It’s dead man walking again in Tamil Nadu – Times of India

Early in his election campaign, Kamal Haasan got what he wanted: attention from not just the voters, but his political rivals too. If inciting chief minister Edappadi K Palaniswami was Kamal’s idea, he did it with elan. “Many present-day ministers wouldn’t have seen the bright face of MGR,” the MNM leader told gatherings in Virudhunagar and Tuticorin past Tuesday. “But I have grown up on MGR’s lap; he greeted me whenever I achieved something big or small.”
EPS retorted: “The AIADMK was founded by MGR, and we are the only party that can claim his legacy.”
Kamal isn’t the first one this season to allude to MGR. Speaking at the MGR University in Chennai in March 2018, Rajinikanth had said: “I am not MGR, but I can give a pro-poor government like his. Once when I was hospitalised, MGR used to call regularly to inquire about my wellbeing.” Rajini, too, got an acerbic treatment from the AIADMK. Even the BJP tried to appropriate the fur-capped darling of the Tamils, using his image along with that of BJP state president L Murugan and comparing MGR with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The AIADMK asked its overambitious ally to behave.
Those were only trailers of a suspense – even comic – thriller that will play out for five months before the assembly election. What’s striking is that 33 years after his death, MGR continues to be at the centre of public memory and political machinations. The AIADMK can indeed claim MGR’s legacy, primarily because of retaining the name – despite two episodes of rebellion the party survived – the founder chose. Nobody could match the pro-poor and humane spirit of MGR, the governments under J Jayalalithaa and EPS had tried to keep welfare measures on their priority list, though their intentions were more political than philanthropic.
Rajini and Kamal will have personal anecdotes to share about MGR’s kindness and warmth, but projecting themselves as the new-age MGRs will be preposterous. For, MGR was much more than the sum of all that his legacy claimants try to appropriate.
Why can’t the recent star entrants in politics match MGR? Here is reproducing a part of what I wrote in 2002 when the AIADMK turned 30: He (MGR) was just the hero Tamil Nadu badly wanted in real (life). He never played a negative role. On screen, MGR never smoked or drank and always treated his women with respect. Superstar MGR was the harbinger of hope, the warrior of the oppressed and the messiah of the masses. He had sparkling eyes, till those trademark dark glasses hid them. He was fair.
How much of that were Rajini and Kamal on the silver screen? As for the transition from the decked-up film sets to the dust bowls of politics, MGR’s was a gradual manoeuvre, unlike that of the new stars. While being the glamourous messenger of the DMK’s ideologies to the masses, MGR was being politically educated, so much that when he rebelled and launched his own party, the ADMK, on October 17, 1972, he could hit the ground running.
The socio-political fabric, too, was conducive. More from the 2002 story: The DMK was being seen as a party predominantly of such castes as mudaliars and vellalars. Other castes such as kallars, mukkulathor and dalits were getting an inferior treatment in the DMK and it was only natural for them to rally behind the ADMK (which became the AIADMK on September 12, 1976). For MGR, turning his fan clubs into party units was a breeze. It may not be so for Rajini or Kamal.
[email protected]