Currently, in India, new notions of centralised norms are arising due to social prejudice, media sensationalism and sheer intellectual confusion as the established definitions of the ‘secular’ and the ‘state’ are being demolished by the recent escalation of communal and religious sentiments. Hence, the concept of ‘otherness’ now extends to include all intransigent and seemingly marginal cultures that fail to accept this new interpretation of such centralised norms. In this article, I will be looking at Manipur, a northeast state, through this lens, using Meitei cinema as an example.
The few people who do acknowledge Manipur’s existence tend to view it as a homogenised Hindu state, failing to recognise the diverse tribes with their distinct cultures that exist in the state. Hinduism was introduced in Manipur by Meetingu Miyama, the King of Manipur, who retitled himself to Raja Garibniwaz. He declared Vaishnavism, one of the significant Hindu denominations, as the state religion in 1724. The caste system associated with Hinduism slowly permeated into the Manipuri society along with the introduction of conservative clothing, food restrictions, and notions of purity and pollution. Meiteis, the dominant tribe in Manipur, was forced to let go of their ancient religion, Sanamahism, and the Meitei script was prohibited in favour of the Bengali script. Today, the Sanamahi religion peacefully coexists with Hinduism. However, one can assume that the establishment of the caste system led to the complex tribal politics prevalent in Manipur.
The imposition of Hinduism, along with various other factors, caused Meiteis to demand an independent state after India regained its independence in 1947. However, Manipur was merged with the union of India in 1949, and after several transitions in her political construction, it eventually became a full-fledged state in 1972 as a result of the North-Eastern Areas (Regulation) Act 1971. The merger of the Kingdom of Manipur with India led to an uprising of the Meiteis since they desired an autonomous Manipur. In the words of Archana Upadhyay, a professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), “This is the nature of militancy in Manipur, a sort of ethnic nationalism which is deemed to be against national integrity and is hence tagged, terrorists.”
One might wonder how this correlates with the ban of Hindi films in Manipur by insurgents in 2000. Here it is essential to recognise cinema as the most influential art form present in the world that helps us realise how our society and culture operate. It provides perspective and opens new ways of thinking, feeling, and pursuing our lives. By the time Manipuri cinema emerged in 1972, people of different languages and regions were coming together to watch movies in Hindi, a language foreign to most in Manipur and one of the militant nationalist organisations in Manipur associated with the hegemony of the Indian state. Even Manipuri films had started becoming influenced by norms that were unknown to them. “The sight of watching a Manipuri woman wearing a mangalsutra on the silver screen became common”, says Angomcha Bimol Akoijam, a director of short films and Associate Professor at the Centre for Study of Social Systems, JNU. “Women began to look down upon the traditional Manipuri fanek, and mainstream Indian clothes suddenly became more acceptable”. Hence, since Bollywood was viewed as a means of Indianizing Manipur, an insurgent group altogether banned the transmission, screening, and viewing of Hindi movies and entertainment connected with the Hindi language.
The ban on Hindi films allowed Meiteis to promote the cultural heritage of Manipur through the medium of cinema. When the cinema halls closed down because of financial constraints, Manipuri cinema devised adaptive strategies. For instance, the Manipuri film industry could not produce enough celluloid films and therefore digitised production. This decision helped to make films comparatively cheaper and affordable. The cost of making digital films now ranges from 10 to 15 lakhs, and around 80 films are released every year. Kangla Film’s ‘Lanmei’ became the first Manipuri feature film produced digitally in 2002 and was screened in Imphal. Younger filmmakers are now attempting to narrate stories that capture the turmoil of the present-day Manipuri society while also depicting folktales and stories from Manipuri literature.
One such filmmaker is Haobam Paban Kumar, a prominent young voice in the entire Northeast. After making internationally-acclaimed documentaries such as ‘AFSPA, 1958’, that released in 2006, he made his debut fiction film ‘Loktak Leirembee’ in 2016. The film is based on the clearance of the Loktak lake phumdi (floating biomass) which was implemented by the Manipuri Government in collaboration with a corporate body in 2011, which resulted in the displacement of several indigenous fisher-folks whose lives depended solely on fishing activities done in the lake.
However, Meitei filmmakers continue to struggle with depicting their vision or having the power to portray their imagination because of the harsh censorship imposed by the insurgent groups in Manipur. Akoijam informs, “In addition to the Central Government’s Indian Censor Board, Manipuri films are censored by the Film Forum and the AMMIK (Apunba Manipur Matam Ishei Kanglup) for music. Hindi has been completely prohibited by the Forum. Any object associated with mainland India is also not allowed. Many actors have been prohibited from performing in Manipuri cinema because of working in Bollywood films. Filmmakers are left with no choice but to take the Forum seriously since without its approval a film cannot be screened in Manipur”. Even Akoijam’s short film ‘Karigee Kiruni Nungshiradee’ could not be released in Manipur because it had Hindi dialogues. Therefore, filmmakers like him are left with no choice but to avoid releasing their films in Manipur and distribute them through other means since censorship causes a restriction on their creative liberty.
To enable the Manipuri film industry to flourish and widen its audience, Akoijam proposes certification of movies according to pre-defined criteria decided by the Forum that need to be flexible. If censorship is required then it must be conducted internally among directors instead of relying on external censorship conducted by insurgent groups or the government. The inclination towards orienting Manipuri films to thrive only in film festivals needs to be upgraded. The industry needs to experiment with innovative methods of dissemination to engage with audiences on a global scale. Doing so would also help increase the funding for Manipuri films as local consumption of the cinema risks dying out.
As a student of sociology, Nanao has realised that the subject exists everywhere. Now she is on a journey to examine political, cultural, historical, and economic realities through a sociological lens. This voyage has led her to Itisaras. She enjoys studying mythological texts and literature to present alternative opinions to popular narratives. Her love for history has also developed into an interest in exploring monuments around her.
It’s a very crisp write up. To sum up such a big story into a brief so well.
Enjoyed the details I didn’t know.