DIt’s hard not to fall under the spell of Pawo Choyning Dorji’s film The Monk and the Gun [sur les écrans depuis le 24 juin], ode to peace and the life of the humble acclaimed by the public. The action takes place in Bhutan, while the resigning king organizes a “blank” poll, in 2006, in order to teach his people to vote in view of the next real first parliamentary elections. This is a historical fact, the rest is a fable.
Read also | Article reserved for our subscribers The film “The Monk and the Gun” recalls the splendor and misery of voting
Add to your selections
Bhutan, landlocked between China and India, jealously protects its independence, its image and its culture. It has earned itself the reputation of being a paradise on earth, having enshrined in its Constitution in 2008 the notion of “gross national happiness” – a reputation that will be reinforced by the success of the film. Who, indeed, would want to disrupt this apparent harmony? Why impose on these sincere Buddhists, who have remained simple in their mountains, political parties that would disrupt their peaceful social life with useless conflicts? Who would not be tempted, after discovering this Eden, untouched by the defects of modernity, to reproach Western Eve for offering the Himalayan Adam the poisoned apple of her model? Who would deny that wars, digital surveillance and pollution are her escort?
Read also | Article reserved for our subscribers Bhutan dreams of building first ‘mindfulness’ city
Add to your selections
But this film is like all fairy tales. Historical facts contradict the idyllic image that the screenplay wants to impose. Let’s go back a few years to better judge the time of the story: in 1974, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck imposed Bhutanese culture on all the ethnic groups in the country; in 1985, the Lhotshampas of the southern plains, of Nepalese origin, were stripped of their citizenship. Their language was banned and Bhutanese costume was imposed on them.
Abused minorities
Some 100,000 of them fled to Nepal or India. They led miserable lives in camps there, without anyone being moved, and fought in vain to regain their land. As for the Tibetan refugees, who shared the language and religion of Bhutan, they were forced to take Bhutanese nationality in 1979. Many fled. This tragic story surfaces in the fiction, but in such an allusive way that few viewers will stop to consider it. The Bhutanese monk who carries his old rifle tells with a big smile that the weapon was once used to shoot Tibetans, but he is careful not to explain the reasons for these fratricidal wars. He also takes care not to point out that the Tibetans in exile are crying out for freedom and democracy.
You have 53.77% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
