Application of Auchitya on controversial films like Padmavat and Stand-up Comedies
Dilip Barad
With ref to presentation by Sanjay Rathod:
Applying Kshemendra’s Auchitya to modern controversies like the film Padmaavat or Indian stand-up comedy is a fascinating exercise. In classical Sanskrit poetics, Auchitya is about "the right thing in the right place." When that balance is broken, it results in Anauchitya (impropriety), which leads to a "rasabhanga"—the shattering of the aesthetic experience.
Here is how you can analyze these modern cultural frictions through Kshemendra’s 27 varieties of propriety:
1. Film Controversies (The Padmaavat Case)
In the case of Padmaavat, the controversy primarily revolved around three specific types of Auchitya defined by Kshemendra:
Kula-Auchitya (Propriety of Lineage/Clan): Kshemendra argued that a character’s actions must align with their social and family background. The protests against the "Ghoomar" song or the imagined dream sequence (which wasn't actually in the film) were rooted in the belief that the depiction violated the "dignity" expected of a Rajput Queen.
Desha & Kala-Auchitya (Propriety of Place and Time): This refers to historical and geographical accuracy. Critics often point to Anauchitya when a period film uses modern sensibilities, costumes, or behaviors that don't belong to the 13th or 14th century.
Vrata-Auchitya (Propriety of Vows/Values): The depiction of Jauhar (self-immolation) sparked a different kind of Anauchitya debate among modern audiences. Feminists argued it was "improper" to glorify the practice in the 21st century, while traditionalists argued it was "proper" within the historical context of the film's narrative.
2. Stand-Up Comedy in India
Stand-up comedy often thrives on Vakrokti (indirect/crooked speech), but it frequently runs into trouble because it intentionally breaks Auchitya to create humor.
Pratibha-Auchitya (Propriety of Creative Intelligence): Kshemendra suggests that a creator must know their limits. In the Indian context, comedians often face backlash when they touch upon Devata-Auchitya (Propriety regarding the Divine). From a classical Indian perspective, joking about deities is seen as a massive breach of Auchitya because the "tone" (humor) does not match the "subject" (sacredness).
Sabha-Auchitya (Propriety of the Audience/Assembly): This is perhaps the most relevant. Kshemendra implies that the poet must understand the "assembly" they are addressing. A joke that is "proper" in a private club in Mumbai might be "improper" (Anauchitya) when broadcast on YouTube to a diverse, pan-Indian audience with different sensibilities.
Vilaasa-Auchitya (Propriety of Playfulness): Comedy is essentially Vilaasa (play). Controversy arises when the audience perceives the "play" as "insult." According to Kshemendra, if the "Vilaasa" causes pain instead of pleasure (Rasa), the poet has failed the test of propriety.
3. The "Rasabhanga" (The Breaking of the Experience)
Kshemendra’s theory explains why these controversies happen:
The Creator's Intent: The filmmaker or comedian thinks they are maintaining Kavi-Auchitya (the poet's propriety)—the freedom to express.
The Audience's Perception: The protesting group perceives Anauchitya (impropriety).
The Result: Instead of the audience reaching a state of Ananda (bliss), they experience Krodha (anger). The "soul" of the art is lost because the harmony between the subject and its treatment has been severed.
Analysis Framework for You
If you are analyzing a specific controversy, ask these three Kshemendra-inspired questions:
Is the "Vesha" (Dress/Appearance) appropriate to the "Kula" (History/Background)? (Common in film debates).
Is the "Vachana" (Speech/Jokes) appropriate to the "Sabha" (The People listening)? (Common in comedy debates).
Is the "Bhava" (Emotion) appropriate to the "Rasa" (The overall goal)? (e.g., Is a serious historical tragedy being treated too lightly?)