Marta's suitcase - Carrying pain and fear

"Marta's suitcase" (La maleta de Marta) by director Günter Schweiger is an unusual documentary on a social issue - violence against women. It is unusual because it touches on areas usually ignored by discussions on this subject. The film travels between Spain and Austria, as it looks at the lives of women and men touched by the violence.

"Marta's suitcase" will be a part of the International Documentary film festival "Mondovisioni" to be held in Bologna (Italy) at Kinodromo between January and April 2014.

Introduction

"Violence against women" is also called "domestic violence" as it usually occurs within the home-walls and the perpetrators are mostly husbands/male companions of the women. Less often it may be perpetrated by brothers, fathers or other men in the family. For this reason, it is also called "intimate partner violence". The violence can be emotional, physical and/or sexual.

The impact of emotional violence is usually under-estimated, and people tend to look at it as something not so important. However, it can be equally devastating. It saps away the victims' self-confidence, hopes, dreams and autonomy, leaving the persons more vulnerable. It may also be the first step of a cycle that leads to physical and sexual violence.

Domestic violence is surrounded by a strong sense of stigma and a sense of shame. Thus, women and children who are victims, also feel judged negatively by others and made to feel that it was their fault. Persons and institutions, who are supposed to provide support such as the police, often share the society's mindset that it is not important, it is an internal family matter and that men have a right to hit their wives if their wives do not behave properly. Thus, instead of providing support, they may even ridicule the victims for complaining. On the other hand, organisations providing refuge or support to battered women are sometimes depicted as creating unnecessary fuss and "destroying the families".

Finally, the words "domestic violence" can give an idea that it is about minor violence, in reality, it usually leads to broken bones or even death. It also results in emotional scars that may never heal, not just in the women victims, but also in the children.

Film

Marta, an Andalusian woman in Spain, asked for separation from her husband in 2000. At that time her two daughters were 12 and 15 years old. One day, while Marta was crossing a street, her ex-husband, a pharmacist, attacked her with his car, breaking the bones of her legs and then attacked her with a knife, cutting her in different places including her neck and abdomen. He was sentenced to prison while Marta underwent numerous operations.

The film presents Marta's testimony about what had happened and her fears because her husband is out of prison now and she knows that one day he is waiting to attack her once again and to kill her. The police and the legal system in Spain does not take Marta's complaints seriously, as her ex-husband had completed his punishment and has not done anything illegal. Marta is forced to hide and change homes and towns, in search of a safer place.

The film also talks to some Austrian psychologists and mental health specialists dealing with men who perpetrate violence against women, to discuss why men behave this way. The film also has some interviews with men who had been violent in the past to ask them to explain why they had behaved the way they did.

Comments

It is a very hard hitting film. To watch Marta tell what had happened and look at the signs of the violence on her body, and to hear about how her own mother and other family treated her after the violence, how it changed her relationship with the world and with her daughters, is very moving.

Marta's family from a small town in south of Spain is ashamed of her for bringing dishonour to the family and for having made different life-choices. Her mother felt that what had happened to Marta was her own fault because she had walked out of her marriage.

The film shows that even in a country with excellent support services such as Austria, the persons dealing with victims of violence say that their shelter for battered women had to turn away more than 50% of the women because they did not have enough space for them.

An interesting part of the film is the interviews with psychologists and the men who had been the perpetrators of violence in the past. The issue of domestic violence is kept under wraps and ignored. However when one does talk about it, it is usually in terms of victims' point of view and the services that are needed to support them. In such discussions, the perpetrators are like monsters and criminals, and thus the discussions are exclusively in terms of legal measures for punishing them and for imprisoning them. The film makes you think about this and raises new ideas about prevention and reduction in domestic violence by designing interventions targeted at men.

Violent men, or rather men who come to violence, are usually insecure. When they are confronted with ideas such as their wives may be feeling attraction for other men (real or imagined) or may be leaving them because they are not happy in their marriages,  these men do not have the skills of articulation, expression of their feelings and discussion. Part of it may be because of the way our societies raise male children and adolescents and the societal representations of masculinity and femininity. Thus, the men may also feel as victims and impotent to change anything, responding to the situations they perceive as threats to their self-image and masculinity, only with violence.

The violent men in the film also feel victims. They say, "She made me lose my mind and turn violent". Due to psychological violence that usually precedes physical and sexual violence, often the victims also feel "guilty" that somehow they themselves were responsible for provoking the violence.

However these insights stimulated by the film about the role of the perpetrators in the violence and perpetrator-victim relationships, point towards different and complex issues. Since domestic violence is very common - in some countries, more than 50% of the women face it at least once in their lives, and it affects both rich and poor homes, I think that the issue of male behaviour in the violence requires urgent research and discussions.

The film is a bit long and also a little repetitive, but perhaps that was my impression because I am familiar with the subject and have been involved in research in this area. Almost all the films planned for the Mondovisioni festival that I have seen so far, were 1 hour 10 minutes to 1 hour 25 minutes long. I feel that this length is excessive for documentaries and most of these films could be shorter by 10-20 minutes, and become more incisive. However, this small critcism does not take away from the hard-hitting impact of Marta's suitcase!

***

The abusers and the lynching mobs

When Tahehlka's Think Fest had started, we were getting ready to start our research on "Violence and Abuse" in north Karnataka. Reading the list of the speakers at the Think Fest, I had briefly fantasized about somehow flying to Goa to listen to some of them. About two weeks later, as the first news about Tarun Tejpal's sexual abuse of a journalist had come out, we had just started to discuss the preliminary research results. We were trying to make some sense out of the terrible situation that had come out of our research.

Our research was on "violence and abuse, including sexual abuse, towards persons with disabilities in the Bidar district of Karnataka". The research was conducted jointly with local associations of disabled persons and persons working in a community programme.

A group of disabled persons and community workers from Bidar district, both women and men, were trained to conduct the research. The aims of our research were two - (i) to gain an understanding about factors influencing violence and abuse towards disabled persons and (ii) to initiate a dialogue on how can violence and abuse be prevented.

During the initial training of the researchers, it had come out that this issue directly concerned both disabled persons and community workers. In the past 12 months, many of them had also been through personal experiences of emotional, physical and sexual violence.

Our daily feedback sessions during the research, when we discussed the information collected during the day, brought out sharing of peoples' stories and invariably had some of us crying.

In the next few weeks, I will be working at the analysis of the information collected during this research. However, the preliminary analysis of our data shows a terrible situation -

• More than 80% of the disabled persons interviewed had at least one experience of significant violence and abuse in the past 12 months. For most of them the experiences were more frequent, some times even daily.
• More than one third of the women interviewed had had at least one episode of sexual violence in the last 12 months.  Married women suffered more violence and abuse compared to unmarried women.
• Disabled men were also victims - more frequently of emotional and physical violence, but about 9% of them had had at least one episode of sexual violence in the last 12 months.

Our research shows that violence and abuse are common in our homes, in our families and in our communities. Few persons had the courage to talk about the abuse they had suffered. Often, those who were supposed to protect them, including police and authorities, were themselves complices and even perpetrators.

While reading about Tarun Tejpal and the journalist, everyday I am listening to the shrill debates, to the cries for jail and stringent punishment, to those who ask for castration and death. And I think of our research.

They shout - kill the rapist, hound anyone connected with them, make examples out of them, better if they are well known persons. The shrill noise means we are exempted from looking inside ourselves, to recognize and understand our societies. We do not need to look at what we do every day in our homes and our communities.

One Nirbhaya every now and then, is fine for breaking news, prime time debates and candle light vigils, so that abuse of hundreds of silent unknown Nirbhayas in our homes, families and communities can go on.

***

Kalakaar - Visual artists in contemporary India

Avijit Mukul Kishore's documentary film in two volumes, "To let the world in", provides an intimate and rare glimpse of some of the better known visual artists from contemporary India.

The world of visual artists is a hidden world and a largely ignored world, except by the people who deal with art. The only exceptions are when suddenly some artist gets in the limelight because of some scandal, like M. F. Hussein. In the recent years, economic magazines and investment bankers have also started talking about some Indian artists whose works command big money. However, both these kinds of spotlights on the artists, have little to do with them as artists and with their art.

This article is about the first volume of the documentary film "To let the world in". The film presents brief interviews with some important visual artists of contemporary India, and shows some of their works. The interviews deal with issues like early influences, finding one's own specific path of artistic expression, and interactions between artists. The visual arts touched in the film vary from paintings, sculptures, installations, photography and performances. A key area of discussion on which many of the women artists talk about is gender and art.

The film starts with artists born in the 1930s and proceeds towards younger persons.

UNDERSTANDING ART

Whatever be the area of a creative expression - writing  or painting or acting - people are always interested in understanding what made the artist reach that specific artistic expression. "What did you and why did you want to express that?", they ask.

Arpita, one of the artists in the film illustrates this when she says, "If I have made a fish, you should also see a fish. But people ask you 'what is it?' so you have to write down everything that this is a fish, this a flower ..."

I think that there is some confusion among artists and among general public in differentiating between the "artistic expression" from "understanding art". At one level, art is about experiencing it, feeling it emotionally and instinctively rather than trying to understand it logically. At another level, somehow people are also interested in whys and hows of the art.

I feel that not all persons who are good at "artistic expression" are equally good at "explaining and understanding their art", and that these are two specific and separate skills. Good artists may be skilled at expressing their feelings and emotions in their art-form, but they may not be good at explaining the subconscious processes and ideas that prompted that artistic expression.

To understand this difference, I like to use the example of persons with obsessive dreams. A person can be a wonderful dreamer and may have strong obsessions about some dreams, but that person can not always understand the significance of those dreams and may need the help of a psychologist or a psychiatrist to understand that. However, most of the time we are happy with our dreams as they are, we do not go to psychologists or psychiatrists to understand them.

Thus, in my opinion, when people say that art-experts and art-critics are "frustrated artists" (or even book critics and film critics), I think that they are confusing between two different skills.

Coming back to the film, seeing different artists tell about their creative processes and their lives, was a wonderful opportunity to look at their art through their eyes. It adds new dimensions to their work. For example, I felt moved by the explanation of Sudhir Patwardhan about the changing relationships between the city and the nature, and his conclusions about painting tiny bits of the city seen through windows.

Just seeing the artists as persons can also add to our understanding about their work, though I am not sure if there are ways to define that understanding as "correct" or "wrong" - it becomes your specific interpretation of their work. For example, after listening to Arpita, the images of nude women in the foreground and military men in the background in her paintings, were no longer generic expressions of violence against women during wars but for me they became a depiction of the situation in the north-east of India.

FINDING ONE'S OWN SPECIFIC PATH

Artists explaining how they slowly discovered their own specific way of being an artist was an area that fascinated me in the film. Thus, Arpita's process of making, cancelling and re-making, Nalini's need for an immersive experience of her art, and Nilima's decision to put her children in her paintings, were interesting in understanding their works and also the kind of forces that gave directions to their artistic expressions.

The artists come out of their art schools with knowledge about techniques, norms and the examples of famous masters. Then, they need to find their own distinctive artistic voices that can move away from the recommended techniques and norms, and become something new. In this process, the artists in the film illustrate the importance of inter-action, dialogue and conflict with their peers. They talk about coming together to hold exhibitions or living together in the same area where they can interact regularly.

The name of late Bhupen Khakhar came up frequently in these discussions in the film, as one of the important artistic influences on different artists in contemporary India.The film pays a special homage to him by showing some of his works - thus, he is the only non-living artist featured in the film.

 AGAINST THE CONVENTIONS

Artists are expected to follow their own social rules and flout the conventions. Different artists in the film express it by depicting subjects that are usually ignored in mainstream medias - violence, exploitation, nude bodies, vaginas and even homo-erotic imagery.

I know that "flouting conventions" is a kind of stereotype, yet it was comforting to see that in spite of the rise of the conservatives of different religions in public spaces in India, Indian contemporary artists are willing to raise questions about those issues that are usually hidden behind the walls of morality and hypocrisy.

THE DICHOTOMIES

There are different dichotomies of meanings given to words and concepts such as - visual versus spoken cultures and popular versus elitist art, that were seen as static but have revealed to be more dynamic. The film touches on some of them and raises questions about them.

What is the role of visual arts today? With social media, TV and films, and digital art, are visual arts going to change and disappear? If photography is a visual art form, how is it affected when millions of persons start taking billions of photographs with their cell phones and putting their personal exhibitions up on Facebook, Twitter and Flickr? Is it democratisation of art or the loss of this art-form because it is now a common skill and not a special skill?

In the film Pushpamala talks about the changing meanings of elitist art meaning some higher quality of art form that is accessible to a few, while popular art is that is practiced by simple persons in their communities and homes and should be accessible more easily to the people. She underlines the contradiction by pointing out that today the "elitist art" of Rabindranath Tagore is far better known and accessible to public compared to the more "popular" art of Kalighat paintings.

Before human beings learned to speak, read and write, we were visual beings and we expressed ourselves mainly through visual mediums. For long part of our history, reading and writing were elitist skills reserved for a few and thus, we continued to be mainly oral and visual societies. Then over the past centuries, gradually reading and writing became more accessible to people and slowly we had started to become words-based societies. Finally, now slowly the pendulum has started to move in a different direction, where people can click pictures with their mobile phones and share them or share short-hand messages that use visual icons. So in future will we go back to being visual societies? What would that mean for the visual arts?

I am still wondering about such questions stimulated by watching the film.

ART AND MARKETING

How do we compare and who compares artistic merits, deciding who is a better artist? The film is about certain artists who are considered important in contemporary India. How was their importance decided?

I can imagine that defining someone as "good" or "great" artist is a result of interplay between the skills of the art-making along with a range of other factors including luck, mentorship, influence and the ability to market oneself. Were it not so, we would not have so frequently persons who become famous many years or decades after their death, while during their life-times no one recognizes their artistic worth.

I was wondering about it while watching Pushpmala in the film as she prepared herself for a performance. How is the performance of a visual "artist" different from that of a person like Lady Gaga or Poonam Pandey, who are able marketers of their skills? Is the difference only in their aesthetics, attitudes and motivations?

And now with the increase in the aggressive marketing of some persons on the social media and their ability to create news, will the criteria for defining good artists change in the future? I can imagine that already some artists with better social marketing skills get more attention from media and their art sells for more - will they be the important artists of our future?

ABOUT THE FILM

I loved watching the first volume of "To let the world in" for stimulating all these different ideas in my mind. I am planning to watch it again soon. At one and a half hours, it is almost as long as a feature film, yet it rushed past so quickly. There were so many moments in the film, especially while it showed the artists' works, that I wished that I could freeze it and look more carefully at those art works.

In the film, often the screen goes dark, as if the camera-eye is blinking.I felt that as a metaphor of how we can have the world in front of us and yet not see it. The human mind is a master illusionist. Each of our two eyes sees a different aspect of the world, but our mind learns to bring those two views together and we forget that our two eyes can see two different worlds. Our eyes also keep on blinking, adding intervals of darkness in front of our eyes, but our mind makes sure that we do not notice that darkness. The film reminds you about those intervals of darkness.

Film is visually very rich, full of colourful images of different art styles. The interviews with the artists are very unhurried and gentle, leaving them to choose the kind of things they wish to talk about, making it richer also at the level of emotions.

CONCLUSIONS

As a child, I was very much aware of contemporary Indian artists of 1960s including J. Swaminathan, Hebbar, B. Prabha, Jatin Das, Ram Kumar, M. F. Hussein ... I had even met some of them. However, over the past 3-4 decades, I had lost contact with the world of Indian artists. Thus, the artists featured in the film are my reintroduction to that world. Except for Anita Dube, who had been part of an exhibition in Bologna in 2012, I was not even aware of their names.

Hearing different persons in the film talk about Bhupen Khakhar and thinking that I had no idea who he was, made me feel bad, and was a reminder of what I had lost while I had been away from India. Searching for and admiring his works on internet, made me feel better.

I am looking forward to watching the second volume of the film, as well as go back to the first volume, for a more in depth viewing.

***

Delhi or Mumbai, the rape capital?

Since December 2012, after the infamous and cruel rape of Nirbhaya in the moving bus in Delhi, reports of other rapes in the Indian capital and other metros continue to appear in the news, including the recent news about the rape of a photo-journalist in Mumbai. Recently, I was reading a paper from a social psychology research about the messages used for changing public behaviour, that raised some questions and doubts in my mind about the common communications in the Indian media about rape. This article explains the research and those doubts.

Social psychology

Social psychology is an area of study that looks at how persons relate to and influence each other. At present, I am involved in an online course on social psychology from Coursera. These online courses are run by prestigious American and a few British universities. They are free and open to everyone. If you have never looked at the Coursera website, and you are interested in continuing your learning through online courses, my recommendation is that you should take a look at it!

Cialdini's research

The research that struck me and prompted this article was done by Prof. R. B. Cialdini from Arizona university and was published in 2003 ("Crafting normative messages to protect the environment" in journal of American Psychological society). This article is one of the learning materials in the course on social psychology.

In this research Cialdini looked at undesirable behaviours and the effectiveness of different public messages that were used in USA to limit those behaviours. Cialdini's paper is not about rapes - it is about damage to the environment. He suggests that people's behaviour can be influenced by 2 kinds of norms in our communications -

(1) Descriptive norms: these norms are about behaviours that are popular and are carried out by a large number of persons. If a behaviour is seen as common, other people feel like copying it. Thus, we should use these norms in our messages when we wish people to do something.

(2) Injunctive norms: these norms tell us which behaviour is forbidden or wrong in our society and should not be done. These norms should be used in messages when we wish people to stop doing something.

Cialdini's research showed that often messages given to public for stopping some bad behaviour used both kinds of norms in an inappropriate way so that they become contradictory, and thus may not be effective. Cialdini's research showed that such contradictory messages can be counter-productive - that is, they promote the behaviour, they wish to stop.

Let me explain myself a little better.

When we talk about an issue, usually we feel that it is important to underline the gravity and the severity of the problem, because we think that if people understand how bad it is they will try to stop it. However, it may not work in that way.

Thus, when we prepare messages, we give information that this problem is very widespread. This may give the unconscious message to public that the undesirable behaviour is very common, and that it is carried out by a large number of persons in the society. Some people listening to or watching that message start thinking that "it is something common and popular, so we can also do it". Due to this reason, such messages may have the opposite effect.

Cialdini gives different examples of his studies to support these ideas. For example, in a protected natural park containing important fossils, visiters were taking away small pieces of fossils and it was a big problem. The authorities used a message informing the visiters that every year 40 tonnes of fossils are stolen from the park and asking the visiters not to steal the fossils. However, this message-campaign did not have any effect, rather the stealing increased after this campaign. Thus, Cialdini explained that this message told people that taking away fossils was common and popular, and people felt that if they also take away a small piece it will not make much difference.

Delhi as the rape capital of India

Let me start with some of my own ideas about the issue of rapes in India. Delhi was not a safe city even 40 years ago. From those years, I remember, my sister's worries about the behaviour of guys in Delhi buses going to the university.

I am sorry to confess that at that time even I used to believe that it was because of "provocative clothes" that girls wear, and if they can look like "behen ji" they will be spared. Only much later did I realize that saying that the fault is because of girls' dress or behaviour shifts the responsibility from the guys who behave wrongly onto the girls, and in a way, approves that guys can behave the way they wish and then put the blame on the girl.

I believe that Indian society's emphasis on girls' izzat and how it is equated with "family honour" worsens this situation.

Today the things seem to have worsened. Social phenomenon are almost always complex and have different causes. I think that partly, the number of rapes may have "increased" because now more girls and more families have the courage to report it. In this sense, increase in reporting of rape should be seen as a positive sign.

Asking that police and laws should stop or reduce the rapes can be a superficial solution, because it allows us to ignore the harsh social realities of India where class and caste inequalities are closely interlinked with the way women are treated. It makes us feel that we can continue to be a chauvenistic and unequal society, and that only police or stronger punishments can resolve this problem.

Just listening to the declarations of police officers, politicians, religious leaders and sometimes, even magistrates and judges (including many women), shows how entrenched such ways of thinking are in our society's psyche.

I think that it is the same societal attitudes that are also responsible for dowry killings, female infanticide and violence against women, that are responsible for rapes and the inceased feelings of insecurity perceived by girls and women in India. Unfortunately these are so common among outside the big cities and among more marginalized groups that these are taken as the norm and do not even make it to any kind of news.

However, after reading Cialdini's paper, I was wondering, if in our desire to bring a change in our society, we are not emphasising too much on how frequent and common rapes have become and if this is fueling the perception at least in some men that it is common and even they can do it?

Can talking about "Delhi as the rape capital of India" or "Mumbai as the new rape capital of India" is the wrong message to give to country's men, because it tells them that rape is common or even "normal"?

What do you think?

***

Angels, snake-women and queens - Female forms in Viennese sculptures

Europe provides a lot of opportunities for admiring sculptures and art in public spaces. They can be memorial statues of famous persons such as kings, leaders, artists and scientists. They can be commemorative statues to remember specific events from countries' or cities' histories. They can be expressions of symbolic ideas or an expression of peoples' wealth and linked to specific buildings. They can also be artworks and cultural expressions used for beautification.

In this post I want to share 16 of my favourite images of sculptures of female forms from Vienna in Austria.

Starting from medieval period, Vienna gradually became a rich city - it was the capital of Austrian-Hungarian empire and a trade hub for commerce between western and eastern Europe. As it lacked the ruins, history and culture of  ancient Greek and Roman civilisations, over the past couple of centuries, the city asked artists to create works that represent those ancient civilisations. Late Gothic and Baroque styles are thus most prominently visible in Vienna. Most of the images presented in this post show sculptures in these two styles.

The first four images present sculptures of women from different groups of statues remembering or celebrating famous  men - persons like Ferdinand Raimund, Johann Andreas von Liebenberg and Johannes Brahms. The first one has an angel with butterfly wings and a star on her forehead. I like the playful expression on her face.

The next one is also an angel, but with more classic angelic wings and a serious face. She holds in her hand a victory wreath.

I especially like the next image from the famous music composer Johannes Brahms' memorial. The woman in this sculpture has one hand on a broken lyre. However, for me the beauty of this sculpture is in the cracks that seem to symbolise death and decay.

Finally this last statue in bronze of a sitting woman, has nice green-effects due to oxidation, and seems to be holding a branch of olive, probably to symbolise peace.

The next image shows the only statue commemorating a powerful woman - Maria Theresia from 18th century (her titles were: Archduchess of Austria, King of Hungary and Queen of Bohemia) and thus, it is also the only statue of a woman in this group of images, who is not young and beautiful.

The world is controlled by men and it is men who take decisions about the statues in public spaces. Thus statues commemorating persons are usually of men, where women are supporting figures and are selected for the male gaze. In fact, if you look at the women in the sculptures shown in all the other images of this post, you will see that they are all young and beautiful looking.

The next five images have women used as a symbol to express a concept such as victory or justice. The first two are from the parliament building. The first one is a little kitsch with lot of gold-plating including an angel holding a victory wreath. Though Austrians call their country "fatherland", I feel that this statue probably denotes Austria (or may be, it is democracy? or law and order?)

The next image has a half-woman and half feline mythological figure with wings, that brings to mind the sphinx from Egypt.

The next two images of sculptures are from the opera house, where Mozart used to work and perform. The sculptures are in renaissance style and probably depict virtues such as shyness, purity and destiny.

The next image is from Schonberg residence of the king and is in classical Greek style with a Greek mythological figure (may be a forest godess or a hunting godess, with a dead deer at her feet).

The next two images are also symbolic and both have women with a snake. When I saw them, my first thought was that these were figures inspired by the Adam and Eve story of the Bible, where the snake represents the temptation, while the discovery of sexuality is represented by the apple. These representations often show Adam as the personification of innocence, while Eve is shown as the temptress holding the snake or the apple in her hand and thus causing Adam's fall from the heaven. This identification of woman as the negative influence on men and thus, whose body must be covered and hidden, and who should be controlled by the men, is common in conservative groups of different religions.

This next sculpture also reminded me of stories of nag-panchami in India, when you are supposed to offer milk to snakes.

Women and snakes were together part of many other mythologies - like Echidna, the half-snake and half human figure from the Greek mythology and Ichchadhari nagin (woman who turns into a snake at night) in the Indian mythology. These statues also reminded me of the Cleopatra story, who had committed suicide by getting herself bitten by a poisonous snake.

Stories of snake-woman can be seen as old superstitions. In psychological terms they can also be seen as expression of suppressed emotions linked to jealousy or sexuality. (If you can read Hindi, I suggest you to read Archana Verma's analysis of Indian writer Premchand's story "Nagpuja" on the theme of snake-woman.)

The next two images are about the female figures in art. The first figure is the often represented ideal of "woman as a mother".

The second figure is that of the baby girl Maggie Simpson with her milk bottle from the well known animated films of the Simpson family.

Finally, the last two images of this collection are about women used as columns to support doors or windows. Using female figures as columns is an ancient practice and such figures are called Caryatids. Perhaps the most famous example of caryatids is from a temple in ancient acropolis in Athens (Greece).

I love these two images very much. Though they are also made in the Greek style, they represent working class women in their daily lives. At the same time, they show women who are friends, and who share an easy intimacy. Normally caryatids show young women striking poses to show off their bodies, like most other public sculptures of women. These two images instead have everyday women who seem to be together in their own worlds and who are not on display for others.

So which of these images do you like most?

***

Swami - Lover boy or My lord?

"Swami", the 1977 film by Basu Chatterjee, based on the eponymous novel by Sarat Chandra Chatterjee, gives a glimpse into ideas about love and marriage in early twentieth century Bengal. Most of the ideas explored in this film can be applied to other parts of India and to certain extent, are still prevalent in Indian society.

Western doubts about the ideas of arranged marriages

Often persons from outside India are perplexed by continuing practice of arranged marriages in India. Friends in Italy often ask me, how can Indian women accept such arrangements that "doom them to loveless lives"? In the west, arranged marriages are often seen as oppression and violation of human rights, especially of women.

I think that our understanding of the world is shaped by explicit and implicit social and cultural norms and ideas that pervade our lives since early childhood. These are extremely potent in shaping our ideas, ideals, expectations and meanings. In this sense, perhaps Indian and Western ideas of love and marriage are shaped by two different visions?

The western visions of "getting married" are built on ideas of individual search and decision making that require "falling in love" as the most important pre-requiste for marriage. These ideas are common to both women and men, though there could be some gender-related differences since romantic novels often have pregnant women who refuse to get married to the man they "love", because he talks only of "taking care", "giving a name to the baby" and not of "love".

My married friends in the west agree about the changing nature of their love with time, however, for getting married, they consider fundamental the initial "falling in love".

On the other hand, marriages in India are also linked to ideas of pre-determination and destiny such as "marriage is for seven lives". You may feel that you don't believe in such ideas, but they remain in the back of your mind. These ideas are also linked to other ideas about castes, food-cultures, language-cultures, etc. Thus, your expectations from life are shaped differently.

Arranged marriages in India are sometimes violations of desires, more so for young women, forced to get married to persons much older to them, sometimes widowers with children. Or when they are forced to get married to someone for avoiding their marriage to someone they love, who is considered unsuitable by their families, usually because of considerations of caste or religion or economic status.

Yet looking at arranged marriages exclusively in terms of oppression and violations, misses the vast majority of Indian young men and women who expect their parents to find the appropriate spouse for them, and "fall in love" with the wife/husband chosen for them. These men and women who think that it is duty of their parents to find their spouses, can be persons with limited education, living in rural areas or small towns, but they can also be persons with university degrees living in big cities or even abroad, who if they wish can choose their own life partners. But they choose the option of arranged marriages, and today participate actively in the process of identifying their spouses.

"Swami" gives a glimpse into how cultural and social ideas of family and society shape our ideas about love and marriage in India. "Swami" (the word can be used in different ways including as husband, lord, owner, guru or a spiritual person) explores it in two ways – as love between two young persons who know each other, who share interests and who are attracted to each other; and the love that comes slowly when you discover a different way of looking at things, when you admire someone, when that love is bound to a sense of duty.

Synopsis

Saudamini or Mini (Shabana Azmi) lives in a village with her widow mother (Sudha Shivpuri) and mama (mother’s brother - Utpal Dutt). Their neighbour Narendra or Naren (Vikram) is son of the local landlord, who is in love with Mini.

To meet Mini, Naren comes to their home frequently, pretending to meet her uncle, and then uses this opportunity to argue about books and philosophy with Mini. Her uncle understands their mutual attraction.

While Naren is away in Calcutta for studies, Mini’s mother and uncle fix her marriage to Ghanshyam (Girish Karnad), a childless widower, in another village. Mini writes a desperate letter to Naren, hoping to run away with him, but Naren does not come and Mini is married to Ghanshyam.

Ghanshyam lives with his widowed step mother (Shashikala), younger step brother Nikhil (Dheeraj Kumar) and step sister Charulata (Preeti Ganguly). Younger brother Nikhil is married for three years and is very much in love with his wife (Ritu Kamal) but they are still childless. Charu, simple and likeable, is fat, and the family has difficulties to find a husband for her. Ghanshyam, the eldest son and head of the house, is runs a business of selling wheat and takes care of the family expenses. Nikhil also works, but uses his income to live more comfortably and does not contribute to household expenses.

The new bride, Mini is full of resentment and anger against Ghanshyam and still dreams of Naren. She refuses to share bed with her husband and is sullen in her relationship with the rest of the family. Ghanshyam is very patient and understanding towards his young wife. In spite of her anger and resentment, slowly she is drawn in the complex negotiations and power-plays of living in a joint family.

She observes everyone’s obsession with Nikhil – he is the uncrowned prince of the house and everyone is ready to fawn over him and run to fulfill his desires. Ghanshayam on the other hand, is neglected and ignored. Yet, he is kind and gentle towards everyone. He is ever respectful to his mother, even when she is unjust towards him.

At the same time, on issues of principles, Ghanshyam does not bend to anyone, gently but firmly, he refuses compromises with his principles. Like when a guy offers to marry Charu, only if he is paid a large amount of money. “I will not sell my sister”, Ghanshyam says firmly and refuses to change his decision inspite of his step mother's insistence.

Slowly and grudgingly, Mini starts liking him and admiring him.

Then suddenly one day Naren, her old love, comes to their home. In the university, he knew Nikhil, and has come to meet his friend, but in reality he wants to meet Mini. “I am still in love with you, come away with me”, he says to Mini.

Charu sees Mini and Naren together and informs her mother, who accuses Mini of being an unfaithful wife. In anger, Mini decides to leave the house with Naren. But when her anger subsides, she realizes that she loves her husband, and returns home with her "Swami".

Comments

The film has been largely shot inside two buildings – Mini’s uncle’s house and Ghanshyam’s house. There are only a few outdoor scenes. This gives the film a feeling of intimacy. Most of the time, the film explores the relationships between the main characters, who are mostly shown isolated from the rest of the world.

Progressive men and shackled women: The first part of the film has just 4 characters – Mini, her widow mother, her uncle and Naren. In this part, Mini is the new Indian woman, a person who studies at university, who argues about her ideas, who feels that she is not less than any man. Naren is the new progressive man, who wants an educated and progressive girl as his companion and wife. Mini’s uncle is also a progressive man, he wants his niece to study, to think and to have her own ideas.

On the other hand, Mini’s mother is the guardian of traditional values. A widow with a small daughter, who was turned out by her late husband’s family forcing her to seek the support of her brother, Mini’s mother knows the role of women in Indian society and understands that if you step out of line, the society can be ruthless.

Ghanshyam’s mother is also a widow. Even she, after becoming a widow has lost her position in the family, and must accept that the house belongs to her step son, Ghanshyam. However, her step son is respectful towards her, she lives in her late husband's house and her source of pride is her own son Nikhil.

Love and marriage: During one of the discussions with Naren, in the intial part of the film, Mini argues that both men and women, must accept limits on their freedom after marriage and they should not have relationships outside the marriage. However, after being forced to marry a man she does not love, Mini has to face the reality of her thoughts – would she accept that she has no right to leave her marriage to be with the man whom she loves and who wants her?

The film finds a solution to Mini's dilemma by making her fall in love with her husband. Ghanshyam is a kind, understanding and patient man, for whom Mini feels admiration and attraction. Thus she decides to stick with her principles and stay in the marriage. However, if her husband had been uncultured or a boor, would she have been justified in leaving him? Or if he had been old and ugly, would she have left him? The film does not pose such tricky questions.

Modernity and Western ideas: Naren is representative of modernity in the film. He is young, handsome, educated and liberal. He wears western clothes and believes in love. He is willing to fight for a woman whom he loves, even if she has been married to someone, and even if it means that society will be against them.

Ghanshyam on the other hand is the traditional face of Indian men. Not much educated, he wears Indian clothes, and epitomises Ram, the mythical hero from Ramayana, as the elder son, who speaks gently, who takes care of everyone, who is obedient and respectful. Film looks at both the men with empathy, though in the end takes the side of the traditions.

Complexities of a joint family: Personally I found the second half of the film much more satisfying, probably because I find fascinating the mixture of closeness, manipulations and strategies of negotiating personal spaces and choices in the living together of joint families. My favourite film on this theme of joint families is Apne Paraye (Family and outsiders), also based on a novel by Sarat Chandra Chatterjee, and directed by Basu Chatterjee. From the "Swami" team, it also had Shabana Azmi as the young bride of an uneployed man, while Utpal Dutt and Girish Karnad played two brothers.

Technical aspects of the film: Swami has some beautiful songs including the sublime “Kya karun sajni” sung by Jesudas. Film's dialogue were written by acclaimed Hindi author Manu Bhandari.

There are some parts of the film that are left vague. For example, Mini lives in a village, but is supposed to study in university, and it is not clear how she goes to the college. She is shown friendless, except for Naren. From the terrace of her home, she can see and wave at Naren standing in his home, but in the rain scene in Naren's garden, it seems that Naren's house is in some far away place and for coming back to her house she has to cross a river. The film glosses over such practical details. However, these are just minor glitches.

In conclusion, “Swami” is a simple film with some good acting and music. I liked it very much. It is an unhurried look at human emotions and traditional Indian views about marriage and the role of a joint family.

I think that today in India a girl like the character of Mini, will not give up her love so easily - she would fight more to marry the man to whom she loves, and who loves her. However, the dilemmas of a married woman contemplating running away with her old lover, are different and I am not sure if leaving the home to be with a lover in today's India would be any easier.

PS: “Swami” was produced by Jaya Charavarty, mother of the well known actress Hema Malini. The theme of this film was the sanctity of marriage, and it was made when gossip about the love affair between Hema Malini and already married actor Dharmendra were dominating film magazines. May be this film was a message of Jaya Charavarty to her daughter? Anyway, the message did not have any effect on the romance between Hema and Dharmendra, who were married in 1980, even though he never divorced from his first wife.

***

Age and desirability

I was with a friend and we were talking about the most beautiful Italians. I told him about a blog post I had written some time ago about my favourite Italian sex symbols and that I had put Alba Parietti and Sabrina Ferrilli in my top list.

"What?" he said horrified, "but they are old!!!"

"OK, I also had Monica Bellucci in that list", I added.

"She is also too old for this kind of thing now. You have to look for some one younger!" He insisted.

"There are really hot east European babes", the bar man added helpfully, providing details about the contortions they can do in some porn videos.

"They are not women, they are just meat. And anyway they are not Italian and we exclude porn stars from this classification", my friend clarified.

So there I was trying all kinds of combinations on Google to find out the top young models that Italians love today. Unsurprisingly, there is no unanimity.

Actually quite a lot of them seem to root for Martina Colombari, born in 1975, she was Miss Italy in 1991 and is still considered as one of the best models here. In 2006, in a pool on the best Miss Italy of all times, she was number one.

She does look great but I don't think that she is that young, like my friend was insisting.

Many others think that Carla Bruni is the best Italian top model of all times. Born in 1967 and now married to the French president Sarkozy, even Ms. Bruni is also not very young.

Two other names were mentioned on some websites - Marta Cecchetto and Federica Ridolfi. Ms. Ridolfi was in some recent list of top 100 most desirable women of the world compiled by Askmendotcom. Yet, born in 1974, Ms. Ridolfi is 34.

Marta Cecchetto, the other person often mentioned was born in 1978.

Finally a group of Italian journalists asked to identify the woman they would like to see nude on a calendar, gave the maximum votes to Ilaria d'Amico, a TV presenter but their choice had not so much to do with age, as with the fact that Ms. Ilaria refuses to have top less or nude pictures.

So in the end does it matter what year persons are born? Anyway, I feel that desiring a person has much more to do with the perceived personality of the person than just measurements of breasts or hips, etc. My wife keeps on saying that she finds Sean Connery, who must be seventy now, sexy. So there is hope for all of us, over the hill, but still somehow sexy and desirable, to the people who matter most to us! And I will stick with my Ferrilli and Parietti, thankyou.

***

The tragedy of being a sex symbol

I had gone to work on my bicycle. In the evening, when I finished, there was a slight drizzle and so I locked my bicycle and left it there and decided to take a bus. The bus starts nearby and thus when it reaches our bus stop, it is still relatively empty. I found an empty seat and parked myself there. On that seat somebody had left a folded newspaper.

Soon the bus reached the university area and young students filled the bus. I was going through the newspaper I had found my seat, when I suddenly heard a sharp intake of breath close to me. I looked at the newspaper and I understood the reason for the sudden silence around me. I think all the persons around me were looking at the full page ad on the newspaper.

It is an ad of the March issue of a men’s magazine called Max and the picture showed the cover of the magazine with a breath-taking nude young woman. The picture shows the face and the back of the woman clearly while her breast is seen in a silhouette. The girl is Eva Riccobono and is described as the new Italian top model, a new sex symbol.

As I got down from the bus, I took care to take that newspaper with me. Usually I prefer looking at more mature woman but in this picture, Ms. Riccobono does look wonderful.

While walking to home, I was thinking about the tragedy of Ms. Riccobono. When people proclaim you as a sex symbol, when you become famous for your beautiful body, I guess in your head a clock starts ticking like never before.

I think that all professions where your face, your body are the most important part of being you, the pressure must be terrible. The pressure to be thin, to be paranoid about every strand of hair out of place, every little pimple or wrinkle that appears, every bad angle that could show you less than perfect. How long it is going to last, you must be asking yourself.

And when people love you for your body, somehow it means that rest of you is not worth much. Initially you may love being the sex symbol, but soon you must be dreading it and hating it as much as you love it. Not that I was ever a sex symbol so that I can speak about the feelings of a sex symbol, but you only need to look around at all those beautiful people and how they all, sooner or later, try to show that they are not all body and beauty, that gives you an idea of how they feel.

So many of them become a recluse as their bodies start to age. Like Brigitte Bardot. There was a time, she was the epitome of sex symbols.

And then she hid, closed herself in baggy clothes, huge sunglasses and floppy hats, trying to become invisible. Finally she did find redemption in her love for animals and found the courage to come out and be herself. Look at her older pictures and you realise that she is still wonderfully beautiful, even if it is a different kind of beauty, more gentle and relaxed.

Some of them never find the courage to come out, like Greta Garbo, who lived her life behind closed doors and died in her solitude.

More closer to home we have our Rekha. Look at her pictures from twenty years ago and now, she still looks young and beautiful and yet in a way, a caricature of herself. Even as a grandmother in films like Krissh, she continues to be a young woman dressed as a granny.

Relax Rekha ji, we would still like you even if you let yourself go and relax a little bit. It is ok even if you are not perfect always, chill and enjoy. Yet, once you are prisoner of your image, I guess that it requires lot of courage to come out into open.

So don’t be jealous of these moments of glory of Eva Riccobono. She is sure to earn millions but she is also going to pay a heavy price for it. So best of luck Ms. Riccobono. Once the party is over, I hope you will have the courage to come out and be yourself.

***