Conduct Unbecoming?

By Taha Kehar | December 2020

Celebrities who are outspoken about their political beliefs often stand the danger of alienating the public. The cult of fame enjoyed by those who are affiliated with the glamour business is aligned closely with a favourable public image. Those who struggle to maintain their public persona are written off for espousing controversial opinions. With the emergence of the ‘cancel culture’ on social media, the long shadow of criticism over statements made by celebrities has intensified.

The bitter burdens associated with this trend were witnessed when a forthcoming biographical film on former Sri Lankan cricketer Muttiah Muralitharan stirred a controversy. The film documents the milestones of Muralitharan’s career and has been aptly titled ‘800’ as a reference to the number of Test wickets he took in his career as a professional cricketer. On October 8, Tamil actor Vijay Sethupathi announced on Twitter that he will be playing the lead role in the film. Sympathizers of Tamil nationalists and various political parties were livid over the development. Many of them viewed the film as an attempt to glorify a public figure whose problematic political leanings have undermined the cause of the Sri Lankan Tamils.

Sethupathi, who has gathered critical attention for his contributions to Tamil cinema, was flooded with a chorus of appeals on social media from fans and well-wishers who advised him against taking up the project. In an open letter to Sethupathi, Tamil film director Bharathiraja declared that Muralitharan had betrayed “the Tamil race” by showing support for a Sri Lankan government that had conducted genocide against the Tamil population.

Echoing Bharathiraja’s sentiments, Tamil poet and lyricist Thamarai urged Sethupathi to play the character of a chief of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) instead of Muralitharan.

Despite the chorus of criticism, some members of the film fraternity defended Sethupathi’s right to pursue the project. Veteran Tamil actor Radikaa Sarath Kumar asserted that policing Sethupathi’s professional conduct was unfair and hypocritical. According to Kumar, Tamil nationalist sympathizers had remained silent over Sun Network owner Kalanithi Maran’s decision to appoint Muralitharan as a mentor of his IPL team, Sunrisers Hyderabad. This shows that Sethupathi was unduly criticized because he may be a soft target.

Amid a wave of mounting criticism, Muralitharan requested Sethupathi to withdraw from ‘800’ as he feared that the actor’s career prospects would be adversely impacted by the project. Sethupathi eventually announced his decision to bow out of the film through a post on social media.

The reaction to the film on Muralitharan did not come as a surprise. Even after eleven years, memories of the 2009 Sri Lankan civil war are still fresh in the minds of the Tamil populace. Though the then Sri Lankan government has been accused of pursuing genocidal practices during the war, an impartial investigation into the alleged war crimes committed under Mahinda Rajapaksa’s presidency has yet to be carried out. After Mahinda Rajapaksa was sworn in as premier earlier this year, the possibility of a thorough inquiry into the matter seemsed all the more unlikely.

Muralitharan has been billed as one of Sri Lanka’s greatest cricketers and is globally recognized as one of cricket’s greatest spinners. However, his public persona was somewhat chequered as he was criticized for doing little to advance the Tamil cause in Sri Lanka during the war. A vast majority of Tamil nationalists in Tamil Nadu perceived his silence as a sign of a blanket approval for the Tamil genocide. In the past, Muralitharan hadn’t shied away from voicing his support for the Rajapaksas and had frequently condemned excessive interference of politicians from Tamil Nadu in matters pertaining to the Sri Lankan Tamils. For his part, Muralitharan has clarified that he did not support genocidal policies that led to the killing of innocent Eelam Tamils during the civil war.

In 2019, Muralitharan said that 2009 was the “best year of [his] life” - a statement that was widely misinterpreted. In a recent statement, Muralitharan clarified that he didn’t rejoice over the genocide. To the contrary, he believed that the end of the civil war put a stop to the senseless casualties on both sides. The former Sri Lankan cricketer also outlined the various initiatives he had taken to assist Eelam Tamils. It is difficult to ignore the fact that Sethupathi was compelled to opt out of the film because he is a soft target. In the digital age, celebrities are frequently arm-twisted into taking steps to protect their public image. However, it is unconscionable of Tamil nationalist groups and their sympathizers to act as unofficial censor boards and expect a cinema actor to toe the line. If the statements issued by the film’s producers are anything to go by, ‘800’ will not portray the Eelam Tamils in an unfavourable light. In our modern times, experts are hired to address any concerns related to the representation of different groups in the media. Tamil nationalists and sympathizers need to trust the makers of ‘800’ instead of crying foul over a film that has yet to be made.

Even so, this isn’t the first time that news of a film on Muralitharan’s life has grabbed headlines and drawn the ire of various political groups. The filmmakers ought to exercise due diligence and ensure that ‘800’ realistically depicts the life of a controversial cricketer.

Region

Conduct Unbecoming?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Update