London, Oct 25 (PTI) Expressing his reservations on film personalities accepting the post of Censor Board Chief following the controversial sacking of Anupam Kher, well-known actor Naseeruddin Shah has said artists and actors taking up such assignments should be aware of the fact that there is a reason behind every power that is given to them.

"I feel that there is a certain intellect in the film world, but I fail to understand why do the film artists run after politicians. Now Sharmila Tagore has accepted a post from which Anupam Kher has been sacked, Kher had also been appointed when Vijay Anand was sacked, so why indulge in this humiliation game," he asked while participating in a BBC Hindi Programme broadcast last night.
 
Answering a spate of questions, 54-year old Naseeruddin Shah, said: "see, when any artist is chosen for such a post, one thing is clear that there is definitely a thought of political convenience behind it. And if the artist chosen does not understand this, then I term it as clear immaturity and naivety on the part of that artist.
"Having said this, I do not mean that allegations which were leveled against Anupam are true, simply because he was chosen by a particular government. I was awarded Padma Bhushan by the same government, but it does not mean that I have any association with any such society."

Recalling that he had been offered one or two posts in the past, he said: "But I have not accepted them. I feel that I would not be able to make any impact in such organisations, I would be appointed only for namesake and I am sorry I can't agree with this."

Shah, who has acted in films such as Aakrosh, and Ardh Satya, said "if you look at the track record of actors entering politics, majority of them were at the fag end of their film careers or had hit a low. It is because of the media glamour and the habit of keeping themselves in the limelight, that they decide they could shine in the political world for some time..."
 
On whether artists and film actors in India were getting dragged into the political arena in the name of the freedom of expression, Naseeruddin Shah said "See, the artists and actors who become part of bureaucratic or diplomatic circles or those who enter politics, should be well aware of the fact that there is a reason behind every power that is given to them.

"If and sooner they accept this, it would be very good, so that this sort of naivety is not demonstrated when such posts are given and then taken back from them."

Answering a question on why he had stayed away from politics inspite of being politically aware, the veteran actor said he would not be able to survive in it "I strongly feel that an artist does not get a chance to show his political beliefs in his work. He is a mouthpiece of others, of others convictions and beliefs. The political belief of any artist lies in what type of work he does."

So far as an artist's freedom is concerned, Shah said: "the censorship code in our country is very old and it is really difficult choice as one fails to understand what can be done in such a situation, as you cannot give total freedom also." To why there can't be total freedom in a country like India, Shah, who was awarded the Padma Bhushan last year, claimed "because majority of the film makers in Mumbai are irresponsible, and not because that there would be a danger to the government or those in power, or some sort of a movement would be built because of the films...

"If this dirt has to be checked from spreading, which is not happening at present despite the Censor Board, the question today is, what is the work and relevance of the Censor Board?"

Asked why the film world has not been able to reach a consensus that important bodies like the Censor Board be free of political interference, the ace actor said "...Film world has never been able to be unanimous on any issue, howsoever important or sensitive it might have been.

"The reason being that people here have chosen a path of convenience, whichever suits them to get their work done," he said adding there was a time when there was a strict ban on certain scenes but today "nobody, including the censor is bothered about that anymore."

"Certain other things are found to be objectionable today...Some films with such scenes are passed, while others are not. So there is this whole inconsistency in the entire process. It is the convenience of the film makers who want to get their films passed, so how can there be unanimity on issues of principles?"

Shah concurred with the questioner who suggested that unlike in the past, film producers currently avoided controversial issues, saying: "The answer to your question is an absolute yes. Unqualified. It is courage only that the film world here lacks."