HOW LATE ACTOR JAGDEEP ROSE UP FROM CHILD STARDOM TO BECOMING A LEGENDARY COMEDIAN
by ASJAD NAZIR
WHEN legendary Bollywood actor Jagdeep passed away aged 81, film fans, actors and media mourned the loss of his Sholay character Soorma Bhopali in a way that it was all he had to show for his career.
But there was so much more to the talented actor and a closer look at his remarkable life is testament to that. He nearly landed a lead role in an Oscar nominated film, was an in-demand child star, got into the boxing ring with Muhammad Ali and entertained audiences for 70 years.
He was born Syed Ishtiaq Ahmed Jaffrey on March 29, 1939, into a relatively comfortable life, but India’s partition in 1947 stripped his family of all they had. Things got worse when his father died soon after Partition and the impoverished family were literally on the streets. The youngster started selling soaps, combs and even kites to support his family. The nine-year-old landed a role as an extra in BR Chopra’s film Afsana and made a little extra money because he was confident enough to say a dialogue in Urdu. “I joined the industry, because I needed money. I never had any ambitions of playing the lead role or anything,” said Jagdeep in an interview.
This led to further films as a child actor, including Aar Paar, Munna and the award-winning Hum Panchi Ek Dal Ke, for which the then prime minister of India, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, gifted him his walking stick. A big turning point for the child star was 1952 classic Dhobi Doctor. Although he had a tragic role, ace director Bimal Roy was inspired to cast him in a comedian’s role in iconic 1952 film Do Bigha Zameen as Laloo Ustad. He recalled, “I still remember Bimalda’s words, that a person who could make one weep can also make one laugh heartily. It was then and there that I decided to take up comedy roles. I realised that a role is a role whether it is that of the leading man or the comedian.”
The talented teenager would appear in movies throughout the 1950s and was considered for a lead role in Oscar-nominated movie Mother India, but was seen as too nice to play the villainous Birju and was dropped after a few days of shooting. This would give a life-changing break to actor Sunil Dutt, who would go on to become a Bollywood legend. The young man was even launched as a leading man in films, including Bhabhi, Barkha and Bindaya. He soon realised audiences want to see him in comic roles and adapted accordingly. He recalled.
“I realised I was just not cut out to be a hero, because the kind of films made those days’ required chocolate-faced heroes who had nothing to do, but prance around with the heroine. I have absolutely no regrets having lost the bus as a hero and taken the plunge from the leading man to the comedian”
Playing supporting comic roles enabled him to do more roles and would result in him starring in more than 400 films, which included his unforgettable turn playing Soorma Bhopali in record-breaking curry western Sholay. He would later direct a movie titled Soorma Bhopali and had big named stars lining up to do cameos in it. In Qurbani, he played a comic boxer named after heavyweight champion Muhammad Ali and was invited to meet him to raise funds for a mosque in the US. They even did a mock fight in a boxing ring. Jagdeep was proud of being the people’s actor and had said: “My comedy will not be appreciated by the elite, or by a group of press people who watch a film with a pen in their hands. But it will be appreciated by the masses.”
He would act in films continuously for over 60 years, sometimes appearing in 10-20 films a year. Although he loved acting, the prolific star slowed down considerably later on in life because he didn’t like the vulgar comedy that became dominant in Bollywood. He also felt the respect for artists, especially elders, was no longer there and this disheartened him.
He had said, “In those days, art, culture and sentiment inspired filmmakers. Films were entertaining then. Unlike today, they did not portray vulgarity.”
His son Javed Jaffrey would carry on the family legacy by carving out a successful film and television career. In 2019, Jagdeep was given a Lifetime Achievement Award at the IIFA Awards, but deserved more from an industry he gave his whole life to.
Could this long, hot summer see violence like last year’s riots erupt again? It surely could. That may depend on some trigger event – though the way in which the tragic murders of Southport were used to mobilise inchoate rage, targeting asylum seekers and Muslims, showed how tenuous such a link can be. There has already been unrest again in Ballymena this summer. Northern Ireland saw more sustained violence, yet fewer prosecutions than anywhere in England last summer.
"We must not wait for more riots to happen" says Kelly Fowler, director of Belong, who co-publish a new report, ‘The State of Us’, this week with British Future. The new research provides a sober and authoritative guide to the condition of cohesion in Britain. A cocktail of economic pessimism, declining trust in institutions and the febrile tinderbox of social media present major challenges. Trust in political institutions has rarely been lower – yet there is public frustration too with an angry politics which amplifies division.
The political arguments this autumn will not take place only at the traditional party conferences. Both the supporters of Tommy Robinson and his opponents in anti-racism groups will try to mobilise marches and street movements in September, just days before US president Donald Trump’s state visit provides a focal point for political protest that could stake a claim to unite, rather than polarise, British public opinion.
Amid a febrile political atmosphere, the State of Us report does find reasons for grounded hope too. There is pride in place just about everywhere. In the long run, Britain’s story is of increasing tolerance and liberalism across generations, despite cities and towns having contrasting experiences of economic change. Talk of a ‘lost decade’ of growth after the 2008 crash had turned into 17 years, Southport MP Patrick Hurley told the recent Belong summit, fuelling a nostalgic sense of decline and loss in many towns. That event spotlighted useful work on cohesion happening around the UK, though Fowler notes that this can be patchy. The 35 areas where unrest briefly flared up did get one-off community recovery grants of £650,000 each to spend in six months. There were no conditions to prevent councils just shoring up general finances, but most tried to do something constructive. Sunderland and Tamworth held community conversations that could found longer-term strategies. Some councils hoped to myth-bust misinformation or contest racist narratives, but they can struggle to know how to engage low-trust sections of the public effectively.
What should be done - and by whom? Because the State of Us report is a foundational input for an Independent Commission on Community and Cohesion, being co-chaired by Sajid Javid and Jon Cruddas, the report sets out the key challenges, but deliberately stops short of recommending an action plan. The government should act faster on the flashpoint risks. The very incitement for which users were imprisoned last August remains online today, illustrating how slow platforms and regulators have been to act on this ongoing national security threat.
Immigration and asylum divide opinion. Governments have spoken loudly about stopping boats crossing the Channel, but failed to do so. Perhaps the new UK-French pilot deal unveiled last week will scale up into an orderly asylum process that could reduce dangerous crossings. The UK government does already have more control over local impacts. The incentives to concentrate asylum seekers wherever housing is cheapest, with minimal communication with local authorities nor contact with local communities, exacerbate local cohesion tensions.
Faith minister Lord Khan rightly notes that addressing the root causes of division and discontent will take time. Making a start requires a clear analysis of both the drivers and the useful responses. This government can sometimes see cohesion as an issue for deprived and diverse areas, rather than as a challenge for everywhere.
Even in withdrawing his contentious “island of strangers” comments, prime minister Sir Keir Starmer again fell into sending parallel messages to different audiences, “deeply regretting” the language in the Observer before reassuring Sun readers that he “stood by” the underlying sentiments. The acknowledged lack of pre-delivery scrutiny over the speech was a symptom of the government not yet finding the bandwidth to work out its philosophical framework, public narrative or policy strategy. This government has had no public position, for example, on whether it is an advocate or critic of multiculturalism, or seeks to offer its own distinct framework for what integration should mean in this changing society.
The anniversary of the riots offers the prime minister another opportunity to voice a more coherent public narrative of what it means to respect our differences and work on what we can share in common. That could underpin a sustained, practical strategy on cohesion. Even in polarising times, one core test of a shared society is how far we can develop a shared story about who we are, how we got here, and where we want to go together.
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.
It is a truth universally acknowledged that voters are dissatisfied with the political choices on offer - so must they be in want of new parties too? A proliferation of start-ups showed how tricky political match-making can be. Zarah Sultana took Jeremy Corbyn by surprise by announcing they will co-lead a new left party. Two of Nigel Farage’s exes announced separate political initiatives to challenge Reform from its right, with the leader of London’s Conservatives lending her voice to Rupert Lowe’s revival of the politics of repatriation.
Corbyn and Sultana are from different generations. He had been an MP for a decade by the time she was born. For Sultana’s allies, this intergenerational element is a core case for the joint leadership. But the communications clash suggests friction ahead. After his allies could not persuade Sultana to retract her announcement, Corbyn welcomed her decision to leave Labour, saying ‘negotiations continue’ over the structure and leadership of a new party. It will seek to link MPs elected as pro-Gaza independents with other strands of the left outside Labour.
Nigel Farage
Would the new party cooperate or compete with the Green Party? Zack Polanski’s leadership campaign promotes a “left populism” with much overlap with the Corbynista agenda. He is challenging MPs Adrian Ramsey and Ellie Chowns, who offer continuity with the quieter strategy which saw Green gains in their Herefordshire and Norfolk seats while winning in Bristol and Brighton.
On the right, Ben Habib, sacked as a Reform deputy leader by Farage, launched a new ‘Advance Party’ - but could not get Great Yarmouth MP Lowe to join it. Lowe launched a Restore Britain campaigning movement instead.
Habib has yet to make his new party official, claiming it must recruit 30,000 members to be eligible for registration. The Electoral Commission has no such threshold: there are over 300 registered parties. This false claim may just be a recruitment tactic or a device to delay revealing its donors.
A congratulatory tweet from US billionaire businessman Elon Musk reinforced Habib’s hope that the world’s richest man may help to fund his new party. But Musk’s own focus is on launching a new “America Party” as his feud with US president Donald Trump escalates. Musk self-identifies as a centrist, oblivious to his own self-radicalisation after curating an entire social media platform in his own image. Reform had hoped for a multi-million pound donation from Musk too, before he attacked Farage’s refusal to embrace former EDL leader Tommy Robinson. Yet this simply reinforced Musk’s toxic reputation with the British public.
How much political space is there further right of Farage? About a quarter of the Reform vote - about three per cent of the electorate - find Farage too moderate on race and immigration. But these are mostly the same group who supported last summer’s violent riots. Farage believes a boundary rejecting the BNP (British National Party) and Robinson is imperative to be a mainstream party. Farage faces start-up challenges too. Farage wants to bring 300 first-time MPs to parliament - and would have to give top Cabinet jobs to many unknown quantities. Thurrock MP James McMurdock resigned the Reform whip over the weekend after credible allegations of business fraud during the pandemic.
Rupert LoweGetty Images
Habib can appeal only to those within the segment to Farage’s right who find ethnic minority leadership acceptable. He may be offering too niche a product to find a viable market. Lowe’s agenda is to go much further than Farage on immigration and race. Since Farage’s slogan is to cut net migration to zero, Restore Britain is campaigning for “negative net migration” - pledging to remove ‘millions’ of legal migrants so that “outflows considerably outstrip inflows’. The Migration Advisory Committee projects that the UK population would begin to shrink if net migration was below 110,000. Lowe argues that rising ethnic diversity can be reversed, not just be slowed down. His slogan, ‘stop importing, start deporting’, consciously revives the ‘send them back’ politics of Enoch Powell and the 1970s National Front. Lowe is celebrated by overtly racist bloggers for these efforts to popularise the idea of ‘remigration’. Several London Conservatives are dismayed that Susan Hall has joined this Restore Britain campaign, since the former Tory mayoral candidate leads the party’s Greater London Assembly group. But that criticism remains muted in public. Lowe himself has not ruled out joining the Conservatives before the next election.
The rise of new parties is an expression of democratic politics, but can reflect a misunderstanding of its challenges, too. New parties can voice arguments that citizens feel are missing. But a consumerist search for the perfect party can seek to side-step the inevitable frustrations of compromise. Politics is about how societies make collective decisions when we disagree. Whether we have four-, five- or six-party politics, the challenge for parties - old and new - is how any can secure broad enough support to govern in such fragmented and polarised times.
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.
ONE reason I watched the BBC documentary Amol Rajan Goes to the Ganges with particular interest was because I have been wondering what to do with the ashes of my uncle, who died in August last year. His funeral, like that of his wife, was half Christian and half Hindu, as he had wished. But he left no instructions about his ashes.
Sooner or later, this is a question that every Hindu family in the UK will have to face, since it has been more than half a century since the first generation of Indian immigrants began arriving in this country. Amol admits he found it difficult to cope with the loss of his father, who died aged 76 three years ago. His ashes were scattered in the Thames.
Amol, who is 41, was born in Calcutta and was brought to Britain when he was three.
“My dad was my hero, totally and utterly,” he declares.
He recalls: “Very suddenly, three years ago, he got pneumonia, went into hospital, spent five dreadful weeks in intensive care, and died. This was really shocking to me because it was the first time I’d ever lost someone I loved.” Watching the grand final of University Challenge, in which Christ’s College, Cambridge, beat Warwick 175–170 in an exciting finish, we saw Amol’s intellectual and secular side as a BBC TV presenter.
He says he is an atheist, but nevertheless undertook a pilgrimage to the Ganges to see if he could emancipate his father from the eternal cycle of birth, death and rebirth and help him gain moksha. He couldn’t get to the confluence of the Ganges and the Yamuna at the Kumbh Mela because of a stampede in which 30 people were trampled to death and hundreds injured. But he participated in pind daan and took a dip in the Ganges.
Rajan offers the pind daan in honour of his father and ancestors
He says: “I think that one of the things that I wanted to go to the Kumbh Mela to do, was to confront my grief, reconnect with my dad, but also to try and work out what the next 38 or 40 years of my life would have to do with the first half.”
Expressing grief on camera, as Amol does, is a little odd, but he explains: “I think there are three things I want people to take away from this documentary. One is about grief, the other is about faith, and the final one is about family. Every grief is different, and everyone grieves for somebody they’ve lost in a very unique way, but I do think there are certain rules about grief. I do think it does get easier over time, and I do think that sharing grief by talking about it, by connecting with other people that are aggrieved, is a really valuable thing. This documentary is a way of trying to grieve in public, not for vain reasons, but because I think there’s something that people could learn from that.”
Do not expect any parties in Downing Street to celebrate the government’s first birthday on Friday (4). After a rocky year, prime minister Sir Keir Starmer had more than a few regrets when giving interviews about his first year in office.
He explained that he chose the wrong chief of staff. That his opening economic narrative was too gloomy. That choosing the winter fuel allowance as a symbol of fiscal responsibility backfired. Starmer ‘deeply regretted’ the speech he gave to launch his immigration white paper, from which only the phrase ‘island of strangers’ cut through. Can any previous political leader have been quite so self-critical of their own record in real time?
This unconventional approach could be a reminder of Starmer’s best quality: that he is the antithesis of US president Donald Trump. Trump has a narcissistic need to be the main character, a hyperactive addiction to conflict, the attention span of a toddler and no interest in policy substance beyond the television and social media optics. So Trump is the disruptor in chief of global trade, security and the US constitutional order. Given a binary choice, it is infinitely better to have the serious sobriety of Starmer, trying to cooperate with allies to limit Trump’s chaotic contributions to increased insecurity.
Yet, it is a contrast that could be taken too far. Trump realises that politics is about what you say as well as what you do. What Starmer is palpably still missing is a clear public story of what his government is for. This was partly a matter of choice. A gritty public mood has little appetite for new visions, unless shown tangible progress first. It reflects the taciturn character of the leader too. Yet the issue is not simply one of communication. The challenge of finding a narrative reflects uncertainty about the strategic direction of the government.
Judged by its actions, this is a centre-left government. It has made many decisions that the previous Conservative government would not have taken. It changed the fiscal rules, borrowing much more for investment. Despite the constraints of its manifesto pledges on most taxes, it did raise taxes so as to have more to spend on the NHS, and on housebuilding. The government is committed to higher defence spending, and also to net zero, to closer UK-EU relations, within the ‘red lines’ which Labour set out, as it takes care to check if it can take the public with it. It will work with multilateral institutions, rather than quitting treaties and conventions. If this is a centre-left government in its deeds, it may prefer to self-identify as something else, without quite managing to articulate what that is.
So this has been a very tactical government, which has changed its mind about most of its tactical choices. The Comprehensive Spending Review was intended as a reset moment, in giving the government clearer priorities, though it has been challenging to make the numbers add up. But the parliamentary rebellion over its welfare bill could prove a more significant turning point. A government which won a landslide had lost its majority once 125 of its MPs - a majority of the backbench - declared they were unable to pass a government bill without a significant change. This was about the substantive impact of heavy income losses for disabled people - and the lack of a rationale beyond saving money. This rebellion is also about the political strategy of the government. Much of the parliamentary group seem diminishing returns in actively picking fights with progressives who Labour will need to keep the populism of Reform leader Nigel Farage out.
Can Starmer fix his government? The prime minister is 62 years old. He cannot change his personality or working style, not metamorphosis into a visionary speech-maker. There is little point in advisers inventing hypothetical strategies - such as choosing to present Starmer as a radical insurgent, rather than the sober incumbent, which cannot fit with the prime minister they have got, and his gradualist agenda for long-term change. Yet Starmer could use his evident capacity for self-reflection to identify feasible changes. He needs to repair how his Downing Street operation makes decisions - and now knows that backbench support is not unconditional.
Facing a fragmented opposition, Labour’s chances of re-election in four years time may be underestimated. Yet most of Labour’s tactical mistakes have come from trying to run a permanent election campaign in government, four years early. The government needs to govern to generate the substantive record and future agenda it would defend from the populist right in 2029. Australia's Anthony Albanese, who faced many similar criticisms to Starmer, bounced back to get re-elected, though the Canadian Liberals changed leaders to defeat the right. How many years Starmer has left in Downing Street is anybody’s guess. This time next year, he would need a stronger story to tell.
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.
Anniversaries can catalyse action. The government appointed the first Windrush Commissioner last week, shortly before Windrush Day, this year marking the 77th anniversary of the ship’s arrival in Britain.
The Windrush generation came to Britain believing what the law said – that they were British subjects, with equal rights in the mother country. But they were to discover a different reality – not just in the 1950s, but in this century too. It is five years since Wendy Williams proposed this external oversight in her review of the lessons of the Windrush scandal. The delay has damaged confidence in the compensation scheme. Williams’ proposal had been for a broader Migrants Commissioner role, since the change needed in Home Office culture went beyond the treatment of the Windrush generation itself.
The Windrush commissioner, the Reverend Clive Foster, a pastor in Nottingham, found himself on home turf in opening a Windrush event at Nottingham Forest’s City ground. Forest legend, Viv Anderson spoke of the racism that his pioneering generation of players faced, being pelted with apples, pears and bananas as a 19 year old, when sent by Brian Clough to warm up on the touchline at Carlisle in his first away game. The event captured the power of story-telling across the generations about past progress and today’s challenges. The 50th anniversary of Anderson becoming England’s first black full international cap, which coincides with co-hosting Euro 2028, offers a landmark moment for football to tell the story of its journey towards inclusion.
Whether Britain should become a multi-ethnic society was fiercely debated in the era of Enoch Powell, two decades after the Windrush docked. This had become a settled social and political fact by the turn of the century. Indeed, Powell himself saw mass repatriation as a time-limited agenda, impossible once half of the Commonwealth-descended population were British-born by the 1980s. The Conservatives moved on to Margaret Thatcher and Norman Tebbit’s case for integration via assimilation. David Cameron later sped up the visible ethnic diversity at the top of the party. After the Windrush scandal, it was the incumbent Conservative governments which officially recognised National Windrush Day and commissioned the National Windrush Memorial in Waterloo station. Yet, the 2020s online right is dividing over how far to re-racialise arguments about who is truly British.
LONDON, ENGLAND - JUNE 22: Baroness Floella Benjamin speaks during the unveiling of the National Windrush Monument at Waterloo Station on June 22, 2022 in London, England. The photograph in the background is by Howard Grey. (Photo by John Sibley - WPA Pool/Getty Images)
Former Tory and Ukip MP Douglas Carswell was once the most vocal critic of anti-migration nativism among Brexit campaigners, repudiating Powell to avoid Nigel Farage putting ethnic minorities off. So how odd it is to see Carswell flip to tweeting, “Out. I don’t care how long you’ve lived here” in calling for the ‘mass deportation’ of Pakistanis from Britain. Carswell told me he now believes the ‘old demonisation’ of such arguments as racist will fail. Moving to the pro-Trump heartlands of Mississippi for his new think-tank gig has badly skewed his perceptions of how the British public think. Former Reform MP Rupert Lowe and Conservative peer David Frost are recommending accounts that promote prejudice.
Think-tanker David Goodhart last week proposed moving the capital from London to York – telling Evening Standard readers that 2030s London may have too few white people to stay as the capital city. Goodhart began arguing that Britain had become too diverse back in 2004, when the visible minority percentage was in single digits. It goes beyond an argument about the pace of change of immigration when the white British score is made the central indicator of how British a place is. That casts millions of British-born minorities as, by definition, diluting Britishness rather than having a shared stake within it.
Can this government tell a shared story of how we got here and where we are going? Or will it tend to communicate to segments of majority and minority audiences in parallel on separate occasions? Downing Street is now working at pace to deepen the government’s policy agenda. The existence of a new social cohesion taskforce may reflect how anniversaries catalyse attention. The anniversary of August’s riots will be a natural focal point for scrutiny of how far the government has been able to combine getting tough on the riots in real-time with a long-term plan to address the causes of cohesion. The third anniversary of the Leicester disorder of 2022 will also attract further scrutiny into when the delayed independent inquiry report into the local and national lessons may finally materialise.
The prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, regrets the ‘island of strangers’ controversy over his immigration white paper – so he hopes to place as much emphasis on the case for integration as his fear of the risks of its absence. One test of the government this summer is whether it can navigate the contested language of identity more confidently. What will matter most is whether action can be sustained to address the vacuum in national policy once the anniversaries that spur flurries of action go past.
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.