THE STREOTYPICAL PORTRAYAL OF

WOMEN IN COMMERCIAL INDIAN

CINEMA

By Madhav Prasad
B.Sc. Cinema Sem 6th
Enrolment No – 2018010392
Roll No – 18073935090

Thesis
Under the guidance of Mr. Atul Arora

_______________________________________
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract

Chapter 1 - Introduction

Chapter 2 - Pilot Study – Quantitative Methodology

Chapter 3 - Women in Indian Cinema: History, Socio-Cultural Factors and Women’s Roles in
Films

Chapter 4 - The Great Indian Epics and Indian Pop culture - Character Prototypes in Epics
and Their Influence on Story Telling in Indian Cinema

Chapter 5 - Elements that Encompass the Film Viewing Audience - The Film, Audience and
Film, Film and Other Media

Chapter 6 - The Controversy over Films with an Alternate Storyline - Films Fire 1996 and
Water 2005, Directed by Deepa Mehta

Chapter 7 – Conclusion

References

Abstract
What roles women play onscreen is more often than not, the male director’s notion of what roles
women ought to be playing. This notion is based on the director’s beliefs, attitudes and values,
combined with what the director thinks viewers want to see. What viewers want to watch is
something that conforms to their beliefs, attitudes and values, which come from the social
framework within which they live, which is the same social framework in which directors, live. There
has to be a consistency in the beliefs, attitudes and values of all those 3 involved. This thesis intends
to provide research and observation to help us seeing the portrayal of women in Indian Cinema since
1940 to 2009.

Chapter 1: Introduction
In India 122 existing languages feature films are made in 20 of them. Feature films are produced in
approximately 20 languages in India. The term “Indian cinema” therefore, could refer to films made
in any of these 20 languages. On the basis of the percentage of films generated, “the four South
Indian film industries (Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam and Kannada), that account for almost 60% of the
films made since 1971 together represent the largest section of the Indian film industry”, followed
by Hindi cinema or Bombay cinema, popularly termed “Bollywood” which produces “about 150 to
200 films of a total of 800-1000 films a year, 20% of the total number of films made in India”.
According to the research, Hindi films, though comprising only 20% of the film product
of the nation, are the ones that circulate nationally and internationally dominating discourses
on Indian film. Hindi film represents Indian cinema internationally and is regarded as the
standard archetype to follow or oppose. This is because the principal official language
of India is Hindi succeeded by English. Hindi is the national language of India, and in a
country which has 22 official languages it is convenient to have one official Indian language,
which is representative of India, and Hindi is that language. Therefore, Hindi feature films
become representative of Indian films in any international forum. In the purely regional
context of India itself, films made in Hindi are viewed across the nation owing to the
commonality of this language. Indian cinema is the single largest medium of communication
with the masses, and close to 12 million people are watching films every week in cinema
houses and theatres. Considering that the film industry entertains an enormously
large population, what and who this film industry is made of becomes an important question.
Bombay which is now Mumbai film industry was a male-dominated industry. Women pursuing
careers within the industry were primarily either actresses or playback singers. This trend has
changed in recent years with women making their mark as choreographers, costume designers,
editors and screenwriters but their numbers are still much smaller in comparison to their male
counterparts. Very few women are lyricists or composers. While a handful of them have ventured
into direction, they have not achieved the commercial success their male counterparts have. Women
are thus very sparse in number behind the scenes of this film industry. In an industry with so few
women working within it, it seems fair to assume that the portrayal of women onscreen by male
directors and other male professionals will have gender biases and constraints and may not
necessarily explore women’s world views, perceptions and subjective realities. What roles women
play onscreen is more often than not, the male director’s notion of what roles women ought to be
playing. This notion is based on the director’s beliefs, attitudes and values, combined with what the
director thinks viewers want to see. What viewers want to watch is something that conforms to their
beliefs, attitudes and values, which come from the social framework within which they live, which is
the same social framework in which
directors, live. There has to be a consistency in the beliefs, attitudes and values of all those involved.
films that uphold their value system and conform to it, because they live in that social value system.
This cycle is hard to end but some revolutionary directors have tried to do so. In this thesis, I will
look only at one such director, Canadian-Indian film maker Deepa Mehta and two of her
controversial films. Her films Fire 1996 and Water 2005, created a public outrage upon release,
because the earlier film portrayed women in roles completely non-conforming to existing patriarchal
social norms (as lesbians) and the latter film portrayed the ills of the Hindu religion and the atrocities
committed on Hindu widows in the 1940s, making a politically incorrect point. Both films stirred the
anger of religious groups and resulted in riots across North India. Fire 1996 is the story of two
women who by chance are daughters-in-law of the same household, in heterosexual marriages.
However, their marriage equations with their spouses are unequal and a lack of the love, affection
and space they look for in their marriages, drives them towards each other. They find the comfort
and space they always lacked in their heterosexual marital relations, in the love relationship that
ensues between them. The whole idea of women being portrayed as making this choice angered
political parties, religious groups and religious fanatics, who went about threatening to kill the
director, smashing and destroying the theatres and cinema houses that dared to screen the film. The
film was banned from screening in the city of Mumbai, the center of the Bollywood film industry,
and the entire state oThis is Milton Rokeach’s beliefs, attitudes and values theory from 1968, in
action. Each member of the audience looks for entertainment that conforms to an existing system of
beliefs, attitudes, and values which come from a socio-cultural context in society. The Socio-cultural
framework, and power structures in operation in society, including religion, the Hindu religious
beliefs, and the influence of Hindu epics and myths on popular culture, govern the tastes and
preferences of the audience. Both these factors determine the directors’ preference. Directors and
producers have to make films that address audience preference and also meet their profit margins.
Audience is quite satisfied to see f Maharashtra where Mumbai is located. Water 2006, made by the
same director, was thrown out of India even before it could be shot on location in Varanasi, a small
town in the state of Uttar Pradesh. Deepa Mehta’s set
was destroyed and the film’s cast and crew were driven out of the shooting locations by state
religious factions. Water is a period film set in the 1940’s in the pre-independence era when
Gandhi’s Satyagraha movement was the biggest social phenomenon in British colonial India.
During this period widow remarriage was not common. Widows were considered unlucky
and a curse on society. They were sent from the homes of their in-laws and parents to special
widow homes. The treatment of one such child widow who is sent to a widow house in the
small town of Varanasi on the banks of the River Ganges is the essence of the story. This
child widow learns the hardships of widowhood as she observes another widow in her early
twenties who is also confined here. Using the “holy” aspects of religion like the town of
Varanasi and the River Ganges, to bring out the negative aspects of the religion was
unacceptable to society, especially to politically affiliated religious groups who were able to
mobilize the masses against this film. Riots broke out in protest against the screening of this film.
Deepa Mehta, who was already a controversial figure in India after Fire in 1996, was given police
protection when she came to India to film Water. Finally, she could not film there and had to go to
Srilanka to make the film. Why did these two films wreak such havoc? Is it the in-built patriarchal
propaganda that thrives in Indian society or is it religious and political propaganda?
Also, given that this decade has seen many changes in Indian women’s roles in society, it
is interesting to explore how much has changed in a male dominated film industry. During the last
decade, women in India have been fighting a bill for 33% seat reservation in parliament for women.
Women in politics and other fields believe that this bill will enable more women to come to the
forefront and represent the feminine population with greater empathy and sensibility, especially
pertaining to women’s issues. At a point and time with such political happenings, the representation
of women in Indian cinema, is a significant issue. At a time when women seem to have broken free
from the Indian home and family set-up into the world, and are ready to challenge stereotypes, is
this happening in the Indian film industry and the industry’s portrayal of women in films? Are Indian
films reflecting this changing social trend? These are questions worthy of exploring.
Since a large population watches Bollywood films, Bollywood cinema is a powerful mass
medium of communication in India, and cinematic portrayals definitely are highly
impressionistic, as this paper will later validate. What does this highly impressionistic
medium communicate to the masses through the many stories that films tell? How does it
portray women and what sort of messages does it send to the mass audience?
The phrase “portrayal of women” could refer to both women pursuing film careers offscreen and
actresses onscreen. The study focuses only on the onscreen roles of lead actresses.
A reference to off-screen roles has been made above only to mention the context in which the
lead actresses are working in the industry.

Chapter 2: Pilot Study – Quantitative Methodology

Defining Stereotypes
Although this paper is primarily a qualitative analysis of the roles given to women in Indian
cinema, a quantitative pilot study was undertaken to understand the operational definitions of
the term and to check if the operational definitions conformed to the portrayal of women in
commercial Indian cinema. The research question of this quantitative pilot study is - Were lead
actresses portrayed in stereotypical roles in highest grossing blockbuster Indian films from
1960-2009.The question that will follow it for the purpose of this thesis is: In the last 64 years how
have female characters been treated onscreen and how much of the treatment has changed today?

Method
Content analysis of the highest grossing all time blockbuster hit film of each decade, based on their
box office earnings as recorded by boxofficeindia.com. In this website films are classified as (i) All
time Blockbuster Hit, (ii) Blockbuster Hit, (iii) Super Hit, (iv) Hit, (v) Above Average and (vi) Average.
In this thesis only the first three categories are considered. Table 1 below shows the gross adjusted
earnings, by decade for films in categories one and three. It shows the highest figures for category
one, and the lowest figures for films in category three, indicating the range between the highest and
the lowest possible earnings for a film to belong to the blockbuster league. The figures for category
two films are understood to be anywhere in between this range. For the purpose of the quantitative
pilot study, one film from category 1, all-time blockbuster hits was chosen for each decade. Two
Indian coders, one man and one woman, both 26 years of age viewed the entire film. They coded the
film by observing the actresses - their traits, characteristics highlighted, costumes, interaction with
other characters etc. scene by scene.
Universe: Highest grossing films (all-time blockbuster hits) as listed by boxofficeindia.com, based on
the revenue earned by the films at the box office
Sample size and inter-coder reliability: The all-time highest grossing film of Indian cinema, Sholay
1975 was chosen for the purpose of this pilot study. This study can be replicated and expanded
quantitatively. Two coders coded the film Sholay, based on the operational definitions explained
below. This film was chosen since it still stands as the highest grossing film in Bollywood ever,
adjusted to inflation. The following were the operational definitions of stereotype that I coined for
the purpose of the pilot study.

Operational Definitions
Subordinate role function (Lead actress role defined in relation to male lead)
Protagonist’s Mother
Protagonist’s Wife
Love interest of the male protagonist/girlfriend
Aids male protagonist to achieve his goal
Screen-time less than the male lead
Alternative role function
Vamp/courtesan dancer
Night club dancer/bar dancer/cabaret dancer
Prostitute/call girl
Family ahead of self
Compromises personal interests at least on one occasion for the sake of family
Willing to put spouse/male protagonist ahead of her own interests
Non-rebellious to established customs/social patterns
Sacrifices for the sake of family honor/ family’s social status
Career orientation
Home maker: Takes care of children, Takes care of in-laws
Performs household chores
Lives in a joint family
No specific mention made of her career interests
Purity/chastity
Never had a pre-marital affair/never has more than one lover in the movie
Portrayed as on following customs and rituals of her respective religion
Always conforms to set traditional values pertaining to marriage, prayer, religion, rituals
Pious/devoted
Very religious/God fearing
Shown as performing religious rites/offering prayers in the “puja” (prayer) room/temple
Symbolism of virtue (Presence on screen)
Does not smoke
Does not drink alcohol
Non-flirtatious
Not highly interactive with men (except her family or her love interest)
Does not make sexual advancements
Does not appear in an ‘item’ number (a cabaret dance, a night club dance)
Appears in traditional Indian costumes for majority of her role screen time
Objectification
Tribal costume
Rain dance
Behind the bushes scene
Framed in sensuous ways: if she is wearing a low back blouse then framed in a way as to
show that back or waist
Appears in revealing clothes: (exposing large part of thighs, back, waist, pelvic region
None of these - Appears in a completely “non-stereotypical” role
Appears as a vamp or courtesan dancer
Breaks tradition, rebellious
Atheist and/or agnostic
Other roles in which woman does not conform to any of the above mentioned stereotypical
categories

Results
There were 2 main actresses in the film, each actress playing the female lead opposite the
2 male leads. All scenes in which either of them and/or both of them appeared were coded as
per the categories by 2 coders. The two actresses were coded separately. Firstly, both actresses
together (individually and in unison) appear in 26 out of 50 scenes, which is about 52% of the entire
film, much less than their male counterparts who appear in almost all of the 50 scenes.
Second, lead actress Basanti appears in 16 out of 50 scenes, which is 32% of the film and
lead actress Jaya appears in 12 scenes, 24% of the film. The screen-time for the actresses
seems low in comparison to their male counterparts who appear almost 100% of the film.
Both actresses have been portrayed in at least one or more stereotypical categories
throughout the film barring a few occasions. The category that is the highest is the
subordinate role function and the category that is the least is the alternative role function
supporting my corollary that blockbuster Indian films will not portray the lead actresses in
alternative (non-stereotypical) role functions. The second highest category is the symbolism of
virtue. The next two highest categories tending to the stereotype role are family ahead of self and
purity/chastity -- though coders agreed on these categories there seem to be greater differences
between the coders in these two categories more than any of the others. While one lead actress
seems to have been objectified, the other lead actress seems to have not been objectified at all and
there is 100% coder agreement on that. This method could well be applied to other blockbuster
films, which will help ascertain if the hypothesis will be supported for highest grossing blockbuster
films over the last fifty years. This pilot study has been included in the qualitative analysis of the
subject only to
emphasize that even if a mathematical and quantitative approach is undertaken, it is more
than likely, that the results will match the current study, ascertaining that women are more
frequently portrayed in stereotypical roles in Indian commercial cinema. A detailed look at a film
such as Sholay 1975 supports the point of view that women do not have defining and empowering
roles. In herself the woman has not the slightest importance While it is apparent that women have
been portrayed in stereotypical roles including the role of the vamp, there are certain censorship
norms that films had to conform to and these norms came into being in the 1930s, during the
primary stages of Indian cinema. According to Shah (1950), the Censor Board prohibited films and/or
scenes that explicitly represented passion and love, indelicate sexual situations, immorality, first
night after marriage, brothels, prostitution, illicit sexual relationships, etc. While a number of rules
may have been relaxed in recent years, the basis of these rules remain the same and to that extent
influence the portrayal of women in popular Indian cinema, ensuring that roles conform to the
existing socio-cultural framework. This thesis explores how patriarchy imposes certain roles on
women. Why are women’s roles in films stereotyped; where these stereotypes come from and what
they mean to Indian society and film? The subject of this thesis can be placed within the framework
of a number
of theories. The first of them would be Milton Rokeach’s (1968) beliefs, attitudes and value theory,
which has been explained in the introduction chapter of the thesis. Other psychological theories,
including Leon Festinger’s (1957) theory of cognitive dissonance and Laura Mulvey’s (1975)
psychoanalytic theory which are at play in Indian society, have been elaborated, in context, in the
course of the paper. Since cinema is a mass medium of communication, the idea of satisfying the
masses by providing them with entertainment that caters to their needs is fundamental to this
industry. Blumler & Katz’s (1974) uses and gratification theory which emphasizes on what people do
to media is also at play in the Indian film industry and will be further explored in the following
chapters.
The other dynamics in operation are the persuasion theory of alter-casting, the
psychological dynamic of implicit stereotyping, and Gramsci’s concept of hegemony
(1930s), all of which have been in subliminal operation in society and culture leading to
repetitive female stereotypes in Hindi cinema.

Chapter 3: Women in Indian Cinema

History, Socio-Cultural Factors, and Women’s Roles in Films

In the context of an evolution in the roles of women in Indian films, Laxmi (1991), writes,
“From the passive wife of Dadasaheb Phalke's "Raja Harishchandra" to the long-suffering
but heroic mother-figure of "Mother India" to the liberated single-parent of "Mother `98," it
has been a rather long and challenging journey for women in Hindi cinema”. In a single sentence,
Laxmi traces the history of Indian films, all the way back to the silent film, Raja Harishchandra in
1913, moving on to Mother India 1957 and Mother 98 1999, during which time women’s roles in
Indian cinema have changed in many ways. Since the 1960s, as more and more women’s issues
come to the forefront of the patriarchal Indian society, the more varied women’s roles have become
in Indian cinema. However, does variation necessarily eliminate typicality of roles? First, while many
films have been made on social themes in the realm of women’s issues including dowry, widowhood,
rape, etc. it is not necessary that any of these films have been blockbusters; neither have they been
popular viewed. The first women to act in Indian films in the 1920s were women of mixed British,
European and Indian origins referred to as the “Anglo-Indians”. Since they had hybrid origins, they
were deemed separate from the women of pure Indian origin. There was a stigma associated with
Indian women acting and in the context of this social stigma, when Indian women began to act,
directors, in order to conform to social norms might have been pressured to portray Indian women
leads as characters who live within the confines of society even in the films. In Indian cinema, this is
probably the beginning of the idea of having to necessarily cater to audience needs and conform to
existing value systems. However, if slightly older female leads are cast opposite younger male actors,
the actresses are criticized by the press, industry and audiences of having lost their “youthful charm”
because the audience likes to see young women in the lead, who is attractive to the male lead and
performs sensuous song and dance sequences. This indicates the male centralism and bias not only
in the minds of those who make films but also the viewers who have been conditioned over years to
view characters in films from this point of view. Patriarchal Indian society views young women as
being sensuous and sexually appealing and older women as being less attractive. This is the male
fantasy in operation which expects the female lead has to be young and in her prime, while the male
lead can be in his early fifties and yet pass for a young hero/protagonist in his late twenties and early
thirties. Many a time the casting hunt involves looking for a young actress in her early twenties to act
with the male lead who is probably in his early forties or even fifties. This suggests the possibility of
an inherent “male gaze” within and outside the industry. There exists a pre-conceived notion in
society and within the industry about the kind of woman who should play the lead actress based on
a fascination built by the film form and its pattern over the years. The highly male dominated
audience perceives women in a certain way, the directors have their version of what people might
want to see, and they build their stories for the people, and the stereotypes are further reinforced
and the cycle continues. Not only is there a certain established pattern associated with which the
woman plays the lead actress, there is also a pattern associated with the portrayal of women who
play the lead. According to Manusmriti which had a profound effect on shaping the morals of Indian
society, a female should be subject in childhood to her father, in youth to her husband, and Sita –
Lead lady character in an Indian epic story, Ramayana *Manusmriti – An ancient code of conduct
governing social and familial lives of individuals in society when her husband is dead, to her
children…women were given no kind of independence…She is told to be cheerful, efficient in the
management of household affairs, fastidious in cleaning utensils, careful with expenses… these
norms governed the lives of women in traditional India and they find clear articulation in Indian
cinema, especially in popular films. While women were embodiments of purity, they could have
romantic love affairs which are based on the Radha-Krishna” model of pure, all consummating,
absolute love with no space for mistakes, errors or slips. Indian films represent the lead actress in
the role of romantic woman based on this model. Women who are portrayed as per the norms of
the traditional value system of society is shown as women who are rewarded while those characters
in the story, who transgress the boundaries of traditionalism, are punished. It appears from the
above that the socio-cultural context within which women started acting in films, conditioned the
roles that were given to them in films; their film roles had to conform to the existing socio-cultural
realities of women, and to the semiotics of their real life roles (upholder of family values,
representing the status of family and community, etc.) Radha-Krishna- Krishna is one of the many
Hindu Gods. He is considered a re-incarnation of the god “Mahavishnu”. Radha is his lover. The love
between Radha and Krishna is widely read and narrated and is considered a very pure, sensuous,
erotic and romantic love. Since women and their actions were considered epitomes of family honour
and respectability in Indian society. In trying to portray characters in these “stereotypical” socially
acceptable roles, Richards (1995) observes, “The Hindi film upholds the traditional patriarchal views
of society which, fearful of female sexuality, demands of the woman, a subjugation of her desires”
point out that in conformity to social norms, women have been given two significant kinds of roles in
commercial films; that of the mother (whose attributes are matched to that of the supreme form of
feminine energy, the Goddess) and the wife (based on the mythological characters of Sita and Sati
Savitri; Sati – the characteristic of extreme devotion to the husband). They say, Sati Savitri is a very
pious and spiritual mythological character, whose husband dies when he is still very young. Savitri
cannot accept this and she is so in love with him that she follows the God of death “Yama” who has
taken her husband’s soul. As she travels the path of the dead, she convinces Yama to return her
husband to her. Unable to refuse the demands of this persevering and sacred woman, Yama,
miraculously returns her husband to life. Savitri’s love for her husband, Satyavan, is greatly revered
in the Hindu religion. Sati concept led to a considerable number of films in the 1920s and 1930s…
and although it is no longer fashionable, its effect was to portray women ‘stereotypical’,
unidimensional creatures with no personal ambitions of their own” The theme of marriage, being
married, performing the roles and functions of the typical Indian wife, conforming to the rules of
family, being the perfect mother, wife, daughter, daughter-in-law, etc. were all central to Indian film
stories. Belonging to a patriarchal social structure and enacting the role of a woman in the confines
of this structure and social order became the role of women in cinema as well. This is not surprising
given that 90 percent of the directors and producers are men. It is not an oversimplification to say
that in
popular Indian cinema women are seen very much in bad or good roles. The good ones are, more
often than not (self-sacrificing) mothers, (dutiful) daughters, (loyal) sisters or (obedient and
respectful) wives. They support, comfort and very seldom question their men. They are self-
sacrificing and above all pure…. On the other side of the coin modernity often seems to be equated
with being bad. Bad women, other than being modern, are often single, sometimes widowed. They
may be westernized (synonymous with being fast and 'loose'), independent (a male preserve),
aggressive (a male quality) and they may even smoke and drink. Often they will wear western
clothes but the moment they suffer a change and reform their ways, they will clad themselves in a
sari and cover
their heads. There are, of course, exceptions to the above stereotypes, but they remain exceptions.
While courtesan dancers are one end of the spectrum, the vamps are on the other end. As discussed
earlier, these are the women who would be cabaret dancers in bars and pubs, the cigarette-smoking,
sexily clad, sensuous women who are open about their sexuality and easily flirt with and entertain
either the male protagonist or the male antagonist in the film. Some of the most popular actresses
who have played these roles in films were Helen Jairag Richardson, Aruna Irani and Bindu Zaveri
from the 70s and 80s. While they have played vamp, two actresses, Zeneth Aman and Parveen Babi
have played the relatively more unconventional female leads – relatively more westernized in their
outlook as characters, more daring wardrobe and sensuous dance sequences. Actresses who were
cast in unconventional and more modern roles were recognized for having been different from the
norm. Although the idea of the vamp being the immoral woman and the female lead being the moral
and chaste woman was high, this did not substantiate women’s roles. It only led to demarcation
between the vamp and the lead actress, with emphasis of certain character traits in these roles. The
commonality between both the roles are that, they were both objectified anyway. On screen the
only real difference between the vamp and the lead actress in terms of their objectification was
purely contextual to the story. Many a time, the difference between the vamp and the so-called
heroines was probably that the vamp characters are more open about their sexuality on screen.
They already were “bad” and “immoral”, pursuing cabaret dancing, wearing revealing and sensuous
clothes,
openly flirting with men, etc. all of which they did as a matter of choice. They were portrayed as
characters who chose this way of living. The heroines, on the contrary, despite having some
sensuous moments on screen, which included wearing revealing clothes and dancing some sensuous
dances with hip shakes and breast thrusts were still pure. Why would that be? – Simply because
their moves were portrayed as being the point of view of the hero. These acts done by the heroine
were done with or in the presence of the male protagonist during his moments of passion and desire
and it comes across as being his point of view of the woman he loves and desires which is much
more legitimate in the minds of the audience than the open and unrestrained sexuality of the
already immoral vamp. Although both heroines and vamps had many similarities in terms of what
they wore and how they danced and how they were objectified on screen, the confines within which
they exhibited them
sexuality on screen, psychologically demarcated them in the minds of their audience as either
being good or bad, moral or immoral. The differences between the heroine and the vamp
indicate that the Madonna and the whore complex operates in Indian society. The
girlfriend/wife/mother is a Madonna and therefore has to conform to those pure traits while the
vamp is a whore and can simply be immoral. The justification of her immorality is that she is a
whore. The pictures below highlight the contrasting qualities of the Madonna and the whore. In
Sholay 1975, an all time blockbuster Hindi film, Helen makes only a special appearance as a gypsy
dancer with a very sexy costume and dances as the male antagonist of the film watches her. One
could compare that to the present day bar dancer, stripper, etc. only that it was done in the “gypsy”
context at the time. The audience would look at Helen, her costumes and her moves as being
justified by the theory that she is just a gypsy woman who is entertaining men out of her choice to
do so. On the right is the heroine Hemamalini, sprawled out, with specific shots aimed at her hips
during the entire sequence of the song, but this in the minds of the audience, is legitimised exposure
because in the sequence she is dancing for the very desirous antagonist in order to be able to save
the lives of the male heroes of the film. Although the shots used on Helen and Hemammalini,
showing their hips and stomachs might seem to have similar effects on the viewer, the perceptions
of these shots are very different because the context in which the heroine is objectified and the gysy
woman/vamp is objectified vary greatly. Even in the film Sholay, there are two heroines with very
opposing characteristics. One is the very
talkative, boisterous but yet projected as homely and the hero’s love interest, and the other is
the widow, very quiet, introverted and portrayed as submissive and timid through the film. The role
of the talkative woman is played by Hemamalini and the widow by Jaya Bhadhuri. Both the roles,
though opposing in nature, clearly conform to the social norms of how a woman should behave and
how a widow should behave. Any sort of sexuality that the heroine exhibits during the 60s and 70s
period, is done within the confines of the male gaze upon her. While this is true to a great extent, of
cinema in the later decades also, the interesting thing about the last couple of decades is that there
seems to be a merging of the roles of the heroine and the vamp. Why? As society becomes more
modern and is exposed more to the Western world and globalization, it becomes necessary to
conform to the modern male’s idea and fantasy of what a woman should be. The Indian film industry
caters to a wide range of audiences. While some unconventional ideas and films may have appealed
greatly to the wide-ranged audience, such occurrences are rare. The industry is under constant
pressure to deliver what viewers want to see, in order to make a profit. There has to some
commercial element (symbolic sex, song and dance, hot girlfriend and yet the homeliest wife etc.)
for the film to be satisfying to the largely male audience and as long as the audience are gratified by
it, cinema with women in monotonous roles is going to continue. Hence, having a ‘modern’ woman
onscreen which mostly means wearing more revealing clothes, dancing sensuously, etc. caters to the
male fantasy of the modern-day Indian woman, who is both the librarian and the stripper.
Unfortunately, the woman remains as just the love interest of the male protagonist and is rarely cast
in a stronger and more independent role. On the one hand the heroine is the good Madonna and on
the other hand she is the sexy stripper and whore. How can this disparity be justified? This is a
classic example of Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissoance. According to Moskowitz (2005), “The
premise of the congnitive dissonance theory is that when people experience inconsistencies
between two cognitions, this causes an aversive drive state that people are motivated to eliminate”
In the case of the cognition of women by Indian men, women are to be the Madonnas, epitomes of
all that is moral. They must uphold the values of the Indian culture. This is the popular perception.
But, they also need to be elements of fantasy for the Indian male with Western outlook and/or
exposure. The Madonna now has to become the whore for male fantasy. But how can that happen?
When both perceptions merge, they seem very
contradictory and there is dissnonance in cognition; there needs to be a way to appease the value
system and eliminate this dissonance. So, the Madonna, becomes the sexy woman of fantasy not by
her own choice, but by the gaze of the male upon her and therefore, it is his point of view of her,
which is justified. The dissoance in the contradictory cognitions is thus merged.
The issues of either wearing or not wearing revealing clothes, by themselves are not a matter of
right or wrong. The point is that the role of the female lead in these films is nothing beyond the
costumes and the hip shaking, boob thrusting dances. The role of the female lead ends up lacking
substance and her character becomes sheer eye candy. The heroines, thus, become an interesting
addition in the
film and plainly support the role of the male protagonist. The audience which has repeatedly
seen such roles, begin to perceive it as being eye candy and brand these roles as the only
possible roles for women in Indian cinema. A new stereotype is built around that eye candy,
defeating the purpose of trying to break stereotypes. Films find ways to justify why the heroine is
performing these song and dance sequences and more often than not, they will be a love sequence
between the hero and the heroine or a sequence where the female lead is doing something for the
sake of the male lead, either to save his life, or help him out of a situation. The fundamental idea of
the male gaze,
male fantasy and perspective is not lost yet. Merging the Madonna and the whore by suitably
justifying the synchrony of roles is just a different way of catering to those fantasies, yet being within
the parameters of what is or is not socially acceptable. Madhuri Dixit in Tezaab 1988, Madhuri Dixit
in film Khalnaayak 1993, Dancing to song Ek Do Teen dancing to song Cholee Ke Peeche In the film
Tezaab 1988, Madhuri Dixit is the heroine but her clothes are similar to the vamps of the 1970s.
Such sensuous songs are usually referred to as “item numbers”, item referring sometimes in a
derogatory fashion and sometimes in a sexy and sensual fashion to the woman who is dancing. In
the 1970s, these item numbers are mostly the work of the vamps and bar dancers. In the 80s, this
demarcation becomes hazy and the heroines perform these item numbers themselves, but in a
manner that conveniently bridges the dissonance in the perceptions of the Madonna and the whore.
For instance, in the film Khalnayak 1993, Madhuri Dixit, is the main female lead. She is a police
officer, who goes undercover as a prostitute, in order to clear the reputation of her Police officer
boyfriend, Ram. She is not a prostitute but a police officer, under-cover, (which is not the main point
here), trying to save her boyfriend. Since she is trying to save the male protagonist and the audience
knows her mission, anything that she does becomes acceptable under those circumstances. Actress
Shabana Azmi also mentions in an interview to Ganti (2004), that while there may have been a clear
cut difference between the heroine and the vamp in earlier films, in recent times, specifically in the
80s and 90s, the images of heroine and the vamp seem to be blurring with the heroine being the sex
symbol before her marriage and then the chaste wife after her marriage, making the portrayals even
more stereotyped and one-dimensional . Although the fundamental nature of the roles of heroine
and vamp may have changed, what they represent, or what they signify in their roles has not
changed significantly. In the context of the merger of roles for the heroine and the vamp,
Sivasankaran in a telephonic interview says, Objectification of women always existed in Indian
cinema and will continue to exist for many years to come. What has really changed today, by
merging the roles of the heroine and the vamp, is not the roles of women, but simply the nature of
the objectification. Initially women wore Indian costumes and were objectified. Today they wear
more Western costumes and reflect in their character, the so called Western, modern woman with
the modern attitude and then they are objectified… I cannot say whether this is for better or worse,
but I can definitely say, that the nature of the objectification may have changed, but ideas and
perceptions about women, or the way women are projected in Indian cinema, remain fundamentally
the same. The aim is to cater to audience escapism and fantasies, which is what ensures that the
films earn their profits and whatever sells best is the blockbuster formula and is emulated and
duplicated endlessly. In so many years of Indian cinema, having women characterized as stereotypes
seems to have been selling very well with viewers. The most monetarily beneficial option is to
continue to do the same. Das Gupta (1969) writes,
The trouble with the Hindi cinema is not that it is commercial; all film industries in the world,
including the state-owned ones, are commercial because they cannot go on throwing away money
on films which people do not want to see. The trouble is that other film industries do two things that
the Hindi cinema does not (for the simple reason that it is incapable): produce films at many levels
ranging from pure art to pure commerce, and occasionally bowl over the art critic and the box office
with the same film. Diligently, the Hindi cinema has perfected its one and only formula. It has had no
John Ford turning out Westerns, no Milestone making memorable war films, no Hitchcock to hold us
in thrall,
no Minnelli, no Donen to make it by music alone. It has no genres. However, the way this exposure
and exhibition of sexuality is portrayed on screen has an undercurrent, which carries messages to
the audience, reinforcing further, the pre-existing stereotypes in society, adding strength to the
vicious cycle – do films lead to socio-cultural stereotypes or do these stereotypes find their way into
films? Where does the Madonna and the whore complex even come from? It certainly has its base
in religion and the factors that influence religion. The next chapter will explore one aspect that
influences the Hindu religion greatly - the epics and
mythological tales that are an important part of the foundation of the religion and them
unmistakable presence in the realm of popular culture.

Chapter 5: The Great Indian Epics and Indian Pop Culture

– Character Prototypes in Epics and their Influence on Story Telling in Indian Cinema

The origins of the characterization of women for script and story purposes in Indian cinema has its
roots in the epics of India. The two greatest and widely acclaimed Indian epics are the Ramayana,
the story of Prince Rama and his wife Sita, and the Mahabharata, the story of a family feud between
cousins for their kingdom. In the Ramayana, the female protagonist Sita is the exemplified perfect
woman, who stands by and supports her husband right through all his hardships. After Rama marries
Sita, Rama’s stepmother Kaikeyi, one of the Queens of the kingdom, who wants her own son
Bharath to inherit the empire, manipulates her husband, King Dasaratha, into banishing the eldest
son, Rama, from the empire. Rama, who has given word to his father that he will do anything to help
his father, agrees to be in exile for 14 years. His wife Sita, accompanies him into the forests to spend
her life in exile with her husband. During this period Rama and Sita, accompanied by one of Rama’s
brothers Lakshmana, live in the forest and help the sages from the atrocities of the demons and
devils in the forest. During this time, Sita is captured by a demon king, Ravana, who wants her to be
his wife. Rama goes on to overthrow Ravana in order to win his wife Sita back. In trying to do this,
Rama helps, befriends and builds relationships with various beings in the jungle to help him in the
war against the demon king Ravana of Lanka. After Rama wins his wife back, in some versions of the
epic, he is supposed to have asked his wife Sita, to walk through and bathe herself in fire as a proof
of her purity. Sita acquiesces to this. The idea behind this fire bath or fire walk is for Sita to prove to
the world, that during her period of captivity, she remained untouched by Ravana and that she did
not succumb to a 45 physical relationship or violation of any sort with Ravana; that she was neither
raped nor willingly accepted Ravana. She is so pure, that the god of fire, Agni, can’t much as even
give her a small burn. This is popularly referred to as Sita’s test of purity. According to Hindu religion,
Rama is an incarnation of the Lord Vishnu, and his wife Sita, an incarnation of the Goddess Lakshmi,
wife of Lord Vishnu. The purity of Sita has led to the Madonna complex in society, where the
woman, bearer of children and the enhancer of lineage is supposed to be as pure as Sita in the
Ramayana. This is a powerful concept in the minds of people in India. Films and film stories are many
a time based on these epic prototypes and powerful impressions that epic characters make in the
minds of people. Pattanaik (2009) says, “We're looking at stories that have lasted the test of time,
like the Ramayana, the Mahabharata… That's proof of their effectiveness.” This is because stories of
the Gods, myths and epics are the stories people are told through their lives. They are stories
children are raised with. Since it is so much a part of everyday life, people internalize the values in
these stories for life. According to Pattanaik (2009), epics and stories that people hear all their lives,
create subjective realities in their minds and these subjective realities are internalized, leading to the
construction of their world views and perceptions. These world views then begin to dominate their
ideas, attitudes, beliefs and approaches to life situations including management and business. In the
case of film stories, internalization of epics creates epic based ideas and fantasies in the minds of the
people, which then enter the realm of popular culture, influencing character stereotypes in film. In
the controversial film Fire 1996 directed by Canadian-Indian film maker, Deepa Mehta, one of the
two female protagonists. While the film itself was not a commercial blockbuster and aroused violent
sentiment amongst religious fanatics and political parties, as discussed earlier, the idea of naming
the character Sita comes from the epic Ramayana, and the director, in an interview on the DVD of
the film says, “The point is to make somebody, women especially, go through continuous trials, to
prove their purity, this seems to be a part of our ethos and that is why I called her Sita.” In the film
the character named Sita has a situation in the story where her husband questions her because she
breaks tradition and makes an independent choice overruling her husband. This is the moment the
director is referring to in the interview and she says that this notion of the woman’s test of purity is
an integral part of many Indian traditions and in some way permeates Indian society in so
subconscious a manner that people hardly realize it. In the second greatest Indian epic, The
Mahabharatha, two sets of cousins, the Pandavas and the Kauravas, fight over a kingdom. The first
set, named the Pandavas, are five people with one wife named Draupadi. (We assume that
polygamy and polyandry were perhaps common in society, the time at which this epic was written,
because of a scarcity of land, resources and perhaps because the sex ratio was not evened out). The
second set, are one hundred brothers, the sons of King Dirdashtra. The Kauravas call upon the five
Pandavas to gamble. The Kauravas cheat and manipulate putting the Pandavas in a position of
tremendous loss. The Kauravas are greedy for territory and want to possess not only their part of the
kingdom but also the part of the kingdom that belongs to their cousins, the Pandavas. The Pandavas
gamble everything they have until finally, after losing all they have, their territory, property and
wealth, they gamble their wife Draupadi. Draupadi is dragged into court by one of the Kaurava
cousins, who insults her and starts to strip her off her saree. This is referred to as Draupadi’s
violation in court. Draupadi, a great devotee of the Lord Krishna, prays to him and miraculously, her
saree can never be pulled off of her; as the Kaurava cousin tries to strip her off it, more and more
layers of cloth just keep making the saree longer and longer. Lord Krishna protects her by making
sure her saree magically becomes longer and longer, so much so that the Kaurava prince tires of
trying. The point to be noted in this story is the idea of treating a woman, one’s wife, as property
that can be gambled with. As in all societies, women are more vulnerable and any mishap leads for
them to be raped or molested or violated in some form or the other. This vulnerability of women is
used in Indian cinema very frequently. While rape may be a real social human rights issue in all
countries, the problem with Indian cinema is that rape is a cinematic tool that leads to some
empathy for the victim for sure, but it is mostly a cinematic moment that is used to exhibit the
heroic nature of the male protagonist, who always ends up saving the damsel in distress. More often
than not, the female lead will never get raped because it challenges the notion of feminine purity.
The rape scene is only an attempt by the bad guys to rape the female and how the male lead saves
her, showing off his brawling abilities, is the real story there. If at all a woman gets raped onscreen, it
will be someone’s maid, or the male protagonist’s sister, and then the story is about revenge. It is
never the main female lead who gets raped. Why have these repetitive and monotonously
predictable rape scenes then? Why can’t the male character’s greatness be demonstrated in
something else? Why should a rape scene or a dance sequence for the villain by the female lead be
the cinematic tool through which the audience understands the male character? – This is because
men see themselves as saviours of women in society and the male character’s actions are their
fantasy. It is possible that women have fantasies of being saved by the handsome prince or perhaps
some other very different fantasy, but somehow, that is a point of view that is never really explored.
Not a whole lot about female fantasy finds voice in Indian cinema, because it is not a subject openly
discussed or explored, nor is it considered appropriate in a patriarchy governed family system to
even try to express women’s sexuality or fantasies openly. Women are so used to this system and it
is so internalized in them, that even women find other modern women (who are open about this
subject), “not modest enough about femininity”, “immoral” or “wrong”. Women have come to
believe that there is a certain patriarchy in the system that is legitimized and they must behave in
accordance with this power structure. It has become an internalized value system which is further
reinforced by the media and its portrayal of women. In the case of the female lead dancing or
sexually enticing the villain or antagonist - this again is a classic male fantasy, where they want to be
the saviours of their women, but also want their women to do almost anything for them; be the
chaste woman when needed and be the stripper when needed, satisfying the need for the Madonna
and the whore. So, it is all about the man’s gallantry and the woman’s vulnerability and these
extreme character traits seem to have come from the epics. We worship Goddess Durga, and
Goddess Kali, who are symbols of absolute power, and empowerment but we want the women in
society to be Sita or Draupadi. Incidentally, in the mythological stories of the Goddesses, they always
kill evil which is in the form of male demons. There has to be some sort of a feministic ideal
associated with the portrayal of these Goddesses, which was perhaps women’s way of associating
with power, empowerment, opportunity and independence in a patriarchal, male dominated
society. This portrayal somehow never made it to popular Indian cinema. This is because, in a
patriarchal society, while men are willing to worship the powerful, empowered Goddess, they
probably feel greatly threatened if the same traits of power come from the real woman, and incline
towards suppressing women even more. So, they start to draw from the softer prototypes in epics
and myths and try to impose those traits on women, thereby preventing the true empowerment of
women. In fact, Goddess Kali, is usually portrayed as being topless, with a garland made of the heads
of the demons that she killed to save mother earth from their atrocities. This image of power,
independence and the sort of fear that this image instils, is worshipped by people, men and women
alike, but somehow never translates into reality. The male fantasy is the vulnerable woman, not the
powerful, empowered woman. So, the male-controlled society tends to impose and emphasize on
women’s vulnerability. Women as symbols of purity, softness, obedience, chastity, virginity until
wed, etc. are all concepts perhaps emerging from the prototypes in epics. The two epics are very
important to Indian culture, religion, tradition and in many ways influence pop culture and therefore
film, filmic situations, scenes, and values resonated in film and so on. As late as 2010, the film
Rajneeti 2010, directed by Prakash Jha, is based on the story of the epic Mahabharatha adapted to
modern times. In an interview to Sengupta (2010), Director of Rajneeti, Prakash Jha says, every kind
of character, every kind of situation is embedded in the Mahabharata, he said. It becomes the
reference point for our psyche. One is never out of the Mahabharata… There is no story that is not
contained here. This is the power of the epic and the many fascinating stories contained within it
and it no doubt influences the story writer’s psyche. Sengupta (2010), observes, that these epic
stories do not get transmitted via books, but via the traditions and cultural framework within which
one is born. She says of Director Prakash Jha, For Mr. Jha, the filmmaker, the stories of the
Mahabharata did not first come through books. He was born into a family of Brahmin priests.
Children were told the stories of the Mahabharata all the time. They were planted in his brain. To
this day, he said, he sees it as the story of all stories. Summarizing Director Shyam Benegal, who
belongs to the regional Bengali film industry which is one of the many film industries in the country,
Simons (2001) says, Soon after, Bollywood moviemakers had come into their own, and by the early
1950s, they'd developed a distinctive style, based on the teachings of a 1,000-year-old Hindu text
called Natya Shastra (Science of Theatre). Under tenets set down in that book, entertainment must
comprise the nine essences. These are love, hate, sorrow, disgust, joy, compassion, pity, pride and
courage. In addition, there is supposed to be a lot of song and dance, as in popular staging of the
epic Ramayana, which to this day enthrals Indians. The epics therefore form a great basis for story
tellers to take morals from, to adapt stories from and in many ways might be acting as the
foundation to building more and more stories, and a stepping stone to forming characters in these
stories. The epics are so embedded that they penetrate everyday speech. A woman may be warned
against following the path of Ahalya, the adulteress of the Ramayana. A family feud might be likened
to the battle of rival clans in the Mahabharata. There is even a school named after Eklavya, a gifted
archer who chopped off his right thumb to prove his devotion to his archery teacher.” Neither the
Mahabharata nor the Ramayana is considered to be the word of God. But they are powerful fables,
and they represent for Hindus what the Bible and the Greek myths together may have historically
represented in the West. Pattanaik (2009), a writer who uses the Hindu epics in human resource
management, describes them as ‘the template of Indian thought’. Given that it is understandable as
to how and why these epics subconsciously retain themselves in the realm of story-telling and story
writing. Not only do epics from a basis for popular story writing and narrative patterns, but they
have greatly influenced Indian classical culture and pop culture in various ways. South Indian
classical music popularly referred to as Carnatic music contains the works of a trinity of composers of
whom Thyagaraja, who lived in the 18th century is very popular. A number of compositions of
Thyagaraja are extremely complicated and unprecedented and remain unsurpassed to this day in the
realm of Indian Classical music. Thyagaraja’s compositions are taught to students of vocal and
instrumental music at a highly developed and advanced level of learning the art. Thyagaraja’s songs
and verses are all his interpretations of various situations in the epic, Ramayana. Classical dance in
India is also influenced by epics. Dance dramas portray stories of the Gods and Goddesses. The epics
have influenced the basis of classical music and dance, and have been so much a part of classical
culture that it is not surprising that they influence even modern-day stories and popular culture.
Drawing from epic character prototypes to create new story characters seems the most natural and
spontaneous thing to do while thinking of creating stories and characters. Women in all these epics
and other mythological stories have been portrayed as being obedient, subservient, complying,
dutiful and enduring. Many a time they have been portrayed as being property to be gambled with
or owned and these ideas tend to carry on in modern adapted ways into cinema creating a new set
of stereotypes. This is how epic prototypes that conform to male fantasy, become character
stereotypes of women in Indian cinema. Once the epics and their prototypes enter the realm of
popular culture, (it is not only film that the terrain of popular culture covers, but everything from
lifestyle and social trends to society and family) then the focus shifts to this population which
embraces the factors that govern popular culture – the mass audience. Who is this mass audience
and what do they want to watch? What are the other factors that govern what they want to watch?
The next chapter explores the composition of this audience itself.
 Chapter 5: Elements that Encompass the Film Viewing Audience
- The Film, Audience and Film, Film and Other Media
The Film
The Film itself is one of the first elements that encompass the film viewing experience. What kind of
film is a blockbuster film and what kind of film gets the mass approval? Before commenting on the
nature of the roles given to women in blockbuster films it's important to define what makes a film a
blockbuster hit. Knowing this is important because in my opinion this underlines the reason why
women are given the kind of roles they are in "blockbuster" films- mostly stereotypical and
conventional. A movie is declared a blockbuster hit only if it garners a profit for both- the producer
as well as the distributors. For the film to make money for its distributors it has to be a smash hit not
only in the metro and mini metros in India but it also has to be a big hit in the smaller towns and
rural pockets of the country. Audience and Film Psyche of the audience Now that a blockbuster has
been defined, it is important to understand the audience who watches films in theatres and decides
whether the film is a hit or a flop. Who is this audience and what is their psyche People inhabiting
these small towns and villages are generally traditional as well as conventional? The society in which
they live has very set ideas about women and unless these ideas are replicated on screen, people,
including the female audience can't relate to the heroines in films. For these people, a woman's
world is restricted to her parents before marriage and after that it's her husband and her children,
sometimes even her in-laws which rule her life. A woman's role in a man's life is romanticized and
she's seen as faithful, god-fearing and utterly devoted to her family. There is no end to the sacrifices
a woman will make for the sake of her husband and her children. This idea is so in-built and idolized
by people that this is what a girl is conditioned to do while she's growing up. She's taught to think
only about her home and anything beyond that is for the man to do. It is this population which is a
majority in India and these people are the ones who make a film a hit film- not the urban population.
Film makers therefore safely make a film to appeal to this kind of an audience. So it's always the
hero or the main male protagonist who carries the entire film on his shoulder while the actresses are
present only for a relief This is the audience and this is their psyche and directors try to cater to this
psyche. The interview excerpts clearly help to understand the male dominated, hero centric,
patriarchal, psyche of the audience.
The film viewing experience of the audience
The whole gamut of the film viewing experience in India is very different from the West. Film
viewing in India is not about going out on a date privately, or enjoying a few hours of solitude or
losing oneself to the fantastic happenings on-screen. While it does have components of all those
experiences, it is primarily a mass experience, a large group experience, a family experience, a very
shared few hours as opposed to an isolated few hours. In those few hours, everybody in the family,
ranging from the grandfather to the adolescent child need to be entertained, engaged and free of
embarrassments because everyone attends the film together. Pendakur (2003), terms film viewing a
social act, and says that more often than not, families with almost three generations watch films
together in the theatres. At times children and parents watch films together. A wide range of age
groups watch films together in a theatre. There are no specific age regulations like in the US, as to
who can or cannot watch a film. It is left entirely to parent discretion. Although there is a rating
system prescribed by the Censor Board for Films, the final decision is left to the parent. If an
adolescent, 13 years of age, ends up in a film which is meant for adults, there is no one to really
restrain that except the family, which in many cases will take the child with them to watch the film
anyway According to the Censor Board for Film Certification in India, films are rated “A” which
means adult viewing, A/U which means adult and unrestricted viewing based on parental guidance
and “U” which is unrestricted viewing. The rating in American terms is explained:
U -- Unrestricted Public Exhibition: This rating is given to films suitable for 'family viewing'. A movie
with 'U' rating contains no or mild violence and sensuality. This would be similar to the G rating of
the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).
A/U -- Unrestricted Public Exhibition but with parental guidance for children below 12 years. This
rating is similar to the PG-13 of the MPAA.
A -- Films are meant for Adult audience above 18 years only. This rating is similar to R of the MPAA.
While these are the ratings, it is not necessary that every film with small amounts of sensuality or
vulgarity should be given the adult rating. It turns out that when directors want to make blockbuster
films, they want younger people to be able to view them as well. Since an entire family, across three
generations becomes the audience for popular film, it is perhaps 58 conditioned in the minds of
directors and screenwriters to conform to all of their expectations, and conforming means
portraying women as cultural stereotypes, acceptable to this wide ranged audience of varying age
groups. Such cultural stereotypes can have non-stereotype moments on screen, but these moments
have to be justified eventually, as either being wrong or brash of the woman, or as being her fantasy,
or as something she would do only because she does not yet have a man in her life. Once the man in
her life arrives, many a time the woman goes back to being the very homely, socially acceptable
wife, or mother or sister on screen.
The fantasy element for the audience
Justified objectification of women is important because objectification itself is a male fantasy of the
woman being both the Madonna and in a justified manner the stripper and the sexy girl as well.
Since the film viewing audience and the film making audience are primarily male this fantasy must
be catered to and yet be family and kid-friendly since a wide ranged age group is the audience for
almost every film made in India. The real man (who actually cannot fight away ten other men and
still be unscathed), or the real woman (who is not always the young and sexually appealing
character; real women are middle aged, elderly, not always objects of desire, not just ready to dance
and sing at the first given chance, they are simply normal – neither the Madonna nor the whore), are
not characters the real people want to see. They do not want to see themselves onscreen, however
easy it may be to relate to those very real characters. They want to see unbelievable, unrealistic
projections of themselves, fantastic heroes who conform to the real system of beliefs and values,
but can achieve more than the real man, can be more than the ordinary man. This is the sense of
fantasy cinema has to cater to so that it can consistently appeal to the mass audience, in rural and
urban areas. It has to be extraordinary but it must conform to the ordinary value system. In an
interview to Simons (2001), Bhawna Somaya, editor of G Magazine (a magazine for movie buffs),
said, Poor India is not interested in pictures about poor Indians living in ramshackle huts. Rural India
definitely is not interested in movies about rural India. And the affluent, educated in urban India, are
looking away from Bombay and Calcutta to New York and London. People don't want to see
problems on the screen. The audience loves this, wants this and then wants more of it. The fantasy
element in Indian cinema is what keeps the audience going to the theaters in the first place. There is
a sense of awe and admiration for these film characters who jump into all kinds of wardrobe and
turn up for one part of the song in Darjeeling and the other part in Switzerland! What the audience
wants is based on the hardships and realities within which they live. They do not want to see these
realities portrayed in their few hours of entertainment also. The directors have an idea of what the
audience wants and projects to them, the unrealistic fantasy that the reel man lives out for them
within the confines of society, which further reinforces their belief that all cinema must be fantastic
and unreal and this is the vicious cycle which the film industry is struggling to break.

Film and other Media - The reinforcement of Social and Cultural Stereotypes
Does the social context of film in India lead to representation of women in stereotypical fashions in
Indian cinema, or is it that the media and media culture increasingly reinforce the stereotypes?
Middle class ideologies of women's roles as wives and mothers provide the underlying basis for most
programs. In a country where 36 percent of the agricultural workforce is female, women continue to
be projected as predominantly non-producers and as playing a limited role outside the home.
Women are basically seen as performing a decorative function and as being marginal to national
growth and development. Their primary place is seen as being within the home and this value is
reflected in the content and setting of most television programs. The plural nature of Indian culture
and the diverse roles that women play is neither acknowledged nor communicated.

Chapter 7: The Controversy over Films with an Alternate Storyline

- Films Fire 1996 and Water 2005, Directed by Deepa Mehta
Two films made by a Canadian Indian film maker, Deepa Mehta had severely violent repercussions
from the people and religious political parties. The films are Fire 1996 and Water 2005. In the special
features section of the film’s (Fire 1996) DVD, journalist Eleanor Hall in her voice over for the
package says, “In a country where going to the movies is an obsession, in a country which churns out
more celluloid fantasies than anywhere in the world, one film is sparking an extraordinary reaction.”
Fire is the story of a family leading a middle class lifestyle. An old and ailing, widow and,
handicapped mother, is taken care of by her son and the son’s wife. The son’s wife has not produced
an offspring. Frustrated with life, the son renounces his marital life and gets on the spiritual path of
celibacy. Although he does not separate from his wife, he refuses to engage in marital or physical
relationship with her. He asks his wife to lie next to him only to test if he can refrain from being
attracted to her. The wife’s desires, and love and affection needs are trapped and she continues her
existence out of no other choice. All that the wife is there for is to take care of household chores and
to care for the ailing mother. The younger son is having an affair with a foreign lady but is forced into
a marriage arranged by the family. The younger brother marries her, but beyond that, he does not
care for her and continues to have an affair with his foreign girlfriend. In a home where both women
do not get any love and affection from their spouses, where the old and ailing mother-in-law is still
the head of the family (despite being handicapped and losing speech), they resort to each other for
love and affection. What starts off as a mutual friendship between the two daughters-in-law, ends
up being a love affair.
When the two sons find out about this they are disgusted. The younger daughter-in-law slaps her
husband and leaves the home. The elder daughter-in-law waits to explain to her husband and
declares her unwillingness to stay with him any longer. As she plans to leave the home, her mother-
in-law spits on her face for the disgraceful deed that the daughter-inlaw has done, by sleeping with
the other lady of the house. By accident, a fire starts in the kitchen. The husband lifts his mother and
leaves his wife without rescuing her, almost as if she deserved to be burnt. Finally she escapes on
her own. The film ends with both women finding each other as they had planned to. In Indian
cinema, this is one of the most revolutionary and unique roles played by women. It created a
complete public outrage, fuelled by politics and religious fanatics. Cinema houses were broken
down, the religious political party in the city of Mumbai, the Shiv Sena, appointed people (men and
women), to protest and create damage to property. The director, Deepa Mehta, in an interview in
the film’s DVD, says, ““I think what I remember was the viciousness in the expression of the women
who were tearing up the posters. And it felt like such a desecration.” The two lead women
characters were named Sita and Radha, who as explained before, are important mythological
characters with certain traits and characteristics which were completely violated by the roles given
to the lead women in the film. The fact that these names were used for two lesbian characters
angered religious groups. They questioned why Hindu names which carried religious significance had
to be used in the film to portray the very anti-Hindu sexual orientation of lesbianism! Indian society
especially religious fanatics were offended by the idea of lesbianism. Mehta was shocked by the
violent repercussions and responded to them, It is amazing that a film which explores choices,
desires, and the psyche of people who are victims of people who are victims of tradition, would
cause such uproar… It was not the lesbian relationship that so offended middle aged Indian men,
(surprisingly younger and older men are ardent advocates of Fire), it was the fear that Fire might
shift the status quo of husbands and women might just question their insignificant role in marital
relationships that lean very heavily in favor of husbands.
Fire 1996, with its different outlook and storyline, got sidelined as an art film and never made it to
the commercial arena. Political and religious propaganda, inclining towards the patriarchal power
structure, changed the course of this film’s life span. It was banned, and wherever it was screened
there was controversy surrounding it. The film was not sexually explicit, because had it been like that
it would not have cleared the censor board norms and regulations. The only problem with it was that
it was about two women who made their choice which happened to be lesbianism. This is a classic
example in India, of Antonio Gramsci’s concept of hegemony. The hegemonic patriarchal ideology
and societal framework is a reality in India. This reality possibly transfers itself on to screen and is
reflected in the audience’s reactions to a film made on a subject that questions the existing power
structure or portrays the power structure in bad light. According to Gramsci (1998), the dominant or
hegemonic ideology is so convenient for its perpetrators that it is enforced and upheld until it
becomes the most popularly reigning common sense ideology of the day, followed, imbibed and
internalized by all, even those that it does not really benefit. This common sense ideology is the
prevailing and dominant ideology and is so internalized, that even those who do not benefit by it
think nothing of it and conform to it instead of opposing it, thereby maintaining the status quo. This
explains why many women opposed the films, Fire 1996, despite the fact that it portrayed women as
independent and free to make a choice of their own. The stereotyped, patriarchal projection and
treatment of women characters has become the reigning narrative pattern of the day; it is so
internalized that no one, not even the female actresses, realize that there seems to be a dominant
narrative pattern in cinema. The female audience does not see this as an imposition of patriarchy
but simply as an ideology that must be conformed to although it does not really benefit them. The
film Water 2005 is a period film set in pre-independent India of 1938. During this time child marriage
had not yet been completely abolished in India. It was very common for child brides to be married
off to much older men as a settlement of debt, as a riddance to the female child in the family, and as
an effort to be done with the parental responsibility of marrying off a female child. These sources
support the idea that Indian commercial cinema resorts to stereotyping women’s roles and restrains
the storyline within the confines of society for a variety of reasons, ranging from social, cultural,
political and religious propaganda, to the economy of filmmaking, which leads to churning out
blockbuster hits with a monotonous and repetitive formula. This formula unfortuantely provides
very few options for alternative and substantial roles for women in cinema. This chapter is followed
by a discussion topic for the paper.

Chapter 10: Conclusion

This paper can be criticized on a few counts. Firstly, there could have been other approaches to
studying this subject. This paper does not have a quantitative approach except for the pilot study,
and is based in qualitative variables. Secondly, there are many ways to pick and choose from Indian
cinema in order to analyse the roles given to women in cinema. Using the terms commercial and
blockbuster have led to the choosing of films from the box office lists alone. Perhaps categorizing
films as films that have won film fare awards, or films directed by women directors, or alternate
films directed by male directors, etc. might have led to different conclusions. This thesis looks only at
commercial blockbuster Indian cinema and that might be a limitation. Thirdly, the emphasis in this
paper on the films Fire 1996 and Water 2005, made by Canadian Indian film maker, Deepa Mehta,
might raise the question as to why other films made on women centric subjects by Indian male and
female film makers were not mentioned or analysed. It is true that Indian film makers, including
directors, Madhur Bhandarkar and Raj Kumar Santoshi have made films on women centric issues and
subjects, giving their female leads the role of the protagonist. Some of the films including,
Bhandarkar’s Chandi Bar 2001, and Santoshi’s Damini 1993 and Lajja 2001, etc. feature women in
unconventional roles addressing subjects pertaining to women and their emotions. In these films
women have been lead characters and have played very substantial and defining roles. However,
while these films were recognized at the national level and were awarded, none of these films were
on the blockbuster list. But it would certainly help to take these films into consideration in the
context of the subject of this thesis. Fourthly, while Indian society, culture and religious influences
have been touched upon, the politics of the country has not been detailed. Since India had a woman
Prime Minister, Ms. Indira Gandhi, 1966-1975 (two terms), 1975-1977 (emergency rule), and 1980-
1984, it might be interesting to look specifically at films made during that era to see if women’s roles
underwent change because a woman was leading the nation. In general, how politics influences the
cinematic climate of India, particularly with reference to women in Indian cinema would be an
interesting subject of discussion to pursue. In conclusion, this thesis has found evidence in various
forms, enough to say that women in Indian cinema have stereotyped roles. While studies can argue,
and find support for statements and hypotheses, ultimately, change by itself has to come from every
individual working for the film industry. Whether the industry really wants this change or not is
definitely not territory that this paper is qualified to comment on. But the fact that more cinema
should focus on women in a variety of interesting and more challenging roles, apart from women
being pure eye candy is a statement that cannot be disputed too much. There definitely has to be
more in it for women than just acting as the hero’s love interest with a few song and dance
sequences. With more women finding their way into the field of films as crew members, writers,
technicians, etc. it is more than likely that approaches to story-telling might have women playing
more substantial roles, independent of the male lead. Also, thinking of the audience as an intelligent
mass might lead to better films, cultivating in the audience, the need for different storylines. More
often than not, even such papers are simply considered a feminist attempt to criticize the healthy
film industry. Since the paper goes into details about the patriarchal 84 power structure in society
and how this encourages the male fantasy and does not allow for a substantial female point of view,
this will be greatly debated by many in the industry and many outsides of it. The paper itself is an
argument against this subconsciously prevailing dominant narrative pattern. If only directors and
story writers could think of films from the point of view of women a little more frequently than they
do right now, it might break the vicious cycle of stereotyping and monotony that Indian commercial
cinema is mitted in. Over time this might condition masses to expect different story lines and
encourage directors to conceive newer stories, improving the overall quality of story- telling. Cinema
is a highly impressionistic medium and it is important for this medium to be an instrument that
enables people to think differently and empathize with alternative perceptions of reality.

References
Acitelli, L. (2010, Dec 2nd). Cultural Stereotypes. (S. Nandakumar, Interviewer) Bazin. Andre & Gray,
H. (1960). Ontology of the photographic image. Film Quarterly, 13(4), 4-9. Bhandarkar, M. (Director).
(2001). Chandni Bar [Motion Picture]. Bhandarkar, M. (Director). (2005). Page 3 [Motion Picture].
Bharjatya, S. (Director). (1995). Hum Aapke Hain Kaun [Motion Picture]. Bhatt, M. (Director). (1982).
Arth [Motion Picture]. Bingham, D. (1999). I do want to live: Female voices, male discourse, and
Hollywood Biopics. Cinema Journal, 3(38), 3-26. Boxofficeindia.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from
www.boxofficeindia.com Butalia, U. (1984). Women in Indian Cinema. Feminist Review(17), 108-110.
Chakravarty. S, S. (1989). National Identity and the realist aesthetic: Indian cinema of the fifties.
Quarterly Review of film and video(11), 31-48. Chandra, N. (Director). (1988). Tezaab [Motion
Picture]. Chopra, A. (Director). (1995). Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jaayenge [Motion Picture]. Das, J. (2007,
July 13). A woman who was much ahead of the conventional norms of the society. News India -
Times, 16. David, D. (1981). From virgin to dynamo: The amoral women in European Cinema. Cinema
Journal, 21(1), 31-58. Dwyer, R. (2005). 100 Bollywood Films. London: British Film Institue. Foss, S.
W. (2005). Theories of Human Communication. Belmont: HollyJ.Allen. Ganti, T. (2004). Bollywood:
Guidebook to popular Hindi Cinema. London, New York: Routeledge. Ghai, S. (Director). (1993).
Khalnaayak [Motion Picture]. Government of India, M. o. (2001). Retrieved from censusindia.gov.in:
http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/Census_Data_Online/Language/gen_not e.htm
Gramsci, A. (1988). Gramsci's prison letters=Lettere dal carcere : a selection translated and
introduced by Hamish Henderson. London: Zwan in association with the Edinburgh Review. Hardy, J.
(2002). Bollywood Boy. London: John Murray. Haun, M. J. (2010). Communication Theory and
Concepts. Houston: The McGraw Hill Companies, Inc. Hussain, N. (Director). (1971). Caravan [Motion
Picture]. Jha, P. (Producer), & Jha, P. (Director). (2010). Rajneeti [Motion Picture]. India: Prakash Jha
Productions. K.Asif (Director). (1960). Mughal-e-Azam [Motion Picture]. Kapoor, R. (Director). (1978).
Satyam Shivam Sundaram [Motion Picture]. Khan, M. (Director). (1957). Mother India [Motion
Picture]. Kindem, G. (Ed.). (2000). The International Movie Industry. Carbondale, Illinois: Southern
Illinois University Press. Kumar, M. (Director). (1981). Kranti [Motion Picture]. Lakshmi, V. (1999, Feb
5). How women are still stereotyped in Hindi Cinema. India Abroad.