Contradictions or Syncretism? The Politics of Female-Female Desire in Deepa Mehta’s Fire and Ligy J. Pullappally’s Sancharram (The Journey)

  • Oliver Ross


The importance of Deepa Mehta’s film Fire for the burgeoning gay and lesbian rights movement in India cannot be overstated. Many commentators1 locate the beginnings of a public dialogue surrounding lesbianism in the historical moment of the film’s release and dissemination in late 1998 and early 1999, which was marked by acrimonious debates surrounding its representation of Female-Female desire. Yet affirmations of the national significance of Fire, whether made by members of the Left or the Right, frequently elided the demographic limitations of its politics. Just as the film focuses on the Anglophone Indian middle classes, so was its English-language form inaccessible to much of the population. Shohini Ghosh has persuasively identified a similarly exclusionary logic surrounding the reception of Mehta’s films in Euro-America: “A less careful reading of the Fire and Water controversies runs the risk of being interpreted as a tussle between a modern (progressive) text and a traditional (regressive society), and a majority of mainstream critics in the West (particularly in the US and Canada) saw them that way.”2 Significantly, Fire had already been circulating on the international festival circuit for some two years prior to its release in India. If it initially marketed itself as a window into “oppressive” Hindu customs from outside India, once inside it insinuated that the English language was the proper vehicle for critique and progress, contributing to the developmental and sometimes exclusively Anglophone taxonomies of the gay and lesbian movements that succeeded it.


Indian Culture Gender Nonconformity Binary Opposition Sexual Politics Hindu Tradition 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    See Shohini Ghosh, Fire (Queer Film Classics) (London: Arsenal Pulp Press, 2010);Google Scholar
  2. Geeta Patel, “On Fire, Sexuality and Its Incitements,” in Queering India, ed. by Ruth Vanita (London: Routledge, 2002);Google Scholar
  3. Brinda Bose, “The Desiring Subject: Female Pleasures and Feminist Resistance in Deepa Mehta’s Fire,” in The Phobic and the Erotic: The Politics of Sexualities in Contemporary India, ed. by Brinda Bose and Suhabrata Bhattacharyya (King’s Lynn: Seagull Books, 2007), pp. 437–450;Google Scholar
  4. Sibaji Bandyopadhyay, “Approaching the Present—The Pre-text: The Fire Controversy,” in ZZ Bose and ZZ Bhattacharyya, 2007, pp. 17–90.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    Eve Sedgwick, Epistemology of the Closet (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008), p. xvi.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shamira Meghani, “Articulating ‘Indianness’: Woman-Centered Desire and the Parameters for Nationalism,” Journal of Lesbian Studies, 13, 1 (2009), 59–67 (pp. 65–66).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 8.
    Jacqueline Levitin, “An Introduction to Deepa Mehta,” in Women Filmmakers: Refocusing, ed. by Jacqueline Levitin, Judith Plessis, and Valerie Raoul (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2002), pp. 273–283 (p. 273).Google Scholar
  8. 14.
    Heidi R. M. Pauwels, The Goddess as Role Model: Sita and Radha in Scripture and on Screen (New York: OUP, 2008), p. 523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 21.
    Jyoti Puri, Woman, Body, Desire in Post-colonial India: Narratives of Gender and Sexuality (New York: Routledge, 1999), p. 178.Google Scholar
  10. 22.
    Mohandas K. Gandhi, The Story of My Experiments with Truth: An Autobiography (London: Penguin, 2007), p. 198.Google Scholar
  11. 23.
    Robin Sharma, The Monk Who Sold His Ferrari (London: Element/Harper Collins, 1997).Google Scholar
  12. 26.
    Ruth Vanita, Love’s Rite: Same-Sex Marriage in India and the West (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 28.
    Madhu Kishwar, “Naive Outpourings of a Self-Hating Indian: Deepa Mehta’s ‘Fire’,” Manushi, 109 (November to December 1998), 3–14.Google Scholar
  14. 33.
    Tharayil Muraleedharan, “Women’s Friendship in Malayalam Cinema,” in Women in Malayalam Cinema, ed. by Meena T. Pillai (New Delhi: Orient Black Swan, 2010), pp. 153–177 (p. 170).Google Scholar
  15. 34.
    Maya Sharma, Loving Women: Being Lesbian in Underprivileged India (New Delhi: Yoda Press, 2006).Google Scholar
  16. 35.
    See Mandakranta Bose, “Sat¯ı: The Event and the Ideology,” in Faces of the Feminine in Ancient, Medieval, and Modern India, ed. by Mandakranta Bose (New Delhi: OUP, 2000), pp. 21–32.Google Scholar
  17. 36.
    Gayatri Spivak, “Can the Subaltern Speak?,” in Colonial Discourse and PostColonial Theory: A Reader, ed. by L. Chrisman and P. Williams (Malaysia: Pearson Education, 1994), pp. 66–111 (p. 103).Google Scholar
  18. 38.
    The Nayars were one of the few groups to be organized matrilineally in India. Only the children of females could become members of the family unit (known as the taravad), property was passed down through the female line, and the youngest daughter inherited the family home, thereafter becoming its custodian. **See Robin Jeffrey, The Decline of Nayar Dominance: Society and Politics in Travancore, 1847–1908 (London: Chatto and Windus, 1976). Many of these customs were dying out by the twentieth century, yet they are still considered an essential constituent of Malayali identity and are used to explain women’s high status in present-day Kerala in comparison with other Indian states.Google Scholar
  19. 42.
    Kamala Das, A Childhood in Malabar, trans. by Gita Krishnankutty (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2003).Google Scholar
  20. 45.
    Gayatri Gopinath, Impossible Desires: Queer Diasporas and South Asian Public Cultures (Durham: Duke University Press, 2005), p. 155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Oliver Ross 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oliver Ross

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations