English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Tom Alter, the blue-eyed ‘saheb’ of Indian cinema, is no more

Published

on

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The acclaimed actor, sports journalist, Padma Shri awardee and Urdu lover was recently diagnosed with skin cancer. He was 67

– By Puneet Nicholas Yadav

An acclaimed actor, sports journalist, Padma Shri awardee and Urdu lover, Tom Alter, is no more. The blue-eyed ‘saheb’ of Indian cinema, who portrayed a wide range of characters through his nearly four decade long acting career that saw him feature in over 300 films, was recently diagnosed with terminal stage of skin cancer and admitted to Mumbai’s Saifee Hospital. He passed away late on Friday night, surrounded with his family members. He was 67.

Born Thomas Beach Alter in Mussourie in 1950, Tom was an American through his family lineage. His grandparents were American missionaries who traveled from Ohio to preach, convert and teach in the part of Punjab that is now in Pakistan. His father, also a missionary, was born in Sialkot (now in Pakistan) and later settled in the Himalayan hill station of Mussourie. Tom went to the famous Woodstock School in Landour with other Americans, children of missionary parents, diplomats, business executives and other ‘settlers’ and later for a brief year-long stint to the prestigious Yale University in New Haven, USA.

But if you ever met the man, you could only risk calling him an American or non-Indian at your own peril. Tom was as Indian as an Indian can be and immensely proud of it. With his impeccable Hindi and flair for Urdu, Tom was quite the anti-thesis of that image of him that most Indian moviegoers are familiar with – that of the ‘gora’ villain, a foreign diplomat or British colonial – roles which typecasted him in Bollywood and for a period won him the moniker of Indian cinema’s ‘blue-eyed sahib’. But then those were roles.

Fiercely proud of his Indian identity, Tom would often speak – in what could turn into a gripping monologue unless he was interrupted – about the ‘idea of India’. The current political and social churning in the country wherein gau rakshaks, lynch-mobs, abusive right-wing trolls and political leaders who promptly advise anyone with views divergent to theirs to ‘go to Pakistan’ was something that affected Tom deeply and he worried about what we were transforming into as a nation. The concept of a Religious State is something Tom never missed to vociferously attack.

In an interview that the actor had given to this writer sometime in 2010, he had minced no words while comparing a Religious State with “the making of a pornographic film”.

In that interview – the substance of which is more relevant today than it perhaps ever was – Tom has said: “I have always held that without India and everything that it stands for the world will be destroyed. If we destroy the secular, democratic and free country that India is and become like other Religious States, the world would come to an end in not more than 25 years.”

“It’s too easy to run a Religious State where there is no freedom of expression or freedom to practice what religion you want to or the freedom to wear what you like. It’s as easy as making pornography. But then Religious States will disappear without a trace, no one will remember them for anything good, just as no one remembers names of any directors of pornography,” Tom had said.

The actor, who essayed the role of freedom fighter and India’s first education minister Maulana Azad on stage in the highly acclaimed play ‘Maulana’, believed that India’s real challenge today is to preserve its secular and democratic set up, traits that he believed had taken a beating over the years.

His pride in India aside, Tom was always just as passionate about the one thing that got him international acclaim and recognition – acting – a craft which, ironically, wasn’t his first love when he started off in life. He was more interested in sports, cricket in particular, and pursued a simultaneous career as a sports writer in the 1980s and 1990s even when big roles in films began coming his way. He was the first person to interview Sachin Tendulkar for a television channel in the 1980s, much before the cricketer earned his iconic status. His love for cricket stayed with him till the end. When this writer met him in Bhopal a couple of year ago – where he had come to perform Maluana to a packed audience at the Ravindra Bhavan – Tom had admitted that he missed writing on sports as often as he would like.

Tom had started off as a teacher in a hamlet called Jagadri in Haryana at the age of 19 and in those days rarely watched Hindi films. But then that same year, almost like the script of a good Bollywood film, his life took a sudden turn when he saw the then reigning superstar of India, Rajesh Khanna, romancing the stunning Sharmila Tagore in the cult film Aradhana that had released in September 1969.

Tom would often remark – “I saw Aradhna over and over again and was in love with Rajesh Khanna. I wanted to become Rajesh Khanna. I packed up my stuff and decided to quit my teaching role in Jagadri and move to Mumbai”.

In 1972, Tom became one of only three aspirants – the other two being actor Benjamin Gilani and Phunsok Ladakhi – to be selected from a batch of over 800 candidates from across north and central India to get selected for the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII), Pune. Tom’s talent in acting was evident during his stint at FTII from where he passed out in 1974, winning a gold medal in his acting diploma course. At the FTII, he struck a close bond with Naseeruddin Shah. Tom, Naseeruddin Shah and Benjamin Gilani would go on to form the theatre troupe- Motley – in 1979.

After the initial struggle to find his feet in the fiercely competitive world of Bollywood where he had no godfather, Tom got a break in Ramanand Sagar’s 1976 production, Charas, in which he played actor Dharmendra’s ‘firang’ boss. Dharmendra was already a huge deal among Indian cinemagoers then but Tom managed to make a mark and was noticed by other directors and producers who began offering him roles – though largely of the same sort – that of a ‘gora’ character. This stereotype of playing the ‘blue-eyed saheb’ would break only occasionally, particularly in films like Raj Kapoor’s Ram Teri Ganga Maili or Vidhu Vinod Chopra’s Parinda in which he played pivotal roles and as an Indian character.

Through his career, Tom worked with leading actors, producers and directors – the likes of Chetan Anand, Dev Anand, V Shantaram, Hrishikesh Mukherjee, Manmohan Desai, Shyam Benegal and Subhash Ghai, Mahesh Bhatt, Ketan Mehta, Priyadarshan and even Satyajit Ray. Offers of working in foreign productions too came along and Tom did pick up roles in Richard Attenborough’s Oscar-winning film Gandhi and the Peter O’Toole starrer One Night with the King.

While his acting resume expanded with each passing year, Tom also ventured into theatre giving audiences stellar, mind-blowing performances in plays like Ghalib ke Khat, Maulana (both in chaste Urdu), Lal Qile ka Aakhri Mushaira, Trisanga, Teesveen Shatabdi, Copenhagen and the City of Djinns.

But unlike several Indian actors – like his dear friend Naseeruddin Shah – who are associated with both theatre and cinema, Tom never took a dim view of the Indian film industry. “Whatever I am today is because of the roles – even the bad ones – that I got in Indian movies. I can never, ever disown the Indian film industry or criticise it”, Tom told this writer once.

When asked if he regretted not having become a ‘star’ in Indian cinema despite his indisputable talent, Tom had said: “You need that flair to present yourself, market your work. Theatre actors don’t do that.” When this writer asked him if he lacked the ‘flair’, Tom had candidly replied: “I think I did have the flair but I made some wrong decisions in the beginning of my career. Also there were some films I did which unfortunately never released. Had they released perhaps they could have pushed me in a different league. But I have no regrets.”

A question that Tom would hate being asked was “how are you so good with Urdu”. For a layman who wasn’t familiar with Tom’s body or work or his upbringing, this might seem an obvious question given the ‘colour’ of Tom’s skin. But Tom would almost lose his famous temper (if he was in one of those moods) or have some witty repartee for such a question.

“I learnt Urdu as a child. Everyone spoke in Urdu where we lived,” he had once told this writer. Tom’s father was well versed with Urdu and even read the Bible in the language – something that Tom followed too. Tom would pick up Urdu books, dictionaries (though one felt that he never really needed them because he understood the language better than even some Urdu scholars) and poetry whenever he got a chance, and would get extremely agitated by anyone who ignorantly associated the language with Pakistan.

“Gandhiji gave the language a beautiful name- Hindustani. He learnt the language and its script. He even wanted all members of the Congress to learn both Devanagari and Urdu scripts… The Pakistanis today say Urdu is their national language. I tell them are you mad! How can Urdu be the language of the Pakistanis? The language was born in India, in Delhi,” this writer remembers Tom telling an interviewer once.

Tom had some quirks too and the most irritating one for the people who knew him was his extremely stubborn dislike for mobile phones – “I hate the damn thing” – he would often say when asked why he didn’t have a cellphone or told that it was difficult to get in touch with him. He felt that mobile phones had connected people from far-flung regions but had also “taken away emotions, inter-personal relations and the ‘tameez’ of a conversation”.

Tom’s calming presence, his vibrant performances, his idealism and his quirks will be missed by anyone who knew him. Rest in peace, Tom Alter, the Indian sahib.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Om Birla likely to move motion to revoke suspension of 8 opposition MPs today

The Lok Sabha is likely to revoke the suspension of eight opposition MPs today, with a motion expected to be moved by the government following consensus on maintaining discipline.

Published

on

Om Birla

The suspension of eight opposition Members of Parliament in the Lok Sabha is expected to be revoked on Tuesday, with Speaker Om Birla likely to initiate the process, according to sources.

The MPs, including seven from the Congress and one from the CPI(M), were suspended on February 3 for unruly conduct during the first phase of the Budget session after a resolution was adopted by the House.

Motion to be moved in Lok Sabha

Congress leader K Suresh said that Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju is expected to move a motion around noon seeking revocation of the suspensions.

Although the suspension was initially imposed for the entire session, scheduled to conclude on April 2, opposition parties have consistently demanded reconsideration since the second phase of the session began on March 9.

Agreement on maintaining decorum

At a recent meeting convened by the Speaker, both ruling and opposition sides reportedly agreed on maintaining discipline in the House.

Key understandings include:

  • No member will enter the well of the House to protest
  • Papers will not be torn or thrown toward the Chair
  • MPs will not climb onto officials’ tables

The Lok Sabha Secretariat has also reminded members to keep areas within the Parliament premises obstruction-free to ensure smooth movement.

Speaker raises concern over conduct

Earlier, Om Birla had expressed concern over the use of banners, placards, and inappropriate language by some MPs. In a letter to party leaders, he stressed the need to uphold the dignity and traditions of parliamentary democracy.

He had also indicated that actions like suspension are taken in cases of serious misconduct, such as climbing onto tables during proceedings.

Suspended MPs

The suspended MPs include Gurjeet Singh Aujla, Hibi Eden, C Kiran Kumar Reddy, Amarinder Singh Raja Warring, Manickam Tagore, Prashant Padole, Dean Kuriakose (Congress), and S Venkatesan (CPI-M).

Continue Reading

India News

Maharashtra passes freedom of religion bill with jail term up to 10 years

Maharashtra passes anti-conversion bill with strict jail terms and fines, aiming to curb unlawful religious conversions.

Published

on

Maharashtra faces freedom of bill

The Maharashtra Assembly has passed the Freedom of Religion Bill 2026, introducing stringent penalties to curb religious conversions carried out through coercion, fraud, inducement or marriage.

The bill was cleared by voice vote late Monday, with the government asserting that it aims to protect individuals from unlawful conversions while safeguarding constitutional rights.

Under the provisions, individuals found guilty of conversion through marriage or deceit can face up to seven years in prison along with a fine of Rs 1 lakh. In cases involving minors, women, persons of unsound mind, or those belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the punishment increases to seven years’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5 lakh.

Mass conversions will also attract a jail term of up to seven years and a fine of Rs 5 lakh. Repeat offenders could face imprisonment of up to 10 years.

Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said the law is not aimed at any particular religion but seeks to prevent conversions through illegal means. He emphasised that the right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution does not include conversion through coercion or fraud.

He also noted that several states, including Odisha, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka and Jharkhand, have enacted similar laws.

The bill allows complaints to be filed by the affected individual or close relatives, while police can also initiate action in certain situations. The government said this provision is necessary as victims may not always be in a position to approach authorities.

Minister of State for Home Pankaj Bhoyar said the legislation ensures that conversions take place voluntarily and transparently. He addressed concerns over the requirement of giving a 60-day prior notice to the district magistrate, stating that the provision is meant to verify free consent.

The law also mandates informing authorities within 21 days after conversion, failing which it may be treated as invalid. The government described this as a measure for administrative record-keeping and to avoid disputes.

During the debate, members from the opposition raised concerns over possible misuse and vigilantism. Congress MLA Aslam Shaikh argued that the bill could affect constitutional rights, including privacy and equality. Some legislators also demanded that the bill be sent to a joint select committee for further scrutiny.

However, the opposition Shiv Sena (UBT) extended support. MLA Bhaskar Jadhav said the bill does not target any religion and is aimed at preventing unethical practices.

The government maintained that the law does not restrict an individual’s right to change religion voluntarily but is intended to curb unlawful practices and maintain law and order.

Continue Reading

India News

Mamata Banerjee writes to poll chief over officers’ reshuffle, calls move arbitrary

Mamata Banerjee has written to the Chief Election Commissioner, calling the reshuffle of senior Bengal officials arbitrary and raising concerns over constitutional norms.

Published

on

mamta banerjee

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has written to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, raising strong objections to the recent reshuffle of senior bureaucrats in the state ahead of the assembly elections.

In her letter, Banerjee described the move by the Election Commission of India as “arbitrary” and expressed “deep concern” over what she termed a unilateral decision. She urged the Commission to refrain from adopting such measures in the future.

The Chief Minister pointed out that while the Election Commission does have the authority to make administrative changes during elections, past practice has involved consultation with the state government. According to her, the Commission would typically seek a panel of officers from the state and make its selections from that list, maintaining what she called constitutional propriety and administrative convention.

Banerjee warned that bypassing this process could undermine the institutional credibility and long-standing legacy of the poll body, and may also affect the foundational principles of the constitutional framework.

The controversy stems from the Commission’s decision, taken soon after announcing election dates, to remove several top officials from election-related duties. These include the state’s Chief Secretary, Director General of Police, Kolkata Police Commissioner, and Home Secretary.

The Commission has maintained that the reshuffle was aimed at ensuring a peaceful and violence-free electoral process.

Reacting sharply, Banerjee alleged bias in the decision-making, claiming that the removal of the Chief Secretary indicated an anti-women stance. She also accused the Commission of selectively targeting officers, suggesting that the move favoured individuals aligned with the Bharatiya Janata Party.

Meanwhile, the Trinamool Congress escalated its protest, staging a day-long walkout from the Rajya Sabha earlier in the day.

Responding to the criticism, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the Election Commission is a constitutional authority, adding that questioning its decisions in Parliament is inappropriate and unproductive.

The Commission has appointed a new Chief Secretary in place of the outgoing official as part of the reshuffle.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com