"Modern" Marriage and Love in India: Karan Johar's 2 States (2014)

      Karan Johar and Sajid Nadiadwala's adaptation of 2 States: The Story of My Marriage (2009) recently released in the theaters world-wide last week. After the end of the first year as an English PhD student, I was looking forward to this film. Although I have not read Chetan Bhaghat novels, his phenomena as an engineer-turned-writer enigma has made him a celebrity. Perhaps, because he is emblematic of the creative gap that exists among the youth in India. Science, mathematics, medical, and economics are among the valued subjects in India while subjects in humanities continue to remain undervalued as career prospects for future generations. That being said, I have noticed in the recent years that many Indians are pursuing successful careers in all types of fields including music, writing, and so on. Chetan Bhaghat's success and intervention into this particular issue is also symbolic of the growing acceptance of careers in Humanities. His novel, Five Point Someone (2004) was adapted into the famous Aamir Khan starrer, Rajkumar Hirani's 3 Idiots (2009). 

A selfie moment: Chetan Bhagat with his wife, Anusha (left) and Alia Bhatt and Arjun Kapoor (right)

           A semi-autobiography, the film stars Arjun Kapoor (Krishh) and Alia Bhatt (Ananya). The film depicts the journey of a couple from their college days when they meet each other to the time when they are able to win the hearts of their parents. Although the film is a romantic comedy, it addresses many issues that still remain apparent in modern India: dowry, skin colour, domestic violence, premarital sexual relations in modern India. In addition, it also speaks of inter-regional marriages that do indeed take place within India. While I will try my best not to discuss the plot in detail, please excuse me this time if there are spoiler alerts. I do recommend this film for any Bollywood-film lover or any one interested to see how the romantic films are depicted the various contemporary relationships through their films. Since this past year, there are three romantic films that I highly recommend: 2 States, Hassee to Phasee (2013), and The Lunchbox (2013). I have been focusing mostly on films and documentaries that focus on the representations of violence against women, but I think its also important to see how the film industry is illustrating films which focus on the complexities of contemporary Indian relationships because it does give us further understanding of the status of women in India right now. It also reminds us that not all women in India are vulnerable to violence, instead are able to pursue their careers and become empowered individuals. That being said, this film also reminds us of the issues that I had mentioned earlier that we, as Indians, are still coping with. 

          Unlike other films that have recently been focused on the evolving "modern" relationships such as couple co-habitation in Shuddh Desi Romance (2013), the retelling of Shakespeare's Romeo & Juliet in Ram-Leela (2013), or the melodic and haunting love story of Ashhiqui 2 (2013), Two States is more than just a love story. Perhaps, the most touching moment of the story is that it hearkens back to the 90s romantic films in which the opinion and approval of families was important to the couple. Although Krishh and Ananya love each other, there is a need for both of them to gain approval from their parents before they can get married. Both of them make an effort to win over their future in-laws. Perhaps the most touching moment is when Krishh proposes with rings not just to Ananya but places a ring for her father, mother, and brother. Although the film does indeed give off Hum Aapke Hai Kaun (1995) vibes, it shows that modern relationships are a complex amalgamation of traditionality, modernity, and uncertainty with a hint of adventure. 

           While the couple are in college, the film shows them engaging in pre-marital sex, in many ways, "normalizing" that these type of relationships do indeed take place in contemporary universities and removing the taboo that was illustrated perhaps in Anurag Kashyap's Dev D (2009). While the couple are able to enjoy a utopic relationship in the college, the film does not get interesting until after the couple decide to commit and get married. It is at this time their parents meet each other. Amrita Singh plays Arjun's mother (Kavita Malhotra). As a strong Punjabi woman, she is convincing and memorable. Her husband's role is depicted by Ronit Roy who is known to play the stern father in films such as Udaan (2010). Even though her personality is dominating, her role as a heartbroken mother with a sensitive side is hard to overlook. Unlike her counterpart, Revathi who plays Ananya's mother who is passive, Amrita Singh plays a stark contrast in many ways enforcing the stereotype of "scary" Punjabi mother-in-laws (although it may never be true in all cases). Furthermore, what I liked about this film was that although it did speak of the North and South Indian stereotypes, it also showed them as multi-layered and multi-faceted. For example, Revathi seeks to become a singer but no teacher wants to take her. Krish's mother and aunt are both shown as judgmental people. However, when Ananya wins their heart during a wedding addressing dowry, they become more "humanized" and less of a one-dimensional stereotype. 
    Although Krishh belongs to a dominant patriarchal family in which his father is an alcoholic and also physically abuses his father, the film does not paint the picture that dysfunctional families are one-dimensional. Instead, towards the end, we learn that despite his father's shortcomings, there is a desire for him to recover and crave love from his only son. The film does not presuppose the notion that children who belong to dysfunctional families will not turn out to be good citizens unlike children who are born and brought up in a tight-knit nuclear families. 
                The film also complicates and further pushes its viewers to think about love and arranged marriages. Love marriages, to this day, in many parts in India continue to be viewed as tabooed as the involvement and approval of parents is seen as vital part of a marriage's success in India. However, that being said. It shows a love marriage that has failed via Kavita and Vikram (Krish's father) and a successful inter-regional marriage via Ananya and Krish. Therefore, it argues that it is the relationship between two individuals that matters and how much both of them are willing to work towards making their union successful. Even though there is domestic abuse and alcoholism that has seeped into the veins of their happy family life, both parents strive to make efforts to stabilize their family when their son chooses to get married. 
                Although I am tempted to speak more about the moments I found touching in the film, it is a must watch for any one who is interested in fun, romantic comedies but also keen to learn about India's complicating marriage culture. Marriages in India are viewed as a union not only between the couple, but also between the families. This particular film highlights this point to the T in a humorous and endearing manner. Even though there is a happy ending at the end, it does not come without a realization that there are cultural changes that are indeed taking place in India, which was once rampant with caste-ism, classim, and so on. 

Image sources: situated.in, images.indianexpress.com, static.ibnlive.com 
             
             

The Power of Celebrity: India's Upcoming Elections and Satyamev Jayate (2014)

     I was born in Dehra dun, India and  growing up I was obsessed with Aamir Khan. He was my first love (well after my papa), my first crush, and my first hero. I think from what I remember of the stories that I was told, I would calm down if my mother put Dil (Heart, Indra Kumar,1990)'s video cassette and I would quieten down and go about my day! Today, the same man proves to be more than just a pretty face! He is an intellectual and has been called "a social crusader" by the recent media press that has released since the release of his final episode. Although I am not in India right now, I have as an Indian woman who has developed and shaped her career in hopes of bettering and understanding India's future and improving the lives of those who live in the marginalized edges of the nation.
        When Satyamev Jayate (2012) was released, the show sent shock waves around the nation as it uncovered truths about the country through sophisticated research. His views are also very democratic, secular, and speak volumes about the plight of the nation. Although agreeably and perhaps rightfully many will critique them based on their own values (and they are indeed entitled to their opinion). However, his final episode of the second season, which began with a bang explicating the question of rape, ended on a powerful note especially in regards to the current elections that in his words is a historic moment in India's fate. As I talk among my peers, friends, and advisors in regards to India's political elections, I get a mixed bag of reactions. To be honest, I was never really a fan of Indian politics as the government to me, as someone who was living outside of India (but visiting India for short periods of time), seemed to me like an entity of its own separate from the heart of India.I used to say naively: "I love India and its people but not the government" However, as time have passed and I have grown emotionally and intellectually trying to understand the Indian history in greater detail and understanding where I, as an Indian woman, really fit in. I have come to realize that Khan is indeed correct and courageous to bring this show to the forefront just as Nisha Pahuja and her The World Before Her (2012) team has been proactive in bringing the issues of violence against women to the forefront.  As citizens of India, we need to realize our individual power to bring change in India whether we do it through writing, rallying, protesting, or any act that shows one's stand in the future of the country. In order to bring change within a system, you need to understand the system. As easy as it is to blame the government, indeed we need to look in the mirrors and reflect on our selves - what have we done to bring change the various systems that exist within the government? if we don't want to participate in the politics, that is okay. How can we then bring changes as citizens. What can we do? One, honestly, does not need to be in a so-called "seat of power" to bring change to a country. You can do it from wherever you are. I would suggest that this is the underlying message of the show - to make citizens realize their own empowered position within the nexus of the Indian nation. You don't need to be an intellectual or a politician to better your nation. Any one can do it. You don't need higher education degrees. What you do need is a clear mind that is aware of the surroundings, a clear heart, and an agenda to bring change? I think everyone has that. That being said, its a matter of taking one step - of going one extra mile! :-) 

             In the finale episode of Satyamev Jayate, Khan exposes horrifying numbers of criminals - people who have committed grave crimes such as rape, murder, kidnapping, and etc - who are currently MPs and MLAs in the Indian government. While this is a truth that everyone knows and no one wants to speak about, it is something to think about. Of course, as one of his guests had said, that this system of corruption has become so grandeur that it has overwhelmed the country as a nation. No matter whom you support politically, nobody can deny that corruption continues to be a debilitating disease that continues to plague India. I am not writing this to say or urge you to vote for one candidate or another but I am writing this in support of what his show's content is trying to speak of. Perhaps, for me, the most touching moment in the episode was when he takes a vow (a shapath) that he will wear the three colours of the Indian flag as threads as a reminder that he will vote for the right people who will work together to bring India to great levels. 

              One cannot deny that unlike many celebrities, Aamir Khan is using his star power to create change in the country. He is a paragon of humility, intellect, and shows great concerns for the future of India. When you watch him or listen to him speak, it is evident that he is down to earth and that fame and its privileges have not spoiled him. Instead, he is ready to talk to the nation at an emotional and intellectual level to bring some sort of reality (which sometimes we do not want to see or hear because it makes us ashamed or embarrassed as a nation). While it is understandable to react in that way - to feel uncomfortable - it is important to give an open minded chance to all who are involved in making a difference in India - whether it be the Right or Left. It is important, however, as citizens to make the decision after much thought and without any greed. I think that is the point of Aamir Khan's finale and something that really should be thought about more.  
               Unlike many other countries, India has had a privilege to be called literally one of the largest democracies yet we do not take advantage of it. We live in a nation where all types of religions, castes, and communities have always come together since the B.C. era. Imagine the power we have together if as Indians, we forget our differences and join hands to better the nation and bring to the heights of success it deserves. You do not need to be a politician to do that but you need to be a good citizen (whether you reside in or outside of India). 
                 Growing up I lived in so many countries including Malaysia and Singapore, but thanks to my parents and extended family, I grew up in an environment where I was taught to always be humble, to be grateful, and never forget and be proud of my roots and heritage. I used to visit India for months on end, live with my progressive (and traditional) grand parents, and even as I grew up - I would find excuses to live in India for the summers and stay with my relatives and family. I would have a chance to wear my salwar suits and be in a country where I didn't have to adapt at all. My passion and love for India never changed even when I moved to the States, I would wear Indian salwars to my high school and would proudly tell my fellow students and classmates that I don't need to wear clothes that signify my culture on a holiday or a special occasion. My love for my heritage has always shaped my life and every day decisions. It is the reason I chose to do a Ph.D - the reason why when the Delhi Rape Case happened in 2012, I jumped to speaking to my entire class on Introduction to Women's Studies trying to tell them to not believe everything that the media speaks of  but to understand and learn about India, its culture, history, and so on. Sometimes, it would even surprise and bother me at the same time that people will be like - either "oh wow, you speak such good English or oh wow, you speak Hindi so well!" - or when I would have to prove my "Indianness" - but I do that now as a writer and a budding intellectual in my actions, words, and voice. I am proud of my roots, culture, and heritage - its strengths and weaknesses - but I am not the one to watch India's future develop as a  mere spectator but my intellectual project and work has been to better India and its future. Its what makes me wake up everyday! 
           All of this being said, the questions of poverty and the fate of women who do indeed still get treated as second-class citizens is still an issue. Having studied feminism and feminist theories as a graduate certificate at University of Michigan and a master's degree at Western (and I am not a "feminist"), I can also say that unfortunately and fortunately, the violence is not gender- or class-specific. Female infanticide, for example, happens everywhere in India not only in rural areas but in families where people hold professions typically known to be more forgiving and understanding of such crimes. The process of dowry (the culprit) behind the increasing rates of female infanticide is still an issue.These are just few examples. It is also hard to overlook the question of poverty that continues to hang like a sword above the head that remains important for India's fate. However, I would argue, that even beyond any of these issues that I think are important for the progress of India as a nation and country. We need to remain united as "Indians" and really think about who we are as "Indians" - what defines us? is it our history? our future? our present? The amalgamation of various and diverse cultures and customs coming together to form a nation? As citizens, we have the utmost right to choose whom we want to vote for. I think we should all participate and vote, as Khan urges, and remember how the nation came to be in 1947. 
          I am aware that my views reflect hope and idealism (which many will think is perhaps too unrealistic) but I think desiring a coherent and united nation was an idea that was pushed by our own ancient political scientist and intellectual, Chanakya who brought together "India" as a nation for the first time. I call for a united nation. A nation where the young and the old work together to bring change in India regardless of religion, caste, class, gender, and creed. To me, that is the India I want to call home and every day of my life I work to bring this idea together. We sometimes forget in our daily lives that we indeed are empowered individuals who have the right to bring change in India (and believe me, it only takes one). So as the election day come near, please take the time to vote (and don't just vote for anyone) but think about the right leaders who bring the nation together as one, whom we can be proud of, and who can shed light to the issues such as poverty, unemployment, women's issues, development, and so on. 
           Recalling what Satyamev Jayate tweeted: Cast your vote, don’t vote your caste. Make an informed choice in the 2014 elections. #MyVoteNotForSale.”

Image sources: www.nrimatters.com and images.indianexpress.com 

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

Stepping On Blurred Lines of Reality and Fiction: Anubhav Sinha's Gulaab Gang (2014)

          When I was 11 years old and living in Singapore, my good friend Manoganya introduced me to Jim Henson's fantastical movie, The Labyrinth (1986), starring the popular singer of the 80s David Bowie and with him was the young Jennifer Connelley who recently was part of The Winter's Tale (2014) and A Beautiful Mind (2001). While the entire movie is cute and unforgettable with muppet-like characters, it is the journey of Sarah who is in search of her brother, Toby, who has been stolen by Jareth (David Bowie), the king of the goblins. Towards the end of the film, Jareth is frustrated with the cat-and-mouse chase with Sarah. He blames Sarah for being the cause of the conflict as she had been the one who had initially been frustrated with her brother and had asked Jareth to take the baby away. While he continues to psychologically manipulate and play with Sarah's mind trying to gnaw at her weaknesses, Sarah realizes that she has always had the power within her to overpower and overcome his tactics that are attempts to weaken her strong and resilient spirit. At the end of the scene, Sarah cries, "you have no power over me!" 
            Sarah had the power all along to combat such negativity and control from Jareth. The film ends with Jareth falling into the abyss and Sarah rescuing her younger brother. Why is this story important to understanding the mission of Gulaab Gang (2014) or Nishtha Jain's documentary Gulaabi Gang (2014), one might ask? This anecdote reveals the power struggle that continues to exist between the subjectivity of the marginalized peoples and oppressive systems that attempt to control them and overpower them through verbal and physical tactics. Sarah breaks the psychological control by empowering herself and not allowing Jareth's meaningless words to overpower her own subjectivity. 

          As a disclaimer though, I do want to say two very crucial points that I wish to reiterate whenever I write about violence, patriarchy, and bio-politics. First and foremost, I want to emphasize the idea that not every man is a Jareth in the Indian context. Surprisingly, I have encountered more men who are sympathetic and empathetic to the cause and are against any or all types of oppression. They are gracious and are filled with respect for all marginalized communities and genders. Secondly, I want to reiterate that I am not a "feminist." My political concerns span across gender, caste, class, religion, and other realms and my ultimate goal is to understand why India is the way that it is, how can we improve its conditions and lives of the oppressed and marginalized communities, and what does being an "Indian" mean for women like me who have lived outside of India for majority of their lives but continue to live, breathe, and intellectualize India daily and everyday. 
           Although unfortunately recent news reports have said that Madhuri Dixit-Juhi Chawla starrer Gulaab Gang (2014) bombed the box office, I would suggest that the film is still a must watch. Perhaps, even should be watched alongside Nishtha Jain's documentary on the Gulaab Gang (2014) that took five years to make. Both these films have been the avenues that have placed Sampat Pal Devi and her Gulaab Gang on the international map. The members live in the rural parts of Uttar Pradesh, a region known to have an oppressive and misogynistic culture and sometimes physically fight for their rights against the issues of dowry, domestic abuse, and political corruption.

 I am reminded here of an interview I was watching on Bollywood Boulevard the other day when Dixit said that the film focuses on the lives of women who live in the 75% India - the poor India - and how they overcome various systems of oppression. Unfortunately I have been unsuccessful in locating the clip online, Dixit has realized the struggle that India as a nation is facing. There are two "Indias" that co-exist - The "Old" India and the "New" India. The former that is kept alive by centuries old traditions, while the new one striving to be cosmopolitan and modern in the 21st century. Both worlds trying to reconcile their differences and attempting to find a "middle ground" if one exists. At the heart of this struggle, recent films and documentary such as Gulaab Gang (2014) have emerged to strongly argue that "No, India is not dangerous for women. Here are examples of women who do fight back verbally or physically and repeat Sarah's words to their oppressors - YOU HAVE NO POWER OVER ME!" 
                  While I will not divulge Anubhav Sinha's Gulaab Gang (2014), I will urge those who are indeed concerned with the cause to at least watch the movie once (and then watch Nishtha Jain's documentary). Both these renditions of the real Gulaab Gang offer us the realities that we sometimes overlook and erase from our cosmopolitan memories. The women who live in rural areas do not have access to education, are privy to child marriages (even Sampat Pal herself), and are readily abused or even have acid thrown on them if they refuse advances. Gulaab Gang was formed to protect women from such oppression and dedicated to the cause. Had both Sinha and Jain worked together or even released the two films side-by-side, we as audiences could have seen that the intention both filmmakers had was the same - to show that women in India were fighting back by uniting and literally taking arms to fight oppression. Instead, there are countless articles that show that both sides are immersed in a controversy days before the release of Sinha's film. Perhaps, their controversy serves a reminder that there is a need - a desperate need - for a united India. Without unity, there is no space for progress of any kind if people are too busy trying to find differences in one another. Although one film was a commercial enterprise set to release on the eve of International Woman's day, the other was a labour of love that took five years to make and was an attempt to capture the reality of the Gulaab Gang through Jain's perspective. I do have to say though that Chawla's performance as the corrupt, shrewd, and power-hungry performance should not be missed! 

            The other issue that I found alarming was that the film did not do well at the box office was because there was no male lead in the film. Why is this an issue when no one questions Hollywood films such as Meryl Streep's The Iron Lady (2011), which was a biopic on Margaret Thatcher? The silver screen was dominated by Madhuri Dixit and Juhi Chawla who are both strong and empowered women in their lives and are working to promote the causes that support the empowerment of young women and girls through their means. There is no reason why this film should not work. Perhaps, people are turned off by violence but do not the same people watch films that are action-based and maybe even more violent that the realities illustrated in Sinha's film or Jain's documentary. I believe that this is a realities that many people are aware of and witness in their daily lives and thus have been desensitized to them. Many also perhaps do not want to watch the horrific realities that exist in the poor India where conditions remain the same as they might have been two hundred years ago and it is a reminder that India still needs to work to bring change in the lives of the poor and forgotten! 

Images & Sources: hindustantimes.com, india.blog.nytimes.com, nytimes.com, firstpost.com, and gallery.oneindia.in

© 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. 

Is India A Dangerous Country For Women? - A Response to CNN's iReport: India - A Story You Never Wanted To Hear

I came across an iReport published on CNN entitled "India: A Story You Never Wanted To Hear" while I was perusing through my daily Facebook rounds and immediately I was drawn to the title - the story of this young undergraduate student had everything - a young woman drawn to the exotic and oriental Indian culture choosing to study abroad and learn the rich history that India has. However, what was disheartening and hurtful in her experience was that she proclaimed about her experience in India as being traumatic so much so that she had begun to show signs of PTSD and had to remove herself from her social settings to recover from the harassment, eve-teasing, and the bitter and nightmarish experiences she had had in India. She was not quite specific where her experiences had happened but she did indicate that as a foreigner, she was harassed by the shopkeepers who wouldn't stop haggling, the men who wouldn't stop jeering and passing sexual advances. This story adds more fuel to the fire of the already shamed India - a country that is assumed in the mainstream media as being chaotic, lawless, and furthermore a nation that continues to be immersed in patriarchal systems that demeans and oppresses a woman's subjectivity and her person hood  The same country, which worships goddesses and mothers simultaneously will treat women like sexual objects ready to obey every command. 

I want to begin by stating my position and my stake in the woman question of India. Needless to say, as a scholar I am made to question everything and everything  but also over the course of the past four years I have read and read scholars who have written extensively on the subject - from Partha Chatterjee to Leela Fernandes to Ania Loomba to of course Gayatri Spivak and the list continues. I am also careful because I do not want to universalize the experiences of women or belittle in any way, shape, or form the experiences of this young girl - instead I see her experience as a counter to my own. Furthermore, I respect her views though I am not wholeheartedly in accordance with what she has written but I can relate to many of her experiences. However, as an Indian and American woman myself, I feel like I have a stake in her article and what is being said about my country and it did emotionally hurt me. So here is my opinion about the article and a response to her claims and experiences: 


Rape and eve-teasing culture is a universal phenomenon and not regionally-specific. While not comparable to her experience, I also experienced eve-teasing and even felt violated when a random guy at an Australian bar in London, England just went by after briefly hitting on my hips like as if it was a normal and everyday occurrence. Because I belong to a culture that practices a don't-ask-don't-tell policy, I am going to use the word - intimacy is rarely discussed in home settings. It is assumed that as a young woman, you will wait until the right time with the right guy after you are married and will lead a honorable life without the danger of pre-marital pregnancy and single motherhood that will isolate and ostracize you from the society. To this day, I continue to respect the wishes of my parents and am proud of my values. At the same time, due to my extensive study, I have also realized that I may not apply the same rules to my son or daughter. Thus in my opinion, what she experienced was a product of popular culture and racial profiling- in essence- men and women alike assumed quite wrongfully that if you belong to the west, you are sexually easy and available and if you are alone, you are DEFINITELY there to have "fun." However, I want to add that it is not limited to "western" girls alone but women who belong to various classes are also equally subjected when need be - again this Eve teasing is more regionally specific! 

 Indian men are not out to get "some" - they are not violent brutes out to attack any woman they see - perhaps the ones she experienced who may fall into such a category are products of a popular culture that encouraged eve-teasing with films in the 1980s and 90s, which revolved around the heroes singing songs around the streets trying to draw the attention of the woman they are attracted to. There is more to the story than what has been told thus far in the media. 

Jason Burke has written a meaningful article that paints the life stories of the men who were involved in the rape case. Although the four men have been sentenced to death, there needs to be more work that needs to be done to resolve the issue. I am not wholly convinced by the abused goddess campaign though I am grateful for their effort to make a relevant point about the vulnerability of women in India. Growing up, I read a very problematic book called Elizabeth Bumiller's May You Be The Mother of A Hundred Sons. This was one of the most jarring non-fiction accounts I have read of a woman's experience in India. In a very superficial manner, the author examines the struggles that Indian women face and she highlights all types of issue starting from 18-year-old Raj Kanvar's sati-like death in 1987, which prompted her to write the book and continues on to discuss female infanticide all over India. In the Indian society, yes, many types women are revered as goddesses and mothers but it only limits their agency and the way they are perceived in India. Their roles are somewhat limited and if a woman does choose to become independent and self-reliant, she is viewed as the "other" and an outsider to this day. Although the woman involved in the Delhi rape case was shaping her own career path but because she was out "late" in the night, she provoked the danger and was severely and violently raped almost as a punishment - as if she had committed a crime! The change however will not come from stopping women from freely roaming the streets in India, it will come from educating children both boys and girls to treat each other with respect and dignity, by encouraging girls to become self-defensive and learn the tricks and trades to make the right decisions and choices. Without this basic step to educate children, change will not be imminent any time soon but unfortunately, will only prolong and further worsen the situation in India. This is only the tip of the iceberg but to me, it is the starting point where education system should be radically changed and have curriculum that is designed around sex education from a young age, and open discussion in households will make a radical difference in the ways children are raised. If India is now becoming more stable economically, then perhaps it should invest in development projects (if it hasn't already!) on providing free education, providing sex education, creating educational programs that are free for women and men for self-defense, and so on. The attitude is at the heart of the situation which needs to change and it only comes from within! 

Eight months later, at the conclusion of the trial of her killers, it is difficult to argue that J's ordeal and death has made much difference in India, at least so far: the rapes and sexual assaults that are now highlighted daily by the Indian media act simply as a reminder of how widespread violence to women is in the country.

Clearly, there is more work that needs to be done. When this article came out, I was ready to post an angered and frustrated response although I understood and could relate to the experience this woman had experienced in my home country but before I could, Mumbai rape case took place leaving me puzzled and confused. There is a lot of work that needs to be done in India to eradicate this environment for women and others who feel marginalized in the society. However, that being said, it is not always the case based on the part of class you belong to but this article does bring us food for thought! I also want to make a note that these are just starting points towards a larger depth of study. 

Images & Source: ibntimes.com, ireport.cnn.com, blogspot.com,  thehindu.com, wallstreetjournal, and huffingtonpost.com
video: youtube 

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