Moti Struggles Even After Silver Jubilee

At UoH, there is no dearth of committees that students have at their disposal. However, some others, who toil it out on campus so that students have a comfortable life, are often at a loss.

One case in point is Mr. Motilal Chaudhary, who runs the cycle shop in UoH from 1984 – much before many of the students who study here were born. He and his wife came here bag and baggage from Uttar Pradesh and later raised their four children here.

Currently, Moti does not have a place to lock up the work-impending cycles when he leaves for his home at Gopanpally. With cycle thefts rampant on campus, Moti, who leads a hand to mouth sustenance, bears the brunt as students ask for a new cycle instead of the lost ones.

“The room behind our shop is locked up and full of useless remnants of construction works that go on. We requested the Estate Department multiple times to let us pay a rent and use it; but in vain,” he laments.

One fine morning this September, he got another shocking surprise. He found that all the cycles parked outside his shop were thrown into the bushes behind. He is clueless to this day about who would have done something so ruthless. “If it happens again, I will report it. I pay a rent for this place; even I need security,” he says.

But what would happen if he reports the incident? Speaking to UoH Dispatch, Deputy Registrar (GAD) Mr. Raseel Ahluwalia said that the Campus Amenities Committee (CAC) looks into the requirement and approval of vendors on campus. This body, currently chaired by Prof. G Uma Maheshwara Rao (Centre for Applied Linguistics and Translation Studies), has representation from faculty, students and the administration. However, there is no separate redressal mechanism for the vendors as such. “They can always come to the CAC if there is any problem,” he asserted.

Sheela Devi, Motilal’ss wife and ‘Bread Bajji Aunty’ for students, says it is not as simple as it sounds – “I have given many applications and attended meetings too with the CAC. Apart from hollow promises, nothing is delivered.” She analyses that the administration knows that they will continue even without the facilities. Since they are concerned about the students, they have not resorted to extreme measures like abruptly closing down the shop until now.

On top of not facilitating their business, the administration sometimes creates problems as well. In spite of paying electricity bills promptly, Sheela’s connection in the canteen near F Hostel was cut off citing a reason that ‘there is no requirement.’ Her customers have to now drink their tea in darkness after dusk. “There is clear partiality for some vendors while some like us are pushed around. The dhobi stationed near us pays no rent – yet she gets a room, electricity and water. We are ready to pay and still are not granted even the basic facilities,” she says.

“We have no direct say in how the CAC functions. It is an autonomous body. It is completely up to them as to which vendor should be on campus and what facilities they should get,” Estate Section Officer Mr. S Vijayakumar commented.

However, he also said that if students feel strongly that a particular vendor needs to be given more facilities or permission to diversify the business, they can file a request with the Estate Department in the Admin block. This adds value to the vendor’s case.

Sheela and Moti also concludes saying that a little bit of initiative from the Students Union can help them a lot. Of course, they know such complaining does not help much. They have to work against all odds to send kids to school and feed them.

Let us do the least we can for the family that keeps our lives running with functional bicycles and tasty bread bajjis – stand and speak for them!

Individual Rights, Cultural Terrorism And Media Ethics - The Mangalore Question

India with its ‘post-colonial’ tag and the baggage that comes along with it has never had it easy. As a country, we have had to fight the moral dilemma of choosing between an indigenous culture that embodies multiple facets and a remnant western culture still being infused through what is called ‘cultural imperialism.’ We never got rid of the obsession with anything remotely connected with the West; not once during the sixty two years of independence. At the same time, we cannot let go what we boast about as Indian culture. It is a funny case of confusion and identity crisis.

This dichotomy often manifests in many forms in our day-to-day life which we hardly notice. But when some events are re-presented as larger than life through our mainstream media, they generate discussion and debate.

The whole of India watched in horror when news channels across the country (English and regional) aired the scenes of violence from a pub in Mangalore. Young men and women who came to chill out were being beaten up by the activists of an outfit called Sri Rama Sena for contaminating the Indian culture by drinking and smoking. The incident attracted supreme media attention and the focus was women’s rights to socialise freely. Women’s organisations across the country took up the issue and condemned it on the same grounds. One lady formed ‘a consortium of liberal, pub-going women’ on the Internet inviting women to join her cause to send ‘pink chaddies’ to the Sri Rama Sena head Pramod Muthalik on Valentines’ Day and protest against the Mangalore incident.

The politics of power

It is impossible to miss where this drama was staged – in Karnataka, a BJP ruled state. The BJP, ever torn between its love for Hindu culture and its desire for a modern image, was embarrassed. With the BJP in power in Karnataka, Muthalik knew the publicity value of his show. Had he enacted his theatre elsewhere, like the Shiv Sena which raided pubs years ago in Mumbai and Pune under the ‘secular’ Congress rule, it would have been far less noisy.

With just one mad act, Muthalik turned many, including a minister at the Centre, into full-scale lunatics. It would be irrelevant to ask if Renuka Chowdhury would have supported a ‘pub bharo andolan’ to take on Muthalik, had this happened in a Congress ruled state. The Union Minister for Women and Child Development, who has never ever uttered a word on the continuing rapes and paedophile crimes in UPA -ruled states, has got agitated and warned the Karnataka government.

The rights of individuals

The most important outcry post-Mangalore is against ‘moral policing.’ Young men and women do not want anybody to dictate to them what they should do and what they should not. Forget young men and women, no adult with a thinking mind would want ultimatums on what he/she should do for the weekend. This right to freedom of thought and expression is a constitutional right. Some people say that society is more important than an individual. Well, easier said than done because society comprises of individuals. No society constituting repressed individuals has ever had ‘order’ that these people envisage.

However, it is necessary that we look at the other side of the coin as well. There is an observation that connects individual right claim and the present economic crisis. It says that the current Indian discourse on individual and human rights apes the West, and many in the West now seem to realise that continuously undermining the moral and social order has led to the present economic crisis.

In the United States, the contract-based model undermined families and led to low or no household savings, high personal debt, credit card based living, outsourcing of household functions, and the like. The erosion in relation-based lifestyle soon imposed a huge social security burden on the state because the family mechanism that supported the unemployed, infirm and the aged became dysfunctional forcing the state to step in to aid them.

Apparently, all individual- centric economies are deep in debt; but family-oriented nations like Japan, China, India and generally Asian nations, account for over three-fourths of global savings. This idea that unbridled human rights and unrestrained personal freedom have led to social and cultural degeneration, and that it is possibly the cause of the present economic crisis is extremely interesting.

Terrorism in the name of culture

Most hooligans, who justify the violation of human right of freedom of choice, do so, on the basis of culture. It is depressing that these ruffians operate in the name of Rama and Shiva causing disrepute to genuine Hindu organisations and more importantly, Hinduism.

Here are some arguments that appeared in reports related to the incident:

‘To drink alcohol or indulge in carnal pleasure is not sin, but its abstinence bring great rewards says our Dharmasastras. [Manu Smriti 5.56]’

‘Renunciation is the national ideal of India, ratified Swami Vivekananda.’

The custodians of the so-called Indian culture have taken it upon themselves to uphold these thoughts and indulge in violence to avoid cultural erosion. Whether Indian culture tells one to kill lives and break bones is doubtful. It is also strange how other factors that go into this ‘erosion’ are not ever considered. India, as an economy, liberalised itself in the last decade of the twentieth century opening floodgates of opportunities for the West and their culture to pour in. McDonaldisation, Cocacolanisation or whatever ‘isations’ followed. All of these were acceptable because there was huge money involved. Many cultural custodians benefited from them. When there is no shame in accepting an English education system and multinational corporations, why ridicule the individual choices which form just a subset of many governmental choices and have been deemed legitimate by the existing legal system?

Also, in the Indian tradition, women have been overwhelmingly burdened with the duty of being the embodiment of culture that needs to be preserved. It is extremely anachronistic in this age of equal opportunities.

The question of media ethics

The argument about media’s irresponsibility in dealing with this issue stems mainly from the fact that this was a staged act. Media personnel were at the venue, much before the unfortunate incident happened. It was almost a ‘Lights, camera, action’ episode. It is disturbing that not one of them chose to inform the Police about this grave law and order situation. Had they done that, the chaos that occurred could have been averted, of course at the cost of ‘a colourful scoop of violence against youth.’

Another aspect worth noticing is that the attack that happened against a group of young women and men swiftly transformed into one against women only in the subsequent media reports. Everybody took up the cause of women’s rights raising questions about their individual right to freedom. It is dubious how the men in the picture faded away. Was it done because talking about violence against women is fashionable; or because that is what the violent outfit targeted anyway – just that men came in the way?

If the latter option is the answer, we have a serious problem at hand. Even while condemning what happened, media is abetting such insane organisations’ cause of propagating the argument that the baggage of morality has to be borne only by women. The men of our country have been visiting bars regularly all through the history of our country. That never has been a problem. However, when women started going to places of socialisation openly, probably in the last two decades, there is hue and cry over it. Some say that ‘women have the additionally responsibility endowed by nature to usher in new life into this world. Drinking and smoking are unhealthy habits for women as they would not be able to perform this task ably without a healthy body.’ It sounds as if healthy men are not required for reproduction. The institutionalisation of such biased ideologies will lead to permanent damages from which recuperation might not be possible. Media should be the last agency to let that happen, let alone be a part in the heinous process.

Next is the classic debate of the urban versus the rural; the elite versus the marginalised. Why is it that the urban elites get a lion’s share in airtime as well as newsprint? The Mangalore incident was of importance, and had to be reported. Nobody disagrees with that. But the amount of coverage it got was beyond proportion of its news value. What is news value anyway? Whose value for news are we talking about? There are thousands of women who fight a battle everyday for a dignified living. Who will tell their stories? Who has the time to report and to read these subaltern stories? These are pertinent questions that are lingering around media ethics, unanswered.

Discussions and debates go on. But the reality remains. The Mangalore incident can happen again in our country; probably in another location, to different people. But it can happen. Our mainstream media will still act like hawks hovering for a piece of meat. Let us try and remember that a lesson not learnt in time, is a lesson lost forever. Before it is too late, we should realise our strengths and weaknesses as a culture and reach a consensus on what is the right path for us. Otherwise, the identity of a confused caricature will get jinxed and get stuck to us.

Women’s Right To Freedom Of Expression - The Khushboo Question

Right to freedom of expression is a constitutional right guaranteed to every citizen of India. However, it is doubtful if this is understood in its full capacity by all sections of our society. Also, if gender plays a role when it comes to the luxury of exercising this right is worth looking into. Tamil superstar Khushboo underwent quite some trouble in 2005 when she decided to exercise her right to freedom of expression on a very sensitive topic – premarital sex. A deeper dive into this chapter will possibly unravel many double standards of the Indian civil society and media.

In October 2005, the respected news magazine India Today published a survey in which a lot of college students confessed to having premarital sex. For its Tamil language edition, India Today asked Khushboo about her reaction to the survey. Khushboo, who lived together with her future husband for two years before marrying him, opined that “pre-marital sex is okay provided safety measures are followed to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.” She also said that “no educated man would expect his wife to be a virgin at the time of wedding.”

One would think that the comments were innocuous enough, particularly when juxtaposed against the survey which would have shattered the comfortable myths Indians grow up with. One would further think that the advice about safe sex is relevant in the context that India has one of the fastest- growing HIV patient populations in the world, with Tamil Nadu leading the way. In fact, the first AIDS patient in India was identified in Tamil Nadu.

The initial reactions to Khushboo’s remarks did not give a clue about what was to follow. Sun TV carried a report on her remarks and the news of a small demonstration against her for having maligned Tamil women. The demonstration apparently also demanded an unconditional apology to all Tamil women.

But soon, the protests snowballed into something wholly different. Her remarks unleashed a veritable storm, with the Dalit Panthers of India (DPI) and the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) orchestrating a campaign against her, which comprised filing false cases in courts throughout Tamil Nadu, burning her effigies, and a demand that she should leave the state and return to Maharashtra. Some of them went on to allege that Khushboo made the remarks on pre-marital sex to justify her own life's experiences and that she had no right to talk of the chastity of Tamil women. Moral policing moulded itself in various forms and came out as statements like ‘it is not correct to advocate free sex,’ ‘marriages are based purely on trust,’ ‘it is important to protect the institution of marriage,’ and the like. Media – both national and local- was crammed with Khushboo and her remarks.

It is interesting that the cases filed against Khushboo were all under criminal law. In the US, a private citizen can only file a civil case against an individual. He could prefer a criminal complaint against another person, but the district attorney’s office will have to decide if there is a prima facie case and launch criminal proceedings. Here, every Tom, Dick and Harry was filing criminal complaints. A total of twenty eight complaints were filed in various district courts nearly simultaneously. Judges, who have no hesitation in postponing even murder cases against politically-connected persons, responded with unusual alacrity, issuing summons. At least in a few instances, these summons conflicted with each other, requiring Khushboo’s appearance hundreds of miles away on the same day.

Khushboo tearfully apologized on Television for having hurt the sentiments of her people. Though the demand for apology was met with this, the lawsuits proceeded.

The politics involved in the whole issue cannot be missed. The actress had earlier demanded an apology from a film director Thankar Bachchan, for his remark that “actresses who act for money are like prostitutes.” Many conventional political parties (friends of the director as well) could not tolerate the audacity of a woman to make such ‘noise.’ Groups which waited for a chance to even out scores used this situation heavily.

A few enlightened citizens like Suhasini (film actor) came to Khushboo’s rescue raising the legitimate issue of freedom of expression. Not so surprisingly, she also faced vehement criticism for ‘bringing shame to Tamil people.’ Fortunately, there were some others also who argued that they will defend Khushboo’s right to speak her mind even though they did not agree with her opinion. The leader of the Dalit Panthers found himself isolated when he appeared on NDTV and claimed that the protesters did not act at his or his party’s instigation.

However, protests virtually held Khushboo hostage for a month at her home in Chennai. The groups that politicized the issue went on organizing protests and throwing footwear and eggs even when she tried to appear before the Magistrate. To add to the confusion, at least four criminal complaints were filed against India Today for publishing the sex survey and the starlet’s remarks.

Here, we see a clear case of intimidation and trying to deny freedom of speech which is guaranteed by our constitution. It is worth noting that political groups protest only when women threaten what they imagine to be sexual decorum. If it were a man who had said this, the media would have had a field day covering major sections of the society and asking every other person his opinion about Indian women and their rights over their bodies! A woman making a comment on a subject is far more than a taboo.

A pertinent question here is what the masses (especially women) would do if they have to give a vent to their views. In light of Khushboo’s experience, the safest option would probably be to crib about it in the safety of one’s living room, have a happy dinner, and sleep!

Indian civil society should understand that women of this century are more matured and sure about themselves, their sexuality than their counterparts from 1990s. It is high time that the Indian man stood up and tried to accept the fact that women and sexuality have come of age and pre-marital sex might be a reality, more than they think of it as a westernized concept.

As a nation, we should stop being cowards. We should condemn our famous mentality to hide away from things that we feel are against the ‘traditional picture.’ Why the double standards? Many television serials show men having a wife and multiple mistresses. Why don't protestors target such themes? There is never protest against such themes because the one indulging in free sex is a man. Nobody agitates against the filthy language, the sexual innuendos and double meaning in the lyrics used in movies. Khushboo was the chosen one, undoubtedly because she was a soft target.

Politicians and the beholders of the destiny of the nation think that 33% reservation for women in the Parliament is enough to make the fairer sex feel safe. But don’t they forget that the constitution has given the power of free speech to all the citizens of the nation. This right should endow men and women alike the courage to say that, “hey, I don’t think I agree to being nudged when I am walking on the roads” or talk freely about their views on pre-marital sex, religion, contraceptives and much more. The day has to come when freedom of speech is not just a clause in the constitution.

It is regrettable that media all over India chose to sensationalise the Khushboo issue rather than point out the politically motivated tactics of the self-styled champions of Tamil culture. Some media took it out of context and irresponsibly ran stories that were provocative and untrue. The very first report that instigated the whole issue came up on Sun TV expressing ‘shock’ over Khushboo’s remarks. It was a well strategised blow to undermine her popularity through a gameshow ‘Jackpot’ that airs on Jaya TV, archrival of Sun TV. Such cheap and irresponsible actions by some sections of the media who defend their actions as ‘lost in translation!’ cannot be forgiven. There should be a minimum level of ethics in media etiquette.

If a debate is not generated to discuss such issues, we stand a high risk of disintegrating our democracy in the coming years. A country where fifty percent of the population does not have a voice in the mainstream media or public domain as a whole, cannot hope to achieve anything substantial.

The Khushboo story came to a close only when The Supreme Court suspended trial in as many as 23 criminal cases against her. A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice M.K. Sharma stayed the trial and issued notices against pro-Tamil outfits for outraging public morality against her.

It is depressing that one has to move the High Court or the Supreme Court to obtain justice. One can be subjected to harassment through criminal complaints that can only be fought through expenditure of considerable amounts of money and time. What we need immediately is a reform of the criminal law so that free speech – for men and women - is not subject to prosecution even by the state let alone by individuals.

Coupled with that, we also need to inculcate a strong sense of responsibility and accountability in our media to ensure that they facilitate democratic processes and not impede them. Ethics should not be limited to speeches; let us put some into practice as well.

Sharira: Chandralekha’s explorations with dance

Dance is undeniably one of the finest art forms that modern world knows about. Chandralekha, one of the greatest exponents of dance India has ever seen took it to new levels of creativity and discovery before she passed away last year. ‘Sharira: Chandralekha’s explorations with dance’ is a first person account of how this talented woman conceptualises dance as a spiritual revelation rather than just an art form.

Technically speaking, this documentary directed by Ein Lal is a crude work shot impromptu at various occasions and compiled later. However, its highly effective content that is executed mainly through narratives of Chandralekha and demonstrations by her students makes it work.

Liberation of body through dance is the central theme of her work ‘Sharira’ that is demonstrated in this film. Body is always looked at as the valley of sins where all problems originate. Thanks to its innate connection with sexuality, body is wronged all the time. Chandralekha comes up with a masterpiece that throws these stereotypes into air and creates a new world of a free body along with a free soul that is not embarrassed by its sexuality. The moves are bold and graphical and borrow heavily from Yoga. Put together, those moves depict the rhythm of the body that drives people ahead.

Chandralekha asks some pertinent questions like “where does the body begin and end?” and “how do two dancers come together?” Her answers lie in her work Sharira that embodies freedom in every sense of the word.

Fearless: The Hunterwali story

Some women stick to stereotypes. Some women put great effort to change them. Fearless Nadia undoubtedly falls into the second category. The dramatic story of this bold and beautiful woman told with great authenticity and sombreness is Fearless: The Hunterwali story.

Filmed by Roy Vinci Wadia, Nadia’s great nephew, this documentary is a sincere attempt to document a life that was pioneering in many a way in the history of Indian cinema. It features the interviews of the heroine herself and several other eminent film personalities apart from some rare footage of her otherwise unavailable films.

Born Australian as Mary Ann Evans, Nadia was introduced to the Hindi film industry by JBH Wadia and his brother Homi Wadia (owners of the Wadia Movietone). She had a sprawling career spread over 30 years with a pre-dominant image of the gutsy and stylish fighting diva. Her character Hunterwali, the whip-weilding woman, in a movie with the same name made her a huge hit with the masses. The nick name Hunterwali stuck to her ever since.

Being a foreigner definitely helped her as it was more convenient for the conventional Indians to believe that a blonde lady is doing the unbelievably risky stunts as against an Indian woman doing the same. However, we should remember that Nadia made waves during a time when cinema itself was in a nascent stage, that too in a patriarchal country like India. If not for this convincing story by Roy Vinci Wadia, generations down the decades would possibly never believe that such a courageous woman once lived changing the equations of cinema and its audience.

The Women Of Hindi Cinema

Hindi cinema has never been the best place for women to be in. At least, the insiders of the industry and its audience have continued to believe so through the 95 years of this business. A surplus of television channels and print media options in this century opened more avenues for us to become familiar with this representation of the chauvinism of our cultural behemoth – the movie industry. It has been the male-dominated industry that it is without much dissent barring some singular activist voices.

But did that stop the women of this country from dreaming big? A quick recollection of the last eight years of the new millennium seems to reveal a negative reply. A deeper study of women participation in Hindi movie making of the last eight years is thus a necessary and relevant exercise.

The portrayal of women (read the characterization of female actors) in Hindi cinema is not the major concern here. That will remain the puzzle that it is forming nothing but a topic of debate that satisfies the intellects; the primary reason being its dependence on audience-taste rooted in conventions of heroism.

This study intends to look at a more realistic aspect of women in Hindi cinema – their participation in the movie making process. The focus will be on the following elements of creating cinema:

Direction

Screenplay

Editing

Cinematography

The choice of the period of study is justified in that a noticeable stir created by a plurality of women happened post 2000 only. At the same time, the two decades prior to it that gave a good breeding ground for the surge that happened after 2000 are not forgotten. In fact, it is fondly remembered throughout.

CALLING & CREATING THE SHOTS

The directors and writers who made films post 2000, in the order of their debut films, are:

Aparna Sen is the veteran in the women director faction of India. An actress for several years, she broke the myth that actresses lack grey matter, with her directorial debut - 36 Chowringhee Lane (1981). It fetched her the Best Director award at the Indian National Film Awards and the Grand Prix (the Golden Eagle) at the Manila International Film Festival.[2]

 

Her Paromitar Ek Din (2000) was a critical hit and Mr. and Mrs. Iyer (2002) won her a second national award besides the Best Actress trophy for her daughter Konkana Sen Sharma. 15 Park Avenue (2005) is another feather in her cap with The Japanese Wife based on Kunal Basu’s short story waiting to join the list. With a very unique style of film making, she is cherished by critics and audience alike.

Kalpana Lajmi who made a stunning directorial debut with Ek Pal (1986), also co-scripted the movie with Gulzar. Ruddali (1993), Darmiyan (1997), Daman (2001), Kyon? (2003) and Chingaari (2006) followed. Kalpana Lajmi became the only director who helped two protagonists in her films win National Awards; with Dimple Kapadia winning it for Ruddali and Raveena Tandoon for Daman. That speaks volumes about the female flavour and fervour of her movies.

Mira Nair, born in India and based in New York, is a film maker who debuted in 1988 and continues to make crossover films mostly with her own production company Mirabai Films. She debuted with Salaam Bombay! (1988). Post 2000, she made Monsoon Wedding (2001), Hysterical Blindness (2002), 11'9"01 September 11 (Segment - "India") (2002), Vanity Fair (2004), The Namesake (2006), and Migration (2007).

If there is one word that describes Mira’s films, it is reality. The slice of life experience that Monsoon Wedding gave to thousands of Indians made her a household name here.

Deepa Mehta, again, born in India and settled in Canada, is best known for her Elements of Trilogy that is based in India. Fire (1996) which dealt with the shackles of gender and homosexuality, 1947: Earth (1998) which told a story during the Indo-Pak partition and Water (2005) that spoke of the widow life in Banarasi Ashrams are the three films. Her other films include Bollywood / Hollywood (2002), The Republic of Love (2003) and Heaven on Earth (2008).

The boldness of her themes marks her apart from her contemporaries. There is a strong urge in her films not be a part of the status quo created by others.

Tanuja Chandra who started her career with a path-breaking teleserial Zameen Aasmaan is another name worth mentioning. Having scripted a massive hit like Dil To Pagal Hai (1997) from the Yash Raj stable and a critically acclaimed Zakhm (1998) from the Bhatt camp, her transition to wielding the megaphone was just natural. After her first movie Dushman (1998) with Kajol in a double role, Sangharsh (1999), Sur (2002) and Film Star (2005) followed. Except Dushman, none was received at Box Office well. Her last film Zindaggi Rocks (2006) with Sushmita Sen as the protagonist was, again, poorly received.

Nevertheless, her conviction in her kind of cinema seems to be strong as she does not show any signals of digressing from the path of telling the story of women. This is where Tanuja beckons a positive light into the future.

Meghna Gulzar, daughter of Rakhee and Gulzar, made an impressive debut with a female-centric film on surrogate motherhood – Filhaal (2001). She followed it up with a chick flick Just Married (2007) and one short film Pooranmasi in the ten-film compilation Dus Kahaniyaan (2007).

Revathy, a National Award winning actress of multiple Indian languages debuted as a director with Mitr, My Friend (2002). This is one of the most significant movies to be considered in a study like this because Revathy chose to work with an all-women crew, with almost a vengeance. Phir Milenge (2004), her second movie and a star-studded affair, acquired a lot of attention as the first Hindi movie based on AIDS.

She comes across as a passionate filmmaker who creates cinema for a cause. Her high-placed connectivity fetches her stars and gives her films the mileage that they deserve.

Honey Irani, a child artist of yesteryears made her directorial debut with Armaan (2003). The story of doctors bombed at the Box Office. But it does not undermine the fact that she is nothing short of a power woman in the industry, thanks to her prolific screenplay writing career and hi-fi family ties. She has a huge number of acclaimed movies under her belt that will make any man/woman competitor envious. Some of the recent and well known ones are Krrish (2006), Koi.. Mil Gaya (2003), Kya Kehna (2000), Kaho Naa.. Pyaar Hai (2000).

Pooja Bhatt, born with a golden spoon in her mouth, inherited the directors’ cap from her father, Mahesh Bhatt, an established film maker himself. Also an actress of the past known for her bold characters, she carried on the boldness even when she changed her role. Paap (2003), Holiday (2006), Dhokha (2007) – all of them have women adorning bold moves and a lot of oomph. However, an unintentional label of ‘B Grade’ has affected the way her movies are perceived and accepted by our conventional audience.

Parvati Balagopalan made an interesting movie Rules: Pyaar Ka Superhit Formula (2003) with super model Milind Soman and a newcomer Meera Vasudev. Tanuja played a pivotal role in this movie which is ‘female’ in every sense.

Farah Khan, the golden name in the list of the Hindi film directors (not just women), is a veteran choreographer as well. Her directorial debut Main Hoon Na (2004) and her second film Om Shanti Om (2007) were adjudged ‘the biggest grosser’ in both the years.

Her intimate friendship with Shahrukh Khan guarantees her instant access to a whole lot of facilities which any other director in this list cannot dream of. Nevertheless, if not for her sheer talent, vision and experience, two mammoth hits of such stature would not have been possible. Predictably, she became the first ever woman director to be nominated for the Filmfare awards in 2005.

Soni Razdan, a well known face for Indian television viewers, again, from the Mahesh Bhatt clan, debuted with a film Nazar (2005). The movie which featured Meera, an actress from Pakistan, released first on Aaj TV in Pakistan for a change.

Leena Yadav, who penned and directed her debut movie Shabd (2005), could effectively use her cinematographer husband Aseem Bajaj’s film connections to get introduced to the Pritish Nandy production house. The break given to this Guru Dutt fan by Mr. Nandy, however, was proven right when she delivered a technically well made movie.

Kanika Verma, another debutante director who took up a social issue while making her film assisted Hansal Mehta before going solo. Dansh (2005) dealt with Mizoram’s transition from dictatorship to democracy.

Reema Kagti, with a refreshing movie Honeymoon Travels Private Limited (2007), made her debut memorable. Having assisted fine directors like Farhan Akhtar (Dil Chahta Hai and Lakshya), Mira Nair (Vanity Fair) and Ashutosh Gowariker (Lagaan), her film making techniques are contemporary. An inspired writer herself, she scripted this film.

Bhavna Talwar, a journalist-turned-director, made her debut with Dharm (2007). The movie about a Hindu priest based in Banaras was chosen the closing film at the World Cinema Section at the Cannes Film Festival 2007. A court case to fight the selection of Eklavya (2007) as India's official Foreign Language Film submission for the 80th Academy Awards did not help her movie much, thanks to the cobweb of Indian bureaucracy.

Sooni Taraporevala, an established photographer based in India, is best known as Mira Nair’s working mate. She scripted the Oscar nominated Salaam Bombay (1988), Mississippi Masala (1991), The Namesake (2006) - all Mira Nair movies.

Anvita Dutt Guptan, a darling of Yash Raj Films (YRF), has embellished several films in various roles. She scripted Neil ‘N’ Nikki (2005) and penned the dialogues for Bachna Ae Haseeno (2008) and Dostana (2008). She was also one of the lyricists in the above movies besides Tashan (2008) and Heyy Babyy (2007).

Shibani Bhathija, formerly creative head of a prominent television channel, made her writing debut with all grandeur in YRF’s Fanaa (2006). Following it up with Kabhie Alvida Naa Kehnaa (2006) with Dharma Productions is nothing but a dream run for a newcomer and it became possible because of her power list friendships. Her latest release is Kidnap (2008).

Bhavani Iyer, another journalist who stepped into the world of cinema, co-scripted two movies in 2005 - the legendary Black by Sanjay Leela Bhansali, one among the must see 25 Hindi movies of all times and Main Aisa Hi Hoon by Harry Baweja.

Vibha Singh, who scripted Dharm (2007), also donned the role of a dialogue writer in major motion pictures like Parineeta (2005), Chura Liyaa Hai Tumne (2003) and Sur – The Melody of Life (2002).

Rahila Gupta is a freelance journalist and writer who co-scripted Provoked (2007).[14] The movie directed by Jug Mundhra was an adaptation of Circle of Light written by Rahila and Kiranjit Ahluwalia, the real victim portrayed in the story.

Zoya Akhtar is another name that is being looked forward to by the industry. Farhan Akhtar’s sister, Javed Akhtar and Honey Irani’s daughter - she has a lot of lineage to fall back on. Whether she proves her mettle with the audience remains to be seen.

CAPTURING & CUTTING THE SHOTS

Eight years of Hindi cinema and a multitude of directors (and production houses) gave only one female cinematographer the opportunity to capture a movie through her eyes. Revathy paved the way in creating this milestone through her all-women-crew in Mitr My Friend (2002).

The talented woman who was chosen for this prestigious project was Fowzia Fathima. Having trained under ace cinematographer P C Sreeram for years, Mitr was her first independent work. While she did films in other languages after Mitr, another Hindi movie never beckoned her.

The editing table, however, seems to be a brighter picture. Notably, women editors in Hindi cinema are not one-movie wonders. There are established technicians who command equal amount of respect if not more for their professional expertise compared to their men counterparts.

Renu Saluja, the undeniable stalwart in this department should be remembered here. Her glorious stint ended just before the period of this study. However, she is a technician whose work spoke for her and who inspired a whole generation of women editors in the country. A product of FTII, Pune, she won the National Award four times - Parinda (1989), Dharavi (1991), Sardar (1993) and Godmother (1999).

Bela Sehgal, legendary Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s sister and a fine editor, has cut only her brother’s films until now apart from some high profile music videos. Khamoshi (1999), Devdas (2002) and Black (2005) are the films in which she worked with him. She is now working on her directorial debut with Adnan Sami in the lead.

Deepa Bhatia, another prolific woman editor of recent times, debuted with Hazaar Chaurasi ki Maa (1998), a Govind Nihalani film. Her subsequent cuts were for Thakshak (1999), Dev (2004), Maine Gandhi Ko Nahi Maara (2005), Taare Zameen Par (2007) (TZP) and Rock On! (2008). She also contributed to the concept and research for TZP.

Hemanti Sarkar who started her editing career in mainstream cinema with Sur – The Melody of Life (2002) went on to do several other films like Parineeta (2005), Dansh (2005), Strings (2006) and Maati Maay (2006).

Aarti Bajaj Kashyap is another editor who has made her presence felt in mainstream Hindi movies quite successfully. While her debut film Paanch (2003) was not noticed much, the following ones grabbed much attention - Black Friday (2004), Honeymoon Travels Private Limited (2007), No Smoking (2007), Jab We Met (2007), Aamir (2008).

Meghna Ashchit, who started off as an Associate Editor in Krrish (2006), went solo with Krazzy4 (2008), another movie from Rakesh Roshan’s Film Kraft Productions. She is now working on Dilli 6 slated to be released next year.

------------------------------------------------------

Women in the early days of cinema had more opportunities and were more successful at creating films due to the fact that the structure of the industry had not been masculinised yet. Once the industry's economic worth became evident, men assumed positions of power and forced women out of the system.

This history gives us a far better understanding of the present. While we may have seen a ‘fair’ number of names in the section directors and screen-writers, none except Farah Khan, has achieved the type of commercial success that accords power in the industry.

Also, what percentage of the total cult does the list account for? How many of them have a scope of sustainability? In the examples discussed, we see that women from a film family or with industry power pockets face less threat of extinction. The others who work on their own terms and standing find it difficult to continue.

Nevertheless, it is heart-warming to see the considerable increase in the number of female film makers who give it a shot instead of giving up before trying. The fear of sexual harassment, casting couch and potential exploitation is on a decline among girls and their families, thanks to modernity aided by education and awareness. Also, we cannot deny that the industry is more open to the fairer sex in comparison to the last century. Thus, women warming up to the changes and scope of the new century are definitely moving in the right direction.

The aspect that should be discussed the most in such a study is cinematography; due to the sheer lack of a female plurality there. That discussion would be incomplete without a mention of Alexis Krasilovsky. Renowned world over for her astounding work on women cinematographers, she helped establish ‘Behind the Lens: an Association of Professional Camerawomen,’ an organisation that helped members get jobs and mentored them professionally, in 1984. Needless to say, there is no such association in India that protects rights of camera women. Neither does the Indian Society of Cinematographers have a single registered woman member.

It is a matter of surprise to us, however, that Alexis was surprised at the support our film industry extends to women cinematographers in comparison with Hollywood. When Alexis came to India in 2003 to shoot a sequel to her book Women Behind the Camera, her interviewees included Vijayalakshmi in Chennai, who already has 20 feature films to her credit as Director of Photography. But exceptions are not examples. Women technicians in India do not command the respect even remotely close to what their men counterparts enjoy.

Women cinematographers are often perceived as not strong enough to operate heavy cameras. “But they frequently carry babies at least as heavy,’’ Krasilovsky protests.

But editing, as mentioned earlier, is a far more welcoming arena. Women editors are taken seriously in India and we have seen many examples that prove it. Institutions like FTII, Pune produce almost equal number of boy and girl graduates and it is starting to get reflected in the industry as well. The avenues are very bright; in fact, brighter than for their director and writer friends.

All said and done, a few words by Claudia Raschke are relevant to conclude this study.

“When you go to an interview or onto a set, as a woman, you are incompetent until you prove you know your stuff. As a man, you are considered competent until you are proven totally incompetent. We're not given the same chance because we don't have a track record yet."

This quote stands as a testament to the prejudices faced by the women who choose any department of film making as their career. In disguise, it also salutes all those women who make it in tinsel town despite not being ‘given the same chance.’