In the age of digitization, where information (and misinformation) fits in the palm of one’s hand, the media and popular culture surrounding it play a vital role in moulding social behaviour. Films, advertisements, songs, books, television, etc. all are both- inspired by, and further inspire the relations in a society.
For instance, ever since the time of the national struggle, the media has played an important role in the creation of a strong national identity, a process that holds true to this day. This national identity is often merged with that of an individual by displaying the heroism of one’s own nationality at the expense of the ‘other’. The easiest target of this ‘othering’, therefore, in Hollywood is often the ethnic minorities in America- the Arabs, Indians, Asians, Africans, etc. The representation of this ‘other’ is often based on socially misconstrued stereotypes; for instance: African Americans are often depicted as lazy, backward, and poor, and Latinos, specifically women, are often depicted as one-dimensional sexual creatures. Since films have a deep impact on the long-term memory of people, these stereotypes, depicted in a dramatised manner, over time create a lasting impression of the ‘other’ group (or the outgroup) in direct contrast with the ‘ingroup’- making cinema an important language of othering.
Indians in Hollywood have long been the face of this process of othering. Indian representation in mainstream American media, however, has had a journey of its own. The first phase of this representation of Indians in mainstream Western cinema, for example, had a set pattern or a template. In this pattern, the film essentially revolved around an American lead, with Indian characters as either the shabbily written ‘sidekick’ or worse, the villain, portraying characteristics exactly opposite to those of the ‘American hero’. One of the most notable examples of Indian representation in this period was the popular Indiana Jones film, “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom,” the second in the franchise. This film combined every stereotype ever perpetrated on Indians by their colonial masters, as it revolved around the titular characters (an American white man, no less) attempting to save an illiterate Indian village ruled by an illiterate and despotic ruler, as well as their superstitious and outdated religious beliefs (which, unironically, stemmed from their illiteracy). This movie, though banned in India, was still watched by millions abroad, who now, when asked about India, immediately think of the Kali cult depicted in the film, with human sacrifices, blood, death, and destruction. They also go back to the infamous dinner scene in the film, where the foolish Indian King offers the Americans ‘delicacies’ such as snakes and monkey brain soup ( also referenced by Angela in the ‘Diwali’ episode of “The Office” when she talks about Indians saying “but they eat monkey brains!”). This portrayal of Indians as people different from Americans created a schema, attributing behaviours and character traits, defined as their ‘Indianness’. Every Indian character in a Hollywood movie of this time, therefore, would be a one-dimensional, shallow character, only defined by his/her Indianness. For instance, the Indian character Apu in “The Simpsons” was “a convenience store owner, an immigrant with an unnecessarily broad accent who is unaccustomed to American propriety and customs.”
With time, however, Indians found more space and representation in mainstream American media. This second phase of Indian representation in Hollywood started with the popular show “The Big Bang Theory”, wherein Raj Koothrappali became the first character to have a proper role and arc in primetime television. Raj, however, in a way was not very deviant from the portrayal of Apu- the only difference being his portrayal as an intelligent science nerd as opposed to an illiterate unskilled convenience store owner. The broad accent of the character, however, continued; now added to it was a hint of feminine traits and behaviours (based on the stereotype that Indian men were not ‘manly enough’ as compared to Americans). Despite the fact that the show was mostly comedic, the majority of the jokes were directed at him (and his Indian behaviour) rather than by him (Felicelli 2012). Another Indian sitcom character in the comedic genre was when Mindy Kaling played Kelly Kapoor in “The Office.” This was a notable difference since female characters were even further and fewer in the already underrepresented Indian group. Not only that, the Office had an entire episode centred around the Hindu festival of Diwali as a background to Kaling’s character, making it a layered character with an actual cultural link to her roots for a change. Cecelia Parekh from ‘New Girl’ would be the third bearer of the sitcom genre, a nuanced character who is also shown to be outspoken, conventionally pretty, and a successful model (breaking away from the awkward nerd category reserved for Indians). Importantly, she had her own storylines in the show rather than simply being a sidekick to the titular white lead (not to mention, she had a big, fat, typical Indian wedding, complete with Bollywood songs in the background music!)
Changes in television were seen alongside changes in movies. After the initial imagery used by the Indiana Jones movie, Hollywood transitioned to more subtle, diverse characters whose primary identity was not their nationality (or, in this case, otherness). This was seen in the franchise of “Harold and Kumar” movies centring around not a white male, but an Indian and a Korean (both minorities, in a sense.) Their characters, however, were shown to be just like every other guy in America, instead of ‘others’ who don’t fit in due to their inherent Indianness. Kumar Patel was a stoner, albeit a smart doctor in the movies, and he gets the girl in the climax—all qualities that Indian characters were apparently incapable of prior to the same. The comedy saw a role reversal in the position of an Indian character from being on the receiving end of the jokes to being the one actually cracking them. However, Hollywood and the representation of India were being questioned again in this third stage, with movies such as “Slumdog Millionaire” gaining critical and popular acclaim. With the success of this movie, set in the famous/infamous streets and slums of Mumbai, came the critique of Americans trying to ‘glorify poverty and portray it in an aesthetic sense’. This portrayal also reflected the American bias of depicting India as either extremely opulent or extremely backward. This bias lasted until the advent of OTT-web platforms and social media, which completely altered cinema and the viewer experience.
These platforms allowed more creative liberty and hence the coming up of shows with diverse storylines, characters and the backgrounds they were set in. Mindy Kaling shined once again as the poster girl of Indian representation in Hollywood, only this time as the Indian director of the teen drama ‘Never Have I Ever’ centering around Devi Vishwakumar, an Indian immigrant teen in an American high school. Devi’s character was deep and at the same time shallow, making mistakes that every high school teenager would (breaking the mould of the typical Asian ideal child). “Bridgerton ” also took its creative liberties by having an Indian family in the lead as Kathani and Edwina Sharma, a novelty in period drama set in Regency era (which was almost always, by the norm, headed by white actors). All of this culminated in an increasing demand for Indian-South Asian or actual brown-skinned actors to play these roles instead of the initial trend of blackfacing white actors. This rising demand and space for diversity has not only led to Indian actor Priyanka Chopra being a global star, but it has also given opportunities to the likes of Irrfan Khan, Deepika Padukone, and Alia Bhatt, not to mention the posterboy of Indians in Hollywood- Dev Patel. This has led to a cultural intermingling in Hollywood, with more representation, to an extent, meaning better representation.
India, as portrayed in Hollywood cinema, has come a long way, from the idea of using the Indian character as a contrasting ‘other’ to portraying it as just another character, separate from its nationality. This journey of Indian characters from ‘them’ to ‘our’ has been a masterclass in how cultural changes affect mainstream media, and vice versa.
