Abstract
How do we make sense of a situation in which a film industry turns its own workings into one of its primary narrative ingredients and begins to represent itself obsessively? Is this simply a matter of modernist self-realization, now cast in a mythic frame that springs from commercial cinema’s penchant for the grandiose, the spectacular, and the hyperbolic? Or is something more at stake in a particular industry’s on-screen and off-screen self-projections at this conjuncture, in its mediatized articulation of the mythic and the reflexive, and in its willful blurring of the so-called “presentational” and “representational” modes1 in the service of metafiguration?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Works cited
Roland Barthes, Mythologies (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1972/1957).
Anustup Basu, “The Eternal Return and Overcoming ‘Cape Fear’: Science, Sensation, Superman and Hindu Nationalism in Recent Hindi Cinema,” South Asian History and Culture 2.4 (October 2011) 557–571.
Jean Baudrillard, “The Ecstasy of Communication,” in Hal Foster, ed. The Anti-Aesthetic (Port Townsend, WA: Bay Press, 1983).
Jon Beasley-Murray, Posthegemony: Political Theory and Latin America (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2011).
Walter Benjamin, Understanding Brecht, trans. A. Bostock (London: Verso, 1998).
Lauren Berlant, The Anatomy of National Fantasy: Hawthorne, Utopia, and Everyday Life (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991).
Gautam Bhatia, Punjabi Baroque (New Delhi: Penguin, 1994).
Navdeep Kaur Marwah “Bollywood Mat Kaho Na,” Hindustan Times, February 5, 2011.
Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello, The New Spirit of Capitalism (London: Verso, 2007).
Bertolt Brecht, “The Epic Theatre and Its Difficulties,” in Willett (1964) 22–24.
—, “The Modern Theatre Is the Epic Theatre,” in Willett (1964) 33–42.
—, “Short Description of a New Technique of Acting Which Produces an Alienation Effect,” in Willett (1964) 136–40.
Noel Burch, To the Distant Observer: Form and Meaning in Japanese Cinema (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979).
John Caldwell, Production Culture: Industrial Reflexivity and Critical Practice in Film and Television (Durham: Duke University Press, 2008).
Anupama Chopra, First Day, First Show (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2011).
Rey Chow, “When Reflexivity Becomes Porn: Mutations of a Modernist Theoretical Practice,” in Jane Elliott and Derek Attridge, eds. Theory after “Theory” (New York: Routledge, 2011) 135–148.
Wendy Doniger, The Woman Who Pretended to Be Who She Was: Myths of Self-Imitation (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006).
Thomas Elsaesser, “From Anti-Illusionism to Hyper-Realism: Bertolt Brecht and Contemporary Film,” in Pia Kleber and Colin Visser eds, Re-interpreting Brecht: His Influence on Contemporary Drama and Film (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990) 170–185.
Jane Feuer, “The Self-Reflective Musical and the Myth of Entertainment,” Quarterly Review of Film Studies, 2.3 (August 1977) 313–326.
Sangita Gopal, Conjugations: Marriage and Form in New Bollywood Cinema (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012).
Miriam Hansen, “Benjamin and Cinema: Not a One-Way Street,” Critical Inquiry25 (Winter 1999) 306–343.
Sylvia Harvey, “Whose Brecht? Memories for the Eighties,” Screen 23.1 (May-June 1982) 45–59.
“Hollywood, Bollywood in Anti-Piracy Drive,” The Hollywood Reporter (March 18, 2010), http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hollywood-bollywood-anti-piracy-drive-21760.
“Hollywood, Bollywood Form Film Council,” Wall Street Journal (November 11, 2010), http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/11/11/hollywood-bollywood-form-la-in-dia-film-council/.
Philip Lutgendorf, “Om Shanti Om,” Philip’s Filums, http://www.uiowa.edu/-incinema/Om%20Shanti%20Om.html.
“Manoj Kumar: Shah Rukh Khan Is Communal.” November 19, 2007, http://www.ibos-network.com/newsmanager/templates/template1.aspx?articleid=21051&zoneid=1.
Meg Mumford, Bertolt Brecht (New York: Routledge, 2009).
“Now, Copyright Is Replacing the Copycat Culture in Bollywood,” The Times of India(August 22, 2008), http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-08-22/mumbai/27899715_1_film-makers-blaise-fernandes-hollywood-studios.
Vijay Mishra, Bollywood Cinema: Temples of Desire (New York: Routledge, 2001).
Dana Polan, “Brecht and the Politics of Self-Reflexive Cinema,” Jump Cut1 (1974), http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC17folder/BrechtPolan.html.
Madhava Prasad, “Surviving Bollywood,” in Anandam Kavoori and Aswin Punathambekar, eds Global Bollywood (New York: NYU Press, 2008) 41–51.
Ashish Rajadhyaksha, Indian Cinema in the Time of Celluloid: From Bollywood to the Emergency (New Delhi: Tulika Books, 2009).
Bhaskar Sarkar, Mourning the Nation: Indian Cinema in the Wake of Partition (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2009).
Bhaskar Sarkar, “The Mellifluous Illogics of the Bollywood Musical,” in Steven Cohan, ed. The Sound of Musicals (London: The British Film Institute, 2010) 41–53.
Mushtaq Shiekh, The Making of Om Shanti Om (New Delhi: Om Books International, 2008).
Nigel Thrift, Knowing Capitalism (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2005).
John Willett, ed. and trans. Brecht on Theatre: The Development of an Aesthetic (New York: Hill and Wang, 1964).
Neelam Sidhar Wright, Bollywood Eclipsed (Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sussex, 2009).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2013 Bhaskar Sarkar
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sarkar, B. (2013). Metafiguring Bollywood: Brecht after Om Shanti Om. In: Sen, M., Basu, A. (eds) Figurations in Indian Film. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137349781_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137349781_11
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-33209-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-34978-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Media & Culture CollectionLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)