The British rule over India, also known as the British Raj, contributed to a major change and profound impact on the Indian subcontinent. From the years 1858-1947, the British Government ruled over India both internally and externally as a colony. India’s blooming and abundant natural resources were an appealing source of profits for the British Empire, starting in the early 16th century under the East India Trading Company. India was the largest subcontinent under British control, and the British Empire was determined to stop any other power from obstructing its ultimate goal. This led to the scramble for India, and the rise of the British Raj was soon evident during the mid-19th century. The Indian elite were often granted protection under British rule as long as they pledged loyalty to the Crown. Throughout its colonial rule in India, the British Empire worked swiftly to overtake all elite positions to establish complete rule over the nation.
The British Raj employed acts of violence and terrorism to control and suppress any potential revolution, which contributed to modern day views of anti-imperialism. It was evident that India yearned for independence, as evidenced by the resistance against the British regime. During the Great War, Indian people were often promised sovereignty in exchange for their support during the Great War, yet these promises went frequently unfulfilled. When all hope was lost for freedom, the Civil Disobedience Movement, initiated by Mahatma Gandhi, began to garner support throughout India. Women and members from the lower caste system, began to rise and march for Independence. This form of protest garnered attention around the world and popularity, ultimately leading to the independence of India in 1947 from the British Raj.
Films play a significant role in reflecting common social sentiments, as is the case in many countries. The rise of Bollywood has enabled India to extend its influence as a 'soft power' by portraying common themes through cinema. It is evident that India's yearning for independence, and its ongoing struggle with the effects of colonization, are symbolized in its media. Bollywood films often present fictionalized accounts of historical events. In this paper, I aim to demonstrate how contemporary media, particularly Bollywood, has brought the injustices of British rule in India to a global audience. As socio-political issues evolve, films adapt to reflect the current state of affairs related to the British Raj. The films I will analyze are three contemporary works that depict the Indian revolution against the British Empire. These films primarily focus on the years 1847-1857, a critical period in determining the future of imperialistic influence over India, and they share a common theme of suffering and resistance.
The film Mangal Pandey: The Rising, directed by Ketan Mehta released in 2005, is based on the figure Mangal Pandey in the year 1857. The movie begins with the death sentence hearing of Pandey for protesting against the new rifles introduced by the British East India Company. The movie then proceeds by flashing back to four years prior to the execution. Pandey, initially a loyal member of the British Empire, had risked his life to save Captain William Gordon during a battle in Afghanistan. However, tensions begin to arise for Pandey when he learns about the rumors that the cartridges, which soldiers had to bite down on and used in the British rifles, were coated in a layer of pork and beef fat. Although trivial to British troops, this information posed a conflict for Pandey and other Indian troops due to their religious beliefs. Biting down on beef or pork would go against Hindu and Muslim religious dietary restrictions that forbids the consumption of pork and beef. Despite Gordon’s assurance that this is an untrue rumor, Pandey discovers the truth, leading to not only the end of his friendship with Gordon, but also his loyalty to the British crown. Pandey subsequently becomes the leader of a rebellion against British forces. He is eventually captured and tried for treason. Although Gordon warns that his execution would incite a revolt, he is ignored, and Pandey in the end is ultimately hanged. The film concludes with the start of the Indian Rebellion of 1857.
Mangal Pandey,the historical figure, joined the British East India Company’s army in 1849 with ambitions of advancing in the British military ranks. In 1850, new Enfield rifles were introduced that were rumored to have cartridges greased with either cow or pig lard. This rumor caused outrage within the British army, as it was believed that the British were aware and had done it intentionally. In 1857, Pandey attempted to instigate a revolt against the British military. However, historians suggest that this action was not motivated by nationalistic sentiments but might have been a result of his intoxication with “bhang,” a form of marijuana . As a consequence, Pandey was sentenced to be hanged. Shortly thereafter, the Indian Rebellion commenced.
In the film Mangal Pandey: The Rising, Pandey's transformation from a loyal member of the British military to the leader in the resistance serves as a powerful narrative against British Imperialism. The film also portrays Pandey as an example of how Indian civilians, despite pledging loyalty to the British Crown, would always continue to be seen as outsiders. While the film is often praised for its virtuous retelling of Pandey’s story, it faces criticism for the glorification of violence as an act of protest. The film went on to make over 14 million in domestic sales and over 23 million in worldwide Box Office collections making it one fourth highest grossing film in India.
The 2019 action film Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi, directed by Krish Jagarlamudi, depicts the historical figure Manikarnika Tambe, also known as Rani Lakshmi Bai, set in the year 1828. The film bases majority of its interpretation of Manikarnika Tambe against the East Indian company in the Indian Rebellion of 1857. After the death of her husband, Tambe ascends to the throne as the Queen of Jhansi. During this period, the British East India Company and the Indian people began to face ongoing conflicts, eventually seizing control over the throne of Jhansi. In response, Tambe chooses to become the leader of a rebellion against the British and take back her throne from the British. In the film, Tambe encourages not only the men but also women to fight against their oppressors for the protection of their land and way of life. Tambe manages to gather the support of over 20,000 troops to join her campaign. However, Tambe is ultimately killed by the British army and shortly after the British Empire gains full control of Jhansi.
Manikarnika Tambe was raised unlike many other royals. From an early age, she learned martial arts and became an expert sword fighter and horse rider. After the death of her husband, Gangadhar Rao, Tambe adopted a young boy to inherit the throne of the Maharaja of Jhansi. However, the East India Company appointed one of its own as an overseer instead. In 1857, with her son still a minor, Tambe became the Queen of Jhansi. Tambe swiftly garnered the support of other revolutionaries and led an attack on the British. The British quickly rushed to surround the fortress of Jhansi, but Tambe along with other revolutionaries managed to fight their way out and later lead a successful attack on Gwalior. Dressed as a man, Tambe fought bravely in her final battle against the British but was ultimately killed in battle.
The film's portrayal of Tambe serves as a symbol of resistance, highlighting not only the fight against British Imperialism, but also the significance of women's contributions to the resistance. Women and members of the lower caste were often overlooked or forgotten in historical accounts of those who fought for freedom. Therefore, making Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi, a film that many civilians can look to as a hero. However, the film has faced criticism regarding its fictional deviation, which some argue take away from the real Manikarnika Tambe, Queen of Jhansi’s contributions to the anti-British movement. The film claims to have been approved and vetted by three unknown Historians in order to ensure accuracy, yet it has been accused of historic inaccuracies by film critics like Betsy Reed in the Guardian. Despite the movie's mixed reception regarding both the historical accuracy and the overall film, Tambe continues to be praised for her effort in the resistance against the British Empire. Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi went on to 67th National Film Awards and made over 1 million in sales in the Box Office.
In the 2022 film RRR directed by S. S. Rajamouli, showcases a fictional historical adaptation of two revolutionaries, Alluri Sitarama Raju and Komaram Bheem. The film RRR, although fictional, portrays Alluri Sitarama Raju and Komaram Bheem as heroes who stood against the unjust oppression of the British Empire. Raju, who is part of the colonial police, is given the task to dismantle any forms of rebellion. However, As the film unfolds, Raju becomes close to Bheem and later reveals that he too secretly was part of the resistance against the Raj. Together, Raju and Bheem, with the aid of other revolutionaries and oppressed individuals, soon are able to succeed against the Raj.
Komaram Bheem was born in 1901 in the Gond tribe where he didn’t receive any formal education. When he turned fifteen his father was killed, out of anger, Bheem ended up killing a informer who was exploiting their land. This caused Bheem to run away to the city of Assam where he learned to read and write and became part of the resistance against the Nizams. He worked predominantly defending rural villages that were being exploited by heavy taxation with his guerilla army. During one of the battles Komaram Bheem was killed.
Alluri Sitarama Raju, born in 1897, was conscious from a young age of the atrocities committed by the British. To better understand the extent of British power over the people in India, he traveled across the country. Upon his return, he emerged the leader of a rebellion to defend the rights of the Adivasis. Raju won multiple battles using simple weapons like bows and arrows and often acquired guns and bullets from his successful encounters. In 1924, a British officer, TG Rutherford, placed a bounty of 10 thousand rupees on his head. Raju was eventually found and killed in that same year. Although both Komaram Bheem and Alluri Sitarama Raju were aware of each other's achievements, they never met.
Through this symbolic representation, the widespread acceptance of negative perception of the British Raj, established in India, became evident. The opening scene shows a British elite kidnapping a young girl from a village solely for the purpose of causing mayhem. Many dialogues in the film depict British officers speaking of Indian civilians as inferior to themselves. Additionally, RRR illustrates that even loyal Indians, like Raju, were given little to no respect and excluded from events where other British Elites would be present. Raju was expected to simply follow orders not appropriate to other British police officers. The movie also shows how any attempt at a revolution or rallying of Indian citizens was often met with extreme measures, such as the death penalty or massacres, fuelling the rise of rebellions.
On the contrary, the film fails to show any form of acceptance towards the British Empire or acknowledge the positive impact of its influence. RRR is often criticized for as a “ movie that stoke the flames of nationalism,“ failing to provide an unbiased view of imperialism. While critics like Pranav Jani criticize the film for the romanticization that is perpetuated in the film. Nevertheless, the film's anti-colonial narrative and popularity have raised awareness about these issues to those who might not be familiar with these events and historical figures. The film went on to receive an oscar for their song “Naatu Naatu” and made over 170 million in the Box Office Collections while also receive multiple awards around the world. The film went on to be one of the first films to star on Netflix and helped with the spread of awareness of not only its anti-imperialistic message but also the spread of Bollywood. These films have enabled scholars to analyze and understand complex socio-political issues prevalent in Bollywood. Following the end of the British rule in India, the nation was determined to forge a new culture and unity through democratic means. It was Jawaharla Nehru that utilized film as a tool to unite both the remaining wealthy elite left in India and the poor through the Indian People’s Theatre Association (IPTA). The Indian People’s Theatre Association, was responsible for creating Indian films and were done with the intention of fostering unification by depicting historic and fictional renditions of traumatic events.
Understanding the impact of films can be detrimental to the interpretation of the message conveyed by popular Bollywood films. However, the study of these films often encounters challenges and limitations from western and Indian scholars. Many scholars, as Neelam Sidhar suggests, consider these films to be too “culturally specific,” implying that they are meant to only be used as nationalist tools to disseminate a particular message . In the journal “ PostModern Bollywood,” it is discussed that instead of using these films as only a reflection of historic and political issues in India, they should be seen as an expression of cultural and symbolistic necessity in shaping a standard Indian culture.
While some scholars share this view, others, like Meheli Sen, argue that the overall exaggeration of historical events in Bollywood films regarding colonization is essential for creating a lasting impact. Meheli Sen believes to fully understand socio-political issues depicted in Bollywood, one must be able to look beyond Western film standards of “normality.” Elements of Bollywood films that might be seen as mere interruptions, such as music, dancing, and exaggerated storytelling, actually serve to convey an important social narrative. Being able to grasp the underlying themes and central ideals of popular Indian films, like in Bollywood, can draw more attention to prevalent issues in India. While all Bollywood films have contributed to their own unique perspectives, modern films help understand the current state of affairs and how views have progressed over time.
The progression of these modern films also showcase how attitudes have become more stern regarding Imperialism. Mangal Pandey: The Rising, released in 2005, presents a more sympathetic view of the British Raj by using characters like Captain William Gordon. Although Captain William Gordon is still oppressive to the Indian people, he still highly respects Pandey. By incorporating characters like Gordon, the film encourages its viewers to view this historic event of the British Raj from multiple perspectives. In contrast, RRR released in 2022, holds a more straight forward stance against colonial rule.
The film RRR uses its opening scene to clearly state the intention and message regarding the British Raj. It begins with Raju, bloody and injured, fleeing from a Lion who is actively hunting him. Despite his determination, Raju shows signs of fear as he leads the lion to his predetermined spot. Upon arrival, the lion is trapped in a net. However, the ends of the net come loose. Raju quickly runs to hold on to the ends of the net with both hands, struggling to contain the lion as it continues to attempt to attack. Just as the net becomes undone and leaps toward Raju, he throws a ball filled with sleeping powder at the animal. Using his extraordinary strength, Raju manages to restrain the lion until it eventually falls asleep, securing his victory in the battle.
Although this opening scene can be interpreted in various ways, it serves as a symbolic representation of the struggles and suppression faced by the Indian rebels against the British Empire. With the unique characteristic of Bollywood, this scene portrays Raju as a heroic figure, willing to sacrifice his own life for the sovereignty of his nation. Despite being seen as weaker compared to the British army, his readiness to fight is clear. The film itself also progressed to a far more intolerant view from the British. This overall film presents a much more direct message about British Imperialism.
Although Imperialism has ended, its after-effects remain prevalent in today's Indian society. Colonization by White Europeans in India led to the institutionalization of the caste system, a discriminatory systemic social structure designed to benefit only the British and to maintain power over India. The caste system is divided into four main classes: Bhramin, Kshatriya, Vaisya, and Shudra. Those born outside these castes were called the Asprishya Shudra, which translates to “not-to-be-touched Shudra” also known as the Dalites. This term and concept was created by Sir Herbert Risley for the 1901 Indian Census.
The British positioned themselves at the top, aligned with the Brahmin elite class. Although the caste system dates back to over one thousand years ago, it was the British who enforced and cultivated it more stringently, deeping its impact over skin color, economic status, and social hierarchy. One’s caste continues to influence social standing in society. Despite the caste system being declared illegal in India, the caste system is still prevalent, not only in India but also in Western Nations. For instance, the immigration data from the United States reveals that eight out of ten Indians immigrants accepted identify as being part of the upper caste system. The persistence of the caste system is evident in continued discrimination against those of lower rank, even outside India.
Bollywood films such as, RRR, Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi, and Mangal Pandey: The Rising, demonstrate the caste system influence through the treatment of their characters. Raju and Pandey, despite their loyalty to the British power, and even their enforcement of harsh techniques to quell rebellions, are viewed with suspicion and considered “lesser than” by their superiors. They are frequently tasked with executing the commander's dirty work, as it was deemed inappropriate for the British to enforce these laws themselves. In contemporary India, various groups are actively working to dismantle these beliefs. They are venturing out to rural communities and informing the public about the harms and misconceptions of the caste system. Additionally, many young Indians are increasingly more open to the idea of marrying outside their caste, a movement that will hopefully soon contribute to eventually eradicate these end such discriminatory and outdated ideals.
The prominence of colorism, which was intensified in India during the British Raj, has led to the establishment of toxic and racist standards of beauty and discriminatory treatment based solely on one's physical appearance in modern society. Many Bollywood films predominantly feature mixed-race or fair-skinned actors and actresses to depict historical figures of indigenous Indian origin. Lighter and fair skin complexions are often regarded as superior, both societally and by beauty standards. This bias could be attributed to the belief that wealth was associated with lighter skin, while those who were poor often had darker complexions.
In instances where the historical figure is known to be of a darker skin tone, a common practice, often used in Bollywood is known as “brown face.” Instead of casting actors that shared similar skin tones, those with lighter skin were chosen and used darker makeup on their face to fulfill these roles. Although this practice has been critically condemned by multiple people who consider such practice and racist , it continues to make its way in Indian films.
Due to the influence of both Bollywood and post-imperialist attitudes, the issue of colorism is prevalent even among civilians in India. Indian women are continually bombarded with advertisements for skin lightening treatments and cosmetic procedures. However, as more activists begin to criticize such standards, significant changes have been implemented throughout India.
Film has played a pivotal role in symbolizing and understanding a nation's past, present, and future goals and aspirations. Bollywood has utilized film to highlight and spread awareness of the lingering feelings of post-imperialism. These modern films use art forms unique to India, predominantly using historic events against the British Raj, resonating common sentiments of desperation for a sovereign nation. Although these Bollywood films are criticized by some scholars for being overly nationalistic and creating false narratives of prominent revolutionaries, others argue that these films should be viewed and analyzed with a non-ethnocentric mindset in order to truly grasp their meaning and symbolism. Bollywood has provided the Indian people with a unified sense of nationhood but also shared cultural experiences. Films that were once only accessible to Indian audiences have gained a global following for their uniqueness and quality. This international recognition helps spread awareness of the issues that persist in India due to colonization to a broader and more diverse audience.
Primary and Secondary Sources:
(1) Sharmistha Gooptu. “Mangal Pandey: Is ‘History’ Important?” Economic and Political Weekly 40, no. 35 (2005): 3797–3800. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4417064.
(2) Babu, Ritesh. "RRR is an incredible action movie with seriously troubling politics." Vox.com. July 20, 2022, 9:00am EDT. https://www.vox.com/23220275/rrr-netflix-tollywood-hindutva-caste-system-oscars-2023.
(3) Jani, Pranav. "Anti-colonial Militancy, Hindutva Politics: Review of S.S. Rajamouli’s 'RRR'." Medium.com. February 20th. https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/anticolonial-militancy-hindutva-politics-review-of-s-s-rajamoulis-rrr-e72841a79c73
(4) CHATTERJEE, PARTHA. “INDIAN CINEMA: Then and Now.” India International Centre Quarterly 39, no. 2 (2012): 45–53. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41804040.
(5) Wright, Neelam Sidhar. “Anti–Bollywood: Traditional Modes of Studying Indian Cinema.” In Bollywood and Postmodernism: Popular Indian Cinema in the 21st Century, 21–45. Edinburgh University Press, 2015. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt16r0hqr.7.
(6) Sen, Meheli. “Beyond Bollywood?” Cinema Journal 52, no. 4 (2013): 155–60.http://www.jstor.org/stable/43653157.
(7) SHARMA, KANHAYA L. “Is There Today Caste System or There Is Only Caste in India?” Polish Sociological Review, no. 178 (2012): 245–63. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41969443.
(8) Charsley, Simon. “`Untouchable’: What Is in a Name?” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 2, no. 1 (1996): 1–23. https://doi.org/10.2307/3034630.
(9) Badrinathan "Social Realities of Indian Americans: Results From the 2020 Indian American Attitudes Survey." Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. June 09, 2021. https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/06/09/social-realities-of-indian-americans-results-from-2020-indian-american-attitudes-survey-pub-84667.
(10) Phoenix, Aisha. “Colourism and the Politics of Beauty.” Feminist Review, no. 108 (2014): 97–105. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24571924.