Qutie’s piece for Sakaal Times - an excellent one!

May 15th, 2008Related|Filed Under

Sadly, I had to edit out some portions due to space constraints, so I’m pasting here Q’s entire article, along with the PDF of the published copy

An air of self-congratulation is common among Hindi film audiences these days. Evidently, now that the over-the-top baddie, the weepy mother, the saccharine sister, and the rape scene, have been banished into the furthest recesses of our memory (banished so deep, in fact, that some in the contemporary audience seem to believe these were staples of every Bollywood era; Om Shanti Om, for instance, was especially notable in its inability or unwillingness to distinguish between Bollywood’s 1980s and preceding eras), we can all sit back, relax, and watch “edgier”, “different”, and “new” films – and ensconced in multiplex luxury to boot. Some weeks – the weeks when a Taare Zameen Par, Chak de India, Johnny Gaddar, or Black Friday is released – even I find myself succumbing to the dream of the popular cinema renaissance that is just around the corner. It’s just as well I manage to snap myself out of my reverie, for if I ever did get to wherever it is they’re staging the renaissance, I’d be terribly bored not to find any women at the party.

The marginalization of women is one of the best kept secrets in the new Bollywood: right in front of our eyes, and beneath the radar. In most contemporary Hindi films, lead actresses have nothing to do. Certainly, there’s plenty for women to do, given the hordes of Eastern European imports needed to serve as eye-candy in dance sequences, the number of poles that must be shimmied up and down, the excess of bastardized hip-hop tropes mindlessly re-cycled into Hindi song videos. Just don’t expect it to include meaningful characterization, or even much dialogue. With the exception of a Bhool Bhulaiya or a Jodha-Akbar, our lead actresses have been reduced to a gym-toned skin-show that tends more toward bland sameness than sexiness, and hence toward a fungibility that would have shocked predecessors like Sridevi, Madhuri Dixit, or Kajol, let alone the likes of Meena Kumari or Nargis. And even meatier female roles (e.g. in Dhoom 2 or Tashan) are sold as “about” the lead actress showing more than we’ve ever seen before (Yashraj’s Tashan website lists Kareena’s character Pooja’s “[q]ualifications” – as part of a mock CV the website has for all the film’s main characters – as “34-22-34″, a line that speaks volumes about the true function of the most intelligent character in the film).

Substantial female roles ostensibly survive in some of the more traditional Hindi film genres, though even here the game seems to be up, what with the male halves of the Shah Rukh Khan-Kajol and Saif Ali Khan-Rani Mukherjee pairs having moved on to romantic films with curiously passive heroines with nothing to do but smile (e.g. Om Shanti Om); or “thrillers” where it doesn’t matter who’s shedding clothes, as long as enough of ‘em are doing it (e.g. Race). As for the rest, the love stories have morphed into brain-dead comedies (do I really need to list them?) and wannabe styleathons (Dhoom 2). In fact, watching previews of U, Me aur Hum gave me the odd sensation of watching a throwback: the heroine was actually having a conversation. Strange indeed (and the sort of strangeness that perhaps explains why Imtiaz Ali’s films have struck a chord with youngsters; though casting the leggy and inept Deepika Padukone in his next film smells of an impending sellout).

Nor are films like Laaga Chunri Mein Daagh or Saawariya much better: these certainly have women in important roles, but they are “about” womanhood itself, more specifically, about the problem of womanhood (in a world where femininity only exists in two relevant flavors, whorish and virginal; personally, I wanted lemon). Needless to say, neither film was even remotely progressive, or interesting, in its representation of gender issues (although Laaga Chunri Mein Daagh goes some way in subverting the easy complacencies of the sort of “family values” film the 1990s fed us dollops of).

Ultimately, filmmakers cannot be absolved of all responsibility – they are not mere mirrors of our taste, and shape it in important and subliminal ways – but neither can the audience. Our unwillingness to watch any film with a woman as the principal character (Aaja Nachle and Umraojaan, anyone?) speaks volumes about our preferred on-screen representation of contemporary femininity: lips parted and shaking her ass. Indeed, globalization has exacerbated the problem: sexism has never been a stranger to Bollywood, but today sexism is sold (and consumed) as the liberation of Bollywood’s on-screen personae. And those (like Shobha De) who (usefully) remind us that it is refreshing to see mean, manipulative, and tough women after a steady diet for years of good girls, also overstate the case.

For while we’ve imported the stance, the gesturality, of Western film and music as far as representations of femininity are concerned, we (and Bollywood) certainly seem far less eager to import Western feminism(s), or even the West’s greater commitment to formal gender equality. In the absence of a concomitant intellectual frame shift, we and our films run the risk of reinforcing traditional inequities in new and more insidious ways – precisely while thinking that the shackles have been broken.

There Are 38 Responses So Far. »

Comment by Qalandar on 15 May 2008:

Thanks so much sandy — love the page layout, and most of all thanks for the opportunity!
Comment by Simply Som on 15 May 2008:

Good piece here, Q!!
Comment by Tango on 15 May 2008:

Great piece Q

I like your uniform across-the-board coverage of a number of films.
Comment by rks on 15 May 2008:

Good piece Q.
Comment by rks on 15 May 2008:

Q: Generally agree but here are some 2007 movies
TZP: Tisca’s role
CDI: 16 girls - the real hero
JBJ: Almost equal footage
Cheeni Kum: Tabu
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

A wonderful piece here Q though its how the world is now. EG IPL and cheerleaders! There are exceptions to the rule, but overall agree with sentiments of write up
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

Sandy Sakaal times will need a re-name soon. Maybe NG Times?
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

Also what about the sheer lack of women involved in all parts of the industry. Where are the female music directors? Producers? Directors? There are exceptions to it, but it should not be an exception. Even in technical aspects of film making, it appears to be male dominated. I think there is a wider issue here.
Comment by rhapsody on 16 May 2008:

This is a fascinating read Qalandar..
To add to Jay’s comment such signs become alll the more worrying when a female director sees actresses as mere decorative assets otherwise how do you account for Deepika Padukone walking around in a bra addendum in the second half of Om Shanti Om?
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

rhapsody - that is some irony!
Comment by rockstar on 16 May 2008:

great piece and congrats q,

will add some movies did provided meatier role to them in last 2 year or so dor , namesake and water stands out but again u cannot label them as part of commercial cinema
Comment by Ravi on 16 May 2008:

Nice article Q bhai.
Comment by satyam on 16 May 2008:

Excellent piece here Qalandar!
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

Jay:
Music director: I can remember only one, Usha Khanna.
Producers: I don’t think women were given control of money in Indian society. And with corporatization this is not going to happen.
Directors: I think we have more in current generation, Ravathy, Farah Khan, Tanuja Chandra, Leena Yadav
Comment by Qalandar on 16 May 2008:

Re: “And with corporatization this is not going to happen.”

Not sure I follow? Shouldn’t female producers be MORE likely with greater corporatization?
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

“Shouldn’t female producers be MORE likely with greater corporatization?”
Even in business world women are treated secondary to male counterparts. We rarely have women CEOs (even for western world the ratio is very low). Ultimately with corporatization the CEO or COO would have power in ultimate transaction of money (When we are talking about crores of money, and their main concern is profits to shareholders).
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

rks your right but this situation has improved over years. The ratio is indeed low, but probably much better than 10 years ago.
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

Agree to some extent[lack of data].

Link1 - 13

Link2
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

According to Forbes,

‘There are more women running FORTUNE 500 companies this year than there were last year. Currently, 12 FORTUNE 500 companies are run by women* (up from 10 last year), and a total of 25 FORTUNE 1000 companies have women in the top job (up from 20).’

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/womenceos/

It is very low. But its improving for sure. Getting to this level in a company takes years and years. So it will only improve IMO.
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

Also it is probably true, from my experience anyway, CEO positions are occupied by large proportion of people with Finance backgrounds

eg http://www.gaapweb.com/News/814-CEOs-in-the-UK-have-stronger-financial-background.html

Not perfect research but would say it is the higher % overall. It is probably true also that finance is usually a male dominated area. Its what I see in college, university. So statistically it is not surprising at all.
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

You asked for it.

Link1
Link2
Link3
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

Jay: Just finished a ‘Investment’ class in last semester and there were aleast 40% female in my class. I see lot of females in MBA classes. I did a project on MBA salaries couple of years back and most of the major US colleges have around 30% female enrollment[Did a hypothesis test ]. I am not sure how many of them are doing finance specialization.
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

rks - I cannot beat you in links! You should read the first link of yours. % of women as corp officers gone from 9% to 16% between 95-02. This will kick in later into CEO’s And top earners, they are improving!
Comment by Myna on 16 May 2008:

Agree with Jay here. It will be just a matter of few years before women will take over. In the company that I work there are more women in the managerial positions than men, about 70% (Its a big comapny too.)

(As I type this, I see March issue of FORTUNE magazine on my desk with Indra Nooyi (Pepsi CEO) on the front cover :). She is setting a very good example for women ceo’s, unlike Martha Stewart.)
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

That is interesting rks. Higher than I would have suspected. Put it this way, in my grad scheme at work out of 13 people in my class, 2 were females in a finance program. Overall out of about 80 odd, there were not more than 15-20. If you compare that to Marketing or Sales function it is polar reverse.
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

Martha Stewart probably gained from her Jail stint.
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

But what about the lack of female writers in Hindi cinema. I cannot name one. This is certainly an area where I’d expect more. Book writers there are loads, of course film writing is different but certainly surprised at lack of women in this area aswell.
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

Age fails to dampen Zohra Sehgal’s spirit-Link
Comment by jayshah on 16 May 2008:

“Almost 70 per cent of the world’s work is done by girls and women and they have only 0.01 per cent of the world’s assets. Isn’t that a shame?”

If that statistic is anyway directionally true it is indeed a shame. BUT behind every successful man, lies a successful woman
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

“BUT behind every successful man, lies a successful woman ”
That is a pet excuse for not giving enough time to your better half .
Comment by Ravi on 16 May 2008:

Jay, according to me they have 100% of all the assets needed.
Comment by Tuenkens on 16 May 2008:

Female Producers: Rangita Nandy (PKSE)comes top of the mind. There a couple more, can’t seem to recall, one from the Sippy family I think.
Comment by Qalandar on 16 May 2008:

Tuenkens: well Ekta Kapoor too. And Smita Thackeray. And Drona is being produced by a woman (Goldie Behl’s sister, also a television producer, at least so I’ve heard). Most of these are examples of feminine “empowerment” the way Indira Gandhi and Benazir Bhutto were (or were not) — i.e. as female “scions” of a line founded by “patriarchs.” But yeah the point stands (since, in Bollywood, even the MEN are mostly scions of lines founded by patriarchs!).
Comment by Tuenkens on 16 May 2008:

Yes, Shristi Behl, I was confusing her to be a Sippy. But I think comparing them with IG/BB is not fair, except perhaps Smita Thackeray. I also didn’t mention Gauri Khan/Reena Khan for that reason.
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

Q: You are correct. Most of the time the names are just place holder. The actual power lies with their husband or father. In that sense I think Ekta Kapoor is different.
Comment by Eire on 16 May 2008:

Shristi Behl is producing Drona. Goldie Behl is also producing Drona. So its a tag team of siblings doing the honours for Drona. I’m in agreement that Ekta seems to have full control and power over her eandeavours.
Comment by Qalandar on 16 May 2008:

Re: “Most of the time the names are just place holder.”

Nevertheless, even place holders have value– they open up a certain symbolic space (because payment of even lip service involves a concession that a certain ideal is worth paying lip service to, a victory that is heavily qualified yet significant), and pave the way for better things down the road. Hence I’m not so pessimistic in the face of media reports that many women’s seats at the panchayat level are “remote controlled” by male relatives. That’s how it BEGINS. But that isn’t the last we’ve heard of the matter.
Comment by rks on 16 May 2008:

Agree Q. We have to start at some place.

ps: BTW, when we talk of equal footing, I resist the idea of reserving seats for example in buses, for women. I think it should rather be reserved for elderly (above certain age) or disabled. At same time I acknowledge that it is very difficult for women folks to travel in buses with so much crowd and consequent ill-treatment.