As the ‘ladies’ in Laapataa Ladies find their ‘pata’ (address) at the Oscars, it seems that the jury members of the Film Federation of India (FFI) have found their home in tokenism.
Recently, the jury members’ unanimous decision to select Laapataa Ladies, among 28 other strong contenders, as the official entry to the Oscars made news. What also made news was the citation:
“Indian women are a strange mixture of submission and dominance. Well-defined, powerful characters in one world a LAAPATAA LADIES (Hind) captures this diversity perfectly, though in a semi-idyllic world and in a tongue-in-cheek way. It shows you that women can-happily desire to be home makers as well as rebel and be entrepreneurially inclined. A story that can simultaneously be seen as one that needs change, and one that can bring about change, Laapataa Ladies (Hindi) is a film that can engage, entertain and make sense not just to women in India but universally as well..”
The above words by an all-male jury is a fine instance of how men’s perceptions shape women’s characterisation in media and the creative arts.
The film clearly says Indian women are not a “strange mixture” of submission and dominance; rather, they are clearly defined by their choices. But reality is ironical.
In an interview with The Indian Express, Jahnu Barua, the Jury Chairman of the FFI, said that it was the “Indianness” of Laapataa Ladies that most effectively celebrated the essence of Indian ethos and culture. Ravi Kottakara, FFI president, was quoted in an interview with Etimes as having said that this “ghoonghat misunderstanding” happens only in India which adds an essential Indian element to it.
Are we truly on a wild goose chase in ill-defining what the film’s narrative actually wants to educate us on?
Kishwar Desai’s opinion on the citation in The Indian Express is a fine jibe at the use of the term ‘semi-idyllic world’:
“And how is the world of LL even remotely “semi-idyllic”? Unless you think that women who live in a world where they are abused is semi-idyllic because it is idyllic when they are not being abused.”
Although the ends seemed to be tied up in a utopian thread, where Phool gets to reunite with Deepak after living a series of episodes as an independent woman, and then there is Jaya who breaks the social norm by forging an identity for herself, the film is still far from being semi-idyllic. In their monumental yet fleeting victories, as the characters choose their desired identities, we must know their journeys aren’t tied in an altogether promising utopian thread. Both Phool and Jaya would continue to grapple with challenges that accompany their choices, just like any other woman. Sure, there is empowerment but only partially.
However, the jury committee’s decision to select Laapataa Ladies for its “Indianness” still leads me to question whether this women-centric cinema, which redefines a gendered narratives, ultimately boils down to the cultural elements that help define India for an international audience. Some have asked whether Payal Kapadia’s All That We Imagine As Light gives the impression of foreign cinema. The film has won big at Cannes but notably got the snub as the Oscar pick.
Laapataa Ladies’ nomination is a fabulous treat for us, but the jury committee appears to have selected it to put multiple ticks on its checklist: ghoonghat, organic farming, rural India, women empowerment and so on, without critically engaging with Indian patriarchy.
Finally, is this the path for India to attain an Oscar? By telling the world that rural India is trying to overcome “ghoonghat” ordeals?
Manya Singh is an editorial intern at The Wire.