Glimmers of Hope - Interview with Melanie Walker, Intern at Guild For Service Organization in India

While the current Indian social and news media is focused on the recent controversies surrounding the lack of outrage in India after the Assamese Gang Rape case , my fellow friend academic and colleague is making a great contribution to a wonderful organization that supports the rehabilitation of widows barring race, religion, cultures, and class to give them a chance to start their new lives in a country where the status of women is constantly called into question especially in the eyes of the international (and local media). Feminists and non-feminists are focused on attacking each other rather than trying to spend time and work together to come up with a solution to eradicate or at the very least alleviate the issue of women's inferior status in India altogether.While I have focused on troubling issues that Indian (middle class) women are facing currently, there are also marked efforts being made by individuals whose efforts go unrecognized but play such an important role in contributing to some sort of a "progress" towards the status of women in India. As an Indian woman, I am critical of the discourse both academic and non-academic that constantly emphasizes that countries like India and Middle East are misogynistic and continue to enact systems of oppression that suppress women and take away their rights as human beings. Among the women who suffer from these conniving and "evil" misogynistic hands are widows. Widow remarriage is a topic that has always sparked a controversy in the Indian discourse both in popular culture but also in the social media that seeks to define boundaries for women who are living without men in their lives. The Tanishq Ad that sought to break taboos was for me one of the first glimmer of hope that people were now seeking answers for this problematic tradition that essentially annihilated the subjectivity of women after the (untimely) death of her husband. Like single women who are mostly unrecognized in the society, a widow in India especially lives a life that is a constant reminder of the loss of her husband - she is always clad in white (that is emblematic of her [sexual] purity) and no longer wears jewelry and other symbols that show her living a vibrant life! Films like Baabul (2006) and Water (2005) have played a profound role in honing on this issue and beg us to take a look at them once again and ask the question - does not a widow have the right to remarry? I would argue - yes - she does! I applaud the efforts made by Dr. Mohini Giri and her intern, Melanie Walker who is not only a close friend but who is contributing immensely to the service.

Melanie and I at the South Asian Studies Conference in Claremont, CA

We had met by chance at the South Asian conference in Claremont University, California in 2011. I was working in EMC at that time but was passionate about my career in academia so I had applied for a conference and with my own funding had gone to the conference and it rightfully changed my   life (but that's another story for another day!) In any case, the conference became a forum where I met many wonderful scholars who have stayed in touch and have been supportive. Among them, I met Melanie Walker. 

So now that I know that she is achieving great heights, she had to be featured in my blog because both her work and contribution are evidence that while there may be concerns regarding a woman's subjectivity in India, there are also groundwork efforts being done by individuals and organizations that are providing resources for women to have a better life. There is a glimmer of hope and The Guild For Service and Melanie Walker's work and contribution is a great and profound contribution to this thought! 

So without further delay, I introduce Melanie Walker to you: 

Nidhi Shrivastava:   How and why did you select The Guild for Service as an organization that you wanted to work for?

Melanie Walker: To be honest, it selected me. I’m here under extreme happenstance! Well, I was connected to the Guild for Service and Dr. Giri under happenstance; the rest was up to me. It is one of those, “you never know who you are going to meet” stories. I met Dr. Giri’s Niece, Nalini while working an open house for my Uncle while in California in September. My Aunt was ill that day, so he chose to stay home and asked me to fill in and support his business partner, Susan, where needed. Nalini works in the same real estate office as my Uncle and Susan, and stopped by the open house. Susan introduced us and shared some of my history, having done research in India, and it only took a minute to not only realize that we had a lot in common, but Nalini asked me if I knew of her aunt, Dr. Mohini Giri, and of course I did. Not only had I heard of Dr. Giri, but, had done a presentation in grad school on a movie she is represented in (Forgotten Women) and discussed her work to my students in Development Studies lectures at the University of Calgary.

Nalini said that I should reach out to Dr. Giri mentioning our shared connection - I told her I would love to, being that I was post-grad and searching for an internship opportunity in an organization that supported my values in community development - a rights based approach. Dr. Giri and Guild for Service focus on the plight and rights of widows in India through advocacy, activism, and participatory outreach. I knew that it would be important to follow through, even if just to be a supporter. However, after some emails, phone calls (with Dr. Giri herself! - this was very exciting at the time!), and further endorsement from Nalini, Dr. Giri looked into my background and being satisfied, offered me an internship and told me to come to India. I applied for my Visa the next day.

NS:What was your inspiration to work in the organization? I know earlier you had done a lot of work in the development work that included helping those who were most affected by the dam politics (If I remember correctly 2 years ago)

MW: You are correct. My previous research and advocacy work was within the umbrella of community development, focusing on displaced indigenous populations due to dam building in India. Though the concentration of my work is on rural India, indigenous populations, dams, and specifically development induced displacement (DID), the premise of mine, and Dr. Giri’s work is participatory community development, capacity building, and rights based. Our goal is to advocate for those without a voice; include marginalized populations in the fight to be heard, increasing their human rights awareness and education; therefore, allowing people to be the agents of change - changing policy and societal mindsets.

My inspiration came from knowing that I valued and supported the work I would be doing. I would be a part of something that was already creating change, and had been for years. Of course, part of my inspiration was being given the chance to intern under a legend. Dr. Mohini Giri is one of the leading social activists and human rights advocates in India, if not the world, especially when it comes to the topic of widows. Her connections lead to UN Women, she was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, and sits on the board of numerous organizations, such as The Hunger Project in New York. With her background, experience, and reputation, how could one not be inspired to work with her? It was an opportunity I had to take and was privileged to receive. Maybe I’ll have to write a book? - Behind the Scenes of a Legend - haha!

NS: Knowing how unsafe arguably Delhi is right now for women of all ages, races, and skin color, how are your adjusting yourself to the environment? (this is optional/ mostly I am curious) 

MW: Haha - you should ask this first question to my family - you would get an intense response! Yes, over the past while if you watch the news and/or any medial outlets, including social media, you might think that once you arrive in Delhi you will be raped, and later murdered. However, I believe that anything can happen to anyone, anywhere, and at any time. This is my fourth time to India, which may allow me to connect to the real Delhi on a better level, outside of what’s shown on TV. I first came to Delhi in 2008 to attend the University of Delhi, returned in 2010 for a research study group, and again in 2011 to conduct research for my MA Thesis. I have been in Delhi during other significant events, such as terrorist attacks and/or bombings, and thus have first hand experience of  media portrayal versus what’s actually happening on the ground. In my experience media uses a close-up vision of an occurrence. However, the occurrence will be in one small section/area of a city, so I won’t go there - or I will use extra caution and common sense. For example, now more than ever I do not go out after dark in Delhi, unless I am with someone(s) I trust and know well. I also stay away from areas that are known for political rally’s etc. Although, the other day I attended a Violence Against Women protest and ran smack into a huge (mainly male) intensely political rally - these are not the best situations for visible foreigners, so I got out of there quickly - this is part of the work and job of an advocate and activist and are bound to happen. I’m not suggesting that violence such as rape and murder in Delhi are impervious to me, not at all, just that the media portrayal has painted Delhi as a “rape city” and yet is so much more. It’s got a bad rap and I could get hurt/harmed just as easily elsewhere if I’m not smart, safe and aware - this is the world we unfortunately live in, and that’s what Dr Giri and others are trying to change!

NS: How did you meet Dr. Giri? 

MW: The first time I “met” Dr. Giri was when her niece (re: previous story) Nalini had me contact Dr. Giri on the phone while she was visiting her daughter in Michigan. I was nervous. I mean who just calls up a legend?! I had a good breakfast and asked everyone in the house to leave - haha! She of course was completely laid back and lovely - she is a very busy woman, so was to the point and had questions about my work and qualifications, but was so accommodating and welcoming in her offer of internship that I hung up the phone elated and maybe a little stunned! I met her in person upon arriving at the Working Women’s Hostel where I am staying, which is also run by Guild for Service and the location of the main office where I work - my commute is very long - two flights of stairs. From the moment I met her she was just as lovely as on the phone, we had tea and got to know each other. Since, I’ve been here two weeks now, she has taken me under her wing and invited me to follow her along in her work, in which I am learning so very much, getting a glimpse behind the scenes.

NS: What was the experience like to witness the widow remarriages? Do you remember any anecdotes or stories the women told?

MW:  The Group Marriage totaled 15 couples, of which five were widow re-marriages. It was incredible to witness; this was due to the details covered by Guild for Service and Ma Dham (Vrindavan). Staff, volunteers, and Ma’s (widows) living at Ma Dham, decorated the grounds beautifully. The Ma’s especially were so excited for the event because it was the first Group Marriage at Ma Dham, previously they were held in Delhi. They prepared marigolds and other auspicious elements while singing, dancing and chattering excitedly, working together in circles. Brides received full dress and adornment, which added to the experience and excitement that this was a real wedding. I had time to talk to some of the brides and one in particular was so excited to get married that she took me over and proudly introduced me to her bridegroom; they were an adorable couple. Her sister, mother and father were also there and had the same expression of any parents on their daughters wedding day; this was especially heartwarming to see in India because a wedding can be a mournful time for a bride as she leaves her family and embarks to live with her husbands family, seeing her own family less. Norms are changing, if slowly, due to the advocacy work Dr. Giri and others do, creating awareness of women’s human rights, and the importance of gender equality.

NS: What are the future events that will be conducted with Guild for Change? What is it that you like most of the organization?

MW: We are currently working on a three-part South Asian conference series on the Empowerment of Widows, which would include attendees/speakers from all of the SAARC countries and bring together SANWED members. The first phase would be a conference in Delhi where discussion/workshops would lead to recommendations required for a change towards the empowerment of widows. The second phase would be to take those recommendations/document to the 58^th session of the Commission on the Status of Women (March 10-21, NY) as hosted by the UN-NGO branch. The third phase would be to begin implementation at the grassroots level of such recommendations, starting June 23 - the International Day of Widows. We are currently at the funding stage, have confirmed one sponsor, and are working to find additional funders for the project.

What do I like most...I think it’s the motivation I gain by working in the field. Working on such causes from Canada is removed and it’s easy to go home at the end of the day and go about your life, and although work-life balance is important, working on the ground makes it real. Very. Real. Without being removed from the issue time becomes rapid - things must change now and you must work hard to do that. Sometimes the results are instant, which makes you work harder because you want to see increased change. Increased change = increased motivation. Community development, advocacy, and activism can be exhausting and de-motivating on the best of days. Though what I like most is also the most challenging part of my internship, it’s also the lesson everyone in the field must experience. I am lucky enough to have this experience with an organization and group of individuals that are hard working and truly believe in what they seek out to do each day.

So...there you have it! I will be in India next month and will document and hope to do a follow-up blog with Dr. Mohini Giri and my dear friend, Melanie Walker - so proud of you! 

Image sources: courtesy of Melanie Walker and Facebook 

© Nidhi Shrivastava 2014 This content is subject to copyrights. Please ask for my permission before using this content for any purpose. 

Domestic Violence In India : Critical Analysis of A Forgotten Film - Ashok Gaikwad's Raja Ki Aayegi Baraat (1997)

Rani Mukherjee who has been known for as one of the penultimate Indian actresses of Bollywood started her career in very low-budget films that spoke of glaring women's issues in the 90s. Her debut film entitled "Raja Ki Aayegi Baraat" or "Prince's Wedding Procession Will Arrive" is reportedly said to be a "commercial failure" in India's million dollar film industry. Recent discourses both in various social media outlets, newspapers, and even university classrooms have been hinting towards the increased sexual violence in India - one of the themes that both hinges upon on me emotionally and intellectually as I try to work through both my coursework term papers and attempt to unpack the current discourses that speak to the troubling violence of women in India.

I am no "feminist" and do not identify my politics with the term after having studied the historical discourses that have shaped the Western discourses since the suffragette movement began during the industrial revolution period in England. I hold a MA degree in Women's Studies from Western and a graduate certificate in Women's Studies from University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Suffice to say, I have had time to think and shape my politics as a 1.5 generation woman of color who identifies herself both as an Indian and an American but strongly as a post-colonial scholar who is concerned with the status of women (and other marginalized others) in India.

I do believe in gender (and "other" studies) that speak to the politics and subjectivity of the subaltern (Read Gayatri Spivak's Can the Subaltern Speak?) - the marginalized - be it a man, woman, or any other person who belongs to a part of the society who is oppressed by socio-political-economic systems that have been in place for the less-privileged. However, I do consider my self a post-colonial scholar who is deeply concerned about the discourse that is centered upon the (sexual) violence of women in India as one of the major concerns that have shaped my intellectual and personal passionate study of the topic.

While there are other issues I hope to discuss in my blog in the future including acid attacks, dowry, the fairness debate, and other things that shape a middle class Indian woman's subjectivity in India. I will begin with this forgotten film, which I hope to resurrect from the "dead" and encourage people to watch it again (forgetting the low-budget production but focusing on how astutely and arguably "accurately" the director has brought about many important issues that continue to be hush-hush in India)! The film link that I have posted is with English subtitles but divided into parts. A full version is available but without any subtitles.

Raja ki Aayegi Baraat stars Rani Mukherjee, Shadab Khan, British-Indian actor Saeed Jaffery, and Mohnish Bahl - all of these actors (sans Shadab Khan) have made an international name for themselves but I give them props for being associated with a film that centered so heavily on domestic (and sexual violence) of women in India at a time when these realities were not even discussed or brought to light (which explains its supposed commercial failure). Today, I view their efforts as a gem and hope to use it in my pedagogical teachings in the future.

This film has three instances that I find are especially relevant when we discuss today's subjectivity of an Indian woman. Rani Mukherjee's character, Mala, is outspoken and strong. She angers Raja (Shadab Khan) when she arrives at his friend's wedding accusing his friend of abandoning his pregnant ex-girlfriend. Insulting and breaking the ceremony, Mala, a school teacher is then pursued by Raja who rapes her and leaves her naked and vulnerable in the classroom she teaches in. Humiliated but still resilient, Mala returns home to her father and a court case ensues. The court eventually sentences that Raja and Mala should be married in order to maintain the "honor" and "reputation" of both families. While the marriage takes place in a hush-hush manner, neither Raja nor Mala are happy with the arrangement. While Mala gradually starts to accept her role as Raja's wife, Raja and his family continue to despise her because of the fact that she belongs to a lower class and would not have been their daughter-in-law had Raja not raped her. Throughout the story, the family members attempt many schemes in order to literally remove Mala from their lives - anywhere from using physical violence (a scene where Raja tries to hit her with his belt) to a poisonous snake her uncle-in-law leaves in her honeymoon lodge when she is by herself to her sister-in-law leaving the gas on so that she can catch fire and lastly, her father-in-law hits her violently with a vase at the climax of the film. In all these instances, Mala comes out unscathed. The snake ends up poisoning Raja instead and she as a "heroic" figure sucks the blood out of him and like a true lover and wife saves his life and the film ends on a "sweet" note when the older brother (who supports Mala finally lashes out at this villainous wife who is no longer evil after her husband's rejection of her ideas) and when the lawyers and cop intervene, Mala lies to them that she had fallen from the staircase saving the "reputations" and "honors" of both her natal and marital home. The film wraps up nicely as both of them are shown getting married with celebrations and pomp.

Yes, the film is embedded with problematic issues and instances and perhaps the most glaring to an unfamiliar eye of India's cultural complexities and nuances will be a) a woman marrying her rapist b) silencing and forgetting all the moments of brutal violence against her - she is only accepted within her society if she remains silent and forgives and forgets all the attempts her in-laws and husband attempted to get rid of her. However, my argument as someone who is familiar with these complexities will suggest that the film was not a commercial success and is now among the forgotten films still alive in Youtube's search engines because it drives home the important points of silence and honour that continues to be so relevant to the society. There is always an uneasy silence that surrounds domestic violence in India (among other countries). The decision that the court did that encouraged the rapists to marry the victim is something that by no means that I endorse but it calls into question the ethics behind why the law would ask for such a decision and that is where it gets sticky. This is a practice that has been done for centuries but truly it makes you question WHY that is the case!

 You also have to give credit to Mala for everything that she does - she attempts to find a happy medium between her vocal and strong character and her choice to still comply with traditional customs that is expected of her. Her husband eventually too gains respect, stands for her, and is even willing to take revenge for her against her perpetrators. The filmmaker's attempt to make a controversial film in the late 90s when Yash Chopra musicals were enjoying commercial success is something to think about. These are issues that no one wants to discuss or hear about. Furthermore, this film is definitely produced with a low budget even for its time. Lastly, I really like this film because it suggests that there are many women like Mala who exists who I would argue choose silence (from the law and the outer society) to enjoy a peaceful life with their families. she could have easily complained to the law and gotten her in-laws and husband jailed for their continuous brutal violence upon her but why did she choose not to speak to the law? Why was this the director's choice? Would the film have given the same message if the ending had not been the way that it was? I would suggest that because the film's ending was an eerily "sweet" one, it allows us as viewers and consumers of the film to take up the issues that are unresolved within the framework the film. Although the film speaks of issues we want to close our eyes to, I think the film makes a remarkable impact on the broader repertoire of Indian films that represent domestic violence and beg us to take a look at them again.

Kudos to the filmmakers who attempt to make movies that compel us to rethink glaring issues that impact the status of women in India.

Source Image:  upload.wikmedia.org, static.indianexpress.com, static.ibnlive.com, i.smash.saavncdn.com 
Video Source: Youtube 

© Nidhi Shrivastava 2014 This content is subject to copyrights. Please ask for my permission before using this content for any purpose. 

It's Time For A Change - A Critical Response to Anurag Kashyap's That Day After Everyday

N.B: This blog entry is an analytic response of the documentary. Please do watch this documentary as it will only enhance your experience understanding my point of view and analysis of the film. IIts only twenty minutes but they will be a really powerful 20 minutes you will spend! The link is above and spread the word! :-) 

Written by Nitin Bharadwaj and directed by independent filmmaker, Anurag Kashyap who has been known in the past to make radical films such as Dev D (2009), Gulal (2009), That Girl In The Yellow Boots (2011), and Gangs of Wasseypur (2012) have produced a short Youtube film entitled That Day Every Day (2013) that takes the subject of eve-teasing (a topic I have discussed before my previous blogs) and molestation cases. The ending of the film is powerful and riveting speaking to the importance of self-defense. It is also interesting to note that both Anurag Kashyap and his wife, Kalki Koelchin have been proactive in exploring the problematic issues of India's insidious rape culture and its numerous implications.

Image via ytimg.com

As a post-colonial scholar and a woman whose roots are embedded in India, this film immediately caught my attention. While the film was kept short and sweet and only ran for mere twenty minutes, it packed with it a sharp punch especially towards the end of the movie. I was deeply saddened that the film did not have subtitles, which limited the audience of the film especially in the much broader international context such that this film could be made available to audiences all over the world. Like many of Kashyap's films, the topic is controversial and provocative. The film stars Sandhya Mridul, Radhika Apte, and Akash Sinha, and other names.

Image via Wikimedia.com

       The film starts with Radhika Apte making food and tea in the kitchen as a voice hovers over her speaking to her about the current troubling events happening in India as well as ridiculous studies that suggest that the reason for the increase in rape is due to the increased consumption of the Indo-Chinese dish known as "chow mein" doing nothing but revealing the anxieties that are instilled within the Indian society as they target those who are "others" within the larger Indian context. In other words, the chowmein consumption is not only associated with the othering of the Nepali and other "Asian-looking" immigrants but is also associating them with promoting a dish that acts almost like a viagra for men increasing their sexual desire and increases rape cases. The man then advises her to quietly walk without dealing with the men who eve-tease her and fears that if she rebels, then she will be found dismembered on the corner of the street. He says, "auratein jitni chup rahe utna accha hai" or "its better if women are silenced, its better to prevent provoking sexual harassment or molestation. Within the first minute and thirty seconds of the film, the story has already highlighted many problems that are associated with India's rape culture. I want to repeat again that rape culture in general is universal and insidious and varies from one experience to another. We do not do justice if we compare rape cultures between countries because we, in my opinion, do not have and should not appropriate the trauma as it is unique to each victim's experience regardless of whether the violation was brutal or a case of eve-teasing or sexual harassment. He also reprimands her for not going to work and developing a professional career - he argues that it only adds to her vulnerability towards sexual violence. Like this first instance, the film continues on to show two other women who are also being reprimanded and advised by their loved ones to stop going "out" as much to prevent and protect themselves from sexual violence and rape. 

                                                               Image via Indiaopines.com
                The film is very visceral in that it shows men harassing women and eve-teasing them in a quite scary manner especially when the women are trying to get to work. Even at work, the women face sexual jeering and eve-teasing from peons who drool over her using their smart phone's camera features to stalk her and use excuses to get physically close to her. In the middle of the film, the women are seated in the car and are encouraged to stand up for themselves. The film's ending is quite radical in that these women physically fight against the men and try to save themselves rather than being "rescued", which speaks profoundly to the contradictory space that women occupy in India at this time. While I am still struggling with Marxism, I do think that a woman's economic and social status as a professional woman and are desiring now to become part of the "New" middle class culture (Read Leela Fernandes's India's New Middle Class) plays a role in making her a vulnerable subject to these atrocities but before I can completely make this claim, I want to understand the politics of marxism and classism further to shape my point-of-view. The issue is far more complicated and sensitive and this observation is just one aspect of the problem. 
            With the growing capital economy, malls in Delhi and Bombay are laced with bars, clubs, and movie theaters and women who participate in the professional world earn enough living to support themselves and their families. The lifestyle, culture, and expectations are definitely in the midst of evolving as women become more and more independent in their respective fields. It is not to say that such progress is "linear" but a complicated zig-zag line that sometimes takes two steps forward and one step backward (and the cycle continues - with different variations). Earlier, yes, there was eve-teasing, sexual harassment, and rape that took place within India but now due to the increased use of social media such as Facebook and Twitter, information is more readily available and people are able to connect via cyberspace and distance is no longer an issue. Anyone can be a journalist, a writer, a blogger, and a contributor with mediums available for people to express their emotions, thoughts, and concerns. 
              The women featured in the film all belong the middle class. They work, use a shuttle bus to return to their homes, stay together and communicate with each other as a band, and fight the men who are eve teasing them together as a unit. The ending is pretty comical actually when the man asks her if she wants a cup of tea coming to a full circle. 
             Now, for the most interesting and fun part - the fight scene. Did it not remind those who have seen the movie of the typical 90s Hindi/ "Bollywood" film fight scenes. The men harassing the women and the women taking the opportunity to band together and literally fighting back showing their empowered "superwoman" selves (Thanks Ramanpreet for this observation). As women who have been in India and walked through the streets, we questioned if this ending was realistic or not. Here is my answer and its a double-edged sword. I think what the film portrays is totally possible if women take self-defense classes and are able to stand up for themselves and literally fight the men (and are prepared and armed with pepper sprays etc) but if we really think about it, the film makes a very salient point - how will they stand up for themselves if their families encourage or advise them to be couped up within the four walls of their home - will it really solve the problem or is it just a solution that takes us back to the times of purdah and zenana? The film strives to encourage women from all classes to stand up for themselves, which I think and believe is a strong and empowering message! 
               Kudos to Anurag Kashyap and Nitin Bhardwaj for such an excellent rendition of a film based on glaring issues that need to have a dialogue in this world!! 

© Nidhi Shrivastava 2014 This content is subject to copyrights. Please ask for my permission before using this content for any purpose. 

Questioning the Ethics of Filmmaking: Bollywood Fetisizes Violence

newspaper clipping of Arushi's case via Hindustantimes.com

On May 16, 2008, Indian televisions and news channels were flooded with the murder of 14-year-old Aarushi Talwar who was a student at the Delhi Public School in Noida, U.P. Although I had been in India at that time and actually in Noida, I was in my early 20s absorbing the sights and smells of India and completely ignorant of the events that were taking place around me. I do, however, have a faint memory of the media circus that took place near Aarushi's home because I had lived in Noida for some time as I had been visiting my relatives there. This case, like many cases in India including the 2012 Delhi Rape case, has been in the court for the past 5 years! Her story has all the elements of a drama: suspicion on the domestic help and parents (both affluent doctors). The prime suspect, Hemraj's body was found on the terrace of the apartment. Most recent development of this disturbing and sensationalized news suggests that it was the parents who were allegedly responsible for the murder of the domestic servant and their young daughter. Their motives in the even recent news report seem unclear.  

Milan Lutharia 

While the case is still undergoing investigation, Times of India has released an article claiming that filmmaker Milan Lutharia will be undertaking this controversial topic and making it into a film. Lutharia is known to team with Ekta Kapoor and has directed other eye-brow raising films like The Dirty Picture (2011), Once Upon A Time in Mumbai (2010), and other films that are based on the underbelly of the Indian society. While these films especially the Dirty Picture was a biopic on the B-movie South Indian movie star, Silk Smita, Lutharia will be pushing the envelope taking on this controversial case into in his own hands. 

The Dirty Picture Poster

Lutharia tells TIO, "When investigations are not conducted properly and people do not know how the system works and who to point a finger at, there comes the desire to tell a story. Also, there's always this grey area that's intriguing and, as filmmakers, we have always responded to the stimulus around us."

Recently, Ekta Kapoor was also compelled to take a step back when Aarushi's mother implemented the National Commission for Protection Against Child Rights Against Balaji Telefilms to prevent Kapoor from airing an episode "inspired" by the case. The episode withheld from airing in 2008 itself (unbelievable, isn't it?) 

Manish Gupta's Rahasya was also inspired by this troubling incident. Gupta informs, " "The case gives a classic premise for an Agatha Christie kind of murder mystery, which would keep the audience guessing and hooked. Plus, there's the emotional quotient of the parents being accused of murdering their only daughter, something that the Indian audience has always felt for  [my emphasis]." 

Gupta, Kapoor, and Lutharia are directors and filmmakers who are known for making controversial films on topics that were otherwise not discussed in the public discourse. In many of their films especially like The Dirty Picture, the events were reconstructed from the life of a "fallen" woman/actress of the 1980s. Her decision to dress in skimpy and revealing clothes and act in more sexual bold and seductive films made her by default a controversial figure in the 1980s. While I was satisfied with the film, I did not find it problematic! 

What I do find problematic is that the decision to make a film, although the case itself has yet been concluded (and God knows when it will be?!) provokes the questions of film making. What are the ethics that filmmakers should keep in their mind when they touch on sensitive topics such as Aarushi's case? 

Gupa, Kapoor, and Lutharia's decision to make a film inspired by recent events suggest that these directors fetisize violence on women.

 Okay, the events of the poor girl's murder case may be like an Agatha Christie novel but what is the motive behind the filmmaker's decision to make the film? Is it to sensationalize violence? I would understand if they decided to make a film documentary on the subject as I believe that documentaries seem to be a more "realistic" medium than a film, which can "dramatize" the events and fictionalize them. There needs to be a law that requires film makers to a duration/period of time before they can jump unto making a controversial fictionalized film that will keep the audiences glued to the seat. At this point, it seems nothing more than a way to make an easy buck but also to further promote violence, which is problematic and troubling. 

 Secondly, we do not know when the case will end and how the events will turn out. Is it really a story worth telling when the scars of the Aarushi case are still visible and hot for the last 5 years? What if her parents are not guilty of her murder? If they are, what are the motivations? Shouldn't the filmmakers question what is the motivation behind their decision to make a film "inspired" by true events? What message are they sending to the audiences? These questions still remain unanswered and deeply problematic. Something I fear these filmmakers are still not aware of. 

Lutharia says in another interview, "We are still doing research on the subject, but as a company, we want to tell Aarushi's story. There's a lot of curiosity and confusion about this case, that has seen several twists and turns. People should be aware about how our system works. We should start the film in about four to five months. It all depends on the final judgement."

These are the questions that plague my mind when I come across news articles such as these. While these filmmakers thus far have made successful films, I hope that this time they are careful and aware of their decision to make a film on a subject that is yet to be resolved. In addition, I hope they respect the poor teen who lost her life in mysterious ways at such a young age. 

Sources: timesofindia.com, dnaindia.com,and  indianexpress.com 

© Nidhi Shrivastava 2014 This content is subject to copyrights. Please ask for my permission before using this content for any purpose. 

No Woman's Land: Radha Bedi's Documentary "India: A Dangerous Place To Be A Woman" Echoes Concerns of the Past

Radha Bedi's India: A Dangerous Place To Be A Woman was released during the summer. Produced by BBC, the cameras followed Radha's journey to India and documented interviews with family members, lawyer, victims, and the father of Jyoti - the 2012 Delhi Rape case victim. Bedi's documentary was endearing, emotional, and traumatic. I do want to warn the viewers to be aware that the documentary has very troubling images and can trigger emotions to be vary of it while watching this documentary. Bedi is a British-Indian broadcast and journalist who belongs to a multicultural background in England. She is a third-generation British Indian who has grown up mostly in Belfast and she was educated at London Academy of Music and Dramatic Arts (LAMBDA). 

Bedi in India via Timeout.com

Recommended to watch this documentary by a good friend, I embarked upon the one-hour journey with her and came across many glaring issues that I have been dealing with not only of my own experiences when I have traveled to India, but also her project raised many issues that take us back to the time of the Partition and earlier. Particularly, I am referring to well-known Partition scholar, Ritu Menon's edited No Woman's Land: Women from Pakistan, India, & Bangladesh write on the Partition on India. The documentary touched on topics I am familiar with and have been working on since the time of my high school days - "harmless" eve-teasing, acid attacks, dowry deaths, female infantilization and now and much more magnified on international media - gang rapes. Bedi started her journey in Delhi and traveled to Assam and Punjab throughout the duration of her documentary. She recollected the horrific memories of the assaults she had experienced, interviewed a 15-year-old survivor of acid attack (her only crime was that she had refused to say yes or give attention to her friend who was enamored by her), and even comes face to face with Jyoti's heartbroken father who couldn't even express his love for her when she took her last breath. 

Bedi suggests in her documentary that these violent crimes are a result of the status which women have in India. She argues that because of problematic practices and cultural rejection of girls - women are seen as burdens to their families. She draws on stories of women from both upper and lower classes highlighting that the issue is not class-caste specific but something inherent within the Indian society.

I write this blog from a site of privilege (similar to her standpoint). I was born into a well-to-do family, where I have been lucky that my birth after 18 years was celebrated - my baby pictures found in relative's home whom I had not met since I was a year or two. I have dealt personally with many of the issues mentioned in the documentary but never to the extent that the stories that the documentary conveyed.Unlike Bedi's relatives who celebrated the birth of boys in the families and cried at the birth of daughters, I was warmly received into my family and loved by my immediate and extended family. Bedi herself concluded that she took the life of equality she had growing up as a Diaspora Indian-British woman was something she could never take for granted after the violence she saw in her one month journey into the dark crevices of India during the filming of the documentary. I was not satisfied with Bedi's conclusions and feel that there is more to the story than even what she told in this documentary. I can also never speak for the victims or women of India. I speak as a diaspora American-Indian who is coming to terms with her country especially her nation's capital being called the "Shame capital". It is this blackening of my country's capital that drives me to do the research I do today. This is the reason I wake up to everyday and makes my life worthwhile and meaningful. 

Yes, women are vulnerable in India but what can we, as individuals, do to support them?  How can we change the mindsets of a society so steeped in patriarchal values that values men over women on a daily basis. Is India really a No Woman's Land? 

According to the representative of UN Women in India, Sabrina Sidhu who tells Radha, "We did a study in Delhi. 95% of women in India are scared to go out. Our study also showed that 2 in 3 men interviewed felt that the dress that women wore provoked them." She continues, "Men want to be in control. They want to be in power. In your families, when boys grow into men, they see how the mothers and sisters are treated, right? What value is put on their education, on their mobility, etc and then they go ahead and do exactly that with their wives and daughters. Through their life cycle, they are being discriminated at every stage. Until these mindsets change, rapes, molestation and harassment will continue to happen. What's really clear and urgent  - we need to value women equally?" 

Sidhu makes a very salient point - mindsets need to change and become acceptable of women. Perhaps there are three steps that need to be taken in order to ensure a dialogue about women's subjectivity in India: 

1) Since the post-liberalization period in the 1990s India, the "new" women of India have now come into being. Women are now working late in call centers and other professional positions, which would not have been possible before. They are also social drinkers, do go clubbing (though I may not practice it myself, I have no issues of other women my age do), and they are now independent thinkers who are now attempting to shape their subjectivity in a country which has been deemed to have a "shame" capital. 

2) She speaks that "mindsets" should change, but its unclear what she means by "mindset"? I am being a little nit-picky but I think this should be defined and also - who's mindset? society's? families? boy's family? victim's family? 

3) Many blame westernization or "modernization" as a result of the magnified increase in rape cases in India, but is it really the fear of that these changes bring to the culture (which are inevitable) Is it enough to justify the "other" for the lack of steps taken to protect and empower your own country's women? I think Sidhu hit the nail on the head when she said - we need to value women equally! 

In the documentary, Bedi interviewed one of the defense lawyer of the Delhi rape case. The lawyer blamed the girl and said that she was not "respectable" and thus provoked the crime unto her. He said, "We have a different culture. Respectable girl and a non respectable girl means if you see someone if you feel respect about her, she is respectable. If she would be respectable, this will never happen to her. Respect is a very strong shield, which cannot be crossed by anyone at all. And respect comes by your character, respect comes by your behavior, respect comes by your actions, respect comes by your circumstances." Bedi questions him if he thinks Jyoti had any responsibility because she was out at the night with a boy. He responds, "She was responsible for this. You cannot say only the rapists were responsible. She is also responsible equally. And entirely the boy is responsible who put her in such circumstances and such scenario. You have to protect yourself number one. Any dog can bite you - that's happened." 

The defense lawyer echoes many themes that have been continuously discussed in post colonial feminist theories. He speaks of a "respectable" woman but his definition is unclear. He also blames the victim for provoking the crime and violence unto herself - that the men who raped her are not the only ones at fault for this heinous crime. 

Just this weekend, NY times released an article - Gang Rape In India, Routine and Invisible - which was a disheartening read and added more voice in an already controversy-wrought discourse on the Common Indian Male and the responses that have sprung up since the last time I wrote about this issue. The author argued: 

But the Mumbai case provides an unusual glimpse into a group of bored young men who had committed the same crime often enough to develop a routine. The police say the men had committed at least five rapes in the same spot. Their casual confidence reinforces the notion that rape has been a largely invisible crime here, where convictions are infrequent and victims silently go away. Not until their arrest, at a moment when sexual violence has grabbed headlines and risen to the top of the state’s agenda, did the seriousness of the crime sink in. 

The authors's argument sheds light onto another aspect of the rape culture. They suggest that not only is rape an "invisible crime" but the men or rapists who have committed the crime are a "group of bored young men" who routinely commit this crime. The writers describe the men as: 

None of the men worked regularly. There were jobs chicken-plucking at a neighborhood stand — a hot, stinking eight-hour shift that paid 250 rupees, or $4. The men told their families they wanted something better, something indoors, but that thing never seemed to come. They passed time playing cards and drinking. Luxury was pressed in their faces in the sinuous form of the Lodha Bellissimo, a 48-story apartment building rising from an adjacent lot

The men who have gang-raped the victims are said to have similar profiles. Jason Burke's remarkable article on this issue described the perpetrators as: 

Ram and Mukesh Singh, two brothers living in a slum known as Ravi Das Colony. The "fun", on previous occasions, had meant a little robbery to earn money for a few bottles of cheap whisky and for the roadside prostitutes who work the badly lit roads of the ragged semi-urban, semi-rural zones around the edges of the sprawling Indian capital.

Lavanya Shankaran argued, "Let me introduce the Common Indian Male, a category that deserves taxonomic recognition: committed, concerned, cautious; intellectually curious, linguistically witty; socially gregarious, endearingly awkward; quick to laugh, slow to anger. Frequently spotted in domestic circles, traveling in a family herd. He has been sighted in sari shops and handbag stores, engaged in debating his spouse’s selection with the sons and daughters who trail behind. There is, apparently, no domestic decision that is not worthy of his involvement." 

Shankaran's argument released a series of article strongly disagreeing with her standpoint and her call for the idealization of the "Common Indian Male." We do not know what she means by the common Indian male still. Does she mean a Middle class man? If so, then is she speaking of lawyers like the aforementioned men who blames the victim for bringing the crime unto her. Furthermore, have we forgotten that when the crime happened, NO ONE was there for the 45 minutes when she was bleeding and was by herself and her companion. The language in the media also refrained from defining the relationship between her and her "male companion" but I strongly believe that they were a couple or dating to my knowledge. 

While I enjoyed watching and was emotionally troubled by Bedi's documentary, there were many questions that the documentary sparked. Is being an empowered, vocal, opinionated, and strong woman a crime in India? Perhaps its even more basic - do women in India have inferior status? Have they always represented the honor of their communities through their silence, chastity, and sexual purity? If that's the case, then surely examples of popular culture that promote the idea that Indian women are now stronger and more empowered than is surely promulgating a misconstrued image in their films in which women have found a happy "medium" between their traditional and modern selves. Instead, even in the rhetoric discussed in the documentary and through personal experiences, the opinions seem to be contradictory. Had the 1990s liberalization not taken place or even the modernization that happened in the post-independence period not taken place, how would an Indian woman's subjectivity been shaped? There is more to the story than what we are being told and this documentary is an example of an avenue and dialogue that needs to take place to discuss this sensitive but powerful issue. 

There are no right or wrong answers to these questions but a reflection of media that seeks to answer these troubling questions. A must watch! 

Video Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6r8jgFxgA
Source: bbc.co.uk, huffingtonpost.co.uk, unwomensouthasia.org, nytimes.com, radhabedi.co.uk

© Nidhi Shrivastava 2014 This content is subject to copyrights. Please ask for my permission before using this content for any purpose. 

Productions of Othello, Halloween, and the Production of the Other

                        Bethanny Jillard (Desdemona) and Dion Johnston (Othello) via Montreal Gazette

I recently went to see the production of Othello at the Stratford Festival in Stratford, ON. Dion Johnston (Othello)  and Bethanny Jillard (Desdemona) played the main characters in the most recent Stratford production of the play. Othello is one of the most memorable plays in the Shakespeare canon. Unforgettable for its powerful themes including the racialization of the other, military heroism and the incompatibility of love, and problems of isolation. I am particularly drawn to two themes in the play - domestic violence and racism - but I will focus only on racism. Since Halloween is in 3 days, I thought it will be interesting to discuss the various productions of Othello and think about how we perform different types of characters - whether they belong to our 'race' - and how we "perform" or enact different personalities.

Inspired from a Huffpost article I recently read arguing that Halloween is not an excuse hate and racism. When we are asked to "dress up" and not be who we are, people use this holiday to impersonate or dress up in costumes that can be offensive without realizing (albeit it could be an unintentional move and not directed to hurt anyone)

I want to suggest that we should use Halloween as a time to wear costumes that yes, are fun and creative but also respect various cultures and people without reducing them to others reinforcing racist ideologies. It should not be a time to mock cultures and customs but a time to celebrate the act of "dressing up" in costumes without trying to "perform" people of different races and cultures. I also agree and want to reemphasize the idea that Halloween is NOT an excuse to promote hate and racism.

I still question Heidi Klum's Kali costume but these are the types of costumes that I want to draw attention to. This type of a "costume" not only mocks the religious Hindu ideologies and further promotes the notion that Indian religions are primitive and barbaric. Without knowing the reason for why Goddess Parvati/Durga transformed into Kali, the costume will promote a very problematic understanding of Hinduism.

                                   
                                                 Heidi Klum as Kali via fasthack.com

On my recent trip to the Stratford Festival last Friday, I learnt that Othello had been produced in 1973. Nachum Buchman, an Israeli actor with a heavy "accent" played the role of Othello while Stratford icon Matha Henry owned the role of Desdemona. I found it fascinating and troubling that the production choices has "othered" an already "othered" actor. During the trip, my classmates and I earnestly and excitedly went through all the image stills, production booklets, and so on trying to understand and construct the performance in our minds.

                      Nachum Bachman (Othello) and Douglas Rain (Iago) via pictures.historicimages.net

The production choices included Nachum Bachman to wear the blackface makeup, brought especially from England and earlier worn by Lawrence Olivier in his 1965 NT Live production. I found it troubling and fascinating that the production had doubly othered Othello and the play had not received good reviews. Why was there a need to produce an already racialized actor who would have been perfect to play Othello as he were and almost mock his costuming and make up? In my opinion, I would strongly argue that Othello can be a man of middle-eastern descent. It is not necessary that he has to played by a "black" actor although it has become a norm for the productions of Othello to be performed. Performing a racialized character, one that is not of our own race, is always a questionable move. Furthermore, it almost seemed unnecessary to put the "blackface" make up on. Below is Laurence Oliver and Maggie Smith 1965 production of Othello:

                                 Laurence Olivier (Othello) and Maggie Smith (Desdemona) via dailymail.co.uk

Olivier's costume again emphasizes his "uncivilized" roots reinforcing the play's racist ideologies that are at work in both the text and production. By wearing the "blackface" makeup, Olivier is still "white" in the inside but attempting to construct a persona, which is a characterization of an African man in his own mind. It is not authentic by any means but the character of Othello is magnified by his star persona. Is it "authentic"? I would argue NO.

Thus far, we have talked about actors who wore "blackface" makeup - Nachum Bachman and Laurence Olivier. Now, what happens when an Othello is produced in Washington theatre and Othello is played by a "whiteman" i.e. (hold your breath) Star Trek star Patrick Stewart while the rest of the characters are "black." I struggle with the rhetoric "black", "white", "brown", etc to describe people as the language is problematic but that discussion is for another day!

                               Patrick Stewart (Othello) and Patrice Johnson (Desdemona) via Tony Awards

In an interview, Stewart who had come up with the concept told Playbill,"I've been imagining myself playing Othello and, in a sense, preparing for it, since I was about 14. "When the time came that I was old enough and experienced enough to do it, it was the same time that it no longer became acceptable for a white actor to put on blackface and pretend to be African. One of my hopes for this production is that it will continue to say what a conventional production of Othello would say about racism and prejudice... To replace the black outsider with a white man in a black society will, I hope, encourage a much broader view of the fundamentals of racism."

Many actors have suggested that Othello should be produced in a similar way - a man who is an "outsider" in his own society should play Othello to understand the "fundamentals of racism." In my own view, I do not think it is a bad idea - much better - than the idea of "blackface" which actors wear stripping the character of any sort of an "authenticity" the character may have. Halloween is a great time to explore these problematic ideologies when we dress up and try to enact characters that are not our own. Stewart uses an important word  - "pretend" - and that was we do during this time - we "pretend" to be someone who we are not. Our actions are at stake each time we wear our costumes. Just because theatre has stopped using "blackface" makeup, it does not mean that we should have an excuse to wear it during this time.

Halloween is not the time to promote and produce the "Other"!

Images & Sources: stratfordfestival.ca, playbill.com, thepsn.org, tonyawards.com, i.dailymail.co.uk, montrealgazette.com, fasthack.com 

© Nidhi Shrivastava 2014 This content is subject to copyrights. Please ask for my permission before using this content for any purpose.