Lyricist Manoj Muntashir on Monday disputed AR Rahman’s characterisation of the film Chhaava as “propaganda” and pushed back against the composer’s suggestion that a decline in assignments could be linked to religious discrimination in the Hindi film industry. Speaking in an interview on Shubhankar Mishra’s YouTube channel, Muntashir said Rahman would have seen the script before agreeing to work on the project and that other factors may explain any slowdown in offers.
What Manoj Muntashir said
Muntashir questioned the logic behind Rahman’s critique of Chhaava, arguing that a creative professional who takes on a film generally does so after reading its script. “It is not like you hadn’t heard the script before agreeing to work in it,” he said during the interview. He suggested that if Rahman genuinely felt the film carried an agenda he disagreed with, the composer could have declined to participate rather than later label it as propaganda.
“It is not like you hadn’t heard the script before agreeing to work in it. You suddenly started composing music for it? He must have read the script,” Manoj Muntashir said in the interview.
Muntashir also took aim at the notion that decreased professional opportunities should be immediately ascribed to the musician’s religious identity. He argued that the ebb and flow of work in the film business can have many explanations and cautioned against drawing direct causal links without fuller context.
Background and implications
Rahman had earlier described Chhaava as “propaganda” and referenced concerns over possible discrimination within the Hindi film industry, remarks that prompted this response from Muntashir. The exchange spotlights tensions around creative choices, perceived agendas in filmmaking and the sensitive subject of communal identity in the entertainment field.
Beyond the immediate disagreement, the debate may prompt industry figures to reflect on how public comments about films and professional setbacks are framed. Allegations of discrimination in any sector raise complex questions that often require corroboration and broader scrutiny; public disagreements between prominent artists can further intensify discussion in trade and social media circles.
- Key actors: AR Rahman – composer; Manoj Muntashir – lyricist.
- Issue: Rahman’s description of Chhaava as “propaganda” and his suggestion of possible discrimination; Muntashir’s rebuttal that Rahman knew the script prior to signing and that reduced work need not imply bias.
- Platform: Muntashir’s remarks were made during an interview on Shubhankar Mishra’s YouTube channel.
| Person | Statement |
|---|---|
| AR Rahman | Described Chhaava as “propaganda” and raised the possibility of discrimination affecting assignments in Bollywood. |
| Manoj Muntashir | Contended Rahman would have read the script before agreeing to work; said reduced work may have other explanations and criticised labelling the film retrospectively. |
The disagreement exposes the fine line artists tread between creative choice and public accountability. Industry insiders often note that decisions to join a project are influenced by scripts, collaborators, schedules and commercial considerations; retrospective characterisations can therefore invite rebuttal from those involved in the creative process.
As debate continues, the episode underscores how remarks by prominent cultural figures on sensitive topics such as alleged discrimination quickly gain traction and spur wider conversation. Observers say such disputes may lead to calls for more detailed discussion within the industry on hiring practices and on how filmmakers address historical and political themes on screen.
At present, the exchange remains a public disagreement between two established artists. Neither side has announced further steps; the matter may remain a point of discussion in trade columns and social media as film-makers, composers and writers consider the implications for creative collaboration and public commentary.
