Anything that moves

What a one-man Oxbridge protest reveals about the national anthem debate in India

Neither in Britain nor in the US are people bullied for sitting through renditions of the anthem.

In the single-screen era, we had to endure tacky Films Division documentaries before the start of feature films. Now, we wait outside the auditorium past screening time for janitors to finish hoovering up popcorn indiscriminately spilled on the carpet by previous occupants. We watch gruesome shorts about the dangers of tobacco. We listen for the nth time to the annoying Turkish Airlines jingle. We are subjected to occasional propaganda for Narendra Modi. We are informed that smoking kills each time someone lights up on screen. We have our view obscured by waiters delivering food mid-show to people in mid-row. In Maharashtra, we also have to bear with the national anthem being played before each screening, a rule instituted in a fit of patriotism a decade ago by the Nationalist Congress Party.

Since then, members of the public have periodically been evicted for not standing up when the anthem plays, although Indians have no legal obligation to do so, and foreigners have neither legal nor moral cause. A few days ago, a family was asked to leave a PVR auditorium for this reason, after other customers got belligerent. Instead of taking on the people threatening violence, PVR staff showed the door to those at whom the threats were directed.

The incident illustrates the point I made in last week’s column, that Indian culture respects religious customs but demonstrates little concern for individual rights. In that article, I spoke of England having a wider respect for rights than India. The anthem controversy reminded me of a small protest I initiated as a graduate student, which makes explicit what I meant.

Formal hall protest

The college I attended in England served unusually good food in hall, and offered students a free formal meal every Tuesday evening in term. A brief ritual accompanied the dinner. Once all scholars were in the room, the dons (a word that refers to professors rather than mafiosi) filed in and took their place at high table. We all stood, the principal said two Latin words, “Benedictus Benedicat”, and banged a gavel, after which everyone sat and dinner service commenced.

After my first experience of this rite, I expressed reservations about Christian grace being said in a community that included students and teachers of many faiths, as also atheists like myself. Few of my fellow graduates were interested in the issue. The ritual lasted about ten seconds, and it was no skin off their nose to stand in silence for that period of time. Among those who did join the debate, some stated we had a contract with the college that obliged us to accept certain conditions, and standing at formal hall could be construed as one of them. Others suggested it was unclear if we were being asked to stand for grace or as a mark of respect for our teachers. Yet others questioned whether those two Latin words, translated by the classicists among us as meaning, “May the Blessed bless”, could even be categorised as Christian, especially given that many Oxbridge colleges had far more elaborate renditions of grace. Finally, two or three colleagues agreed with my position, but felt (correctly no doubt) that there were weightier battles to fight.

My plan to petition the authorities quickly fell apart, but I decided I would do what I could personally to express my disagreement. And so, for eight weeks a term, three terms a year, for three years, I sat through the Benedictus Bendicat incantation. Occasionally I was joined by one or two sympathisers, but on most occasions I was the lone person seated in the high-ceilinged, wood-panelled hall. The action may have been quixotic, but proved instructive for the response it received. A few dirty looks was as bad as it ever got in those three years. No student, kitchen staff or lecturer ever berated me, or asked me to reconsider in a tone that was anything but polite.

Would anybody dare to protest in this fashion in India, given the ever-incipient wrath of the mob, and the protection throngs usually receive from authorities less interested in the law than in maintaining public order? Salman Mohammed tried in Thiruvananthapuram, refusing to stand for the anthem as a way of rejecting nationalism. He was arrested, charged with sedition, and denied bail for 35 days.

Revering national symbols

It might seem like an apples and oranges comparison to juxtapose Jana Gana Mana and Benedictus Benedicat, but the liberal attitude I described in relation to standing for grace extends to God Save the Queen. Have you heard of Brits threatening those who sit through the anthem at football matches? Do people write angry letters to newspapers about Lewis Hamilton resetting his helmet hair on the podium and waving to fans even as the anthem plays?

If you think the United Kingdom is the wrong country to compare ourselves with, consider a nation every bit as enthusiastic about national symbols as we are: the United States of America. The Star Spangled Banner plays at most major sporting events and everybody stands hand on heart facing the band. Well, not quite everybody. A small minority chooses to sit through renditions of the anthem, and faces no eviction from stadia. Whether one remains seated as a conscientious objector or through sheer laziness, it is a constitutionally protected form of free expression. Even mocking the national anthem, as the Englishman Sacha Baron Cohen did so marvellously in his film Borat receives far less public censure than Aamir Khan faced merely for expressing his discomfort with incidents of intolerance in India.

After I finished my studies and returned to India, I was often asked if I’d been a second class citizen in England. I took to replying that I hadn’t been a citizen at all, of any class, thus evading the issue. If I had to answer, I’d say I encountered plenty of ignorance, prejudice, and even straightforward racism. But my experience in formal hall is more typical of the attitude of the people I met than any of those unpleasant occurrences.

I’m also happy to have discovered, in Googling Benedictus Benedicat to make sure I had the spelling right, that Newnham College in Cambridge has eliminated Christian grace from its dining room protocol, replacing it with a clunky but secular alternative.

Support our journalism by paying for Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at
Sponsored Content BY 

Bringing the glamour back to flying while keeping it affordable

The pleasure of air travel is back, courtesy of an airline in India.

Before dinner, fashionable women would retire to the powder room and suited-up men would indulge in hors d’oeuvres, surrounded by plush upholstery. A gourmet meal would soon follow, served in fine tableware. Flying, back in the day, was like an upscale party 35,000 feet up in the air.

The glamour of flying has been chronicled in Keith Lovegrove’s book titled ‘Airline: Style at 30,000 feet’. In his book, Lovegrove talks about how the mid-50s and 60s were a “fabulously glamorous time to fly in commercial airlines”. Back then, flying was reserved for the privileged and the luxuries played an important role in making travelling by air an exclusive experience.

Fast forward to the present day, where flying has become just another mode of transportation. In Mumbai, every 65 seconds an aircraft lands or takes off at the airport. The condition of today’s air travel is a cumulative result of the growth in the volume of fliers, the accessibility of buying an air ticket and the number of airlines in the industry/market.

Having relegated the romance of flying to the past, air travel today is close to hectic and borderline chaotic thanks to busy airports, packed flights with no leg room and unsatisfactory meals. With the skies dominated by frequent fliers and the experience having turned merely transactional and mundane, is it time to bid goodbye to whatever’s enjoyable in air travel?

With increased resources and better technology, one airline is proving that flying in today’s scenario can be a refreshing, enjoyable and affordable experience at the same time. Vistara offers India’s first and only experience of a three-cabin configuration. At a nominal premium, Vistara’s Premium Economy is also redefining the experience of flying with a host of features such as an exclusive cabin, 20% extra legroom, 4.5-inch recline, dedicated check-in counter and baggage delivery on priority. The best in class inflight dining offers a range of regional dishes, while also incorporating global culinary trends. Other industry-first features include Starbucks coffee on board and special assistance to solo women travellers, including preferred seating.

Vistara’s attempts to reduce the gap between affordability and luxury can also be experienced in the economy class with an above average seat pitch, complimentary selection of food and beverages and a choice of leading newspapers and publications along with an inflight magazine. Hospitality aboard Vistara is, moreover, reminiscent of Singapore Airlines’ famed service with a seal of Tata’s trust, thanks to its cabin crew trained to similarly high standards.

The era of style aboard a ‘flying boat’ seems long gone. However, airlines like Vistara are bringing back the allure of air travel. Continuing their campaign with Deepika Padukone as brand ambassador, the new video delivers a bolder and a more confident version of the same message - making flying feel new again. Watch the new Vistara video below. For your next trip, rekindle the joy of flying and book your tickets here.


This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Vistara and not by the Scroll editorial team.