Suddenly I realize what dilemma I’m caught up in…n all thanx 2 IPL frenzied country of ours. Well not tht I m a cricket buff- no…believe me, but wid d entire country,& y go so far, even my family and frnds r going ga-ga over this IPL Fever.
I m being forced into all this just so as to be a part of d crowd. But that’s not even my real dilemma. My real point is what sud I support in IPL…cricketer? Teams? Or celebrities?
Mixing of all these 3 is making it all go haywire 4 me.
See normal cricket I get…one-days and test matches n even 20-20s.
But aren’t v all alrdy so divided in name of cricket- national team, international teams, this cricketer or that one, etc. then I don’t get it y would 1 like to bring in more elements in this gap?
Well in this IPL, even further divided is d fact that here even cricketer taking part r a mix of national & international stars. Teams r being owned by either bollywood celebrities or big business magnets. Even bollywood stars r going in different directions to provide support (as brand ambassadors) for either their hometown teams or their friend’s teams.
IPL mania is catching up like a fire in d jungle. Save yourself from dis alignment, is all I can think of as of now. So far, it is the inspiration drawn from d ‘non-alignment movement’ initiated by certain developing and underdeveloped countries of d wrld, during the time of Cold War. This solution is appealing to me d most 2 save myself from these dilemmas.
Whom should I follow…
Cricketers- national or international hotties that I love 2 see(rather stare at…hehehe)?
Teams- my hometown team or the teams of the place where I earn my livelihood (gladly 4 me both r one…but this can b a question 4 others, I guess) or one that my favorite stars own.
Or Bollywood?
Like I would now cite my example here.
Home team- Delhi- Delhi daredevils.
Favorite star- SRK- his team Kolkata Knight Riders.
Now which should I support being an ok-ok fan or cricket but a a great lover of Delhi and also of bollywood as well.
Where should, or rather where do, my ‘loyalties’ lie in such scenario.
Delhi daredevil or Knight Riders?
Akshay kumar or SRK?
Sehewag or Ganguly?
Mumbai Indians or Kings XI?
Ambani or Priety Zinta?
Dhoni or Yuvraj?
Bollywood or Bhangra?
Why do I still ask…..its all IPL.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Indian T.V. strengthening stereotypical hierarchies
Soap operas of Indian TV have been playing a major role in promoting stereotypical patriarchal ideas in our society. Whether it is subjugation of women, or idea of women as ‘perfect’ housewives or even presenting women as soft targets for crime of various nature; TV has played its role successfully in all this.
Serials project the ‘so-called’ stereotypical image of traditional women to its audience that then restrengthens these stereotypes in their minds. Totally, house confined tulsi’s and parvati’s without any individuality and who face all the acts of their family members by being mere voiceless entities. Without individuality, is what is now being the most favored attribute that people wish to inculcate in their daughters and daughter-in-laws. Idealism is being reset at so high altitude and the representation is set so much in past that it ends up confusing the people and in turn forces them to accept these images as a part of their living.
India is a country that believes in holding not only its traditions and rich culture but also holding the ‘almost-patriarchal’ stereotypical norms that are attached to it. In such a situation, if TV upholds such ideas further then it is not fair for the ‘new-age’ Indian women who wish to break beyond the bounds of these patriarchal hierarchies.
Shows that show women as soft targets of crimes at home and outside thus give rebirth to the ideas of patriarchy at all phases in society. Crimes like rape, dowry harassments, and molestations and even show various ways and through various arguments with which women are stripped out of their identity and dignity repeatedly.
What is even more shocking is the fact that these shows more than often use women itself to propagate the stereotypes that are typically not in favor of women.
Soap-operas and tear jerker like “kunki..” and “kahanni...”; and even so called different stories like “kasam se”, “betiyaan”, “saat phere”, “parayadhan” and “doli saja ke”, or any other for that matter have same environment that believes in subjugating and suffocating its women in the confines of the four-walls of the house and even women who hold this to be their life of freedom.
Even when shows project women who are career oriented the story itself after 2-3 turns and twists comes back to the same old ‘saas-bahu’ drama.
Well so is the scope of Indian television for now but all that is left to speculate is its future trends, will those in any way be able to offer any ‘change’ for real?
Serials project the ‘so-called’ stereotypical image of traditional women to its audience that then restrengthens these stereotypes in their minds. Totally, house confined tulsi’s and parvati’s without any individuality and who face all the acts of their family members by being mere voiceless entities. Without individuality, is what is now being the most favored attribute that people wish to inculcate in their daughters and daughter-in-laws. Idealism is being reset at so high altitude and the representation is set so much in past that it ends up confusing the people and in turn forces them to accept these images as a part of their living.
India is a country that believes in holding not only its traditions and rich culture but also holding the ‘almost-patriarchal’ stereotypical norms that are attached to it. In such a situation, if TV upholds such ideas further then it is not fair for the ‘new-age’ Indian women who wish to break beyond the bounds of these patriarchal hierarchies.
Shows that show women as soft targets of crimes at home and outside thus give rebirth to the ideas of patriarchy at all phases in society. Crimes like rape, dowry harassments, and molestations and even show various ways and through various arguments with which women are stripped out of their identity and dignity repeatedly.
What is even more shocking is the fact that these shows more than often use women itself to propagate the stereotypes that are typically not in favor of women.
Soap-operas and tear jerker like “kunki..” and “kahanni...”; and even so called different stories like “kasam se”, “betiyaan”, “saat phere”, “parayadhan” and “doli saja ke”, or any other for that matter have same environment that believes in subjugating and suffocating its women in the confines of the four-walls of the house and even women who hold this to be their life of freedom.
Even when shows project women who are career oriented the story itself after 2-3 turns and twists comes back to the same old ‘saas-bahu’ drama.
Well so is the scope of Indian television for now but all that is left to speculate is its future trends, will those in any way be able to offer any ‘change’ for real?
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Arrival of new directors, small budget movies and the multiplex phenomena.
The most hyped about multiplex phenomenon is here to stay and now along with economic importance it is showing certain amount of unification with society and culture as well. The place that earlier came up as the pilgrim’s ground for luxury shop-holics has now added a new dimension to entertainment for moviegoers. The contagious phenomenon of multiplex cinema halls has turned to benefit of one and all—viewers, new directors, small budget films, and experimental movies.
The hectic life of 9-9 economic scenario has given a lot to be demanded by the new young age working generation. The new pace is hard to cope up with and the multiplex culture offers a certain amount of relief to the overworked generation of present.
It provides them with relief from all that trouble that earlier went in catching a movie for mere relaxation. No more long crowded booking counters, no more disappointments of houseful, etc. with multiple movie going on in the same complex in different halls allow people to catch a movie anytime.
The multiplex concept has made it easier for small budgeted movies to make their presence felt among the audience. Movies like “Khosla ka Ghosla,” “Mixed Doubles” and “Bheja Fry,” etc. have been able to not only make a mark with the audience but at the box office as well.
The multiplex culture has ensured constant movement of audience towards such movies as well that earlier would had been left with no takers. This has also helped in the distribution of small budgeted films as the distributors and producers are no longer unsure of film reach, impact and box office collections. As a matter of fact in the past one or two years it has been observed that these small budgeted movies have done much better job with audience reactions in comparison to big-bucks Magnus-operas.
These movies too have done their share in making such impact on the audience. These films offer a pleasant escape to the audience which otherwise had been over fed with the doses of pulp-fictionalized reality of the tear jerking magnum operas.
The new category of movies presents humor, fiction, reality all at the same time yet distinction between each is never blurred which provides the well needed relief to the overworked generation of the age.
This multiplex phenomenon has also encouraged new directors and filmmakers to give reality to their visions. It has given them a sense of security in terms of audience and that it has left them with enough choice to experiment on their work. It has also made producers and distributors more confident in financing and distributing movies of new names and of new genres.
This has also helped the filmmakers to experiment on new genres and the multiplex culture has given a new way to art/ parallel cinema. Movies like “Maine Gandhi ko Nahi Maara”, “Khamosh Pani”, “Haazaron Khawaishein Aisi” and “Haazar Churasi Ki Maa,” etc. have caught audience fancy and thus made the experimental efforts of the directors successful.
Thus we see how the economic ground of multiplex provided opportunities for development and reflection on society and culture.
The hectic life of 9-9 economic scenario has given a lot to be demanded by the new young age working generation. The new pace is hard to cope up with and the multiplex culture offers a certain amount of relief to the overworked generation of present.
It provides them with relief from all that trouble that earlier went in catching a movie for mere relaxation. No more long crowded booking counters, no more disappointments of houseful, etc. with multiple movie going on in the same complex in different halls allow people to catch a movie anytime.
The multiplex concept has made it easier for small budgeted movies to make their presence felt among the audience. Movies like “Khosla ka Ghosla,” “Mixed Doubles” and “Bheja Fry,” etc. have been able to not only make a mark with the audience but at the box office as well.
The multiplex culture has ensured constant movement of audience towards such movies as well that earlier would had been left with no takers. This has also helped in the distribution of small budgeted films as the distributors and producers are no longer unsure of film reach, impact and box office collections. As a matter of fact in the past one or two years it has been observed that these small budgeted movies have done much better job with audience reactions in comparison to big-bucks Magnus-operas.
These movies too have done their share in making such impact on the audience. These films offer a pleasant escape to the audience which otherwise had been over fed with the doses of pulp-fictionalized reality of the tear jerking magnum operas.
The new category of movies presents humor, fiction, reality all at the same time yet distinction between each is never blurred which provides the well needed relief to the overworked generation of the age.
This multiplex phenomenon has also encouraged new directors and filmmakers to give reality to their visions. It has given them a sense of security in terms of audience and that it has left them with enough choice to experiment on their work. It has also made producers and distributors more confident in financing and distributing movies of new names and of new genres.
This has also helped the filmmakers to experiment on new genres and the multiplex culture has given a new way to art/ parallel cinema. Movies like “Maine Gandhi ko Nahi Maara”, “Khamosh Pani”, “Haazaron Khawaishein Aisi” and “Haazar Churasi Ki Maa,” etc. have caught audience fancy and thus made the experimental efforts of the directors successful.
Thus we see how the economic ground of multiplex provided opportunities for development and reflection on society and culture.
South Indian flavor missing from the Indian TV platter
Just as on urban Indian television rural India is very minimally represented similarly in Indian news, especially on national news channels, southern India is presented very marginally.
Music shows never concentrate on d south, Class 12 topper from north gets 9 o'clock headlines, but from south he/she gets a brief interview.
Several reasons go into this…and well I may or may not be correct in my observation.
Firstly, the language barrier keeps southern states separated from rest of the country. Since Hindi is the national language and most of the news channels have Hindi version they probably concentrate on the Hindi-speaking sector. Recently one of my friends pointed out to me that in d latest television show “antakshri”(star one) you can find four Zones representing India and those zones do not include south zone. It includes only north, east, west and Central.
While d shows tagline says “har akshar ki dhun par khelega India” yet somehow southern states are easily omitted, Which makes one wonder if South India belongs to India or not.
This is just one example. India’s 24-hour news channels have just barely an hour or two devoted to news related to the southern belt.
Well I also think that I will not be entirely incorrect if I say that ‘south’ in itself too is a quite secluded community, that like to keep within itself, maintaining their distinctive cultures and traditional roots.
Nevertheless, I think that we too have a hand in that sort of thinking being upheld until now. By ‘we’, I mean the rest of the country and representatives of people. Representatives of southern states themselves do not seem to b making any effort to work on solutions of language and regional barriers and towards bringing ‘south’ closer in the mainstream India.
You know one more interesting thing to ponder on is that in this modernized day n age of global village concept we have become much more closer to foreign countries like U.S.A. and China, etc, than we can ever be to our own southern states.
Well another reason is also d fact that d ‘heartbeat’ of India lies anywhere but in southern India. Like the politics of the country is concentrated in north especially in the national capital of d country Delhi.
Similarly, mumbai and Delhi together become hubs of India’s economy.
Even the hub of India’s biggest movie industry is in Mumbai whereas Delhi plays a very strategically thought of headquarters for all the major news channels of the country.
Bears and bulls, seats, ministries, bollywood, economics, politics, conservatism, ethnic differences, education, growth, and ideas of protecting a pure essence of cultural roots… well according to me all these factors go in seclusion of southern India from the rest of the country.
Music shows never concentrate on d south, Class 12 topper from north gets 9 o'clock headlines, but from south he/she gets a brief interview.
Several reasons go into this…and well I may or may not be correct in my observation.
Firstly, the language barrier keeps southern states separated from rest of the country. Since Hindi is the national language and most of the news channels have Hindi version they probably concentrate on the Hindi-speaking sector. Recently one of my friends pointed out to me that in d latest television show “antakshri”(star one) you can find four Zones representing India and those zones do not include south zone. It includes only north, east, west and Central.
While d shows tagline says “har akshar ki dhun par khelega India” yet somehow southern states are easily omitted, Which makes one wonder if South India belongs to India or not.
This is just one example. India’s 24-hour news channels have just barely an hour or two devoted to news related to the southern belt.
Well I also think that I will not be entirely incorrect if I say that ‘south’ in itself too is a quite secluded community, that like to keep within itself, maintaining their distinctive cultures and traditional roots.
Nevertheless, I think that we too have a hand in that sort of thinking being upheld until now. By ‘we’, I mean the rest of the country and representatives of people. Representatives of southern states themselves do not seem to b making any effort to work on solutions of language and regional barriers and towards bringing ‘south’ closer in the mainstream India.
You know one more interesting thing to ponder on is that in this modernized day n age of global village concept we have become much more closer to foreign countries like U.S.A. and China, etc, than we can ever be to our own southern states.
Well another reason is also d fact that d ‘heartbeat’ of India lies anywhere but in southern India. Like the politics of the country is concentrated in north especially in the national capital of d country Delhi.
Similarly, mumbai and Delhi together become hubs of India’s economy.
Even the hub of India’s biggest movie industry is in Mumbai whereas Delhi plays a very strategically thought of headquarters for all the major news channels of the country.
Bears and bulls, seats, ministries, bollywood, economics, politics, conservatism, ethnic differences, education, growth, and ideas of protecting a pure essence of cultural roots… well according to me all these factors go in seclusion of southern India from the rest of the country.
Saturday, June 16, 2007
MEDIA AS PR MANAGERS 4 CELEBRITIES
Media is considerably turning away from its role of being society’s gatekeeper or well a security guard. Currently its status is more similar to that of a lapdog. By this I am in no way trying to minimize reach and effect of media in general, all I wish to point out is media’s changing loyalties. Media has taken on a new role of being publicity managers for celebrities. A ‘star’ is a ‘star but media makes a ‘star’ a celebrity. Creating hypes, acting as paparazzi around them, creating images and even destroying images. Media is on them 24 hours a day.
Well I don’t think media is at any fault either. In this scenario of 24 hours news channels one cannot expect them (news channels) to bring in “breaking news” all the time, to fill the news slots. Therefore, for sensationalisation it has to turn towards other mediums as well. Media makes a real-life star wedding just as important as prime time news coverage. It brings us scoops and gossips from the world of bollywood, sports, television, etc. they are able to find a celebrity wherever they go. Star- studded launch parties are just as important as tsunami coverage. It is a world of celebrities which media creates or breaks.
Well good or bad, media works to give you publicity whenever, wherever and however.
Well I don’t think media is at any fault either. In this scenario of 24 hours news channels one cannot expect them (news channels) to bring in “breaking news” all the time, to fill the news slots. Therefore, for sensationalisation it has to turn towards other mediums as well. Media makes a real-life star wedding just as important as prime time news coverage. It brings us scoops and gossips from the world of bollywood, sports, television, etc. they are able to find a celebrity wherever they go. Star- studded launch parties are just as important as tsunami coverage. It is a world of celebrities which media creates or breaks.
Well good or bad, media works to give you publicity whenever, wherever and however.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
