Films are a powerful medium which create a social understanding in various ways. Till decades ago we had films which reflected social realities and promoted progressive values. Mother India, Do Bigha Jameen and Naya Daur are just a few of these. Some biopics have also contributed a lot to disseminating common sense and promoting inclusive values. Attenborough’s Gandhi and various films on the life of Bhagat Singh were greatly inspiring. Many of these were based on extensive research and brought out the true spirit of the people on whose life they were based.
With the ascendance of majoritarianism and divisive identity politics centred around the ideology of Hindu nationalism, some canny producers and directors started making films which promote divisive, sectarian views of politics and history. The common theme among these is a tilting of truth and in most cases glorification of Hindu Nationalist icons. The clever undermining of truth and building up of ‘fiction as fact’ is the underlying theme of most of these films. One of these, Kashmir Files, was heavily promoted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat. BJP leaders bought tickets in bulk and distributed these in their areas to encourage people to watch the film.
Another example was Kerala Story, where the figures of those being converted to Islam and recruited for IS were exaggerated to the sky. Many other such fiction-like films flopped at the box office like 72 Hoorain, which tried to link the political problem of ‘Islamic Terrorism’ to Islam as a religion.
The aim of these films was to promote Islamophobia. On another level, Godse (2022) was an attempt to glorify Gandhi’s assassin by putting together many falsehoods, eg. that Gandhi did not try to save Bhagat Singh when he was sentenced to death and that he opposed the Congress resolution mourning the young revolutionary’s execution. And now comes the film Swatantaraveer Savarkar by Randeep Hooda. This one takes ‘fiction as truth’ to an even higher level. It claims that Bhagat Singh went to meet Savarkar and told him that he wants to translate his book, First War of Independence, from Marathi to English.
What is the truth? Many revolutionaries read this book and appreciated it. The fact is the book was written in Marathi around 1908 or so and was translated into English a year later. Bhagat Singh was born in 1907 and as a matter of fact never met Savarkar in his life.
The film shows Savarkar stating that we shall win Independence by 1912 i.e. 35 years before we actually got Independence. The fact is that Savarkar was in Andamans from 1910 and had started writing mercy petitions and by 1912 had written three of them. In these petitions he sought to apologise to the British for his earlier actions and committed to serve the British loyally if he were released. And that’s what he did after his eventual release by the British, remaining aloof from the freedom struggle even as it picked up steam in 1920 due to the non-cooperation movement.
Hooda’s film goes on to question why no Congressman was sent to Andamans and most of them were sent to mainland jails alone. While this may not even be true, the fact is that after 1920 the anti-British movement took the path of non violence led by Gandhi. The sentences given to Congress supporters who took part in the movement were of different types like imprisonment in jails. An Andaman sentence or the death penalty (as for Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru) were reserved for involvement in acts of violence. As non violence was the basic credo of the movement led by Gandhi they were neither sentenced to death nor were they sent to ‘kala pani’.
The film argues that India got independence not through non-violence but through violence. This point is certainly worth debating – the role of the revolutionaries in India’s freedom struggle has indeed been downplayed by successive governments – but does Savarkar no credit. The fact is that the major revolutionaries operating in India belonged to the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association. After Bhagat Singh and his comrades were killed or hanged there was no major violent movement. Savarkar’s Abhinav Bharat had abandoned its anti British stance with Savarkar’s mercy petitions. Subhash Bose, who formed the Azad Hind Fauj, was killed in 1945 and his soldiers were imprisoned and kept in Red Fort as prisoners. It was the INC which formed a committee to defend them. In this, Nehru had taken the lead to form a committee for the release of these prisoners of war.
There are claims in the film that it was Savarkar who advised Bose to form an army to fight the British. This is totally in contrast to what are the real facts. Bose after leaving Congress had made up his mind to fight the British through military means with the help of Germany and Japan. When Bose was fighting against the British, Savarkar was urging the Hindu Mahasabha to get Hindus recruited to the British army, to help British,
“Addressing the Mahasabha’s Calcutta session, Savarkar urged all universities, colleges and schools to ‘secure entry into military forces for youths in any and every way’”, writes Pavan Kulkarni. “When Gandhi had launched his individual satyagraha the following year, Savarkar, at the Mahasabha session held in December 1940 in Madura, encouraged Hindu men to enlist in ‘various branches of British armed forces en masse’.”
About Savarkar, Subhash Chandra Bose wrote: “Savarkar seemed to be oblivious of the international situation and was only thinking how Hindus could secure military training by entering Britain’s army in India.” Bose concluded that “…nothing could be expected from either the Muslim League or the Hindu Mahasabha.”
Bose in an address to Indians via Azad Hind Radio said “I would request Mr. Jinnah, Mr. Savarkar & to all those who still think of a compromise with the British to realize once for all that in the world of tomorrow there will be no British Empire”
As far as associating Savarkar with Subhash Bose in the film, Chandra Kumar Bose, grand nephew of Netaji after seeing the trailer told Hooda, “Please refrain from linking Netaji with Savarkar. Netaji was an inclusive secular leader and patriot of patriots.”
The film is yet another one based on distorting the truth to strengthen Hindu nationalist politics, with an eye on the forthcoming elections.
Ram Puniyani is president of the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism.
