Peeing on the grave

Despite the fact that a tiniest of error would cost him his life and Troy, the ongoing battle, King Priam, in the darkest hours of night, went to Achilles’ camp to plead for his son’s dead body which Achilles, after killing him had kept in his captivity, robbing him off of his last rituals. Achilles, although being an enemy, was moved by Priam's gesture and returned him Hector's body and promised a truce of twelve days to allow the Trojans to perform funeral rites for Hector. Priam returned to Troy with the body of his son, and it was given dignified funeral honours.

Not only in Greek mythology, but also in the community we live, ‘Shok Sabha’ is organised where we gather to offer our condolences and pay honour to the deceased for all their contributions to this world, be that in any form. Even the persons one has always lived in disagreement with, come to put an end to their differences and acknowledge the worth of the deceased in the society. Although, few argue against this practice, calling it ‘pretence’ and ‘fake’ but the notion behind paying testimonial homage and commendations is, setting a moral persona of the departing soul; untarnishing the spirit and establishing an image for us to remember the nobility of the dead.

So it was upon King Priam to decide whether Hector should be remembered as the man who was killed by Achilles, tied to his chariot and was dragged to the enemies camp or, the brave leader who he’ll be claimed to have been in farewell speeches of the people of Troy in his dignity. King Priam opted the latter and hence risked his life for procuring Hector’s dead body.

We remember Hector as the man who stood for the honour of Troy, fought for his brother and his people. We remember him as the glorified warrior who died combating the man who was known to be immortal!

The act of remembering someone isn’t just an algorithm for sustaining the structure of a society, but your entire identity, foundation and school of thought depends on how you are remembering the people you are remembering. For example, in July, 2016, ‘Hindustan Times’, published a story where it reported that actor Naseeruddin Shah believes that late actor Rajesh Khanna’s entry in Bollywood changed the way films were made, but not for good. According to the report, he also said that Rajesh Khanna was a poor actor and his era of acting was an era of mediocrity of Bollywood. The credibility Naseeruddin Shah holds as an actor, changed the way his fans used to remember Rajesh Khanna. The memories of same Rajesh Khanna which were filled with ‘Anand’, ‘Kati Patang’, ’Amar Prem’, and as a pictorial representation of the evergreen voice of Kishore Kumar, was adulterated with doubts of him even being a good actor. In Rajesh Khanna’s defence, Twinkle Khanna, his daughter, replied to Naseeruddin Shah through a tweet saying, ‘Sir, if you can’t respect the living, respect the dead. Mediocrity is attacking a man who can’t respond’.

Naseeruddin Shah, as per democracy, is rightfully entitled to have an opinion but was it required to dishonour a man’s entire life and an institute’s entire era by calling it an era of mediocrity which was generally known to be a golden era of Bollywood? Was there no other way to put his opinion than to discredit a man’s entire work, who must, on his deathbed, be lying satisfied thinking about the fact that he did justice to his institute by giving 15 consecutive solo hit films?

Declarations like these not only change the way people look at somebody, but also fabricate the history of an institute; Bollywood in this case. Because as Twinkle said, the man is no more to undo the damage that has been done to the memories of his existence. The man has probably lost the co-ordinates he earned for himself in the mapping of history and sadly, he didn’t have the opportunity to fix it!

It’s 2019. We have grown almost 3 years older since this incident but, did we really grow up? Because in 2016 it was Rajesh Khanna and in 2019, it is Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel, Bhagat Singh, Subhash Chandra Bose and many more. A certain section of the society is practising this idea of demeaning historic leaders of opposition to earn some political benefit in the coming Lok Sabha election. The humungous circulations of questions, being raised to justify the credibility of our leaders of the past, on social media under the banner of election campaign, is not just adulterating our memories of these great leaders but is also tarnishing the history of our country. The same leaders who lost their lives fighting for country’s independence are being charged with having alliances with the people they were fighting with. And sadly, just like Rajesh Khanna, they are no more to answer to those questions.

How unfortunate is this, that the people who believed that their martyrdom will be paid off with honour, that their contribution in the freedom struggle will be paid off with respect, that their death will be paid off with immortality, are being accused of treason!

And all this just for winning an election! The campaigns for the elections are being designed in a way which could hit our psyche and change the way we remember our history and historical figures. To win a Parliament for 5 years, the campaign has been designed to destroy decades of our narratives forever.

It’s time for us to understand that no matter what outcome the election will bring to the political party of our choice, no matter who wins or loses, the glory of our leaders should remain intact, the sanctity of our history must remain intact, the decency of our ‘Shok Sabha’ must remain intact. It is for us to understand that the polarisation on the basis of our political opinions, is blinding us too much to hold on humanity. It is for us to understand that unlike King Priam, we are digging our warriors from their graves and dragging their bodies in the battlefield.

The greatness of our Hectors must remain intact!

Jai Hind!