After watching this film, I was kind of shocked that my parents never mentioned this film to me. This was the film that supposedly made headlines across India and the start of the gay rights movement there. I think this is simply a misconception. My parents were born and raised in south India and there, the gay rights movement is nonexistent. Any hint of homosexuality is frowned upon by society. I think the reason that’s true is because society in India revolves around family and community. Here, the individual is celebrated and people strive to differentiate themselves among the herd. There, family is given more importance. Marriage is between families rather than individuals for instance, hence the existence of the caste system and dowry. Since homosexuality is a very individual-based characteristic, the idea is simply nonexistent in India.

My best friend is gay. When he first started coming over my house, my mom was open to him, but I could definitely sense a sort of judgement coming from my dad. Not about his homosexuality, but rather, that I am hanging out with a boy. In doing so, he completely disregarded the existence of my friend’s sexuality. I am not sure if this can ever change within an individual. It seems to be an understanding that occurs as a movement through generations rather than individuals. Of course, that is not to say that an individual cannot change his/her perception, but I think it’s extremely difficult.

I remember once, my mom asked me if gay people have genes that make them gay. It’s really surprising how there is such a lack of awareness regarding different sexualities in India.

I remember once, in India, my family was on the train and a group of transgender beggars came over and asked for money and immediately, my grandpa handed her some cash. In the area where I am from, transgender people are shunned from their families at young ages so they clan together and beg for a living. People hand them cash without thinking twice because there is a belief that transgender people are cursed and they can easily curse you too.

The cultural perceptions of homosexuality in India are crazy and it’s amazing how even my parents don’t understand it fully even though my best friend is gay. I guess with time, things will change.

I saw the film Fire this past Friday. Fire is a South Asian movie that explores and questions some of the archaic practices of South Asian society. The film choses to focus on sexuality and arranged marriage, and revolves around complex family dynamics. These were and still are out of the ordinary topics for a film of Indian origin to cover, and as a result created controversy in India upon its release.

The movie revolves around one extended family living together in their shop: Sita, her husband Jatin, Radha, her husband Ashok, Jatin and Radha’s mother Biji, and the family servant Mundu. Over the course of the movie it is made painfully clear that Jatin does not care for Sita, preferring his girlfriend Julie over Sita. Jatin Openly talks to Sita about his relationship with Julie and how he prefers Julie. With the other marriage Ashok’s following of a religious fanatic has ruined his marriage with Radha, with Radha being trapped in a dysfunctional relationship for most of her life. After Sita moves in, Sita and Radha comfort each other with words in the beginning, but as time goes on their relationship becomes more intimate. They begin to think of each other as lovers and support one another through the hardships of their marriage. After some time has passed since their relationship bloomed, they think about leaving their husbands who never showed even one bit of affection towards them. As Ashok found out about Radha and Sita’s relationship he was horrified, and resented Radha, even refusing to help her when her clothing caught fire. The movie ended with Radha and Sita going away together to start a new life.

I thought the film illustrated perfectly the negatives of arranged marriage. Here we see two broken marriages, with both Sita and Radha unable to do anything, Radha herself being in the marriage for decades, because the society they live in demands that they remain loyal to their husbands even if they are unaffectionate towards them. This causes them to waste so many years with someone they resent. Homosexuality is also explored in the film, in how it gave Radha and Sita the companionship and affection they had been wanting from their husbands for years. This is unacceptable in the society they lived in, and the film makes the viewer feel angry that it isn’t accepted because Sita and Radha are so happy together, happier than they had ever been in their marriages, and deserve to be together.

Last night I attended my first “Flora’s Friday film”. We watched the movie Fire, a film directed by Deepa Mehta about two women from loveless marriages who grow close and later fall in love in spite of the societal stigma against woman-on-woman love. I really enjoyed this film because it felt like a very candid look in the life of an LGBT individual on the other side of the globe. By nature of living here in the United States, it often feels like everything we learn and experience has a very americentric lens, and I genuinely enjoy learning about other cultures through powerful, emotionally evocative movies like this one. There is a very high chance that I would never have been exposed to this movie otherwise, so I’m very glad I was able to attend this event.

Beyond the multicultural perspective, however, I really enjoyed this movie because it provided an interesting commentary on the nature of human desire. Even the comparison of the two brothers– one very conservative with an intense need to be in control of his desires, the other who succumbs to his desires to the extent of visibly and shamelessly cheating on his wife–offers a very interesting juxtaposition of two different ideologies. I feel, this film spoke to the human necessity for communication. We all have desires, but if we simply suffer in silence then nothing will come of them. Working toward being more open and willing to speak with one another candidly is a necessity for humanity as we become increasingly globalized, and I believe this film speaks to this idea.

In the opening scenes of Fire, Sita and her new husband, Jatin, are outside the Taj Mahal. A guide is explaining how the Taj Mahal was created as a symbol of love. Sita tries to make small talk to Jatin, but he seems dismissive. She asks him “don’t you like me?”

Sita and Jatin live with Jatin’s older brother, Ashok, Ashok’s wife, Radha, and Jatin and Ashok’s grandmother, who has suffered a stroke and lost the ability to speak. The family owns a combination take-out restaurant and video rental store, where Sita and Radha work.

Most of the scenes in Fire are filmed inside the family’s home and store. The film contrasts scenes of seeming domestic tranquility with indications of deep-rooted conflict and discontent. Jatin tells his brother that he married Sita only to stop his brother’s nagging. He is also still seeing his girlfriend, Julie, and makes no attempt to hide her identity from Sita when Sita finds a picture of Julie in Jatin’s wallet.

Radha and Ashok’s marriage is similarly strained. After learning that Radha was unable to have children, Ashok took a vow of chastity.

Fire is interesting in the way that it suggests that Sita and Rahda are both alone and not alone. Both are married, but neither feel loved. The two women live in a busy household, but many scenes feature Sita and Radha alone together. And yet, even when Sita and Radha have the house otherwise to themselves, Jatin and Ashok’s grandmother is there. She cannot speak, and thus cannot tell others what they do, but she is there to observe them nonetheless.

Fire, a movie set in India, is about the relationship that develops between two women that have married into a family. Each of them is married to a brother in the family, and the film starts with Sita, joining the family after recently being married to one of the brothers. Both of the women are unhappy in their relationships, with Sita’s husband openly having a Chinese lover, and Radha, being infertile, is with a celibate husband who does not want intimacy with her. The two women find solace in each other because of their marriages and become lovers themselves.

Being one of the first Bollywood films to incorporate and emphasize a story based on a homosexual relationship, the film has even more of an impact on the viewer. It explores themes that were not accepted by many at the time, and in doing so brings to light the different viewpoints on the subject.

Personally, I believed that the film was very impactful. I thought that the way that the film developed the relationship between Sita and Radha was particularly good. The small moments that passed between them before Sita kissed Radha showed the bond that was shared between the two women. Even after that moment, when Radha was doing Sita’s hair, the relationship could be felt by the viewer, and was established as an integral part of the film. The connections between the two was largely emotional, and by setting up their backstories and showing the way that their marriages functioned, one could see the way that the two came to each other.

This past Friday we watched a movie called Fire.

It was eerie watching a movie that depicts reality so close up. I had to avert my gaze many times not because any scenes were explicit, but because they were so poignant and different in their form of loneliness. This wasn’t the western idea of loneliness, that I find often presented bounded by romantic, social, work etc lines, but a cohesive, consuming one.

The want to be desired isn’t just a romantic want, but an innate human need to feel valued. Not delegated to carnal desires, but the desire to be valued for anything: work, effort, or intention. Instead, if a person is constantly berated and treated like a second class citizen it can lead to a fire, one providing a slate for a new beginning.