JOIN USCan indignation alone drive activism?
The Malayalam film industry is known for progressive films but that doesn’t necessarily mean the industry is as progressive.
It has gone through various controversies, the biggest of which was when an actress was kidnapped and tortured in 2017 as part of a blackmail plot. Actor Dileep was arrested and the investigation is still underway.
Following this, women in the industry decided to form an organisation that ensured the welfare of women film workers and named it Women of Cinema Collective (WCC). The organisation was formed to work parallelly with the larger Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA).
The WCC created a row within the industry and outside when launched, with many questioning the need for such a collective.
Nevertheless, the association continued to battle it out and make its presence felt. Fast forward to 2020, WCC is back in the spotlight again. A member recently quit the collective and took to social media to criticise its work. Vidhu Vincent, an award-winning filmmaker of the 2016 film ‘Manhole’ and a core member of WCC, published her resignation letter, saying the organisation is not democratic.
She said that WCC had elitism at its core and that this should not be the case with a collective that declares equality as its vision.
The trouble started with Vidhu’s new movie ‘Stand-up’, produced by Anto Joseph and B Unnikrishnan. Vidhu claimed WCC had problems with Unnikrishnan, who recently made a film with Dileep.
She pointed out that the top members of the collective had also worked with people who had supported the actor; some had even worked with Dileep himself.
Following this, costume designer Stephy Xavior came forward with allegations against director Geethu Mohandas and WCC. She wrote about not receiving the remuneration for her works in ‘Moothon’, which Geethu had directed.
Geethu said Stephy’s assistant, Rafi, had stolen costumes from the film’s sets. Soon enough, Rafi came forward with a voice clip of Geethu herself asking Rafi to collect the clothes and with his version of the story. With each passing day, more and more people came out against the WCC, one of the stronger voices being that of veteran dubbing artiste Bhagyalakshmi. WCC, in a statement, denied all the allegations by Vidhu.
Parvathy Thiruvothu, often considered the face of WCC, also came forward with her side of the story. Parvathy said Vidhu’s allegations would have made more sense if discussed in person than on a public platform. Things may get sorted out soon, but the predicament that WCC is facing right now is not unfounded.
It lies in the sentiment around which the WCC is built: the resentment towards Dileep and patriarchy in general. But is that the sole driving factor in their activism?
Even after three years of its founding, WCC is yet to come up with a layered agenda and spread its activism to more than just promoting and helping out members’ own films. With one or two exceptions, WCC has always stayed out of the mainstream and never raised its voice against problems faced by women in the industry.
This, coupled with the extreme audit that feminism faces, has been critical for WCC’s reputation. It also appears that the top brass of WCC somehow forget what they fought for. Some cases of assault were not addressed as effectively as others.
These incidents need proper addressing and if, in fact, there is classism in WCC, it needs to be addressed by none other than its members. These controversies should help the organisation become better, stronger and better defined in its vision.