Maybe it’s too late to jump into the Slumdog Millionaire argument, but whatever. Here’s my take: it’s a brilliant film. Yes, there are scenes of poverty but that’s because its basic premise is rooted in an uneducated slum child who answers all the questions in a TV quiz show. It’s a moving, enthralling, gripping film which fulfils Wilkie Collins’s conditions for a good novel – makes you laugh, makes you cry.

Beyond that, how about the pain us desis must feel about the way Indians see the world – shit-filled slums, beggar rackets, children being maimed and blinded, communal riots, gangsters and so on? This is a non-issue, non-argument frankly. Creative expression can take whatever route it chooses and cannot be judged on choice of subject matter to suit jingoism. Do writers or artists or filmmakers have to sign some bond with the Government of India or the Indian Civil (Squeamish) Society that they will only show India in a good light to foreigners? Absurd. Besides, Slumdog might as well have been based in the slums of Brazil as in the ghettoes of New York – all you need is the contrast. Danny Boyle’s brilliant Trainspotting was about the drug scene in Edinburgh – warts, horrors, cold turkeys, crime and all. I can only hope that the people of Scotland did not get all uptight and touchy about the fact that he chose that as a subject (based on Irvine Welsh’s eponymous novel) when he could have talked about its fabulous theatre festival instead.

The only thing I didn’t get is AR Rahman’s music, so shoot me.

All that remains is for me to buy and read Vikas Sarup’s Q&A. Ingenious concept there...