Resurrection of a patriot?

When Uddham Singh assassinated General O'Dwyer for his role in the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, some condemned him for his actions, while others revered him as a hero and patriot. RAJNI BAKSHI writes on a movie based on the character of a man who made a powerful political and historic statement in his time. The film also makes us question the contradiction between violence in the pursuit of justice and high ideals.

RAM MOHAMMED SINGH AZAD. This was once a man's self-given name, his identity and his mission. History remembers him as Uddham Singh - revolutionary-assassin and martyr or mad-man and terrorist. In Punjab, this man is revered as a folk-hero and patriot. For Uddham Singh was the man who "avenged" the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh. Like Bhagat Singh, Uddham Singh's legacy has been claimed by both Indian nationalists and armed separatists in Punjab.

A film now presents Uddham Singh as a missionary of justice, equality and the brotherhood of different religions. The film, "Shaheed Uddham Singh: alias Ram Mohammed Singh Azad", is due for nation-wide release at the end of January. Interestingly, the film is likely to be released around the time that the nation pays homage to a more universal martyr, Mahatma Gandhi, on January 30.

Both Shaheed Uddham Singh and Mahatma Gandhi valued their sense of mission more than life itself. Both shared a particular dream of free India. This was a dream of justice for the "last man" and a united India based on a brotherhood of all religions.

Here the similarity ended. Their methods and responses to injustice were drastically different. This film creatively renews the lively tension between the legacies of two very different kinds of political beings.

"Shaheed Uddham Singh" is rooted in the view that the violence of the oppressed is sometimes justified. The makers of this film have made a valiant attempt to distinguish revolutionary violence from terrorism which claims innocent lives. This is a tricky task. Should we support certain assassins depending on their motives? Is violence a necessary evil in the pursuit of justice?

In the film, the story of Uddham Singh effectively begins at Jallianwala Bagh on Baisakhi day in 1919. The 19-year-old boy is shown as a volunteer giving people drinking water at the peaceful gathering of over 5,000 men, women and children. People had come to the enclosed Jallianwala Bagh in defiance of a British order banning assembly.

General Dyer ordered his troops to fire at the crowd. The British newspapers reported about 300 dead, popular memory records the number at close to 2,000 people.

The order banning assembly had been given by the then Governor of Punjab, Sir Michael O'Dwyer. So both Dyer and O'Dwyer were marked as the guilty men of Jallianwala Bagh.

The film portrays young Uddham as being permanently scarred by the trauma of Jallianwala Bagh. He swore to avenge this national humiliation and build a free India. Over the next 20 years he was an activist of the Ghaddar Party, a revolutionary group formed by Indians in the U.S. and Canada. This involvement took him first to the U.S. and then eventually to Britain, in 1933.

Along the way Uddham Singh changed his name to Ram Mohammed Singh Azad. For now, he said, "to divide me (from my people) in the name of religion they will have to cut me in pieces."

By then Dyer had died. Uddham located O'Dwyer and, for a while, became a servant at his house. However, in the film Uddham argues that there would be no point in simply killing O'Dwyer in private. That would look like the common murder of a master by his servant. To serve its political purpose the "execution", as Uddham saw it, had to be carried out in public. So in 1940 he smuggled a pistol into a public meeting attended by O'Dwyer. There, amid hundreds of people, he shot O'Dwyer at point blank range.

Turning himself up to the police, Uddham Singh is reported to have said: "For full 21 years I have been trying to wreak revenge. I am happy that I have done the job. It was my duty."

These were the days when London was being battered by the air raids of the Nazis. The sensational assassination of a knight of the realm, at a public hall a few blocks away from Buckingham Palace, was an acute embarrassment for the British establishment. The reaction in India was mixed. Subhash Chandra Bose commended Uddham's action. Nehru expressed regret and Mahatma Gandhi categorically condemned the assassination.

The film depicts the Indian National Congress leadership as wimps who could not appreciate Uddham Singh's heroism. Krishna Menon tried to persuade Uddham Singh to plead insanity. An enraged Uddham Singh declined to take this plea and thus escape the gallows. When the death sentence was finally pronounced he said: "what greater honour could be bestowed upon me than death for the sake of my motherland."

Thus in Punjab Uddham Singh became a hero and martyr in the tradition of Bhagat Singh. He was executed and his body was buried in Pentonville Jail. Over 30 years later, in 1974, Giani Zail Singh had Uddham's remains exhumed and brought to India. After being ceremonially carried on a tour through Punjab, the coffin was buried again at the village Sunam, Uddham's birth place.

The impetus for this film came partly from the fact that 1999 was the centenary year of Uddham Singh. Iqbal Dhillon, a film producer in Punjab, carried the idea to Raj Babbar, who was enthralled by the possibilities of the project. Babbar, who has himself been associated with the socialist movement, played a key role in bringing together the team which decided to resurrect "Ram Mohammed Singh Azad" more than Uddham Singh. The hero, as played by Raj Babbar, emerges as a tough but sensitive revolutionary heart-throb. The colourful musical drama features brief performances by stars like Juhi Chawla, Shatrughan Sinha and Amrish Puri. Gurdas Maan appears as a dashing Bhagat Singh. "This is not a revenge drama" says Chitraarth, director of the film, "it is a film about opposition to any oppression."

Atul Tiwari, who wrote the script, does not see Uddham Singh as a terrorist. "Disrespect for the life of uninvolved, innocent people is terrorism" says Tiwari. Uddham Singh and Bhagat Singh, he adds, believed in the restricted, focused use of violence while relying primarily on mass mobilisation of the people at large.

The objective of Tiwari's script is to destroy the Uddham Singh myth which feeds the separatist movements of Punjab and Kashmir. This is a hero to strengthen the anti-communal forces who nurture the plurality of Indian culture. Thus the emphasis on the multi- religious alias and the hero's deep commitment to freedom and egalitarian values.

The film also changes the image of the generalised angry young man which has dominated Hindi cinema for over three decades. So Ram Mohammed Singh Azad is not simply angry because of his personal trauma. He is shown to be part of a larger movement to creatively transform society. He is not a loner obsessed with bitter vendetta. The film creates a powerful impression of a man making a political and historic statement.

For those who believe that the violence of the oppressed is justified, these are vital distinctions. And the film "Shaheed Uddham Singh" limits itself to this view. So Mahatma Gandhi's condemnation of the hero is shown as virtually a betrayal. There is no place in the film to question whether killing O'Dwyer actually achieved anything worthwhile. In Uddham Singh's life, violence was a necessary evil in the pursuit of justice.

This stream of thought and action continues to thrive today. For example, Naxalite groups exercise a commanding presence in parts of Bihar and Andhra Pradesh. Many of them are contemptuous about the gradual path of change, involving non-violence and civil- disobedience. But it is also true that a sizeable segment of social activists engaged in constructive projects today were once part of the Naxalite stream. They have chosen to forge a different, non-violent, path to the same goal - justice for the dis-empowered.

The tussle between these two radically different views of life and action will continue. The merit of "Shaheed Uddham Singh" is that it attempts to explore the psychology and passion of one approach. The film's severe limitation is that it cannot tackle the contradiction between the lofty mission implied by "Ram Mohammed Singh Azad" and the methods of the man who chose to wear this alias as a badge of honour.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Entertainment
Previous : Joyless cinema, listless fare