Letter to The Hon.Minister of Information and Broadcasting

Letter Drafted by the Students association

 to The Hon.Minister of Information and Broadcasting

Students’ Association

Film and Television Institute of India,

Law College Road,

Pune:411004

To,                                                                                                                 9^th September, 2010

Ambika Soni ji

The Honorable Minister

Information and Broadcasting

Government of India

Shastri Bhavan

New Delhi-110001

Dear Madam,

We have already sent joint representation from the staff, faculty and students regarding the report prepared by Hewitt Associates and the re-designing of the syllabus for the diploma courses, but have not received any reply. The students of FTII have no option now but to request your immediate intervention in the developments taking place in the institute.

A few days before, a press report in the TOI mentioned the re-modeling of the institute as a PPP. The report has caused much anxiety and confusion among the students, teachers and staff on the campus, as none of the respective associations were taken into confidence. On being questioned, both Hewitt Associates and the Institute Administration denied the report. However, both refrained from a press release regarding the same. That the report was from a PTI source heightens our concern.

Even after repeated appeals and requests, all we have received from Hewitt Associates is a truncated Project Report. The sad inconsistency is that while this same report mentions “students” as stakeholders, in actuality these very “stakeholders” are being denied access to the full report.

What is bothering all present on campus is the secretive nature of the entire process – where a private company has been hired to make a report on the institute, even draft a vision statement for a national institute like FTII – a task for which existing constitutional bodies such as the AC and GC are more qualified and equipped in any case. Moreover, the intention here seems to be geared towards disinvesting in an institution formed under the Neheruvian idea of nation building. This ironically coincides with the celebrations of fifty years of FTII’s glorious existence.

The second fundamental issue is regarding the formation of a revised syllabus – an agenda of utmost importance, which, as you are aware, has been dragging for more than two years now. Over time a number of persons ranging from academicians, filmmakers, ex-students and students have maintained that any review of the syllabus should be a constructive and holistic process. Also, keeping in view of the Reservation Act, 2006, every institution should ensure that there is no qualitative depletion in the academics. Sadly, even after so many months of deliberation, the entire process is still being subverted at the institute level. Lack of transparency and continuum between various meetings has resulted in a stalemate. Now the institute authorities are trying to bulldoze with a truncated syllabus instead of improving the available infrastructure – a demand that is being appropriated in the garb of the report prepared by Hewitt Associates.

The so called “reconstruction” of FTII, done on the principles of a private company accompanied by a stripped down syllabus, will fundamentally alter the fabric of the institute and the plural cinema that FTII has encouraged and stood by over the years. Given the present situation, FTII is in danger of becoming a back office for churning out blue collar technicians for an industry which the Khosla Committee has commented, is “… a wild and fiercely competitive jungle, infested with peddlers of cheap and vulgar entertainment, money grabbing producers, greedy distributors and unscrupulous exhibitors who keep the medium in a vicious stranglehold…” (Khosla committee report, 1972)

Instead, as the Khosla Committee had agreed, the objectives of the Institute should be “… to impart training in that raising the standards of films to make them aesthetically and artistically more satisfying and realistically more acceptable and convincing. There should be a constant endeavor to raise the taste of the cinema going public by promoting the making of films which passes technical and artistic excellence… to give a complete academic, aesthetic and practical training in filmmaking so that the diploma holders can find ready entrance into the world of filmmaking.”

You have been advocating tribal representation in the institute for years now. We fail to understand how, if we go ahead with the ongoing developments, are we to expect the Institute to have a pan-India fabric?

Over the years the same demands have been made. Somehow they are lost every time in the bureaucratic jargon which threatens to stifle the very consciousness on which institutions like FTII have been set up.

We request your immediate intervention in the developments to restore the faith of students on campus. The situation on the institute will continue to remain volatile until this lack of transparency is removed and a healthy dialogue is sincerely undertaken to avert the crisis.  We look forward to your support in dealing with a system which assumes all power without any corresponding responsibility.

Thanking you

Yours Sincerely,

Samarth Dixit

President

Students Association

CC:

The Chairman (Governing Council)

Secretary Films (Ministry of I&B)

Joint Secretary Films (Ministry I&B)

Members of the Governing Council

Members of the Academic Council

Director (FTII)

Dean (Films)

Dean (Television)

President (GRAFTII)