How are these two so sure about Bhagavanji's death in August, 1985 when there is no documentary proof of the same? How are these two subscribing to the concocted tale of Netaji's marriage and progeny when there is no evidence to support the tale whatsoever? Has convenience got the better of conviction or are there other compulsions as well, no less among which must be the need to keep certain quarters happy? And how did they come to their understanding of PTSD having affected Bhagavanji when they have neither met him ever nor gone by what those who have met the saint have had to say on it? Is Netaji now free market commodity that anybody and everybody can say what he feels about him? Is this not insulting the hero which ought to be considered by ardent devotees as veritable sacrilege, especially when such narratives gain national currency in no time owing to the popularity of these protagonists?
Please consider these contentious issues and the way the hero's spotless image is being tarnished thus in all manner and from so many quarters, a state which calls for the severest condemnation. If what they state are true, then they are free to do so but if it comes to passing off mere conjecture as gospel truth even in a film which goes by their convictions and assertions, is it not commerce that has got the better of truth-telling? I leave it to you all to ponder these pertinent points and come to your own conclusions.
Written by Sugata Bose
No comments:
Post a Comment