Spoke to Shakespeare, the sultan of smut, about what he thinks of the sarkar shooting down Ullu!
The government has ordered the blocking of 25 OTT websites and apps showcasing obscene, vulgar and in some cases, pornographic content. Representation pic/istock
Shakespeare (real name) is a star from another sky, which exists six feet under. I’m not surprised, you’ve probably not heard of this underground actor. Or watched the 500 films/series/shorts he’s starred in. He’s an onscreen star, alright.
Consider that he once simply posted an Instagram Reel from the sets of his series, Utha Pathak, with him and few women, bathed in chocolate sauce. That short/reel, Shakespeare tells me, got him 360 million views, and 5 million new followers, on Insta alone.
In Utha Patak, if you really wanna know, and since I asked him, Shakespeare plays a different character in each episode: plumber, carpenter, chef, photographer, tailor… “Top TRP,” he says, for the viewership his series has got on the app, ALT.
The government has banned 25 [such] apps, he had messaged me earlier, to say he’s starred as lead on all 25 of them! Shakespeare, by his admission, is an “erotica star.” As in, generally speaking, an actor in the adult-entertainment or semi-porn industry.
Imagine Shakespeare, in his primate form, performing the most primal act, for public consumption. The difference between erotica and porn being the lighting of the room (ie budgets), I guess.
Also, cultural and narrative context, isn’t it? Is Khajuraho, porn; and Utha Patak, erotica? As an adult, you could be okay with both.
Shakespeare Tripathy, the male lead of adult films, in a still from the series Utha Pathak
Either way, Shakespeare tells me, he has a child-lock even for his social media followers. As for his content on the apps, he claims, “There is no violence, murder, terrorism, drug-use… And the women make their own choices [both as actors and characters].”
He further philosophises, “Take a movie like Animal, where women are even disrespected; it becomes a hit. My shows/films are about lust, which is a source of natural imagination. You can’t control it, like you can’t control hunger.”
I haven’t critiqued Shakespeare’s masterpieces. Don’t intend to. They ought to be critic-proof, anyway.
But we have heard of cases filed against specific shows, on apps such as ALT, that have landed them in legal trouble — for sexualising minors; offending the Army, with a man in uniform making love; or plots encouraging/insinuating incest.
“But those are not my shows!” Shakespeare protests, since it’s not particular movies/series that have been blocked; but entire apps, 18 such before this, that have vanished from the digital ether, based on a blanket ban ordered by the state.
Shakespeare, while obviously pissed, doesn’t sound half as loud/rabid as the door-knob news anchor, solidly cheerleading censorship, further demanding arrests, over a news debate that I watched (before writing this), with his pliant panelists, alongside, full-throttle rattled and upset by obscenity on apps!
These blokes, who peddle hate and propaganda, for daily news, on prime-time Indian TV, also for ratings/money, are the ones to talk.
You’ve probably not watched ALT, since it doesn’t suit your senses/sensibility. I don’t watch the crazy news channels. And that’s the first-principle argument against any kinda content ban, no?
It’s not the exit of these apps, but the entry of the state, with a seeming public-consensus on censorship, that could cause concern for the likeminded.
For, once precedence is recurrently set, how do you draw the moral line, let alone define, obscenity?
And wasn’t vulgarity allowed in the original Cinematograph Act, that certifies feature films for theatrical releases, anyway? How do you distinguish between vulgarity and obscenity; an Instagram thirst-trap, and Kavita Bhabi in a saree on Ullu?
Must seek legal advice. Entertainment lawyer Tanu Banerjee, partner, Khaitan & Co, tells me, “While this ban was basis a report prepared in conjunction with multiple ministries, plus FICCI and CII consulted, what it says isn’t in public record.
“Given their content, across, though, these apps may find it difficult be able defend themselves in court against obscenity [charges].”
Is the state well within its right to ban, outright? “Yes.” As and when, at its own will?
Banerjee says, “These apps could argue, if the government can unilaterally decide what adults can/can’t watch, and that producers have creative freedom.
“But then, sexually explicit content is prohibited under law, and the government does have the power to block access, in the interest of national security, public order, etc.”
As in an emergency. In this case, what was the emergency? Is there an empirically established, direct, causal relationship between sexual crimes and soft-porn?
On this point, Shakespeare vehemently butts in, “Back when Nirbhaya happened, were these apps around? They just took off during the [202o-21] lockdown...” I’ve muted Shakespeare, but he’s right!
I did first hear of Ullu, in the context of a rare, positive business story, emerging from the pandemic, when its customer-base “boomed” at 250 per cent, in the first two months, before “reaching normal”, that is, 60 per cent, day-on-day growth (charging users Rs 36 for five days, and Rs 198 a year)!
Which is what Ullu’s Lucknow-based, suited-booted founder, Vibhu Agarwal, told me, while holding talks for content tie-ups in 18 countries then, and planning to move to Australia himself.
I don’t know if he’ll push back the way America’s legendary porn-publisher Larry Flynt (Hustler) had a profound impact on the US First Amendment [freedom of expression] law in 1984.
Agarwal’s funda was quite simple: “I’m just an Agarwal, with business in my blood.” Well, the blood’s stopped streaming!
Mayank Shekhar attempts to make sense of mass culture.
He tweets @mayankw14 Send your feedback to mailbag@mid-day.com
The views expressed in this column are the individual’s and don’t represent those of the paper.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
