It might be a cliché to recognise the current phenomenon of filming “actual” India for “actual” Indians, if one had been to go by that outdated adage that “India lives in its villages”. Earlier this month, the third season of Amazon Prime’s extremely beloved net collection, Panchayat, premiered with nice fanfare. So far, the collection appears to have delivered on its guarantees, with its viewership solely growing. Nevertheless, as some critics argue, the once-beloved “Phulera Gaon” of Panchayat has bought embroiled in “a political maelstrom”, difficult the present’s earlier vibe, as journalist Vibha Maru places it. She notes that the ‘Phul’ of Phulera has misplaced its lustre. Maru’s commentary of the fading Malgudi Days-like simplicity of Phulera and Phakoli Bazaar good points credence contemplating the rising reliance of OTT platforms on huge knowledge to cater to particular viewers preferences and perpetuate sure aesthetics or predispositions.
A Layered Image Of Twenty first-Century India
What initially appeared as a timeless Indian story of Abhishek (performed by Jitendra Kumar), an IIM aspirant-turned-village secretary, and his earnest companion Vikas (Chandan Roy), supported by Brij Bhushan Dubey (Raghubir Yadav), Manju Devi (Neena Gupta), Prahlad Pandey (Faisal Malik), Rinki (Sanvikaa), Bhushan (Durgesh Kumar), Binod (Ashok Pathak), and others, has now advanced right into a narrative encompassing social, political, and gender complexities distinctive to Twenty first-century suburban India. The query stays: how idyllic is the India that Panchayat portrays on display screen, and the way credible is the transformation of its fictional village to a doubtlessly darker actuality?
Learn | Was Panchayat Shot In Rajasthan’s Phulera? The Reply Is…
Given the collection’ broad enchantment, opinions naturally fluctuate. Political scientist and Tata Institute of Social Sciences professor Ashwani Kumar means that Panchayat challenges “the endurable photographs of primordial rural actuality within the basic Do Bigha Zamin (1953), Pather Panchali (1955) or Mom India (1957)”. As a substitute, it presents a “pleasant and seductive celluloid ethnography of vernacular cosmopolitanism in Indian villages”.
Steering away from stereotypical, crude, or unrealistically utopian portrayals of rural life, Phulera in Panchayat presents a cinematic journey that Ashis Nandy describes as a “time journey to a possible self” inside an Indian village, the place real Indian experiences confront contrived, pseudo depictions of the village. Rural cultural entrepreneur and founding father of banglanatak.com, Amitava Bhattacharjee, concurs on the theme of consultant realism, noting that Panchayat authentically portrays rural life, placing a steadiness by showcasing each its charms and its challenges.
“Like Doordarshan From Many Moons In the past”
Till the discharge of Season 3, these viewpoints largely encapsulated essential views on the collection. In keeping with Bhattacharjee, till the earlier season, Panchayat explored the every day lives of easy villagers, specializing in their interactions and challenges by means of “situational comedy”, highlighting rural forms’s absurdities and inefficiencies. The narrative centred on a metropolis graduate’s journey of getting used to village life. Bhattacharjee emphasised that the collection’ triumph lay not merely in its depiction of rural India however in revitalising a country style devoid of weapons, crime, and bloodshed. It virtually reminded one in all “the Doordarshan serials from many moons in the past”, says Mumbai-and-Delhi-based creator and entrepreneur, Shriti Tyagi.
This sentiment is echoed by filmmaker and Al Jazeera journalist Gautam Singh, who praises the collection for its sharp portrayal of rural India’s humour and authenticity, notably in capturing the nuances of “purvanchali boli” or dialects from Jap Uttar Pradesh, together with the Ballia district.
Theatre vs OTT Audiences
Nevertheless, Singh cautions that no single present can absolutely seize the variety of rural setting. Due to this fact, it’s essential to contemplate the bigger political contexts shaping OTT collection like Panchayat. Harish Wankhede, Professor of Political Science at Jawaharlal Nehru College, observes {that a} stylised city perspective shapes new representations of rural and suburban India. He additional provides that “there’s a clear bifurcation between theatre-going viewership sensibilities and OTT aesthetics”.
In lots of of those ostensibly real looking portrayals of a newly mainstreamed rural India, caste complexities stay uncared for, laments Wankhede. Rittvika Singh, Professor of English at IGNOU, additional observes that OTT platforms cater to the pursuits of the social elite and have failed to deal with the difficulty of deeply entrenched caste dynamics. “The informal erasure of caste – given that each one the principle characters of the collection hail from a specific caste – works as a tried and examined method of mainstream viewing to keep away from coping with troublesome questions,” she says.
This commentary resonates with Jitendra Kumar’s acknowledgement that OTT platforms entice a big following amongst city younger adults, who eagerly wait to return house to their favorite net collection after company work hours, the place ‘authenticity’ turns into each a buzzword and a contested idea.
Rittvika Singh observes that whereas Season 1 of Panchayat authentically portrayed rural life, its realism has waned since then. “What if,” she questions, “the panchayat election is fought on caste traces (because it typically is in actuality)? Would the Pradhan have the identical circle of associates if he weren’t from a privileged caste? Would he settle for a secretary from a unique caste? Imagining a comedy on display screen that’s not solely emotionally but in addition politically conscious of village social dynamics can be extra intriguing.” Bhattacharjee concurs, suggesting that Panchayat may have delved into caste dynamics, gender inequality, and financial disparities.
Let Panchayat Not Be A Sufferer Of Its Success
Regardless of these evident shortcomings in its political narrative and the complicated politics surrounding its consumption and incidental studying, the query, as Kumar advises, is that this: ought to Panchayat develop into a sufferer of its success? The present deserves recognition for what it represents: an India that was not thought-about worthy of mainstream portrayal till a decade in the past. Fairly than solely interrogating Panchayat, one ought to think about what prompts the city gaze to localise themes of frustration, aggression, and violence in smaller cities and the so-deemed “much less civilised” elements of India, and why cities like Noida, Delhi, Bangalore or Mumbai are normally spared this therapy.
There’s a noticeable rise within the variety of screenwriters and filmmakers from cosmopolitan cities devoted to crafting unique narratives of rural India, particularly following the success of Anurag Kashyap’s Gangs of Wasseypur (2012) duology. One would possibly even hyperlink this new OTT development to the political adjustments in India since 2014. Nevertheless, correlation doesn’t essentially suggest causation.
Thus, whereas the highlight on Phulera could seem too rose-tinted to critical critics, what if the medium itself is the message? Maybe India’s socio-political destinies are certainly quietly brewing in its villages and small cities.
(The creator is Professor of English, O.P. Jindal World College)
Disclaimer: These are the non-public opinions of the creator