Gita Govindam: Brotherhood Rebooted 2018!

Gitagovindam: Brotherhood Rebooted 2018!!

Since 1990s it seemed as if Telugu film makers nearly gave up thinking about what female protagonists want from the heroes who pursued them endlessly. Getting saved from the villain and married to the hero, of course, was the thoughtless and routine answer that we got in film after film. It was purely male imagination, their desires and ambitions that drove the majority of Telugu films. Of late, though, Telugu cinema seems to be paying a little more attention to this question, yielding some interesting and unlikely hero figures. Nani for instance rose to prominence playing a range of relatable heroes, male characters that were willing to be ridiculed; did stupid things and struggled with failure and cried like normal men did in real life. They were not completely narcissistic and the desires and ambitions of female leads mattered to these characters. Of course, these characters are entirely new. A range of romantic heroes, starting with Uday Kiran to Raj Tarun, with Varun Sandesh, Siddhardh to Tarun in between, have been trying male characters that are relatable or boy next door characters. While they stopped with hero and the female lead getting married, Nani’s characters went further, appealing to a range of mainstream audience. Meanwhile, the so-called mass heroes went on portraying male characters that saw women as either precious things to be saved from big bad outside world or beautiful trophies that they deserve because they were fighting such big battles in the world!

Vijay Devarakonda is the new popular hero trying out different masculine roles. His Pellichupulu was an unassuming but convincing portrayal of an unambitious protagonist in love with an ambitious go getter female protagonist, a role that Nani also could have played. But his character in Arjun Reddy brought a definitive turn to the terrain of new masculinity. Breaking off from both the fighting-bad guy mass heroes and winning heart boy next door romantic heroes or relatable male characters, it brought heroism to the battle inside, the battle of new age man with himself. It touched an emotional chord with a lot of young men and women as this is the battle that most young men in our society seem to be fighting, a personalized battle in the familial domain, a deeply traumatic one, nevertheless. No wonder so many young men felt empowered with their private misery portrayed as a heroic battle.  Arjun Reddy was 21^st century Devadas with a happy ending.

It was not like Shekhar Kammula’s heroes and Indraganti Mohankrishna’s who consciously made a dent in the mainstream, by bringing in relatable female protagonists in response to whom the male protagonists changed or grew in the course of the film. Both Fida and Sammohanam are a case in point, with heroes who took the aspirations of heroines seriously and plan their joint future accordingly. Bhanumati and Sameera have an independent character and plans for a career that the male protagonists have to take into account. Telugu cinema had allowed such female characters – as single mothers, aunts or sister-in –law but rarely as heroines. Heroines in post 1990 films often did not have a career except in a few heroine centric films, a rare category. Arjun Reddy was a shoring up of tottering masculinity in the face of this changing reality where self-sufficient women cannot but be brought onto the screen, as heroines, not as mothers or sisters-in-law. Which is why, though the female lead of Arjun Reddy possesses the resources to act like a heroine, she is not allowed to be one. Even though she fights the family and society all alone, the man gets to be hero, for fighting his inner battles and misery. Welcome to the new age man who is willing to wear his vulnerability on his sleeve.

Gita Govindam takes on this battle for a new model of Telugu masculinity in the face of changing gender relations by focusing on sexual harassment. The film begins and runs on a thin premise - of a good hearted Govind’s attempt at selfie with a woman - Gita, while sleeping - gone horribly wrong. He lands up in a situation where he has to apologize and beg her to forgive him. The movie exploits the situational comedy produced out of close interaction that they are forced into. The humour is at the expense of the Govind whose mistake he, and the audience, strongly believe is small and unintentional, as a misguided action due to the wrong advice of friends. Once Gita realizes that the hero is a good man, she not only forgives him retrospectively, but falls in love with him, only to be rejected by the hero on the ground that she is not a lovable person. Her anger, in the course of the film, is shown to be unreasonable, like Satyabhama’s anger against Lord Krishna. After some difficult twists and turns, Govind recognizes her as the woman who he has been looking all along, once again, and gets married to her.

Govind is lovable, sincere and honest, personification of a good boy, handsome too, raised by an equally honest and good hearted father. He believes in committed monogamous relationship and does not even look at other women. His old-fashioned ideas are made fun of by friends who nevertheless go along to fulfil his dream of setting him up  with his dream girl. The audience does not find it difficult to believe that he is a genuinely nice guy who has committed a mistake – of taking a selfie with a trusting woman sleeping next to him, only to end up planting a kiss on her with phone-camera on. The audience is convinced by this time of his innocence. Those in doubt, like me, are assuaged by his repeated repentance, ‘What was I doing? Why have I fallen to this level?’ or ‘I am not that kind of a man’ or scolding his friend for sullying his impeccable reputation. He is willing to apologize a thousand times to the heroine, admits his inability to face difficult family situations and is willing to publicly humiliate himself to win her back. It almost convinced me that this is how men caught in acts of sexual harassment would repent. I wished that even those who are not caught would repent. And I hoped that this film gave them an opportunity to reflect and repent their actions.

The film also has a counterweight (or a near villain), the heroine’s brother. He too is a good and respectable man. As soon as his sister calls him about Govind’s attempt to molest her, he gets ready to kill him. The audience is carried along with this side of the story too. Who does not want to kill the molester of his sister? He tries all his links with the police department to trace and beat up the guy who harassed his sister. The battle between the good hearted but mistaken Govind and Gita’s brother who feels wronged is quite engaging for the audience. After all, the audience is both these two good men – of a Govind who has (accidentally) harassed his future wife and a brother wanting to preserve the honour of a sister. As the brother asks the hero who is telling him to calm down, ‘would you stay quiet if it were your sister that got molested?’

So far so good, I felt very content and nearly satisfied with this neat logic. But a niggling doubt cropped up. What if Gita remained a stranger to Govind? Would it still be okay for him not to bother about her pain, though caused unintentionally?  Would he still go to apologize to her? Where do stranger-women fit in this moral economy of the male brotherhood? Can they be molested or harassed, by mistake? Does their pain count?

Come to think of it, the film beautifully uses Gita’s anger as a fuel. Despite being educated and employed she fears that the society would fault her for sexual harassment that she suffered, which is not out of place. She is definitely worried that it would be a slur on her if the incident gets out and would disturb her chances of finding a suitable husband. So, Gita uses her privilege to get the man adequately punished. She is not a helpless or weeping victim but a strong woman, who courageously manages the difficult family situations when Govind gives up and passes the buck to her. She is more efficient and clued in handling social relations. She takes his rejection well and also informs him that wives cannot substitute for mothers.

But again, another niggling doubt bothered me about this strength of the heroine. How is it that this well educated and strong female lead accepts dowry as a given nor seems to be aware of laws against molestation and harassment, intentional or unintentional? Why is it that, when the police department itself is educating the public about the law against sexual harassment and encouraging the young women to file complaints that the heroine chooses to go the brother?

That is when it dawned on me, that this is the moral economy of masculinity that holds the movie together that is most appealing to the audience. Honourable men do not molest each others’ sisters and good women, if molested do not complain to the police. When such things happen, the men try to avenge it like real men. In the new brotherhood code – version 2018 – harassment/molestation in the big bad world will be solved by returning to good old moral code – you don’t touch my sister and I won’t touch your sister.

If Arjun Reddy shored up the masculinity of the new age men who are unable to bear the cultural burden of masculinity, Gitagovindam delivers us to the good old soft but conservative gender code to deal with the new assertive, educated and independent women. Men could agree to submit in private, provided such women agree to the laws of this gender code. However beautiful and strong willed the women are, she should know that her strength lies in preserving her chastity and honour which is well served within domestic arena. And what gets in return is a sexy and engaging man with six packs giving her exactly what her mother got from her father. The big question, however, remains – is this what the new age women want from their men?