How soap operas influence society

A Hindi soap airing on Prime Time Indian network needs to cater to some elements of the lowest common denominator and pander to certain unwritten rubrics and precepts to keep afloat in the viciously competitive channel and timeslot wars. One must understand that the overwhelming majority of viewers in India do not come from priviledged, insulated higher strata of Indian society who have the benefit of liberal education, refined background and benign circumstances to analyze and dissect TV shows rationally and leisurely. For most of the people who post on this forum the Saksenas represent the Familiar and thus representative of the hackneyed principles and over-done morality that have been done to death, starting from our grade 2 moral studies primer book to the moralistic veneer that encompasses modern, middle-class Indian society. The Thakurs, on the other hand, represent that face of the society which clamors rancorously from the middle pages of the English daily newspaper and forms the fodder of self-important, pompously inflated discussion forums in posh, air-conditioned auditoriums. This section of the Indian society, the face of atrocity, corruption and overall social malignancy, is so far out of ken for the city-bound, educated India populace that the true nature and depth of this evil is quite hard for most us to fathom, much less to understand fully.

A Hindi soap, at the end of the day, remains a mode of entertainment. It cannot be a social plaque for justice for societal evils and inequities. The inherent conflict of a daily entertainment portal versus a deep-rooted, effective fight for moral and social upliftment of the larger fraction of 1 billion people is so self-evident that it does not even merit a serious debate. However, to deride any and every attempts by the CVs (who in the face of untenable odds and conflicting demands are doing an exemplary job) to show solutions for the problems infesting rural India as childish and unrealistic, and hence, worthy to be ridiculed and thrashed to the point of making out the chief protagonist as a block-headed biddy, is sad. It takes centuries to change the basic fabric of a society, especially one which is buried under illiteracy and superstitions and every kind of social malignancy that you can imagine. But, after all this, if even a small handful of rural woman finds that protesting against chauvinistic mores and sinful practices is not such an utopian idea and merits some consideration, it is a laudable attempt, IMO

We had a domestic servant while growing up who had bonded away his next generations to work for the village head. When my dad tried to tell him that that it is illegal and he should try to rectify his situation by any means, the worker bent his head and said that " Wu hamri mai-baap hai. Hamara raksha karta hai, hamara paarivar ko do waqt ki roti deta de..uske khilaaf kaise jaye. PAAP LAGEGA". So, what appears as so blatantly and purportedly evil and villainous to us may not even merit the same consideration from the people who actually face this part of the society. For them, even this delineation of good and evil in a daily soap is an exercise that is worthy to be praised. Ultimately, if it comes down to do that, the social message of Pratigya is for that section our society for whom even the simple concepts of individual rights and legal protection and judicial recourse are new and untested. Just like the ads for Polio vaccinations ' some things do need to be spelt out.

Originally posted by: Relda

We had a domestic servant while growing up who had bonded away his next generations to work for the village head. When my dad tried to tell him that that it is illegal and he should try to rectify his situation by any means, the worker bent his head and said that " Wu hamri mai-baap hai. Hamara raksha karta hai, hamara paarivar ko do waqt ki roti deta de..uske khilaaf kaise jaye. PAAP LAGEGA". So, what appears as so blatantly and purportedly evil and villainous to us may not even merit the same consideration from the people who actually face this part of the society. For them, even this delineation of good and evil in a daily soap is an exercise that is worthy to be praised. Ultimately, if it comes down to do that, the social message of Pratigya is for that section our society for whom even the simple concepts of individual rights and legal protection and judicial recourse are new and untested. Just like the ads for Polio vaccinations ' some things do need to be spelt out.

Originally posted by: Relda

A Hindi soap airing on Prime Time Indian network needs to cater to some elements of the lowest common denominator and pander to certain unwritten rubrics and precepts to keep afloat in the viciously competitive channel and timeslot wars. One must understand that the overwhelming majority of viewers in India do not come from priviledged, insulated higher strata of Indian society who have the benefit of liberal education, refined background and benign circumstances to analyze and dissect TV shows rationally and leisurely. For most of the people who post on this forum the Saksenas represent the Familiar and thus representative of the hackneyed principles and over-done morality that have been done to death, starting from our grade 2 moral studies primer book to the moralistic veneer that encompasses modern, middle-class Indian society. The Thakurs, on the other hand, represent that face of the society which clamors rancorously from the middle pages of the English daily newspaper and forms the fodder of self-important, pompously inflated discussion forums in posh, air-conditioned auditoriums. This section of the Indian society, the face of atrocity, corruption and overall social malignancy, is so far out of ken for the city-bound, educated India populace that the true nature and depth of this evil is quite hard for most us to fathom, much less to understand fully.

A Hindi soap, at the end of the day, remains a mode of entertainment. It cannot be a social plaque for justice for societal evils and inequities. The inherent conflict of a daily entertainment portal versus a deep-rooted, effective fight for moral and social upliftment of the larger fraction of 1 billion people is so self-evident that it does not even merit a serious debate. However, to deride any and every attempts by the CVs (who in the face of untenable odds and conflicting demands are doing an exemplary job) to show solutions for the problems infesting rural India as childish and unrealistic, and hence, worthy to be ridiculed and thrashed to the point of making out the chief protagonist as a block-headed biddy, is sad. It takes centuries to change the basic fabric of a society, especially one which is buried under illiteracy and superstitions and every kind of social malignancy that you can imagine. But, after all this, if even a small handful of rural woman finds that protesting against chauvinistic mores and sinful practices is not such an utopian idea and merits some consideration, it is a laudable attempt, IMO

We had a domestic servant while growing up who had bonded away his next generations to work for the village head. When my dad tried to tell him that that it is illegal and he should try to rectify his situation by any means, the worker bent his head and said that " Wu hamri mai-baap hai. Hamara raksha karta hai, hamara paarivar ko do waqt ki roti deta de..uske khilaaf kaise jaye. PAAP LAGEGA". So, what appears as so blatantly and purportedly evil and villainous to us may not even merit the same consideration from the people who actually face this part of the society. For them, even this delineation of good and evil in a daily soap is an exercise that is worthy to be praised. Ultimately, if it comes down to do that, the social message of Pratigya is for that section our society for whom even the simple concepts of individual rights and legal protection and judicial recourse are new and untested. Just like the ads for Polio vaccinations ' some things do need to be spelt out.

Originally posted by: PRAGMATIC

Thanks Bubble nice post 👍🏼, I take this importunity to thank Pearl Grey in her efforts for attempting to show a difficult concept for the small screen audience. Continued efforts through soap opera does impact thinking and mind set no matter how small but it does. Qtra Qtra samandar banta hai. There is an evident change seen here too.😃

Bubble! Such a great post. And thanks a lot for the link to the Slate piece. Most edifying and very heartening!

Relda – so powerfully written.

TV is a very powerful medium, especially so in societies where it forms the only window of exposure to alternate thought and lifestyle. Since these are the societies that it most powerfully influences, TV programming has also gravitated to these sections in order to find their setting and background.

Having set themselves in these societies the drama's want to hold a mirror to those societies. This serves a dual purpose of entertainment (the scope for inherent drama in those cultures is limitless) and the purpose of effecting a change in the mindset with regards to those areas of that social structure that desperately need to change.

So while we the urban world audiences can find Krishna's Bhasha tremendously exciting and look forward to his idiomatic exchanges with his father, we are intended to simultaneously rejecting the father's ethics and the son's unquestioning belief in his parenting. The problem of course arises when we want one thing and refuse the other, simply because it has no immediate relevance to our lives. But like you rightly said Relda that while the Bhasha which so fascinates us might have served as a hook to bring in the core audiences by helping them identify with the set-up, what really sustains them is their desperate interest to understand alternate though systems through the narrative. To them Amma and Kesar and Shakti are dismally familiar, but the courage of Pratigya and the love and supportiveness of Krishna pathetically new. It is not whether Pratigya comes up with a fool-proof, one-fits-all solution for the plight of millions, but the very idea that a woman can voice her opinion in such a society that is revolutionary here. In is her character and not her successes that is of most significance. The fact that she does not feel the need for constant fear itself must plant seeds of liberation in minds that have been told exactly for which offenses they must learn to expect beatings and punishments.

For a while back then I lamented that television programming did not cater to the modern urban woman in India. I found Saas-bahu sagas tedious because I did not really identify with the situations within them. Coming from that mindset, however, when I began to watch MKAP because I could not resist the quality of the form and content of the show, I came fully prepared for a show where I was only the fringe audience.