Mainstream Weekly

Home > Archives (2006 on) > 2013 > Representation or Resistance?

Mainstream, VOL LI, No 32, July 27, 2013

Representation or Resistance?

Sunday 28 July 2013

#socialtags

COMMUNICATION

The present times of globalisation and commercialisation offer a specific and elegant image of art, culture and aesthetics. Interestingly, the meaning of these words changes dramatically when the caste issue comes into the picture. An interesting article titled ‘Dalit Representation in Bollywood’ by Harish Wan-khede (Mainstream Vol. LI, No. 20, May 4, 2013) traces caste representation in Indian cinema as it marks its 100th anniversary. Caste is a peculiar Indian reality but is often ‘cast away’ by the Bollywood film-makers, as he argues. However, the article lacks evidences proving that the caste issue has been ignored by the Indian cinema. It simply asks for the representation and does not deal with the problem critically.

Wankhede’s statement that “Bollywood in the most visible way is devoid of creative freedom, honesty and the passion to break the conventional norms which eventually can produce a radical art form” is contradictory in nature. On the one hand, he asks about creative freedom and, at the same time, he expects it to be radical. Creative freedom is not necessarily limited to radicalism. In fact, Bollywood tried to oppose traditional structures with its freedom. Water and Fire are prime examples of using art as a form of resistance against the traditional practices of our social and religious system. Last year’s popular film, O My God, is another successful example of mockery on religious practices in India. On the other hand, if a director makes a critical movie on caste or religion, he tries to balance depicting the social reality by providing entertainment and fulfilling the commercial purpose. For a director, the target audience is not solely Dalits. One should accept the fact that for the masses, cinema is a form of entertainment. Caste, a serious social issue, does not always translate readily into entertainment material. Recently, the release of Aarakshan and Shudra—the Rising met with opposition by various Hindu groups. They claim that the films negatively portray the Hindu religion and caste system.

Similarly, if we go along with the author’s subaltern arguments that “upper caste names, brahmanical cultural rituals and Hindu aes-thetics were portrayed as the natural assets of the entire nation”, it does not show the full picture. Browsing through the history of Indian cinema, one can find that many a time caste issues have gained special importance. In 1946 Chetan Anand’s Neecha Nagar portrayed the practice of untouchability, and won the Grand Prix award in an international film festival. Shyam Benegal’s film Ankur in 1973 painted a picture of the myriad types of social discrimination. Moreover, other directors like Govind Nilhani and artistes like Dadamoni Ashok Kumar contributed to highlighting the caste issue. One must remember there are many ways to show the caste issue. In the last two decades, Bollywood produced several movies presenting caste through politics, love-marriages and corruption. Bandit Queen, Bawander, Gangajal, Khap are some examples of films showing the heinous caste politics and gender discrimination. Wankhede also fails to mention Shudra—The Rising, one of the latest films expressly showing caste atrocities and assertion. All of these facts have completely been ignored in the article when the author remarks critically: “Bollywood cinema is the apt example of such fake world.”

I find the author’s claim of “invisibility of caste and Dalit protagonist in Bollywood” proble-matic. It is true that participation of Dalits in Bollywood is nil but token participation of any social group does not guarantee the represen-tation of their real world in films. For example, the popular Dalit icon and former Railway Minister, Ramvilas Paswan, recently launched his son, Chirag Paswan, in a high-budget Bollywood film Mile Na Mile Hum. The film is a love story about an elite couple, yet it is far removed from the daily realities of a typical Dalit’s life. Then, this is also an apt example of the fake world of Dalits.

Finally, an important question is: why would Dalits go to watch depressing and pathetic scenes on the big screen since those they face in daily life? Why do we expect glamorous cinema to be pro-Dalit when the market is its godfather as the caste issue is a selective reality of the market in present times? There is a difference between talking about caste for commercial purposes and to use it as a weapon for anti-caste struggle. Asking for Dalit representation or participation in Bollywood is not resisting that dominant culture, rather surrendering to it. Thus, the issue is to counter the dominant culture of oppression of which Bollywood itself is a part. If Dalits have to fight a larger battle of social justice through art, then organic forms of resistance such as theatre, street plays and docu-mentaries have more potential to challenge and expose the hegemony over art, aesthetics and culture, not the highly commercial and glamorous cinema of Bollywood.

Gaurav J. Pathania (Research Scholar)
Zakir Husain Centre
for Educational Studies,
Jawaharlal Nehru University,
New Delhi
e-mail: gauravjogi@hotmail.com
91-9871847100

ISSN (Mainstream Online) : 2582-7316 | Privacy Policy|
Notice: Mainstream Weekly appears online only.