I started writing this post sometime last month, but being true to the spirit of the pseudo crusader, I have left it unfinished. Probably its my inability, or perhaps, its my disability...
The eighth month is slowly drawing to a close, and as the year enters it's twilight zone, it seems India's flirtation with Madame Fortune is all but over. Things, however, were quite different, at the same time last year, when the liaison was at it's prime. The economy was chugging ahead at a healthy 9 percent plus. The Sensex was zooming ahead at Mach 3. Inflation was yet to raise its dreaded hood. And there was a relative calm in the political arena.
But now, tables have turned.
Let's start with the least sensitive of all the issues - The Sensex. The gluttonous few of Dalal Street, are in a pensive mood these days. Their betting game is no longer yielding high returns, and this is definitely a cause of concern for the Country. The markets have come down significantly from the highs. FII inflows have dried up. And the SEBI is ready to compromise monetary flow issues to revive the dubious P Notes, for the sake of 'domestic' investors. But then who are we to blame for this? And then, why should we blame, or even be bothered by it? Those involved in organised and legal betting are not new to the hazards of the game. They themselves were responsible for the rise, and now, for the fall. The markets are almost the private domain of the 'selected' few, and I don't see any cause of concern. If a person decides to build a blast furnace in his backyard to heat his broth, it his private matter, and I really respect privacy.
The slowing down of the economy is definitely worrisome. This implies that the wheels of 'development' can come to a standstill. But then the question arise were they rolling at all??? If the driver of the carriage decided to oil one wheel, and shuns the rest, the consequence is a foregone conclusion. As the rich keep continue to feast , latest poverty norms ($1.35/day) suggests that two-thirds of the country still cannot even afford a single meal a day. And this number is by no means trivial...We are talking about 70 crore people...that is the combined population of UK, France and the Scandinavian countries. So is there any development at all???
However, those whose minds are still clouded by misplaced notion of growth might argue that even if sheer numbers are daunting, poverty has been declining faster now than it ever did before. This is yet another figment of imagination of the ruling classes propogated as reality/truth. These people are great believers in numbers, and yes, its the numbers game after all. Poverty in the pre-liberal era (1975-1990) was declining at 59.3% annually. However, this figure dropped to 43.2% in the period 1991-2005.
And yes, the burning hot topic of the moment is the Nano. The real people's car, is facing a stiff opposition from the people. Sounds strange, nah?? Yes, Singur, can very well be a political gimmick, and Mamta Bannerjee, a ridiculous joker, but then can you deny the fact that it is being built on fertile agricultural land.What will the children of this area do when they grow up? They no longer would have any land to till, and the paltry sum given as compensation would have been dwindled away by alcoholic fathers. None of them would find any sort of employment in the gas guzzling factories, not because the Tatas would bear grudges against them, but because these people would be simply unemployable.
This isn’t a review. This article is not about the film either. In fact, this film is not yet another Superhero film. The Dark Knight is not about Batman and exploits against his nemesis...it’s just a facade. It’s a facade that writer/director Christopher Nolan uses to question the dichotomy between good & evil...between hero and villain... between light and darkness.
Let’s start with the name – The Dark Knight. Does anything strike you? The name in itself is an oxymoron...well... not in the truest sense, but it does question the hegemonic beliefs about Knights/night. The pun on ‘night’ is obvious instantly. So the Knight is as dark as the night. Or is the night as dark as the Knight? Night has traditionally been associated with evil/Satan, and Knights with good deeds, and they are always in shining Armour (light). So, is our perception, correctly placed? And then who is the knight? The Batman in his dark costume, or the Joker with a technicolor face? Does this seem baffling? Well, it’s just the beginning.
This film speaks to the audience on various levels. The most apparent is the clash between Batman and the evil Joker. But even at this level, Nolan, seems to mock at the notion of such a struggle. And through Harvey Dent, he ties to convey the message. The two faced Harvey, is in fact, a perfect alter ego, of both the Batman and the Joker. In the first half, Wayne sees Harvey, as the man who can guarantee a retirement plan for the Batman, and in the second, Dent, becomes the Joker’s successor. Nolan uses the age-old theatrical device of the mask, to show two sides of a coin (Harvey’s coin is yet another device) and yes, the coin reminds me of yet another old debate between free will and pre destination, and man’s obsession with it. Dent thought that he could create his destiny, but then was he successful? Through the two faced Harvey, Nolan, tries to say that the battle is not being waged outside, but the struggle is inside us. Even in the climax of the film, it is not Batman vs The Joker, but the battle is raging inside the people stuck on the two barges.
The Dark Knight also brings to fore the question of identity. In a perfectly shot jail room sequence, the Joker asks the Batman, “What are you without me, and what am I without you?” The existence of the self is based on the construction of the other. The self cannot exist without the Other. God would not have existed if there were no Satan. How can there be a Heaven, if there is no Hell? And does Black have any meaning without the existence of White? For the preservation of Self, man constantly creates and re-creates the Other. So when Joker asks the poignant question, he is not only questioning the Batman, but the entire theology and tradition that gives birth to such ideas/heroes/superheroes. Imagine there was no dichotomy between good and bad, between God and Satan, between Man and Woman...Do you think there would have been any conflict? Look at any conflict raging around, and you can reduce all those struggles to the basic dichotomies. If there was no difference between Man and Woman, do you think the society would have been as it is now? If there was no Self and the Other, between God and Satan, do you think religions would have existed....and if there were no religion, then would have terrorism cropped up? If there was no God, then there would not have been Feudalism, and without Feudalism neither Fascism nor Capitalism would have cropped up. No Capitalism means no Communism, that means no Cold War would have had happened. No Cold War, means no Afghanistan. No Afghanistan means no Taliban and Al Qaeda. Can it be simpler than this? No matter how complex a situation is, everything derives its legitimacy from the basic dichotomy between God and Satan, between good and evil. Thus, a seemingly innocuous question by Joker has the potential to change the entire world order.
And this is the power of this film.
It does not matter whether you have seen the film or not, go and watch it again. You’ll probably unveil yet another layer beneath the apparent.
