women in patriotic films
Devi To Daasi
Feminine? Yes. But today's bold heroine doesn't fight in tandem.
Mother India (1957) and Gadar: Ek Prem Katha (2001), both of them larger-than-life nationalistic sagas but with a gap of more than four decades between them, are two of the biggest commercial successes in Hindi cinema. Mehboob Khan's rural epic is the story of Radha and her lonely struggle to farm her land, bring up her children and lead the village to better days.
 
 
Mainstream films portray women mostly between the extremes of brave and docile.
 
 
Anil Sharma's jingoistic drama is the story of Sakina, rescued during the Partition riots by a man she later marries. In the first film, Radha is depicted as brave and independent. On the other hand, Sakina is depicted as passive and docile. When her father doesn't let her go back to her husband, she replies, "Main intezaar karoongi. Woh zaroor aayenge." Eventually, her husband appears, crossing the border to bring back his wife.

Most women characters in mainstream Hindi cinema can be located somewhere between these two extremes. Closer to the Radha mould is Bimal Roy's Paro in Do Bigha Zameen (1953) who, pregnant and malnourished, collects water chestnuts for money before she leaves the village to come to Calcutta. In Chetan Anand's war film Haqeeqat (1964), the quiet heroism of women is shown in back stories about mothers, wives, bhabhis and lovers waiting at home—and also the local woman Kammo, who cares for the wounded men, carries a message to the man she loves, escapes after being assaulted by enemy soldiers, and dies fighting.

Govind Nihalani's Ardh Satya (1982), which comes at an interesting point on the timeline—roughly midway between Mother India and Gadar—shows a more brutal face of the nation. Jyotsna Gokhale is not only involved in a relationship with police officer Velankar, she is also his conscience and witness to the collapse of his integrity. But in their final meeting, after Velankar has beaten a man to death in the lockup, she can't quite bring herself to touch him. She drops her hand.

This seems to be the moment where the man-woman partnership breaks down, as far as nationalistic cinema is concerned. In the '90s, women, even in films that feature them as terrorists, are largely defined by their femininity. In Mani Ratnam's Dil Se (1998), the terrorist is a beautiful woman and an object of desire; it is the brave and patriotic hero who, although he loves her, will not let her harm the nation. In Santosh Sivan's Terrorist (1999), the female terrorist (Ayesha Dharker) rejects violence in favour of her unborn child. In Gulzar's Maachis (1996), Veera first speaks for non-violence when she takes the gun out of Kirpal's hands. But in the final section, she has joined the terrorists—not only to shoot missiles but to take on the conventional womanly role of cooking and cleaning.

In Mother India, questions about the patriarchal order, women's 'honour', social injustice and exploitation remain unresolved; and yet, the strength of Radha's integrity shines through the narrative. Radha begins her marriage as a partner, even offers her jewels to reclaim the family's land. She works side by side with her husband in the fields, her baby strapped to her back. After he leaves, she struggles on. When a drought strikes the region, she calls on the villagers to stay back and till the land. Finally, when she inaugurates the dam that will bring water to the village, she does not forget that the blood flowing in the water is blood that she herself has shed by killing her son. The film has all the elements of classic Bollywood, including its length, sentimentality and kitsch. But at its best moments, it dreams of a nation built in partnership. When will we dream that dream again?




(The author is a civil servant based in Mumbai.)
 
Daily Mail
COLLAPSE COMMENTS :
HAVE YOUR SAY
May 20, 2007 12:00 AM
8
Chaitanya,

>> Nargis as Mother India is a sick joke. It only vindicates the Arab centric view of Hindi cinema. The role should have been handed over to Vyjayanthimala.

The role should have gone to Jayalalitha, who is a pure Brahmin.
Muntajib Khan
Aurangabad, India
May 20, 2007 12:00 AM
7
Uma Mahadevan-Dasgupta’s 'Devi To Daasi’ was more of an ode to the black and white cinema. While the usual theme of Hindi films is a mediocre fare nowadays, and the digression from weightier subjects in Hindi films is most palpable, it must not be forgotten that the history of Bollywood is interspersed with women-oriented films all throughout. Some carved a permanent niche in the annals of Bollywood, while some turned out to be pot-boilers. The recent paradigm being the film “Black”, in which the female protagonist played by Rani Mukherji has to deal with a dual dilemma— deafness coupled with blindness. ‘Lajja’ starring Mahima, Manisha and Rekha showed feminine fortitude in the face of calamitous turn of events in their lives. It had a very powerful story line played sublimely to the hilt by the cast and the film turned out to a reasonable box-office success and won huge critical acclaim. Rekha’s ‘Khoon bhari maang’ depicted a woman’s vengeful streak against men’s atrocities and hegemony.
There is a temptation in both the general public as well as film critics to perceive films from the black-and-white era and the sixties as eternal benchmarks and regard any newer stuff with a degree of condescension and skepticism. While there is nothing wrong in reminiscing the stellar histrionic acts of a bygone era with fondness and nostalgia, it is odious to portray the present performance by the newer breed of actors in poor light. It is true that we profoundly miss the brilliance of Nargis, alabaster looks of Madhubala and the vermilion-daubed and perpetually sobbing wimp played so subtly by Meena Kumari. But the newer generation of heroines as Madhuri, Kajol, Rani Mukherji, Preity Zinta and Ashwarya Rai are also connoisseurs in their own right and subtly showed their repertoire as and when the opportunities came their way. While we miss the tremulousness and touching innocence of yesteryears’ heroines who resorted only to allusions when it came to revealing their inner feelings and suffered inexorably, today’s heroines are known to be upfront in every aspect. They exude galore of oomph; they are glibly coquettish, noisy or scurrilous when being abandoned and even violent when messed with on the celluloid.
And lastly, they are being paid heavily to act thus.
Muntajib Khan
Aurangabad, India
May 16, 2007 12:00 AM
6
true women have not got their just dues form bollywood , the potrayal of women reached its nadir in the 80's and early 90's
. but the later half of the past decade did have some brillinat women centric films, though all were not necessarily box office hits. the writer seems to have overlooked chadni bar , astitva , mrityudand and to some extent fiza too. i fell if any heroine can claim nargis and mother india's legacy , it is tabu, whose potrayal of women has always added respect abd dignity, not to mention beauty to the concept of womanhood in contemporary india.
ameetbhuvan
bhubaneswar, India
May 14, 2007 12:00 AM
5
Chaitanya
sorry to take you on, but my son is also named Chaitanya and I am pained at your comment.
Sure you might have preffere Vaijyantimala as a good Iyengar gir playing Radha but you cant criticize the perfect casting of Nargis on communal grounds?
Please introspect .
Bindu Tandon
Mumbai, India
May 14, 2007 12:00 AM
4
Where are the women in Indian cinema?
Given the silly, fraudulent roles our great heroes play, as con men, gangsters, terrorists, are you surprised there are few women on the screen? Except in really supporting or minor roles as sweetheart, moll or victim.
when meaningful films are made women get their due, notably, Black, Monsoon Wedding, Rang de Basanti Swades..
The most prevalent art form is not the most praiseworthy.
Since film making is all about hustle and a bit of sleaze are you surprised women are not at hte forefront?
Bindu Tandon
Mumbai, India
May 13, 2007 12:00 AM
3
Chaitanya,

>> Nargis as Mother India is a sick joke. It only vindicates the Arab centric view of Hindi cinema. The role should have been handed over to Vyjayanthimala.

Posted as a pathetic example of a sick mind set.
Ghulam Y Faruki
New York, United States
May 13, 2007 12:00 AM
2
Nargis as Mother India is a sick joke. It only vindicates the Arab centric view of Hindi cinema. The role should have been handed over to Vyjayanthimala.
chaitanya
chennai, India
May 12, 2007 12:00 AM
1
There is a thin dividing line between a political fim and a patriotic film... the versatile portrayals by Suhasini Mulay - from Bhuvan Shome to her roles in 'Hu tu tu', Lagaan, DCH, and the lesser known Seher - bring forth a kaleidoscopic set of volatile - yet not passive & docile - images. These images could be seen as representative of the changing times (despite the oft regressive roles of females in our soap operas).
If we include Television then Buniyaad had many brilliant female protagonists too - and not always in the shadow of the males? The disadvantage of TV is that when episode-stretching is there the fillers dilute the impact!
Harsh Rai Puri
Bhopal, India
COLLAPSE COMMENTS   
Post a Comment
You are not logged in, please log in or register
ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISING RATES | COPYRIGHT & DISCLAIMER | COMMENTS POLICY