Lecture on Rang de Basanti

Well well well.. Everyone knows Bollywood these days! But more than that, I think it is increasingly taken more seriously. People seem to become aware that Indian cinema has more to offer than masala.

And lo behold! What do you know...
I have been asked by a group of young alternative thinkers and artists to come and speak on Rang de Basanti on the 13th of feb in an art gallery in Amsterdam. The evening will begin with me talking on how movies might lead to political activism amongst youth, and after that we will watch RdB, which perfectly illustrates the theme ofcourse.

And to make things better than ever, Kriti and I are gonna spin the wheels of steel, and make people dance to the latest Bollywood tracks! How i'm looking forward to that night...

Who knows.. one day we might even make a living off this hobby ;-)

Bollywood cosmopolitanism

1,5 years of books, libraries, lots of films and great conversations have ended. For now at least. A few months ago i finished my masters dissertation called: Bollywood cosmopolitanism. An exploration of belonging through popular culture. If interested, it is fully downloadable here. (don't mind the Dutch, the dissertation is in English)

Roughly, what i've done is the following. I have studied the recent history of popular Hindi film, for a broad context of what i'm talking about. Especially the changes since the early nineties, when the term Bollywood was 'invented' worldwide, where the movies have become more cosmopolitan. The movies deal often with NRI's struggling with their identity, and Indians fly all over the world to do business.
Then instead of focussing on the changes in movies (tons of people have written about it), I thought it would be interesting to write about the experience of of the viewers of films. I wanted to know if Bollywood helps young viewers in Bangalore to construct a sense of cosmopolitanism. In other words, if it gives them a feeling of belonging to a local and a global community at the same time.

Most analysts think that Bollywood is not able to help in catering a new lifestyle for the globalized youngsters in big Indian cities, because most of the typical Bollywood movies show a sort of 'Hindu conservative cosmopolitanism'. This means that on the outside Indians can be 'global', they have all the material luxuries of the Western life, but on the inside, the heart, the values are Indian. So, it is Indian in global clothes. (phir bhi dil hai hindustani!) This is a construction that is not threatening to viewers. Because the Western and Indian values are not really conflicting; in the end it is the Indian pride (Hindu mostly) that matters.

My interviews with youngsters in Bangalore shows that this view is too simple. When talking about movies they see recognize this morale in movies, but they themselves think of it in more complicated terms. Today's youngsters know that movies are just that, constructed images, and not the same as reality. Instead it helps them to think about their lives in new ways. And this is sometimes indeed a matter of conflicting values. They would also like to wear clothes like in the movies, but they understand perfectly that they have to fight with parents over that. And this is not always resolved as in the movies.

Living in the Indian city is a juggling of values (in the villages probably as well). Modern values, traditional values, traditional versions of modern values or modern interpretations of traditional values. Etcetera.
And Bollywood is a buddy to help thinking and laughing about this complex process.

Water (2005), by Deepa Mehta

In The Netherlands i thank god for Belgian state-run television. They still show good film in its entirety, no commercial breaks, and with full end credits. Whereas here in Holland you have to work your way through diapers and insurances every 20 minutes in order to watch a good film.
Last Sunday, Belgian channel Ketnet/Canvas showed the film Water, the third in Deepa Mehta's elements-series (after the other must-sees Fire (1996) and Earth (1998)).
Water deals with the life of widows in India, who, according to the ancient lawbooks of Manu, have to stay single and 'pure' in order to achieve salvation. This literally means that these women live in extremely poor and dingy ashrams, doing nothing but waiting to die. (at least, that's what the movie shows) It is believed that when they, or their shadow, touches another person, this brings bad luck. Besides that it was common for little girls to be married off to an older man, and then have a life without childhood.
Water beautifully shows the loneliness and isolation these women suffer. Water, the holy element for many a Hindu, the bringer of life, is also the seperation between the poor woman and the rich man who uses them for prositution. And it is the element that can make a beautiful woman drown herself out of despair.
Of course, things have changed. The movie is set against the backdrop of Ghandi coming to rise against the British, and Raja Ram Mohan Roy passing the widow- remarriage act. But if it was up to many a reactionary Hindu in India right now, time is to be turned back to the golden days of Manu, where women were still men's property. Not surprisingly, a group of fundamentalist Hindus have put Deepa Mehta on their 'hitlist'. (although this was mainly because of Fire, which supposedly dealt with lesbianism)
The film left me moved by the great acting of the little girl Chuyia, and her interaction with none other than John Abraham (whom we now know as a six-packed Bollywood star from Goal). But I think the main character was the ashram's moral centre Shakuntala. She was the only one divided in her faith, confused between tradition and modernity. It is her indicisiveness, stubbornness sometimes, which is the best representation of India's society. Choosing for individual freedom can not come without pain, without loss.

Movies in movies

Here's what i meant in the previous post. A song from the superhit Dil Chahta Hai, where you see a couple imagining themselves onscreen (don't we all do that?), and going through the different Hindi-film styles (50's, 70's, 90's). Through going to the movies together, they realize they are in love. A landmark movie that according to many youth set a trend. A trend towards movies that were more about friendship than about all the love-parents-tradition crap of the 90s bollywood.

King Khan dethroned

One thing I love about Indian movies, is that they are often, at least partially, about Indian movies as well. Frequently you see people sitting in a cinema watching a movie, in the dialogues they refer to other movies, or the stories even revolve around someone trying to make it in film business. You watch (one of) the following movies and you know what i mean: Om Shanti Om (2007), Mili (1975), Rangeela (1995), Bombay Boys (1998).
I would say it shows that Indian cinema is a very selfaware cinema. India is a cinematic society, movies make up an integral part of the social cement. How we talk, how we walk, what we sing, what we drink. By making all this a theme in the films themselves, this is great fun to watch of course. Because now the films are about the stars, but also about the people watching, thinking and talking about those stars. Very much a cinema of and for the people. (Although some Marxist cynics claim this 'making cinema about cinema and the viewers' is the best way to make people addicted to cinema, and keep them buying.)
But recently this backfired. Yesterday we watched Billu Barber. It's about a small time barber, in a small time village. Then, his fate changes dramatically when the superhero Sahir Khan (played by Shah Rukh Khan) and his team come to the village for shooting a new SFX film in Matrix style. The rumour spreads that Billu used to be Sahir's friend in childhood, and suddenly everyone respects the poor barber. The storyline of the film is simple, and revolves around the question: 'Will Billu and Sahir meet again?'
The interesting parts of the film are about how the village is affected by the luxurious invasion of cinema. Business is going up, people become star crazy, and all try their best to get a glimpse of the hero or even a part in the movie. We see actual villagers playing actual villagers who want to play film villagers. We are supposed to believe the movie is about it's morals, that no matter if you're rich or poor, filmstar or barber, it's friendship that really matters.
But i couldn't help seeing in everything a glorification of the real life star, Shah Rukh Khan. He plays himself, under a slightly different name. People sing actual songs of his actual past movies.
He is shown loving his fans, but also critical of the people (politicians) underestimating his honesty and hard work. Even if he's not there, the movie revolves around him, by showing the effect he has on others. And in the end, the fate of the poor barber is finally changed for the good. Why? Of course, because the star takes care of that.
I couldn't help getting the idea that Shah Rukh Khan wanted a film about himself, showing the person behind the star. He wanted to show that Shah Rukh once was a little boy as well, just like everyone else. The film, produced by Shah Rukh's wife Gauri, is about Shah Rukh Khan about Shah Rukh Khan about Shah Rukh Khan.
But King Khan was someone else, NOT SR, but Irrfan in the role of Billu (whom many will know as the interviewing policeman in Slumdog Millionaire). Irrfan shows that a movie is much more interesting if an actor can actually act. And that it is high time stardom is not something that should be managed. It could, possibly, also be left to the opinion of the audiences, who I'm sure have a voice of their own. (Although the villagers in Billu Barber don't seem to be anything more than dumb, fame-following sheep.)

Hindu Surinams watching Bollywood in Holland

Just around the corner where I live there is a grocery store run by Hindustani people who came from Surinam to Holland in the 60s and 70s. One corner of this store is transformed to a Bollywood dvd-store. It offers a huge range of films, classics till the latest, and they are offered for the rediculous price of 10 euros for 4. (I wont try to figure out how this is possible, but the photocopied covers say enough.) For me, one of the few white Bollywood freaks, this is great. It saves me a lot of waiting for the download to be finished. But ofcourse, the main market are the ones that watch these films the most, the people from Surinam. Now, I have always wondered, why do people who have not so much of a bonding to India, love these movies so much? The current generation is born in The Netherlands and has hardly a bond with Surinam anymore, and not even close to one with India.
Last week I attended a lecture by Sanderien Verstappen, a Dutch woman who graduated with an anthropological study on the meaning of Bollywood for these Hindustani youth. She explained that the Indianness of these films is not interesting to them at all. The main reason for them watching is the portrayal of the family, which relates to them much more than the nuclear and distant families in Hollywood or an average Dutch soap. The films show children struggling with parental pressure, or family that is always around, which is an actual reality for them. The most beautiful quote was of a girl who had said: 'Why i watch Bollywood? To feel normal!'
A great example of how films can mean different things to different people, but also on how Bollywood appeals to many of these different people at the same time. Unity in diversity, as India likes to describe itself.

Mumbai My Life

The horrifying terrorist attacks in Mumbai are still going on. Reaching 48 hours now. Many speculations, many stories, many emotions. One of the issues will be how the city is collectively going to process this trauma. This made me think of a movie I saw recently, Mumbai Meri Jaan (Mumbai my life, 2008) by Nishikanth Kamath.
I would say this movie is an Indian version of Crash. It revolves around the lives of different people that come together because of the terrorist attack on the Mumbai train on 11 july 2006. Over 200 people lost their lives then. The movie is original and touching in the sense that it is not so much about the blast itself, but about a few people dealing with its impact. At the same time it is a movie about the way media deals with these happenings. A big newschannel wants to cover the horrors and at the same time get the most viewers.
The movie opens with a speech of Nehru, who adresses the public about the awakening of India. In the context of the images to come the speech gets a different meaning. Maybe 'the nation' is not able to provide security for all. And maybe it is more the people themselves that have to learn how to live together. No one is going to do that for them. Mumbai Meri Jaan shows how the people of this mega-city struggle, but that human contact is possible.
In the light of the terror currently happening, Mumbai Meri Jaan is an important movie and could help the people in talking about their experiences. I wish the city inspiration for finding connections between people, instead of further clashes and divisions.
By the way, the title refers to the classis song Bombay meri Jaan from the movie CID. It already said that living in a big city is difficult, with so many material things and danger around. Apparently it can not be sung and shown enough...