India’s New Independent Cinema

This book breaks new ground in what has become a field of cliché: Indian Cinema. is an insightful peek into what in India has evolved into. A must read for anyone studying the subject, or just passionate about cinema. —Renji Matthews, University of Sharjah, UAE

This is the first-ever book on the rise of the new wave of independent Indian that is revolutionising Indian cinema. Contemporary scholarship on Indian cinema so far has focused asymmetrically on , India’s dom- inant cultural export. Reversing this trend, this book provides an in-depth examination of the burgeoning independent Indian sector. It locates the new ‘Indies’ as a glocal hybrid film form – global in aesthetic and local in content. These films critically engage with a diverse socio-political spectrum of ‘state of the nation’ stories: from farmer suicides and disenfranchised urban youth and migrant workers to monks turned anti-corporation animal rights agitators. This book provides comprehensive analyses of definitive New Wave films, including Peepli Live (2010), Dhobi Ghat (2010), The Lunchbox (2013) and Ship of Theseus (2013). It explores how subver- sive Indies, such as polemical postmodern rap-musical Gandu (2010), trans- gress conventional notions of ‘traditional Indian values’ and collide with state censorship regulations. This timely analysis shows how the new Indies have emerged from a middle space between India’s globalising present and traditional past. This book draws on in-depth interviews with directors, actors, academics and members of the Indian censor board; it is essential reading for anyone seeking an insight into a current Indian film phenome- non that could chart the future of Indian cinema.

Ashvin Immanuel Devasundaram has a PhD from Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh. He is currently Programming Adviser for the London Asian (LAFF) and Creative Director of the festival’s expansion to other cities in the UK. Routledge Advances in

For a full list of titles in this series, please visit www.routledge.com.

18 European Civil War Films 25 Crossover Cinema Memory, Conflict, Cross-Cultural Film from and Nostalgia Production to Reception Eleftheria Rania Edited by Sukhmani Khorana Kosmidou 26 Spanish Cinema in the 19 The Aesthetics of Global Context Antifascist Film Film on Film Radical Projection Samuel Amago Jennifer Lynde Barker 27 Films and 20 The Politics of Age Their American Remakes and Disability in Translating Fear, Adapting Contemporary Culture Spanish Film Valerie Wee Plus Ultra Pluralism Matthew J. Marr 28 Postfeminism and Paternity in Contemporary US Film 21 Cinema and Language Loss Framing Fatherhood Displacement, Visuality Hannah Hamad and the Filmic Image Tijana Mamula 29 Cine-Ethics Ethical Dimensions of 22 Cinema as Weather Film Theory, Practice, and Stylistic Screens and Spectatorship Atmospheric Change Edited by Jinhee Choi and Kristi McKim Mattias Frey

23 Landscape and Memory in 30 Postcolonial Film: History, Post-Fascist Italian Film Empire, Resistance Cinema Year Zero Edited by Rebecca Weaver- Giuliana Minghelli Hightower and Peter Hulme

24 Masculinity in the 31 The Woman’s Film of Contemporary Romantic the 1940s Comedy Gender, Narrative, and Gender as History John Alberti Alison L. McKee 32 Iranian Cinema in a 41 The in the Global Context Global South Policy, Politics, and Form Edited by MaryEllen Higgins, Edited by Peter Decherney and Rita Keresztesi, and Dayna Blake Atwood Oscherwitz

33 Eco-Trauma Cinema 42 Spaces of the Cinematic Home Edited by Anil Narine Behind the Screen Door Edited by Eleanor Andrews, 34 American and Chinese- Stella Hockenhull, and Fran Language Cinemas Pheasant-Kelly Examining Cultural Flows Edited by Lisa Funnell and 43 Spectacle in “Classical” Man-Fung Yip Cinemas Musicality and Historicity 35 American Documentary in the 1930s in the Digital Age Tom Brown Depictions of War in Burns, Moore, and Morris 44 Rashomon Effects Lucia Ricciardelli Kurosawa, Rashomon and Their Legacies 36 Asian Cinema and the Use Edited by Blair Davis, Robert of Space Anderson and Jan Walls Interdisciplinary Perspectives Edited by Lilian Chee and 45 Mobility and Migration in Edna Lim Film and Moving Image Art 37 Moralizing Cinema Cinema Beyond Europe Film, Catholicism and Power Nilgün Bayraktar Edited by Daniel Biltereyst and Daniela Treveri Gennari 46 The Other in Contemporary Migrant Cinema 38 Popular Film Music and Imagining a New Europe? Masculinity in Action Guido Rings A Different Tune Amanda Howell 47 and Affect Towards a Corporeal Model 39 Film and the American of Viewership Presidency Xavier Aldana Reyes Edited by Jeff Menne and Christian B. Long 48 India’s New Independent Cinema 40 Action Films and Rise of the Hybrid Spatial Theory Ashvin Immanuel Nick Jones Devasundaram This page intentionally left blank India’s New Independent Cinema Rise of the Hybrid

Ashvin Immanuel Devasundaram First published 2016 by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 and by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

© 2016 Taylor & Francis

The right of Ashvin Immanuel Devasundaram to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Devasundaram, Ashvin Immanuel. Title: India’s new independent cinema: rise of the hybrid / by Ashvin Immanuel Devasundaram. Description: New York: Routledge, 2016 | Series: Routledge advances in film studies | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2016003977 Subjects: LCSH: Motion picture industry—India. | Independent films— India. | Motion pictures—India. Classification: LCC PN1993.5.I8 D485 2016 | DDC 791.430954—dc23LC record available at HYPERLINK “https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/ lN5JBRUazbLgum” http://lccn.loc.gov/2016003977

ISBN: 978-1-138-18462-6 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-64501-8 (ebk)

Typeset in Sabon by codeMantra For John, Mum, Dada, and Family This page intentionally left blank Contents

List of Figures xi List of Interviewees xiii Acknowledgements xv

Introduction: Setting the Stage 1

PART I Enter India’s New Indies

1 Bollywood and the Cinemas of India: The Story so Far 15

2 The Meta-Hegemony: Leviathan Bollywood and Lilliputian Indies 32

3 The Anatomy of the Indies 60

4 Avenues of Indie Funding, Distribution and Exhibition 80

5 Interstitial Indies Interrogating India’s Double Narrative 109

6 Running with Scissors: Censorship and Regulation 125

PART II Case Studies

7 Rapping in Double Time: Gandu’s Subversive Time of Liberation 149

8 Dhobi Ghat: The Marginal in the Mumbai Mainstream 180

9 Peepli Live: Neoliberal Capital, Media ‘Knowledge’ and Political Power 201 x Contents 10 All the World’s a Ship: Broken Binaries and Hyperlinked Heterotopias in Ship of Theseus 226

11 A Cinematic Quartet Conjuring Ghosts of Nation: Harud, Haider, The Lunchbox and I Am 250

Conclusion: Charting the Ship’s Course 271

Index 279 List of Figures

2.1 ‘Vamp’ Helen in the 1970 film, The Train. 44 2.2 Katrina Kaif’s item number, ‘Chikni Chameli’, in 2012’s Agneepath. 44 2.3 Miss India training session. 46 2.4 Marc Robinson examines ‘hot legs’. 47 3.1 The Ship of Indian Cinemas. 63 7.1 The vox populi. 151 7.2 Scrolling subtitles. 171 7.3 Gandu and Ricksha’s POV. 173 7.4 View of Q filming. 173 7.5 Second camera revealed. 174 7.6 Mise-en-abyme diptych. 174 7.7 Las Meninas, by Diego Velázquez, Prado Museum. Source: Google Earth. 176 8.1 Shai’s wide shot of windows in Dhobi Ghat. 185 8.2 View from Jeff’s window in Rear Window. 185 8.3 Shai’s ‘stakeout’. 186 8.4 Her object of scrutiny – Arun. 186 8.5 Arun looking into the while playing Yasmin’s diary. 187 8.6 Shai interrupted by a phone call from her father. 187 8.7 Shai spying through her camera. 188 8.8 Jeff indulging in the pleasure of looking. 188 8.9 Arun: seeing himself in the other. 190 9.1 Natha and Budhia: Isolated long shot. 204 9.2 Rakesh’s encounter. 217 9.3 The vacant pit symbolising Mahato’s absence. 217 9.4 Mahato in the midst of the media circus. 218 9.5 Ineffectual offerings: The Lal Bahadur Shastri hand pump and untouched . 220 10.1 Butades’s ‘blind tracing’ of her lover. Source: Joseph-Benoît Suvée, Invention of the Art of Drawing (1791) © Groeningemuseum, Bruges. Image appears in Blocker, J 2007. Reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis. 233 xii List of Figures 10.2 Spiritual and material in Mumbai. 239 10.3 Karma and commerce in contemporary India. 239 10.4 Through winding alleys. 240 10.5 The museum-cinema heterotopia. 244 10.6 Heterogeneous assemblage: The organ recipients. 244 10.7 Looking into time. 246 10.8 Presence and absence coterminous in the cave. 247 11.1 Boy frisked during stop-and-search. 252 11.2 Haider frisked by security forces. 257 11.3 Army reterritorialises Faraz cinema. 259 11.4 Bollywood ‘applauds’ hegemonic power. 259 11.5 Confronting the wall of the past. 263 11.6 Police officer’s assault on Jai, with Indian flag in the background. 264 List of Interviewees

Bashir, A. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Mumbai, 18 July 2013. Belawadi, P. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Bangalore, 28 July 2013. Bhaskar, I. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], New Delhi, 30 June 2013. Bose, R. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Mumbai, 17 July 2013. Ghosh, S. 2011. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], London, 21 October­ 2011 Kumar, P. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Bangalore, 2 August 2013. Nag, A. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Bangalore, 5 July 2013. Nambiar, B. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Mumbai, 23 July 2013. Onir. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Mumbai, 12 July 2013. Q (Qaushiq Mukherjee). 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Mumbai, 27 July 2013. Raghavendra, K M. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Bangalore, 2 July 2013. Rao, K. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Mumbai, 20 July 2013. Ravindran, N. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Bangalore, 5 July 2013. Rizvi, A. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Bangalore, 29 June 2013. Swaroop, K. 2013. Interviewed by Ashvin Devasundaram [in person], Mumbai, 20 July 2013. This page intentionally left blank Acknowledgements

This book started its life cycle as doctoral research conducted in 2011–2014 at Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, in the Department of Languages and Intercultural Studies. I was ever mindful that I was embarking on a corpus of work that would entail the first published academic work on new, inde- pendent Indian cinema. This ethos has informed the book at every milestone of its development and metamorphosis into the monograph you now see before you. I am very grateful to Maggie Sargeant and Chris Tinker at Heriot-Watt University for their help and support. Interminable thanks to my family for always being a bastion of strength: my mother and father for being a peren- nial source of inspiration, my sister Bina for animating my love for reading, and brother Avinash for his abiding support. Most of all, I am grateful to my creative muse John Field for ‘being and being there’. I am thankful to everyone in Bangalore and Mumbai who supported me through the fieldwork journey I am especially grateful to Suneil and Kiran Ramakrishna for their indefatigable and unwavering assistance during the Bangalore segment of my research. Thanks to Sukhbir Kalsi and Steve Lewis for their help in connecting Edinburgh to Bangalore and Mumbai. I am grateful to all the respondents in Bangalore, Delhi, Mumbai and elsewhere who gave graciously of their time despite their busy schedules: Aamir Bashir, Kiran Rao, Onir, Anusha Rizvi, Q, Rahul Bose, Prakash ­Belawadi, Pawan Kumar, Kamal Swaroop, Ira Bhaskar, M K ­Raghavendra, Arundhati Nag, Suman Ghosh and Nirmala ­Ravindran inter alia. I am particularly thankful to the managers and agents of the filmmakers and actors interviewed for this book for their help with con- sent forms. I am deeply grateful to Professor. Renji Mathews, Head of Digital Media at the College of Fine Arts and Design, University of Shar­ jah, for his wonderful design and creation of a state-of-the-art Ship of Cinemas­ diagram. Thanks to Shreya and Ria Mathews for designing the website linked to the book. I would like to acknowledge Media in Australia journal (MIA) for per- mitting the use of sections from a previously published article. I am also thankful to The South Asianist: Journal of South Asian Studies, University xvi Acknowledgements of Edinburgh, for granting permission to re-use excerpts from one of my articles. All film still images used in this book are screenshots. Thanks to Taylor & Francis for allowing use of a previously printed image. I am very grateful to Felisa Salvago-Keyes and Nicole Eno at Routledge for their assistance and support through the editorial process. Introduction Setting the Stage

I want this to be mainstream. I want the frivolity, the silliness, the ­regressiveness to be alternative. —Anand Gandhi, on new independent Indian cinema (Naqvi, 2013)

Indian cinema is undergoing a foundational transformation through the emergence of a new wave of urban independent films since 2010. The growth and development of this new filmic form, currently alluded to as new Indian ‘Indies’, is raising fresh awareness of Indian cinema in the public sphere. The paucity of directly related academic literature on this contem- porary form of independent cinema also presents an opportunity for this book to question a majoritarian bias in scholarship. Contemporary critical writing on Indian cinema has so far focused on Bollywood, India’s dominant cultural signifier. The absence of a comprehensive, dedicated and up-to-date analysis of the new Indian Indies appears all the more anomalous in light of their burgeoning popularity. The credo of this critical analysis is to address this key knowledge gap. In this regard, this book constitutes the first com- prehensive academic investigation of the ongoing cinematic phenomenon that is new independent Indian cinema. As an au courant analysis, this book will adopt a multi-angle, pluralistic and intercultural approach, featuring a diversity of voices and perspectives. As part of this strategy, I have undertaken in-depth interviews in three Indian cities, Delhi, Mumbai and Bangalore, with several independent film direc- tors and actors, whose works are either analysed at length in this book, or have played pivotal roles in the ascendancy of the new Indies. In a bid to address the predominantly Indian focus of academic literature on Indian cinema, I have incorporated a broad-sweep approach that includes voices from Bangalore, Kolkata, Mumbai and Delhi. Interview respondents include renowned independent cinema actor, Rahul Bose, acclaimed inde- pendent directors Kiran Rao, Anusha Rizvi, Aamir Bashir, Onir, Kamal Swaroop, Bejoy Nambiar, Pawan Kumar, Prakash Belawadi, Suman Ghosh and Q (Qaushiq Mukherjee). This book is also informed by interactions with ­former members of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) (some are anonymised), leading film scholars and representatives from the 2 Introduction arts, culture and journalism spheres in India. These include Ira Bhaskar from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi; M K Raghavendra; Arundhati Nag and Nirmala Ravindran from Bangalore. The importance of a timely scholarly study of the new Indies is empha- sised by these films intertwining with metamorphosing Indian socio-political structures. The nation is currently undergoing a tumultuous neoliberal restructuring characterised by a commitment to consumer capitalism, for- eign multinational investment and an inexorable thrust towards a global free market economy. These liberalisation-induced vicissitudes in the Indian nation-state are punctuated by a paradoxical retrenchment of right-wing Hindu religious and nationalist ideology. It is therefore pertinent that this book is born into an extant socio-political Indian milieu that is fraught with escalating intolerance towards rationalism and increasingly inimical to secu- lar and libertarian free expression, particularly concerning the creative arts. This is attributable in large measure, as Diana Dimitrova (2014: 86) cogently points out, to the obsessive thrust by religious nationalist power structures towards a return to ‘Aryan roots’ and the idea of a ‘modern Hindu-Indian nation from which Muslims, other religious minorities, women’ and Dalits are excluded. In this milieu of undecidability, the new Indie films with their topical narrative themes and issues constitute intersectional sites of contemporary Indian discourse. They appear to reflect multifarious dimensions of the above-mentioned fractures and socio-economic schisms in multilayered modern Indian society. In essence, the new Indies narrate micro-narratives – the minority and alternative stories of nation excluded from Bollywood film representations. An examination of the new Indies, therefore, will reveal the discursive contexts and subjective voices in contemporary India, largely elided in academic literature’s preoccupation with the majority narrative of Bollywood. Recent literature, such as Beyond the Boundaries of Bollywood (Dwyer & Pinto 2011), alludes to non-Bollywood Indian cinema, but either fails to affirm these films as a distinctive and de facto modern Indian cinematic discourse or obviates the specificities and nuances that are integral to the individuality of new independent Indian cinema. Adrian Athique has con- ducted erudite and percipient analyses of one important facet that influences new Indie cinema – the growth of The Multiplex in India (Athique and Hill, 2010). Monika Mehta’s Censorship and Sexuality in Bombay Cinema (2011) extends an insightful perspective on censorship and regulation, albeit focusing on Bollywood. New Indian Cinema in Post-Independence India (Needham, 2013) presents a rigorous appraisal of 1970s and 80s Parallel cinema Shyam Benegal’s oeuvre. Despite the book’s title – New Indian Cinema – its content exhibits the common symptom of scholar- ship on Indian film studies. This involves the seemingly inevitable recasting and reinscribing of dominant paradigms, such as Bollywood, or a restric- tion of research focus to 1970s and 80s Parallel Indian cinema. In general, Introduction 3 academic engagement largely continues to either perpetuate the dichotomy of Bollywood/Parallel, or nostalgically recall hoary historical achievements in a unilinear, uncritical and often mythologised construction of Indian cinema historiography. Indeed, some contemporary scholars go so far as to invest Bollywood with ‘divine’ authority, seeing in the commercial a new-age avatar of ancient mythological texts. They proclaim ‘Bollywood cinema has assumed the mantle of upholding a distinct moral code, just as the pauranic kathas [ancient Hindu mythological stories] once did’ (Kishwar, 2013: 95). These scholars extend an undifferentiating adulation predicated on the notion that Bollywood has been ‘obsessive in teaching young people the value of sac- rifice, commitment to family well-being and respect for elders’ (ibid., 97). Such expressions are symptomatic of current transdiscursive attempts to formulate a ‘constructed notion of history that can be traced back from the present day to the Vedic age in one continuous unbroken line’ (Dimitrova, 2014: 86). This book momentarily halts this linear national narrative in its tracks, stopping to consider whether there is space left for alternative voices and counter-narratives in the seemingly all-encompassing brand-building exercise of bolstering the myth and monolith of nation. Whilst the transglobal perpetuation of Bollywood as shorthand for Indian culture ostensibly augments India’s ‘global street credibility’, it arguably obfuscates the nation’s current socio-cultural and religio-political frictions. These tensions are exemplified in escalating levels of religious intolerance, violent attacks on minorities, and transgressions on freedom of expression, all largely met by the ruling state’s policy of silence. India’s current global image has been corroded in relation to a raft of incidents involving religious antagonisms and the suppression of expres- sion. Prominent among these events was the recent Hindu mob lynching of a Muslim man over his alleged consumption of beef, which is forbidden in the Hindu religion. The nation is also countenancing an assault on expres- sions of free speech and rationalism, with three prominent proponents of rationalism and science murdered by religious radicals in different regions of the country. In light of these events, it could be stated that the nation’s outward-facing narrative of economic ascendency appears antithetical to this tumultuous internal geopolitical configuration. This is magnified in recent events, where Bollywood star Aamir Khan was pilloried for publically expressing his apprehension about rising intolerance in India (‘Aamir Khan’, 2015). A barrage of vituperation from the religious-­ nationalist domain of the political and public sphere followed Khan’s state- ment, including abusive directives urging him to convert to Hinduism or relocate to Pakistan with his filmmaker wife, Kiran Rao (Bhatia, 2015). These events could be perceived as a predictable iteration of earlier belli- cose reactions to other high-profile individuals from the arts and culture spheres, including Bollywood’s Shah Rukh Khan, upon vocalising similar concerns. In this environment, myopically laudatory academic analyses that 4 Introduction shore up the majoritarian national status quo, as cited earlier, are prototypi- cal of the reluctance displayed by several sections of Indian scholarship to be perceived as ‘disloyal’ to the nation-state. It could be argued that the refusal to acknowledge and address endemic socio-political issues for fear of being labelled ‘anti-national’ panders to the uncontested ratification and reproduc- tion of hegemony. There is a growing mobilisation of the Indian intelligentsia and the arts and culture community, manifested in the returning of national awards by prominent Indian writers, artists, filmmakers, historians and scientists. In this germination of a collective counter-narrative spearheaded by artists, liberals and the progressive-minded, it is worth locating and interpreting the role of alternative narratives cinematically and self-reflexively emerging from the new Indies acting as specular interrogative instruments of India’s ongoing transformations. Analysing the emergence of this new independent Indian cinematic form that at present is marginal to Bollywood and represents alternative socio-­ political micro-narratives necessitates the adoption of congruent philo­ sophical and theoretical frames of reference. It will be demonstrated that a postcolonial, postmodern and poststructural approach that problematises grand narratives, such as Bollywood, and facilitates the emergence of multi- ple subjectivities, is appropriate to this book’s main arguments. In addition, my theory of a ‘meta-hegemony’ forms one of the core contributions of this book on the new Indian Indies. I have devised this paradigm to explain the historical hierarchy of dominance in Indian cinema. Examining the inner workings of Bollywood’s meta-hegemony within Indian cinema will assist in contextualising the emergence of the new Indies, mapping their quest for representative space and their thrust towards a dedicated ‘Indie’ funding and distribution infrastructure in India’s Bollywood-dominated cultural domain. Concomitantly, this book seeks to ascertain whether the Indies’ divergence from Bollywood’s representations of a normative patriarchal national meta- narrative could be indicative of an urban Indian socio-cultural and cinematic ‘time of liberation’ in a ‘time of cultural uncertainty’ (Bhabha, 1995: 155). In this context, I will address the important question of whether the Indies constitute a counter-narrative to Bollywood’s appropriation of the nation’s cultural narrative. Expanding on the conceptual framework, this book locates the new Indies in a median space that signifies the nation’s ‘agonistic’ (Bhabha, 1994: 38, 41) dialectical arbitration between its traditional national past and neoliberal present. One of the main aims is to ascertain how the Indies negotiate and frequently destabilise this national binary whilst diverging from dominant Bollywood norms in terms of form, style and content. In view of their rising popularity, particularly in the urban space, it is worth examining whether the hybridity of the Indies, their positioning in an ambivalent interstitial space and their alternative narration of nation can be posited as a cinematic narra- tive of resistance to mainstream socio-cultural and political discourses. Introduction 5 At this stage, it is worth mapping the main themes that will serve as guidelines for this exploratory journey into the heart of new Indian Indie cinema. In this regard, I pose several questions. How are the alternative narratives emerging from the interstitial representative space of New Wave independent films influencing a current transformation in Indian cinema? What modes and strategies do the new Indies use to represent alternative articulations and marginalised narratives of the nation? How do their dis- courses evoke censorship and address the dominant national metanarrative in a changing socio-political landscape? What is the historiographical con- text of the emergence of the Indies? That is, are they fundamentally a ‘glo- cal hybrid’ of India’s mainstream and marginal cinematic forms? How do the New Wave Indie discourses address the existing hegemonic Bollywood superstructure? Stemming from these questions, the book’s various chapters will exam- ine to what extent the new independent films amalgamate heterogeneous cinematic influences and are glocal in their ‘globalisation of the local and the localisation of the global’ (Marramao, 2012: 35). In essence, I raise the proposition that the new Indies combine a universal aesthetic with locally specific stories, circumventing ubiquitous Bollywood ‘song and dance’ sequences and stereotypical storylines. This study also considers whether the new films draw from India’s multiple contemporary socio-political real- ities to espouse everyday human narratives, often focussing on marginalised individuals and communities. In this regard, I will appraise a variegated array of seminal independent films, including Gandu (2010), Dhobi Ghat (2010), Peepli Live (2010), The Lunchbox (2013), Harud (2010), I Am (2010) and Ship of Theseus (2013) – all films that represent themes and issues that discursively engage with the contemporary ‘state of the nation’. The main focus, therefore, is on how the emergence of the Indian Indies from an in-between space enables them to represent alternative stories whilst simultaneously gaining popularity in urban India. This middle Indie space could be located between the two enduring Indian cinema traditions, Bollywood and Parallel arthouse, and in India’s current tryst between glo- balising modernity and traditional past. The book is divided into two parts. Part I presents a background insight into the emergence of the new Indies, appraising their characteristics, modes of dissemination and delving into the socio-political discourses that inform these films’ thematic content. Part II undertakes a practical case- study approach through close textual readings of the aforementioned independent films. Data from fieldwork interviews, evaluations of news articles and reviews in the public sphere and the case-study film analyses will be examined through the lens of existing theoretical frameworks and the self-devised model of a meta-hegemony expounded in this book. The intention of this syncretic paradigm is to bring a refreshing and revitalis- ing perspective to the broader realm of modern Film Studies and (s). My aim is to widen transdisciplinary horizons in an effort to 6 Introduction decompartmentalise and destabilise parochial borders that have often resulted in self-contained or repetitive epistemological and philosophical approaches to Bollywood-dominated scholarship. Breaking these barriers, I will deploy an intercultural approach, one that does not recoil from draw- ing on a global palette of analogies or cognate disciplines. This comparative pan-global frame is commensurate with the network society in which we find ourselves inextricably immersed; constantly colliding in a sea of cul- tural and information interflows. The book’s first chapter traces the evolutionary timeline of new indepen- dent Indian cinema. It maps the genealogy of the new Indies, ostensibly as a hybrid ‘mutant’ synthesis of their cinematic ‘parents’, Bollywood and Par- allel arthouse cinema, but revealing numerous other cinematic overlaps and influences. Reiterating the diffuse composition of the Indies as an amalga- mation of various Indian (and, as detailed in later chapters, global) cinemas, this chapter traces the Indies amorphous antecedents, subsequently disman- tling the binary conception of Indian cinema as either Bollywood or . Encapsulating a post-independence timeline, this overview charts the influences of other cinemas on the current Indie New Wave, including urban ‘Hinglish’ cinema – cosmopolitan films with a mixture of Hindi and English dialogue. Chapter 2 explicates my theory of a ‘meta-hegemony’, which is one of this monograph’s original contributions to scholarship. This paradigm has been devised to explain the historical hierarchy of dominance in Indian and global cinema and how this impacts the new Indies. The concept asserts that Bollywood dominates Indian cinema and culture whilst being subservient to a larger global Hollywood hegemony. In the context of this study’s focus on new independent Indian cinema, the paradigm of a global meta-hegemony will focus on its Indian inner-workings – Bollywood’s hegemony in modern Indian cinema in relation to the new Indies. The meta-hegemony has three distinctive facets within the contours of Indian cinema. The first feature is Bollywood’s over the Indian film industry’s modes of production, distribution, exhibition and capital generation. In this regard, Bollywood films largely dominate Indian urban multiplex cinema screens, leading to the new Indies being locked in a disproportionate struggle for space and having to seek alternative avenues of exhibition. The second facet is Bollywood’s ideological propagation of a post-globalisation master narrative through its role as national cultural signifier of India’s neoliberal economy. This section contends that Bollywood has melded neoliberalism, patriarchy and religion in its articulation of a ‘one-size-fits-all’ national narrative. It argues that several mainstream Bollywood films validate a majoritarian ethos, both in terms of the state’s thrust towards market liberalisation and a stan- dardisation of ‘traditional’ Hindu values and ideology. This proposition is contextualised through the new Indies’ divergence and contestation of normative national discourse, often through polemical, self-reflexive and sometimes transgressive narratives. This segment of the chapter also looks Introduction 7 at Bollywood’s narration of a patriarchal, postcolonial, national narrative through gendered and stereotypical representations of women. It inspects Bollywood’s ‘gendering of the nation’, particularly through the industry’s normalisation of sexualised song and dance sequences known as ‘item num- bers’. Bollywood’s patriarchal representations of gender seem amplified in comparison with the increasing number of female directors and strong female roles in several new independent films. The third dimension of the meta-hegemony is the state’s endorsement of Bollywood as an instrument of soft power, signifying Bollywood’s branding as a national and global com- modity. Soft power, a term coined by Joseph Nye (2004), is a strategy for nations to gain global influence through cultural and political ‘attraction’ rather than military ‘coercion’. This portion of the chapter argues that the state and Bollywood fold into the new Indian neoliberal national narrative, and their political and cinematic discourses converge in the rhetoric of soft power. Demonstrating how Bollywood is validated at the highest levels of executive power, this section contextualises the arrival of the new Indies and the challenges they face in the subsuming discourse of Bollywood’s soft power. Chapter 2’s contextualisation of the Indies’ emergence in a Bollywood meta-hegemony, Chapter 3 presents an overview of the new Indies’ general characteristics. It details attempts to define and classify them and the features that distinguish them from the mainstream. Presenting the new Indies as a postmodern hybrid film form emerging from a middle ‘third space’, this chapter effectively dismantles the longstanding Bollywood/­ Satyajit Ray binary model perpetuated both in Film Studies scholarship and in mainly Western perceptions of Indian cinema. This section investigates whether the blanket-term ‘Indie’ can be superimposed on the new wave of independent Indian films, acknowledging the American associations of this appellation. I consider whether it is more accurate to perceive the Indian Indies as a glocal mélange of heterogeneous Indian and global cinematic influences hybridising under the monolith of Bollywood’s meta-hegemony. I use an inventive diagrammatic model of the Ship of Theseus, (an ancient Greek philosophical paradox and title of a globally successful Indian Indie), in order to trace the evolution of the Indies from a ‘Ship of Indian Cinemas’. Exploring the various modes of defining and categorising the new Indies, this section therefore constructs a template to chart the course of the Indies in their attempt to create a new cinematic space. This sets up the next chap- ter, which will elucidate the channels of dissemination available to the new Indies. The fourth chapter analyses the practical mechanisms of prolifera- tion available, afforded or accessed by the new Indies. It delves into the Indies’ paradoxical reliance on Bollywood producers, stars and corporate production houses for funding, distribution and exhibition. In this regard, the Indies’ alternative content often proves an Achilles heel whilst sourc- ing mainstream funding and exhibition opportunities. This chapter reveals 8 Introduction alternative mechanisms adopted by young Indie filmmakers to either mit- igate or circumvent reliance on Bollywood infrastructure. These include international co-productions, social media and the Internet, ‘instant cinema’, video on demand, film festivals and . Importantly, this segment analyses the growing migration of urban film consumption to pirate spheres, where young urban Indians gain free access to new Indie films through torrent downloads on peer-to-peer file-sharing websites. This displacement to cyberspace is largely a legacy of the Indies struggling to find mainstream space in overpriced Bollywood-dominated multiplexes, as mentioned in Chapter 2. It was mentioned in Chapter 4 that the Indies’ unconventional content entails limited avenues of funding, distribution and exhibition. Acting as a bridge to Chapter 6, which is on censorship and regulation, Chapter 5 deals with the Indies challenging the status quo of Bollywood’s linear narra- tion of nation. The Indies exhibit postmodern traits in their sometimes con- troversial representations of India’s socio-political tryst with tradition and modernity. Indie films often feature fragmented time and space, non-linear narratives, cultural heterogeneity, stylistic hybridity and pastiche. Locating the Indies in a hybrid, in-between space, this chapter reveals how the Indie New Wave raises questions about India’s progression into postmodern con- nectedness and consumer hyperreality whilst the nation holds on to tradi- tion and religiosity. Presenting this as the ‘double narrative’ of nation, this portion of the chapter argues that the Indies subvert Bollywood’s normalised meta-hegemonic homogenisation of an integrally heterogeneous nation. The Indies perform this function cinematically by splitting this grand unifying master narrative to reveal multiple layers in India’s current navigation of spiritualism and materialism, neoliberalism and nationalism. Chapter 6 examines how the new Indies are often subject to stricter cen- sorship and regulation parameters than Bollywood, owing to their critical representations of topical themes and national issues. This section presents an incisive argument, drawing from the views of former representatives from the CBFC, commonly referred to in India as the Indian Censor Board. In the past, scholarship has been preoccupied with sex and violence in rela- tion to censorship in India. Often the focus has been on Bollywood films. This chapter centres on the new Indies, adding a third dimension to the examination of censorship – films representing contemporary political dis- course. This portion of the book reveals the Indies’ navigation of a discrep- ant state-controlled censorship system prone to nepotism and bureaucracy, largely bereft of systemic guidelines and codes of practice. In this configura- tion, the state either directly or by proxy of the CBFC, encroaches frequently on free filmic expression of political commentary or censure. One of the propositions of this chapter is that the Bollywood meta-hegemony largely bestows on the mainstream industry’s mainly non-polemical films the ability to surmount censorship hurdles with greater ease than Indies. This chapter suggests however, that censorship in India transcends top-down government Introduction 9 control, unveiling the practice of moral policing by extreme religious fun- damentalist and political groups, who frequently turn to vigilantism in their role as self-appointed censors. Providing topical examples, this chapter demonstrates how several Indies have been prescribed cuts, denied a certif- icate of exhibition (Gandu, for example, based on profanity) or have been banned outright (Kaum de Heere, Unfreedom) because of ‘taboo’ topics relating to traumatic episodes in India’s national narrative. Themes include state complicity in the 1984 anti-Sikh killings (Amu, Kaum de Heere), the 2002 state-supported massacre of Muslims in Gujarat (Final Solution), caste-based oppression of minorities (Papilio Buddha), far-right Hindu reli- gious fundamentalism (The World Before Her) and same-sex relationships (I Am, Unfreedom). The aim is to demonstrate how independent Indian films have consistently evoked turbulent debates with right-wing religious groups and state censorship. As mentioned earlier, Part II of the book is dedicated to film case studies and provides in-depth close readings of several ground-breaking new Indie films, from multiple analytical and epistemological perspectives. The case studies commence with a close reading of Bengali Indie Gandu (‘Asshole’, 2010), an explicit, controversial and iconoclastic Indie rap-musical set in Kolkata, with themes of urban decay, alienated youth, drug abuse and repressed sexuality. I argue in Chapter 7 that Gandu’s defiant questioning of Indian ‘traditions and values’ signifies a post-liberalisation rupture in the linear narrative of nation. Mentioning the absence of a popular youth counter-culture in post-independence urban India, this section argues that Gandu epitomises the globalisation-induced mosaic of modern urban youth culture. Exploring the film’s cinematic attributes, this analysis contends that Gandu typifies the Indies as ‘hybrid mutants’, with its experimental post- modern pastiche of film form, style, music and mise-en-scène. Framing Kiran Rao’s Dhobi Ghat as a postmodern ‘city film’, the next case study (Chapter 8) examines the film’s juxtaposition of a local Mumbai context with global cinema audio-visual codes. This chapter demonstrates how Dhobi Ghat’s triple-narrative, multi-strand story reveals hierarchical layers in urban Indian society, foregrounding the metropolis’s marginalised, including migrant workers, whose contribution to the city’s construction is often left out of the neoliberal master narrative of progress. Dhobi Ghat’s representations of marginality and alterity will be examined in relation to the thesis of fragmentary narratives and cultural difference emerging from an interstitial space. This case study will also incorporate the impli- cations of globalisation on India’s changing cultural, socio-economic and spatio-temporal constellation. In this regard, this close analysis of Dhobi Ghat will evaluate inter-relations between the nation’s transformations, subaltern figures, cultural difference and the urban space as a site for post- modern intersections. Chapter 9 provides an analysis of Peepli Live, directed by Anusha Rizvi, and one of the pioneering films of the Indie New Wave. This close textual analysis 10 Introduction delves into the film’s themes of farmer suicides and media misrepresentation, revealing wider contexts of India’s transition from past social democracy towards present free market system privileging multinational corporate invest- ment. Observing the ternary convergence of capital, knowledge and power, this study reveals that Peepli Live’s indictment of post-liberalisation state apathy towards farmer suicides has intertextual links to previous post-independence Indian art films and classical Hindi literature. Chapter 10 contains a critical analysis of Anand Gandhi’s Ship of Theseus, widely acknowledged as a watershed in Indian cinema and included in a global list of life-changing films by the Critics Circle UK. Scrutinising the glocal elements in the film’s diegesis, including transnational co-operations in the film’s sound design, music, dialogue and locations, this study sees Ship of Theseus as blurring India’s binary between ancient religious ritualism and postmodern urban hyperreality. This chapter reads this portmanteau film’s multi-linked narratives as a representation of the nation, not as a binary, but as a heterotopia, which is a syncretic space where majority and minority discourses coexist, comingle and confront each other on a daily basis. The final chapter, Chapter 11, presents an anthologised analysis of four Indie films with similar and different themes, all invoking past events in India’s national trajectory that still haunt its present. Aamir Bashir’s Harud and Haider, directed by Vishal Bhardwaj, engage with issues of alienation and territoriality in the volatile Kashmir region. Onir’s film, I Am, is a four- story anthology dealing with women’s rights, child abuse, Hindu-Muslim discord in Kashmir and criminalised same-sex relationships in India. This chapter also looks inside The Lunchbox (directed by Ritesh Batra), which evokes themes of memory and nostalgia for India’s unified socialist narra- tive prior to 1990s globalisation, unpacking the state of a nation as it rap- idly transits from tradition to cosmopolitan post-modernity. Summarising the main points raised in the book, the Conclusion raises ramifications of the Indies’ advent in a cultural landscape overshadowed by Bollywood’s meta-hegemony. It presages future scenarios where the Indies establish an autonomous space or create a fusion with Bollywood. The Con- clusion foresees more Indie international co-productions, alternative arenas of Indie exhibition and increased Indie presence on the global cinema circuit. The closing segment of the Conclusion also identifies strategic and logistical changes that may be necessary to envision an independent infrastructure where the Indies could avail themselves of funding, distribution and exhibi- tion avenues, decoupled from the strictures of the current system. Overall, the book’s Conclusion boldly augurs the new Indies as future bellwethers of Indian cinema. As mentioned in the above chapter summaries, this book is dedicated to the formulation of a holistic, intertextual and intercultural analysis of a new filmic phenomenon that is transforming contemporary Indian cinema. Ultimately, the book endeavours to tread the unbeaten path, making first steps into a cinematic terrain that could well chart the future course of Indian cinema. Introduction 11 Note For more information and more images, visit the website www.IndianIndieCinema.com.

References ‘Aamir Khan Joins “Intolerance” Debate, Says Wife Even Suggested Leaving India’ (2015). NDTV.com, 24 November. Available at: http://www.ndtv.com/india- news/aamir-khan-joins-voices-against-intolerance-says-wife-even-suggested- leaving-india-1246725 [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015]. Athique, A. and Hill, D. (2010). The Multiplex in India. New York: Routledge. Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture, London: Routledge. Bhabha, H. (1995). ‘Cultural Diversity and Cultural Differences’, in Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G. and Tiffin, H. (eds.). The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 155–157. Bhatia, I. (2015). ‘Aamir Khan Should Either Convert or Go to Pakistan: Hindu Mahasabha’, The Times of India. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ india/Aamir-Khan-should-either-convert-or-go-to-Pakistan-Hindu-Mahasabha/ articleshow/49908845.cms. [Accessed 15 Nov. 2015]. Dimitrova, D. (2014). The Other in South Asian Religion, Literature and Film. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Dwyer R. and Pinto, J. (2011). Beyond the Boundaries of Bollywood: The Many Forms of Hindi Cinema. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Kishwar, M. (2013). ‘Bridging Divide: The Triumph of Bollywood’, in Balslev, A. (ed.). On India. New Delhi: Sage. Marramao, G. (2012). The Passage West. London: Verso. Mehta, M. (2011). Censorship and Sexuality in Bombay Cinema. Austin: University of Texas Press. Naqvi, S. (2013). “No, I want this to be mainstream. I want the frivolity, the silliness, the regressiveness to be alternative”. Hard News. 2 August. Available at: http:// www.hardnewsmedia.com/2013/08/6007 [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015]. Needham, A. (2013). New Indian Cinema in Post-independence India. London: Routledge. Nye, J. (2004). Soft Power. New York: Public Affairs. This page intentionally left blank Introduction ‘Aamir Khan Joins “Intolerance” Debate, Says Wife Even Suggested Leaving India’ (2015). NDTV.com , 24 November. Available at: http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/aamir-khan-joins- voices-against-intolerance-says-wife-even-suggested-leaving-india-1246725 [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015]. Athique, A. and Hill, D. (2010). The Multiplex in India. New York: Routledge. Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture, London: Routledge. Bhabha, H. (1995). ‘Cultural Diversity and Cultural Differences’, in Ashcroft, B. , Griffiths, G. and Tiffin, H. (eds.). The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 155–157. Bhatia, I. (2015). ‘Aamir Khan Should Either Convert or Go to Pakistan: Hindu Mahasabha’, The Times of India. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Aamir-Khan-should- either-convert-or-go-to-Pakistan-Hindu-Mahasabha/articleshow/49908845.cms. [Accessed 15 Nov. 2015]. Dimitrova, D. (2014). The Other in South Asian Religion, Literature and Film. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Dwyer R. and Pinto, J. (2011). Beyond the Boundaries of Bollywood: The Many Forms of Hindi Cinema. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Kishwar, M. (2013). ‘Bridging Divide: The Triumph of Bollywood’, in Balslev, A. (ed.). On India. New Delhi: Sage. Marramao, G. (2012). The Passage West. London: Verso. Mehta, M. (2011). Censorship and Sexuality in Bombay Cinema. Austin: University of Texas Press. Naqvi, S. (2013). “No, I want this to be mainstream. I want the frivolity, the silliness, the regressiveness to be alternative”. Hard News. 2 August. Available at: http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/2013/08/6007 [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015]. Needham, A. (2013). New Indian Cinema in Post-independence India. London: Routledge. Nye, J. (2004). Soft Power. New York: Public Affairs.12

Bollywood and the Cinemas of India Ahluwalia, A. (2014). ‘University of Westminster, London, Moving On Conference, Miss Lovely Post-screening Q&A.’ 12–14 June 2014. Appadurai, A. (1990). ‘Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy’. Theory Culture Society; Sage Journals. vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 295–310. Athique, A. (2012). Indian Media. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Athique, A. and Hill, D. (2010). The Multiplex in India. New York: Routledge. Bhowmik, S. (2013). ‘Film Censorship in India: Deconstructing an Incongruity’, in Routledge Handbook of Indian Cinemas Gokulsing, K. and Dissanayake, W. (eds.). Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. 29 Budhraja, S. (2012). ‘Wasseypur Gets Moody’. Times of India. 20 June. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/Wasseypur-gets- moody/articleshow/14268780.cms [Accessed 20 Nov. 2014]. ‘Can the Indian Film Industry Go Global?’ (2011). The Hindu. 22 April. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/news/the-india-cables/the-cables/248356-can-the-indian-film- industry-go-global/article1716155.ece [Accessed 20 Nov. 2014]. Chakravarty, S. (1993). National Identity in Indian Cinema 1947–1987. Austin: University of Texas Press. Dasgupta, P. (2011). ‘Q’s Gandu Leaked Online’. Times of India. 27 October. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bengali/movies/news/Qs-Gandu-leaked- online/articleshow/10506042.cms [Accessed 20 Nov. 2014]. Desai, J and Dudrah, R. (2008). The Bollywood Reader. Maidenhead, Berkshire, UK: McGraw-Hill. Devasundaram, A. (2014), ‘Cyber Buccaneers, Public and Pirate Spheres: The Phenomenon of Bittorrent Downloads in the Transforming Terrain of Indian Cinema’, in Khorana, S. , Parthasarathi, V. and Thomas, P. (eds.). Public Spheres and the Media in India. Media International Australia,. 152, pp. 108–118. Dhaliwal, N. (2012). ‘The New Indian Cinema: Sex, Crime and Censorship. The Guardian. 21 June. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/jun/21/new-indian-cinema- censorship [Accessed 8 Nov. 2015]. Dhingra, R (Producer) 2011, We the People: Love Sex and Cinema (television broadcast). 13 Nov 2011, New Delhi Television Ltd (NDTV). Donner, H. (2011). Being Middle-Class in India. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor & Francis. Dutta, N. (2012). ‘I Wanted Paan Singh Tomar to Be My First Film: Tigmanshu Dhulia’ DearCinema.com . 7 March. Available at: http://dearcinema.com/interview/i-wanted-paan- singh-tomar-to-be-my-first-film-tigmanshu-dhulia/0941 [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Dwyer, R. (2006). ‘Planet Bollywood’, in Ali, N. , Kalra, V. and Sayyid, S. (eds.). A Postcolonial People: South Asians in Britain. London: C. Hurst & Co. Francis, A. (2014). ‘How India’s Film Festival Boom Is Boosting Indie Cinema’. BBC News. 16 July. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-28122756 [Accessed 16 Jul. 2014]. Ganti, T. (2004). Bollywood: A Guidebook to Popular Hindi Cinema. London: Routledge. Ganti, T. (2013). Bollywood: A Guidebook to Popular Hindi Cinema, 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Gokulsing, M. and Dissanayake, W. (2004). Indian Popular Cinema. Stoke on Trent, UK: Trentham Books. Gokulsing, K. and Dissanayake, W. (2009). Popular Culture in a Globalised India. London: Routledge. Gopal, S. (2011). Conjugations: Marriage and Form in New Bollywood Cinema. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Gowricharn, R. (n.d.). Bollywood and Diaspora. Available at: http://www.forum.nl/pdf/bollywood_in_diaspora.pdf [Accessed 6 Jan. 2013]. Guneratne, A. (2003). ‘Introduction’, in Guneratne, A. and Dissanayake, W. (eds.) Rethinking . London: Routledge. Harper, G. (2001). ‘Film and Other Media’, in Hawley, J (ed.) Encyclopaedia of Postcolonial Studies. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Hood, W J. (2009). The Essential Mystery: Major Filmmakers of Indian Art Cinema, New Delhi: Orient Longman. 30 Kabir, N. (2001). Bollywood. London: Channel 4 Books. Khanna, P. (2014). ‘The Brave New World of Indie Films’. Hindustan Times. 8 December. Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/brunch/the-brave-new-world-of-indie-films/story- WCxWo5GFhiEbedltqs61eM.html [Accessed 8 Aug. 2014]. Kumar, A. (2011). ‘Are You Ready for Change?’ The Hindu. 30 June. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/features/cinema/are-you-ready-for-change/article2147948.ece [Accessed 28 Nov. 2014]. Lutgendorf, P. (2007). ‘Bending the Bharata’, in Pauwels, M (ed.), Indian Literature and Popular Cinema: Recasting Classics. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Majumdar, N. (2012). ‘Importing Neoliberalism, Exporting Cinema’, in Giovacchini, S. and Sklar, R (eds.) Global . Jackson: University Press of Mississippi. Martyris, N. (2002). ‘Films Are Our Gangotri, Don’t Soil Them. Times of India. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/stoi/deep-focus/Films-are-our-Gangotri-dont-soil- them/articleshow/17288305.cms [Accessed 20 Nov. 2014]. Mehta, M. (2011). Censorship and Sexuality in Bombay Cinema. Austin: University of Texas Press. Mishra, V. (2014). ‘Bollywood’, in Thrift, N. , Tickell, A. , Woolgar, S. and Rupp, W. (eds.) Globalization in Practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Needham, A. (2013). New Indian Cinema in Post-independence India. London: Routledge. ‘Peepli Live Scores High at World Cinema Amsterdam, Narrowly Misses Parool Audience Award’ (2011). Economic Times: Entertainment. 27 August. Available at: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-08-27/news/29934945_1_peepli-live- indian-films-independent-films [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Pendakur, M. (2003). Indian Popular Cinema. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Raghavendra, K M. (2009). ‘Local Resistance to Global Bangalore’, in Gokulsing, M. and Dissanayake, W. (eds.). Popular Culture in a Globalised India. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Rose, S. (2013). ‘Anurag Kashyap: Bollywood Is to Blame for India’s Inability to Deal with Reality.’ The Guardian. 28 February. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/feb/28/anurag-kashyap-gangs-of-wasseypur [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Roy, G A. (2013). ‘The Politics of Hinglish’, in Wee, L , Goh, R and Lim, L (eds.), The Politics of English. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamin Publishing Company. Shah, K. (2010). Aamir Goes Good Wit Hunting. Times of India. 1 July. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/Aamir-goes-good-wit- hunting/articleshow/6113549.cms [Accessed 5 Dec. 2014]. Sharma, S. , Hutnyk, J. and Sharma, A. (1996). Dis-orienting Rhythms. London: Zed Books. Shetty-Saha, S. (2011). ‘Kaushik Mukherjee: All of Us Are Polysexuals.’ Mid-day.com . 14 July. Available at: http://www.mid-day.com/entertainment/2011/jul/140711-Gandu-Kaushik- Mukherjee-Polysexuals-controversial-film.htm [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Shoesmith, B. (2011). ‘Film Industry’, in Kaminsky, A. and Long, R , (eds.) India Today: An Encyclopaedia of Life in the Republic (Vol. 1). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. 31 ‘Small Budget Movies, Big Box Office Collections’. Times of India.17 December. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/Small-budget- movies-big-box-office-collections/articleshow/17652606.cms [Accessed 1 Dec. 2014]. Thussu, D. (2008). ‘The Globalisation of “Bollywood”’, in Kavoori, A. and Punathambekar, A (eds.). Global Bollywood. New York: New York University Press. Vasudevan, R. (2000). Making Meaning in Indian Cinema. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Vasudevan, R. (2011). The Melodramatic Public. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Velayutham, S. (2008). Tamil Cinema. New York: Routledge. Verma, R. (2011). ‘Beyond Bollywood: Indian Cinema’s New Cutting Edge’. The Guardian. 23 June. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jun/23/india-independent-cinema [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Verma, R. (2013). ‘Irrfan Khan: Indian Want Deeper Cinema, Not Massala Films’. Metro: Entertainment. 15 July. Available at: http://metro.co.uk/2013/07/15/irrfan-khan-a- growing-indian-audience-wants-deeper-cinema-not-masala-films-3880411/ [Accessed 14 Oct. 2014]. Virdi, J. (2003). The Cinematic ImagiNation, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

The Meta-Hegemony ‘Aamir Khan meets British Prime Minister David Cameron’ (2013). Indian Express. 19 February. Available at: http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/aamir-khan-meets-british- prime-minister-david-cameron/1076427/ [Accessed 26 Oct. 2014]. Aigthefilm.com , (2015). [online] Available at: http://www.aigthefilm.com/ [Accessed 17 Nov. 2015]. [STYLE??]. 56 Alessandrini, A C. (2003). ‘My Heart’s Indian for All That’: Bollywood Film between Home and Diaspora’. Diaspora 10: 3: pp. 315–340. Alessio, D and Langer, J. (2010). ‘, Hindu Nationalism and Modernity’, in Hoagland, E. and Sarwal, R. (eds.). Science Fiction, Imperialism and the Third World. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, pp. 156–171. Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Athique, A. (2012). Indian Media. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Athique, A. and Hill, D. (2010). The Multiplex in India. New York: Routledge. Balibar, E. (1991). ‘Racism and Nationalism’, in Balibar, E. and Wallerstein, I. (eds.) Race, Nation, Class, London: Verso, pp. 37–67. Banerjee, M. (2011). ‘Lunch with the Bigot’, in Davis, R G. , Fischer-Hornung, D. and Kardux C J. (eds.) Aesthetic Practices and Politics in Media, Music and Art. New York: Routledge. Banker, A. (2001). Bollywood. Harpenden, UK: Pocket Essentials. Bennett, B. (2014). The Cinema of Michael Winterbottom. New York: Wallflower Press. Bhabha, H. (1995). ‘Cultural Diversity and Cultural Differences’, in Ashcroft, B. , Griffiths, G. and Tiffin, H. (eds.). The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. London: Routledge. Bhattacharya, N. (2012). Hindi Cinema: Repeating the Subject. Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Blum, D. (2007). National Identity and Globalization. New York: Cambridge University Press. ‘Bollywood Women Deliver Big Hits for Small Paychecks.’ (2014). NDTV.com . 25 November. Available at: http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/bollywood-women-deliver-big-hits-for-small- paychecks-625596 [Accessed 7 Dec. 2014]. Cerny, P. G. (1996). ‘International Finance and the Erosion of State Policy Capacity’, in Gummett, P. (ed.) Globalization and Public Policy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Chakravarty, S. (1993). National Identity in Indian Cinema 1947–1987. Austin: University of Texas Press. Chatterjee, P. (1989). ‘Colonialism, Nationalism and Colonized Women: The Contest in India’. American Ethnologist 16(4), pp. 622–633. Chatterjee, P. (1993). The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Chatterji, S. (1998). Subject Cinema, Object Woman. Calcutta, India: Parumita Publications. Creekmur, C. K. (2007). ‘Remembering, Repeating, and Working through Devdas’ , in Pauwels, H. (ed.) Popular Indian Cinema and Literature: Recasting the Classics. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Desai, J. (2004). Beyond Bollywood: The Cultural Politics of South Asian Film. New York: Routledge. Desai, J. and Dudrah, R. (2008). ‘Introduction’, in Dudrah, R. and Desai, J. (eds.). The Bollywood Reader. Maidenhead, Berkshire, England: McGraw-Hill. Devetak, R. (1996). ‘Postmodernism’, in Burchill, S. and Linklater, A. (eds.), Theories of International Relations. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Dudrah, R. (2012). Bollywood Travels: Culture, Diaspora and Border Crossings in Popular Hindi Cinema. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. 57 Dutt, B (Presenter) 2015, The Buck Stops Here: Snapdeal Pays Lagaan for Aamir: Commerce New Weapon of Intimidation? (television broadcast) 25 Nov 2015, New Delhi Television Ltd (NDTV). Ellis-Petersen, H. (2014). ‘Bollywood Superstar Shah Rukh Khan Named World’s Second Richest Actor’. The Guardian. 21 May. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/may/21/bollywood-shah-rukh-khan-actor [Accessed 13 Oct. 2014]. ‘Ethnic Media Icons Our Best Ambassadors’ (2003). PIB Press Releases: Ministry of Information & Broadcasting. 10 January. Available at: http://pib.nic.in/archieve/lreleng/lyr2003/rjan2003/10012003/r1001200310.html [Accessed 26 Oct. 2014]. Gangadhar, V. (1999). ‘New Twinkle to Bollywood Stars’. The Tribune India: Editorial. 4 September. Available at: http://www.tribuneindia.com/1999/99sep04/edit.htm#5 [Accessed 25 Oct. 2014]. Ganti, T. (2013). Bollywood. 2nd ed. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Gokulsing, K M. and Dissanayake, W. (2004). Indian Popular Cinema. Stoke-on-Trent, UK: Trentham Books. Gokulsing, K M. and Dissanayake, W. (2009). Popular Culture in a Globalised India. London: Routledge. Gopal, S. (2011a). Conjugations: Marriage and Form in New Bollywood Cinema. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Gopal, S. (2011b). ‘Sentimental Symptoms: The Films of Karan Johar and Bombay Cinema’, in Mehta, R B. and Pandharipande, R. (eds.), Bollywood and Globalization: Indian Popular Cinema, Nation, and Diaspora. London: Anthem Press, pp. 15–34. Gopinath, G. (2005). Impossible Desires. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Gray, J. (1998). False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism. London: Granta Books. Hayden, C. (2012). The Rhetoric of Soft Power. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Hirji, F. (2005). ‘When Local Meets Lucre: Commerce, Culture and Imperialism in Bollywood Cinema’. Global Media Journal 7(4). Available at: http://lass.purduecal.edu/cca/gmj/fa05/graduatefa05/gmj-fa05gradref-hirji.htm [Accessed 6 Oct. 2012]. Hirji, F. (2010). Dreaming in Canadian: South Asian Youth, Bollywood and Belonging, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. ‘Hollywood, Bollywood Sign Landmark Cooperation Pact’ (2010). Independent. 11 November. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/hollywood-bollywood- sign-landmark-cooperation-pact-2132356.html [Accessed 25 Aug. 2014]. ‘Hollywood Meets Bollywood’ (2009). Huffington Post, Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/17/hollywood-meets-bollywood_n_216965.html [Accessed 25 Feb. 2016]. Hood, W J. (2009). The Essential Mystery: Major Filmmakers of Indian Art Cinema. New Delhi: Orient Longman. Jacques, M. (2009). When China Rules the World. New York: Penguin Press. Jess-Cooke, C. (2009). Film Sequels. Edinburgh, Scotland, UK: Edinburgh University Press. Kaminsky, A. and Long, R. (eds.) (2011). India Today: An Encyclopedia of Life in the Republic (Vol.1). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. Kaur, R. (2005). ‘Cruising on the Vilayeti Bandwagon’, in Kaur, R. and Sinha, A J. (eds.) Bollyworld: Popular Indian Cinema through a Transnational Lens. New Delhi: Sage Publications. 58 Khan, S. (2009). ‘Nationalism and Hindi Cinema: Narrative Strategies in Fanaa’ . Studies in South Asian Film and Media (1) 1, pp. 85–99. Lechner., J F. and Boli., J. (2010). ‘World Culture, Origins and Consequences’ in Ritzer, G. and Atalay, Z. (eds.) Readings in Globalization. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley- Blackwell. Mangalwala, O. (2013). ‘Item Songs and Flirting with Danger’. Express Tribune Blog. 15 February. Available at: http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/16099/item-songs-and-flirting-with- danger/ [Accessed 13 Oct. 2014]. Marramao, G. (2012). The Passage West. London: Verso. Mazumdar, R. (2007). Bombay Cinema. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Mazzarella, W. (2003). Shoveling Smoke: Advertising and Globalization in Contemporary India. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Mehta, M. (2011). Censorship and Sexuality in Bombay Cinema. Austin: University of Texas Press. Mehta R (2011) ‘Bollywood, Nation, Globalization: An Incomplete Introduction’, in Mehta, R B and Pandharipande, R. (eds.), Bollywood and Globalization: Indian Popular Cinema, Nation, and Diaspora, London: Anthem Press. Mishra, S. (2013). ‘Negotiating Female Sexuality’, in McDonald, C. and Sellers-Young, B. (eds.) Belly Dance Around the World. Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company. Mishra, V. (2014). ‘Bollywood’, in Thrift, N. , Tickell, A. , Woolgar, S. and Rupp, W. (eds) Globalization in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nayak, S. (2008). Globalisation and the Indian Economy: Roadmap to a Convertible Rupee, Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Nye, J. (2004). Soft Power. New York: Public Affairs. Punathambekar, A. (2013). From Bombay to Bollywood. New York: New York University Press. Rajadhyaksha, A. (2003). ‘The “Bollywoodization” of the Indian Cinema: Cultural Nationalism in a Global Arena’. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 4(1), pp. 25–39. Ramesh, R. (2009). ‘Kylie Does Bollywood: Stars Go East to Beat the Hollywood Crunch’. The Guardian. 13 March. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/mar/14/bollywood- kylie-minogue [Accessed 2 Jan. 2014]. Rancière, J. (2006). The Politics of Aesthetics. London: Continuum. Roy, A G. (2011). ‘Is Everybody Saying ‘Shava Shava’ to Bollywood Bhangra?’ in Mehta, R. & Pandharipande, R. (eds.) Bollywood and Globalization: Indian Popular Cinema, Nation, and Diaspora. London: Anthem Press. pp. 35–50. Roy, A G. and Chua, B H. and Chua, B H. (2012). ‘The Bollywood Turn in South Asian Cinema: National, Transnational, or Global?’, in Roy, A G. and Chua, B H. (eds.) Travels of Bollywood Cinema. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Roy, R. (2011). ‘Bollywood and the Mumbai Underworld’, in Basu, P. and Chanda, I. (eds.), Locating Cultural Change. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Rycroft, D. (2012). ‘Beyond Resistance’, in Das Gupta, S. and Basu, R. (eds.). Narratives from the Margins. New Delhi: Primus Books. Schaefer, D. (2013). ‘Box Office and “Bollywood”: An Analysis of Soft Power Content in Popular Hindi Cinea’, in Schaefer, D. & Karan, K. (eds.) Bollywood and Globalization: The Global Power of Popular Hindi Cinema, Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Schaefer, D. and Karan, K. (2013). Bollywood and Globalization: The Global Power of Popular Hindi Cinema, Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. 59 Singh, Y. (2014). ‘Indian Films High on Sexualisation of Women: UN Report.’ Outlookindia.com . Available at: http://www.outlookindia.com/news/article/Indian-Films-High- on-Sexualisation-of-Women-UN-Report/861077 [Accessed 27 Oct. 2014]. Sparks, C. (2012). ‘What’s Wrong With Globalization?’, in Thussu, D. (ed.), International Communication (Vol.1). London: Sage Publications. Stadtler, F. (2014). Fiction, Film, and Indian Popular Cinema: Salman Rushdie’s and the Cinematic Imagination. New York: Routledge. Thussu, D. (2013). Communicating India’s Soft Power: Buddha to Bollywood, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Verma, R. (2011). Beyond Bollywood: Indian Cinema’s New Cutting Edge. The Guardian. 23 June. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jun/23/india-independent-cinema [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Yueh, L. (2014). ‘Is It a Golden Age for Chinese Cinema?’ BBC News. 30 October. Available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29834530 [Accessed 24th Nov 2014].

The Anatomy of the Indies Appadurai, A. (1990). ‘Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy’. Theory Culture Society 7(2), pp. 295–310. Athique, A. and Hill, D. (2010). The Multiplex in India. New York: Routledge. Bagdadi, D. (2014). ‘Heroes 2013: Rise of the Independent Films in Indian Cinema’. dnaindia. 20 December. Available at: http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/report-heroes-2013-rise- of-the-independent-films-in-indian-cinema-1938082 [Accessed 15 Aug. 2014]. Berra, J. (2008). Declarations of Independence: American Cinema and the Partialitiy of Independent Production, Bristol, UK: Intellect. Bhumika, K. (2013). ‘There’s Kung Fu in the Air’. The Hindu. 25 September. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/features/cinema/theres-kung-fu-in-the-air/article5167612.ece [Accessed 14 Oct. 2014]. Chandavarkar Taylor Music.(website) (n.d.). Available at: http://chandavarkartaylor.com/about/ [Accessed 16 Dec. 2014]. Chatterjee, S. (2012). ‘Looking for screen time’. hindustantimes.com. Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/regional-movies/looking-for-screen-time/story- ANe91Kjt6YrUPv7X7TqujJ.html [Accessed 25 Feb. 2016]. Devasundaram, A. (2014), ‘Cyber Buccaneers, Public and Pirate Spheres: The Phenomenon of Bittorrent Downloads in the Transforming Terrain of Indian Cinema’, in Khorana, S. , Parthasarathi, V. and Thomas, P. (eds.). Public Spheres and the Media in India. Media International Australia, Incorporating Culture & Policy, No. 152. pp. 108–118. Dhar, O. (2013). ‘Save Indie Cinema’ (petition). Change.org . Available at: https://www.change.org/p/save-indie-cinema [Accessed 11 Dec. 2014]. Gopal, S. (2011). ‘Sentimental Symptoms: The Films of Karan Johar and Bombay Cinema’, in Mehta, R. and Pandharipande, R. (eds.) Bollywood and Globalization: Indian Popular Cinema, Nation, and Diaspora. London: Anthem Press, pp. 15–34. Hood, W J. (2009). The Essential Mystery: Major Filmmakers of Indian Art Cinema, New Delhi: Orient Longman. IANS (2013). ‘The Lunchbox’ must be India’s frontrunner for Oscar: Karan Johar.’ Mid-day. 24 August. Available at: http://www.mid-day.com/articles/the-lunchbox-must-be-indias- frontrunner-for-oscar-karan-johar/228471 [Accessed 14 February 2016]. ‘Ilai’ (2013). IMDb. Available at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2723568. 79 ‘India’s Gets Its First Martial Arts Comedy: Local Kung Fu’ (2013). Zee News, 24 September. Available at: http://zeenews.india.com/entertainment/and-more/india-s-gets-its- first-martial-arts-comedy-local-kung-fu_143353.html [Accessed 14 Oct. 2014]. Jhaveri, S. (2009). Outsider Films on India. Mumbai, India: Shoestring Publisher. Khanna, P. (2013). ‘The Brave New World of Indie Films’. Hindustan Times. 8 December. Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/brunch/the-brave-new-world-of-indie-films/story- WCxWo5GFhiEbedltqs61eM.html [Accessed 10 February 2016]. Lee, D. (2013). ‘Kickstarter-backed Film Bags Oscar.’ [online] BBC News. 25 February. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21574994 [Accessed 11 Dec. 2014]. Malani, G. (2012). ‘Harud: Movie Review.’ Times of India. 26 July. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/Harud- Movie- Review/articleshow/15170367.cms [Accessed 3 Nov. 2014]. Marramao, G. (2012). The Passage West. London: Verso. Mishra, V. (2002). Bollywood Cinema Temples of Desire. New York: Routledge. ‘“Mumbai Police” to “Lucia”: 10 Outstanding Southern Films of 2013’ (2013). IBNLive. 21 December. Available at: http://ibnlive.in.com/news/mumbai-police-to-lucia-10-outstanding- southern-films-of-2013/440891-71-210.html [Accessed 28 Nov. 2014]. ‘Onir, Anusha Protest to Save Indie Cinema’. (2013). Zee News, 2 May. Available at: http://zeenews.india.com/entertainment/bollywood/onir-anusha-protest-to-save-indie- cinema_133489.html [Accessed 9 Dec. 2014]. Shankar, A. (2014). ‘The Indian Film Scene Diversifies, Even as Bollywood Dominates’. NPR.org . Available at: http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2014/ 10/09/354808515/the- indian-film-scene-diversifies-even-as-bollywood-dominates [Accessed 14 Oct. 2014]. Shoesmith, B. (2011). ‘Film Industry’, in Kaminsky, A. and Long, R. (eds.), India Today: An Encyclopaedia of Life in the Republic (1). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO LLC. Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and Time, Vol. 1: The Fault of Epimetheus. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Publishers. Thacker, A. (2003). Moving Through Modernity. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press. Variety Staff , (2013). ‘Review: Ship of Theseus’. Variety. 5 February. Available at: http://variety.com/2013/film/reviews/ship-of-theseus-1117949172/ [Accessed 3 Nov. 2014]. Vasudevan, R. (2000). Making Meaning in Indian Cinema. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Vats, R. (2014). ‘“Harud” Review: Whose Kashmir Is This Actually?’ IBNLive. 28 February. Available at: http://ibnlive.in.com/news/harud-review-whose-kashmir-is-this-actually/452788- 8.html [Accessed 3 Nov. 2014]. Verma, R. (2011). ‘Beyond Bollywood: Indian Cinema’s New Cutting Edge’. The Guardian. 16 January. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jun/23/india-independent-cinema [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014].

Avenues of Indie Funding, Distribution and Exhibition ‘Annual Report 2012–2013’ (2013). Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Available at: http://www.nfdcindia.com/about-nfdc/corporate-performance/ [Accessed 2 Aug. 2014]. Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Athique, A. (2012). Indian Media. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Athique, A. and Hill, D. (2010). The Multiplex in India. New York: Routledge. Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge. Bhushan, N. (2013). ‘Cannes: “The Lunchbox’” Director Ritesh Batra (Q&A)’. The Hollywood Reporter. 23 May. Available at: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/cannes-lunchbox- director-ritesh-batra-524943 [Accessed 17 Oct. 2014]. Bienal de São Paulo , (2012). (Entrevista) Homi Bhabha. [video] 4 December. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ym2dPYqIvmA [Accessed 2 Jan. 2013]. ‘Bombay Velvet’ (2013). Times of India. 27 June. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/first-look/Bombay-Velvet/articleshow/20794025.cms [Accessed 31 Oct. 2014]. Bora, S. (2013). ‘In Response to Indie Rants – The Method and Madness of Ticket Prices’. F.I.G.H.T C.L.U.B. Blog. 22 July. Available at: https://moifightclub.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/in-response-to-indie-rants-the-method- madness-of-ticket-prices/ [Accessed 1 Nov. 2014]. 107 Borpujari, U. (2009). ‘India Major Online Film Piracy Hub’. Deccan Herald. 15 December. Available at: http://www.deccanherald.com/content/41541/content/219231/F [Accessed 20 Jul. 2014]. Chakravarty, S. (1993). National Identity in Indian Cinema 1947–1987. Austin: University of Texas Press. Chary, M. (2009). India: Nation on the Move: An Overview of India’s People, Culture, History, Economy, IT Industry, & More. Bloomington, IN: iUniverse Books. Chatterjee, S. (2012). ‘Looking for Screen Time’. hindustantimes.com . Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/regional-movies/looking-for-screen-time/story- ANe91Kjt6YrUPv7X7TqujJ.html [Accessed 25 Feb. 2016]. Dasgupta, S. 2013. ‘Our films are slowly transcending international borders’. Box Office India. 12 January. Available at: http://www.boxofficeindia.co.in/“our-films-are-slowly-transcending- international-borders” [Accessed on 20 December 2013]. Devasundaram, A. (2014). ‘Cyber Buccaneers, Public and Pirate Spheres: The Phenomenon of BitTorrent Downloads in the Transforming Terrain of Indian Cinema’. Media International Australia152(1), pp. 108–118. doi: 10.1177/1329878X1415200112. Dundoo, S. (2013). ‘The Monk and the Producer’. The Hindu. 4 August. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-cinemaplus/the-monk-and-the- producer/article4986279.ece [Accessed 1 Nov. 2014]. Francis, A. (2014a). ‘Film Shows Two Worlds of Indian Women’. Aljazeera.com . 19 June. Available at: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/06/film-shows-two-worlds- indian-women-2014619101948534270.html [Accessed 16 Jul. 2014]. Francis, A. (2014b). ‘How India’s Film Festival Boom Is Boosting Indie Cinema’. BBC News. 16 July. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-28122756 [Accessed 16 Jul. 2014]. Go Fund Yourself! (n.d.) [website] Available at: https://www.wishberry.in/create-campaign/ [Accessed 26 May 2014]. Gopalan, L. (2012). ‘Cinema, Nation and National Identity: Indian Cinema’, in Nelmes, J. (ed.) An Introduction to Film Studies. 5th ed. London: Routledge, p. 424. Goswami, P. (2014). ‘Ranbir Kapoor-Anushka Sharma’s “Bombay Velvet” not to Release in 2014: Report’. International Business Times. 22 August. Available at: http://www.ibtimes.co.in/ranbir-kapoor-anushka-sharmas-bombay-velvet-not-release-2014- report-607423 [Accessed 31 Oct. 2014]. Harvey, D. (1990). The Condition of Postmodernity. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers. ‘India Is Now World’s Third Largest Internet User after U.S., China’ (2013). The Hindu. 24 August. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/internet/india-is-now- worlds-third-largest-internet-user-after-us-china/article5053115.ece [Accessed on 3 Jan 2014]. ‘India Unblocks the Pirate Bay and other sharing sites’ (2012). BBC News. 22 June. Available at http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-18551471 [Accessed on 2 December 2013]. Khanna, P. (2013). ‘Anurag Kashyap, the Godfather’. Hindustan Times. 9 July. http://www.hindustantimes.com/. Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/brunch/anurag- kashyap-the-godfather/story-SW0CUzKTN8ElmqC7WKjPxL.html [Accessed 6 Oct. 2015]. 108 Liang, L. (2009). ‘Piracy, Creativity and Infrastructure: Rethinking Access to Culture’. SSRN Electronic Journal. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1436229 [Accessed on 22 December 2013]. Liang, L and Sundaram, R. (2011). ‘India’, in Karaganis, J. (ed.) Media Piracy in Emerging Economies. Social Science Research Council, USA. Maniar, P. (2013). ‘Ship of Theseus among the List of Films That Changed Life’. Times of India. 27 August. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/Ship-of-Theseus- among-the-list-of-films-that-changed-life/articleshow/22090720.cms [Accessed 22 Nov. 2015]. McDonald, K. (2012). Feminism, the Left, and Postwar Literary Culture. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi. Mehta, M. (2005). ‘Globalizing Bombay Cinema: Reproducing the Indian State and Family’. Cultural Dynamics (17), p. 135. Sage Journals. [Accessed 24 November 2013]. Menon, S. (2011). ‘I-Banks Eye Startups with Crowd Funding’. The Economic Times. 15 February. Available at: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-02- 15/news/28539704_1_funding-films-onir-startups [Accessed 9 Dec. 2014]. ‘Milkmen turned producers’ (2014). The Hindu. 6 July. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-sundaymagazine/milkmen-turned- producers/article6181411.ece [Accessed 1 Aug. 2014]. ‘Move Over Bollywood, US Festival Spotlights Indian Indie Films’ (2014). Gulfnews.com: Celebrity. 9 April. Available at: http://gulfnews.com/arts-entertainment/celebrity/move-over- bollywood-us-festival-spotlights-indian-indie-films-1.1317150 [Accessed 1 Nov. 2014]. Rai, A. (2009). Untimely Bollywood. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Rangan, P. (2012). ‘Some Annotations on the Film Festival as an Emerging Medium in India’, in Dudrah, R. , in Gopal, S , Rai, A and Basu, A. (eds.), Intermedia in South Asia. London: Routledge. pp. 19–37. Ross, S. (1998). Working-Class Hollywood. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Scaria, A. (2013). ‘Online Piracy of Indian Movies: Is the Film Industry Firing at the Wrong Target?’ Michigan State International Law Review, 2013, Vol. 21, Issue 3, pp. 647–663. www.ssrn.com [Accessed 25 Jan 2014]. ‘Ship of Theseus Free HD Download Available from Jan 15’. (2014). IMDb. 15 January. Available at: http://www.imdb.com/news/ni56666101/ [Accessed 6 Apr. 2014]. Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and Time, 1: The Fault of Epimetheus. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Publishers. Vaidyanathan, R. (2012a) ‘Is 2012 the Year for India’s Internet?’ BBC News. 13 January. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-16354076 [Accessed 27 Dec 2013]. Interstitial Indies Interrogating India’s Double Narrative Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, 3rd ed. New York: Verso. Basu, A. (2010). Bollywood in the Age of New Media. Edinburgh, Scotland, UK: Edinburgh University Press. Baudrillard, J. (2001) ( M. Poster , [ed.]; translated by J Mourrain ). Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings, 2nd ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge. Bhabha, H. (2012). ‘Making Emptiness’. 31 January. Five Senses of Naked Shape [blog]. Available at: http://anishkapoor.com/185/Making-Emptiness-by-Homi-K.-Bhabha.html [Accessed 5 Aug. 2014]. Bharucha, R. (2014). Terror and Performance. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Bhattacharya, N. (2012). Hindi Cinema: Repeating the Subject. Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Bolt, B. (2011). Heidegger Reframed. London: I B Tauris. Chapman, J. (2003). Cinemas of the World. London: Reaktion Books. Chatterjee, P. (2004). The Politics of the Governed. New York: Columbia University Press. Chauduri, S. (2012). ‘Unpeople: Postcolonial Reflections on Terror, Torture and Detention in Children of Men’ , in Ponzanesi, S. and Waller, M. (eds.). Postcolonial Cinema Studies. London: Routledge. Cusack, C. (2012). ‘The Gods on Television’, in Possamai, A. (ed.) Handbook of Hyper-real Religions. Leiden, the Netherlands: Brill. Engineer, A. (2003). The Gujarat Carnage. New Delhi: Orient Longman. Fanon, F. (1963). The Wretched of the Earth. New York: Grove Press. Harvey, D. (2014). Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism. New York: Oxford University Press. Hayward, S. (2013). Cinema Studies: The Key Concepts, 4th, ed. Milton Park, Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Huddart, D. (2006). Homi K. Bhabha. London: Routledge. Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, Or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. London: Verso. Kool, V. and Agrawal, R. (2006). Applied Social Psychology: A Global Perspective. Delhi: Atlantic Publishers. Lutgendorf, P. (2007). ‘Bending the Bharata’, in Pauwels, M. (ed.), Indian Literature and Popular Cinema: Recasting Classics. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. McLaren, P. (1995) ‘Postcolonial Pedgagogy, Desire and Decolonized Community’, in McLaren, P. (ed.) Postmodernism, Post-colonialism and Pedagogy. Albert Park, Australia: James Nicholas Publishers, pp. 227–268. 124 Mehta, R. (2011). ‘Bollywood, Nation, Globalization: An Incomplete Introduction’, in Mehta, R. and Pandharipande, R. (eds.), Bollywood and Globalization: Indian Popular Cinema, Nation, and Diaspora, London: Anthem Press. Mishra, V. (2002). Bollywood Cinema: Temples of Desire. New York: Routledge. Nussbaum, M. (2008). The Clash Within: Democracy, Religious Violence, and India’s Future. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pisters, P. (2009). ‘Homi K Bhabha’, in Coleman, F. (ed.) Film Theory and Philosophy, Durham, UK: Acumen Publishing. Rai, A. (2009). Untimely Bollywood. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Roy, A. (2014). Capitalism: A Ghost Story. Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books. Schaefer, D. and Karan, K. (2013). ‘Introduction’, in Schaefer, J D and Karan, K. (eds.). Bollywood and Globalization: The Global Power of Popular Hindi Cinema, Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Shoah. (1985). [DVD]. France: Claude Lanzmann. Slattery, P. (1995). Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era. New York: Garland Publications. Warner, M. (2003). Signs & Wonders: Essays on Literature and Culture. London: Chatto & Windus. ‘We Have No Orders to Save You’. (2002). Human Rights Watch Asia, 14(3(C), p. 21. Running with Scissors Althusser, L. (1971). ‘Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses’, in Althusser, L. (ed.). Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. New York: Monthly Review Press, pp 127–188. Anandan, S. (2012). ‘Papilio Buddha Director Terms CBFC a Draconian Institution’. The Hindu. 9 September. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/ tp-national/papilio- buddha-director-terms-cbfc-a-draconian-institution/article 3876478.ece [Accessed 1 Oct. 2014]. ‘Anupam Kher, Rakesh Sharma Disagree over Final Solution’ (2014). The Hindu, 22 April. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/anupam-kher-rakesh-sharma-disagree- over-final-solution/article5934898.ece [Accessed 1 Oct. 2014]. Bajoria, J. (2004). ‘“Girlfriend” Causes India Storm’. BBC NEWS | Entertainment. Updated 14 June. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3805905.stm [Accessed 7 Aug. 2014]. Bhabha, H. (1990). Nation and Narration. London: Routledge. Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge. Bhowmik, S. (2013). ‘Film Censorship in India: Deconstructing an Incongruity’, in Gokulsing, K. and Dissanayake, W. (eds.). Routledge Handbook of Indian Cinemas. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. 143 Biswas, S. (2014). Why Did Penguin Recall a Book on Hindus? BBC News. 12 February. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-26148875 [Accessed 1 Oct. 2014]. Bose, N. (2013). ‘We Do Not Certify Backwards: Film Censorship in Postcolonial India’, in Biltereyst, D. and Winkel, R. (eds.). Silencing Cinema. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 191–206. Chandrababu, D. (2014). ‘Tamil Nadu Theatres Refuse to Screen Madras Cafe’. The Times of India: City. 24 August. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Tamil- Nadu-theatres-refuse-to-screen-Madras-Cafe/articleshow/22017706.cms [Accessed 1 Oct. 2014]. Chatterjee, P. (2004). The Politics of the Governed. New York: Columbia University Press. Chatterjee, S. (2015). ‘“Unfreedom”, a Film That Was Banned by the Censors, Is Now Using That as Its USP’. [online] The Huffington Post. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2015/03/30/unfreedom-censor-banned-gay_n_6966608.html [Accessed 2 Oct. 2015]. Das, V. (2001). ‘Crisis and Representation: Rumour and the Circulation of Hate’, in Roth, M. and Salas, C. (eds.). Disturbing Remains. , CA: Getty Research Institute. Express News Service (2012a). ‘Ban on ‘Papilio Buddha’ is Fascism’. The New Indian Express. 20 September. Available at: http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/thiruvananthapuram/article924721.ece [Accessed 1 Oct. 2014]. Express News Service (2012b). ‘Cancellation of Parallel Screening of “Papilio Buddha” Sparks Protest The New Indian Express. 14 December. Available at: http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/thiruvananthapuram/article1378964.ece. [Accessed 3 Dec. 2015]. Gatty, H. (2015). ‘Two former FTII Students Detained at Goa Film Fest’. The Indian Express. 21 November. Available at: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/two-former- ftii-students-detained-at-goa-film-fest/ [Accessed 21 Nov. 2015]. Gopalakrishnan, A. and Rituraj, D. (2014). ‘Penguin India Caves In, Agrees to Trash Wendy Doniger’s Book on Hinduism’. The Indian Express. 12 February. Available at: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/penguin-caves-in-agrees-to-trash-wendy- donigers-book-on-hinduism/ [Accessed 1 Oct. 2014]. Haq, X. (2015). ‘MSG Row: Censor Board Chief Quits, Alleges Govt Interference with Films. Hindustan Times. Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/msg-row-censor-board- chief-quits-alleges-govt-interference-with-films/story-89tiQTDS3UBN5RswKV5PRP.html [Accessed 1 Oct. 2015]. ‘Hemant turns Hemangi Now She Become Eunuch Heroine of the Movie Titled “Third Man”’ (2015). Manipalworldnews.com 2 January (updated). Available at: http://www.manipalworldnews.com/2015/01/02/hemant-turns-hemangi-now-become-eunuch- heroine-movie-titled-third-man/ [Accessed 7 Jan. 2015]. Hood, W J. (2009). The Essential Mystery: Major Filmmakers of Indian Art Cinema. New Delhi: Orient Longman. ‘Indira Gandhi Assassination: Controversial Film Blocked’, (2014). BBC News. 22 August. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-28892001 [Accessed 2 Sep. 2014]. Indo Asian News Service , (2012). ‘“Gulabi Aaina” Would’ve Released If Made Today: Sridhar Rangayan’. Yahoo!Cricket. 24 May. Available at: https://cricket.yahoo.com/news/gulabi-aaina- wouldve-released-made-today-sridhar-rangayan-093609785.html 144[Accessed 7 Dec. 2014]. Jauregui, B. (2013). ‘Dirty Anthropology: Epistemologies of Violence and Ethical Entanglements in Police Ethnography’, in Garriott, W. (ed.), Policing and Contemporary Governance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 125–156. Jha, S. (2011). ‘“I Am” Is the First Gay Film to Win National Award’. Times of India. 11 March. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/I-Am-is- the-first-gay-film-to-win-national-award/articleshow/12209306.cms [Accessed 22 Nov. 2015]. Kamath, S. (2014). ‘I Find It Satisfying to Jump All the Time’. The Hindu. 2 August. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/features/cinema/interview-with-actor-akshay- kumar/article6275477.ece [Accessed 8 Sep. 2014]. Kausar, H. (2014). ‘DU Kicks Off First Lesbian Film Festival’ India Today. Indiatoday. 27 September. Available at: http://Indiatoday.intoday.in/story/lesbian-film-festival-delhi- university/1/393015.html [Accessed 4 Dec.2014]. Khaleeli, H. (2014). ‘Hijra: India’s Third Gender Claims Its Place in Law’. The Guardian.16 April. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/apr/16/india-third-gender-claims- place-in-law [Accessed 22 Nov. 2015]. Kishwar, M. (2013). ‘Bridging Divide: The Triumph of Bollywood’, in Balslev, A. (ed.). On India. New Delhi: Sage. Kumar, A. (2012). ‘A Space for Indie Films’. The Hindu. 14 November. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-cinemaplus/a-space-for-indie- films/article4063041.ece [Accessed 8 Sep. 2014]. Lalwani, V. (2014). ‘Vishal Bhardwaj’s “Haider” Cleared With a UA Certificate After 41 Cuts.’ The Times of India: Entertainment. 6 September. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/Vishal-Bhardwajs- Haider-cleared-with-a-UA-certificate-after-41-cuts/articleshow/41842174.cms [Accessed 6 Sep. 2014]. Lee-Loy, A. (2010). Searching for Mr. Chin. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. ‘Lesbian Film Festival Starts in DU’ (2014). The Times of India: City. 16 September. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Lesbian-film-festival-starts-in- DU/articleshow/43460213.cms [Accessed 22 Dec. 2014]. Maclay, K. (2004). ‘Anand Patwardhan, the “Michael Moore of India”, Brings His Hard-Hitting Documentary Films to Campus.’ Berkeley.edu . 13 october. Available at: http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/10/13_patwardhan.shtml [Accessed 28 Nov. 2014]. Maheshwari, L. (2015). ‘India’s Censorship Board in Disarray Amid Claims of Political Interference’. The Guardian. 21 January. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jan/21/india-censorship-board-crisis-leela-samson- msg-messenger-of-god-political-interference [Accessed 1 Oct. 2015]. Mehta, M. (2011). Censorship and Sexuality in Bombay Cinema. Austin: University of Texas Press. Mehta, T. (2015). ‘After His “Modi Kaka” Video Draws Ridicule, Pahlaj Nihalani’s Defence’. NDTV.com . 16 November. Available at: http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/pahlaj-nihalanis- video-tribute-to-pm-modi-amuses-social-media-1243949 [Accessed 3 Dec. 2015]. Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (n.d.) . Central Board of Film Certification [website]. Available at: http://cbfcindia.gov.in/ [Accessed 1 Sep. 2014]. 145 Murthy, L. and Dasgupta, R. (2014). Our Pictures, Our Words. New Delhi: Zubaan Books. Najar, S. (2014). ‘Film about Indira Gandhi’s Assassination Is Barred from Indian Theaters’. Nytimes.com . 22 August. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/23/world/asia/film- about-indira-gandhis-assassination-is-barred-from-indian-theaters.html?_r=0 [Accessed 6 Sep. 2014]. ‘9 Censor Board Members Resign a Day After Chief Leela Samson Quits’ (2015). NDTV.com . 17 January. Available at: http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/9-censor-board-members-resign-a- day-after-chief-leela-samson-quits-728608 [Accessed 21 Nov. 2015]. Nussbaum, M. (2011). ‘Gandhi and South Africa’. Thenation.com . 12 October. Available at: http://www.thenation.com/article/163916/gandhi-and-south-africa [Accessed 6 Jun. 2014]. Prasar Bharati (website) . (2014). Available at: http://www.ddindia.gov.in/Information/Acts%20And%20Guidelines/Documents/hindifeaturefil m.pdf [Accessed 29 Sep. 2014]. Sharma, A. (2014). ‘Makers of “Kaum De Heere” Paid a Bribe of Rs 1 Lakh to Get the Film Cleared: Rajesh Kumar to CBI’. The Economic Times. 20 August. Available at: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-08-20/news/53029102_1_cbi-official-cbi- scanner-censor-board-ceo [Accessed 28 Nov. 2014]. Somaaya, B , Kothari, J. and Madangarli, S. (2012). Mother Maiden Mistress. New Delhi: Harper Collins India. Spivak, G. (2006). ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’, in Ashcroft, B , Griffiths, G. and Tiffin, H. (eds.). The Post-Colonial Studies Reader, 2nd ed. London: Routledge. pp. 28–37. Thottam, J. (2011). ‘Gandhi, Lelyveld and the Great Indian Tamasha’. TIME.com .1 April. TIME.com. Available at: http://world.time.com/2011/04/01/gandhi-lelyveld-and-the-great- indian-tamasha/ [Accessed 1 Oct. 2014]. Vetticad, A. (2014). ‘Molesters or Heroes?’ The Hindu Business Line. Available at: http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blink/watch/molesters-or-heroes/article6268105.ece [Accessed 3 Dec. 2015]. Walsh, D. (2005). ‘An Interview with Shonali Bose, Director of Amu’. World Socialist Web Site. Available at: http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2005/10/bose-o06.html [Accessed 2 Sep. 2014].146

Rapping in Double Time Ahmed, S. (2012). The Fuschia Tree. [online] http://www.thefuschiatree.com. Available at: http://www.thefuschiatree.com/259/Q-On-Questioning-Answers/fullview [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. ‘AIB Roasted: Democracy Cannot Survive If We Ban And Comedy’ (2015). India Times.15 February. Available at: http://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/aib-roasted- democracy-cannot-survive-if-we-ban-humour-and-comedy-230010.html [Accessed 4 Sep. 2015]. Althusser, L. (1971). ‘Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses’, in Althusser, L. (ed.). Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. New York: Monthly Review Press, pp. 127–188. Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, 3rd ed. New York: Verso. Banaji, S. (2013). ‘A Tale of Three Worlds or More’, in Henseler, C. Goes Global. New York: Routledge. Barlow, T. (2004). The Question of Women in Chinese Feminism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Basu, S. and Ghosh, D. (2014). ‘To Break Jadavpur University VC Gherao, Police Molest Students.’ The Times of India. 14 September. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/To-break-Jadavpur-University-VC-gherao- police-molest-students/articleshow/42743274.cms [Accessed 28 Sep. 2014]. Bienal de São Paulo , (2012). Interview with Homi Bhabha. [video] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ym2dPYqIvmA [Accessed 2 Jan. 2013]. Chakravarty, S. (1993). National Identity in Indian Cinema 1947–1987. Austin: University of Texas Press. Chatterjee, P. (1993). The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Chatterjee, P. (2010). A History of Ambivalent Modernisation in Bangladesh and West Bengal. New York: Peter Lang Publishing. 179 ‘Cheap Alcohol, an IT Crowd and Low Taxes: How Metal Got a Hold in Bangalore’. (2014). The Guardian. 7 April. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2014/apr/07/heavy-metal-bangalore-india-iron- maiden [Accessed 27 Sep. 2014]. Das Gupta, C. (1991). The Painted Face: Studies in India’s Popular Cinema, New Delhi: Roli Books. Derrida, J. (1976). Of Grammatology. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Derrida, J. (1994). Specters of Marx. New York: Routledge. Derrida, J. (2001). Writing and Difference. London: Routledge. Dollar, S. (2010). ‘Kids Take Over the School’. Wall Street Journal. Available at: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1000142405270230346700457557449320216826244932021 68262.html [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Dhingra, R. (Producer) 2011, We the People: Love Sex and Cinema (television broadcast). 13 Nov 2011, New Delhi Television Ltd (NDTV). D’Silva, E. (2011). ‘Is Q India’s most Dangerous Filmmaker?’ CNN Travel. Available at: http://travel.cnn.com/mumbai/life/q-indias-most-dangerous-filmmaker-161252 [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Ganguly, K. (2010). Cinema, Emergence, and the Films of Satyajit Ray. Berkeley: University of Press. Gopal, S and Sen, B. (2008). ‘Inside and Out: Song and Dance in Bollywood Cinema’, in Dudrah, R and Desai, J. (eds). The Bollywood Reader. Maidenhead, Berkshire, UK: McGraw- Hill. Harvey, D. (1990). The Condition of Postmodernity, Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers. Hood, W J. (2009). The Essential Mystery: Major Filmmakers of Indian Art Cinema. New Delhi: Orient Longman. Kamath, S. (2010). ‘A telling tale’. The Hindu. 1 January. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-metroplus/a-telling- tale/article1021623.ece [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Majumdar, N. (2012). ‘Importing Neoliberalism, Exporting Cinema’, in Giovacchini, S. and Sklar, R (eds.). Global Neorealism. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi. Mazierska, E. and Rascaroli, L. (2003). From Moscow to Madrid: European Cities, Postmodern Cinema. London: I B Taurus. Monaco, J. (2009). How to Read a Film. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Royle, N. (2003). Jacques Derrida. London: Routledge. Saldanha, A. (2002). ‘Music, Space, Identity: Geographies of Youth Culture in Bangalore’, Cultural Studies 16(3): 337–350. Vasudevan, R. (2011). The Melodramatic Public. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Verma, R. (2011). ‘Beyond Bollywood: Indian Cinema’s New Cutting Edge’. The Guardian. 16 January. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jun/23/india-independent-cinema [Accessed 19 Nov. 2014]. Wollen, P. (1972). Signs and Meaning in the Cinema. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Zizek, S. (1989). The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso.

Dhobi Ghat Appadurai, A. (1990). ‘Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy’. Theory Culture Society; Sage Journals. vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 295–310. Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Athique, A. and Hill, D. (2010). The Multiplex in India. New York: Routledge. Barthes, R. (1981). Camera Lucida. New York: Hill and Wang. Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge. Bhabha, H. (1995). ‘Cultural Diversity and Cultural Differences’, in Ashcroft, B , Griffiths, G. and Tiffin, H. (eds.). The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 206–209. 200 Broudehoux, A. (2001). ‘Image Making, City Marketing and the Aestheticization of Social Inequality in Rio de Janiero’, in AlSayyad, N. (ed.). Consuming Tradition, Manufacturing Heritage. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge, pp. 273–297. Butler, J. (1999). Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge. Chandran, R. (2008). ‘Raj Thackeray’s Arrest Sparks Protests in Mumbai’. Reuters. 21 October. Available at: http://in.reuters.com/article/2008/10/21/idINIndia-36069020081021 [Accessed 4 Oct. 2014]. Chawla, D. (2011). ‘Monologues in Brown: A Mystory Performance’, in Chawla, D. and Rodriguez, A. (eds.). Liminal Traces. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers. pp. 75–94. Chibber, V. (2013). Postcolonial Theory and the Specter of Capital. New York: Verso. Dolan, J. (1993). Presence and Desire. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Ebert, R. (2006). Roger Ebert’s Movie Yearbook 2007. Kansas City, MO: Andrews McMeel Universal. Madison, D. and Hamera, J. (2006). The Sage Handbook of Performance Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Marramao, G. (2012). The Passage West. London: Verso. Mazierska, E. and Rascaroli, L. (2003). From Moscow to Madrid: European Cities, Postmodern Cinema. London: I B Taurus. Monod, K P. (2009). Imperial Empire: A History of Britain and its Empire, 1660–1837, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Narine, N. (2010). Global Trauma and the Cinematic Network Society. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 27:3, pp. 209–234. Reddi, C V N. (2009). Effective Public Relations and Media Strategy. New Delhi: PHI Learning. Villar-Argaiz, P. (2008). The Poetry of Eavan Boland: A Postcolonial Reading. Dublin, Ireland: Maunsel & Company. Winkler, M. (2009). Cinema and Classical Texts. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Peepli Live Aikara, A. (2010). ‘The Unlikely HERO’. Journal of Courage Archive. 18 August. Available at: http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/the-unlikely-hero/662109/ [Accessed 4 June 2013]. Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Bayly, S. (1999). Caste, Society and Politics in India from the Eighteenth Century to the Modern Age. New York: Cambridge University Press. Chatterjee, P. (2012). The Nation and Its Peasants’, in Chaturvedi, V. (ed.). Mapping Subaltern Studies and the Postcolonial, 2nd ed. London: Verso. Chaturvedi, V. (2012). Mapping Subaltern Studies and the Postcolonial. 2nd ed. London: Verso. Chibber, V. (2013). Postcolonial Theory and the Specter of Capital. London: Verso. Dasgupta, B. (2005). Globalisation: India’s Adjustment Experience. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Dalmia, V and Sadana, R. (2012). The Cambridge Companion to Modern Indian Culture, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality. New York: Pantheon Books. Fraser, B. (2006). Bengal Partition Stories: An Unclosed Chapter. London: Anthem Press. Guha, R. (2012). ‘On Some Aspects of the Historiography of Colonial India’, in Chaturvedi, V. (ed.). Mapping Subaltern Studies and the Postcolonial, 2nd ed. London: Verso. Gupta, D. (2008). Communism and Nationalism in Colonial India, 1939–45. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Harvey, D. (2005). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Hebbar, R. (2010). ‘Framing the Development Debate: The Case of Farmer Suicides in India’, in Sengupta, C. and Corbridge, S. (eds.). Democracy, Development, and Decentralisation in India. New Delhi: Routledge, pp. 84–110. Herring, R. (2013). ‘Stealth Seeds, Bioproperty, Biosafety, Biopolitics’, in Herring, R. (ed.). Transgenics and the Poor: Biotechnology in Development Studies, 2nd ed. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Karnad, R. (2007). ‘The Editor? Do We Need the Fellow?’ Outlookindia.com . Available at: http://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/the-editor-do-we-need-the-fellow/235794 [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016]. 225 Loomba, A. (2005). Colonialism-Postcolonialism, 2nd ed. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Rayaprolu, P. (2015). ‘One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: The Case of Land Acquisition in India. Centre for Development and Human Rights. 15 March. Available at: http://www.cdhr.org.in/land-acquisition/one-step-forward-two-steps-back-the-case-of-land- acquisition-in-india/ [Accessed 6 Nov. 2015]. Roy, A. (2014). Capitalism: A Ghost Story. Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books. Krovvidy, S. (2001). ‘The People Who Matter Most: P. Sainath Records the Forgotten India’. Indiatogether.org . May-June. Available at: http://indiatogether.org/opinions/talks/psainath.htm [Accessed 6 May 2013]. Sainath, P. (2013). ‘Farmers’ Suicide Rates Soar above the Rest’. The Hindu. 18 May. Available at: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/sainath/farmers-suicide-rates-soar- above-the-rest/article4725101.ece [Accessed 4 Jan. 2014]. All the World’s a Ship Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Asberg, C. (2014). ‘Imagining Posthumanities, Enlivening Feminisms’, in Blaagaard, B. and Van Der Tuin, I. (eds.). The Subject of Rosi Braidotti: Politics and Concepts, London: Bloomsbury. Aurelius, M. [167 bce] (2015). Stoic Six Pack. Lexington, KY: Enhanced Media. Barthes, R. (1981). Camera Lucida. New York: Hill and Wang. Bhattacharya, R. (2011). Studies on the Cārvāka/Lokāyata. London: Anthem Press. Blocker, J (Winter 2007). ‘Blink: The Viewer as Blind Man in Installation Art’. Art Journal, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 6–21. Reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis. aBolleée, W. (2002). The Story of Paesi (Paesi-kahanayam). Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz. Castells, M. (2010). End of Millennium, 2nd ed. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers. Cooper, D. (2012). ‘Schopenhauer and Indian Philosophy’, in Vandenabeele, B. (ed.). A Companion to Schopenhauer. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 266–279. Derrida, J. (1993). Memoirs of the Blind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Fanon, F. (1967). The Wretched of the Earth. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books. Fraser, B. (2011). Henri Lefebvre and the Spanish Urban Experience. Lanham, MD: Bucknell University Press. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. New York: Harper. Iammarino, D. (2013). Religion and Reality. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications. Kenaan, H. (2006). ‘Tracing Shadows: Reflections on the Origins of Painting’, in Bornstein, C. and Fishhof, G. (eds.) Pictorial Languages and their Meanings. Tel Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, pp. 17–28. Lawlor, L. (2006). The Implications of Immanence. New York: Fordham University Press. 249 Marks, L. (2000). The Skin of the Film. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. McComiskey, B. (2002). Gorgias and the New Sophistic Rhetoric. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. ‘Mukhtiyar Ali (Home)’ | Kabirproject.org Available at: http://www.kabirproject.org/profile/mukhtiyar%20ali [Accessed 10 Sep. 2015]. Myers, M. (2001). Brahman: A Comparative Theology. Richmond, UK: Curzon Press. Nandy, A. (2008). ‘Introduction: Indian Popular Cinema as a Slum’s Eye View of Politics’, in Dudrah, R. & Desai, J. (eds.). The Bollywood Reader. Maidenhead, Berkshire, UK: McGraw- Hill. Neitzsche, F. (1967). The Birth of Tragedy, trans. Walter Kaufman . New York: Vintage Books. Pisters, P. (2014). ‘Transplanting Life: Bios and Zoe in Images with Imagination’, in Blaagaard, B. and Van Der Tuin, I. (eds). The Subject of Rosi Braidotti: Politics and Concepts, London: Bloomsbury. Ribière, M. (2008). Barthes. Penrith, UK: Humanities-Ebooks. Rutherford, R. (1995). The Art of Plato: Ten Essays in Platonic Interpretation. London: Gerald Duckworth. Sennett, R. (2008). The Craftsman. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

A Cinematic Quartet Conjuring Ghosts of Nation Althusser, L. (1971). ‘Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses’, in Althusser, L (ed.). Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. New York: Monthly Review Press, pp. 127–188. Bennett, B. (2014). The Cinema of Michael Winterbottom. New York: Wallflower Press Book, published by Columbia University Press. Devasundaram, A. (2013). ‘Autumnal Explorations of Alterity: Conjuring Ghosts of Kashmir’s Forgotten and Disappeared in ‘Harud’, The South Asianist Journal of South Asian Studies, Special Issue, 100 Years of Indian Cinema, University of Edinburgh, Vol2, No. 3, pp. 179–187. Gertz, N. And Khleifi, G. (2007) ‘Palestinian “Roadblock Movies”’, in Power, M. and Crampton, A (eds.). Cinema and Popular Geo-politics. London: Routledge. pp. 121–138. Ghost Dance. (1983). [DVD] United Kingdom: Ken McMullen. Goldston, J. and Gossman, P. (1991). Human Rights in India. New York: Human Rights Watch. Gordon, A. (1997). Ghostly Matters. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Kabir, A. (2009). Territory of Desire. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Mankekar, P. (1999). Screening Culture, Viewing Politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Mathur, S. (2012). ‘This Garden Uprooted: Gender Violence Suffering and Resistance in Indian-administered Kashmir’, in De Matos, C. and Ward, R. (eds.). Gender, Power and Military Occupations. New York: Routledge. pp. 217–238. Maureemootoo, K. (2014). ‘The Nation as Mimicry’, in Dasgupta, R. and Gokulsing, K. (eds.). Masculinity and Its Challenges in India. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company. pp 106–125. Morton, S (2013) ‘Violence, Law and Justice in the Colonial Present’, in Huggan, G. (Ed). The Oxford Handbook of Postcolonial Studies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Sethi, A. (2015). ‘“Love Jihad” in India and One Man’s Quest to Prevent It’ Guardian. 29 January. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/29/love-jihad-india-one- man-quest-prevent-it [Accessed 29 Nov. 2015]. Snedden, C. (2012). The Untold Story of the People of Azad Kashmir. New York: Columbia University Press.