Assignment paper no 205
“New Historicism in Indian Cinema: A Cultural Studies Analysis of Ram-Leela, Padmaavat, and Veer”
Personal Information :
Name : Mita Jambucha
Batch : M.A. Sem 3 ( 2024 - 2026 )
Enrollment Number : 5108240015
E-mail Address : jambucha66919@gmail.com
Roll Number : 16
Assignment Details :
Topic :- “New Historicism in Indian Cinema: A Cultural Studies Analysis of Ram-Leela, Padmaavat, and Veer”
Paper code:- 22410 A
Paper - 205 : Cultural studies
Submitted to:- Smt. Sujata Binoy Gardi, Department of English, MKBU, Bhavnagar
Introduction
Indian cinema, especially Bollywood, frequently returns to historical narratives, epics, myths, and legends as a way to imagine the nation, reconstruct cultural memory, and negotiate identity. Yet these portrayals are rarely objective or historically accurate; they are shaped by contemporary politics, popular ideology, commercial demands, and dominant cultural discourses. This is precisely where New Historicism becomes a powerful theoretical lens. Emerging in the 1980s with scholars such as Stephen Greenblatt, New Historicism insists that historical texts—including films—are cultural constructs shaped by the power relations, anxieties, ideologies, and social debates of the time in which they are produced. Thus, the historian or filmmaker is not a neutral observer but an active participant in “re-writing” history.
In the Indian context, where cinema remains one of the strongest cultural forces, films like Goliyon Ki Raasleela: Ram-Leela (2013), Padmaavat (2018), and Veer (2010) provide rich material for a New Historicist analysis. These films, though rooted in mythic or historical frameworks, reflect contemporary issues such as nationalism, caste, communal tensions, gender politics, and the search for cultural authenticity in a globalized world. Through a Cultural Studies lens, these films become sites where “history” is mediated, dramatized, contested, and commodified.
This assignment examines how New Historicism operates in these three films and how Indian cinema reimagines history to serve present-day cultural and ideological functions.
New Historicism: Theoretical Background
New Historicism challenges traditional historiography by rejecting the idea that history is fixed, objective, or singular. Instead, it proposes:
1. History as a Text
History is not an objective truth but a narrative constructed through selective representation.
2. Power Circulation
Michel Foucault influences New Historicism with the claim that power is everywhere—circulating through discourses, institutions, cultural spaces, and art forms.
3. Literature (and Film) as Cultural Product
No film or text exists outside its socio-political context. Every narrative is influenced by contemporary ideologies.
4. Subversion and Containment
Texts often resist dominant power structures while simultaneously reinforcing them.
5. Historicity of the Present
Interpretations of the past reveal more about the present than about the actual historical period.
Bollywood’s “historical” films fit perfectly into these frameworks. They do not reconstruct factual history; rather, they perform history as a cultural spectacle that speaks to contemporary India.
Cultural Studies and Indian Cinema
Cultural Studies, as developed by scholars like Stuart Hall, Raymond Williams, and the Birmingham School, focuses on how culture is produced, experienced, negotiated, and contested. Indian cinema is a major cultural industry, shaping:
collective memory and identity
popular nationalism
gender norms
caste and community narratives
myths of heroism and sacrifice
The combination of New Historicism and Cultural Studies helps us understand how historical films in Bollywood are not simply stories about the past, but stories about how modern India sees itself.
Film 1: Goliyon Ki Raasleela: Ram-Leela (2013)
(Directed by Sanjay Leela Bhansali)
Although Ram-Leela is ostensibly inspired by Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, it is deeply rooted in Gujarati cultural imagery, folk traditions, and communal tensions. Its New Historicist reading reveals several dynamics.
1. History as Performance
The film constructs a fictional Gujarati setting filled with hyper-aestheticized costumes, colours, and rituals. While it does not claim historical accuracy, it reimagines Gujarat through the lens of contemporary cultural politics, particularly:
the commodification of Gujarati culture
the rise of Gujarati pride in the post-2000s
the political narrative of regional identity
This is not “old Gujarat” but Bollywood’s Gujarat, shaped by modern tourism campaigns and cultural branding.
2. Power Relations and Community Violence
The film centers on warring clans, echoing real-life communal conflicts in Gujarat. Though not explicitly referencing the 2002 riots, the narrative framework—two groups locked in generational hatred—acts as an allegory for Hindu-Muslim or caste-based violence.
In New Historicist terms, the film reveals the historicity of the present: the contemporary climate of polarization influences the cinematic portrayal of violence.
3. Gender, Sexuality, and Agency
Leela is assertive, bold, and sexually expressive. Her portrayal aligns with contemporary feminist discourses about female desire in the Indian middle class. Yet, the narrative ultimately contains her agency through death, fulfilling the “subversion and containment” concept of New Historicism.
4. Bollywood’s Cultural Commerce
The film transforms folk dances, rituals, and attire into high-production spectacle. Culture becomes a consumable visual commodity—a central concern in Cultural Studies.
Thus, Ram-Leela is not just a love story but a reflection of contemporary India’s negotiations with identity, tradition, and spectacle.
Film 2: Padmaavat (2018)
(Directed by Sanjay Leela Bhansali)
Padmaavat is perhaps the most controversial historical film in recent Indian cinema. The protests surrounding its release, especially from the Karni Sena, reveal how contested the representation of history has become in the public sphere.
1. History vs. Myth
The story is based on Malik Muhammad Jayasi’s 16th-century poem, Padmavat, which is allegorical rather than historical. Yet the film markets itself as a “Rajput historical epic.” This blurred boundary aligns with New Historicism’s rejection of strict factuality.
The film’s “history” serves contemporary political narratives:
glorification of Rajput pride
construction of honour-based masculinity
vilification of the Muslim “Other”
2. Power and Communal Discourse
Alauddin Khilji is depicted as barbaric, hypersexual, violent, and monstrous—a visual embodiment of Orientalist stereotypes. Meanwhile, Rajput characters are framed as noble, disciplined, and honourable.
This dualism mirrors present-day communal tensions and the rise of majoritarian nationalism in India. The film becomes a tool of cultural memory shaping, reinforcing present political identities.
3. Female Honour and Sati
Padmavati’s suicide (jauhar) is portrayed as a noble act, aesthetically glorified with grand visuals and heroic music. New Historicism helps us see this not as representation of medieval customs but as a response to modern debates:
ongoing controversies over women’s autonomy
the politics of honour killings
patriarchal constructions of purity
Bhansali’s film both subverts (by giving Padmavati intelligence and agency) and contains (by reaffirming the patriarchal logic of honour) female power.
4. Subversion and Containment
While the film appears to critique toxic masculinity, it ultimately reinforces caste-based honour codes. This duality exemplifies New Historicism’s key idea that texts resist and reinforce power simultaneously.
5. Cinema as Cultural Weapon
The protests against the film before its release show that history in India is not merely academic—it is a political weapon. The film’s fictional narrative was perceived as a threat to “community honour,” demonstrating the power of cinema in shaping collective identity.
Film 3: Veer (2010)
(Directed by Anil Sharma, starring Salman Khan)
Veer is a dramatic reimagining of British India, blending mythic warrior narratives with colonial-era politics. Though not historically accurate, it reveals significant aspects of cultural nationalism.
1. Hyper-Nationalist Rewriting of History
The story of the Pindari warriors is transformed into a grand heroic struggle against British imperialism. Salman Khan’s character becomes a nationalist icon, embodying:
muscular nationalism
anti-colonial defiance
mythic Hindu warrior identity
This portrayal reflects modern India's desire for heroic nationalist icons, especially in the context of rising patriotic cinema.
2. History as a Construct
The film freely blends fact, fiction, myth, and fantasy, illustrating the New Historicist belief that history is narrative rather than truth.
Its narrative echoes contemporary patriotic films like Lagaan, The Legend of Bhagat Singh, and more recently, RRR. The history it presents is shaped by modern political needs.
3. Representation of the British
British characters are caricatured, portrayed as arrogant, greedy, and cruel. This reflects:
postcolonial resentment
nationalist myth-making
the desire for moral closure
The film constructs a simplified binary of good Indians vs. evil British, aligning with broadly nationalist popular cinema.
4. Gender and Cultural Honour
Female characters exist mainly to support the hero’s nationalist mission. Their representation echoes patriarchal nationalist narratives—a concept widely discussed in Cultural Studies and New Historicism.
Comparative Cultural Studies Analysis
When read together, Ram-Leela, Padmaavat, and Veer reveal common patterns:
1. Selective Historical Representation
Each film chooses specific aspects of history or culture to emphasize while ignoring others. This selective narration serves present ideological purposes:
regional pride (Ram-Leela)
Rajput honour and anti-Muslim sentiment (Padmaavat)
nationalist heroism (Veer)
2. Spectacle as Cultural Capital
Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s films turn history into visual spectacle—lavish sets, extravagant costumes, choreographed rituals. Culture becomes entertainment, reinforcing Cultural Studies arguments about the commodification of heritage.
3. Gendered Narratives
All three films frame women within patriarchal structures:
Leela’s unfulfilled agency
Padmavati’s sacrifice
Princess Yashodhara’s symbolic function in Veer
Yet each film also attempts partial subversion, echoing the New Historicist dialectic of resistance and containment.
4. Myth and Nation-Building
Bollywood blends myth with history to create nationalistic narratives. These films participate in constructing modern Indian identity:
Rajput identity politics
nationalist memory of colonialism
regional pride
communal anxieties
patriarchal honour codes
5. The Present Shapes the Past
New Historicism would argue that:
Padmaavat reflects India’s communal politics of the 2010s.
Ram-Leela mirrors Gujarat’s cultural resurgence and violence.
Veer aligns with rising nationalist cinema under globalization.
Thus, the films are commentary on contemporary India, not historical India.
Conclusion
New Historicism provides a powerful framework for analyzing Indian cinema, especially films that claim historical or mythic authority. Ram-Leela, Padmaavat, and Veer do not simply retell stories of the past—they reinterpret the past through the lens of modern cultural anxieties, political ideologies, and commercial demands. Through this framework, we understand that Bollywood’s “history” is always a negotiation: between myth and reality, spectacle and ideology, resistance and containment, past and present.
Cultural Studies further reveals how these films shape identity, gender politics, nationalism, and cultural memory. Whether through Bhansali’s aestheticization of history or Salman Khan’s nationalist heroism, these films demonstrate that Indian cinema is a crucial site for the performance of history. Ultimately, these films tell us less about medieval or colonial India and more about the socio-political climate of contemporary India.
References
Bhansali, Sanjay Leela, director. Goliyon Ki Raasleela: Ram-Leela. Eros International, 2013.
—. Padmaavat. Viacom18 Motion Pictures, 2018.
Sharma, Anil, director. Veer. Eros International, 2010.
Fish, Stanley. Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Harvard UP, 1980.
Foucault, Michel. The Archaeology of Knowledge. Routledge, 1972.
Greenblatt, Stephen. Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare. University of Chicago Press, 1980.
Hall, Stuart. Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. SAGE, 1997.
