Ms Chinoy’s award

Nothing is good enough for the cynics

Soon after Ms Chinoy’s moving speech at the Oscars, the good old cynical and bitter critique, cloaked in not so subtle tones, appeared.

Numerous arguments have been put forward about why our celebration of Ms. Chinoy’s Oscar should be guarded. They run something like this: 1) Those celebrating the Oscar have forgotten ‘the politics of the Oscars’. We are reifying the Empire’s discourse on gender. (I am actually serious). Also, the award-winning movie is about a terrible practice, so what are you celebrating? 2) The West is only interested in celebrating a certain image of Pakistan. Any work regarding militancy or violence in Pakistan receives a pat on the back so let’s not blow this out of proportion. In fact one commentator even told us “how to win an Oscar”. 3) Why does the first Pakistani documentary to receive an Oscar have to present brutality against women?

To those raising question 3, I say this: Maybe you need to consider that most of the earlier documentaries made by Pakistanis may not have been good enough against the competition they faced. How many Pakistani documentaries can the cynics name that deserved an Oscar? Surely, the choice of the subject alone is not deterministic. Documentaries are about telling stories – often simple but shocking. Why shouldn’t our first Oscar nomination and win be about a reality as terrible as the crime of acid attacks on women? This subject isn’t any less valid than drone attacks (which certain columnists wanted to see a documentary on). Ms Chinoy does not have to choose every subject you consider important. Independent filmmakers have that privilege. To belittle an awe-inspiring achievement by saying, “oh why didn’t you make a film about that other subject?” might reflect a desperate attempt to sound relevant but it is hardly a valid critique. The crime of acid attacks is not any less important than any subject imaginable in Pakistan. You may differ but you can’t hope to have the right answer on this because there isn’t a right answer. There is, as always, the option of sounding absurd. Take your pick.

One of Ms. Chinoy’s earlier documentaries about children being trained to be suicide bombers did win an Emmy. Her TED Talk on that documentary is deeply moving. It questions the West’s usual narrative on Talibanisation rather than furthering it. I respect the cynics’ freedom of speech but your speech will not count for anything if it is based on ignorance.

For those who think they have figured out “how to win an Oscar” i.e. by covering violence against women and militancy I say this: try covering militancy in your articles for two years and call us when you win a Pulitzer for it.

Those who mention US funds being allocated to people who confirm allegedly Western biases about Pakistan fail to mention the 20 million dollars that the US is spending every year on Fulbright scholarships in Pakistan. Yes, I said 20 million dollars. What bias is that confirming?

The “Empire’s discourse on gender” argument is blissfully and willfully ignorant to what has been achieved. This win represents a victory for openness and a freer discourse – furthered by a woman focusing on suffering women. It is relevant not just for the present but also against past injustices where we have remained silent against grave crimes. A Pakistani filmmaker took on a difficult question, focused on brutal acts but also celebrated uplifting acts of individual and collective bravery to fight ignorance, injustice and violence.

No one in Pakistan is undermining the gravity of the crimes covered in the documentary. People are not celebrating or being ignorant of the horrific reality of the crime of acid attacks, they are celebrating a film that also shows the heroes fighting back. There is courage in confronting a nation with that what is most ugly about it. There is virtue in that worthy of celebration.

Who in their right minds would say that Pakistan should not focus on the problem of acid attacks on women? But that remains true regardless of the Oscar. Why not see celebrating the Oscar as an important step in acceptance of a more open discourse on the issue?

Pieces calling for a reality check have mentioned Ms Chinoy’s statement allegedly made some years back that Pakistan is not ready for democracy. Such exercises would be laughable except if they weren’t so troubling in completely missing the point. Ms Chinoy never put herself on a pedestal as the saviour of Pakistan. To burden her with any such thing is absurd. You are free to disagree with her views on politics and I have a feeling she would welcome that. To attempt to undermine her achievement by taking issue with her political views is ridiculous. She won the Oscar for something completely different, remember? She is a filmmaker and a bloody good one. Like most hardworking people, she takes her passions seriously. She came across something that touched her and made a film about it. Just lump it.

Pakistan isn’t perfect because Ms Chinoy won an Oscar. She never claimed that. No one did. Her film focuses on a violent practice and it is incumbent upon us to eradicate it.

None of the victims in Saving Face cover their faces and the film forces us to confront an ugly reality plaguing our society. The fact that each viewer has to look at the victims’ faces is enormously powerful. Confronting that which we may not find comfortable to behold is the essence of any argument or movement seeking meaningful change. That is the beauty and power of Saving Face and the message it holds for Pakistan. It relies on openness. That message won an Oscar. That is why Pakistan must celebrate the film and Ms Chinoy.

The writer is a Barrister and an Advocate of the High Courts. He is currently pursuing his LL.M at a law school in the United States. He can be reached at [email protected] or on his Twitter account: @wordoflaw