<<

JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755

is Watching You’: Glocalization of the ‘Gaze.’

Christina Mary Georgy,

MA English Language and Literature(2017-2019),

Institute of English, University of Kerala, Trivandrum,Kerala, .

Abstract:

It cannot be contested that Big Boss, a show which has garnered such popular success

and enormous mass appeal has subscribed to the process of ‘glocalization’—simultaneously

combining the universal format of the show to the particularities of the Indian socio-cultural

milieu in order to cater to the ethos, values, and tastes of the Indian audience. As such, apart

from the hallmark traits of the parent version, such as appealing to the human voyeuristic

tendencies, Big Boss has routinely capitalised on certain idiosyncrasies of Indian society.

These may include but aren’t limited to: sexual frustration; penchant for melodrama;

maudlin tendencies; hyper voyeurism or ogling. This paper attempts to examine how the

‘gaze’ that is so central to the framework of is modified and some features of it

even amplified in Big Boss in relation to the above mentioned elements and ‘glocalization’.

The paper will depend on theories of gaze in critical discourse such as Lacanian

psychoanalysis, Laura Mulvey’s idea of scopophilia, Foucauldian theory of gaze and power,

and notions of imperial/post-colonial gaze, among others. It is also intended to analyse the

show using Freudian ideas of sexual sublimation.

Keywords: gaze, glocalization, psychoanalysis, scopophilia, visual media.

Volume XIV, Issue VI, JUNE 2021 Page No: 31

JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755

BiggBoss : A Social Experiment

The Dutch television reality show Big Brother, conceived by the media juggernaut

Endemolcompany, has doubtlessly proved to be a fertile ground for psychoanalysts and

group psychology enthusiasts.Since its debut in 1999, it has gone to revolutionise the

entertainment industry and has since become the benchmark with which all reality shows are

compared.The success of the Orwellian show spanned countless versions across the globe,

chief among them being the Indian edition termed Bigg Boss which in itself has seven

varieties catering to seven languages: , , Tamil, Telugu, , Bengali,

and Marathi. The format involves contestants—or ‘housemates’ in the show’s parlance—

living in a house totally isolated from outside contact and news of the external world. They

are made to do all the household chores and are routinely given tasks in order to compete

with each other. Housemates are ‘evicted’ or voted out by the public on a weekly basis.The

person who survives until the end is crowned the victor.Contestants feature a cross section

of society. They include people as diverse as actors, models, politicans, sportspeople, social

media influencers etc. mingling with non-celebrities. All housemates are treated in an

egalitarian manner. The house is run by the anonymous ‘Big Brother/ Big Boss’ whose

authority is apparently absolute. He prescribes the tasks and enforces the rules and codes of

conduct. This avatar is formless and only makes his presence felt through the deep

masculine voice that booms from the loudspeakers embedded in the house.

It cannot be contested that a show which has garnered such popular success and

enormous mass appeal has subscribed to the process of ‘glocalization.’ The Oxford

Dictionary defines ‘glocal’ as “reflecting or characterized by both local and global

considerations.” The Encyclopedia Britannica further expands it as the “simultaneous

occurrence of both universalizing and particularizing tendencies in contemporary social,

Volume XIV, Issue VI, JUNE 2021 Page No: 32

JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755 political, and economic systems.” The origin of the term is traced to a rough translation of

the Japanese term dochakuka , which described the agricultural practise of adapting farming

techniques to local conditions. Local versions of Big Brother have been fairly sensitive of

regional tastes and values. The Australian version featured a house styled in the manner of

“a real Aussie home,” instilling in the audience the impression that they were watching “a

national thing” (Roscoe,312). The Argentinian edition on the other hand, rejected the Dutch

format of dividing the house into two areas: rich and poor, and assigning them to contestants

based on their performance in tasks and contests. The idea was considered to be offensive

and in poor tasteconsidering the enormous rich poor gap and poverty in the country

following the financial collapse of 1999.Apart from the hallmark traits of the parent version

such as appealing to the human voyeuristic tendencies, Bigg Boss has routinely capitalised

on certain idiosyncrasies of Indian society. These may include but aren’t limited to: sexual

frustration; penchant for melodrama; maudlin tendencies; hyper voyeurism or ogling; and

even aspects of slut shaming. This paper attempts to examine how the ‘gaze’ that is so

central to the framework of Big Brother is modified and some features of it even amplified

in Bigg Boss in relation to the above mentioned elements and glocalization. The paper will

depend on theories of gaze in critical discourse such as Lacanian psychoanalysis, Laura

Mulvey’s idea of scopophilia, andFoucauldian theory of gaze and power among others.

Bigg Boss and the Process of Glocalization

Bigg Boss can be said to be the crystallisation of dystopian ideas. The eponymous

Big Brother/ Big Boss is an omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent godlike entity. He

watches and hears all the action that takes place inside the house through multiple cameras

and microphones fixedat various points. In editing and compiling 24 hours’ worth content

into a couple of hours ready for telecasting, he acts as a mediator between the housemates

and the audience and in extension, the outside world. He is privy to information that is not

Volume XIV, Issue VI, JUNE 2021 Page No: 33

JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755 available to the layperson/average consumer. Going by Stuart Hall’s communication model,

Big Bosshas the potential to interfere in the ‘circulation’ stage. As arbiter between the house

and the external world, he has supreme power to manipulate the content in a way so as to

influence the perception of the viewers who are supposedly the decision making authority

with regard to who is eliminated.He primarily uses this power to stitch together narratives

that boost TRP (Television Rating Point). In true totalitarian fashion, Big Boss forces the

contestants to confess their hatred and disapproval of fellow housemates and to point out

their flaws. This is reminiscent of real life fascist regimes encouraging citizens to snitch on

other people. The condition in the Bigg Boss house eerily mirrors that of the idea of

Panopticism as discussed by Michel Foucault in Discipline and Punishment . A panopticon is

a structure designed by Jeremy Bentham. It is a building in which surveillance is

institutionalized; inmates are constantly monitored. Surprisingly, what has been presented as

a dystopian situation has been wholeheartedly approved by the people of the 21 st century.

The housemates of Bigg Boss , in choosing to enter the house, voluntarily surrender to active

surveillance. They seem to enter a Faustian pact in which they exchange their privacy and

freedom for fame and money. George Orwell’s 1984—which was responsible for

introducing the totalitarian Big Brother character to popular lexicon—could not have

predicted such levels of consensual dysfunctionality. However his contemporary Aldous

Huxley had accurately predicted the evolution of a ‘captive culture:’

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared

was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one

who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of

information. Huxleyfeared those who would give us so much that we would

be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be

concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of

irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared

we would become a trivial culture” (Postman 19-20).

Volume XIV, Issue VI, JUNE 2021 Page No: 34

JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755

Foucault’s concept of gaze is rooted in his ideas of Panopticism,

power/knowledgeand bio power. He has established how people modify their behaviour

under the belief that they are constantly being watched. Contemporary Indian standards of

morality regarding sex are widely thought to be regressive, antiquated, and out-dated by the

rest of the world. Both sexes are taught to suppress and contain their sexuality and sexual

desires till marriage. Arranged marriage is still the norm among the vast majority and

virginity in a female is still heavily prized and fetishized. Premarital sex is heavily

discouraged and there is a prominent lack of sex education and information regarding safe

sexual practises in the curricula. Interactions with the opposite gender are highly

scrutinized.Undue stress is placed on controlling and regulating female sexuality, female

dressing styles, and how much ‘skin’ is shown. There are also blatant double standards with

respect to how ‘transgressions’ are dealt with; the women are punished much more harshly

than the men.

Incidents of rape remain alarmingly high. As per the latest data by National Crime

Records Bureau (NCRB), 87 rape cases are reported daily in India.In some respects, the

policing on sexuality is sanctioned by the Indian state. So called Public Indecency Act

(Section 294 IPC) makes it illegal to do obscene acts in public. The law is vague as to what

exactly constitutes ‘obscenity’ and hence, it is routinely misused and misinterpreted to bring

any form of PDA (Public Display of Affection), even benign ones such as hugging under its

ambit. The history of judgements based on the law assert that acts that take place inside a car

are liable to be prosecuted as well if its parked beside a road or a public place. Hence, the

law emboldens miscreants and self-proclaimed vigilantes to act as gatekeepers of public

morality and decency and harass couples inside cars and in public places on the pretext or

allegation of immorality, no matter the truth.Cases of moral policing remain rampant. This

combined with the huge population of India (1.3 billion) and the heavily skewed sex ratio

Volume XIV, Issue VI, JUNE 2021 Page No: 35

JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755 (108.18 males per 100 females)has led to quite an explosive situation. Interestingly, both the

big screen and the mini screen have taken advantage of this. ‘Item numbers’ or ‘item

songs’—musical numbers involving seductive, scantily clad women that have little

relevance to the plot—are a staple of the Indian film industry.All seven Indian variants of

Bigg Boss have effectively taken advantage of the sexual frustration of the viewers. The

Hindi versions broadcast by Sony are notorious for much higher representation of models,

and TV personalities as housemates than international versions. Many people in multiple

versions have entered into romantic relationships, purportedly to replicate the success and

chemistry of popular Bigg Boss couples. Even love is used as a strategy to attract the

attention of the viewer and to increase TRP.

Bigg Boss has also successfully catered to the Indian need for star worship.

Worshipping onscreen idols to the level of frenzy is a uniquely Indian trait. In no other

country are movie stars showered with such love and adulation that they can even excel in

politics and achieve positions of political power. Bigg Boss and the mini screen is no

exception. Bigg Boss has seen the rise of numerous stars and celebrities who were virtually

unknown before their debut in the show. Viewers commonly band together to form ‘armies’

and fan groups to support their favourite contestants.Gossip is a universal element of human

culture.The image of the neighbourhood uncle/aunty gossiping, commenting, and interfering

in private affairs is a persisting one because it is founded in reality. The grapevine and

gossip networks are treated as valid sources of information. Indians extensively utilise it to

check on the character and history of prospective brides or grooms and even tenants.Indian

society had always had a penchant for melodrama and the maudlin. This is showcased in the

extensive library of soaps and television dramas. Soaps which include steamy affairs,

adultery, illegitimate children, and Saas-Bahu models where the mother-in-law and the

newly wed bride are at constant odds with each other are all formats that continue to enjoy

everlasting popularity. Bigg Boss satisfied the craving for drama and melodrama by

Volume XIV, Issue VI, JUNE 2021 Page No: 36

JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755 engineering situations where there would be conflict and fights between housemates, and

through raising tension by forcing housemates to criticize each other in the confession

segment.

Conclusion :

In a nut shell, the show runners of Big Brother have successfully adapted the format

of the show to Bigg Boss , a glocalised, Indianised version which panders to Indian society’s

proclivity for melodrama, star worshipping and gossiping. The show’s astonishing

popularity is a testament to the sexism, sexual frustration, and misogyny deeply entrenched

in the unabashedly patriarchal Indian society. Bigg Boss will only become increasingly

relevant in the social media age where a captive culture surrenders their bodies and lives to

market forces in exchange for the proverbial 15 minutes of fame. It is the harbinger of a

consumerist dystopia.

Works Cited:

Bigg Boss . Produced by Shine India, performance by Viswanathan Nair, ,

season 1, episodes 1-99, Asianet. 2018.

Foucault, Michel. “Discipline and Punishment.” Pantheon Books, 1977

Hill, Annette. “Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television.”Rutledge, 2005.

Mulvey, Laura. “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema”. Film Theory and Criticism:

Introductory Reading , edited by Leo and Marshall Cohem. Oxford UP, 1999.

Orwell, George. “1984.”Secker and Warburg, 1949.

Postman, Neil. “Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show

Business .” Penguin, 2006.

Roscoe, Jane . “Watching Bigg Boss at Work: A Production Study of Big Brother

Australia .” Palgrave Macmillan,2004.

Volume XIV, Issue VI, JUNE 2021 Page No: 37