Hello Readers,
This blog is part of my classroom activities of Deconstruction by Derida.
Monday 20 March 2017
Saturday 4 March 2017
Representation of LGBT in Parallel Cinema
Representation
of LGBT in Parallel Cinema
Komal Shahedadpuri
Department of
English MK Bhavnagar university
Abstract
Abstract
Rohit
K. Dasgupta has rightly observed that ‘established academic debates
surrounding representation of queer identities in India have time and again
illuminated the relationship between sexual (gendered) subjectivities and the
state. More often than not queer individuals themselves have fixated on
heteronormativising their queerness.’ While most would prefer to ‘fit in’ for
socio-cultural and political progress, the radical queer activists and scholar
challenge the ‘norm’ for a different kind of progression. Similarly, Gayatri
Gopinath argues that ‘wither the queer woman is erased from patriarchal
nationalist rhetoric that refuses her existence or she is colonized by a
liberalist western discourse of sexuality that seeks to codify her
subjectivity through indexes of ‘gay’ and ‘lesbian’. (R. K. Dasgupta)
Through the lenses of
these observation, this paper attempts to look into lesbian and gay identities
as portrayed in a serious way in two films of Parallel Cinema ‘FIRE ’(1996)
by diasporic Canadian filmmaker Deepa Mehta and ‘BOMgAY’(1996)
by Riyad Wadia.
Key Words: Lesbian, Gays, Queer Film , Fire, Dostana, BolBachan
Queer Theory
Queer Theory is a field of poststructuralist
critical theory that emerged in the early 1990s, out of the fields of Queer
studies and women’s studies .Queer theory builds both upon Feminist challenges
to the idea that gender is part of essential self and upon Gay and Lesbian
studies. It focuses on mismatches between sex or gender and desire, Since early 1990s,it has been adapted by gays
and lesbians themselves as a non-invidious term to identify a way of life and
an area of scholarly inquiry. These studies have maintained a close relation to
the activists who strive to achieve for gays and lesbians political, legal
and economic rights equal to those of
the heterosexual majority.
Portrayal of
LGBT through Parallel Cinema
The portrayal of LGBT is not essay task
in India because homosexuality is mostly
a taboo subject in Indian civil society and for the government section 377 of
Indian penal code makes sex with persons of same gender punishable by law ,
LGBT people in India face legal and social difficulties, sexual activity
between people of same gender is illegal and same sex couples can’t legally marry or obtain a civil
partnership. A critical moment of rapture in Indian Queer sexuality occurred
with the released of Deepa Mehta’s ‘Fire’ (1996), which shows that queer sexuality is not visible within the
culture of India through a dialogue between major two characters Radha and Sita
that ‘There is no word in our language that can describe what we are and how we
feel for each other’ said Sita. Michael Foucault also agree with Mehta’s views that sexuality
based identity were invented in 19th century in Europe.
Indian Cinema (Films)
Film scholars argued that films are not
just visual images shown to the audience but that they have capacity to
overpower and influence the spectator. With the help of textual and cinematic
codes, the films present meaning in such a way that they match with our
understanding of the real world, as if co-constructing our reality connecting
us to our history, experience and social milieu. Today it becomes significant cultural artifact
in the study of identities and sexualities. Indian Cinema has always been a
mirror image of the Cultural, Socioeconomic and the Political transform that emerged in the nation. This shows that
reel life and real life are so inclined towards each other. Indian film
industry has a rich history of producing a variety of movies showcasing
different spheres of Indian life in myriad themes.
Analysis of ‘Fire’ by Deepa Mehta
The Indian filmmaking Culture somehow still
appears confused towards forming a
universal opinion about projecting homosexual characters. Deepa Mehta,
’Westernized’ Non Residential Indian film maker. However, most of the criticism
that followed its release in India protest against sexual intimacy between two
‘Hindu’, Indian middle class women. It
was 1996s, ‘Fire’ tells a tale of
two women’s journey of exploration of the desire. A film served a sensual echo coddle in an
Indian context while also scooping itself out of the Patriarchal Prevalence.
This film is written and directed by Deepa Mehta and staring Shabana Azami and
Nandita Das. It is a first installment of Mehta’s Elements Trilogy. It is followed by Earth(1998)
and Water(2005).’Fire’
is loosely based on Ismat Chugtai’s 1941 Urdu short story, Lihaaf (The Quilt).It was one of the first
mainstream films in India to explicitly show homosexual relations. This movie
helped mainstreaming homosexuality in India. It tells a tale of lesbian
relationship which was first of its kind in Indian Cinema.
Reinterpretation of Indian Myths and
Traditions with aspect of Lesbianism in a movie ‘Fire’
Radha and Sita are two major characters of a
movie that are represented as Indian women caught in an oppressive web of
commitments of Family, arranged Marriages, and traditional Patriarchal notions
of duty. Many critics describe ‘Fire’ as the story of “the two unhappy housewives
compelled to seek emotional and
sexual satisfaction from each other because their husband provides none”. Ashok
turns towards Celibacy and Jatin loves other Chinese girl Julie. The Film
narratives open with a story within story style in which Radha’s mother told the story of people who
are sad as they can’t see ocean and added that an old woman in the village comforts people by
saying, “What you can’t see, you can
see. You just have to see without looking”. Radha’s initial musing
captures the Political problematic that lies at the heart of the film. This
scene serves as a mystery that Radha is able unravel only after being ‘tested’
by the ‘fire’ at dramatic turn of events. The ‘sexual’ choice then becomes
merely a medium for film to make that statement, the representation and
Visibility of non western queer female desire, what is interesting about the
statement is the seemingly innocuous distinction between “seeing”
and “looking”.
on the other hand, Mehta’s film contests the discursive polemic of Visibility
outside the home. Instead, she traces the domestic and filial orientations of
being a queer subject.
‘Fire’ is a film that questions Traditions,
its about being ‘alive’ and women defining their liberation in their own terms.
‘Fire’ reworks some age old myths that have often been used in oppress Indian
women and reclaims them in a feminist voice. Its first Indian mainstream film
with overt lesbian theme ,and its bold offering of an alternative vision for
Indian women is extremely threatening to the patriarchal system. This film revolves
around Indian joint family in New Delhi which representative of traditional
India. There are few myths that are
reworked within the film. Mehta uses these myths as backdrop of her film but does so by interpreting them in ways
that might be considered as Sacrilegious. The official webpage of ‘Fire’
emphasis the film’s intent of re-envisioning the myth of ‘Sita’.
“An intense moving and sensuous portrait
of change in contemporary India. Fire’ focuses on several generations of a
modern day New Delhi family. A reworking of a story from the Classic Hindu
Ramayana, Fire recounts the family’s
struggle to cope with the pressures of great individual and personal Freedom
while maintaining allegiance to traditional value.” (Fire, official
webpage,1997)
Therefore, Mehta’s attempt to rework myths
provide an extremely empowering vision
for Indian women and their reality. Three important myths are reworking in
‘Fire’, myth of Sita, myth of Radha and myth of Karva chauth.
Myth of ‘Sita’, mythical figure in Ramayana, had to give trial by fire to prove her purity and obedience towards her husband. In a
film, three times it refer, first when Mundu (servant) give reason that why he
and Biji are being so emotional to see the Ramayana, secondly it enacted
through Ramleela where Ashok and Swamiji were present in which a role of ‘Sita’(mythical figure)played by a
man which provides set up for the film and specially for relation of Radha and Sita, Sita somehow
presented as man and final symbolic
episode where Radha has to undergo a
similar trial by fire to prove her purity. ‘fire’ is considered sacred in the
Hindu tradition. Mehta transform the myth which has traditionally been used
against Indian Women to instill fear about their purity and honor where is no freedom for
expression or individual Independence, but in the film two women defy society’s
idea about how they should be living their lives. Therefore, Fire is used to
sanction the union of the two women. Radha’s victorious emergence from the
flames that can discern pure from the impure works to place the two women in a
space of righteous morality even as they reject society’s ideas about morality
and forge their path together. This
myth ,which underlines the entire film
is used to sanction their Choices. As in public Debate, Mehta noted that
“I
can’t have my film hijacked by anyone organization. It is not about Lesbianism,
it is about Loneliness, about Choices.”(quoted in Madhu Jain with Sheela, A
Raval, ‘Ireover’ Fire, New Delhi,1998)
Myth of Radha, in Hindu mythology, Radha was the
consort of the of the God Krishna. Although, Radha married to another
cowherder, she was Krishna’s constant
companion. Therefore , Radha may be seen as the epitomy of women, the ultimate
consort and seducer. However, the love that she and Krishna shared is also used to symbolize
mutual love between God and human Soul.(Caitanya movement, form of Hinduism)The
mythological Radha is embodied in the character of Sita in the film. She is one
who acts her desires and take initiative with
character of Radha in the film. Although, she married to Jatin, she is
Radha‘s constant companion. Mehta has interchanged the names of her two main
characters with the mythological figures they represent. It’s the character of
Radha who embodies the Goddess Sita, while the character of Sita who embodies
mythical Radha. Mehta is making a very important statement by interchanging the names of the two women.
Mehta intimates that two characters are different parts of united whole, both
characters Radha (a pure) and Sita (the desirous)are one dimensional, split-reactions to a
suffocating tradition, Mehta allows for fluidity between different and multiple possibilities ,
The pure and the desirous are no longer separate. They are two aspects of one.
This interpretation questions the original myths.
Myth of Karva Chauth
The story of this, is told by Radha,
and visualized by Mundu , this scene place the entire myth in a comedic light. Radha ends the story by commenting
Radha: So now you know why we fast? To
prove how loyal and devoted we are to our husbands.
Sita : what a wimp! I mean the queen and
as for the king. I think he’s a real Jerk. (ask Radha) what do you think?
Radha : I don’t know, she didn’t have many choices.
Sita: I’m so sick of all this devotion, we can find choices
(Fire,1996)
In this, Radha
stresses word ‘choice’ and looks at
Sita ,the act suggesting that Radha has a choice and that is Sita. Expressing
her dislike for meaningless traditions to keep fast for husbands to show your
loyalty towards them, Sita declares “I am sure we can find choices”. Sita and
Radha thus offer a critique of the notion of “compulsory heterosexuality”, theorized by Adrienne Rich. Mehta uses
Sita’s character effectively to comment on age old Indian myths that are
oppressive to women. As last dialogue of Sita shows as modern India. The reinterpretation
of myths to empower women is very powerful device in ‘Fire’. The film allows
Indian women to re-envision different possibilities by providing alternative
readings to different myths, it challenges the idea that there is only one way
to read these myths, the film ‘Fire’ highlights one possible strength of deconstructing
the myths.
Subeshini Moodley comments that “Mehta’s women characters undergo journeys of Identity. They Travel
from being obedient, dutiful, virtuous women who honor family to women who step
outside of tradition to become empowered, decision maker.”
Traditions, also reinterpreted in movie, it demonstrate various Indian
customs and rearticulates them in an empowering light for the benefit of Indian
women. It highlights spaces of intimacy between women which is already exist in
an old Indian culture like
1) It’s an old Indian custom for women to oil each
other’s hair which found in the film when Sita ask to oil her hair to Radha but
it show erotic nature of customs and this sequence framed and shot through a
full length dressing mirror.
2) Another tradition is that dancing with partners
of the same sex, its very common on Indian stage because Physical contact between
members of opposite sex was not allowed. As Radha and Sita danced erotically in
front of Biji in the house, its uncommon acknowledgement of “too much electricity” (Mundu).
3) Custom of wearing Bangles , exchange
of it, of dressing each other is constantly enacted by young girls and women
who considered to platonic friends, However in film Radha and Sita exchange
bangles the day after their first make love as Radha transformed by Desire with
Sita wearing bangles in common kitchen. Mehta uses the exchange to invoke other traditions like the act of putting bangles on each
other’s hands is clearly reminiscent of exchange of marriage garlands. The myth
about the effects of certain spices like Cardamom on sexual power in public
might seem extremely daring in a western context, but in Indian context
homosexuality is completely silent even as a film strives to give a voice to
that reality.
4) Other scene that uses the Indian custom to massage feet of our
elders (also husbands) in film Sita offers to massage Radha ‘s feet on family
picnic , to see that Ashok being happy and says “I am lucky to have such a good
Family” but only Sita and Radha knows
the Irony. However , it
reinterpreted as Sita touches Radha’s feet in sensual ways. Gopinath, in her
essay discuss how Fire offers politics of subversion through the homoeroticized
act of giving massage in the most heterosexual space like park.
5) Even’
girlhood game of buch is
sexualized when Radha and Sita playing together in extremely sensual moment,
Radha picks up the drop of sweat, from Sita’s leg and tastes it, its provide
new spin on an old game. In an interview, Deepa Mehta comments on this scene
that “Fire is really about sensuality for me what you don’t see is far more
erotic that what you see. I love eroticism but it has to
be subtle. In the scene where Radha takes a bead of Sita’s sweat and tastes it
that extremely erotic for me. Both of them have their cloths on” (Sidhwa,1997)
One of the greatest strength of the film ,
that while it challenges and re-envision
Indian traditions, Radha and Sita continue to exist and act within an
Indian context. They don’t turn towards the West as source of their liberation
, they visit Nizammudin shrine rather than go to movie, we see them inventing a
tradition in their own unique way. There is one question may arise in our mind
that why Deepa Mehta made movie on only lesbian not on gay. So, it’s answer can
found from her comment in an interview that “this story is not an autobiography
but it is based on what I knew of my mother’s life being brought into a joint
household often an arranged marriage . I know that she had bonded with the
other woman and I wondered what would happen for women in the ‘90s.”(Bowen,
1996) Mehta’s story questions centuries of Indian Philosophy which teaches that
“Desire is the root of all evils.”(Ashok
speaks) but ‘Fire’ defies entire premise
As Radha finally declares “without
Desire , there’s no point in living.”
The use of space, Time,
Light and other major terms that include in film studies in ‘Fire’
Films, are carefully
constructed visual objects and each elements of that construction can function
to generate meaning because Audio-
visual speaks more than words, and its effect is create more interest to the story. The primary elements of
meaning in film are composition ,editing and art direction which encompasses
everything from color and sound to set and Location.
A large portion of
film ‘Fire’ is shot in the house ,the
visual spaces in the film are constantly enclosed or framed to reflect the
claustrophobia of the women’s lives. The second scene of the film opens with a
frame within frame shot revealing young couple is leaning against the wall to
face each other giving apparently an archetypal image of a romantic
heterosexual couple formation then camera moves to capture Sita standing before
classic monument, Taj Mahal. However’ as the love the two women share opens up,
Its captured by the close shot of camera. Various spaces used like we see them
in the park, at the shrine and in the market. It is open terrace space which becomes the women’s exclusive territory
where they go to breath outside the air of oppression of their marriage for
fresh and free air and it became physical manifestation of the intimate space
they create together. Nizammudin Shrine
is a place where they visit in spite of they are belong to Hindu family they go
to shrine because somehow they find respect of their relations as they engage
in Qawaali which is of love between God and humans ,as they heard one line that
“I am in you, you are in me” in
Sufism almost all poems have one theme that is love, while not even single Hindu Temple found in movie.
So, through the archetype use of shrine we hoped that Radha and Sita can united
and they united at the end.
Major terms like
Neorealism, sequence of different scenes and art direction
in which symbolic use of color, design, sound ,lighting, music etc used
in film like the Red color of Sita’s sari and other things of her beauty like bindi
,bangles etc are considered as holy things for married women. The transitions
in the film, often a white out to a flashback of one particular scene in
Radha’s childhood psyche, are used to disrupt linear time and as a
foreshadowing device. Throughout the film, the flashback serves as a device
that sets the tone of events to come or pose a question. For example towards
the end of the film, we see Radha in the flames, the film flashes back to young
Radha finally learning how to “see” the ocean in a field of Mustard flowers,
exclaiming’ “I can see the ocean, I can see it.” The
audience is suspended in a moment of wonder about whether the flashback
signifies that Radha is dead and therefore can finally see? The very next shot
change the perception of audience that its shows her reunion with Sita at the
same shrine where Sita wished that both of them never parted. Its shrine that accept them as there is use of rain and
lighting as the impossible being possible at the end. Finally, Radha envision
an alternative life for Sita and herself. In addition to flashback techniques ,
light is used to disrupt time and create ambiguity in the certain scenes . The
time of the day is often unclear in the film. For example, the scene following
their first time love, making seems bright enough to indicate morning , when
Sita leaves Radha’s room , it becomes obvious that it is still dark outside.
This effect is crested through the use of day for night or night for day light.
Near
the end of the film, Ashok sit near the store where on the wall the word
“Crush” capture which relates his situation after Knowing the truth. fire as a
device used to show the aspect of fertility ,sexuality and enlightenment.
Controversies with
released ‘Fire’
Fire opened across
India in mainstream cinema as path breaking film in winter 1998. The film
recorded 80% collections in three weeks until trouble that visited it on November 25, two dozen men of
the Jain Samata Vahni of Mumbai wanted
Maharashtra’s minister of state of cultural affairs Anil Deshmukh to ban the
film but failed. On 1 December Shiv Sainiks ransacked cinema theatre in
Goregaon, Mumbai. Goyal, Delhi chief
of Shiv Sena said, “ The film insulted
Radhaji and Sitaji and Ramayana, it hurts the sentiments of Hindus but did they
listen?” and right winged groups wanted protagonist’s name changed to Nita from Sita which is found in Hindi
version of movie. Bal Thackeray, a leader of Shiv Sena party
in Bombay asserting during the release of the film, “Fire may have
international awards but will anyone
deliberate on the harm these people are
doing by ushering in a wretched culture, also noted that the depiction of
Lesbianism was a direct attack on out Hindu culture and civilization”. In response
to this Mehta argues that lesbianism is part of Indian heritage with historical
narrations and legitimate representation. while Brinde Bose argues that Fire
primarily evoke to define homoerotism in order to define feminist resistance to
patriarchy construction of female
sexuality because the issue of lesbianism hasn’t been accepted like male
homosexuality. The Film helped to gave the voice to lesbians that the most
important verdict for Fire came from audience,
“ That night
after Fire was attacked, there was a Virgil by candlelight at the Regal, As far
as eye could see, there were women and
men with placards that said ‘we are
Indians and we are Lesbians.” To see this Mehta said ‘ I was like ,’Holy
shit, this is cool,’ and she sums up by saying in an interview, “I think the
film had an incredible impact on young people of all communities, because they
are fighting something also. I might not be traditional values but some bias or
injustice . Everybody has this want and basically Fire is a film about desire.
You have to ask yourself, ‘what do I want? We’ve all been taught to go for what
we need, I say it’s more import to go for what you want.” (Sidhwa,1997)
‘BOMgAY’ by Riyad Wadia
and Jangu Sethna
Bomgay is a bold and brilliant 1996 Indian
anthology of short film, the film stars Kushal Punjabi and Rahul Bose. It is known for its controversial gay sex scene in a library. It is a
collection of six cinematic adaptations based on Raja Rao’s selected gay poems inaugurated the era of queer cinema
in India , about “Mumbai same sex sub
cultural life”. It was first screened at Bombay’s National centre for the Arts
in December. According to Thomas Waugh ,
it is one of the very rare Indian Parallel films that might be called ‘queer’
in Euro-American sense this film is Twelve minutes long ,collection of six short
film, its India’s first gay film which closely and openly portray the gay
culture or the subject of homosexuality in India. All vignettes are variously
heavy and light about Mumbai same sex subculture life. Film is first but also
as an entry point to a much larger discussion of Indian Parallel Cinema.
Textual Reading of the Film
The film has been
severely criticized by many for its extravagant and fantastic portrayal of gay men
in India which is far from the Truth but according to Wadia himself, he was
attempting to portray the emergence of a
small gay community that dwells in Bombay and who choose to interpret the word “gay” as practiced and loosely define the
westernized lens is evident in the aesthetics that govern the film. In the
title vignette “Bomgay”, the queer subculture of Mumbai is identified through
the sampling of the oriental fetishism of
western tourist. Rao problematizes same sex closeness in India by location it in the public culture.
Family members
From England, America and Canada
visit you at Bombay
which they call Bomgay
some of them are sex
tourists
you their post colonial pimp
Hungry for pounds and dollars
(Bomgay poem)
This vignette
present a gay male New Yorker as the ‘sex tourist’ and introduced as ‘ Family’ who visit Bombay, for them it’s a place where
more gays are found, so they call it Bomgay which creates the image of Bombay
to the outsiders. The narrator presents as post colonial pimp who took them to
show that places in Bombay only for the hunger of dollars and pounds , they
appeals customers (tourist)for
Prostitution. If the narrator took them at
religious places like Gokul but only main three sites of homoerotic expression in the Mumbai
landscape pleases them more that are
western style gay clubs, men’s public toilets on plateform-2 of Dadar station
and finally steeple of Apsara Theatre.(Waugh,2002), these three sites can be
connected as well as “strangely familiar with each other. The last line that
‘God’s own penis mightier than the
sword’ represent the queer subject very openly and clearly with the words that
are usually not allowed to films or in literature. Because of these language
the film face many problems. Bomgay complicates some of these issues, while it
present the Phallic significance of the Apsara Theatre which sex tourist love
the most.
It also places
queer representation very firmly within upper class sensibility like in a
vignette ‘Opinion’ , a men is seen
reading newspaper while gazing from superior
position at his maidservant ‘Shantabai’
who comes once a day to wash undies , she thinks that man without wife and
kids is nothing ,its represent the picture of habits of Gujaratis, that they
are always free to worry about others
and interfere in other’s life like they are single or married why they are still single though eligible etc. First line ,‘
Onions and Opinions are cheap in Bombay’ means you easily get opinions from
others if you want or nor doesn’t matter people free to give their opinions. Its not only about Bombay but everywhere In India
or somehow outside India also because human nature is same everywhere. The
protagonists in other vignettes are tie wearing ,office goers, college students
in orgiastic fantasies in scorning gay locals in Mumbai. These show the
superior or upper position of gays.
While in a ‘Underground’ another vignette, the
picture of lower class gay community and their lifestyle is portrayed. It describe the scene of railway
lines opposite Dharavi slum in Bombay
that as in old days the touch of men who belonged to lower class or caste like
Untouchables polluted, now is becomes
virtues for gays. It said that goo has its own uses as ripe harvest and
fertilized by defecting humans, it use as a object with which the memories of
gay lovers who met in an underground
urinal to hide from society ‘The
underground has its own shade’ means that the gay community which represent
by underground has their own existence and choices. In Bombay, its small world
for gay community which creates by Wadia in Bomgay ,its far from truth but
represent gay’s individual world where their relations are allowed that their
found their garden of Eden. Through the insightful Imagery like the gay
cruising spots of Victorian Terminus urinals and the Bombay local tracks along
which people defecate it emerging gay community in post-liberalized India of
the 1990s.So, in this the repressed voice of gays is highlighted.
‘Lefty’ is important for its Library
sequence , visual utopia of over abundance is clearly visible in this sequence
which is shot in dimly lit colonial style library with huge mirrors. The
library is far from being liberating space but Wadia recreates and
stylizes queer representation in Library,
the narrator comments how Lefty is stared at by the readers for writing with
its left hand , following this narrator says, “speaking isn’t allowed in
Library but looking is” whish is read against the backdrop of Rahul
sodomised by Kushal. Its place for reading, peace, knowledge , discipline etc
but Wadia make use of this to portray gay scene as it very stressful shot of
Library sequence supervising location had to be distracted and away while the actors
got nude and simulate sex, hiding from Librarian. So this scene because of
location, creates controversy . St. Wilson College Library thus contributes to
the private display of queer desire and it does this alongside scripts of
everyday institutional life.
“The purity of love
subverted , the twisted soul escapes into a world of fantasy. The individual
spirit purges itself by reveling in its
victimization. The love that dare not speak its name, now sits across
table and debates it cause. The protagonists are self respect and
accountability. The antagonists hypocrisy and self denial.” (Bomgay,1996) This
lines present, how the film raise the voice of gay community and show that
in the society, their relations are not
accepted. So the use of utopian world of liberty for gays give them self
existence and choices of sex in life. Aesthetically, Wadia’s film also
demonstrate that utopian made of liberation, releases the self from the control of conformist society. So this
film screened in numbers of film festivals but the film has limited release in
India as Wadia did not apply for a certificate fearing that the Censor board
would reject it.
Thus, these two
films represent the issues related to LGBT which is have to come as demand of
time after 1990s, before that there is no that much realistic and serious
portrayal of it as done in these films. Parallel Cinema aided a lot to these
issues to came into the light, it is
bold enough to represent controversial issues very clearly and openly in India
through media or film. While today’s bollywood movies make fun of these
characters like in Dostana, Bol Bachan etc. Today, LGBTs are still suffered
from many problems to exist in the Indian society.
Works Cited
The film ‘Fire’ by Deepa Mehta
The Glossary of Literary Terms by M.H Abrams
Articles, on Indian Cinema Now and Then by Partha Chatterjee
and on Talkies, movies and cinema by Shyam Benegal
An article ‘A New Fire in an old Tradition’ by Sheena
Malhotra and Kathryn Sorrells. (csun.edu)
‘Igniting Desires’, Politicizing Queer Female Subjectivities in
Fire by Senthorum Raj Intersection: Gender and Sexuality in Asia and the
Pacific Issue 28, March 2012. (http://intersections.anu.edu.au/issue28/raj.htm)
A book , An
Introduction to Criticism , Literature and Film Culture by Michael Ryan “ Film Studies”.
Queer Sexuality : A Cultural Narrative of India’s Historical
Archive by Rohit K Dasgupta , University of the Arts London.
Journal of Religion and Film, Volume 17 Issue 2 October 2013
Fire, Water and The Goddess : The Films of Deepa Mehta and Satyajit
Ray as Critiques of Hindu
Patriarchy , David F. Burton,
Canterbury Christ Church University,
An Article, ‘Keeping flame alive: what made Deepa Mehta’s
Fire such a Path breaking film’ , written by Dipanita Nath and published on March 20,2016 in Indian Express.
The ‘Gay’ Fictive City: Queer Imagination in the Cinematic
Space by Sagorika Singha from Jawaharlal Nehru University, India in ‘The
Apollonian’, A Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies.
‘Queer Kinship in New Queer India: From Wadia’s ‘BOMGAY’ to
R. Raja Rao’s ‘Crocodile Tears’ by Rohit
K Dasgupta (Chapter Three)
An Article ‘Long Life of a Short Film’ by Riyad Vinci Wadia
Google Books,
https:www.google.co.in/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=Bomgay+
PhD Thesis on ‘A
Semiotic Investigation of Positioning of the Queer In Indian Film Narratives’ by Sachin Ramesh Labade
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)