FilmIndia (1948)

member, 1948 Film india province and keep the doors of the auditoriums clotill every one stands in respect to the flag. At this rate the Government of Madras will one dav er us to wait in the streets with our heads bent and hands folded till some of their ministers pass through streets. Admitting that neither practical commonsense nor lgination has been a common feature of our popular listries. the present order of the Madras Government bout the limit of self-righteous conviction in prescriba code for public behaviour. \S hat has the national flag to do with a cinema ere people come merely for entertainment? The ema is hardly a place to vindicate the dignity of the ional Hag. On the contrary, the indiscriminate disy of the national (lag in cinemas outrages its dignity thrusting it on people in their entertainment mood. The nation's flag is a symbol of a people s freedom. Inity. culture and traditions and as such it must be lulled and due respect paid to it on ceremonial state oc lions. To attach it to every picture show is to lower prestige and to confine a crowd to respect it is to in |t its inherent dignity. Even our erstwhile imperialist rulers, notorious for |ir flag-wa\ing. did not lhru>t the I nion Jack on us at unexpected places as cinemas through any official ■pulsion, though quite a few Parsi theatre men em[asized their extra loyalty by exhibiting the royal ily, dogs and all. to the tune of the British anthem. unnuwur Sultana and Surendr;i seem lo be practNiiig elecD-magnetism in "Meri Kahani", a social story of Super Team Federal Productions But then quite a few Parsis also slept under the photographs of Queen Victoria to prevent their getting nightmares. But why is this Parsi method of expressing loyalty being adopted and prescribed by the popular Ministry of Madras? Is it not enough that the people of India are prepared to die for their hard-won flag of freedom when and where the need arises? Is it necessary to stand to attention wherever one sees the National Flag ? At this rate it will be difficult to pass through our city streets, stopping a minute every time at a thousand places from the idli-dosse shops to the hair-cutting saloons. Because there is hardly a shop or a stick in our towns from which we don't see our national flag hanging limply like Jesus on the crucifix. As different provinces have different brains and olten different notions of their power, this matter of our national flag, which concerns all our people whether in the North or in the South, must be once for all decided by our Gentral Government and definite directives issued to the people in general and to the different ministries in particular. Our flag of freedom must not be cheapened by showing it in cinemas or displaying it on idli-dosse shops without any national occasion nor must our national anthem (whenever it is finally adopted I played at circuses and race courses after the gamblers have had their day. A nation s flag certainly deserves a better break than this undignified exhibition at all odd places and odd hours. In the meantime we hope the Government of Madras rescind their present orders and restore the inherent dignity of our national flag. For. the government orders are in themselves an insult to our flag. MOKE SLANDER BY ZII.S The Hon. Dr. John Mathai who recently changed his portfolio in the Gentral Gabinet from Transport to Finance, has graciously (?>. in his former capacity, obliged Paul Zils of the Documentary Unit of India by commending the utter trash produced by Zils under the title "Know Your Neighbour", a documentary short which was shown at the Strand in Bombay, along with the "Iron Curtain". "Know Your Neighbour", apart from its misleading title, purports to teach Indians some civil manners, street etiquette and the wonderful art of telling character by the face iti the characteristically occidental fashion, a la Zils. This film is at best a putrid short which, in effect, not only conveys th? impression that Indians are still novices at learning civil manners (crude and uncivilized enough to make Zils and his fellow -Europeans mock at them!), but actually ends with a moral that they do not even profit by experience and could, in fact, be "duped again in spite of being corrected once. The following episode from the film will illustrate why such an impression becomes inev itable. The picture begins with a Mrs. Desai, supposed to be a decent, educated and respectable woman (though she hardly looks like one?) eye-witnessing an act of robbery on the street (where, incidentally, she appears to be the only solitary pedestrian!) and complaining to the police. This woman is then shown examining a couple