PLEASE NOTE

The negative microfilm copy o f this dissertation was prepared and inspected by the
school granting the degree. We are using this film without further inspection or
change. I f there are any questions about the content, please write directly to the
school.

INFORMATION TO USERS

The following explanation o f techniques is provided to help clarify markings or

notations which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing

W
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This
may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages
to assure complete continuity.
IE
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an
indication o f either blurred copy because of movement during exposure,
duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For
blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If
EV
copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in
the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed,
a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is
PR

customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to
continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on
until complete.

4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic

means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted
into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the
Dissertations Customer Services Department.

5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best
available copy has been filmed.

University
Micrrailms
international
300 N. Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
 I EW
EV
PR

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
 Microfilmed by Univ. of W isconsin-M adison
M em orial Library. C ollection M a in ten an ce O ffice 83-23365

BINFORD, Mira Reym

MEDIA POLICY AS A CATALYST TO CREATIVITY: THE
ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA’S
NEW CINEMA

The University of Wisconsin-Madison, Ph.D., 1983

W
University Microfilms International Ann A r b o r , M ichig an 48106

© 1983 Mira Reym Binford

IE
EV
PR

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
 W
IE
EV
PR

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
 MEDIA POLICY AS A CATALYST TO CREATIVITY:

THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA’S NEW CINEMA

A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of the

University of Wisconsin-Madison in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

W
IE by

Mira Reym Binford

EV

Degree to be awarded: December 19_____ May 19_____ August 19 83

PR

Approved by Thesis Reading Committee:

Major Professor Date of Examination

tfdhfiTf" rf?)
Dean, Graduate School

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 W
IE
EV
PR

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
 MEDIA POLICY AS A CATALYST TO CREATIVITY:
THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA'S NEW CINEMA

by

MIRA REYM BINFORD

W
IE
A th e s is submitted in p a r t i a l f u lfillm e n t
of the requirements fo r the degree of
EV

Doctor of Philosophy
(Communication Arts)
PR

a t the

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON

1983

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited without p erm ission.
 I ©
EW
Copyright by Mira Reym Binford 1983

All Rights Reserved

EV
PR

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission of th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission .
 Dedicated to my parents

W
Dora and Mark Reym
IE
with g r a titu d e
EV

za w iare, nadzieje i miTosc.

PR

"Az men le b t d e rle b t men."

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

A b s t r a c t ...................................................................................................... vi

Preface........................ vi i i
N o t e .......................................................................................................... . xi
Chapter One STATE SUPPORT TO CINEMA ......................................... 1
Introduction to the Research Topic................ 1

Research Methodology............................................. 11

W
Outline of Chapters ............................................. 17
Chapter Two FILM IN INDIA: COMMERCIAL CINEMA, NEW
CINEMA, AND THE GOVERNMENT................................. 18
IE
INTRODUCTION............................................................. 18
THE COMMERCIAL CINEMA ......................................... 23
EV

Indigenous Sources of Commercial Cinema . . 25

The Influence of Hollywood................................. 28
PR

Film Finance............................................................. 30
THE NEW CINEMA OF INDIA..................................... 32

Opposition to Commercial Cinema ..................... 33

Heirs of N e o re a lis m ............................................. 35
Themes of T raditio n and Change......................... 40
A P o litic a l Focus ................................................. 43

Censorship L ib e ra liz a tio n ................................. 44

S t y l i s t i c D iversity ............................................. 46

A esthetic Innovation. . . . t ......................... 50

ii

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 iii

Page
GOVERNMENT AND THE CINEMA .................................. 55

E l i t e and O f f ic ia l A ttitu d e s Toward

Cinema....................................................................... 57

Government Goals f o r Indian Cinema................. 60

Origins of Government Film Patronage. . . . 64

Chapter Three INDIAN GOVERNMENT SUPPORT TO CINEMA ................. 69

FILM SOCIETIES.......................................................... 70

An Indian Film S ociety Movement:

Auspicious Beginnings ...................................... 72

W
Removal o f Government O bstacles ..................... 74

Growth and Dependence .......................................... 78

IE
Impact o f Film S o c ie tie s on I n d i a 's
New C i n e m a ........................................................... 81
EV

FILM FESTIVALS..................................................... . 83

The I n te r n a tio n a l Context o f I n d i a 's Film

F e s t i v a l s ............................................................... 83
PR

The F i r s t Asian Film F e s t i v a l ......................... 87

A Moveable F east: I n d i a 's Unique

F estiv al Model....................................................... 93

F e s tiv a ls and I n d i a 's New Cinema: Seeding

the Ground............................................................... 101

C elebrating th e Harvest: A Panorama of

Indian F ilm s........................................................... 108

Impact o f Film F e s tiv a ls and Film

S o c ie tie s on Indian Film C u ltu re ................. 115

AWARDS........................................................................... 125

Aims of I n d i a 's National Awards ..................... 126

Rewarding th e Message, Rewarding the A rt. . 130

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 iv

Page
Promoting Regional Films and National
I n t e g r a t i o n ............................................... 137

Impact o f National Awards on New Indian

Cinema........................................................... 142
FILM TRAINING............................................... 146
T raining fo r In d ia ’s Film In d u stry ....... 148
Film I n s t i t u t e : Aims and Operation . . . . 150

C u ltiv a tin g a D ifferent Outlook on Cinema . 155

Impact o f The Film I n s t i t u t e on New

W
Indian Cinema ..................................................... 159

FINANCE................................................................. .
IE 164
The Government Enters Film Finance....... 164
FFC—Phase One (1960-68)........................... 169
EV
FFC—Phase Two (1969-75)........................... 171
FFC/NFDC—Phase Three (1976- ) . . . . . . 178
Impact o f Government Finance on New
Cinema. ............................................................. 182
PR

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS................................... 192

Chapter Four THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT
OF INDIA’S NEW CINEMA: CONCLUSIONS AND
DISCUSSION. .................... 198
CONCLUSIONS................................................... 198
DISCUSSION................................ 208

The Influence of S ta te Support on the

Nature and Limits of New C inem a...... 208

Suggestions Regarding Government Film

Support in the Third World................... 214
Suggested Areas ,for Further Research. . . . 217

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 V

Page
Summary o f Conclusions......................................... 222
Appendix A/ I n d ia 's Major Film Production Centers and
Language Regions ................................................. 224
Appendix B New Indian Cinema: A Filmography ...................... 225
Appendix C Opinion Survey Questionnaire and
Description of Methodology................................. 240
Appendix D Table 1. The Top Five Film Support
A c t iv i t ie s (unweighted Ranking) . 244
Table 2. The Top Five Film Support
A c t iv i t ie s (Weighted Ranking) . . 244

W
Table 3. The "Number One" Film Support
IE A c tiv ity ............................. 244
Table 4. Impact of Government-Supported
Film I n s t i t u t i o n s on Selected
New Cinema D ire c to rs ......................... 245
EV
Appendix E Schedule of In terv iew s.............................................. 247
Appendix F Selected Bibliography .............................................. 254
PR

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 PREFACE

In a sense, the o rig in s of t h is d i s s e r t a t io n go back to 1960,

and one o f those chance meetings t h a t can change the course o f a l i f e .
The meeting, with Bhashi Rao, took place in the laundry room of the

U niversity o f C alifornia-B erkeley In te rn a tio n a l House. I t s t a r te d a

f rie n d s h ip , and awakened in me an i n t e r e s t in India and the Indian
cinema. A fter tw enty-three years and many m iles, the frien d sh ip and

W
i n t e r e s t s continue strong.

Berkeley in 1960 was one of the few places in the United S tates
IE
where i t was possible to see both S a t y a j i t Ray films and popular

Indian cinema. But i t was not u n t il 1965 t h a t I was able to indulge

EV
my i n t e r e s t in Indian film s f u l l y , in s i t u . As a freelan ce documenta­
ry film w r i t e r , I was fo rtu n a te to l iv e and work in Bombay in the

l a t e s i x t i e s , during a period of flowering f o r both Indian docu­

PR

mentary and fe a tu re film s, and so I experienced a t f i r s t hand the

emergence o f I n d ia 's New Cinema. In the e a rly seventies I returned

to India to c o -d ir e c t a s e r i e s o f documentary film s.

Although the actual research f o r t h i s d i s s e r t a t io n was not con­

ducted u n til 1979 and 1980, much of i t i s based on ideas and m aterials
gathered when I worked in India during the s i x t i e s and e a rly
se v e n tie s . During those y e a r s , I had a chance to see film s, to ta lk
with filmmakers and would-be filmmakers, and v i s i t and take p a rt in

many of the programs and i n s t i t u t i o n s which t h is study examines.

vi i i

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission .
 The e ig h t years I have spent in India taught me many th in g s. One of

the most important is the awareness t h a t , as an o u ts id e r, even an

o u tsid e r who fe e ls very much a t home in India and has deep a ffe c tio n
fo r i t s c u ltu r e , I am bound by an in h e re n tly lim ited perspective. I

hope the reader w ill also keep t h i s lim ita tio n in mind.

D irec tly or in d ir e c t l y , many people have contributed to make

t h is d i s s e r t a t io n possib le. I am g ra te fu l to the filmmakers, o f f i c ­
i a l s , c r i t i c s , l i b r a r i a n s , a r c h i v i s t s , and many o th e rs , some of whom
are l i s t e d in the Schedule of In terview s, who generously gave hours

EW
to answering my myriad questions and digging through trunks fo r

th ir ty - y e a r - o ld brochures and n o tes; to Professor Don R. Le Due and

the o th er members of my committee, who u n stin tin g ly stim ulated and

I
encouraged the development of my id e a s, and discouraged my per­
EV

f e c t i o n i s t tendencies; to Professor Joe E lder, who moved with grace

among the ro les of teach er, academic a d v is e r, documentary film

producer, and colleague, and whose example o f unflagging optimism,
PR

compassion, and incisiveness w ill continue to in s p ir e .

I thank the U niversity of Wisconsin, the Social Science Research

Council, and the Fulbright-Hays Doctoral D isse rta tio n program fo r

providing the g rants which made my f i e l d research po ssib le. My
special ap p reciation goes to Edith Prideaux Wilimovsky f o r typing a

d i f f i c u l t manuscript with unreasonable dispatch and devotion.

And f i n a l l y , I want to express my deep g ra titu d e to a ll those
who helped to keep me going during these l a s t few h e ctic months by

"piping me the pure oxygen of community": to Bhashi Rao, on whose

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 X

birthday t h is work reaches i t s completion; to Abbie Z iffre n fo r

boundless f a i t h and help both a b s tr a c t and concrete; to Mark and

Nancy Vedder-Shults f o r p r a c tic a l wizardry and a good example; to

Jeannette Golden f o r food f o r the body and flowers fo r the soul,

and fo r not phoning; to Johanna Faye Golden f o r the magical love

of a th re e -a n d -a -h a lf year old; to Sonoo I s r a n i , fo r clipping her
way through my mountains of paper with u n fa ilin g graciousness; to

Jackson T iffany, and George and Ja n et C arnes-H iH iker f o r being

tru e frien d s-in -n ee d ; and to Henoch f o r being th ere always.

W
IE
EV
PR

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 xi

Note

The value of the Indian rupee was s e t a t U.S. 21<£ a f t e r I n d i a 's

independence. I t was devalued in 1966, and flu c tu a te d a t around

12-13^. C urrently, the rupee is e q uiv alent to about 10£.

W
T itle s Of film s are given in the o rig in a l language, with the
IE
English version provided in b rack ets. No t r a n s la ti o n i s given

when a film t i t l e is repeatedly mentioned, i f the film is known

EV
outside India by i t s o rig in a l t i t l e , o r i f the o rig in a l t i t l e
is a proper name.
PR

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 Chapter One

STATE SUPPORT TO CINEMA

Introduction to the Research Topic

The P resident o f the Motion P ic tu re Association of America,

Jack V a le n ti, commenting on the problems o f Third World film
in d u s t r ie s , explained: "You cannot by e d i c t , bayonet or nuclear

W
t h r e a t force somebody to make a good movie.

In the s tru g g le to e s ta b lis h national cinemas where none e x i s t ,

IE
or to maintain e x is tin g film in d u s tr ie s in the fa c e -o f te le v is io n

competition or U.S. film domination, national governments r e s o r t

EV

not to bayonets or e d i c t s , but to subsidies and other forms o f s t a t e

aid to cinema. This is in cre asin g ly tru e in Europe as well as in the

Third World. In Europe in the 1970s, fo r example, Eidsvik found t h a t

PR

every country except Great B rita in had increased i t s subsidies fo r

O
film production. The dominant p a tte rn in the w orld's film
i n d u s tr ie s —o utside the s o c i a l i s t c o u n trie s , where film production
i s s ta te -f in a n c e d —is one of p r iv a te commercial production. But even
where filmmaking is in the p riv a te s e c to r , governments have added the

^Quoted in Time Magazine, Ju ly 20, 1981, p. 47.

Charles Eidsvik, "The S ta te as Movie Mogul," Film Comment

(February 1979), p. 65.

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 2

r o le of cinema patron to t h a t of censor, re g u la to r, and revenue-

c o ll e c t o r .

S ta te patronage may include various forms of support to cinema.

In the l a t e 1960s, Guback described th e major forms of fin an c ia l
a id a v a ila b le in Europe from governmental sources as su b s id ie s, loans,
and p r i z e s J Writing a decade l a t e r , Eidsvik added a fourth form of

s t a t e support to cinema. I r o n i c a ll y , given t h a t te le v is io n compe­

t i t i o n was a major f a c to r leading to the need f o r s t a t e a id , the new
form of s t a t e support came in the form of co-production a id from

W
government-run te le v is io n systems.

Nations stru g g lin g to p r o te c t or e s ta b lis h t h e i r own national

IE
cinemas, whether in Europe or the Third World, might well envy the
s i t u a t i o n of In d ia, which has not only a th riv in g national cinema
EV

with a massive audience, but a lso a dynamic "New Cinema" o f growing

in te rn a tio n a l s t a t u r e . In a la rg e ly ru ra l nation known fo r i t s g re a t
PR

poverty, such cinematic abundance seems anomalous and deserving of

a n a ly sis.

Indian cinema has t r a d i t i o n a l l y been l i t t l e known to Western

audiences—and sc h o la rs—and i s a r ic h ly fa s c in a tin g su b je ct of

in q u iry . Not only i s one out of every four film s produced in the
world made in In d ia, but India is the only Third World nation among

the w orld 's major film e x p o rte rs. India exports films to about one

^Thomas H. Guback, The In te rn a tio n a l Film Industry: Western

Europe and America Since 1945 (Bloomington: Indi ana Uni vers i ty
P re s s ), 1969, pp. 145 f f .
2Eidsvik, 1979, p. 64.

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 3

hundred c o u n trie s , and i t s film s form the s ta p le cinematic d i e t in

large p a rts of A fric a , the Middle E ast, and Southeast Asia. Perhaps
most s a l i e n t i s the f a c t t h a t w ithin India cinema is s t i l l in an
expansive stage. With no s i g n i f ic a n t competition from te le v is io n or
video y e t, although both are growing ra p id ly , Indian cinema is a mass
medium with a seemingly lim i tl e s s audience p o t e n t i a l . The weekly

cinema audience is estim ated a t eighty-seven m illio n , although most

of I n d ia 's predominantly ru ral population has probably not y e t seen

a film . A major segment of the cinema audience i s composed of tr a n s ­

W
planted ru ral migrants who have l o s t access to tr a d itio n a l forms of
entertainm ent. Cinema takes the place of what they have l o s t . It
IE
also brings with i t "new concepts of speech, d re s s, l i f e s t y l e , values,
family r e la tio n s h ip s , dance and m u s i c . I t i s usually considered
EV

the most in f lu e n tia l of I n d ia 's mass media. In the view of mass media

h is to r ia n Erik Barnouw, "there r e a l l y i s no country lik e India where

PR

the film industry has had such a hold over i t s p ub lic."^

The type of cinema audience found in India is id e n tifie d by John

Hinde as a "seminal audience." Hinde describes a seminal audience as
"a very larg e group in some s t a t e of communal anxiety, looking fo r

new social d ir e c tio n s , extended social maps, which a cinema of i t s

^Joseph W. E lder, "Mass Culture in H isto rica l and Contemporary

In d ia," in Mahadev L. Apte ( e d .) , Mass C ulture, Language and Arts in
India: Papers Presented a t a Symposium a t Duke U n iversity , Durham,
North Carolina (Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 1978), p. 25.
cErik Barnouw, interviewed by Chidananda Das Gupta, in
"Hollywood and the Indian Film," Span, January 1980, p. 40.

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 4

own can display fo r i t with an unrivalled e ffic ie n c y in a wonderfully

varied s e t o f choices. With the conjunction of film-making and a
seminal audience, an enormously powerful system of so c ial feedback

i s under way."^ Thriving in a symbiotic re la tio n s h ip with i t s mass

audience, and protected by governmental import r e s t r i c t i o n s , as well

as by l in g u i s t i c and c u ltu ra l b a r r i e r s , the Indian film industry is

2
firm ly in control of i t s n a tio n 's cinema screens. India i s one of

the few nations outside the S o c i a l i s t group where U.S. cinematic domi­

nation is not a concern. But the e sc a p ist c h a ra c te r of I n d ia 's own

W
corranercial cinema is of concern to many Indian i n t e l l e c t u a l s . Barnouw
maintains t h a t "wherever you have a medium t h a t is completely domi­
IE
nant . . . and where you have a monopolistic s i t u a t i o n g ra v ita tin g
n e ce ssa rily toward formula—y o u 're bound to have a movement of
EV

d is s e n t. That is what is happening in In d ia."

In Indian cinema the movement of d is s e n t is known as the New
PR

Cinema, and i t s existence presents us with a paradox. Given the

dominance of I n d ia 's commercial cinema, how was i t p o ssible f o r a

Tjohn Hinde, Other People's P ictu res (Sydney: The A u stralian

Broadcasting Commission, 1981), p. 41.

^L inguistic and c u ltu ra l b a rr ie rs t h a t p ro te c t India from

foreign film domination are p a ra lle le d by l i n g u i s t i c and c u ltu ra l
d iv e rs ity within Ind ia, making the challenge of c re atin g an "Indian"
cinema an imposing one. The ro le Hollywood film s play in India i s
complex. Although they now run in fewer than one hundred of I n d ia 's
12,000 cinemas, Hollywood film s have been the dominant foreign
influence on I n d ia 's commercial films since the s i l e n t e r a , and
continue today as a source of influence.
''Barnouw, Ibid.

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 serious movement opposing i t to emerge and e s ta b lis h i t s e l f ? Given

the success of the Indian formula film , how did New Cinema fin d i t s
finance and i t s audience?

Various authors including Eidsvik, Lipkin, Dermody, Dawson,

E lsae sser, Myerson, Trevino, V ie ira , and others have re fe rre d to the

c en tral r o le o f government policy in the evolution of new or

r e v i t a l i z e d cinema movements such as New German Cinema, the French
"nouvelle vague," New A ustralian Cinema, New Mexican Cinema, and the

Cuban and Venezuelan cinem asJ S ta te support is seen as a s i g n i f ic a n t

W
f a c t o r in the evolution of a number of "new cinema" movements th a t

have emerged sin c e World War I I . In In d ia , the government has taken

IE
a d i r e c t p a r t in the development of the broadcast media and docu-
2
mentary film s. Given the Indian government's extensive involvement
EV

^Charles Eidsvik, ib id ; Steven N. Lipkin, "The French Film

Industry in the 1950s," unpublished work in progress, undated; Susan
Dermody, "Second Cinema: F i r s t P r in c ip le s ," paper delivered a t the
PR

1982 Society f o r Cinema Studies Conference, Los Angeles; Jan Dawson,

"A Labyrinth o f Subsidies: The Origins of the New German Cinema,"
Sight and Sound (Winter 1980-81); Thomas E lsa e sse r, "The Postwar
German Cinema," in Tony Rayns ( e d . ) , Fassbinder (London: B r itis h
Film I n s t i t u t e , 1980), pp. -1-16; Michael Myerson, Memories of Under­
development: The Revolutionary Films o f Cuba (New York: Grossman
P u b lish e rs, 1973). See pp. 18 f f . ; Jesus Salvador Trevino, "The New
Mexican Cinema," Film Q uarterly 32, 3 (Spring 1979), pp. 26-37; Joao
Luiz V ie ira , "Tropical Disease: Towards Development o f an A ltern a tiv e
Cinema in Venezuela," Millennium Film Journal (October/November
1981/82), pp. 171-75. For essays on B r a z i l 's Cinema Novo, see
Randal Johnson and Robert Stam, B ra z ilia n Cinema (Rutherford:
Farleigh Dickinson U niversity P re ss, 1982).
p
‘■Although documentary film i s excluded from the purview of th is
study, the Indian government's massive documentary film e f f o r t may
be noted as an in te r e s tin g area o f in v e s tig a tio n .

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
 6

in mass media, and the importance of the governmental r o le in the

growth of film movements in o th e r c o u n trie s , i t is reasonable to look
f i r s t to the ro le of government when we in q u ire in to the genesis of

New Indian Cinema. The c e n tra l research question of t h is study is

th e re fo re : Did the Indian government play a s i g n i f i c a n t ro le in the
development o f I n d i a 's New Cinema?

In Third World communication re s e a rc h , as in cinema s tu d ie s ,

film policy i s a r e l a t i v e l y neglected area of resea rch . In the

absence o f system atic comparative stu d ie s which might o f f e r c r i t e r i a

W
or dimensions f o r a n a ly s is , fo r example, t h i s study developed i t s own
dimensions of s t a t e s u p p o r t ‘fo r examining the ro le o f the Indian
IE
government in the emergence o f I n d i a 's New Cinema.

In In d ia , numerous governmental and several p r iv a te organizations

EV

carry out a v a r ie ty of a c t i v i t i e s g e n erally r e fe rre d to under the

rub ric of "film improvement." As a prelim inary p a r t of t h is study,
PR

an opinion survey was conducted to determine which of twenty c en tral

and s t a t e government as well as p riv a te film improvement a c t i v i t i e s

were most valued by a group of i n f lu e n ti a l filmmakers and other film

p ro fe ssio n a ls.^ Based on th e r e s u l t s of t h i s opinion survey,

combined with th e r e s e a r c h e r 's f i e l d ob servatio ns, dimensions of

s t a t e support were formulated f o r a n a ly sis in the c e n tra l portion of

t h is study.

^The survey q u e stio n n a ire , and a d e sc rip tio n of methodology used

in i t s ad m in istratio n and a n a ly s is , are included in Appendix C.

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f the copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission.
 7

t h i s study advances th e proposition th a t Indian government film

support stim ulated the growth of I n d ia 's New Cinema. I t i s fu r th e r

proposed t h a t the s t a t e support measures which acted as a c a t a l y s t

to In d ia 's New Cinema were: 1) support to film s o c i e t i e s ,

2) film f e s t i v a l s ,

3) awards,
4) film tr a in in g ,

5) film finance.
This study w ill examine the ro les these measures played in r e l a ­

W
tio n to New Cinema and evaluate t h e i r sig n ific an c e to New Cinema's
development. The purpose of th e study i s to analyze the p o te n tia ls
IE
and lim ita tio n s o f s t a t e support fo r th e development of a c r e a tiv e ,
s o c ia lly rele v an t film movement in In d ia , and to suggest the implica­
EV

tio n s of I n d ia 's experience f o r o th er Third World n a t i o n s J

Despite I n d ia 's unique cinematic "good fo rtu n e ," i t s film s i t u a ­

PR

tio n nevertheless shares some important fe a tu re s with t h a t of other

Third World n a tio n s. Chief among these is extensive government

involvement in the mass media, including cinema. Furthermore, India

^In a recen t study of Third World cinema, Teshome Gabriel

observes th a t the e f f o r t of many Third World governments to "appropri­
a te the medium of cinema f o r propaganda favorable to t h e i r own
needs . . . has met various complex o bstacles . . . most s i g n i f i c a n t l y ,
the absence of a c r i t i c a l l y s e n s itiv e audience." Gabriel contends
t h a t , d esp ite such o b sta c le s , a lt e r n a t iv e Third World cinemas have
emerged in the 1960s and 1970s, known c o lle c tiv e ly as "Third Cinema."
See Teshome H. G abriel, Third Cinema in the Third World: The
A esthetics of Liberation (Ann Arbor: UMI Research P ress, 1982),
pp. 1 and 121 n. Gabriel includes In d ia 's "New Wave" or "Left Cinema"
under the rub ric of "Third Cinema."

R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.