CONTINUOUS INTERNAL ASSESSMENT

SEMESTER – III

SUBJECT: LAW, POVERTY AND DEVELOPMENT

‘TAKING THE CASE OF AN INDIVIDUAL NAMED ‘NATHA’ FROM

THE MOVIE PEEPLI LIVE, 2010,
ANALYZE THE CONTENT OF THE MOVIE TO FIT IN VARIOUS
AREAS OF LAW, POVERTY AND DEVELOPMENT’

LAKSHYATA DAGA
SEC C/ ROLL NO. 96
INTRODUCTION

Poverty is a social phenomena, where a group of people are unable to fullfill the basic needs
of life. these people do not have access to the requisite resources required to attain the
minimum, basic standard of living. The factors which cause poverty are many. In India, a
majority of the poor work in the primary sector.

Peepli Live is socisl satire produced by Amir Khan and directed by Anushka Rizvi, which
take =s on the issue of farmer suicides. Unlike previous Bollywood movies on similar
subjects, like Mother India (1957), and Upkaar (1967), the tone of the movie is not
necessarily a feel- good film. It discusses the life of Natha, a poor farmer, forced to kill
himself to reciee a government subsidy and the attitude of the society’s stakeholders, to the
plight of farmers.

PLOT AND ANALYSIS

Natha Omkardas Manekpuri, character played by Omkardas Manekpuri, is the protagonist

and a farmer who lives in a small town of ‘Peepli’. He is an ardent pot-smoker, married to a
frustrated woman played by Shalini Vatsa, who blames him for not running the household
well. The live with his mother, who is bedridden from her old age and his elder brother
Budhia, who is a bachelor. Unable to pay back their mortgage on their land, they seek help
from a local political leader, who ridicules him and tells him about a government scheme, in
which the families of farmers who kill themselves, receive 1 lakh rupees from the
government. Desperate, the elder brother manipulates, Natha into agreeing to commit suicide.
Meanwhile, the elections are upcoming in the country, and a young passionate local journalist
called Rakesh, played by =, overhears the suicide story. He decides to over the same in his
newspaper. One thing lead to another and the news gets covered by an acclaimed news
channel. Channels after channels pour in and he news get mega – sensationalised. Used as an
opportunity to swing votes durig the elections, various political parties come and law claim
on the characters. Some even guaranteeing his death to push their political agenda. The satire
depicts how no one actually cares about the poor and those in power only pursue the paths
that help them gain it.

A few scenes brilliantly depict how performative politics, is not only a waste of resources but
also perpetuates poverty. In a scene, Natha is gifted, a hand pump by the ruling party
government without any means for the installation of the same. In another scene, he is gifted
a TV by a political party leader. In another scene, the government official is going through
various government schemes but could not find any or farmers who wished to commit
suicide. In an interview, the Director herself asked “We have compensation for the dead, but
what about the living?”. It was the governemnt’s bizzare scheme that inspired her to make the
movie.

After the sensationalising of his case, many major media channels tent around Natha’s house
and the police force had to be deployed for his protection. Interestlingly a fair is made around
the house, and it seemed like the locals were able to generate some cash out of the footfall
near Natha’s house. It can also be a metaphor for the circus that media had set up around
Natha and his family’s life. the agricultural ministry at the Central level, puts the onus to
make a decision on the High Court to avoid any responsibility, as suicide is a ‘legal matter’.

Surprisingly, no character in the entire movie shows any empathy except for Rakesh, who
seems to be moved by the death of Hori Mohata, a landless farmer, who died in the same
ditch he used to dig to sell soil, out of malnutrition. Everyone in his house, including his
children keep asking him about his death. Eventually, Natha is kidnapped by the same local
leader and kept in a warehouse, which he begs to stay in after he is being taken to the ruling
party’s press conference. In the quest to find him, the news channels reach the warehouse and
there is an accidental fire. Everyone assumes that Natha is the one dead as he is not seen after
the fire, but in a later scene it is shown that it was Rakesh who dies in the fire started by
politicians and the media, symbolizing the death of a citizen that actually cared about the
plight of the poor in a country set ablaze by politics and sensationalism.

Natha on the other hand is shown working as a manual labourer in a city, while his family
mourn the fact that they did not get the compensation, as the case was ruled as accident, not a
suicide.
CONCLUSION

In the modern film industry, filmmakers have touched on various contemporary issues.
Lately, movies with a message of social upliftment or showing the plight of the margialised
sections of dsociety have garnered quite a lot of attention. Not only do thise films entertain
the audience but they also instill a feeling of empathy for these social classes. India, with its
unique culture , has equally peculiar problems which have been an insoiration to filmmakers.
Poverty is a subject of great concern in a developing country like ours. Factors influencing
the same have various socio- cultural basis that i=may not be seen in other parts of the world.

In the movie, many areas of rural poverty have been touched through Natha’s family and
Hori Mahoto. The indifference of political leaders, money making mindset of the media, and
the toll poverty takes upon the personal relationships of people are all covered. Although the
film is critized for ignoring subjects like caste, which play a big role in rural society, it is still
a much needed view of the realitites of the rural poor.