Spoilers ahead…
Of the four women in Lipstick Under My Burkha who irked the censors, Leela (Aahana Kumra, who’s fantastically alive) was probably the most irksome. At first, we see her with her boyfriend Arshad(Vikrant Massey), posing in front of a Taj Mahal backdrop – but she isn’t after eternal love. She’d rather have sex.
More precisely, she’d rather get banged. What she does, it isn’t “making love.” She’s working out some issues through her frenzied exertions with Arshad – which she films on her phone – even as she’s getting engaged to Manoj (Vaibbhav Tatwawdi). And when Arshad looks like he’s slipping away, she throws herself on Manoj, who says they should probably wait for their wedding night. I laughed. In Hindi cinema, that’s supposed to be the woman’s line.
The director, Alankrita Shrivastava, doesn’t explain Leela’s desire. Maybe it just is. Maybe it has to do with her mother, whose profession isn’t something we see in the movies. A lot of this film isn’t what we see in the movies. Waxing, for instance. And not on the upper lip. Masturbation. And not by a young woman. Buaji (a sad, sweet Ratna Pathak) is a widow in her fifties. She falls for a hunky swimming coach who could be her son.
And did I tell you she likes reading Mills and Boon-type soft-core stories? The purple prose from these books punctuates the narrative (it’s read out in voiceover), and it acts as a fairy-tale counterpoint to these oppressed women, their oppressed lives. At least in these books, the lady gets laid. The nice way, the proper way, after a ton of foreplay. In other words, a universe removed from how Rahim (Sushant Singh) sleeps with his wife, Shireen (Konkona Sen Sharma). It isn’t sex. It’s rape.
The only story where sex doesn’t play a part is Rehana’s (Plabita Borthakur). She’s a fresher in college and she wants to sing like Miley. Her orthodox parents box her in a burkha, which becomes a sort of invisibility cloak. Rehana makes use of the garment’s shapelessness to shoplift from expensive stores in a mall. She’s saying, “If you won’t buy me what I want, I’ll steal them. And my accomplice is this thing you’re forcing me to wear.” It’s religion as rebellion.
The four narratives unfold in Bhopal, much like the live-in relationship of Shuddh Desi Romance unspooled in Jaipur. The smaller the city, the greater the taboo-breaking frisson of a life secretly lived. For my money, this film’s key image is the tilt-down of the camera as it gazes on a woman in a burkha. We land on the feet, and sticking out are bright red sneakers. The outside tells one story, the inside quite another. It may be no accident that the heroine of Buaji’s steamy paperbacks is named Rosie. Rhymes with rosy, the tint of naive optimism. Leela, Buaji, Rehana and Shireen think they can get away with it.
Lipstick Under My Burkha has images that stick. Buaji in a swimsuit. Buaji’s face when she utters her name after a long time, the act of which makes her shed her burkha of generic auntie-hood and become a specific woman again. Or Buaji being helped on an escalator by a little Muslim girl who holds out her hand. Sisterhood knows no age.
Another instance of unexpected bonding occurs when Shireen (who, unknown to Rahim, is a salesgirl) demonstrates a pest-control gun, and a potential customer aims the device at a portrait of her husband. A cheap shot? Yes. But also a funny one. In a later scene, Shireen feeds her children bread and jam. She’s angry. She hasn’t bothered to cook. She’s a woman first. She can’t always be a mother.
But what does all this add up to? I thought of Satyajit Ray’s Mahanagar, whose heroine was also a salesgirl. (There’s a lipstick moment too.) As affiliations go, Ray was probably more of a “Tagorean” than a “feminist,” but his heroines demonstrated that they were the equals of men without the films feeling the need to reduce these men to monsters. (Another Ray touch: the binoculars through which Rosie spies on men are reminiscent of Charulata’s lorgnette.)
Cut to the eighties, and Mahesh Bhatt’s Arth. A wronged woman, certainly. But the man was not pure evil, merely a prick led by his dick. There’s a sweet man too, waiting in the wings. It’s another matter that Shabana Azmi decides she can do without him. Even Parched took risks, suggesting that women, after years of conditioning, could be every bit as patriarchal as men – there, too, we had a sympathetic man.
In Lipstick Under My Burkha, the men are cads. Even Manoj. He isn’t as obviously an oppressor like Rahim, but when he takes Leela to his house, she sees a roomful of men glued to their TV, which is presumably the fate that awaits Leela. It’s not enough that Rahim rapes Shireen, he even has an affair. (Gavel bangs. Milord, that’s two strikes against him.)
Many scenes are tactlessly on-the-nose, like the protest against the ban on girls wearing jeans in college. Rehana yells, “Hamari azaadi se aap itne darte kyon hai?” (Why do you fear our freedom?) It’s a thesis statement, not a line. Or take Rahim’s warning to Shireen: “Biwi ho, shauhar banne ki koshish mat karo.” (You’re the wife, don’t try to be the husband.)
It’s not that these men don’t exist. It’s that we’ve seen them far too often in far lesser films, and it looks like a cop-out when a brave new film of today opts for the same black-and-white imagery. Dhruv (Shashank Arora) must be the worst. He gives up on Rehana in an instant, without even asking her for an explanation. Under its surface subversions, Lipstick is like Hindi Medium or Nil Battey Sannata, a “soft” take on a “hard” issue. It makes feminism sound so easy, simply a function of rooting for women to escape some very bad men.
Copyright ©2017 Baradwaj Rangan. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
ramitbajaj01
July 27, 2017
“she throws herself on Manoj, who says they should probably wait for their wedding night”
Though in the movie, I found this scene convincing. But on second thoughts, it’s very hard to believe that a straight guy would say something like this, especially in the heat of the moment. ( I mention straight because a similar — albeit less raunchy — scene occurs in Prayers For Bobby, and that felt totally in the character)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
July 27, 2017
“Biwi ho, shauhar banne ki koshish mat karo.” (You’re the wife, don’t try to be the husband.)
Sounds like a harkback from Prakash Jha’s (the producer) ‘Mrityu Dand – Aap humre pati hai, parameswar ban-ne ka bhool mat keejiye’. Madhuri Dikshit to Ayub Khan.
Haven’t seen the film yet, but I would venture to say that the men chosen to be portrayed on screen are precisely as stereotypical as that – Jha knows Bihar like the back of his hand, and however (in his later movies) he may hit us on the head with it, the characters are generally rooted in their cultural ethos.
(And if you haven’t watched Mrityu Dand, I would highly recommend it. )
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sagarika Golder
July 27, 2017
I went to watch the film, with a slight apprehension, because in my experience the films which come with a lot of pre release hype often fall flat. But I was pleasantly surprised. Apart from a few stereotypical portrayals, that you have rightly pointed out, it was an enjoyable as well as thought provoking experience. I, however, have a problem with its ending where the four are sharing a smoke. I understand that the director w ted to convey rebellion through this act. But it reminded me of the year 1929 when the Edward Bernays, the famous PR guru, got society women to walk down the streets of New York, publicly smoking Lucky Stike cigarettes and callled them ‘torches of freedom’. All for a PR campaign. I wish the director had thought of a different symbolism.
LikeLiked by 3 people
ramitbajaj01
July 27, 2017
“what does all this add up to?”
I think the movie was saying if you have to continue to live under social restrictions (image of an aunt, obedient housewife or daughter, monogamous young girl) you better do it morally, without cheating anyone, otherwise you would be exposed one day. You would be left thoroughly embarrassed. However, if you really want to give expressions to your desires, then have the guts to come out of these restrictions and live the life you dream for yourselves. However, now that you have been shamed publicly and all your Burkhas have been done away with, consider it a blessing in disguise, and choose to follow your passions now. (Khidki ki salaakhein ab Rosie ko rok nahi sakti, Rosie ne baal sawaarein, aansu ponche aur chaukath ke bahar kood padi. Pinjre mein band sapno ki chabi aakhir Rosie ke dil ke andar hi thi.)
LikeLike
RoHaN
July 27, 2017
Nice review BR, I especially enjoyed the comparison to Satyajit Ray’s women, who were able to portray their independent mindedness without needing to reduce the men around them to monsters. Very well put.
Can I make a point about the titles to your reviews though (offlate) ? They give too much away. Everything away, in fact (like this one, “Lipstick Under My Burkha”… Some nice moments in a film that makes it too easy to root for its women). Surely a good title says a lot – as yours do – but also holds something back?
LikeLike
ramitbajaj01
July 27, 2017
Another thing I liked about the movie is how it stressed on not following the wrong dreams (enticing a much younger person, that too in a disguise, stealing items to fulfill needs etc) (Rosie ko guldasta kirayedaar ne nahi dukanadaar ne bhejha tha).
LikeLike
Vishakha
July 27, 2017
@sagarika ghose – Completely Agree. The 2 things that jarred in this otherwise good movie was that the women dont come out of the suppression, the director hasnt shown even a glimmer of hope for them. And of course, that the movie ends with all the women sharing a smoke. No, smoking cannot be liberating.
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
July 27, 2017
the men are cads
Even the ‘hunky swimming coach’ is no exception?
LikeLike
venkat1926
July 28, 2017
“doesn’t explain Leela’s desire” why should women explain her desire. If she wants to have sex without commitment there is nothing wrong.
LikeLike
brangan
July 28, 2017
venkat1926: I didn’t mean it that way. I’m saying the film doesn’t offer an explanation, unlike other films that might have felt the need to. It’s a statement, not judgement.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Srinivas R
July 28, 2017
Off Topic: Is Raag Desh playing anywhere in Chennai? Will you be able to review it?
LikeLike
Sanjiivani Mandloi
July 28, 2017
@vishakha- i think the reason the movie didn’t show the women coming out of oppression is because it is not what the movie set out to do. LUMB is not a movie about girls who fight the patriarchy and break down their shackles, it’s about girls who live, finding loopholes in a world where dreaming is an act of rebellion in itself. i agree that it was a weird ending, but not a problematic one, let the women decide what empowerment/ liberation is for them, it can be smoking cigarettes if they want it to be. also, i believe the director/writer took away the little glimmer of hope because she wanted it to be realistic. i mean, it would be absurd if everything turned out to be all rainbows and ice creams in the end, because let’s be real, things this big don’t change in the course of a 2 hour long movie, and we shouldn’t expect them to.
LikeLiked by 4 people
sanjana
July 28, 2017
Interesting review.
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
July 28, 2017
Another instance of unexpected bonding occurs when Shireen (who, unknown to Rahim, is a salesgirl) demonstrates a pest-control gun, and a potential customer aims the device at a portrait of her husband. A cheap shot? Yes. But also a funny one.
IIRC, there’s a similar scene (with pepper spray?) in Ka Ka Po – a fantastically funny one. 🙂
LikeLike
sanjana
July 28, 2017
This film can be watched on dvd.
LikeLike
Radhika
July 29, 2017
The movie had some interesting portrayals of men as well. Rahim is definitely a terrible husband and father – but he also seems to be acting out his miseries – he is unemployed and like the sararimen who lost their jobs, he cannot ‘fess up to it, because of the stigma that our society places on men who are unemployed – typically the word used is not “berozgar” (unemployed) but “bekaar” (useless). The swimming coach, while definitely uncouth and flirty – was seriously damaged by bhuaji’s subterfuge. He treated her with a fair degree of distance and respect and he fell in love/lust with the voice on the phone. Imagine the roles reversed and an old man having phone sex with a young girl and the outrage that would ensue. Of course the relatives would be tougher on the martinet matriarch whom they earlier deferred to, but in that kind of social milieu, it’s not just the bhuaji who would be repressed, even her widower tenant would be criticized for having lewd intentions with a young girl. The problem here is that in all likelihood, bhuaji has no ownership rights to point to given the way widows get shaded in family inheritance matters. I did wish, when Rahim raped Shireen, that they would show her reacting like Juhi Chawla’s character in Teen Dewarein – who knows, she might just yet. For a woman like her, that taste of independence and recognition would be difficult to forget. I didn’t the end was weird – it was like a short story – or 4 short stories converging. The shared camaraderie was rather endearing and there was this a sense of reflective resilience in the last shot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Radhika
July 29, 2017
I think it’s too simplistic to write off the men as cads and the women as heroines. Rahim definitely is a nasty bloke. But Arshad the photographer, seemed to be hassled by Leela’s rather flip/ruthless approach – he was upset at her saying he was merely timepass, he complained that sex was always on her mind. If he had been a cad he could have turned on her in a number of ways. Leela’s “fancy” is, if anything, a decent guy who got caught up in the wrong mess. Rihanna’s father is strict yes, but remarkably restrained given his background and her behaviour. The coach, while no gentleman, was himself damaged by the experience. The nephews who turned on the Bhuajis – well they are true to their miliieu – they had shown her deference and respect earlier, so they were understandably horrified by her behaviour. The horrible dude who thought he was a poor-woman’s-SRK (the imitation was both fascinating and awful at the same time) – seemed more like the college dude who is cool and has women flocking around him – i wasn’t sure if he was caddish, just self-absorbed like many teenagers are. The women, all admirable in their rebellion and desire for empowerment, were not above doing various shady things to further their cause – whether it was cheating a guy or a customer or a shop. I saw this less as a men-are-bad and women-are-good as much as the tectonic shifts to a society when women are repressed and they challenge the status quo.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Apu
August 3, 2017
“It may be no accident that the heroine of Buaji’s steamy paperbacks is named Rosie.”
Would that also be an allusion to the heroine’s name in “Guide”?
LikeLike