India Insights: Indian Cinema and the Rebranding of the Historical Narrative of India
The Kashmir Files
The 2022 film Kashmir Files is about Kashmiri Hindus who fled Kashmir during the 1990s following an insurgency there. The 2024 film Godhra: Accident or Conspiracy is about the death of about 59 Hindus during the 2002 Gujarat Riots, and another movie with a similar story is called The Sabarmati Report. These films have been labeled as “BJP propaganda,” “historical revisionism,” “Islamophobic,” and “Hindu nationalist.” However, when examining these recent Indian films, they illustrate two trends. The first is the gradual evolution of the “patriotic film” genre and the second is how the film industry has been politized by the Indian government to promote its agenda.
It is important to note that nationalistic films existed in India before the BJP came to power. For example, Lakshya (2004) deals with the tensions between India and Pakistan during the Kargil War. Laagan (2001) is about the opposition to British colonialism through a cricket game, and Chak de! India (2007) is about the victory of the Indian women’s field hockey team. Additionally, in most Indian films, Pakistan and China are commonly depicted as enemies, similar to how in American films, Russians are depicted as villains. These movies all share common, broad themes from across India like anti-colonialism, social justice, and economic inequality.
However, while newer films continue to touch upon the theme of anti-colonialism, notably RRR (2022) and tensions with Pakistan like Raazi, (2018) recent films indicate the impact of the broader history debate inside India. Ever since Modi took power, there has been a greater push to “reclaim” India’s past glory and ancient civilization. Thus, the Mughal period and the history of Muslim rule in India are presented as “anti-Hindu,” “barbaric,” and “foreign.” During one of Modi’s speeches, he said how India is being liberated from 1,200 years of slavery, which includes Muslim and British rule.
From a historical perspective, there are multiple instances of Muslim kings actively persecuting Hindus. The Ram Mandir temple that recently opened was built on the premise that the Babri Masjid mosque (constructed in 1529 during the reign of Babur) demolished during the 1992 riots was built intentionally in Ayodhya, the sacred city in which the Hindu god Ram and was constructed after the demolition of a Hindu temple. There have been countless other examples of mosques that were built after the demolition of Hindu and Buddhist temples. Similarly, Aurangzeb is remembered as the king who destroyed many Hindu temples and ordered the beheading of the ninth Sikh Guru, Tegh Bahadur. Likewise, the ruler Tipu Sultan, while hailed as successfully resisting the British during the 1700s, also had policies that discriminated against Hindus. Importantly, this new narrative considers the perception that Gandhi and Nehru are given too much importance in India’s independence movement while ignoring the role of other freedom fighters.
The history of persecution of Hindus and Buddhists by Muslim rulers remains deeply traumatic and influences current-day cinema, politics, and society. Thus, Tanhaji: The Unsung Warrior (2020) showcases the Maratha Empire’s battles with the Mughal Empire, and today, the Marathas are remembered for ending the Mughal Empire and later resisting the British. Similarly, Panipat (2019) showcases the Maratha Empire’s fight against the invading Afghan Durrani Empire in the Third Battle of Panipat in 1761. Notably, this film created tensions with the Afghan government, since Ahmad Shah Durrani was the founder of the first Afghan state. Additionally, Padmavat (2018) showcases the period of the Delhi Sultanate (before the Mughal Empire) and how women committed “Jauhar” or self-immolation to “protect their honour”, avoiding rape and other forms of sexual assault during the periods of Islamic invasions that started around 13th century.
However, these recent films illustrate how the film industry has been politicized by the Modi government. On the one hand, the government is utilizing the film industry to advance its policies. For example, many of these films on the history of the Mughal period star leading A-list actors and actresses. During the opening of the Ram Mandir ceremony, numerous celebrities like Amitabh Bachchan attended. The presence of the film industry is a shift from their earlier position of refraining from being involved in heated political debates. Nevertheless, the film industry’s “partnership” with the Modi government isn’t necessarily ideological but rather opportunistic due to the prestige and the immense amount of revenue the government can supply.
At the same time, there have been instances in which the film industry was a target of criticism by several right-wing politicians and individuals. “Bollywood” is called “Urduwood” as Urdu is the official language of Pakistan, and hence the industry is “anti-Hindu,” and “anti-India.” During the release of Padmaavat, the film experienced an immense amount of controversy. For example, a “regional leader of the BJP announced a reward of nearly $1.5m (£1.3m) for anyone who beheaded Mr Bhansali and Ms Padukone.” Additionally, the film was originally called “Padmavati,” but it was changed to Padmaavat to emphasize the movie’s fictionalized story with the poem “Padmaavat.” Similarly, during the release of Paathan (2023) the leading actress Deepika Padukone was criticized for insulting Hinduism since she wore a saffron color bikini in one of the songs. Additionally, the name “Paathan” was criticized since the word “Paathan” is the Indian version of the word to describe “Pashtun.” Yet, at the end of the day, the immense success of films like Paathan illustrates the limitations of the #Boycottbollywood movement.
