Who chooses Celebrities for us? 

Why are Bollywood actors who are a big obfuscation against the Bahujan interests, come to become their celebrities? Sometimes it becomes necessary to ask poignant questions about the existing power structures and the pillars supporting them. Creating a disturbance in the fatal status quo of the heart of the society, sometimes acts as the Cardio-Pulmonary-Resuscitation (CPR) of society to save it from sure death.

Let the basic question be asked, “Who are celebrities?” “Famous person” describes Oxford dictionary. However, in transitional societies with predominantly primordial aspects like India, celebrities are not just famous personalities rather revered figures who carry huge impacts on the minds and hearts of the people, especially the youth and hence the future. A cursory look at the issue exposes that “Popular celebrityhood” in India has been snatched disproportionately by Cinema, especially Bollywood’s Commercial Cinema; and by cricket in the field of sports.[1] Deconstructing celebrityhood acts as a powerful tool for understanding the hegemonic structures constituted by popular culture and their implications for India.

The Great Construct

A closer look at celebrities of India reveals that Celeb-genesis or the process of generating celebrityhood is not natural. There is an implicit system of social, intellectual, cultural, ideological, behavioural and psychological filtration by which this Great Construct of celebrityhood is developed. There lies a deep nexus between those who own Capital sourced from historical hegemonies, who owns industries producing celebrities and who owns the corporate media; all are controlled by the same section of caste-beneficiaries acting in consonance with each other to make heroes out of Actors and Cricketers. To be more specific, these spheres are pervaded by Dvija who are not only born and raised in a privileged social atmosphere and are mostly brahminist or caste-blind in their social and ideological outlook.[2]

The cultural and economic hegemony along with the resources socially privileged families have cornered and bequeathed generations after generation (earned mostly through hegemonic transfer of surplus) has a great impact on social and economic security, mobility and opportunity. This reduces risk to this privileged social section and smoothens their journey into popular fields. The risks of disaster even in case of failure as a star are mostly eliminated. The efficient socio-cultural filter ensures that members of this privileged section of dvija infiltrate successfully which is facilitated by certain kind of racial features (Especially the colour), phenotypes, language, education, economic security bequeathed from generations etc mixed with the brahminical birth based family connections and nepotism. This is further corroborated by the fact that second and third generation of these celebrities are progenies of the existing celebrities.  Apart from this Socially acquired biased attitudes, result in an extreme level of discrimination against Bahujans and their filtration from this sphere.[3] 

The entry of Bahujans including Pashmanda is an exception than a norm and if someone ever gets there with one’s own capabilities, one is expected to wrap oneself up in brahminical façade, put on brahminical spectacles and get Sanskritized to survive in the industry. The name change is one such phenomenon exemplifying it here. This results in a situation wherein despite a few Bahujan names [4] in the industry, they hardly assert their Bahujan identity or espouse Bahujan issues and speak for their society on the issues related them. Thus, the brahminical filtration system comprising capital, cultural hegemony, resources, connections, nepotism, racialism, ensures that Celebrityhood remains exclusively a Brahminical closed system of, for and by them.

Further, the corporate-controlled media that happen to be owned, manned and operated by the privileged section or the dvija or the adherents of Brahmin religion ensures that selected Actors and Cricketers are projected as the celebrities and occupy subconscious of the bahujans through the ‘hegemotainment’ that is hegemonic attitudes spread through the Trojan horse of entertainment and hence reinforcing and maintaining the historical hegemony through subtle psychological means. 

Page 3 and sports page which have dedicated spaces becomes the most talked-about part in peer groups; celebrities are run after by TV reporters for their views on serious socio-political issues, they form the part of panellists on serious discussions despite the fact they are the most illiterate people to talk on the issue.   All these page 3, sports news and actor studded TV debates create and reinforce notions of celebrityhood. A few cricketers and Actors are projected not only as revered figures rather as literal Gods with a large number of devotees infecting the masses with Celebrity Worship Syndrome [5]. The pompous and deifying language used manipulates minds and manufactures Celebrityhood.

Unlike elsewhere in the world, there has been a whole tradition of the deification of Cinema actors and Cricketers projected as Heros and Gods and thus driving masses into devotion under this project of construction of celebrityhood. The seriousness and the impact of this are reflected in the often-heard stories how many would kill themselves on their deaths. When the so-called celebrities fall sick, the Bahujan masses are normalized through the great construct of conformity to pray for their health while the majority of their own people suffer the woes of nonexistent or ineffective health care system. Thus, the influence of so-called celebrities confines not only to the fields of entertainment but rather creates a grand obfuscation in Indian society.

The Obfuscation

Effectively, a small privileged section of the society is made to define the mainstream social, political and cultural outlook of the whole nation and thus plant the popular notions of mainstream-normal in the minds of the Bahujan away from the realities of the bahujans who are the majority and the real mainstream. The most illiterate, least socially aware and sensitized to Bahujan issues and very often the most selfish individuals are made celebrities out of privileges accumulated through a legacy of historical injustice, loot and victimization of the social/ caste / Bahujan. This implies that the interest of this social class from which celebrities are sourced is very often diametrically opposed to that of the Bahujans. The implications of this for bahujans are grave. 

The strictures, structures, social compositions, vested interests and nexus explains what kind of cinema has been popularized in India and what for. The answer is “Entertainment, Entertainment and Entertainment” as popularly claimed in a movie of the same name. It is not only the excessive emphasis on entertainment that alone alienates the people to such extent that people search for entertainment even in politics thereby sinking serious issues to singularity. This escapism is hence not inherent or inevitable rather constructed for vested interests and shows sheer apathy if not antipathy.

The main theme of the movies inter alia have been love stories, family drama, and feudal vendetta of the caste beneficiaries [6]. In older movies, the social stereotypes against Bahujan were explicitly visible. The main heroes were from privileged social strata as is clear from their names while the villains used to look alike Bahujan with very often Bahujan names thereby creating social stereotypes and reinforcing them [7]. Of late in newer films, the phenomena has been turned into more nuanced and implicit rather than explicit. Bahujans finds themselves imagining as the other, creating a kind of alienation from their-selves and their issues which often translates into Sanskritization of thought process.

The stories are written from the top-down approach which is no exception even for the Parallel cinema that showed social issues but the weaker sections were almost always shown on the receiving ends without doing any heroic mobilization to break free from the social fossilization. Dilip Mandal writes, “Several decades and tens of thousands of films later, what emerges is a caricature – a repeated portrayal of men and women being subservient to their upper caste ‘rulers’, who are often shown as ‘saviours’ (Achhut Kanya, 1936; Sujata, 1959). What rarely got reflected was their victories from the struggle, their oppressors being held accountable, or how they reclaimed their agency.” [8] Even if Bahujan protagonists are ever portrayed in the lead role, it is ensured that his/her social background must not be asserted in their fight against the wrong as in the movie “Newton”. Moreover, the shallow effort of parallel cinema which itself was treated as untouchables, had to die out by 1980s majorly due to the start of the new liberalism which further emboldened the economic offshoot of Brahminism.

It is a psychological fact (Social learning of attitudes, Bandura [9]) that individuals or groups learn their attitudes; and on-screen storylines and the celebrities do have a significant influence on the minds of the viewers, fans and followers. These storylines take the viewers on a ‘Narration Transportation’[10] (Social Psychology) and influence subtly their subconscious [11] despite their knowledge that the story is claimed to be fictitious. 

The other party to this nexus of constructed celebrityhood of Brahminical hegemony is Political Brahminism which use this apparatus of constructed celebrityhood by actively using it as a propaganda tool to influence the topics of film making and how these topics are woven in narratives that suites existing hegemonies, thus, often trumpeting the deafening narratives of terrorism, Pakistan or Jingoistic Nationalism to cover up the issues of interest for Bahujans. The irony is that the idea of Nationalism is used against the nationals themselves mainly because they happen to be Bahujan.

Apart from storyline spreading narratives of the socially privileged, the so-called celebrities from cinema or cricket are made to speak by media for their opinion on wider social, economic and political spheres on which most of these so-called Celebrities are effectively illiterates. However, it is not hard to expect that the views spoken by these celebrities are mostly on popular political lines supporting the so-called mainstream views of brahminical outlook.

Without a doubt, our celebrities are constructed. Bahujans are manipulated psychologically to consider whom to see as celebrities. Bollywood is the virtual Classroom of Brahminism in India whereby, Bahujans are taught rather controlled through non-coercive force called obedience in social psychology drawn here by the authority of celebrityhood (as reflected by Milgram shock experiment). The so-called popular culture is significantly run by these Celebrities; and thereby creates the powerful psychological force of conformity turning a large section of bahujans blind to the realities and normalizing them into exploitation, discrimination and disadvantage. 

The bahujans are hardly shown asserting their identities, espousing their issues, educating masses on their interests, mobilizing them against atrocities, discrimination and disadvantages of segmented society, fighting as heroes for their cause, creating a sense of purpose for bahujans. So remains their reality unchained; where millions of bahujans with extreme hardships remain muted spectators as is seen from the heartrending pictures of Migrant workers during Corona Crisis, travelling hundreds and thousands of kilometres on foot or bicycle without complaining even if they are being cudgelled by police. 

Celebrityfication – The Reconstruction

For a society fraught with social problems to have reduced their definition of celebrity-hood to a few entertainers, greatly reduces its prospects to grow out of its infant stage. In a society, not moving forward, the flow of time leaves it backward. Therefore, celebrity-hood is not an issue to be left for open manipulation.

One is often faced with the choice what should be the form of commitment in Artists and their art, be it socially committed or completely in isolation with the realities of the times. In this context, some light may be thrown by the writings of one of the greatest philosophers and thinkers of the 20th Century, Jean-Paul Sartre. Sartre in his long essay “What is Literature” argues for “committed” art where commitment is with a social cause. The same is the idea is very much reflected in the actions of Sartre. This calls for committed celebrities.

Now, if the Sartre’s ideas are rotated 180 degrees horizontally, it converts into why should not the socially committed individuals be Society’s Celebrities rather Heros. Because, if the objective is to bring change in the prevailing realities, the powerful mode creating biased cognitive lens creating polarized reality turning people socially blind and caste blind, cannot be left unattended. This calls for ‘Celebritification’ of committed Bahujan functionaries.

In the above background, there is strong case for discarding and demolishing the existing construct of celebrityhood and reconstructing it to mainstream Bahujan celebrities who are socially committed for the Bahujans and want to create value-based, egalitarian, just, democratic and ethical society; where liberty, equality and comity/fraternity are the celebrated values; which are now reduced to only rituals and vestiges.

Some might doubt the efficacy or the utility of reconstructing Bahujan or “celebritification”. Skeptics if any, would do well to read about the concept of Minority Influence in social psychology (Moscovici,1976, 1980)[12] and which was exemplified by the first wave of feminist suffragettes in 1910s whereby a minority group was able to overturn erstwhile constructed norms of the times for the majority in relation to denial of voting rights to women.

Arts and sports along with the celebrityhood constructed around them not only act as an industry concentrating economic surplus towards beneficiaries of the system but also as a lightning conductor for political power, rather in a larger scale as a non-coercive consciousness control system concentrating hegemony. Which social class dominate this sphere, decides in which direction its social-cultural-political benefits go.

Those who blinds Bahujan to harsh realities with the shine of constructed celebrityhood, cannot be kept on celebrated by the Bahujans without completing the vicious cycle of their own travesty of status quo. Until discussion on Bahujan celebrities begin and Bahujan celebrities asserting their identity, Bahujan culture and values are espoused, the possibility of building consciousness on a large scale among Bahujans will remain limited. Without bringing it to the centre of the discussion, the desired changes in the powers of socialization and normalization are desired. 

Author – Amit Kumar (the writer is a social activist, a freelance writer with an interdisciplinary approach), 16.05.2020

Bibliography:

[1] “Top 30 Celebrities on the 2019 Forbes India Celebrity 100 List,” News18, Dec. 30, 2019. https://www.news18.com/photogallery/sports/top-30-celebrities-on-the-2019-forbes-india-celebrity-100-list-2430425.html (accessed May 16, 2020).

[2] “Oxfam NewsLaundry Report_For Media use.pdf.” Accessed: May 16, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.oxfamindia.org/sites/default/files/2019-08/Oxfam%20NewsLaundry%20Report_For%20Media%20use.pdf.

[3] N. Mannathukkaren, “Being the privileged,” The Hindu, Feb. 06, 2016.

[4] V. Viplav, “How inclusive is Indian cinema?,” Forward Press, Oct. 01, 2015. https://www.forwardpress.in/2015/10/how-inclusive-is-indian-cinema/ (accessed May 16, 2020).

[5] “Celebrity Worship Syndrome,” Psychology Today. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-excess/201307/celebrity-worship-syndrome (accessed May 16, 2020).

[6] R. S and U. Naig, “In Bollywood, storylines remain backward on caste,” The Hindu, New Delhi/Chennai:, Jun. 28, 2015.

[7] S. Walia, “Bollywood films are all about upper-caste Hindu heroes,” Quartz India. https://qz.com/india/439701/bollywood-films-are-all-about-upper-caste-hindu-heroes/ (accessed May 16, 2020).

[8] D. Mandal, “Lagaan to Dhadak: Bollywood has a Dalit problem and it refuses to fix it,” ThePrint, Feb. 08, 2019. https://theprint.in/opinion/lagaan-to-dhadak-bollywood-has-a-dalit-problem-and-it-refuses-to-fix-it/189538/ (accessed May 16, 2020).

[9] A. Bandura, Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1977.

[10] “Narrative Transportation: Definition & Application,” Study.com. https://study.com/academy/lesson/narrative-transportation-definition-application.html (accessed May 16, 2020).

[11] A. Waude, “Narrative Transportation: How TV Shows And Novels Influence Audiences’ Beliefs,” Jan. 20, 2017. https://www.psychologistworld.com/cognitive/narrative-transportation-fictional-tv-film-influence (accessed May 16, 2020).

[12] A. Waude, “Minority Influence: How Eccentric Opinions Can Influence Entire Groups,” Jul. 28, 2017. https://www.psychologistworld.com/influence/minority-influence (accessed May 16, 2020).

Image – Dhanush in Asuran