A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Monday, July 3, 2017
‘Demons In Paradise’: An Irreparable Miscarriage
A peepal tree/Bodhi tree is shown being cut down in the last scenes of the documentary film ‘Demons in Paradise’. The Director of the film, Jude Ratnam seemed
intent on making the audience feel that when the last branch of that
peepal tree was cut down that similarly the “Tamil people’s dream for a
separate Eelam” had also been completely cut down. To some extent he has
succeeded in creating that feel.
Although
he does that, he goes past questions as to why did the dream of a
‘separate Eelam’ come into being, or whether it was the dream of only a
select few people, by using just a few surface level conversations and
instead moves towards speaking about the internecine killings between
militant groups during the early war period. Through that he has wished
to write an epilogue that the armed struggle should necessarily be
defeated. The problem arises here.
Jude
Ratnam begins ‘Demons in Paradise’ from his own experience as the 5
year old son of a family fleeing (from Colombo to Jaffna) the 1983 ethnic riots which deliberately targeted the Tamil community. He mentions in the film that that the riots and the days that followed made him realise the necessity of a separate Eelam.
The
dream for a separate Eelam and the journey towards that did not begin
with the 1983 ethnic riots. The struggle for a separate Eelam followed
in the course of the political struggle that fought against the
oppression of the Tamils in independent Ceylon/Sri Lanka. The failure of
non-violent (Ahimsa) struggles gave rise to the armed struggle. The
need for that struggle was brought home to the Tamils in the South
through the 1983 July ethnic riots. The Director instead stands atop the
debris caused by the last phase of the war and aims his criticisms at
the armed struggle while staying away from these essential facts.
Questions arise regarding the fundamentals of the product when it is a
wholesale criticism of one side.
No
struggle for the political rights of the Tamil people can be considered
as being beyond criticism. The writer of this article as a son of a
community which had engaged in a long drawn armed struggle, and a person
who has lived in conflict areas has continuously opined that the
consequences of that struggle should be subject to decisive discussion.
But, the writer also wishes to point out that a creator’s freedom cannot
be said to be one free from any kind of criticism.
This
is because, the scenes shown in the film and the former rebels who are
the main characters in the film are seen speaking mainly about the
internecine killings. There is no completeness in their talk. Some of
their words have been cut off midway. What are the issues spoken there?
Why have they been cut midway?
Further,
why has the film shied away from speaking about the occupation and the
destruction caused by other parties including the Sri Lankan Armed
forces and the IPKF? The issues raised in ‘Demons in Paradise’ are
incomplete when the film completely ignores the days in which thousands
were mercilessly massacred at Mullivaikkal. It raises the suspicion as
to whether the film was made to meet to needs of some other basis.
In
the end scenes of the movie Jude Ratnam states, ‘I wished that the
Tamil Tigers be defeated, even if people (members of my community) were
killed I wanted the war to end.’ He has expressed his opinion as someone
who has observed the war from Colombo, but is such an opinion one that
is truly ethical?
The
writer here does not express the wish for war to go on for a long
period and large levels of destruction to occur, instead he deeply
despises war as a Tamil who had been born into this war and who faced
war as a living reality till the year 2000. But, the writer stumbled and
was shaken when faced with the thought process put forward in the film
that finishing the war could come at the cost of killing many people.
After
the screening of the film was over, the Director was asked by a member
of the audience whether he still agreed with his statement in the movie
that the war should be ended even if people were killed, he had no
hesitation in replying with an ‘Yes’.
The
Director, who raises ethical questions about the internecine killings
during the armed struggle in the 1980s and 1990s and tries to prove that
the dream of a separate Eelam has been cut down, stays aloof from
discussing the ethical issues that arise regarding the last phase of the
war. He
fudges away from responding to that. This increases one’s suspicion
about him. The suspicions raised in this article do not try in any way
to deny the right of freedom of expression and creation to Jude Ratnam.
Instead, they should be seen as those raised by the son of an affected
community.