Tracing the Disability Narratives in Contemporary Indian Cinema

Milony Richa Mathew

Second Year B.A. (Hons.) English
The English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad

Abstract

Cinema is considered one of the most powerful forms of media that are capable of

influencing the audience and the public. As one of the largest producers of commercial

movies and feature films, the Indian film industry has its own stance regarding Disability and

its portrayal of the differently-abled. Analyzing these trends revolving around the different

cinematic narratives regarding the same is integral to knowing how it shapes the perception

and thought of the audience as it is certain that they definitely affect or influence the ways in

which people view, understand, and stereotype the differently-abled in real life. This research

aims at identifying and examining the existing cinematic narratives, representations, and

misrepresentations of the differently abled on the silver screen with regard to the cultural

elements. In addition, it also explores its depiction of women while also touching upon the

various prevailing issues like the lack of representation of differently-abled actors, actresses,

and filmmakers in the industry. Over the years, the depiction of persons with disabilities has

consistently been below par in Indian Cinema when compared to Hollywood. But with the

emergence of a new wave in the industry, a handful of movies have been made that treat the

subject with the utmost care, sensitivity, and nearly accurate depictions of the differently-

abled as normal human beings without any over the display of their talents or superhuman

powers.

Keywords: Disability, Portrayal, Cinema, Stereotype, Disabled

1
 Table of Contents

Contents Page no.

Introduction 3-4
Defining Disability 4-5

Disability and Cinema 5-6

Objectives 6
Research and Methodology 7
1) Disability as punitive or punishment 7-9
2) Disability for comedic purposes 9-10

3) Disability as heroism 10-11

4) Disability as an object of pity 11-12

5) Disability as maladjustment 12-13

Conclusion 13-15
Works cited 16-17

2
Introduction

In India, the term “disability” is closely associated with the concept of karma. In Hinduism,

Disability is considered as the punishment for misdeeds of a person in their previous lives or

of that of their parents. This is very much rooted in society and its attitudes towards

Disability. This belief that Disability is like a curse for one’s past sins is widespread.

In the Hindu epics like Ramayana and Mahabharata, there are plenty of characters who

are differently-abled. Most of these characters, the ones belonging to the palatial families are

powerful, they are represented as cunning and mischievous while there are others who live in

extreme poverty with illness and are grief-stricken. In Ramayana, Manthara, the female

servant of Kaikeyi, is hunchbacked and represented as an evil and cunning woman who

caused the banishment and exile of Rama from the kingdom for 14 years. Shakuni, brother of

Gandhari, in Mahabharata, is one of the principal antagonists in the epic. He is crippled but

is portrayed as intelligent, crafty, and devious. He played the game of dice that led to the

exile of the Pandavas and the upcoming Kurukshetra War. The blind king in Mahabharata,

Dhritarashtra is also represented in a not-so-good way as he acts partial toward his nephews

and is blinded by the love towards his eldest son Duryodhana as he wants him to succeed as

the next King of the Kurus. There are several other disabled characters in the Puranas and

other religious texts that are presented in a negative light. These characterizations of

Disability in these two mythological texts have a profound impact on Indian society

considering the fact that a majority of the public is religious.

Insensitivity of the so-called normal people towards the differently abled has been

persisting in society for centuries. They are ridiculed, mocked, prejudiced, and marginalized

for their disability in the mainstream (be it in daily life, workplace, politics, cinema, or any

other field). These cultural reasons for the marginalization of the differently-abled cannot be

3
overlooked while analyzing the portrayal of the same as they are very much visible on the

silver screens also. Until the last decade, the majority of Indian movies contained negative

portrayals of Disability and the differently-abled. With the emergence of Disability Studies as

an academic discipline and its dissemination to various fields has paved the way for

discourses in the public sphere regarding Disability, differently-abled, and their rights that

have tremendously influenced new cinematic narratives concerning Disability and the

differently-abled.

Defining Disability

The general definition of disability, according to the World Health Organization manual is

‘any restriction or lack (resulting from an impairment) of ability to perform an activity in the

manner or within the range considered normal for a human being’ (‘Disabilities,’ n.d.).

Definition of disability, according to Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities,

Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, includes seven broad categories

related to blindness, low vision, hearing impairment, mental retardation, mental illness, and

locomotors disability; whereas mental illness means any mental disorder other than mental

retardation, mental retardation means a condition of arrested or incomplete development of

the mind of a person, which is especially characterized by sub normality of intelligence.

(Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995)

Persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual,

or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and

effective participation in society on an equal basis with others. (United Nations 2006).

In the present research, disability has been defined as any kind of impairment in body

function or structure; an activity limitation is a difficulty encountered by an individual in

executing a task or action; while a participation restriction is a problem experienced by an

4
individual in involvement in life situations. Disability can be physical as well as mental,

neurological, and psychological. Physical disability includes seeing, hearing, speech,

movement, multiple disorders, etc. whereas mental, neurological, and psychological disability

includes dyslexia, asperser syndrome, autism, cerebral palsy, amnesia, all kinds of mental, etc

(Pandey and Singh 2).

Disability and Cinema

Movies engage the minds of the audience, not by stimulating reality, but by offering fiction.

It is the power of imagination that makes a film such a powerful medium. The special power

of cinema lies in embedded narrative and the way it is presented to the audience. It is not

merely the story outline, but also the cinematic experience of a text, that is so appealing. The

power of the film is indisputable in the sense, that “movies offer us, by means of their

cinematic devices, an unusually clear and intelligible medium” (McGinn 3). Cinema is

considered one of the most powerful forms of media that are capable of influencing the

audience and the public. The American literary critic Gary Saul Morson, in Narrative and

Freedom: The Shadows of Time (1994) writes that a film is just not a mirror in which we see

legal and social realities reflected in some more or less distorted way. Thus, films are the

reflections of the happenings of society and the age during which they are made. While they

can be used to entertain, educate, or raise awareness regarding a particular issue, they can

also be considered the propagators and carriers of certain stigmas, prejudices, and stereotypes

prevailing in society. Tracing the different cinematic narratives pertaining to the aspects of

Disability helps in understanding the various trends, misconceptions, stereotypes, and

depictions that are deeply rooted in this arena.

Disability is one among certain issues that are widely misunderstood even in many parts

of the world, including our country. Social marginalization of differently-abled people and

5
lack of sensitization and awareness are some of the reasons why it is misapprehended by the

so-called normal people. In addition to this, the film industry has also delivered failed

representations or rather misrepresentations of disability to the audience and thereby

establishing some tropes, stereotypes, and prejudices pertaining to disability. These are most

often false, twisted, distorted, or over-exaggerated representations rather than reproductions

of the actual mannerisms, behaviour, or concerns of the differently-abled.

Desexualisation is also another troublesome aspect regarding representation. Most often,

disability is represented in popular films in two extremes; i.e., either evoking feelings of pity,

sympathy, or sorrow and seeking charity because of their dependency or helplessness or as

heroes or characters possessing extraordinary skills and talents.

Objectives

This study aims at exploring the various tropes, prejudices, misrepresentations, and the nature

of the stereotypical portrayals of Disability and the differently-abled in Indian cinema.

Research Methodology

The objective is achieved by analyzing films that are either centered on the concept of

Disability and the differently-abled or include some amount of reference to this.

Movies were carefully watched, analyzed, and the data has been collected, sorted, and

included in the study.

Sample size – Total no. of feature films analyzed - 43

Category 1: Completely based on disability theme – 25

6
Category 2: Having substantial reference to disability – 18

Different Stereotypes and Representation of Disability

There are many different kinds of representations and misrepresentations of Disability and

the differently-abled in popular cinema. Most of this stem from the mythologies and folklore

that are deeply etched in the minds of people and are reflected in societal attitudes towards

the same.

Some of the most common stereotypes that I have observed in disability films over the years

are discussed below:

1. Disability as punitive or punishment

In the climactic scene of the Malayalam action film Roudram (2008), the protagonist

(Mammootty) shoots the antagonist (Saikumar) in the leg and it gets crushed by being

under a car. Here, Mammootty wraps the movie by telling him that death would be

too easy a resolution for him and that he deserves a life filthier than death. To repent

for the misdeeds he had done, he should live with this half body, crawl, and feel the

hell of a life before you die. This scene represents an important punitive theme across

Indian film and literature alike. The villain can pay for his misdemeanors through a

simple death, or in the words of the protagonist, be subjected to a fitting ordeal (110).

This is the same in the case of the 1975 Indian cult film Sholay also.

As one of the most popular stereotypes that are evident in most early period films,

this arises from the Hindu concept of karma and disability. It is believed that people

who did bad deeds in the past will be reborn with some sort of disability in their next

cycle and that the off-springs will also be punished with disability for their parents’ or

ancestors’ sins. Film characters who have done evil deeds or villainous characters are

7
portrayed as people with disability (limping, missing limbs, or other defects like

partial blindness).

E.g.: Valmiki (Murali Sharma) in Ala Vaikunthapurramuloo (2020), Khurram Meer

(Kay Kay Menon) in Haider (2014), Mangalassery Neelakanthan (Mohanlal) in

Devaasuram (1993), Chakravarthy (Rajnikanth) in Netri Kann (1981).

Another variant running under the same concept of karma is ‘Disability as

Villainism’ which is the exact opposite of the stereotype mentioned in Point 4 which

is ‘Disability as Heroism’. Here, the trope is that the character (mostly antagonists)

having some form of disability is outcasted by parents and the society around them

and as a result, they develop hatred and turn against society as goons, thieves, and

robbers, villains, traffickers, and such badmen. These antagonists are usually cunning,

crooked, and criminal masterminds. In general, they will have some visible limb or

facial deformities or rare genetic disorders like albinism or progeria. Disabilities in

these such characters are also caused due to accidents or attacks. Beggars in movies

are also portrayed in this way with limping or other deformities. This prejudice that

people with some sort of disability are devious and tricky may have risen from the

character of Shakuni from Vyasa’s Mahabharata who had difficulty in walking but

was a cruel and cunning fellow or from the vision-impaired Dhritarashtra who was

also a tricky character. There is also a rising trend in attributing mental illnesses to the

villains and serial killers in many movies [like Shammi (Fahadh Faasil) in

Kumbalangi Nights (2019) and Nagavalli/Ganga (Shobana) in Manichitrathazhu

(1993)]

E.g.: Kulappully Appan (Narendra Prasad) in Aaraam Thampuran (1997), Vallyathan

(Thilakan) in Mayilpeelikkavu (1998), Mundackal Shekharan (Napoleon) in

8
 Ravanaprabhu (2001), Anand (S.P. Sreekumar) in Memories (2013), and Christopher

(Saravanan) in Ratsasan (2018).

2. Disability for comedic purposes

Disability is exploited by many filmmakers merely for comedy as comic interludes.

Differently-abled comic sidekicks are not rare in the movies. Their disability is often

mocked by the other main characters and they end up being laughing stocks. The

interactions and behaviorisms of these characters are the main source of entertainment

for the protagonists. The disability of the protagonists is also laughed upon by other

characters. This is such an insensitive representation that would seem hurtful to the

people who are actually living with those conditions. Movies with such nonsensical

representations of Disability inculcate and reinforce the existing social attitudes of

mockery and ridicule towards the differently-abled. Therefore, such instances should

be strictly censored and filmmakers should not hurt their sentiments.

In Tom, Dick, and Harry (2006) all three lead characters are people with different

disabilities, and their interaction with each other and their limitations have been used

as a source of entertainment for the audience. Dino Morea playing Tom is deaf, Anuj

Sawhney as Dick is blind and Jimmy Shergill plays dumb the role of Harry. Their

characters have been used as comic relief. They constantly refer to each other as abbe

andhey, abbe behre (O blind, O dumb) and the villain keeps referring to them as

‘defected pieces. Throughout the film, humor is frequently created through the

mockery of their disability (Pandey and Singh 11).

E.g.: Lucky (Tusshar Kapoor) in the Golmaal series, Thoma (Dileep) in Sound

Thoma (2013), Akash (Dileep) in Pachakuthira (2006), Mr. Duggal (Kader Khan) in

Mujhse Shaadi Karogi (2004), and Kalabhavan Mani as a mentally challenged or an

9
 individual with some sort of disability as a sidekick for comic purposes in several

Malayalam movies.

3. Disability as heroism

Differently-abled characters are most commonly portrayed as people possessing

extraordinary talents, as creative geniuses, or having herculean powers. In due course

of the movie, they will overcome all their struggles and emerge as heroes and role

models for others when society learns about their extraordinary abilities. This

portrayal is extremely unrealistic and imparts the lesson that these characters possess

out-of-the-world skills and are meant to be worshipped as idols. There may be people

with such abilities and there are also other people who lead their lives as normal

people and that makes this particular stereotyping idealistic and unfair to others. This

is seen mostly in movies centered around a particular individual with some disability

and is also one of the most popular tropes in literature. There are also instances in

movies where the heroes overcome their disability (mostly with the love, devotion,

and care of their lover) in some or the other way and return to normal life. In this case,

the mythological story of Sukanya in Bhagavata Purana serves as a framework for

such narratives related to the curing of disability.

E.g.: Asokan (Mohanlal) in Yoddha (1992), Mangalassery Neelakanthan (Mohanlal)

in Devaasuram (1993), Chandra (Sukanya) in Chandralekha (1997), Michelle

McNally (Rani Mukherji) in Black (2005), Ishaan (Darsheel Safary) in Taare Zameen

Par (2007), Alexander (Mohanlal) in Alexander the Great (2010), Rizwan Khan

(Shah Rukh Khan) in My Name Is Khan (2010), Aby (Vineeth Sreenivasan) in Aby

(2017), and Naina (Rani Mukherji) in Hichki (2018).

10
4. Disability as an object of pity

Pity and dependence are the biggest stereotype or stigma revolving around disability

in popular films. Disabilities in characters are often magnified and exaggerated with

artificial and loud mannerisms, absurd makeup, use of aids, and other prosthetics that

attract pity and other sympathetic feelings of the audience by emphasizing their

poverty and helplessness. The dependence of such characters on other similar

characters who are differently-abled also comes under this stereotypical

representation. In this way, disability is misused and treated without any sensitivity

for the sake of gaining profits. This stereotype echoes very much with the Charity

Model of Disability where the differently-abled are considered as victims and people

who are in dire need of assistance and help always. They are portrayed as people who

deserve pity and the assistance of the so-called normal people in order to lead a life.

Lots of charitable trusts across the world are being run only on the basic appeal of

care of humans by other humans and this is one of the basic human values. One of the

key figures in the Ramayana who needs assistance all the time, other than

Dhritarashtra, is the couple Shantanu and Gyanavati. The accidental slaying of their

only son Shravan, who used to take care of both of them, by Dasaratha is a touching

tale. The parents curse the king and this even triggers the later events in the epic.

E.g.: Narayanankutty (Jayaram) in Keli (1991), Ramu (Kalabhavan Mani) in

Vasanthiyum Lakshmiyum Pinne Njaanum (1999), Kunjan (Dileep) in Kunjikoonan

(2002), and Meera (Ambili Devi) in Meerayude Dhukhavum Muthuvinte Swapnavum

(2003).

5. Disability as maladjustment

11
The dichotomy between the good/able-bodied and evil/ differently-abled is a popular

stereotype in Indian cinema over years. While positive characteristics are attributed to

the fair-skinned hero with a charming face and great physique, his opponent is

presented as dark-skinned (in most cases as an evil twin) with some kind of disability.

This is evident in the superhit Rajendra Kumar film Gora Aur Kala (1972), and Ajith

Kumar’s film Vaali (1999), One of the strangest amongst several maladjustments is

the faking of disability for some gain by the protagonist. They fake disability for some

purpose like achieving something, taking revenge, escaping from people or

circumstances, etc. when they are totally devoid of hope. In these cases, disability

becomes a part of the new character until they discard them one day when they

accomplish their mission (often revenge or in disguise after some misdeed).

E.g.: Nandini (Revathy) in Kilukkam (1991), Unnikrishnan (Dileep) in Punjabi House

(1998), and Vijay Krishnan (Dileep) in Chess (2006).

12
Conclusion

The stereotypes and tropes presented above are precisely some of the numerous elements in

Disability films that need to be deconstructed as it leads to the misconstrue of the audience

after watching and even aid in confirming different stereotypes in the society. Disability in

the film has become a metaphor for the message that the non-disabled writer wishes to get

across in the same way that beauty is used. In doing this, movie makers draw on the

prejudice, ignorance, and fear that generally exist towards disabled people, knowing that to

portray a character with a humped back, a missing leg, with facial scars, will evoke certain

feelings in the audience. Unfortunately, the more disability is used as a metaphor for evil or

just to induce a sense of unease, the more the cultural stereotype is confirmed (Morris 93).

The deep-rooted ideas on the protagonist that they should be complete and able-bodied

with heroic traits and should not be a differently-abled people with limitations should change.

In this way, differently-abled characters get side-lined as comic figures and if they become

protagonists, their tragedy becomes the highlight of the film. It is also important to note that

the lesser the sensitivity towards disability, the higher it will reap commercial success.

Therefore, it is crucial to spread awareness and sensitivity on such concerns regarding

disability so that the audience will embrace it and shatter all the existing taboos and

prejudices. Female characters with disability are commonly portrayed unrealistically. Such

characters are usually presented as incredibly beautiful so that disability or bodily deformity

cannot hamper their personality in any way. Some of the preferred types of disability

amongst lead woman characters in films are blindness with lovely open eyes or speech and

hearing impairment. Perhaps this keeps the saleability of films intact and unhampered.

Women with disability are also one of the most marginalized and deprived groups in society.

They are ignored, socially excluded, and treated with hostility. The common trope of pairing

differently-abled with other differently-abled should also change as this gives out the

13
impression that they do not deserve other so-called normal people as their partners or love

interest and should stay with someone who has some sort of disability so love blossoms on

mutual understanding of the condition.

Amidst several movies in the industry that represent disability in its very true light

without any superficiality or embellishments (like Sparsh, Koshish, Su...Su…Sudhi

Vathmeekam, Bangalore Days, Thanmathra, Guzaarish, etc.) it is evident that it is definitely

possible to make such movies rather than misusing and misrepresenting disability by

instilling stereotypes, cliches, tropes, and prejudices in them. These ‘images’ are most often

influenced by the mythology and folklore that implanted certain beliefs into the minds of

people that are rather problematic in their portrayal and treatment of differently-abled

characters. With the rise of the new wave in Cinema, it has drastically changed the portrayal

of Disability on silver screens with several sensitive and nearly accurate depictions of the

differently-abled as normal human beings without any over the display of their talents or

superhuman powers. Some of the well-made mainstream movies that shed light on various

rare conditions are Progeria in Paa (2009), Alzheimer’s in Thanmathra (2005) and U Me Aur

Hum (2008), Dyslexia in Taare Zameen Par (2007), Autism in My Name is Khan (2010), and

Cerebral Palsy in movies like Zero (2018), Jalsa (2022), and Margarita with a Straw (2014).

These movies have significantly brought public discourse, as a result of their serious

discussions and depiction of Disability, which is of critical importance in a country where

most of the disabled consider their impairments as a result of their sins in their previous lives.

Making disability movies in this light is of vital importance as they play a vital role in

dispersing common knowledge and information on the conditions while generating

sensitization among the viewers.

14
The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and other such bodies which have the rights

should ensure that movies that have scenes or dialogues that hurt the sentiments of the

differently-abled should be censored. They should also ensure correct or proper portrayal of

Disability and the differently-abled in Disability films and protect the interests of the disabled

community.

15
Works Cited

Admin. “The Disability Narrative in Indian Cinema. By Harsh Mahaseth | Film Matters

Magazine.” Film Matters Magazine, 5 Apr. 2019,

www.filmmattersmagazine.com/2019/04/05/the-disability-narrative-in-indian-cinema-

by-harsh-mahaseth.

Khetarpal, Abha. “So How Has Indian Cinema Portrayed Women With Disabilities?”

Feminism In India, 19 Jan. 2018, feminisminindia.com/2018/01/22/cinema-portrayal-

women-with-disabilities.

Malhotra, Nipun. “There Are More Films with Disabled Characters, and That Can Only Be a

Good Thing.” Scroll.In, 7 May 2017, scroll.in/reel/836644/there-are-more-films-with-

disabled-characters-and-that-can-only-be-a-good-thing.

Mogk, Marja Evelyn. Different Bodies: Essays on Disability in Film and Television.

Illustrated, e-book, McFarland, 2013.

Morris, Jenny. Pride Against Prejudice: Transforming Attitudes to Disability. The Women's

Press Ltd, Sep 15, 1991.

Morson, Saul. Narrative and Freedom: The Shadows of Time. New Haven, Conn , Yale

University Press. 1994.

16
Neel, Mehak. “Representation of Disability in Bollywood Films (Indian Cinema).” Sociology

Group: Sociology and Other Social Sciences Blog, 16 June 2021,

www.sociologygroup.com/representation-disability-bollywood.

Pandey, Neha et Singh, Dev Vrat. “Framing Disability in Contemporary Bollywood

Cinema.” ResearchGate,

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353794229_Framing_Disability_in_Contemp

orary_Bollywood_Cinema.

Rathee, Manjeet. “Shodhganga@INFLIBNET: Portrayal of the Disabled in Indian Cinema.”

Shodhganga: A Reservoir of Indian Theses, 18 July 2016,

shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/handle/10603/106252.

S, Srivatsan. “Before ‘Zero’: A Look at Disability in Indian Cinema.” The Hindu, 27 Nov.

2018, www.thehindu.com/entertainment/movies/disability-in-indian-cinema/

article25597455.ece.

17