The box office verdict on Rachel Dwyer's Bollywood book
It zooms in on Shobha De, Stardust magazine and the films of Yash Chopra; the subtitleproclaims "Sex and romance in modern India". But that's where theexcitement stops in Rachel Dwyer's All You Want is Money, All You Need is Love, whichis actually an intensely academic sociocultural exploration of the relationship betweenthe supposedly 'new' middle class and the 'new' Bollywood blockbuster.
Dwyer, who teaches courses on Indian cinema, literature and the Gujarati language atLondon's School of Oriental and African Studies, lived for a while among what shecalls the "modern metropolitan Indian bourgeoisie" in Bombay before writing thisbook. She spent much of that time identifying the "new middle classes" socentral to her thesis.
As the title - a quote from the cinema world - indicates, the book seeks to connect theconcepts of love and money, but with scattered success. The often chatty tone is at oddswith the patchy but academic underpinnings. What Dwyer claims is the "first study todiscuss the culture of the new middle class" identifies three distinct components ofBombay's middle classes: the old middle classes, or the professional or serviceelite; the lower middle classes, or the petit bourgeoisie and the 'new' middleclasses. This last, Dwyer says helpfully, is located at the "upper end" of theeconomic spectrum.
Members of the 'new' middle classes have high patterns of consumption, livein the western suburbs and speak English. Admitting that some would prefer to classifythem more simply as the nouveau riche or as a separate elite, Dwyer still insists thatthey constitute a middle class because they contest the "middle ground, the centre ofIndian life".
Representatives tend to be Hindu nationalists, marry along caste lines and pay homageto feudal values of honour and status while challenging concepts of individuality. Dwyeralso describes a battle between the old and the new middle classes - a microcosm of the"tussle for hegemony of India's national culture".
And where does Bombay's cinema come into all of this? The '90s, Dwyer says,produced a new cinematic genre that showcases the cultural aspirations of the new middleclasses via the medium of the high-budget romantic films, which have been the superhits ofthe last decade.
These films, she says, "depict the nature of sex, romance and the family in thecontext of the super-rich and set the pace for India's upwardly mobile". ThoughDwyer's "new middle class" is not numerically huge, she sees it as adriving force behind the commercial cinema market that effectively dictates the content oftoday's films.
She suggests that the new films engage in a dialogue with a certain, select segment ofthe audience, leaving the rest (read most) of the audience to play the spectator'srole.
The book argues that the cinemagoer used to be the lower-class urban male, but thatfilms are now being produced for the new, affluent middle class.
They think nothing of paying Rs 100 for a ticket; their tastes dictate the overwhelmingshift towards romance - an upper class indulgence, the author reminds us. She identifiesthe 1988 Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak as the film that opened the floodgates for today'sfamily saga-romances, including Hum Aapke Hain Kaun and Kaho Na Pyaar Hai.The world ofthe new middle class - consumerist, but socially and religiously conservative - is, sheargues, the world of today's films.
But her entire argument rests on the reader's acceptance of the somewhat dubiousconcept of Bombay's new middle class. While Amitabh Bachchan spoke with generousadmiration of Dwyer's "scientific precision" at the book reading inLondon's Chor Bizarre restaurant, it is unlikely that social scientists will agreethat her definition of Bombay's "new middle class" is waterproof or indeednecessary.
Her approach is academic, which in this case translates into a work that is not eithereasily understood or meant to be. Instead of becoming a sharer in Dwyer's thoughtprocesses, the reader often ends up merely being a witness to the author'spre-processed thinking; one reads the book almost in expectation of having to sit throughan examination at the end.
As case studies, Yash Chopra's films, Stardust and Shobha De mix uneasily withDwyer's unconvincing arguments. Little if anything is gained by rechristening oneman's nouveau riche as another's new middle class. The suggestion that this"new" class dictates the contents of contemporary cinema is hardly revolutionary- the idea that cinema is reflecting society is either a terribly obvious argument, or ithides a mystifyingly obscure thesis. If the contents are disappointing, so is thesubtitle. While the "romance" in the title is dealt with in academic fashion,sex never makes an appearance. Don't judge this book by its cover - the subtitle atleast is a clear case of false advertising!