"After silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music."
This philosophical insight by Aldous Huxley suggests that music serves as the ultimate bridge between the void of silence and the complexities of human emotion.
Yet, when the venerable A.R. Rahman, who incidentally is a born Hindu, before transitioned from the contemplative silence of his studio to the cacophony of public discourse that acquired a thick communal colour, that characteristic grace appeared to falter.
While his musical scores are celebrated for their masterful balance of tension and resolution, his recent commentary on "communal" marginalization felt like a rare instance of a maestro losing his rhythmic precision.
When Oscar and Grammy winner A.R. Rahman suggested in an interview that his opportunities in Bollywood had declined due to shifting power dynamics and "communal" factors, he seemed to have composed his own brand of social dissonance.
A.R. Rahman suggested in a BBC interview that a "power shift" and potential "communal" factors might have affected his work opportunities in Hindi cinema over the past eight years.
By introducing these volatile themes, Rahman seemed to have "composed wrong notes", using his platform to orchestrate a form of social dissonance. His remarks struck a jarring chord, igniting an acrimonious debate that rippled through the film industry and across social media platforms.
Though Rahman framed his observations as tentative possibilities rather than formal indictments, they were largely interpreted as a categorical charge of intolerance. Critics characterized his stance as "hypocritical," contending that his global stature and continued success fundamentally contradict any narrative of systemic marginalization.
His subsequent clarification on January 18 offered no concession or apology, instead, he reaffirmed his right to speak from his "lived experience.
By urging the public to avoid "overinterpreting" his remarks, he inadvertently heightened the friction, leading many to conclude that a figure of his immense influence should have exercised greater diplomatic care.
Wittingly or not, Rahman’s rhetoric has reignited a fierce discourse on religious bigotry within creative spaces, primarily fuelled by accusations of communal bias from industry veterans and subsequent pushback from others.
His "wrong notes" regarding non-visible forms of discrimination have exposed deep fractures concerning the influence of politics on art.
This debate is particularly pointed given that his comments coincided with discussions regarding his work on the film Chhaava, a project some argue reflects the broader trend of narratives that amplify a "Hindu-Muslim" binary.
Notwithstanding whether his comments were hypocritical, it’s no denying fact that the trend in Bollywood film making since 2022 was aligned with right-wing jingoistic tastes, featuring narratives that target minorities or amplify nationalistic sentiment, which, in turn, vindicates his point about increasing intolerance and the difficulty of discussing such issues.
Whether one views Rahman’s comments as a necessary "artistic rebellion" or a dissonant misstep, they undeniably reflect a broader national anxiety.
His comments thus bring forth a shift in film narratives that favor a specific, often divisive, historical, or religious viewpoint, moving away from the historically more syncretic, secular, or "Ganga-Jamuni" culture of Indian cinema.
What his comments tried to infer may not be new or to put it cinematically, may be “Behind the Screen”, the observations underscore a reality where Indian cinema increasingly mirrors a polarized society, caught between the pursuit of artistic freedom and the encroaching tide of religious and political division.
