“The cinema, the stage, the race-course, the drink-booth and the opium-den—all these enemies of society that have sprung up under the fostering influence of the present system that threaten us on all sides.”
∼ Mahatma Gandhi’s speech in Rangoon, from The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Delhi Publication Division, Government of India, 1965
Respect and acknowledgement of their craft was important for early film makers. Most of them were from the ‘upper’ castes – dilettantes who had the luxury and networks to indulge and invest in a growing art form. By contrast, the unit that made their vision possible consisted of erstwhile performers and musicians from kothas, amateur actors from the theatre or people who generally belonged to this circle. So it was not surprising that early filmmakers used every attempt to legitimise a profession that was seen as a prurient one, within the social circles they operated in.
Himanshu Rai, for example, introduced Enakshi Rama Rau, as “a beautiful Cashmere girl from a distinguished Brahmin family” for her debut vehicle, Shiraz (1928). Respectability was important because it meant an acknowledgement from the powers that be, institutional recognition and financing. It was definitely not an altruistic pursuit, because beyond the not so intricate window dressing, working conditions at the unit level were bleak.
1945 was the year when Nalini, a junior artist who worked on the sets of the K. Asif film Phool, was assaulted by her casting agent. “Seven years for Raping Film Girl”, screamed the Filmindia headline once the verdict was announced. “Respectability” therefore was merely a prize, a nod, from the powers that be, that the early filmmakers hoped to secure, because with respect came the financial heft the industry required to sustain its growth.
The Indian Cinematograph Committee,…