Ram and Robot

Ram was everywhere, in the media, on the streets, even in school buses. My daughter was eager to know what happened to Ayodhya because she was keen on knowing whether she will get a Friday off. But Ram had to make way for Rajnikant that Friday. Ram might fail, but Rajni ‘kant’. The prayers, aartis and milk abhishegam (offerings) went to the King of Kollywood, not the prince of Ayodhya that morning. Poor Ram, he had to make way for Rajni despite being proved in the court of law that he was indeed born on the disputed site. Rajni was in every news channel holding a million guns, and running sideways on the train. Damn gravity, Newton. Rewrite your theories.
But both Ram and Robot got the money spinning during the Gandhi Jayanti weekend. What Ram could do, Rajni could do better. Ram added wealth to the coffers of television channels and mobile service providers who shared the spoils of the revenue from patriotic and secular messages that rained throughout the week leading to the Ayodhya judgment. And, Rajni’s Robot raked in an obscene fortune on the first day of its release.
The previous day, the High Court verdict was out and the Mc Donald’s generation loved it, the champagne-clinkers in their drawing room discussions were happy with the “sensible” verdict on a sensitive subject. The media added to the spirited discussions with their “India has moved on” and India First campaigns. So everyone was happy, everyone had "moved on". Now, the nation has to focus on its economy. Yes, yes, all of this, and more.
Just thinking aloud: would the same majority be on a high if the verdict was different? The court has corroborated the faith of the people. Is our judicial system supposed to use faith to crush fact? The court has behaved like a benevolent despot, spelling out Birbal-like wisdom to aggrieved parties. The decision seemed to be aiming at soothing nerves, rather than settling a hard core legal dispute. Devotion, not documents, held the key to the Ram janmasthan. Title deeds made way for good or bad deeds, and our Ram’s vanar sena begged, borrowed and stole the contentious area to please their dear Ram. (Stole because they smuggled in the idols inside the Babri masjid in December 1949). The courts then validated the theft by cloaking it with the argument of faith. Isn’t that a dangerous legal trend? Shouldn’t the court take cognizance of evidence, rather than fall back on faith, even if millions of Hindu hearts are involved?
Does the court’s recognition of Ram’s birthplace despite the 1949 illegal break-in then inadvertently give credence to the saffron brigade that prepared the janmabhoomi pitch culminating in the insanity of 1992? Does it then mutely agree on its aftermath, when our much-abused secular fabric was torn asunder and stained with blood again?
Robot, too, fails on logic, if trailers are anything to go by. The spectacular special effects seem to have camouflaged reason, just like the spectacular efforts of our judicial, political and media players to bury reason and make people feel “all izz well”.
In contemporary India, reason certainly does not sell. Ram and Robot triumphed because of loyalty, not logic. Ram stays put right under the now-demolished Babri dome, and Rajni stays put among his frenzied fans.