An analysis of the movie- 'The Oxford Murders'

Submitted previously as a Classical Political Philosophy assignment (Sameera S. Rao, 2014).

An Analysis of the movie ‘The Oxford Murders’

PART I – Mathematical ideas and themes prevalent throughout the movie

The beauty of mathematics is not limited to number series or formulas applicable only to the academic discipline. This is because mathematical patterns can also be found in the real world. For instance, the ‘perfect symmetrical face[1]’ is said to follow the ‘the golden ratio’ (mathematically, two quantities are in the golden ratio if their ratio is the same as the ratio of their sum to the larger of the two quantities.) Pinecones naturally occur in the Fibonacci number series (they are of the following pattern: 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21 - infinity. Each subsequent number is the sum of the previous two). In academia, one can find proponents of ‘logic’, who state that mathematical patterns and sequences are present in nature, humans etc. On the other hand, others argue that this is simply exaggeration. Those who believe in mathematical purity, state that seemingly abstract biological processes occur in a certain mathematical pattern (for instance, the DNA) and it is the task of mathematicians or logicians to identify these patterns.

One of the most striking dialogues that caught my attention in ‘The Oxford Murders’ is the staunch belief held by the graduate student (Martin) in the ‘absolute truth’ – where absolute truth extends into the world. Martin states “I believe in 3.141592 (irrational number Pi[2]) the nature of reality ascribed in mathematical numbers. Numbers are pre-existing patterns in reality.” The Oxford Professor quickly retorts by asking- “Why can’t a single person then, predict a hurricane? We like order, logic we are not in the hands of destiny- this has nothing to do with truth, only with fear.” The fast-pacing dialogues in the movie explore themes of freedom, chaos theory, uncertainty principle, memory, mathematical symbols etc.

The movie shows the dysfunctional relationship between Beth (daughter) and Mrs. Eagleton (mother). Beth is an aspiring violinist, who bitterly despises her circumstances because she has the sole responsibility of taking care of her ailing mother. Beth is also attracted to Martin and wonders what it must be to be like him- to travel, study and explore outside his comfort zone (he is from the United States studying in England). 

PART II – Interpretations of the film through various schools of thought

(i)                         Psychoanalytical Perspective: It is clear from the beginning of the movie that Martin is the main narrator of events and the audience will experience reality- through all five senses as Martin sees it. Martin’s subjectivity includes an almost unidirectional belief in mathematical purity. Martin’s background as a mathematics graduate student studying at Oxford makes him value the ‘gifts’ of mathematics. He shows us that he has an ability of solving a murder mystery by unlocking mathematical symbols. This is Martin’s Achilles heel. He ignores the timing of discovering Mrs. Eagleton’s body with the Oxford Professor (thinking of it as a coincidence) and gets manipulated into thinking in the existence of a mathematical serial murderer. Psychoanalysts believe that motivations of individuals are embedded in their subconscious mind. Therefore, the convictions of Martin’s mind (about mathematics being the absolute truth) would lead him to believe the Professor- and he subconsciously tries to “win the approval” of his revered professor who had earlier ridiculed him and refused to be his supervisor.

(ii)                     Feminist Perspective – A gendered perspective of the movie would analyze the undertones of mother-daughter hostility from the starting minutes of the film. We witness the constant bickering between the mother and daughter. The daughter (like in any other part of the world) has the responsibility of taking care of her aged, ailing mother. The daughter has never left Oxfordshire, England (where she was born) and is constantly in a dilemma to “be free” or “be caged” at home. The daughter lives in a patriarchal society where ideas of nurturing, caring and other feminine ideals are on her shoulders. Beth appears bitter and sarcastic about her life’s situation.

(iii)                  Postmodern Perspective – The entire movie is seen from one narrative (that of the Professor narrating to the Graduate Student) - an approach that would not suit with the fragmented nature of reality that postmodernists believe in. However a strong indication is made towards postmodernism in the end, when the Professor remarks “Numbers lie. Truth is confused, disorderly.”

(iv)                   Plato’s Absolute Truth – Plato believed in an ‘Absolute Truth’ (just like Martin). In his idea of an absolute truth he states that there is only one version of a reality- making it problematic to associate with multiple versions of reality.

(v)                       Ideas – Butterfly effect, Chaos Theory

In chaos theory, the butterfly effect refers to “A very small change in initial conditions which can create a significantly different outcome.” Martin (according to the Professor) unknowingly instigates Beth to murder her mother when he states “You should be free Beth.”  Thus Martin is the butterfly that causes the hurricane (murder).

(vi)                   How does the movie help Social Scientists?

The movie helps social scientists to realise the power of interpretation and the fragmented nature of reality. It craftily depicts the nuances of the idea that ‘objectivity’ or an ‘absolute truth’ exists (or not). It also plays on ideas of language and knowledge – and how these two can have various versions of reality. Although Knowledge (with a capital ‘K’) can lead us to accuracy, it can also lead to disaster due to inconsistency or omission or worse- manipulation. The movie also grapples with ‘the problems of interpretation’ because interpretations would include prejudices, beliefs and value judgements on the part of the observer.

---

[1] Facial Analysis and the Golden number ‘Phi’ (1.618) More information at - http://www.goldennumber.net/beauty/

[2] Interestingly our universe has infinitely less stuff in it than the total number of digits in ‘Pi’ (Source- Ted Talk, Addison Anderson).

Multilingualism

Note - The following is a 2,000 word essay I wrote on Multilingualism and it's importance in a globalized world. I've added footnotes for all the articles I referred to while researching on the topic. Unfortunately, I wrote this with many cups of coffee and do not recall editing it.

India is said to be a socio-linguistic giant and the nerve-system of this giant is multilingualism[1]. Language is of immense importance because it shapes an individual’s identity. Language provides the base with which we think, reason, argue, agree or disagree. One can experience a high degree of discomfort and anxiety if one is found in a city where no one speaks/comprehends the language of one another. Living in New Delhi, India- I was exposed to Hindi, Urdu, English, Bengali (neighbourhood) and French (from Grade V to Grade VIII). I can fluently write/communicate in Hindi and English, whereas I can only comprehend Bengali (a language based in the state of West Bengal, India) and Urdu.

The current trend in colleges and universities today is to encourage students to learn as many languages as possible- for instance my college gives certificate courses in French, Spanish and Russian etc. But if we keep the focus off the number of languages an individual knows aside and focus on what language does to an individual- it’s a different story all together. For instance, while learning French I observed that there are words in French for feelings that don’t exist in Hindi or English. Like the French expression – “Je ne sais quoi” which means, a quality (desirable) that cannot be described or named easily. Similarly, in Hindi, we use the word “Ji.” It is a word used after the name of a person (such as one’s mother, father or grandparents) to emphasize or indicate respect for the subject. It’s not equivalent to Sir or Madame and is a lot more personal or heartfelt. Language then is not just the accumulation of knowledge about alphabets, words, grammar but rather the experience of an entire culture. Multilingualism (or using multiple languages) therefore provides us with the unique opportunity to embrace and be open to different cultures and their languages.

The world today is highly globalized due to the interconnectedness of world financial markets, increased trade across borders, advanced communication technologies and rise of social networks using the World Wide Web (like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter etc.). However some would argue that this should lead to more homogeneity in terms of language and promoting a global culture. This is a highly reductionist argument since the ‘local’ (whether it is language, culture, practices or all of these) is now being shared across borders by eliminating geographical barriers and compressing time-space. It is not uncommon to find young Chicago students studying Sanskrit (India’s classical language) through online videos uploaded by linguists in India.

Multinational corporations while investing abroad will find the need to hire linguists or translators to sign deals with Chinese or Japanese companies that still do not conduct business in the lingua franca. The ability to be fluent in more than one language can be a big asset for young professionals seeking employment in today’s globalized world.

A Case Study of Mumbai

India as a country is multicultural having various castes, religions, languages, sects and lifestyles. In Mumbai (a city in Maharashtra) every child is exposed to at least four languages right from infancy. Education grooms children in such a way that it grooms children to shoulder responsibilities of their adult life with confidence. The educational system relies on education to achieve this. It helps to develop thoughts that need to be presented with integrity and compactness. The relation between thoughts and language is not erratic but rule governed.[2]

Pushpa Pai’s Case Study of Mumbai examines the Government policies with regard to teaching languages in state-run schools in Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. Pai writes that it is the policy of the Government of Maharashtra to try and provide education to all in their mother tongue, as per UNESCO guidelines. Instructions are imparted in as many as eight languages in schools run by Mumbai Municipal Corporations. Maharashtra also follows the ‘Three-language’ formula of Government of India, which means children learn two or more languages, besides the language of instruction. 

Although Pai argues that because of the existence of various colloquial ‘dialects’ the children are unable to master the sophisticated ‘standard’ variety of language, by no means should this be taken as a negative. I say so because knowledge of a language that deviates from the norm is perhaps not economically valuable but culturally it still is. Language Development Projects funded by the Ford Foundation were carried out in these schools, to encourage students to adapt to the standard variety of language.

Another reason why multilingualism is encouraged in India is because of the special privilege given to those who are fluent and have mastered English. The ability to articulate and fluently speak in English is associated with better social status and educational level. One can pick up a General Knowledge magazine, such as Competition Success Review (CSR) and flip through numerous advertisements guaranteeing a “full mastery” of the English language. Hence a large number of parents also prefer to send their children to English-medium schools. English in these schools is treated as a medium of instruction but it is definitely a second language for the students.

It is extremely important to introduce languages early on in school since psychologists say that language acquisition device is sharpest between the ages of three and twelve. Meta-linguistic knowledge in the 21^st century will help children and adults to understand what language is, what it can do for them and its potential as a skill. As Pai says, “Multilingualism should be looked at as an advantage offered to us by history rather than a problem. At a very early stage children learn to express the same thought with different codes in different languages. At societal level, they understand the cultural differences leading to different norms to be observed in interpersonal relations in different discourse situations. Thus it teaches them to live harmoniously with others in the society.”

Multilingualism, Creativity and Innovation

A report for the European commission compiled by David Marsh, Beardsmore, Kees De Bot, Peeter Mehisto and Dieter Woolf puts forth five hypotheses- that there is a link between multilingualism and creativity, multilingualism broadens access to information, multilingualism offers alternative ways to organise thought, alternative ways of perceiving the world and learning a new language increases the potential for creative thought. [3] The study for the European Commission further states that creativity should be thought of as “imaginative activity”. Further innovation should be seen as “outcomes of value.” Therefore creativity would therefore precede innovation. They suggest there is enough anecdotal evidence for arguing that the ability to use more than one language leads to creative and innovative outcomes for individuals and the societies they live in. They state that the ability to communicate in several languages is a great benefit for individuals, organisations and companies. It enhances creativity, breaks cultural stereotypes, encourages thinking “outside the box”, and can help develop innovative products and services- these are all activities that have great economic value.[4]

Multilingualism in a Globalized World

The world is increasingly become smaller, with news travelling faster than the speed of light. There is an inversion of David Hume’s concentric circles of reducing empathy. The news of the horrific 16 December 2012 gang-rape case in Delhi, India[5] sparked a series of protests all across India, cutting across cleavages of caste, religion and language. When I was studying in London, United Kingdom on an exchange program- a variety of students from Italy, Brazil etc asked about the situation of women safety in India- an awareness that perhaps wouldn’t have existed in early 20^th century due to technological barriers. Similarly, on my first few days in London, I felt extremely lucky that I was fluent in English, for had I been in Germany I would have had a very difficult time to even navigate my way to the university or do something as trivial as buying grocery! Knowledge of another language is always an advantage. Moreover whenever I interacted with other Indian students we always conversed in English. A fellow Italian friend was curious to know “Why we did not speak in Indian to each other” – little did he know there is no “Indian” language and most of the Indian students abroad could not speak Hindi (a language of the North Indians comprising areas of the Gangetic Plains- a language granted official but not national status).

As a student of Political Science, my subject focuses on the idea of “global citizenship” – citizens transcending above national boundaries of countries. Countries are, as Benedict Anderson puts it- “imagined communities.” One thing that comes in the forefront of the 21^st century is the increased activism, by civil society, including governmental and non-governmental organisations demanding respect for all human beings irrespective of their gender, sexual identity, religion and a more equitable and just society. This proactive interaction with other people (often belonging to different states) leads to an increased awareness of the self and others- and the issues that threaten the existence of others. Whether it is the ‘Kashmir issue’ in India, the Arab-Israeli conflict or even the ‘global zero’ campaign advocating the complete elimination of Nuclear Weapons- a language to communicate and listen to others is extremely significant.

Closer home, while volunteering with the National Service Scheme in India, I taught English, Hindi, Maths and Science to boys aged 7-14- who resided in an orphanage. Often, they would repeat classes for failing to pass English and Maths. I noticed how they were unable to read words and form sentences (although they could recognize English/Hindi alphabets)- their poor language formation skills were more related to the psychological stress because of coming from unstable homes. However after putting in weeks of effort, I tried to change my strategy. I conversed in English and encouraged reading-aloud activities with reward mechanisms. The improvement was visible. Sometimes the orphanage proudly updates their status on Facebook, showing the world the progress made by the boys- through scholarships, getting good grades and getting accepted into College. These achievements are interlinked with mastery of more than one language, good reading and comprehension skills. The Orphanage also hosted various International Volunteers from USA, Canada and Australia. Each volunteer contributed to group activities and language development. The evidence of increased globalization is reinforced when one international volunteer comments – “Oh! He was only seven when I taught him! Can’t believe he has a job now! I wish him all the best for his future endeavours!”

This concern for literacy, education- for children in different parts of the world is possible because of an idea of ‘Global Citizenship.’ Global Citizenship is defined as a “choice and a way of thinking. National Citizenship is an accident of birth, global citizenship is different. It is a voluntary association with a concept that signifies ways of thinking and living within multiple cross-cutting communities- cities, regions, states, nations and international collectives. People come to consider themselves as global citizens through different formative life experiences and have different interpretations of what it means to them.” [6]

If we understand the necessity of Multilingualism as a prerequisite for an active global civil society we might realise that knowledge of other languages leads to increased tolerance and empathy for other cultures. As Goethe said – “Those who know nothing of foreign languages know nothing of their own.”

---

[1] Pai, P (2005) Multilingualism, Multiculturalism and Education: Case Study of Mumbai City, [Online], Available: www.cascadilla.com/isb4.html    [18 February 2014].

[2] Pai, P (2005) Multilingualism, Multiculturalism and Education: Case Study of Mumbai City, [Online], Available: www.cascadilla.com/isb4.html    [18 February 2014].

[3] Marsh, D., Beardsmore, H., Bot, K., Mehisto, P. And Woolf, D. (2009) Study on the Contribution of Multilingualism to Creativity, [Online], Available: 

http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/llp/studies/documents/study_on_the_contribution_of_multilingualism_to_creativity/compendium_part_1_en.pdf

[February 18, 2014].

[4] Marsh, D., Beardsmore, H., Bot, K., Mehisto, P. And Woolf, D. (2009) Study on the Contribution of Multilingualism to Creativity, [Online], Available: 

http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/llp/studies/documents/study_on_the_contribution_of_multilingualism_to_creativity/compendium_part_1_en.pdf

[February 18, 2014].

[5] For more information on the Nirbhaya (Gang-rape) case [Times of India Online Archives] - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/December-16-Delhi-gang-rape-case

[6] Green, M. (2012) Global Citizenship: What are we talking about and why does it matter?” [online] Available at - http://globalhighered.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/ti_global_citizen.pdf [February 19, 2014].

Riot and Secularism

Purpose- To trace the idea of secularism in India to riot production.

Philosophically, as Ashis Nandy points out, in the religions of South Asia "Secularism refers to toleration of faiths other than one's own"- This concept of secularism was and is prevalent in Islam and Hinduism, especially in the case of pre-Modern India. Religion did not enforce a strong identity, it had "fluid definitions of the self" and did not enforce demarcation of the "self" and "other" as is seen in the later periods. Stephen Wolff, an eminent writer on ethnic conflicts points out that enthonationalism and the violence associated with it was a result of construction of the identity of the 'self' (German, Nationalist, Pure-blooded, Aryan, Superior) against the construction of the 'other' (Jew, anti-nationalist, Impure, Non-aryan, Inferior). This construction has been used to 'rationalize' violence against ethnic communities since the past 200 years or so.

From the 18th century onwards, there was a tendency to view religions in South Asia from the perspective of 18th century Evangelical Anglican eyes. These eyes focused not only on a "civilizing mission" of indians but also succeeded in "colonizing the minds" of the political elite of India. By 1950, India's constitution had established itself as a "secular state" protecting the choices of believers and non-believers. I say colonized the mind of political elite because- as Akeel Bilgrami points out, "Secularism didn't emerge as a creative dialogue between different communities in India. Because the reasoning of the congress was this - Why should we give the sikh masses a sikh leader, the harijan masses a harijan leader or the muslim masses a muslim leader? We ARE secular, we represent ALL of them. The Congrass IS a catch-all party and therefore we speak for all and not for one."  Therefore, Bilgrami argues that secularism had been given 'procedural priority' and not 'substantive authority' that lead to the eventual escalation of violence in the post-Nehru years.

There was a demarcation between public and private. Religion was something that had to remain in the private sphere whereas the public sphere was reserved for politics, this line of thought is western in it's approach and this is the one that was adopted for India (atleast till Nehru and before the rise of the BJP). Nandy suggests this is where the problem lay (as opposed to Bilgrami's lacking substantive authority approach)- an alien bunch of south asian people were subjected to western ideas of public/private demarcation. For the Nehrus and intellectuals of India were quick to undermine the hold religion had on the people of the subcontinent. Perhaps Gandhi was right when he said "Anybody who thinks religion and politics can be seperated is a fool" (-or was it less demeaning?). So Mr. Ashis Nandy suggests that the unleashing of violence following the Ayodhyay movement in 1990s and the Godhra riots of 2002 which had to do with political parties and movements was a result of the breakdown of this 'public/private' distinction many believed in, which was incashed by the Bharatiya Jana Sangh in the 1970s and later by the BJP in the 1990s. The root of the problem wasn't in the party. It was the people who were responding to a notion of secularism that was alien to them. And then the rise of Hindu militancy, Sikh and Islamist extremism...

There are 3 schools of thought on the study of ethnic conflicts-

(1) The Primordialist School- Proponents of primordialist accounts of ethnic conflict argue that “[e]thnic groups and nationalities exist because there are traditions of belief and action towards primordial objects such as biological features and especially territorial location”

There are a number of political scientists who refer to the concept of ethnic wars as a myth because they argue that the root causes of ethnic conflict do not involve ethnicity but rather institutional, political, and economic factors. These political scientists argue that the concept of ethnic war is misleading because it leads to anessentialist conclusion that certain groups are doomed to fight each other when in fact the wars between them are the result of political decisions. Opposing groups may substitute ethnicity for the underlying factors to simplify identification of friend and foe.

(2) The Instrumentalist School-

Anthony Smith notes that the instrumentalist account “came to prominence in the 1960s and 1970s in the United States, in the debate about (white) ethnic persistence in what was supposed to have been an effective melting pot”. This new theory sought to explain such persistence as the result of the actions of community leaders, “who used their cultural groups as sites of mass mobilization and as constituencies in their competition for power and resources, because they found them more effective than social classes”. In this account of ethnic identification, “[e]thnicity and race are viewed as instrumental identities, organized as means to particular ends”.

(3) Constructivist School-

My political theory professor told me that "knowledge is internalized by learners." Do you see the problems with that? This internalization of social norms prevalent in society leads to accepting "social constructs". (Simplest example of a socialist construct- A man cannot be delicate, a woman cannot be a better driver than a man, Fundamentalists are terrorists etc.)

This school focuses on the socially constructed account of the ethnic groups. Benedict Anderson's famous line "A nation is an imagined community." is drawn upon by the constructivist school.

After these schools of thought, I'd like to briefly summarize what Stephen Wolff says about ethnic conflicts. He suggests that a watertight compartmentalization of conflicts cannot be a viable solution. An ethnic conflict has both historical factors (primordialist), which may be constructed by external authorities (constructivist) which are ultimately used as instruments for expanding power (instrumentalist). Let's take the example of the Rwandan genocide of 1994. The belgian colonial rulers had solidified the clan identities of the Hutu/Tutsi tribes by colonial census, records, identity cards etc. Historically the minority hutu population (since 1,000 BCE) had controlled resources in the area. Later on they were a part of the civil services, administration and were a part of the dominant elite group. But it was only by the 1960s that the dominant majority Hutu people started talking about "exterminating" the tutsis that eventually lead to the genocide. These demands were made by popular leaders of political parties.

Having explained these theories on ethnic conflicts, I come back to the question of secularism in India. Rajeev Bhargava has stated that secularism as a value is dependant on internal and external factors. Therefore secularism as an internal value in India isn't wrong, it's as ideal as can be (Various articles in the constitution uphold, freedom of religion, professing religion etc). It's the external manifestations that have lead to the "crisis of secularism".

This crisis can be seen here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_India

It's a list of massacres pre and post independant india. Focus on post-independant india. The communal tensions between Hindus and Muslims is high in Kashmir, Bihar, Gujarat etc. Many innocent Hindu's have died in Kashmir (Doda massacre) by islamic extremists and many innocent muslims have died by hindu militants in Gujarat (Godhra riots, Bhagalpur riots in bihar).

The most comprehensive study of riots done in India is by Paul Brass. He has studied aligarh at the micro level. I am going to summarize his work-

(A) Most of the riots in india have a "communal discourse". This discourse is shaped by historians, students, teachers, journalists. This discourse includes the displacement of blame by attributing the memories of partition and hostile feelings of one community against another. The immediate on the ground reality is lost by explanations of violence later as "emotional outbursts".

(B) Paul brass refutes these emotional outbursts explanations and states "riots are pre-planned, they follow election campaigns or political movements. There is awlays someone who benefits from these riots". He also highlights that riots in India occur in waves. These waves are unpredictable but persistent, if seen by the statistics of the last 60 odd years. The towns and cities that have experienced riots are same, although new cities and towns are added as the years pass.

(C) This chart will help explain Paul Brass's causal sequence leading to a riot -

Precipitating Incident----> [Politicians with interest in fomenting violence + Institutionalized Riot System + Discourse of communalism + Absense of a resolute administration] --> Full scale Riot

First, there must be a precipitating incident with the potential to become transformed into a riot. 

Second, there must be politicians with an interest in fomenting violence. Third, these politicians 

must be aided by an “institutionalized riot system” that makes it possible to orchestrate violence. 

Fourth, these politicians must operate within a discursive framework which makes it possible to 

some precipitating event as a communal incident. Finally, the state administration must not be 

resolute or competent in preventing violence. Given these factors, a full scale riot should result 

with high probability.

Paul Brass's work has helped many political scientists to discuss the persistence of Hindu-Muslim violence in India.  Here is a link for Brass's gujarat pogrom of 2002-

http://conconflicts.ssrc.org/archives/gujarat/brass/

Why am I connecting secularism and riot production in India? The BJP has a progressive vision for India. It's discourse lies on consolidating a united identity for india, it suggests a uniform civil code for india (because plurality is objectionable). Chritopher Jeffrelot has done detailed work on BJP. Jeffrelot has written that the BJP and it's proponents attack the "pseudo-secularism" of Congress and other parties. The term "pseudo-secularism" here comes from the Shah Bano case of the 1980s. They believe the congress plays a game of "appeasement of the minorities" (there is no denying there is truth in that).

So therefore, now a new strategy of politics under BJP leadership has been a construction of what "secularism" is - (is it hindi for india? or hindu for india? i keep forgetting).

Riot production in India is helped by a communal discourse as Brass suggested. But will a politics of secularism also be added to it? Perhaps. Not to sideline BJP alone, it is worthy to note Congress and other parties are equal members of this chess game politics. Nietzsche knew something when he said the morality and values of an individual are constructed according to his "Will to power".

Link to news report of Bhagalpur Massacre-

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/took-17-years-for-a-verdict-in-bhagalpur-massacre-of-116/34003/

Feminist Perspective- The Batman Trilogy

Christopher Nolan Fans- BEWARE!

You may not like what follows. It's not my business to please you.

This is a feminist critique of superhero films that stereotype female characters terribly. Understand? Terribly. Nolan's track record (Inception, Batman Trilogy etc.) almost always is a commercial success but if you dig deeper, like I always do (and this, regrettably) you will find badly sketched female characters. Wait not even sketched. Just doodle. His team of writers have just made doodles of Catwoman, Rachel and Talia.

Now I hear you frantic movie-goers going 'aaah just watch the movie for what it is. don't read between the lines'. I cannot. I have to read what's between the lines. Because what's between them is a representation of how society views women. And then how these writers doodle them on a piece of paper. and then the piece of paper gets a screenplay and becomes a movie. and then that movie is watched by millions, reinforcing patriarchal norms. And it's drilled into their subconscious. Drilled. That's what I wouldn't want- to consciously remain in my subconscious. I want to write the thoughts that are ignored.

In all 3 Nolan movies- Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and The Dark Knight Rises-

(1) Women have been fridged. They suffer from "Women in Refrigerator syndrome". Meaning, a woman needs to be cut, killed, kidnapped, tortured, raped in order to give angst to the hero to fulfill his 'destiny'. So the woman in herself does not represent a purpose. She needs to be used/sacrificed by the comic book writers in order to give depth, revenge, angst to the superhero. Now if a woman is giving up her life for a cause she beleives in - then it's not the refrigerator syndrome- there is still a purpose for herself there, she is independant and able enough to occupy herself in life besides her love interest. But if acts of violence are carried out against a woman - then it's typically refrigerator syndrome.

FOR EXAMPLE-

Rachel Dawes is killed by the 'Joker' in the dark knight - so Nolan essentially creates a character, develops a relationship between her and Batman- only to? you guessed it- get her killed by a maniac.

Read more about "Women in Refrigerator Syndrome" at- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Refrigerators

She is also a perpetual damsel in distress. In Batman begins, she is rescued (ugh) by batman three times from Doctor Crane/Scarecrow... and about damsel in distress - It originated in ancient times in France's folkore, Britain's literature and Arabian Nights also had its beauty half naked chained somewhere- her "modesty" in danger. It's not related to morality. In any which way. It's related to how people, men and women alike, have a fetish. To see something"weaker" than them (esp the hairier gender) in distress. It establishes a power struggle. I really want to get into Foucalt here, but I cannot. Too many tangents.

(2) Catwoman-

Before we move to the movie potrayal by Anne Hathaway- I was intrigued by why a woman was modelled entirely on a cat. I wanted to understand the thinking of the man who created her. Her character predates wonderwoman's- so she was made in 1930/40's - and I wanted a logical explanation by that guy called Bob Kane (who also happened to create Batman).

But wanting an explanation was probably the worst thing, because I found out the rubbish behind why Catwoman was who she is.

According to Bob Kane,

 "I felt that women were feline creatures and men were more like dogs. While dogs are faithful and friendly, cats are cool, detached, and unreliable. I felt much warmer with dogs around me—cats are as hard to understand as women are. Men feel more sure of themselves with a male friend than a woman. You always need to keep women at arm's length. We don't want anyone taking over our souls, and women have a habit of doing that. So there's a love-resentment thing with women. I guess women will feel that I'm being chauvinistic to speak this way, but I do feel that I've had better relationships with male friends than women. With women, once the romance is over, somehow they never remain my friends."

Excuse me Bob? As a woman can I risk my passivity and ask you why you think men are like dogs and women are like cats? Also notice how he assigns all the "positive" traits (loyalty, friendliness etc) to men/dogs and other "negative" traits (detached, unreliable etc) to women/cats. Personally it's not only bashing he'll get from feminists like me, but also cat-lovers. Because frankly, you are not only stereotyping women here but also cats.

Now, coming to Nolan's Catwoman. Issues I have : Objectification, first. Defending herself in 6 inch heels, second. The poster below, third.

Why, even as a super villain, does a women have to objectified first? (See angle of standing, ass, chest etc).

Does the "male gaze theory in cinema studies" establish something? Yes it does. 

Male gaze theory-

"The Male Gaze is a Feminist theory that was first developed by Laura Mulvey in 1975. The male gaze occurs when the audience, or viewer, is put into the perspective of a heterosexual male. Mulvey stressed that the dominant male gaze in mainstream Hollywood films reflects and satisfies the male unconscious: most filmmakers are male, thus the voyeuristic gaze of the camera is male; male characters in the film’s narratives make women the objects of their gaze; and inevitably, the spectator’s gaze reflects the voyeuristic male gazes of the camera and the male actors."

So my point is, if a woman can be subjected to male gaze, let's find a solution. A solution that reeks of equality. Lets subject the hero to something similar-

Haha, I think my point is pretty obvious. 

(3) Observations-

Most of the film credits have females such as gordon's daughter named as "Gordon's daughter" [not important enough to have a name] whereas gordon's son is named as "Jonathan" [important enough to have a name]. 

There are no fat women, there are no female cops and there are no black women (except one).

There is a scene where literally all male cops are fighting against bain's organization, and I am just staring because for 10 minutes there is not a single female in the frame, not a single woman cop. Despite the fact that women represent more than half the population in real life.

My semester project in Political Theory was on "The Feminist Perspective of Nolan's Batman Trilogy" at Lady Shri Ram College, University of Delhi. I wouldn't have been able to write any of this if it wasn't for those excellent lectures by KM and SK. I had watched the movie in July a few days before college started. While watching the movie, I felt an uneasyness I was not able to articulate. Several months later, making this project I identified and articulated what it was. I could not have articulated any of this had I not been in LSR. As cliched as it sounds, there is a magic to LSR. I was warned by many people before joining LSR that in a "same gender environment" it's difficult to get "different perspectives". Had I been in any other college, I wouldn't have been able to see myself as a feminist. I am and will always be a feminist. And the credit goes to LSR for that.

Defending Post-Modernism

Discussion on - Postmodernism

A dialogue between me and my friends. Me and tanya are not post-modernists, we are no "ists"- we cannot stand generalisations like that.. We happen to defend it and hope that misconceptions about political theories decrease.

Modernism from the post-enlightment period has glorified rationality, scientific advancements, logic, facts, objective truths etc. Post-modernism challenges the credulity of modernism, and that's why my friend Amartya thinks that it's some primitive-loving low life theory.

Here are the extracts of our discussion : (Don't be Grammar police, I've copy pasted the conversation over from facebook) -

Sameera Shahid Rao -

Alan Sokal, a critic of postmodernism - read what he did to undermine postmodern cultural studies -

Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair

Amartya Sharan-

Haha it's epic.

Link- http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

Abhinaswar Das-

Off topic: Did any of you guys apply for the Mock Parliament at Hindu next January?

Amartya Sharan-

 I will, soon. Or has the date passed?

Abinaswar Das-

 Don't know mate. They're being a little weird.

Amartya Sharan-

It hasn't, thankfully.

Abinaswar Das-

 Dude, they're taking registration fees from Additional Directors, saying they'll be competing amongst themselves. DAFUQ?

Amartya Sharan-

Haha, htf does that even make sense? : p I don't know too much about the event man, I'll talk to some Symposium guy before I apply ..

Tanya Kak-

(Referring to the links)

imteresting. but the part about post modernity and deconstructuction as one of the most important methods they deploy, makes sense to a great extent. post modernism refuting the objective "Truth " behind subjective experiments, advocating how reality is elusive and hence transient and the linearity of things and finally using deconstruction as a means to unearth the socially constructed norms started making sense to me after today. so actually i might have a lot to say about the "sokal hoax "

Amartya Sharan-

 I challenge you to disprove that gravity is real by surviving a jump off my roof. : p

Abinaswar Das-

^Abetment of suicide, my friend.

Tanya Kak-

 amartyaa, you understand what really happens in deconstruction, it's actually about tracing the genealogy of concepts and then agreeing or disagreeing on the same.so taking this article and the laws of quantum physics into consideration, we'd actually have no objective truth because what you know is true only in the space or area you live in. hence different standpoints of the same so called "reality " and a very good example would be the debate around heliocentricity .  which can be debated on the same lines as the question you asked

Amartya Sharan-

Okay, Read this. 

Link- http://free--expression.blogspot.in/2007/10/john-searle-on-derrida.html

Tanya Kak- 

reading. also this is not to say i'm a post-modernist (firstly even post modernists would hate to be generalised like that ) but some of their methods, do make sense.

Sameera Shahid Rao-

Amartya. Fragments. Micro-narratives are so much more real in todays political context esp keeping in mind the failures of 'modernity' and 'enlightment'. Another valid point of post-modernism is its relativity as opposed to absolute truth claims like "the church knows what is right/wrong. Liberal democracy is best for countries" and so on.

Also the link says how there was no peer review of the hoax.

Deconstruction. Amartya jumping off a roof vaala bit... See. Postmodernism need not disprove anything. It shows alternatives to what we think exists. For example, suppose you were the son of jew-hating parents in nazi germany while the gestapo was winding n loading them in trucks, and killing them which was totally legit with the gov then. So would u fight against it? Would there be only one truth you'd see back in 1930s germany? Postmodernism hopefully tries (as i understand it) to explain the relativity of truth claims, morality, faith etc.

Amartya sharan-

What you're describing is not Postmodernism at all. That is simple disagreement. The characteristic idea of postmodern thought is that there is no 'real' right or wrong, no 'real' best form of government, no 'real' killing of Jews or anything of the sort. That's what I have a problem with. The basic foundations of a useful argument, facts and logic, don't matter within the postmodern discourse, because everything, including the real world, is just a freeplay of signifiers.

Also, I'm not saying that I disagree with everything dubbed as a 'post-modern' idea. I agree that all knowledge exists within language, and that language contains many essentializing social constructs, like sane/insane, or man/woman, which often reflect the power structure of the society we live in. But that doesn't mean that there is no objective truth at all. Because that would mean that there is no truth in the statement 'There is no objective truth', making it a fallacy of the type 'this statement is false'.

Sameera Shahid Rao-

 Absolutely no.

I thought u believed in friedrich nietzsche . Hes said to be the 1st post modern thinker. ( see "antichrist" "will to power").

Youve fallen in a trap. There is no definition of postmodernism per se. And disagreement. I disagree with that. Its not about disagreement at all. And they dont refute reality. They refute the white mans notion of a scientifically advanced modern world. 

Nietsche was the first post-modernist because he refused to agree with the so called objective claims of modernism, society n church.

Facts and logic dont matter? No. I think the overimportance that modernists place on stats, fact etc. Is what doesnt matter.... If modernism in the 19th ce n 20th ce cherished on these scientific advancements, the atomic bombs - everthing that cud be "controlled" and cud produce "desired effects" tht is what postmodernists refute... i may not be able to explain it as well as my pol theory teacher. But foucault is the best example. He started out by labelling, defining, characterising things- only to change n understand that reality could mean many things at different points in time. For example the debate with heteronormativity. 

Tanya Kak-

 i think amartya your blanket assumption is the fact that when they say thereis no 'real truth', they're simply undertaking the task of dismissing things around. however that's not true. they actually.say there is just not that one truth you talk about but many. and Derrida himself talked about the 'difference' if you remember. and therefore that's what they mean by real. because that 'real' is subject to constant changes.

Amartya sharan-

First of all, I don't 'believe in' any thing, ism, or one. Second, the white man's notion of scientifically advanced modern world, is one that believes in the existence of objective truth that can be discovered through science, reason, observation and logic, so to herald a 'post-modern' era is to undermine all of those things, which post-modernists often do. Third, the fact that post-modernists believe that arguments can proceed from things 'other' than logic and facts, and that those 'other' things are more important than logic and facts, is exactly what I have a problem with. The notion that we would be better off in a world without science and technological advancements IS my problem.

Sameera Shahid Rao-

 "Second, the white man's notion of scientifically advanced modern world, is one that believes in the existence of objective truth that can be discovered through science, reason, observation and logic, so to herald a 'post-modern' era is to undermine all of those things, which post-modernists often do."

 ^ That my friend is the biggest assumption - that post modernism would 'undermine' logic/scientific advancements. See the movie Ive posted on your wall.

"The notion that we would be better off in a world without science and technological advancements IS my problem." How can you say that? How? How? How? theyre not saying give up your atm machine, internet connection for a a little hut in a jungle. NO. THATS advocating a primitive way of living. Thats not what postmodernism is about.

Tanya Kak-

^seconded. COMPLETELY. also, as pointed out earlier, facts and logic is definiteely not their problem. what they try to look for ,in my opinion is, how ephemeral those reasons and facts are. constantly changing. and uf still you wanna say they're against something, then it is the centrality and the linearity of things.

Uday Vir Anand-

Balls, ladies and gentlemen. Thats what it's all about, balls.

Amartya Sharan-

 Alright, let us go back to where this started off. What is the Sokal affair about? The fact that postmodern thought also addresses the modern sciences, and argues that science cannot capture the 'real' and that we cannot reach objective truth through the sciences. They believe that primitive cosmologies are just as accurate. Postmodernism also rejects the notion that the modern world we live in is an 'improvement' on other forms of social organisation. It follows that for them, a primitive society is just as efficient at delivering social goods. And I don't agree with that.

So well, Tanya, are the facts posited by Physics and Mathematics 'ephemeral'? Will 1 and 1 someday make 6?

Suvij Sudershan-

 They already do.

"Inner peace" 

- Po ( Kung Fu Panda)

Amartya Sharan-  That's a movie .. but my postmodern friends will reply - "Reality is a kind of film".

Sameera Sahid Rao-

"They believe that primitive cosmologies are just as accurate." Not true. Postmodernism does not believe in the accuracy of primitive cosmologies. but for the sake of discussion , tell me, Primitive cosmologies like? Post modernism literature like The God of Small Things, or Rushdie's Midnight's Children or Marquez's 100 years of solitude- what primitive notions do these profess according to you? None that I would call primitive. Unless I am stupid enough to think that imagination, micro-stories, questioning reality is inferior to facts, logic and hardcore truths. "Postmodernism also rejects the notion that the modern world we live in is an 'improvement' on other forms of social organisation." - So moving along your line of argument, lets assume the notion that the modern world is indeed an improvement on other forms of social organisation- holds true. Now if no "ism" rejects it aren't you claiming it's an absolute truth? why should I consider that notion as an absolute truth? and not reject it? Please Explain. And if that movie (Kung fu Panda) or any other form of art- say poetry- is trying to depict reality as what "a" particular individual sees it, what is wrong with that? [although nobody, postmodernist or not, in their right mind would say reality is a kind of a film. they would say reality is what is perceived at that time and space by that particular individual and how he/she expresses it with art, movie, poetry etc.]

Amartya Sharan-

Modern science views things as discrete objects. For example, a forest consists of trees and other flora, animals, birds and other fauna. But for a tribal inhabiting that forest, it may for example consist of holy spirits of ancestors, he may see in it the sleeping ghosts of dead people which are not to be disturbed and so on. So for a post-modernist, these are just the 'many different truths' about the forest, and there is no absolute truth about it. And concerning improvement, well, you would here concede, that there e x i s t s an improvement of our current form of social organisation. What it consists of is what signifies. You are welcome to reject that, and that would in no way undermine modernism - after all, modernism too was a critique of traditional forms of social organisation. And in order to prove that such a form of social organization exists, you would have to rely on either logical deduction or empirical fact. In no way does that undermine modernism. A post-modernist, however, would deny that such an objectively 'improved' form of social organisation even exists. Finally, well, Derrida did claim that 'Il n'y a pas hors-texte', i.e that there is nothing outside the text, and that all of the 'oppositions' that this world-text contained are capable of deconstruction, including that between reality and fiction. Do read John Searle's monograph on him, which I have posted above.

I'm gutted that you folks are into this debate, btw : ) There's another excellent though slightly advanced piece that I suggest you read

Link- http://www.voxmentis.com/2011/01/on-nature-of-reality-dialogue-between.html

Finally, I draw from this conversation the following pointers-

A. Nobody can explain post-modernism.

B. It is the stage after modernism.

C. It is about- micro-narratives, fragments and deconstruction. The micro in society determines the macro.

D. What do we conclude? Nobody can change another person's opinions because they are just that. Opinions. Solution? How about we not give a F.