Tags:
Journalism of Courage
With the resignation of its Governing Council chairman Mahesh Bhatt, Pune’s Film and Television Institute of India (FTII) has entered another stormy phase of uncertainty.
The discontentment brewing at the FTII, run at a Rs 10-crore annual Central Government grant, boiled over at the convocation on Sunday as students raised banners and placards against the institute’s director Mohan Agashe’s proposals to change the syllabus. Bhatt announced his resignation and it was more than welcomed with loud applause by the protestors — students and ex-students.
“Our chairman has been telling us that he would shut down the FTII if he were Prime Minister,” says Kavita Pai, President of the FTII Students Association, “all very fine, but what about our problems”. Backs an equally agitated ex-student Paresh Kamdar, director of Tunnu Ki Tina, “Seven syllabi changes have been made in the past 11 years on the pretext that FTII graduates are misfits in the industry” . Three films in the Indian panorama in 1997 and three national awards in 1996, could not have been given to misfits, feel others. Apart from several leading directors, the film industry boasts of at least 50 per cent of FTII alumni engaged as technicians, cameramen, sound recordists and editors.
If it took one year for Bhatt to realise that his personal beliefs did not match the institution’s principles, why were students made scapegoats? Bhatt makes no bones about the fact that he doesn’t believe in organised education. But his appeal to students to respect his vision fell on deaf ears leading the director to shrug his shoulders and walk off with a “Thus far and no farther.”
What has gone wrong ? Says Mehboob Khan, a student of the first batch of 1961 who as Dean, Films, worked with all the nine directors including Jagat Murari, Girish Karnad, N.V.K. Murthy, K.G. Verma, V.B. Chandra, John Sankaramangalam and now, Mohan Agashe: “The FTII is a peculiar institution.
The shortage of faculty in both film/TV wings has been a vexatious problem. Only few people have an aptitude for teaching, and it is very embarrassing to proposition them as the salaries are too low. Even if you raise the pay scales, the professional film maker would think twice, thanks to the insufficient remuneration.”
Forty per cent of the faculty is not in place. The reserved post of Professor of Cinematography has been lying vacant for seven years and Assistant Professor of Sound Engineering for three years.
As it is, it is difficult to find teachers as the institute salaries don’t match Bollywood’s glamour and money. A professor at the FTII gets paid less than a university reader.
But the bone of contention remains the much-publicised revamping of the syllabus. (see box) Last year’s hunger strike had yielded the formation of syllabi review committees. Former FTII students were involved in reviewing the syllabus for the direction, photography, editing and sound courses among others.
If that was not enough, experts like director Govind Nihalani, cinematographer Ashok Kumar, audiographer Selva Raj, editor Affaque Hussain and art director Sameer Chanda were also invited to whet the revisions. However, Khan laments the panel could not not find the time to assess these reports. With the revised syllabus still to be finalised, a question mark hangs over the admission process which commences now for the next year’s July batch.
Budgetary cuts and financial constraints are dogging the institute. At present, the mood is militant at the institute with posters and graffiti depicting the psychiatrist-turned-director in the Superman apparel dotting trees and pillars with the message “Agashe don’t give Mrityudand to the FTII”.Lights, camera, inaction
There have been seven syllabus changes in the past 11 years in what appears to be an attempt to reduce duration and dilute content. But the problems never seem to end. And no decsion has been taken on the latest set of proposals.
They come up at today’s Academic Council meeting and the decision is crucial as the tenure of the Academic Council ends on December 18.
Mohan Agashe, the psychiatrist-cum-actor and the director of the FTII, has turned down students’ proposals and put forward his own `conceptual proposals’. After an eight-month studied silence, Agashe’s proposals found approval from the Governing Council.
They are:
Agashe has asked for a period of six months to work out the details and financial implications, obtain approval from the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing and audio-visual experts from Australian film school and National film and television school of England for initiating exchange programmes. Students are wary about the clearance of the revised syllabus. According to the student body, the proposals will have drastic repercussion on academics.
“Instead of academic content leading to consideration of financial implications, education will now be dictated purely by its cost,” say students.
`It was a case of miscasting’
Mahesh Bhatt spoke to Anu Kumar about his views on the institute and its problems. Excerpts:
What are your views on organised education?
Artists cannot demand the luxury of subsidised education in a country where 60 per cent of the population is below the poverty line. I spoke to Jaipal Reddy, the I & B minister, about my resignation and even he said, `Subsidised education makes brats out of students’.
Despite your ideological differences, why did you accept the position of FTII chairman?
I was deluded that I could perhaps make a difference. I was completely surprised when they came to me with the offer. But I was against organised education and I voiced my doubts. I think it was a case of miscasting but the I & B ministry was of the opinion that a man with a world view like mine, who considers a film from Saransh to Sadak just a product which has to be sold, could prepare the students for the mainstream dog-eat-dog world outside where even staying afloat is a fine art.
When did the trouble first start brewing?
Adoor Gopalakrishana, who was the chairman before me had tried to introduce a two-year course instead of a three-year one. There was a students’ strike regarding that and this was a problem I inherited without having any idea about it. When I took over I asked the students to withdraw the strike since I agreed with them that the syllabus couldn’t be covered in two years. The Governing Council wasn’t very happy with my tilt towards the students.
What was the biggest complaint the students had against you?
The students have repeatedly, over these two years, brought up remarks I had made about subsidised education. I had told them that irrespective of my world view I could be of use to them as I supported them on their demand for a three-year course. But I think they couldn’t digest this dichotomy. And just an hour before the convocation on December 15, when I met the gathering, this issue was brought up again and I asked the students what they wanted me to do. They said `resign’ and I agreed, they applaused then, thinking they had won a battle. That is their privilege. But with their current mindset and contempt for mainstream cinema, doom is inevitable. And when your house is burning, you should throw in more gasoline so that something can come out of the ashes.
