For quite some time now film scholars have discussed and debated the
relevance and importance of the 'national' cinema vis-a-vis the Western
or more prevalent Hollywood films. They have argued the scope of
cultural specificity in the paradigm of cinema studies and have observed
that within the national cinema as well there are 'centre'-s and
'alternate'-s which means there are ‘national’ vs 'local'. This becomes a
hierarchical trope then starting with the Hollywood - National to the
National - Local duality. However, looking at the context of Indian
cinema this looks an even more complex matrix. The problem is with
numbers - India being the largest cinema producing nation of the world
with her diversities - of language, culture and religion.So, to define a
'national' cinema is indeed a challenge. There is a systematic and
definite ill purpose in identifying Hindi cinema (primarily made out of
Mumbai) as the 'Indian national cinema'. This is where the problems of
perception lie. The South Indian mainstream industry churns comparable
revenue with the Bollywood films yet the tag of 'national cinema' is
bestowed not on them. This in essence reflects the participation of the
different sections of the country in the national politics that is
controlled and masterminded from North India. All these films -
mainstream of the South and the East should rightfully fall under the
'Indian National cinema' along with Bollywood. In addition, there are
parallel walks by many which may constitute the ‘alternate’ one.
The
question of the centre and the fringe becomes irrelevant in the Indian
context since both as a single collective is in the fringe of World
cinema - from the point of view of acceptance and also recognition and
studying. Even with harping on the theory of a common diction of
expression it can be argued that the common diction needs to be as much
ours as borrowed.When the numbers are insignificant then the matters are
different. But in the Indian scene that is not the case. We have a huge
volume of the Hindi commercial films different from that of the Tamil
ones and then the Bengali art-house cinema, the middle-of-the-road Hindi
films or the Independent film-making wave. So to come to an Indian
common diction is difficult to start with. This essentially confuses and
poses a problem in the cultural experience of the viewer (Indian or
from outside) even though there are certain homogeneities which at times
are pointed at by the foreign viewer that we tend to miss and hence
ignore.
The plethora of theories in culture studies have been
dominated and dictated by the aesthetic standards of the affluent West.
Specifically cinema as a medium had treaded different paths in the
Indian context - the mainstream and the 'parallel' often referred as
'art' films. The film critics and the film societies have for long
aligned with the parallel flow since the critic and the maker both are
supposedly 'enlightened' by the Western theories. They have harbored a
casteist philosophy and castigated anything that is ‘popular’ and
commercially successful as being less 'arty'. This only widened the
divide and in a capitalist organization as the state this meant that the
commercial mainstream cinema in India gained prominence over time. The
numbers and the kitty amount are so overwhelming that the International
film festivals have just no other option but to recognize and realize
the market potential of the Indian sub-continent.
Where
does it leave the film appreciation culture in India?Precisely it makes
the arm-chair critic eat out of the commercial film-makers palm.
Rejected by the western bastions of 'art' cinema and have already shut
out the mainstream from the cultural vortex leaves the critic confused
and puzzled. To overcome the slumber what is required is self-belief.
To accept that in reality no love sequence is amplified by hundred
people dancing on the streets. Just the same way as Avaatar is not a worldly reality and neither Speed
and its sequels. For, cinema is nothing but only an illusion of
reality. We need to look back and deep into the cinema of ours - with
pride and reverence. The medium is developed and sharpened by the West
but we use itto tell our story. The Indian film theory should emerge
hence. Even if the 'enlightened' art film can be read as a text for
conventional theory, the mainstream will surely make the theories numb.
For example the primordial focus of classical film theory revolved round
the concepts of 'gaze' and 'spectatorship'. This then gets
contextualized with respect to gender, voyeurism etc. It has to be
understood that the concept of gaze in Indian context is different than
in the Western world where public exposure of the female body (for
instance) happens in a different way than that in rural India, say.
Renowned
film scholar Madhava Prasad argued that the Indian cinema is a product
of a heterogeneous form of manufacture whereas Hollywood cinema is that
of a serial form of manufacture.The 'story' is at the centre of
Hollywood cinema and that being 'realist' (in most cases) the concepts
of audience identification happens. Indian commercial cinema for
instance, taking cue from Prasad is an assembly of dance, song, story,
fight and the star. The success ofthe film depends on multiple 'visual
pleasures' and not one only. This robs the viewer of the classical
'voyeur' gaze as 'his' 'gaze' is constantly subverted and dissected by
these different sub-contexts. Hence, the melodrama as opposed to realism
in Indian cinema lets the viewer to accept it as unreal from the very
beginning and yet there is a wish-fulfillment attached to it. The film
studies institutes unfortunately look down upon the Indian commercial
cinema majorly. What is demanded of them now however is a serious and
conscious effort to free reading (and thereby banishment) of Indian
cinema from Western angle. The scholars and researchers instead can
devote time to come up with an Indian Film theory (and its different
branches) that would place the diverse films this land is endowed with
in proper context.
[Published in The Bengal Post on 01-Jan-2013]
No comments:
Post a Comment