Veena and Vidya

22
322

As Pakistan had a collective arousal and subsequent ire at Veena Malik’s alleged photo shoot for FHM, India was reveling in Vidya Balan’s celebration of female sexuality in The Dirty Picture. The censor board in Pakistan decided that The Dirty Picture isn’t for the public consumption, what with them being the protectors of our morality and choices.

Released last Friday, The Dirty Picture revolves around the character of Silk Smitha – an actress whose heyday was in the 1980s. This is the period where Pakistani society was being strangled by General Zia-ul-Haq while India was reaping the benefits of its import-substitution and industrialisation policy. “It [the plot] is about a woman who believes in herself and has no qualms about being the way she is… Silk was fearless and so was the character in the film,” said Balan in a recent interview published in Dawn.

The Dirty Picture raked in Rs 20.32 crores till December 4, on its opening weekend. Its opening day business, estimated to be around Rs 9.5 crores, wasn’t the highest in 2011: that accolade went to Bodyguard with a Rs 21.5 crores return on the opening day. The Dirty Picture ranked fifth in 2011, behind Bodyguard, Ra-One, Ready and Rockstar in terms of opening day business.

The success of the movie is in part due to its marketing strategy: a bold movie such as this required a wider acceptance of its subject matter despite the acclaim that it had been getting in urban centres such as Mumbai. As part of the strategy, Balan was invited to Amitabh Bachchan’s Kaun Banega Crorepati as a contestant. Balan and the male lead in the movie, Emraan Hashmi, also made an appearance in a soap on the same channel, Bade Ache Lagtay Hain. Their presence was worked into the script, with a narrative created around the cast of the movie running into the protagonists of the soap in a hotel in Australia, culminating with both heroines performing on Ooh La La. This was the Bollywood marketing machine at its best, “winning hearts and minds” in India and beyond. This was also Indian professionalism at its best, television feeding the film industry and vice versa.

What has been consistent throughout is Balan’s portrayal as an urbane and sophisticated woman, jolly yet reserved in her private life but equally daring to suit a particular role’s demands. In effect, there is little to suggest that Balan has risen from a red-light area – a perception that Veena Malik doesn’t have the luxury of this side of the border.

Unlike the celebration of female sexuality in India, our policy thrust in Pakistan is to ban anything to do with such celebrations. Or any dissent, anything different that falls outside the interpretation of Islamic or patriotic, as defined by the censor board. Remember the case in the Lahore High Court against singers Naseebo Lal and Nooran Lal for singing “vulgar songs”, and for cable operators for “spreading obscenity in society” through their stage dramas and dances? Or for that matter Slackistan, that portrayed the not-so-secret Islamabad? Or even Tere Bin Laden, a brilliant take on catching Osama bin Laden in Pakistan?

It is not as if debate will be stifled in Pakistan by the banning of such films or songs. It is more about the government perpetuating its control over what society can or cannot watch/hear. It is more about how much agency is given to citizens, of what is deemed morally decent or indecent. It is definitely not about Islam or Pakistan, it is about defining the limits of a state perpetually concerned about its survival – the same state that is still cast in Zia’s mould and remains preoccupied with controlling male and female sexualities. This is our Dirty Picture – albeit one where sadly Veena Malik isn’t cast in the lead role. There is much collective arousal and subsequent ire taking place in Islamabad and Rawalpindi, and not just in the corridors of power. There is much to censor on television these days, much drivel that stunts our people’s power to think and question what is happening.

Perhaps it is time to prepare for a return to the decade of the 1980s, because our change agents – political and judicial – and those who back them, feel comfortable in maintaining status quo in our social attitudes. The change is coming, and this time, there are more Zias than ever before. Anything else is mere fantasy.

The writer is a Karachi-based journalist. Connect with him on Twitter @ASYusuf

22 COMMENTS

  1. Smitha wasn't from a red-light area. She came from a very 'proper' household, actually, and that [move from middleclass morality to an 'item girl'] is what makes her story so amazing. This point, however, is where the difference between her and our starlets ends.

    At the height of her career, Smitha had the power to make or break careers and projects; films that had been gathering dust for ages, suddenly became release-able merely with the addition of a Silk Smitha number. Incredible as this power is, it was bestowed upon her only as long as she stuck to the role that was expected from her; the role of an 'item girl'. The same 'power' is bestowed upon our starlets too, as long as they stick to their roles as golden egg-laying geese for industry's lechers by providing entertainment to other lechers. It is only when they seek to use this sexuality for their own selves, as
    Veena as been trying to do for a few months now, that they run up against the brick wall of societal disapproval and even violence.

    You get what I'm saying? At the end of the day, and in areas where it actually matters, both India and Pakistan treat women who refuse to toe the line in very similar ways. The release or the censorship of acertain movie is a rather superficial marker for this.

    To give you a more 'intellectual' example, look at the difference in the way India's liberal intelligentsia, by and large, treats people such as Barkha Dutt and the way it treats Arundhati Roy.

    • You may be underestimating the differences in the ways Indian and Pakistani societies have developed. If you make a clearer statement of why you don't see this difference, it may be possible to see your pov better. What is it that "really matters" in Veena's case, or arundhati or barkha's cases?

  2. Great opinion piece. As an American of Indian origin, another example of excellent fresh insights from Pakistani English language sites and Al Jajeera – comparable to any in TOI/Hindu or for that matter NYT.

    Ms. Malik, whatever her motivation, seems to very brave to me (or the state of state of Pakistan is much better than is generally portrayed.)

  3. Intellectually minded people like yourself get too fixated on the symbolic political "thrust" of these sorts of controversial actions, that you overlook the cultural and moral consequences underlying the direct actions themselves.

    Displaying morally objectionable actions for a higher purpose does not necessarily morally absolve he action. You have to keep in mind that the public audience tends to gravitate toward emulation rather than comprehension, and seeing celebrities bare down can have a strong influence on young minds to do the same without its intended purpose (eg, posing naked pics on facebook or engaging in pornography, both of which degrade women rather than show them to be "bold" and self-sufficient ). That's basically the story of open sexual promiscuity in the West, which was emulated from celebrities by younger girls who started to wear shorter skirts, then bikinis, then nothing – through the process, the original intention of empowering women was long gone.

    Don't get me wrong. To denounce sexual immodesty onmoral grounds doesn't mean to want to ban them on political grounds, although many Pakistanis feel that way. But the solution also isn't to say, "OK, let's then morally embrace it and politically, as well, too!". What I protest is why we can't have one without the other – to politically accept a freedom of expression such as blaspheming or exposing one's self, while still morally rejecting it? I don't see anything wrong with doing so in order to protect one's culture, especially one that, if does anything right, does a good job when it comes to modesty.

    As for furthering the cause of women: why does expression of wanton female sexuality have to be inextricably tied to women's liberation? Can't women choose their roles, have the same job opportunities, and so on without having to expose themselves naked? Even were we to grant the same political rights to Pakistani women as in the West, is the best course of action to achieve female independence to abandon modesty (which is perhaps the one thing Pakistan does do well)? Can't we advise Pakistan's daughters on another road, besides stripping naked and thereby shedding their innocence and modesty in front of a public audience, making them a feast for whatever perverts they expose themselves to? Isn't there another way for them to win their freedoms?

    If this were a necessary action to advance's women's rights, I would understand, but I highly doubt it and I leave the liberal minded the burden of proof to show just how. The enduring image of Rosie the Riveter has done more to advance women's liberation than any other image in the West, and there isn't an ounce of sexual wantonness in it.

    And if you feel that captivating "power" of female sexual prowess can best be advanced by the lure of female sexuality, that can already be achieved by far more subtle means than nudity. The power of female sensuality has been and continues to elucidated by tasteful works of erotic literature. Though not a work of erotic literature, the very ancient Sanskrit epic of Mahabharata shows Draupadi holding down 5 devoted husbands, each exalting her as his favorite wife and, even today, that work is celebrated as an early work showcasing the dominating potential of the feminine spirit.

    To anyone who would consider me to be a cold prude, quite the opposite. It is funny how, even today, despite the sexual openness of the west, most people are astonished and even intimidated by the sensual illumination in the work of Kama Sutra. Part of reason for the West opening up sexually was so it could be more open to the sensual rather than fixated only on the spiritual – yet we've completely overlooked this goal and defeated the purpose. One may even argue the west did a passable job at it with works by Jane Russell, Bettie Page, and Marilyn Monroe showing women to be both alluring, but also powerful and holding their own. But today, in the US, 99 percent of sexual depictions in the media entirely miss the mark of empowering women and, at the same time, completely hit the mark with making the female individual a public offering to all sexual perverts gawking and drooling at her body through the internet, a magazine, or television.

    So was the whole "sexual" dimension of "sexual liberation" really unnecessary? I think so. Was the West's attempt to promote and therefore morally accept the artistic beauty and power of female sexuallity for some higher purpose, or was it only so we could get the ladies to start stripping down?……

    I think the standard fare of crude and baseless pornography everyone the net testifies to the fact that the whole movement was a farce. The only reason most of the men played along was to get the girlies to shed their clothes, along with whatever innocence, modesty, and dignity they had.

    I think anyone who has taken the time to read this can figure out that there is a third way: a society with the Political freedoms of the West, but still preserving all of the moral integrity that our people have tried so hard to preserve (at least in the area of modesty!).

  4. As an Indian, I could'nt agree more with MK-CA. We must learn things from the west that benefit us while keeping our eyes open for where the west has gone wrong.
    I watched Veena Malik on Big Boss and I was struck by the complete cultural similarity between her and the other Indian girls of her age in the show. Maybe Zia wasn't that successfull after all…

    • With generalizations like 'the west', MK-CA could be writing 'neutral' sounding rationale for Iranian Mullahs or the Taliban.

      Individuals (men & women) should be deciding on what is moral choice for them within the broad societal limits. For example, USA jails more rapists and child pornographers than any south Asian or Arab countries where most such crimes have no consequence.

  5. I am sure that it will come as no surprise to learn that the throttling of Pakistan has continued since Zia's sufficating era ended

  6. Im sure Mr Writer you have plenty of material for this kind of celebration,,,shameless…n im sure you ll have your hands on the movie you are upset about n must have watched it by now n lots of other stuff to "celebrate" for too….Why dont You have a mind open enough to get that Veena's path is not the path Pakistani women want,, or any decent women around the world would want….These kind of acts only disgrace women they don't empower them in anyway….From your take I understand that according to you Shedding cloths brings empowerment to Women….is that what you are trying to say,,, ??

  7. Hola, yusuf cool n hot article.With impulsive wordings.Now an unwanted suggestion to u is that do write a article on What if Sunny Leone gets a peak of sucess in bollywood.
    A journalist (Daily Sakal)

  8. As a male I can tell that seeing nude images of women just does one thing for me and that is objectify them. I see them as nothing but pieces of meat meant for satisfying male desire. If women feel empowered by this then more power to them but I don't like the effect it has on me. I would like to see them as spirit which are to be respected and revered.
    Over the past decade there has been an explosion sensuality across the world and I have no doubt this makes us more sensual beings than spiritual. Do I like this? No. But I do not have a solution to this either. Trying to preserve the conservative values of society through aggressive means are bound to fail. I remember years ago Mamta Kulkarni had a similar photo shoot in India and created a similar storm. It was new for India then but no longer now. I am sure Pakistan will eventually move in that direction and it should. Dogmas and restriction of independent freedom will never work. Those of us who care more about virtues and values in a society have to find different means to preserve them.

  9. I think we all can say something about this issue or any issue and this debate is interesting. I am glad Ahmad initiated this debate and gave people chance to present their opinions. However, it seems no one wants to accept that this as a social debate even when we all are participating in it but it seems that point of debate has become to negate others and go into the polemics. But for me all who are talking here are respectable and i learned a lot from this discussion. Ahmad you did great job and all commentators are also honest and engaging.

Comments are closed.