Priyanka Chopra’s Sikkim insurgency comment has touched a raw nerve. Apology means little
There's no taking away from Priyanka Chopra's solo efforts in making a name for herself as an actor, producer, singer, a goodwill ambassador and, most importantly, a global Indian, a tag well-earned. To a majority of Indians brought up on a diet of popular cinema, she is our truly international star, never mind that Om Puri, Anupam Kher and Irrfan Khan have had the meatier roles in Hollywood, whose approbation our film fraternity so desperately desires. Perhaps it is this desperation that led Chopra to err while promoting her Sikkimese film Pahuna at the Toronto International Film Festival no less. By posing with Syrian refugee children and making a film about Nepalese refugee kids running away from Maoists and finding feet in Sikkim, she forgot the differing contexts of both worlds and linked them together in a homogenising umbrella of children of conflict-ridden States. In an interview to Canadian TV, she described Sikkim as a north-eastern State of India that was labouring under insurgency and was deeply troubled. The Sikkim Government was understandably infuriated at the distorted projection of the State and the film its Tourism Ministry had supported.
Clearly, Chopra or her crew had done a recce of the State and interacted with officials and locals to get an on-ground feel of reality, assuming they hadn't had time or inclination to tutor themselves about its history or political correctness. Or did they have a short-term memory after securing the permitsIJ A sincere and civil apology means nothing for a State which has been grossly misrepresented on a global forum. Sikkim has not only been one of the most peaceful States of the North-East, it has been a pioneer in ushering in organic agriculture and full literacy. It's one of the better placed States in the North-East in terms of human development index and progressiveness. Chopra was wrong about the State’s film heritage, too. Pahuna is not the first Sikkimese film.
As a global celebrity, managed by PR bigwigs, Chopra self-admittedly claims she likes to keep herself informed. But in this case, she went back to her Miss World Days when she had mistakenly cited Mother Teresa as a living icon, long after her death. Now she cannot afford the excuse of being a novice who had psyched out on stage, simply because she has the tools, grooming and prepared speeches to fall back on. A celebrity's public posturing on matters Indian comes with a huge degree of responsibility and sensitivity, particularly when it concerns the North-East, which is circumscribed by clichés in the media and perception. A slip in front of the global media not only costs India its modernist image but sends it spiralling down the vortex of clichés and exotica that the West wants to keep us trapped in. In this case, Chopra is guilty of being puerile. The actress says she has broken through racist barriers but she has perpetuated the very myths about India that she claims to be a victim of.