Mumbai. Faking News caught up with the celebrated Indologist and author Candy Schrodinger who was in town for the Bhandup LitFest, to promote her new book, ‘Sholay: An Alternative History’, based on the revered Hindu epic Sholay.
“Yes, I am an Indologist, which means I am the white person who knows Sanksrit. I know more about the Indos than the Indos themselves. Indians find that very offensive,” beamed Ms. Candy with somewhat pride.
“Will a Tiger be offended if a Zoologist tells him he knows more about the Tiger than the Tiger itself,” she wondered.
The book itself is indeed offensive. Completely altering normal reading of the epic Sholay, conventionally a story about friendship, revenge and victory of good over evil, with epic poems thrust in for good measure, to a story of sex, sex, and some more sex.
Candy explained that like all other Hindu epics, Sholay did not really happen. “Most Hindu things, especially the good bits, did not exist. There is no archaeological evidence, no carbon dating, no fossils. But if it did, surely it was all about erotica.”
Book argues chapter after chapter that Ved Salimja, who according to myths wrote the Sholay, deliberately portrayed Gabbar Singh, son of poor oppressed farmer Hari Singh, as evil when in fact he was simply leading a rebellion against the upper-caste, sex addict Thakur Baldev Singh’s totalitarian rule over innocent dwellers of Ramgarh village.
“Ved Salimja was a Brahmin, hence a scheming mind. He could not possibly chronicle the history as is. As an Indologist I know, thus, Gabbar Singh must be the real protagonist of the story and not Thakur. Plus, why would Thakur name his village after his own servant, Ramlal. Ramgarh village was actually built by Ramlal’s father Ramlal Senior and Thakur wrested it from him,” she argued.
But we have not even come to the controversial part yet. ‘Sholay: An Alternative History‘ throws a different light on the two heroes of epic Sholay, Jai and Veeru.
“It is obvious that Jai and Veeru were homosexuals. Have you ever seen them actually stealing anything? But how come they were always in jail?” asked Candy, further answering herself, “Hindu society as you know is extremely homophobic. Even today you can get jailed for being gay. Jai and Veeru were obviously repeatedly incarcerated under ancient version of section 377. This busts the myth that ancient India was tolerant to alternate sexes.”
Candy quotes a verse from poem ‘Bhagwat-Dosti’, “Jaan pe bhi khelenge / Tere liye le lenge ” to make the case. She referred to the part where Veeru is seen repeatedly seen with a white dildo-like bar. “So what was he doing with it?” Candy added making an obscene gesture.
Embarrassed Faking News interviewer took Candy to earlier remark of “sex addict Thakur”. She said, “There is ample evidence that Thakur was an ambidextrous sexual simulator. Due to excessive simulation, his two hands were paralyzed, which he blamed on rebel leader Gabbar Singh.”
When we asked whether the book also suggests illicit relations between Thakur and his daughter-in-law, Candy replied, “What do you think? Women were oppressed in ancient India. That too a widow.”
Book also has a chapter on the Hindu society’s less than friendly view of the minority community. Pointing to the fact that there are only two of them in entire Ramgarh village, one blind and one butchered. Case is also made that Thakur had blinded Rahim Chacha.
If above is not enough, the book is surely going to offend Hindutvawadis with such theories as Thakur killing Jai to keep Radha, Thakur and Mausi being father of Basanti, etc.
“We expect the book to be banned in India. This will certainly help International and online sales,” Candy said ending the interview.