The Tamil film industry is unlikely to be fazed by the new CBFC directive to award adult ratings to objectionable item numbers for TV. This is a cinematic genre that is more than adept at inventing scores of ever-ingenious ways to circumvent all moral gags. Not because they are anarchists who want to thumb a nose at bourgeois morality, but because they are misogynists to the core. You can trip them on a political innuendo here or an ill-timed comment on caste or religion there; but on risque stuff, they are past masters. If there is a language that celebrates the ‘double entendre’, it’s Tamil and, by association, this is extended on to the visual field too.
The item number is the oxygen of Tamil/Telugu cinema. In many cases, the movie itself is a bit-item in between extended item numbers. And in the last decade, a tremendous expertise has been brought to bear upon its conception and execution. They come packaged as racy, pulse-thumping repeat-rhythms, often using onomatopoeic or gibberish sounding refrains—like ‘Kalakalaka kalasala’ or ‘Jhingu chikku’ or ‘Dinga naka diyya’ and so on. The renderings have almost always been group dances, shot brilliantly and cut to blinding speed using six-frame editing techniques. There has also been a certain ingenuity in employing all sorts of local genres to double as item numbers—from temple festival dances to katha-kalakshepams to folk forms.
While many recent ‘leading ladies’ of the Tamil screen like Nayanthara, Lakshmi Rai, Tamannah Bhatia, Meghana Reddy and Trisha have been roped in for these numbers, there have also been specific imports, like Mallika Sherawat and Yana Gupta. But the scene really bubbled up with the introduction of the gifted and uninhibited performer Mumaith Khan. She has become the ‘showstopper’ of the Tamil screen with numbers like ‘Ma peru Meena Kumari, naan porey Kanyakumari’ or ‘Daddy-Mummy veettil illay’. With her, the Tamil ‘item’ shed all coyness and has embarked on a no-holds-barred journey in which you have to think hard to decide which is more explosive, the word or the gesture. The phenomenon has also been helped by the fact that there is a new crop of lead male actors who are great dancers—like Vijay, Dhanush, Simbu, Vikram, Surya and the latest dance sensation, Lawrence Raghavendra.
There’s something deeply disturbing in the pathological objectification of the female body implicit in its reduction to a cheez—an ‘item’. In the Tamil film industry, she is simply caricatured through the English word, ‘figure’. The task of this ‘figure’ or ‘item’ is to merely perform a set number of actions in front of the camera involving her ‘assets’—like breasts, buttocks, hair, lips. There is nothing half-apologetic or tentative here. It is structured through the cold calculation of a choreography of conspicuous effects.
From the early days of word-play and innuendo by lyricists, tailored to suit the husky-voiced, come-hither renditions by playback artistes like L.R. Easwari in the 1960s and ’70s, the seduction device bypassed the ‘bedroom voice’ to come and reside in the ‘bedroom eyes’, flaring nostrils, sensual lips and uninhibited body language of a Silk Smitha for close to a decade-and-a-half. That is until this new crop of lithe, dance-savvy female leads hit the field who scorched the screen with their stand-alone thrusts and gyrations designed to push up testosterone levels across the board.
However, it is evident that the ‘item’ dance signals to the opposite of what it seems to signify. Contrary to the idea that the ubiquitous presence in Tamil films of such raunchy, debauched spectacles indicates some sort of a raw, libidinal overdrive, it might be closer to the truth to see in it a reflection of the consciousness of a male lack, compensated through ever more fantasised representations of the female anatomy.
Set in bars, brothels, hostels, dance floors and discos, running trains and even a running bus, these song-and-dance numbers usually have nothing much to do with the narrative and stand out as high-pitched invitations to unabashed voyeurism. The scopophilia offered to the audience by the illogic of disrobed bodies made to move in controlled ways is compounded by the lyric. Movement, gesture and word combine to liver a concoction designed to stun the viewer into temporary passivity. The intention of all this effort, avowedly, is arousal. However, it delivers quite the opposite message.
Apropos Sadanand Menon’s One Big Shakedown, do we really need a Malayali to comment on Tamil movies? Isn’t Mollywood known for its penchant for soft porn flicks?
Tamil cinema has a weight problem.
This isn't sexy or sexist. Neither!
There is a thin line between showing enough skin to leave the males panting for more ( the ideal that females and the feminist media are comfortable with ), and
showing enough to satiate the appetite of the males, to the extent that they refuse to worship the female body anymore.
Obviously, the feminists are winning, by censoring any scene that may decrease the price for sexual satisfaction.
The 'objectification of the female body' that Sadanand Menon talks about is true of all major Indian language movies, so why single out Tamil movies?
That aside, the article makes quite a few sweeping statements, and reads more like a gratuitous generalization than a serious study.
"The item number is the oxygen of Tamil/Telugu cinema. In many cases, the movie itself is a bit-item in between extended item numbers,” says Sadanand.
Really? Maybe, Sadanand restricts himself to watching a few B-grade movies (again a norm in all film industries, not just Tamil), ignoring the quality work done by some of the finest directors to have emerged in Tamil movie industry in recent times.
Sadanand declares sanctimoniously, "If there is a language that celebrates the ‘double entendre’, it’s Tamil . . . ."
Pray, how many languages does Sadanand know to make such a pompous statement?
'a reflection of the consciousness of a male lack' - Very curious as to how the author got here!! Is this what one must see in Salman Khan's antics, or is it limited to the Tamil men alone? Is this some of the general antipathy that I see towards the agressive Tamil stance, or is it just a personal grouse?
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT