The K Brigade Sunday, February 12, 2006
3:54 PM Permalink
To say that media and the million soaps that TV brings to our homes everyday has a profound impact on society, would of course, be the grossest understatement ever. Interesting however, is, why it has this effect and at such a scale.
Take hindi serials for example. Most of them are part of the ever growing K-family. Most depict huge and very rich joint families where the men all work in the family business and most of the women sit at home, form teams against each other and hatch plans of doom. The woman who goes to work, is , in all probability the vamp. The prototype vamp has her own custom background score, she makes fashon statements with wierd makeup and more wierd innovations to the traditional sari or salwar kameez.
Its a woman's world inside the idiot box. They fight, they bicker and they bring justice to the world. Men are props, often confused bungling souls who have no clue why they are there and when their characters are going to be killed or when they are going to be brought miraculously back to life, almost always with amnesia and in the vamp's house.
Ask the average viewer why they watch these soaps and they say they "identify" with the characters. Identify with who? Is the real world a woman's world? In the real world will the bungling male let the more intelligent female take charge and make decisions?
They identify with, Ba being sympathetic to Tulsi. They identify with Savitha or Tulsi ( depending on which side of the line they are) even as both the characters fight over Mihir and they identify with Tulsi's wrath when Mandira tries to "steal" him. They identify, also, with Parvati feeling angry at the "other woman", not saying a word to Om and leaving the house and of course with all the puja Shaina does to keep Kunal away from Ramola's evil eye.
Its strange however that stronger points like Tulsi standing up for her daughter-in-law in a lawsuit accusing her son of raping the daughter-in-law recieves no such "identification".Parvati's support for her daughter, turning them against the whole family recieves no such applause either.
Worse by far, is this tamil soap portraying a family of 5 sisters and their widower father. Each of them is married and each has a different kind of marital problem.A middle class set up periliously close to the average urban middle class family. A set up which almost all of the tamil speaking population identified with. Disastrous because it portrays the woman as the typical "pativrata" who will spend all her life crying in a household that shows her no respect, with a husband that couldn't care less and will beat her up at every possible opportunity. People freely spewing dialogues that ,translated, go something like " Your education has spoilt you". She will take it all, cry lots of silent tears, bear his children and get beaten some more for not bearing a son.Another will show a very smart divorcee , smart enough to run a business of her own but still reduced to tears because she is not with her "husband" any more.
Essentially media slots all humans into three types of people. Men,"good" women and "bad" women.Three distinct species, the women-kind fighting for who the Men will listen to. A media student ,an ardent fan of all the above mentioned soaps, found herself locking horns with me. On being asked why media never tires of dishing out such trash she simply said " Because it sells". Point taken. Don't you think , as mass media , with so much impact, you should be thinking of something that would also help society grow? She stared at me with a blank expression on her face, trying to suppress the irritation she was probably feeling by now and said as simply as before " No, that won't sell".
Take hindi serials for example. Most of them are part of the ever growing K-family. Most depict huge and very rich joint families where the men all work in the family business and most of the women sit at home, form teams against each other and hatch plans of doom. The woman who goes to work, is , in all probability the vamp. The prototype vamp has her own custom background score, she makes fashon statements with wierd makeup and more wierd innovations to the traditional sari or salwar kameez.
Its a woman's world inside the idiot box. They fight, they bicker and they bring justice to the world. Men are props, often confused bungling souls who have no clue why they are there and when their characters are going to be killed or when they are going to be brought miraculously back to life, almost always with amnesia and in the vamp's house.
Ask the average viewer why they watch these soaps and they say they "identify" with the characters. Identify with who? Is the real world a woman's world? In the real world will the bungling male let the more intelligent female take charge and make decisions?
They identify with, Ba being sympathetic to Tulsi. They identify with Savitha or Tulsi ( depending on which side of the line they are) even as both the characters fight over Mihir and they identify with Tulsi's wrath when Mandira tries to "steal" him. They identify, also, with Parvati feeling angry at the "other woman", not saying a word to Om and leaving the house and of course with all the puja Shaina does to keep Kunal away from Ramola's evil eye.
Its strange however that stronger points like Tulsi standing up for her daughter-in-law in a lawsuit accusing her son of raping the daughter-in-law recieves no such "identification".Parvati's support for her daughter, turning them against the whole family recieves no such applause either.
Worse by far, is this tamil soap portraying a family of 5 sisters and their widower father. Each of them is married and each has a different kind of marital problem.A middle class set up periliously close to the average urban middle class family. A set up which almost all of the tamil speaking population identified with. Disastrous because it portrays the woman as the typical "pativrata" who will spend all her life crying in a household that shows her no respect, with a husband that couldn't care less and will beat her up at every possible opportunity. People freely spewing dialogues that ,translated, go something like " Your education has spoilt you". She will take it all, cry lots of silent tears, bear his children and get beaten some more for not bearing a son.Another will show a very smart divorcee , smart enough to run a business of her own but still reduced to tears because she is not with her "husband" any more.
Essentially media slots all humans into three types of people. Men,"good" women and "bad" women.Three distinct species, the women-kind fighting for who the Men will listen to. A media student ,an ardent fan of all the above mentioned soaps, found herself locking horns with me. On being asked why media never tires of dishing out such trash she simply said " Because it sells". Point taken. Don't you think , as mass media , with so much impact, you should be thinking of something that would also help society grow? She stared at me with a blank expression on her face, trying to suppress the irritation she was probably feeling by now and said as simply as before " No, that won't sell".
Back-Links | »
February 14, 2006 9:53 AM
I agree with your sentiment that TV should be active in helping foster progressive ideas.
But consider the rewards system in place. Do investors appreciate a company being socially progressive? Not exactly. They are ok if a TV channel is neutral or follows convention. Management is safe. If management decides to be socially progressive there is a risk that the audience wont accept it (as with any new ideas). Management will be maligned for bad business sense.
That is why, in my opinion, companies dont usually conspicuously aid social causes.
This is a pity. As you point out TV is a huge medium with great potential for social change. Doordarshan, as a quasi-govt entity, could do more. But they suffer from creative bankruptcy and their programs usually put you to sleep.
February 14, 2006 6:59 PM
Discliamer: Its not the same S. having a conversation with herself. She isn't that mad.....yet.
I realise that it's porbably too far fetched and may be even unfair at some level to ask TV channels to come up with only socially relevant serials. My only point is this, make the trash you make, just pepper it with a few social messages since you know how many people watch the thing.
An example would be , say the movie Kal ho Na Ho (as you can see I am chronic indian-entertainment addict, I like to watch and I like to curse :)). So here's a story about a guy who is terminally ill and who falls in love with this girl. but good soul that he is , he sets her up with another guy that also loves her cause he is not gonna be around to "take care of her" *rollinf eyes* ( oh well thats not the point here) . So Shah Rukh Khan (going-to-die guy) dies of a heart condition. My piint is this.....why a heart disease???? They could have killed him of AIDS...that way they can also be subtly passing on the message of how family needs to support an AIDS victim. If they are worried about his "image" and any suggestions of "immoral" behavior they can use all that time they used to explain in detail, his heart problem, to say that he was being noble and donating blood and got it through tranfusion needles that were being reused....see how in one line there's two messages?? Donate blood but be careful! and does it affect the story at all???? No, he dies anyway right? and if the breathlessness effect in the climax had to be due to the heart disease, well AIDS victims also have similar or more complicated health issues!
so see, in a perfectly saleable package all they needed to do was to think a teeny weeny bit and come up with something that was also socially relevant!
February 14, 2006 8:18 PM
s. : oye!! morality is not a localised phenomenon in the region of the vagina or anus.
how you contracted HIV infection doesnt matter unless you want to warn whoever it is that they may need to do a test too!
February 14, 2006 10:07 PM
while this is a tangent to the main point here let me make my position clear. Pre Marital Sex is still a moral issue in India. When one opts for it, one makes, atleast in the eye of society, an "immoral" choice. A filmstar may, and this is often the case, also be concerned about being projected in this "immoral" light.
All that said, it is also true that AIDS does spread through needles too so what is wrong with showing that part of it?
February 14, 2006 11:30 PM
hmmmm. i'm clamping a hand across my mouth - it's very hard to shut up where that particular subject's concerned! but ok. i understand that that's a huge issue, and maybe we'll get side tracked from media conditioning ... but hey, one day we need to look at that too! :)
February 15, 2006 2:04 PM
Dear Sdot, (Sdot is you. I yam wonly Ess)
I fear your suggestion, whilst deliciously insidious, may not be effective. A significant amount of any program/movie needs to be devoted to explaining and pushing moral values. Its like a thesis. Working this much of, possibly, non-entertainment material will backfire like an ancient musket.
What may be more effective, in my opinion, are programs dealing with issue. Produce slick 30-60 min programs on aids, dowry, religious tolerance etc. Give them prime time and advertise them.
The point is: how many TV channels will do this? How many producers will give their directors/script writers the freedom to explore such issues? Naught i suspect.
So the long term solushun is to improve primary educashun and pay primary school teachers much much more. We need a social revolution. It will be fuelled by education.