The Popularity of Masterchef Australia with the Indian Bourgeois

        George Bernard Shaw once said that there is no sincerer love than the love of food. One would not be in the wrong to go further and declare Indians as some of the truest examples of this love. ‘Indian’, being considered as one of the major cuisines of the world, is much appreciated. Humble food items such as the samosa, the idli, the pani puri and the gulab jamun have found themselves a spot on the international food map. This recognition of the novelty of these delicacies is not just evident on a worldwide scale, but its presence can be felt within the country as well. With the Indian acceptance of one another’s regional and communal disparities comes, gradually, the acceptance of another community’s food. Inquisitiveness, along with the love of food, drives within Indians an urge to know of new types of food forms from within as well as from outside the country. This can be evident from the increasing number of food shows, and more recently food channels, hitting the television.

        One such food show is MasterChef Australia, a competitive cooking game show produced by FremantleMedia Australia. Based in Australia, this show has an Indian fan base so large that it had two of the judges shoot a commercial just for this Indian audience. Here, one can hear them mouthing words such as ‘namaste’ and phrases like ‘bahot maza ayega’ (it will be fun). The judges are food critic Matt Preston, restaurateur and chef Gary Mehigan and chef George Calombaris, a rather jovial trio. The food prepared by the contestants is judged not just on the basis of taste, as Indians are used to, but also on the basis of texture and presentation. Comments such as ‘the meat is cooked rare’ or ‘the main component does not stand out in the clutter on the plate’ are met with fascination by this audience.

        Though a little baffled by the Australian accent, choice of food and vocabulary, Indian audiences are certainly not repulsed by it. Use of proteins such as kangaroo or rabbit meat though unimaginable to the mostly chicken and mutton eating mind, is intriguing. The omission of scripted dramatic scenarios aimed at increasing Television Rating Points is what sets this show apart from other shows of its kind. With contestants being shown releasing stress hormones only over the success of their dish, this is one of the few shows that restore one’s faith in reality television.

        While talking about the willing acceptance of the show in India, it is essential to mention the dress code of the contestants, judges and mentors on the show. The most common complaint that Indians have with most of the other countries is that its citizens dress provocatively. With the main focus of the show being culinary talent, the contestants, both male and female, are always seen donning a basic tee-shirt and pant attire. The only variation to the crisply ironed suit uniform of the judges is Matt Preston’s colourful neck scarves and visiting judge and host Anna Gare’s bright dresses. The mentors arrive mostly in their formal white uniforms. With the absence of bare skin and cleavage display, the show promptly finds itself a spot in the ‘Indian family programme’ slot.

        Another factor that captivates the Indian bourgeois is the unique Australian vocabulary and sense of humour. A refreshing breath of air amidst the American shows that dominate English channels in India, this show stands out. The camaraderie of the contestants despite the tough competition for the ‘MasterChef’ title appeals to the soft Indian intellect that has been trained to dance to the tunes of the romanticism of Bollywood. What is also evident is the inspiration one gets to try out new recipes after watching the show. Watching even kids executing complicated recipes such as those of cakes and cupcakes convinces the ever experimental Indian middle class citizen to not shy away from doing the same. The general social and political response of this category to globalization has been welcoming and this also proves to be beneficial as far as accepting foreign food items goes.

        One sees on this show men and women cooking with equal gusto. This as a concept is new to the country where the reigns of the kitchen are singlehandedly pulled by a woman, whether it is the mother, the wife or the maid. What is also inevitable is the passion for food amongst the contestants. An electrician by profession is seen just as able to produce before the judges a remarkable dish as a lawyer or a student. This desire of pleasing one with their cooking prowess rings a bell with the country for which food has been the conversation starter and ice breaker for centuries.

        The grandeur on which the show is conducted leaves its Indian audience lusting and sub-consciously comparing its extravagance to its Indian counter-part which is nowhere close to the same. The time and resources put into the show’s being as well as the meticulous eye for detail is obvious. Special mention needs to be given to the set designers for putting up such a commendable set as well as the producers for making the use of such an infrastructure such the contestants on the show do, possible. What is also endearing is the approachable and non-celebrity air maintained by the judges, unlike the ones on most competitive shows. The role of mentoring and guiding the contestants played by them is vital, with their inputs being important value add-ons and not just comments for the sake of keeping with the show’s format.

        The absence of unnecessary movie pre-release promotions like Indian and American reality shows is obvious and the only notable guests invited are from the cooking circuit from Australia and abroad. The time of the day during which the show is aired in India is the comfortable time-slot of 9-10 pm, when most families scout channels for some refreshing dinner or post-dinner time television. The quick succession with which all the seasons were aired in India only helped in hooking Indian fans further to the show.

        Speaking about aesthetically arranged food, footballer Andy Rooney once said, “I don’t like food that is too carefully arranged. It makes me think that the chef is spending too much time arranging and not enough time cooking. If I wanted a picture, I’d buy a painting.” Like him, there are inevitably few people who aren’t fans of what the show offers. But its number of fans is by large more than its number of critics. Cooking maestro and TV personality Jamie Oliver believes that there is always something new and amazing to learn when it comes to cooking and the show’s Indian fans wouldn’t disagree.

        Whether it is an invention test, a mystery box challenge, an immunity test or just the contestants toasting and dining with the judges at the end of the day, the viewers find themselves going through the same emotional roller coaster as the participants. As per American journalist Dorothy Day’s saying ‘food for the body is not enough, there must be food for the soul’, this show offers its viewers just that. Watching the show, an Indian merely looks forward to the day when ‘curry’ is appreciated not just as a food item amongst other Australian foods on menu cards but also as an individual amongst the population of the country.

100 Years of Indian Cinema- My Take

Slovene philosopher Slavoj Žižek has very rightly called cinema the ‘ultimate art’ saying ‘it doesn’t give you what you desire, it tells you how to desire’.  Indian cinema, born in 1913, has been doing just that to its faithful audience for a century now. Introduced in India by Dadasaheb Phalke, the motion picture has not just survived the tests of time and Indian cultural differences but also emerged as a victorious hero admired all over the globe.

Indian cinema has come a long way from the era of silent films spearheaded by ‘Raja Harishchandra’ to its present day alter-ego.  While an upgrade in technology has introduced better light, sound and visual effects, an upgrade in mindset has introduced actual, boldly clad (or unclad) women rightly playing female characters.

But not all aspects of film-making can be said to have changed for the better. As decades passed by, the themes on which movies were made, changed. Romance started to take the place of religion in movies and while comedy was present in Indian cinema right from its inception, comedy film makers started to take themselves less seriously, an act that would probably be frowned upon by the puritans of Indian cinema.

The age old Indian school of thought not only condemned professions in performing arts as taboo and meant for impotents, but also did not allow female participation in the few displays that were put up. The people, a few years later, more open-minded than now, did walk the path less treaded by accepting women on stage indulging in regional folk dances, but the stigma of prostitution was attached to such women. The truth behind this accusation cannot be easily discovered after three-fourths of a century. The evolution of women in cinema is interesting under such circumstances.

The whole country was left in a frenzy following Raja Harishchandra. By 1920 the film scenario in Madras looked promising with Raghupathi Venkaiah Naidu, S. S. Vasan and A. V. Meiyappan setting up production houses for Tamil and Telugu films to be shot here. The many cultural differences in India make it difficult for audiences all over the country to understand, enjoy and relate to cinema of just one particular language. When the Ardeshir Irani produced ‘Alam Ara’ hit select theatres across the country, the naïve audience was drawn to the novelty of the talkie. Producers all over the country took cue to produce movies in their respective regional languages. This was the birth of the various brackets of cinemas produced within the political boundaries of India which exist even today and go on to cater audiences beyond these borders as well.

Music soon became an almost obvious part of Indian cinema with actors having to sing their own songs in the early half of the twentieth century. This trend changed over the years with the introduction of playback singers (and more specifically, Lata Mangeshkar) to Indian cinema.

The trends of films were, more often than not, affected by the socio-political scenario of the nation. Movies on patriotism started to be made in the mid-forties to instill a sense of brotherhood and generate public opinion among the masses, for as American film director Martin Scorsese has said, ‘cinema is a matter of what’s in the frame and what’s out.’ During this period Indian cinema did not just speak out against oppression and exploitation against the Whites, but also reached puberty of sorts with Ashok Kumar’s ‘Kismet’ in 1945. With Kismet, audiences got a first glance of an anti-hero and openly accepted the topic of unmarried pregnancy that the film discussed. The movie went on to be one of the biggest hits in the history of Indian cinema.

This period could be referred to as the Golden Age of Indian cinema as it gave birth to film-makers such as V. Shantaram, Bimal Roy, Raj Kapoor and Mehboob Khan followed by Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak, Guru Dutt, K. Asif, K. V. Reddy L. V. Prasad and Ramu Kariat. Meanwhile, French film critic and theorist Andre Bazin’s saying ‘the cinema substitutes for our gaze a world more in harmony with our desires’ can be proven right by the well-built Tamil and Telugu actors playing larger than life characters. These actors include N. T. Rana Rao, M. G. Ramachandran, Sivaji Ganesan, Raj Kumar, Prem Nazir and later, Rajnikanth, Kamal Haasan, Manmooty, Mohanlal, Chiranjeevi and Balkrishna.

In the following decades, the film market was completely taken over by the angry young man Amitabh Bachchan and his ‘masala films’ such as ‘Sholay’, ‘Zanjeer’ and ‘Deewar’. Rightfully called a superhero, he showcased an array of facets of his personality, sometimes playing an action hero, sometimes an ill-fated drunkard, sometimes a wronged coolie and sometimes, even a soft-hearted romantic. What was inevitable about Amitabh Bacchan movies were the desirable female actors who worked alongside him, right from the sultry Rekha and Zeenat Aman to the innocent looking Jaya Bahaduri.

Male actors such as Dev Anand, Rajesh Khanna, Jitendra and Dharmender and female actors such as Savitri, Vyjayanti Mala, Nargis, Waheeda Rehman and Sharmila Tagore found a strong audience in the young and the restless. The Smita Patil- Shabana Azmi duo was much coveted by film-makers. The heart-warming comedy of Sridevi and Hema Malini was a refreshing breath of air too. It would be safe to say that was an era of the women as it is also when woman film-makers such as Vijaya Mehra, Aparna Sen, Sai Paranjpye, Kalpana Lajmi, Prema Karanth and Meera Nair came into the limelight.

The nineties was a Renaissance of sorts of Indian cinema with movies without an educative moral and purely meant for entertainment, were made. This was not the set norm. Sanjay Dutt and Govinda co-starred in many a comedy movies together and so did Salman Khan and Karisma Kapoor. The fame of Shah Rukh Khan, Aamir Khan, Madhuri Dixit and Kajol saw an upward trend too.

With six-packs, bikinis and cleavages being all over cinemas in the twenty-first century, there is a notable rise in the demand for gyms and over-all increased health and physique awareness. Whether it is Vidya Balan spearheading the causes, needs and desires of women in her films or Anurag Kashyap, Vikramaditya Motawane, Imtiaz Ali, Karan Johar or Raj Kumar Hirani bringing new topics to be discussed through their films, Indian cinema, like always, continues to give its audiences a thing or two to ponder over. Indian audiences are witnessing for the first time, animation and 3D in films.

While more has changed in Indian cinema than we know, much is still retained itself such as its entertainment value, large audience and the Kapoor family. Now looking as steady as ever, Indian cinema is nowhere close to fading into oblivion and it marches on, typically, bolder than the times.

One Billion Peas In A Pod

We speak different languages,
We pray to different Gods.
Thank God for Cricket and Bollywood,
It's like we're one billion peas in a pod.

We're rich and we're poor,
We're fast and we're slow.
Still all recovering from a wound,
Inflicted on us years ago.

We're not truly 'Independent' yet,
Or so some supercilious say.
Might not be all too happy,
But the Sun's shining and we're making hay.

A gradual but successful mélange of cultures,
We have Salman 'Khan' celebrating 'Ganpati'.
If only Danny Boyle could open his eyes and see,
We have more to us than just Poverty.

No denying we've bombed masjids and also mandirs,
We insist that it is 'Mumbai' and not 'Bombay'.
We beg to differ from each other sometimes,
But it's just irony at the end of the day.

At the end of the day we're all frustrated,
Making mistakes, punished by a whack from the Rod.
But thank God for Cricket and Bollywood,
Because then we're like one billion peas in a pod.