Amitabh Bachchan, the legendary figure of Bollywood, has captivated audiences for decades with his iconic performances and charismatic presence. However, despite his towering status and widespread acclaim, there remains one thing that even he, the "Shahenshah" of Indian cinema, cannot freely do: consume sweets without a second thought.
In a candid social media post, Bachchan revealed the "torture" of having to feign enjoyment of sweets during an advertisement shoot, despite having given up sweet foods in real life. He shared a picture of himself holding a 'gulab jamun' and a 'rasgulla,' traditional Indian sweets, with a smile, confessing that he had to act as if he were actually relishing them. This revelation highlights a unique constraint faced by actors, where professional obligations can clash with personal choices and preferences.
This isn't the only limitation that the actor has faced. During the Emergency in 1975, a period of political turmoil in India, several film magazines imposed a ban on mentioning Amitabh Bachchan in their publications. This stemmed from the magazines' belief that Bachchan was connected to the censorship of their content. Bharathi S. Pradhan, a film critic, explained that magazines would use a comma instead of his name when he was a co-star. Bachchan was aware of the ban and would position himself on the extreme right or left during group photos to make it easier for editors to remove him from the images.
Moreover, Bachchan has voiced strong opinions regarding copyright laws, particularly concerning the rights to his father's literary works. He has questioned the Indian copyright law that allows exclusive rights to heirs of original literary work for 60 years after the author's death, deeming it "rubbish". Bachchan has argued that his inheritance, including his father's writings, should remain his and not be subject to public use after a stipulated period. He has expressed his opposition to the idea that individual property should become public property, asserting his right to control and protect his inherited aesthetics and creativity.
While the inability to freely indulge in sweets might seem trivial in comparison to censorship or copyright concerns, it underscores a fundamental aspect of fame and professional life for actors. Their personal lives often become intertwined with their public image and professional commitments, leading to situations where they must compromise or make choices that differ from their personal desires. The episode also serves as a reminder that even the most celebrated figures face constraints and compromises in their lives, whether related to their personal preferences, professional obligations, or legal battles.
