Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Parallels between marriage and citizenship

Despite the many thoughtful critiques of the relationship between family and the state, I have always found it a little surprising that there is very little commentary on the relationship between two strange legal fictions. The first is the idea of the restitution of conjugal rights (RCR), and the other is sedition. The restitution of conjugal rights basically consists of the right of a spouse to demand that his or her- though more often his than her- spouse cohabit with him after she has ‘withdrawn from his society’. Away from the misty world of legal euphemisms, we all know what this means: that you can be forced to sleep with a somewhat less than pleasant person against your wishes. A legal commitment to love in a marriage is a serious thing indeed which only warns us that we must proceed with such a choice very carefully.
But like many marriages, the question of choice is somewhat restricted for many people- as is indeed the case of the choice of loving your country. After all isn’t sedition a crime of passion, and the punishment of an offence of the withdrawal of love for your nation. It is interesting to see that while treason in Sec. 121 of the IPC is about the waging of war against the state, sedition is about a forced love. It is about the creation of ‘disaffection’. As Nivedita Menon points out in her post, Disaffection means “the absence or alienation of affection or goodwill; estrangement”.
A legal commitment to love your nation is also a serious thing indeed, and what then is the punishment of sedition if not, the restitution of the conjugal rights of the state? Posted in Law, Media politics | Tags: Arundhati Roy, sedition, disaffection « Sedition: ‘The highest duty of a citizen’ RESPONSES
This analogy is absolutely brilliant.
Obligatory love and duty, punishment for failure to love – why didn’t I see the endless parallels between marriage and citizenship before? Thanks! By: Nivedita Menon on October 27, 2010 at 9:16 AM Reply

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Humble serenity of pure intellection

This interior cathedral is where the soul finds its rest. Schuon speaks of "the humble serenity of pure intellection, humble because impersonal and serene because conforming to That which is." […] Schuon discusses the various spiritual types, which are classically divided into ruler, priest, sage, warrior, merchant, laborer and outcaste. Each can be sanctified in its own way save for the latter, which can only be saved. 
Consider Schuon's description of the merchant caste, which includes the craftsman and farmer: there is a "love of work well done -- both the result and the performance -- and of wages honestly earned; an emotional accent on the fear of God and on meritorious works conscientiously and piously accomplished."

Please note that he is not being the least bit condescending. Imagine, for example, if American capitalism were dominated by this mentality -- which it actually is, far more than people realize. Indeed, this is why it "works," because of the American "civil religion" so accurately described by de Tocqueville.

My father was of this caste -- a very pure businessman. In this regard, it is impossible for me to imagine him engaging in any kind of unethical or dishonest business dealing, even though he was in no way conventionally religious. Nevertheless, one can see how his work was a kind of karma yoga, since it was always "elevating." And people loved doing business with him for it. Is living the truth not a kind of implicit knowing it? Or is it actually explicit?

Schuon goes on to say that such individuals can appear superficially "horizontal" and conventional, but there is nothing wrong with being conventional in a just and rightly ordered society. Indeed, it can be "a protection against the lack of a sense of proportion for those not sufficiently endowed with discernment."

For example, consider an Obama, who clearly imagines himself to be of the priestly/intellectual caste, but who is so lacking in humility -- not to mention discernment and conformity to the real -- that he falls far lower than any upstanding merchant in the Chamber of Commerce. It is no coincidence that he so contemptuously attacks the latter, just as he belittles all normal Americans and the civil religion that has served us so well. 

Continuing our little discussion of caste and clue, Schuon notes that the priest/sage and knight/warrior share the common capacity "for spontaneously placing oneself above oneself," the former through wisdom and disinterested intelligence, the latter through heroism and self-sacrifice. In both cases, the person simply responds to "the nature of things" in order to provide what is needed in the moment, whether in the field of intellect or of action.

The third caste discussed yesterday -- the merchant, artisan, or craftsman -- may have more of a challenge in this area, in that it is possible for the mercantile mentality to dominate, thus reducing everything to quantity -- to know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

Nevertheless, it shares with the sage and warrior "an inward incentive toward the good," in contrast to the fourthcaste, which "cannot maintain itself in the good except under a pressure coming from outside and above," the reason being that "this human type does not dominate itself and does not like to dominate itself" (Schuon). […]

Only the first caste is truly lacking in "worldliness." The warrior caste obviously must deal with the world -- and mankind -- as it is. But the priestly caste is aware of the distinction between celestial and terrestrial things, and doesn't allow the Is to obscure the Ought.

Note that our secular class of tenured priests also trucks in the Ought, but this Ought is purely terrestrial and marxmade. It involves what Voegelin called the "immamentization of the eschaton." It also must redound to coercion, since it is not a "truth" that lies outside or above man. God vouchsafes his truth and lures men to it. Man can only enforce his.

Extremes meet, so it is quite possible -- especially in our day and age -- for our sages to actually be outcastes, in particular, if they are in contact with no reality higher than themselves. As Schuon explains, the outcaste lacks a homogeneous center, and is "unbalanced" or "mixed" with all sorts of incompatible and contradictory impulses. For example, imagine a university professor who doesn't believe in objective truth. Such a person cannot be helped, and yet, here he is presuming to help others!

Schuon goes on to say that the two higher castes are "noble," in the sense that their spirit is "free," or "'sovereign,' for it is naturally conformed to the universal Law, whether in 'heroic' or 'sacerdotal' mode." A man is noble "to the extent that he carries the Law within himself," but he is ennobled "to the extent that his obedience is perfect," at first "quantitatively" but eventually "qualitatively."

In other words, obedience is gradually interiorized -- or, as the interior is awakened, the obedience becomes spontaneous.

There is also a hidden relationship between the priestly and mercantile, which recalls Somebody's wise crack to the effect that few things make a man more peaceable than when he is occupied at making money.

Think of the natural contemplativity of the artisan or farmer: "It is easy to see the peaceful character of the peasant, the craftsman, the merchant; none of them has any interest in coming to blows, and each of the three functions possesses an aspect that binds or unites human groups rather than placing them in opposition" (ibid). Which is why capitalist countries are more peaceful within and with each other.

The warrior may fall if he forgets his higher purpose and descends into ambition or mere quarrelsomeness; this results from "an intelligence with too little contemplativity" (ibid). In contrast, the merchant can be afflicted by a "contemplativity with too little intelligence," whereas the intelligence of the priestly caste may become "narrow and pedantic," thereby becoming flaccid and ineffectual. In other words, it is possible for the elect to suffer from electile dysfunction.

In the ultimate sense, the priest/sage should either be "without caste" or encompass the qualities of each of them. Think of the heroic martyr-priests, or those who patiently and lovingly (not to say beautifully) transcribed and preserved all those ancient manuscripts prior to the invention of the printing press. 


Mine’s the Meno, and no changing it. […] In fact, “favorite Platonic dialogue” is probably the philosophical equivalent of zodiac signs.
You have the Timaeus people, who are generally either hipster vitalists or colorful antiquarians.
You have plenty of Republic people, and they could be of all different types because there’s so much in it.
You have the Sophist people, who tend to be grave ontologists with beards.
What other types are there?
Symposium people. Right. It may even be my second favorite. I’m a Meno with Symposium rising.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

दोपहर के वक्‍त महिलाओं से बहस करने से बचना चाहिए

दफ्तर हो या घर दोपहर के वक्‍त महिलाओं से बहस करने से बचना चाहिए क्‍योंकि शोधकर्ताओं ने शोध में पाया है कि दोपहर के वक्‍त महिलाओं के मूड में काफी उतार चढ़ाव आता है। दोपहर के वक्‍त पुरुष अगर महिलाओं से बहस करते हैं तो उन्‍हें हार का सामना करना पड़ सकता है। 
वहीं शोध में यह भी कहा गया है कि महिलाओं को पुरुष से कोई काम करवाना हो तो शाम 6 बजे का इंतजार करें। क्‍योंकि इस वक्‍त पुरुष अपने करीबी लोगों की इच्‍छा पूरी करते हैं। इस स्टडी ब्रिटेन के 1000 पुरुषों और महिलाओं पर किया गया है। 
अध्ययन में यह भी कहा गया है कि जब किसी महिला को तनख्वाह में इजाफे या प्रोमोशन की बात अपने बॉस से कहनी हो तो वह दोपहर 1 बजे अपने बॉस से बात करें । ज्‍यादातर बॉस इस वक्त अच्‍छे मूड में रहते हैं। महिलाओं की मुराद पूरी हो सकती है। लेकिन बॉस अगर महिला है तो दोपहर में उससे बात करने की कोशिश न करें। आमतौर पर देखा गया है कि दोपहर एक बजे के बाद का समय ऐसा होता है जब मैनेजर अपने कर्मचारियों की मांग के प्रति बहुत उदार होता है। इच्छा पूरी करने के लिए शाम 6 बजे का इंतजार करें दैनिक भास्कर 

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Brahmin, Muslim, Militant, Migrant, Dalit, & Dance

This book unmasks the cultural and gender stereotypes that inform the legal regulation of the migrant. It critiques the postcolonial perspective on how belonging and non-belonging are determined by the sexual, cultural, and familial norms on which law is based as well as the historical backdrop of the colonial encounter, which differentiated overtly between the legitimate and illegitimate subject.
The complexities and layering of the migrant’s existence are seen, in the book, to be obscured by the apparatus of the law. The author elaborates on how law can both advance and impede the rights of the migrant subject and how legal interventions are constructed around frameworks rooted in the boundaries of difference, protection of the sovereignty of the nation-state, and the myth of the all-embracing liberal subject. This produces the ‘Other’ and reinforces essentialised assumptions about gender and cultural difference.
The author foregrounds the perspective of the subaltern migrant subject, exposing the deeper issues implicated in the debates over migration and the rights claims of migrants, primarily in the context of women and religious minorities in India. About the Author
Ratna Kapur is Director, Centre for Feminist Legal Research, New Delhi and Faculty, Geneva School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Geneva. Erotic Justice: Law and the New Politics of Postcolonialism by Ratna Kapur (Feb 3, 2005), Secularism's Last Sigh?: Hindutva and the (Mis) Rule of Law by Brenda Cossman and Ratna Kapur (May 16, 2002)
Indian Political Thought: A Reader by Aakash Singh and Silika Mohapatra (Aug 17, 2010)
The Gender Imperative: Human Security Vs State Security by Asha Hans and Betty A. Reardon (Jul 26, 2010)
Democracy, Development and Decentralisation in India: Continuing Debates by Chandan Sengupta and Stuart Corbridge (Jul 21, 2010)
Grounding Morality: Freedom, Knowledge and the Plurality of Cultures by Jyotirmaya Sharma and A. Raghuramaraju (Jul 21, 2010)
Subaltern Citizens and their Histories by Gyanendra Pandey (Jun 7, 2010)
Multi-stories: Cross-cultural Encounters by Kalpana Sahni (May 26, 2010)
A History of India by Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund (May 24, 2010)
India's Partition by D. N. Panigrahi (Apr 19, 2010)
Ritual Matters: Dynamic Dimensions in Practice by Ute Husken and Christiane Brosius(Apr 14, 2010)
India's Princely States by Waltraud Ernst (Apr 6, 2010)
Dance Matters: Performing India on Local and Global Stages by Pallabi Chakravorty and Nilanjana Gupta (Feb 3, 2010)

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Modern but not Western

Makeshift Migrants and Law Gender, Belonging, and Postcolonial Anxieties By Ratna Kapur Price: £65.00 ISBN: 978-0-415-59629-9 Imprint: Routledge India Pages: 256 pages
This book unmasks the cultural and gender stereotypes that inform the legal regulation of the migrant. It critiques the postcolonial perspective on how belonging and non-belonging are determined by the sexual, cultural, and familial norms on which law is based as well as the historical backdrop of the colonial encounter, which differentiated overtly between the legitimate and illegitimate subject.
The complexities and layering of the migrant’s existence are seen, in the book, to be obscured by the apparatus of the law. The author elaborates on how law can both advance and impede the rights of the migrant subject and how legal interventions are constructed around frameworks rooted in the boundaries of difference, protection of the sovereignty of the nation-state, and the myth of the all-embracing liberal subject. This produces the ‘Other’ and reinforces essentialised assumptions about gender and cultural difference.
The author foregrounds the perspective of the subaltern migrant subject, exposing the deeper issues implicated in the debates over migration and the rights claims of migrants, primarily in the context of women and religious minorities in India.

Erotic Justice Law and the New Politics of Postcolonialism By Ratna Kapur
The essays in Erotic Justice address the ways in which law has been implicated in contemporary debates dealing with sexuality, culture and `different' subjects - including women, sexual minorities, Muslims and the transnational migrant. Law is analyzed as a discursive terrain, where these different... 
The Hindu Right has begun to place an emphasis on Indian society being 'modern but not Western', responding to the material and historical shifts of the late 20th and early 21st centuries in India. Hindutva is today being redefined to ...

Saturday, August 07, 2010

Dowry still determines a daughter-in-law’s place

Schools of thought IE: Saturday 07 August, 2010 Shruti Ravindran
Most urban people would like to think of themselves as mercifully distanced from the sort of petty sagas that spur on the subplots of K-serials and their many regional variants — such as vengeful sisters-in-law who foist household chores on new dowry-less brides, or the barely concealed show of hierarchy within the gift-wrapped present from a newly affluent relative. Should you want a field guide to navigate the thorny thickets that lie before the upwardly mobile middle-class, you ought to read Middle-Class Moralities: Everyday Struggle over Belonging and Prestige in India, by Minna Saavala (Orient Blackswan, Rs 495).
Saavala, a Finnish social anthropologist, gathered most of the material for the book from the personal experiences, opinions and habits of a circle of acquaintances — “informants”— that she met during a stint in Hyderabad for a previous dissertation on fertility. The book begins with the fraught, fiercely contested realm of courtship and marriage, pointing out that despite the illusion of choice and flattening of hierarchy that urban life might promise, factors like dowry still determine a daughter-in-law’s place in the household pyramid, and “free choice” or “love” marriage continues to get “camouflaged” within the curious label of an “arranged-cum-love-marriage”.
If you’ve marvelled at the real-estate advertisements that promise some gilded “lifestyle” and the geographical nowhere-ness we aspire to amid the landscaped gardening we like to surround ourselves with, you’ll especially enjoy the chapter on “Imagined Worlds”. This takes us on an excursion to the “heterotropia” of Ramoji Film City, “a mirage out of nowhere”, of mud villages, the Wild West, and Mughal palaces favoured for film shoots in the outskirts of Hyderabad.
In an arid, rocky land, rolling lawns and luxurious fountains are the most potent form of conspicuous consumption, points out Saavala. When one of her friends, who seemed indifferent to the spectacle, later professed great enthusiasm for it to her friends, Saavala observes that more than the excursion, she’d valued the consumption of indicators of the “West” — hygiene, efficiency, predictability, in a vendor-less, beggar-free environment. In other words, Ramoji Film City and your sparkly, new neighbourhood mall are “a huge stage… to be gazed at, and to prove [one’s] middle-classness.”
None of this upward mobility and aspiration-fulfilment would be possible without modern capitalism or the free-market economy, as its tireless evangelist, French columnist Guy Sorman will remind you in Economics Does Not Lie (Global Full Circle, Rs 495). “During the current crisis, it’s especially important to remember the unprecedented benefits that free markets have brought mankind,” says the blurb. Accordingly, the book marches along to this jaunty neo-liberal tune, telling us how the best measure of a good economy is its growth, how competition is desirable and the welfare state ineffective, and how complex financial markets have ushered in progress.

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Happiness generally comes from links with other people

William Egginton on theodicy, neuroscience, and free will.
“As much as we owe the nature of our current existence to the evolutionary forces Darwin first discovered, or to the cultures we grow up in, or to the chemical states affecting our brain processes at any given moment, none of this impacts on our freedom. I am free because neither science nor religion can ever tell me, with certainty, what my future will be and what I should do about it. The dictum from Sartre that Strawson quoted thus gets it exactly right: I am condemned to freedom. I am not free because I can make choices, but because I must make them, all the time, even when I think I have no choice to make.”

depression and graduate students from Object-Oriented Philosophy by doctorzamalek (Graham Harman)
George Santayana is an underrated author. In The Sense of Beauty (always the surprise hit of my aesthetics classes whenever I use it) he talks about how beauty and happiness are not the same, that artists (and by extension, thinkers) suffer because they prefer beauty, whereas happiness generally comes from social factors: friends, marriage, a satisfying job, sufficient income so as not to worry, and being held in high esteem in the circles in which you travel. And in fact, it’s a reasonably good rule of thumb. Happiness (though perhaps not self-fulfillment) generally comes from links with other people. Or maybe with animals as well: pets can make us happy too.

The overriding interest is in oneself, not in the means adopted. … Sandwiched between an overwhelming regard for oneself and an inability to control one's circumstances with the precision one seeks, we are looking for newer technologies of the self. New age beliefs may or may not be science but they certainly in technologies in that they seek to manipulate the world around us in order to give us outcomes we desire. … Santosh Desai is a leading ad professional.

Peter on 26.02.2008 at 17:52 (Reply)
From my observations, intelligent people often have a tendency to over analyse certain people, situations, etc. The ability to “switch off” and just enjoy the moment is a key to happiness in my opinion. This is completely different from ignorance btw.
John Wesley on 26.02.2008 at 18:04 (Reply)
I would agree with your point about over analysis, especially if you tend to over think potential problems and can’t appreciate positives.
Definitely different than ignorance, but I also think the point about ignorance helping people be happy is valid. Imagine, for example, someone who has no idea about the U.S. economic problems compared to someone who is constantly fretting about it.
etavitom on 26.02.2008 at 18:47 (Reply)
thanks for the interesting post! i think highly intelligent people are sometimes unhappy because they are more aware of stupidity and absurdity around them…. best, brad
Jacques on 02.03.2008 at 09:20 (Reply)
Also, they are more inclined to see ‘patterns’ – connecting events and realizing something similar happened before – because they tend to hide in reading and history – based on that, you can become rather good at predicting outcomes…
KM on 26.02.2008 at 20:17 (Reply)
I believe the interests of intelligent people cause problems for them as well. While many intelligent people may be interested in some of the same topics, it is difficult to find social activities associated with them. 

Loyalty binds people together.  Friendships, marriages, even nations are built on loyalty.  Try imagining a person who has no loyalty whatsoever to anything or anyone.   Such a person would be friendless, loveless, nationless.  She would feel no devotion to any higher cause or principle – like truth or justice.   … Earlier I said that loyalty unites and that’s a good thing.  But loyalty also divides. And that’s a bad thing.  For example, soldiers at war are driven to kill each other by their competing loyalties.  
From pure self-centered cost-benefit analysis, it can be hard to make sense of loyalty.   You might even call loyalty a form of irrationality.  But without loyalty (and trust) all kinds of relationships wouldn’t be possible.   So if loyalty is a form of irrationality, it may be a darned good thing that we are irrational in that way.    

Charles Fourier developed his idea that
the natural passions of man would, if properly channeled, result in social harmony. He compared gravitational attraction in the physical world to “passional attraction” among humans. Fourier’s calculus of the mechanism of the passions was an interactive system of three distributive passions, the cabalist (or intriguing) passion, the butterfly (or alternating) passion, and the composite (or enthusiastic) passion. Together, these ensured the gratification and equilibration of all other human passions and resulted in the formation of the “passionate series,” the foundation for Fourier’s ideal unit of society, the phalanx.

Monday, July 19, 2010

Affective salience which our bodies bear may not be available to reflective scrutiny


In terms of the history of western philosophy, the philosophy of embodiment is relatively recent. For much of this history the body has been conceptualised as simply one biological object among others, part of a biological nature which our rational faculties set us apart from, as well as an instrument to be directed and a possible source of disruption to be controlled. Problematically for feminists, the opposition between mind and body has also been correlated with an opposition between male and female, with the female regarded as enmeshed in her bodily existence in a way that makes attainment of rationality questionable. “Women are somehow more biological, more corporeal, and more natural than men” (Grosz 14). Such enmeshment in corporeality was also attributed to colonised bodies and those attributed to the lower classes (McClintock 1995, Alcoff 2006, 103). Challenging such assumptions required feminists to confront corporeality in order to elucidate and confront constructions of sexual difference. via Feminist Perspectives on the Body (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

Gratton on Stiegler from Object-Oriented Philosophy by doctorzamalek (Graham Harman)

If you were inventing a Zizek simulator on the web, one of the obvious tricks would be to choose a random cliché and somehow reverse it. Throwing in film references at unexpected times would be another obvious trick, as would quoting either Hegel or Lacan as an authority on just about anything. In fact, why hasn’t someone tried this yet– a Zizek simulator?

One just wants a warm hug in the morning from a partner

All David Davidar's Women! : India : Vinita Dawra Nangia: TOI Blogs 18 July 2010 Did he, didn't he? However well you know someone, can you really vouch for his deepest, darkest urges? Or, even your own?

My point is, however well you know someone, how can you even presume to vouch for his deepest, darkest urges? On what basis can you possibly assume that he or she would never ever give in to those urges, when you cannot predict the same even for yourself? Be it a father, brother, husband or son (let alone a boss, friend or professional acquaintance!), we are all entitled to bits and pieces of ourselves that we never reveal even to those closest to us. It may be true to say, that there are dark sides of our personalities and inner selves that we would particularly hide from those closest to us!

So, if I'm not sure what I am myself capable of in my darkest moments or under the pressure of my own emotions in certain circumstances, how can I possibly jump to the defence of another man or woman and swear by his or her sense of decency? […]

(Reply to Diptarup Kahali)-  Vinita Dawra Nangia says: July 19, 2010
Yes, you are right...and in this case we can see why they say "a woman is a woman's worst enemy!" Why do women jump to a guy's defence just because they think they know him so well! Why do they assume the woman acusing him is lying?!
(Reply to DEV D.) -  Vinita Dawra Nangia says: July 19, 2010
Yes of course women have their deep, dark urges as well...when did I say they don't? Everyone does. Absence of urges doesn't make a person good or bad. It's how you deal with them that makes you the kind of person you are. I’m sure even the best of us have the worst urges...

On the couch - Man-Woman - Relationships - Life & Style - The ... ANURADHA VERMA, Jul 18, 2010 Almost half the cases in a psychiatrist's chamber relate to extra-marital affairs. We find out why 

  • In a fast-forward generation, with people living for themselves, patience is thin and so is staying power in relationships. 
  • Premarital and extra-marital sex have gone up by 12-15 percent in the last five years. People want to live for today and are more open and willing to experiment.
  • People tend to live in the virtual world, with little real communication and that creates loneliness. 
  • Lack of communication pushes couples to go their own ways, build walls around their individual spaces, till there is no way to connect with each other. 
  • People get married at later ages and are not willing to compromise. The attitude is of “I am what I am” and of “take it or leave it”!
  • As arguments increase in a marriage, sex takes a beating and desire wanes. Before they know it, there has been no intimacy for three months!
  • People have unrealistic expectations of partners and of themselves. Everybody wants to change their partners, trying to match reality with the images in their heads.
  • With increased awareness, we’re also all too aware of all the things that could go wrong. There’s a sense of disillusionment. Increased awareness festers fear. 

Sunday, July 11, 2010

Only Zeenat

An angry young age Sunday 11 July, 2010 Dipti Nagpaul D'souza It was that kind of a time—Zeenat Aman and Dum maro dum, the Emergency and Vijay Tendulkar. Looking back at the 1970s, a decade that gave us the first taste of rebellion
The men fussed over handlebar moustaches and side locks; they also discovered geometric prints and pink. The women had already slipped out of modest saris and into skirts. And they gladly welcomed the next big rage, two-piece bikinis. Polyester ousted cotton, kitsch replaced sober. It was that kind of a time. Beatles was playing on every screechy stereo set but the Fab Four, inspired by Pandit Ravi Shankar, were far away from the hysteria—seeking refuge at Osho Rajneesh’s ashram. The angry young man took on the system and Amitabh Bachchan found his way to the top. Dev Anand launched the oh-so-sexy Zeenat Aman in Hare Rama Hare Krishna, bringing drugs, sex and rock and roll out of the closet and into the Indian courtyard.
That Seventies show is now into reruns. Filmmaker Vipul Shah is revisiting the decade through his comedy drama Action Replayy; Milan Luthria looks at the incestuous relationship of gangsters and glamour that defined
Bombay then in Once Upon A Time In Mumbaai.
It was a decade, says Luthria, that defined us. “The 1970s to India are what the ’60s have been to the world,” he says. Director of the forthcoming film Aisha Rajshree Ojha is making a documentary on the Seventies; she calls it “the formative years that made India what it is today”. Zeenat Aman remembers it as a time when Indians gave up on a few shibboleths. “Fashion shows were a borrowed concept from the West but it was only in the ’70s that Indians first became willing to let go of the traditional definition of beauty and the role of a woman as a homemaker alone,” she says. She would know.
Delhi-based artist Vivan Sundaram calls it the most free-thinking period of Indian art. “The biggest names in contemporary art belong to this time—FN Souza, Akbar Padamsee, MF Husain and Tyeb Mehta,” says Sundaram. “In the late ’60s, anything new was not considered respectable, could be dismissed as too Western. But as the cultural exchange with the West grew and artists like Husain and Raza became known, the avant garde artists in India got legitimacy. That sowed the seed for the contemporary movement that is today associated with the Baroda school of art.”
For the country as a whole, the decade marked, in some ways, the end of innocence. The first flush of Independence and the optimism of the Nehruvian project had faded away. And it faced the first serious challenge to democracy. “The two wars with Pakistan and the Indo-China war between 1965 and 1971, followed by the Emergency in 1975 were big blows—they drained the nation’s resources and the common man found himself in no better a position than he was in under the colonial rule,” says Shyam Benegal.
It was, most of all, a political time.
The anger against the system bubbled under major works of the time. Writers of the Progressive Writers’ Movement like Kaifi Azmi, Shambhu Mitra and VP Sathe had openly aligned themselves to the Left. Playwright Vijay Tendulkar was one of those who scorched the system and made the smug middle-class squirm—be it through his play Ghashiram Kotwal, which faced trouble at the hands of the emerging Shiv Sena, or Sakharam Binder, which was banned in 1974 because it did not comply with moral norms; or in screenplays for films like Nishant or Aakrosh. For every Mera Naam Joker, there was a Satyajit Ray film and for every Raj Kapoor, there was a Benegal.
The figure of the anti-hero was waiting to be born. Javed Akhtar, who, along with Salim Khan, is credited for having created the character that found its way into iconic films like Deewar and Sholay, says, “Sociologists say that Bachchan’s character represented the man who was losing faith in the institutions and hence rebelled, but we didn’t create such characters consciously. They probably came to us naturally since we were a part of the situation. The character became the ultimate hero to the common man—the one who did what you could not.”
Ironically, this was also the time when government patronage pushed a new movement in Indian cinema. “The government had declared that films depicting real life in the country will receive financing and that set the stage for the evolving film scene in Bengal, with makers like Mrinal Sen, Ritwik Ghatak and Satyajit Ray,” says Benegal. As the movement grew, filmmakers like Adoor Gopalakrishnan in Kerala and Girish Karnad in Karnataka also joined in. “But Hindi cinema shook itself out of the stupor when people like Kumar Shahani, Hrishikesh Mukherjee, Mani Kaul, MS Sathyu, Saeed Mirza and Govind Nihalani ventured in,” he says. The result were films like Garam Hawa, Bhumika, Arvind Desai Ki Ajeeb Dastan, Ardh Satya—which in many ways reflected the losing faith in the state and established conventions.
And beyond the watch of the government, another alliance was being stitched up. The underworld had discovered the movies. Shobhaa De, a former film journalist who is a consultant to Luthria’s film, says, “The underworld was very ‘out there’ during the ’70s. Stars hobnobbed openly with these dons, attended their family functions and accepted their lavish gifts. It was a very cosy and surprisingly open relationship.”
The wheel has turned. The angry young man moved on long ago to host Kaun Banega Crorepati. No one has turned up to claim Vijay Tendulkar’s mantle. Parallel cinema died, the ‘indie movement’ was born. It was the best of times, the worst of times. “Everything of consequence, from the politics and the Emergency to the IITs and the concept of NRIs, was formed then. The Seventies were truly the years that made us a democracy,” says Ojha.

Zeenat Aman was among the top Bollywood heroines in the 1970s and 80s. As she returns to the silver screen after a considerable gap with director Anil Sharma's forthcoming film, Dunno Y... Naa Jaane Kyon, the actress spoke to Meenakshi Sinha: 

How do you feel about the comeback? 

I have a problem with the word comeback. I don't like the word because it has a connotation that one is out of the scene for many years. Post my marriage (to Mazhar Khan) i was completely involved in motherhood raising my two sons. It was very important for me to spend quality time with them. Then their father fell seriously ill and all my time went in tending to him till he passed away. But in between, i tested the waters with odd roles like the ones in Bhopal Express, Jaana... Let's Fall in Love, Ugli Aur Pagli, did theatre with Sanjay Garodia and kept myself busy with the kind of projects and people i wanted to work with.

But these were not major projects. 

One has to take appropriate roles and can't be a laughing stock. I have to make choices from what's been offered to me. It's a male-dominated industry and one has to face that reality. Many ladies of my time bemoan the lack of roles of their calibre. I feel there should be more scripts for people like us. Look at the West; they have wonderful films like the ones done by Meryl Streep or Susan Sarandon.

Why can't we have that in
India? Mr Bachchan, with whom your pairing was a rage at one time, does get to experiment with roles even today. 

Like i said, it's a male-dominated industry and that's the reality one should acknowledge. But i think he's fabulous as an artist. He knows his craft exceedingly well. I wish we get some opportunity like he does and wish him many more such roles.

You set a bold, sexy trend. Was it difficult to break the stereotype of a conventional heroine of the 1970s? 

I wasn't planning any such move nor had any fixed plans. I was just being myself. Having studied abroad, my outlook towards life was far more open. Many years later, when i would read in magazines that i broke x amount of trends, got many publicity titles and accolades for it, i said 'thank you'. I simply didn't realise the furore and impact i'd created.

Being a Navketan discovery, please comment on your relations with Dev Anand. 

I became a star in Navketan. Then Nasir Hussain offered me Yaadon Ki Baraat. It was followed by B R Chopra's Dhund, Insaaf Ka Tarazu, Dharam Veer, Don, Laawaris, Qurbani etc. I did more than 90 films as a female protagonist. When Hare Rama Hare Krishna was offered to me by Dev Saab, i was on my way to
Europe to live with my mother in Germany and study languages. I knew nothing about films. But Dev Saab took me to Kathmandu for the film's shooting and urged me to wait till its release. When the film became a huge hit, there was no looking back. It's only in the last few years that i've paused and looked back to realise what my career was all about. 

It's a woman's world KANKANA BASU
Women have been portrayed in a variety of ways in Hindi cinema over the years. While some actors rejoiced in author-backed sensitive roles, others were confined to a fleeting appearance in a male-dominated film. KANKANA BASU takes a look at how women are asserting themselves again in Bollywood: both as actors and filmmakers.

When Waheeda Rehman relinquished her dupatta to the winds and cast aside her inhibitions and marital obligations as well, little did she know that her signature tune would become an anthem for generations of women.
Decades after the film was made, kaanton se kheech ke ye aanchal......aaj phir jeene ki tamanna haifrom “Guide” continue to epitomise the blithe, free spirit of women.
One of the first films to have an adulterous heroine, “Guide” remains a path-breaking film in terms of maturity and a deep understanding of a woman's emotional needs. As a young dancer who leaves her abusive and elderly husband for the sympathetic young guide Raju, the character of Rosy was well ahead of the social period it was made in (1965). Women-centric movies continued to be made in later years (bold, timid and in-between) but were destined to follow a rather erratic graph. […]
Era of revenge
The departure of Rajesh Khanna from the silver screen marked the end of romance, while the arrival of the angry young man Amitabh Bachan heralded a cinematic era of rage and revenge. The heroine found herself relegated to a scattered peripheral presence either as the love interest of the hero or a decorative piece in a movie filled with muscles and testosterone. Consequently, a breed of actors emerged who looked like sculpted goddesses and who were quick to perfect the art of running around trees. The thinking actor was a threatened species and the likes of Smita Patil, Shabana Azmi and Deepti Naval will always be remembered for holding their own during this masculine and masochistic Bollywood chapter.
“The turn of the millenium was a dark phase for Bollywood films: rehashed themes, tinny music, lyrics sans poetry and women often projected in a derogatory manner,” says Naheed Merchant, a keen observer of Bollywood changes. However, this period was responsible for heralding some startling changes in social and gender stereotypes. Yesteryear heroines had been virginal, docile, bathed in virtue, the professions they hailed from being slightly vague; they were either nurses, dutiful daughters, students or beautiful women just content to be. The heroine and the vamp were two distinct identities.
“The sensational, promiscuous cheroot-smoking Zeenat Aman swaying to dum maaro dum in “Hare Ram Hare Krishna” was a defining moment in Hindi cinema, one that was destined to change the image of the leading lady forever. Parveen Babi followed suit by doing a smouldering cabaret in ‘Shaan' and the watertight compartments reserved for the leading lady and the vamp respectively dissolved forever,” says Mumbai based photographer and movie aficionado Deepankar B. […]
No one quite understands a woman like another woman and women directors are going places. While Mira Nair's “Monsoon Wedding” tackled paedophilia lurking within the family, Aparna Sen spun “36 Chowringhee Lane” around the loneliness of old age among the Anglo-Indian community. The Hindu Sunday, Jul 11, 2010