Nepotism in Bollywood- A Bet on Genes?

By Mahima Paliwal | 1.8k | 22 Jul 2017

Since this is all over the media right now I thought why not share my thoughts on it and maybe help people develop a new perspective on it. Almost every single article coming out right now, is adding more fuel to fire that should have doused out a long time ago. I am not saying public issues are not meant to be explored or that our celebrities should keep mum on such topics. All I am saying is that more than the talk of nepotism and unfairness in general, this topic has become a Kangana Raunat vs the bred industry fight. Now I know that whenever people are treated unfairly in terms of talent and work opportunities it really bothers a large section of the nation and it must be discussed. Its good to see everyone sort of joins forces, however it doesn't work always. As people hear a topic or a statement by a celebrity, they quickly identify themselves with it. Due to past experience or the fear of future interactions and set an opinion on proving their point of view is right, but actually just end up criticising others for their point of views. People really need to weigh opinions and policies from both sides and look at the bigger picture, in terms of Bollywood maybe even the hidden picture. What I mean by this will become clear, as you will read on.

Kangana vs bred industry

What is Nepotism?

The practice among those with power or influence of favouring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs, now that is the definition provided by Google. "Nepotism is merely a weakness of the human nature; it takes great deal of will-power and strength to rise above our intrinsic nature"(Kangana Ranaut). So which definition is more appealing? Probably Kangana's because it puts people who can identify with it feel better about themselves, because they get to shift blame of their failure. Human nature is such that no matter how hard you try you always fall prey to instinctual behaviour and that's exactly why everyone cannot be expected to have enough strength to fight through this instinct. It’s not the first time this is happening and also probably not the last. During the times of kings and kingdoms, the King’s son no matter how worthless would ascend the throne after him. Now some would argue this is not the time of kings and they will not put up with acts like this. Then don’t, no one has asked you to. Yes the throne passes on to the son of the king, but if he is useless the people don’t follow his command and soon he gets overthrown. It takes time yes, but it happens nonetheless.

Joffrey - Game of thrones

Now was it unfair to begin with, that a worthless and unfit ruler was given the throne on the basis of lineage- maybe yes, maybe no. Why do I say no – as a parent (King) he always wants the best for his kids, he probably even thinks his kids are as good as him if not better. Parents work their lives away in creating a secure future for their children, even if it means being unfair to the world at large. Is it ethical – perhaps not, but keep yourself in their shoes and then think about it.

Talent?

Yes the biggest reason for concern here is that ‘Talent’ goes unrecognised. Really? Is talent that weak, that it can be stopped just because someone didn’t give you an equal opportunity and decided to rather present it to their relatives? No! If that were true we wouldn’t have SRK, Irrfan khan, Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Amitabh Bachchan. And if nepotism always worked we wouldn’t have Uday Chopra, Tusshar Kapoor and Fardeen Khan, etc.

Questions!

Nepotism can sometimes be a lose-lose situation (Vikram Chatwal). Is very true in most of the cases in Bollywood, however, it has worked really well in some. Had we judged Ranbir Kapoor with his first film, and no one would have offered him another – would we have such a great actor today? Perhaps not, but would Ranbir have gotten another chance had he not been a celebrity kid? Perhaps not either, but Ranbir isn’t the only one who was given chances- Amitabh Bachchan had around 7 flops before he hit the bulls eye, Deepika’s career from 2007 until 2012 consisted of 3 Hits out of 12 films she did. Now why did these people get a chance, not because of nepotism clearly!

What?

So what am I trying to establish here? Its not that talent is buried under nepotism, yes we get useless, unnecessary films once in awhile because of nepotism but that isn’t the end of the world. Actually if you compare statistics, a product of nepotism like ‘Badrinath ki dulhania’ earn more than ‘Hindi Medium’. Now why does that happen? Is it because we prefer repetition to novelty? Maybe yes, and that’s why movies with star kids do better business and earn more people choice awards in comparison to non-Bollywood background actors. Whose fault is it: the filmmaker’s because he considers his job - strict business and decides to hire actors that will fetch him more profit or the audience’s that time and again is ready to watch mindless movies with actors (who can’t act; not all) over ones that choose to be a part of sensible cinema?

Whose fault is it?

Actually no ones: cinema is entertainment, and no one has the right to decide what type of content should entertain you. If senseless movies starring celebrities’ interest you watch those, if sensible story lines with actors intrigue you – watch those. Always remember it is entertainment for you and business for filmmakers, and as good businessmen they will do whatever it takes to make a profit. And frankly speaking: why shouldn’t they?!

Conclusion:

All topics that are aired in the media are really not worth wasting time on. All you need to know is that: at the end of day it is only talent that matters, the true passion and skills of your work that matter. And time is witness to the one truth of life: “It's not about the cards you're dealt, but how you play the hand” (Randy Pausch) that matters. Yes the starting line is not the same for everyone, but life isn’t about the start is it, it’s about how it ends and how proud you are of yourself at the end of it.

Proud!!!

PS: Just an opinion, not meant as an offence to anyone else’s opinion. "Equal opportunity means everyone will have a fair chance at being incompetent." (Laurence J. Peter)

Opinion.