‘Chak De India’ vs. ‘Swades’
Swades and Chak De India, two recent movies starring Shah Rukh Khan, articulate nationalist feelings in different ways. The first was a flop and the second a hit; the first had depth and the second only superficial ‘popular’ appeal.
The much-celebrated ‘Chak De India’ is replete with stereotypes. And the underlying message of the film, which unfortunately lies buried beneath piles of patriotic one-liners, has a certain violence and hierarchy to it.
The obvious critique of the movie from the point of view of any social science is its celebration of the nation-state at the cost of all diversity. The nation-state articulated by coach Kabir Khan has no Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, etc: it has place only for India. In one broad sweep the locality, with all its specificities, is ostensibly sacrificed at the altar of a brutally homogenizing nationalism.
But only ostensibly! Even from a nationalist standpoint, the movie has disturbing underlying messages. Here is a nation-state demanding unalloyed affection. But does it also dispense equal justice to all its citizens coming from diverse socio-cultural backgrounds? Ostensibly yes, but in a deeper sense no. The nation-state here is full of stereotypes that are naturally suited to construct a cultural hierarchy within the nation. They are calculated to clearly lay down the core and the peripheries of the nation. So in this India with no regions, we have an uncritical portrayal of the “naturally aggressive Punjabi” girl who stands in sharp contrast to the naturally “voiceless tribal girl” from Jharkhand who can say nothing but “ho”. That these stereotypes derive from the same colonizers (“goras”) whom coach Kabir Khan so passionately despises is missed both by the filmmaker and the audience. When some goons pass lewd remarks against the “north-eastern tribal” girls, we have the “naturally aggressive Punjabi” again leading the fight-back. It’s a different matter that all others soon join in – a symbolism of a nation where the North always leads, to be followed by others. No wonder we could not have a non-north Indian Prime Minister for the first four decades of independence!
Again the “real” players in the hockey matches are the girls from Punjab and Haryana, the collective space given to the obviously southern and north-eastern girls being not more than a minute. And we are supposed to believe that there are no regions; there is only an India! A euphemism for north Indian – more specifically Punjabi – dominance at the expense of the “silent” tribals. Surprising that little has been written till now on the deeply hierarchical nationalism of ‘Chak De India’.
The funniest part of the movie is that cricket is sought to be attacked by depicting a comic, evil cricket star in contrast to the celebrated hockey players. Surely, there could have been less crude ways to promote hockey than to make the coach say, “hamaare game mein chhakke nahin hote.”
Swades was very different and much better. The nationalism of this movie sought to engage meaningfully with a society differentiated along class, caste and rural-urban lines. The educated NRI comes to stay with villagers in India. Mutual engagement, though somewhat acerbic at times, leads to both learning from each other. He works to bring self-reliance among them; they in turn make him conscious of the fact that much needs to be done by Indians for their own society far from the West and Indian metropolitan centres. Interestingly, the movie has no enemy to be fought against except the enemy of greed that lies within. There is no celebration of a single, undifferentiated India. Rather, there is an attempt at constructing an India through people’s engagement across class and caste lines in rural areas where development is needed the most. An India strikingly similar to the Gandhian ideal of village republics.
That nationalism loves hierarchised unity rather than critical engagement with the locality has made ‘Chake De India’ a hit and ‘Swades’ a flop.
The much-celebrated ‘Chak De India’ is replete with stereotypes. And the underlying message of the film, which unfortunately lies buried beneath piles of patriotic one-liners, has a certain violence and hierarchy to it.
The obvious critique of the movie from the point of view of any social science is its celebration of the nation-state at the cost of all diversity. The nation-state articulated by coach Kabir Khan has no Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, etc: it has place only for India. In one broad sweep the locality, with all its specificities, is ostensibly sacrificed at the altar of a brutally homogenizing nationalism.
But only ostensibly! Even from a nationalist standpoint, the movie has disturbing underlying messages. Here is a nation-state demanding unalloyed affection. But does it also dispense equal justice to all its citizens coming from diverse socio-cultural backgrounds? Ostensibly yes, but in a deeper sense no. The nation-state here is full of stereotypes that are naturally suited to construct a cultural hierarchy within the nation. They are calculated to clearly lay down the core and the peripheries of the nation. So in this India with no regions, we have an uncritical portrayal of the “naturally aggressive Punjabi” girl who stands in sharp contrast to the naturally “voiceless tribal girl” from Jharkhand who can say nothing but “ho”. That these stereotypes derive from the same colonizers (“goras”) whom coach Kabir Khan so passionately despises is missed both by the filmmaker and the audience. When some goons pass lewd remarks against the “north-eastern tribal” girls, we have the “naturally aggressive Punjabi” again leading the fight-back. It’s a different matter that all others soon join in – a symbolism of a nation where the North always leads, to be followed by others. No wonder we could not have a non-north Indian Prime Minister for the first four decades of independence!
Again the “real” players in the hockey matches are the girls from Punjab and Haryana, the collective space given to the obviously southern and north-eastern girls being not more than a minute. And we are supposed to believe that there are no regions; there is only an India! A euphemism for north Indian – more specifically Punjabi – dominance at the expense of the “silent” tribals. Surprising that little has been written till now on the deeply hierarchical nationalism of ‘Chak De India’.
The funniest part of the movie is that cricket is sought to be attacked by depicting a comic, evil cricket star in contrast to the celebrated hockey players. Surely, there could have been less crude ways to promote hockey than to make the coach say, “hamaare game mein chhakke nahin hote.”
Swades was very different and much better. The nationalism of this movie sought to engage meaningfully with a society differentiated along class, caste and rural-urban lines. The educated NRI comes to stay with villagers in India. Mutual engagement, though somewhat acerbic at times, leads to both learning from each other. He works to bring self-reliance among them; they in turn make him conscious of the fact that much needs to be done by Indians for their own society far from the West and Indian metropolitan centres. Interestingly, the movie has no enemy to be fought against except the enemy of greed that lies within. There is no celebration of a single, undifferentiated India. Rather, there is an attempt at constructing an India through people’s engagement across class and caste lines in rural areas where development is needed the most. An India strikingly similar to the Gandhian ideal of village republics.
That nationalism loves hierarchised unity rather than critical engagement with the locality has made ‘Chake De India’ a hit and ‘Swades’ a flop.
posted by vikaspathak at 12:06 PM
2 Comments:
*nods in approval*
appreciate your critique.
However movies like 'Swades' with the indepth expression seem to fall short in carrying the message to the audience in large numbers. The question is how to bridge the gap. It's not the intellectuals but the masses who should be able to appreciate message cinematic expression.
Post a Comment
<< Home