FTII PUNE

FTII PUNE

Filim and Television Institute of India (FTII,Pune), the premium film institute in the country which has produced veterans in the world cinema like John Abraham, Adoor Gopalakrishnan, Mani Kaul, Shaji N. Karun, Girish Kasaravalli etc. is now struggling for its survival . Government is planning to make this prestigious institute into a profit making one with privet participation. The government is giving a huge grant to upgrade the 50-year-old institute. For the up gradation plan, the government has appointed Hewitt Associates, which usually does analyses for corporate companies. The Hewitt report recommends public-private partnership for the up gradation. It states that FTII should be re-modelled along the lines of public-private-partnership with introduction of highly priced short-term courses to transform it into a profit-generating institute.

But students are of the opinion that such a report should be prepared by someone who knows about the art of filmmaking, else there would be differences in the basic approach. Students, alumni and the film fraternity around the globe are up in arms against this decision. It is reliably known that a major corporate house in India has already shown interest in FTII.

Students feel that the Hewitt recommendation for privet partnership is an industry-oriented approach. The art school cannot be analyzed the same way as a corporate set-up. The founding of FTII was intended to give free space for creative exploration of national talent. It cannot be served with such profit-making aspects.

The other problems include late night sessions, lack of infrastructure and under paid staff, the students complained. The fees for subsidised courses went up from a few thousand rupes in 1997 to over 50,000 in 2000. If they further hike the fees, the film studies will not viable for all the students, which is against the very ethos of FTII” said Patreek Vasta, a final year direction student.

FTII campus is now fumed with agitation; students are gathering support from all walks of life. They held various demonstration against the draft report prepared by the Gurgaon-based Hewitt Association on ‘upgradation of FTII to international standards’.

Courses like an eighteen months program of MBA in Business entertainment, a twelve months program in Advertisement film making, a twelve months program in TV journalism, six months program of preservation and restoration of films are proposed in the report.

The proposed fees structure for the new courses are 4.5 lakhs, 7.5 lakhs, 7 lakhs, 3.93 lakhs for Indian students and 9 lakhs, 15 lakhs, 14 lakhs, 7.86 lakhs for foreign students.

According to the students association, FTII’s syllabus for the 14 programmes it currently offers needs to be urgently upgraded and a new batch of students must not be admitted until the curriculum revision process is completed. Improvement of existing infrastructure including hostel facilities and technical equipment to accommodate an increasing number of students, a freeze on tuition fees, and filling up of vacant faculty positions are the other demands made by the FTII Students Association.

According to John Sankaramangalam, the former director of the institute and the Malayalam film maker, privet participation will help the institute to function more effectively. “FTII’s administration is futile. The syllabus is out dated. Students and teachers of FTII should behave more responsively. Government is granting huge grants to this institution. Let privet parties join hands with government for the betterment of FTII. What is wrong in that? Students and teachers against privet participation, because they should be made answerable.” Sankaramangalam told EDTODAY.

Institute has initiated a high fee structure recently. That itself is a heavy blow to the students .Now they are planning to privatize. This outlook itself is wrong. The institute is failed to attract talents now. It is not fulfilling its demand of aesthetics, said Shaji N Karun, the world acclaimed film maker and member of PK Nair committee.

PK Nair Committee

Against the background of rising student protests, the FTII management has appointed a P.K. Nair Committee to study the course structure and recommend proposals to upgrade the syllabus and infrastructure, has submitted its interim report, which recommends that the government set aside Rs 5 crore for clearing the backlog that has accumulated since 2005.PK Nair Committee has done a detailed study into the various aspects of the functioning of the institute. The committee has recommended that the money be utilised to procure equipment and appoint personnel like supervisors and mentors, so that the courses are completed on scheduled. The committee has recommended that the FTII hold back fresh admissions till the current backlog of academic and project work is cleared. Committee’s final report is expected by February-end. We have done a detailed study about the present problems faced by the FTII. Privatisation is not a solution for the present crisis. Students and teachers are against privatisation. We suggest some administrative changes which will be helpful for the smooth functioning of the institution” PK Nair said in a telephonic interview with EDTODAY. "The newly-formed P K Nair Committee comprising film experts, and representatives of FTII staff and students agreed that the Hewitt report is not feasible for an institute like FTII," said Samarth Dixit, president of the FTII students' association.

He added, "The report states that the FTII should be remodelled along the lines of public-private partnership (PPP) thereby suggesting introduction of a number of expensive industry-oriented short-term courses to make the institute profit-generating. This will turn FTII into a polytechnic. No action has been taken on our demands which we have been voicing for the last three years."

President of the students’ association, Samarth Dixit, said, “For the past three years, we have been following up on various issues being faced by the students. But nothing has changed even now. Instead, the government wants to change the whole spirit of FTII by turning it into a profit-making institution.”

“The institute is heading towards non-function and the administration doesn’t care. While students are facing a severe crunch of basic infrastructure, the administration wants to introduce another batch,” he added.

It’s not for the first time that FTII is facing such an agitation by students when actor Mohan Agashe was the director. In 1997-98, the effects of the strike were felt in Delhi.

Improvement of the existing infrastructure like, hostel facilities and technical equipment in order to accommodate an increasing number of students, avoiding the increase in course fees to make film education available to students from modest backgrounds, proper revision and formulation of the syllabus, and filling up of vacant posts, are some of the demands that have been put forth by the FTII students' association.

Declining Standard

Film fraternity agreed to one point unanimously that the standard of FTII is declining and it has already lost its charm. It has not able to produce a John Abraham or Adoor Gopalakrishnan since last two decades. As K.G George, the well-known Malayalam film director rightly said, the institution is no way comparable to their period. “ When we were students in the institute, we have veteran film makers as visiting faculties from around the globe. Now the institute is not promoting visiting faculties. The sylubus also should include the modern technology and changes according to the new trends in world cinema. Privatisation is not a solution for this” he said.

Institute is unable to attract talents from the various parts of the country as it did earlier. “We are not doing anything to find out talents and to promote them .Our institutional setup has no particular project to trace the talents, particularly from villages. That is the major reason, FTII is not producing any eminent film makers as earlier” said world acclaimed film maker Shaji N Karun and a member of PKNair committee.

Hewitt committee report is very immature. The people who made that report are not connected with films. They were not looking at cinema as an art. They consider it only as a money making industry. Governtment has no moral right to suggest privet participation.Government has earned huge money through

Back ground

Over the past fifty years, FTII has proved to be a central pillar in the evolution of Indian cinema. With their continued contribution to mainstream as well as regional cinema, the alumnus of the Institute has ensured that FTII is recognized as a national centre for film education and practice.

Set up in 1961 with the aim of promoting good alternative cinema and setting new standards in film-making both aesthetically and technically, the institute has provided free space for thinking and learning to generations of would be film-makers. Over and above setting critical benchmarks for the film industry while nourishing it with highly professional and focused people, specialised in various aspects of film-making, FTII resonates in the halls of World Cinema with it’s sensitive understanding of life and film as a post-industrial art practice. Along with the National Film Archives of India (NFAI), the Films Division and the National Film Development Corporation (NFDC), it has played a crucial role in the creation, preservation and propagation of our cross cultural heritage through the medium of Cinema.

Conclusion

Those who are favouring FTII feel that being re modeled as a Public Private Partnership (PPP) regarding the same, a draft report prepared by Hewitt Associates, Gurgaon, appointed by no less than the ministry apparently, proposes an embarrassing and ridiculous “up gradation of FTII to international standards”. The said report strongly advocates the launching of a number of exorbitantly priced, “industry oriented”, short terms courses to make the institute profit generating. The report clearly lays a blue print, which will ensure that in due course of time; the Government can withdraw all support, read responsibility, from the institute.

Students feel that if the recommendations of the Hewitt report are accepted then FTII will cater only to a certain set of people – those who can afford it, making it exclusive and homogeneous, eliminating any of the plurality and diversity in creativity. Skills will be given precedence, and people will be ‘trained’ for the job market rather than organic professionals looking at cinema also as an art and not just a craft. From being an art school which encourages plurality of cinema, FTII shall be relegated to being a facilitator in providing skilled labor for an assembly line production system. It will be designed and constructed as an institution along the lines of a profit making, giving no room for experimentation, or space to redefine the boundaries of film making.

The privatisation and the proposed hike in the fees will make the common man inaccessible to the courses in the institute. Only people from the elite class of the society can afford to study in the institute if it is privatised. There is a chance of subsidised courses getting changed to self financed fee structure.

Voice of veterans of world cinema

Adoor Gopalakrishnan

There are people who are ignorant about cinema behind the new proposal at FTII ", says veteran film maker Adoor Gopalakrishnan. He adds " I will not let this happen. The private firm assigned for this purpose has nothing to do with cinema. It smells fishy when a private firm who is ignorant about cinema is approached to make the plan when there are government agencies and alumni like us. Nobody among the alumni will let this happen.

I am with the FTII students who strike for this cause. The FTII is an asset of the nation. There is no necessity to upgrade FTII to global standard when it has already groomed lot of filmmakers to the world cinema. The institute is meant for all sections of the society. The poor should be able to afford the fees. I will fight against it if the plan is to start self financed courses or privatise the institute in the shadow of the name 'upgradation'. I heard about the project has plans to make FTII a global film school comparing it with institutions that has nothing to do with cinema. The institute is not a space for the 'privatisation thirsty people”

U.R. Ananthamurthy, Chairman FTII

“We have found the report inadequate and decided to terminate it. Our purpose is not to commercialise the Institute but to provide inclusive education to students. A detailed report will be prepared by a new team of experts in three months. The focus of the report will be to revitalise and upgrade FTII on the lines of the vision of FTII”, said U.R. Ananthamurthy, Chairman FTII.

Resul Pookutty

The Film and Television Institute of India (FTII) was set up with his great-grandfather's vision and I'm going to request Rahul Gandhi to save it," says Oscar winner Resul Pookutty.

FTII is going through a very bad time. Now, the government wants to privatise it. I'm making this statement directly to Rahul Gandhi."

Shivajirao Kadam, VC, Bharati Vidyapeeth University

It depends on individual cases. At least 70-80% students in the country are getting education in private or semi-private set-ups. Many private institutes are providing quality education. But that doesn’t mean that the government should withdraw from higher education.”