Kiran Rao’s masterful direction presents a narrative that echoes a clever Indian reimagining of Shakespeare’s “Comedy of Errors,” enriching the story with layers of complexity and depth. Two newlywed couples, seemingly from central rural India, embark on a lengthy train journey to start their new lives in different villages. Amidst the rush of changing trains at night, Deepak inadvertently brings home Pradeep’s wife, Pushpa, leaving his own spouse, Phool, stranded at a railway station, as both women were adorned in identical red sarees with veiled faces hidden by ghoonghats. The error remains undiscovered until they reach his village, where the removal of the veil reveals the mistake. This portrayal of women as commodities, sheltered under the guardianship of men, is a poignant reflection of societal norms. It resonates with the audience as an unsettling reality rather than an exaggerated portrayal.
The movie Laapataa Ladies emerged as a film amidst the remnants of pink balloons, floral decorations, and discounted high-end brands, leftover from the Women’s Day celebrations. This spectacle of celebration, purportedly aimed at empowering women, revolves around encouraging them to indulge in expensive luxuries at discounted rates, organizing talks that glorify them as superwomen capable of excelling in both unpaid and paid work, and offering them flowers and chocolates instead of tangible advancements such as pay raises, promotions, better opportunities and working conditions.
In this era where the essence of women’s empowerment has been shrewdly detached from the broader idea of social justice, hollowed out by capitalism, relegated to urban settings, and commodified into a marketing tool embodied by a select few women CEOs or the conspicuous consumption of luxury goods like iPhones, branded clothes, and high heels, the concept of empowering women has become severely restricted. Laapataa Ladies serves as a poignant wake-up call that the current notion of women empowerment ultimately serves only a privileged few while alienating and invisiblising the majority. The stark reality remains that more than two-thirds of the Indian population still lives in villages and as per the figures of the Annual Periodic Labour Force Survey, 2021-2022, 62.9% of the female labour force is engaged in agriculture and not in corporates! As our perspectives on women’s lives grow narrower, their diverse realities are getting increasingly overlooked and marginalized.
One wittingly unspoken yet profoundly influential character of the movie was the “veil” (ghoonghat), which serves as a tool of patriarchal control and erasure of women’s identities. Concealing a woman’s face goes beyond mere physical obscurity; it also diminishes her socio-political presence. The veil not only restricts their physical vision but also constrains their intellectual capacity, limiting the breadth of their thoughts. When a woman’s sight is confined to the shoes of men, it curtails her mobility, restricts her choices, and confines her agency within narrow parameters. By relegating women to the private sphere and denying them visibility in public spaces, the veil perpetuates their dependence on and subservience to men.
The movie adeptly elucidated the political economy of rural life, highlighting the traditional male breadwinner-female homemaker family structure as its fundamental unit. This portrayal starkly exposed the gendered power dynamics entrenched within households, characterized by a strict division of labour: women were relegated to domestic chores in the kitchen while men toiled in the fields. Such delineation symbolized the rigid public-private divide that permeates our societies.
Within this framework, men assumed sole decision-making authority as the breadwinners, relegating women to a position of alienation and disempowerment. Even in the seemingly mundane act of cooking, women hesitated to assert their preferences, reflecting a deeply ingrained sense of inferiority and subordination. Moreover, women refrained from uttering their husbands’ names, further underscoring their marginalization and lack of agency within marital relationships.
Another bitter yet spitefully real aspect depicted in the movie was the commodification of marriage, with unions often resembling business transactions. The groom’s perceived worth was often determined by the dowry (Daheej) he received, perpetuating the notion of women as objects of exchange. For women, marriage represented the pinnacle of societal validation, with the entire honour (izzat) of their families hinging on this institution. This portrayal sheds light on the systemic inequalities and patriarchal norms that continue to shape rural life, reinforcing the need for comprehensive social change and gender equity.
More often than not, women find themselves at the intersection of patriarchal norms and personal aspirations, compelled to navigate a precarious balance between preserving family honour and pursuing their ambitions. The movie poignantly depicts the sombre reality of marriages in our society, exemplified by the heart-wrenching scene where Pushpa’s mother nearly coerces her into marrying a man accused of harming his previous wife, despite Pushpa’s desire to pursue education in organic farming. Pushpa’s courageous willingness to take risks, even at the peril of her safety, underscores the limitations of capitalist notions of women’s empowerment.
The film astutely captures the coexistence of patriarchal traditions deeply ingrained in our culture, which often render women marginalized and devoid of agency, alongside constitutional laws that ostensibly guarantee women the fundamental right to live with dignity and autonomy. This paradox is brutally encapsulated in a scene where Pankaj assaults his wife Jaya in a police station, and when the inspector intervenes, he asks what can stop him from hitting his wife. The inspector firmly responds with a single word — “Law.”
Through such eloquent moments, the movie sheds light on the stark disparity between legal protections and the lived realities for women, highlighting the ongoing struggle for gender equality and justice within the complex interplay of societal norms and legal frameworks.Top of Form The crux and moral of the story lie in how both lost women not only navigate their way out of their predicaments but also discover their true selves in the process. One woman realizes that there exists a world beyond the confines of domesticity, where she can find fulfilment and purpose beyond the kitchen. The other woman discovers the depth of her passion for education and the pursuit of her dreams, demonstrating her willingness to take risks and defy societal expectations to carve out a path for herself.
Their journeys serve as powerful reminders of the resilience and strength inherent in women, despite the challenges and obstacles they may face. Through their experiences, they reclaim their agency and assert their right to lead lives of autonomy and fulfilment. Ultimately, the story celebrates the transformative power of self-discovery and the pursuit of one’s dreams, inspiring viewers to embrace their unique journeys of growth and empowerment.
***
Anjali Chauhan is a doctoral researcher at the Department of Political Science, University of Delhi.