1-19-16 Viewing Bollywood

In Shri 420, the post-colonial world that Raj finds himself in a place where no longer does personal integrity and honesty suffice for leading a profitable or comfortable life. As a result of India being politically and economically vacated by their colonial suppressors, India is challenged by the world's influences and to support itself after losing a large fraction of its structural integrity at the loss of Great Britain's previous hold. The problem that they're left with is the struggle between whether or not to accept Western values and economics. Maya acts as the catalyst to show the corruption of Westernizing from her garb to her manipulation of Raj and desire for money.

The film depicts a man who works his entrepreneurial spirit in Bombay where money is all that matters. An entrepreneurial spirit however is merely a mirror of a 420, a liar or cheat. Raj talks with some of his mates outside of Mr Dharmanand where his mate expresses his disappointment with honest work because it is no longer enough. Raj is a hyper optimist that believes in honesty and finding work but despite his degree, he still struggles. With influence from Maya, Raj essentially begins operating as a wolf of wall street in a sense, selling bogus bonds to people for pure profit.

The movie shows how the nation is in somewhat of turmoil as this Western culture and set of values bleeds into the more traditional lifestyle of people living in India. The very reason for Raj leaving the countryside to Bombay is also a reflection of the times changing in that urbanization and cities have become the space for profit and success. Just as the rural and suburban forms of profit become strained, so do the feelings of National identity as more traditional values, clothing, etc are slowly lost or merged with global influences – namely that of the West.

Interesting that Seth Dharmanand, the epitome of Western profiteering drives a vehicle with a license plate that reads 840 which is two times that of 420, the number that signifies a liar and a cheat, suggesting that in order to achieve his level of opulence, one must be two times as conniving.

At the end it would seem as though Raj realizes the corruption and problem that comes with acting in a purely profiteering manner such as Western economics permits and suggests is the ideal regardless of moral complications. As Raj realizes what he has become, he recants it entirely only to return to Vidya, what it means to be a hard-worker, honest, and good person.

As for the article by Sahai, he chronicles the similarities between Raj Kapoor and Charlie Chaplin in their scope of film and also the achievements they made in their respective circles. Sahai makes sure not to claim Chaplin is better or worse than Kapoor but refers to the the individual merits of both. The idea is that Kapoor made strong motions to "Indianize" Chaplin as Sahai says in his paper. This representation of Indian socio-economic and cultural struggles was imported into Kapoor's tramp characters to create a more relatable protagonist for Indian film than the Chaplin tramp character. In doing so, Kapoor is able to comment on the ever increasing influence of the Western world on Indian society at large while adopting similar elements from the critically acclaimed Charlie Chaplin, creating a Raj Kapoor special character that can stand alone and act as not just the Indian version of Chaplin's tramp but as Raj Kapoor's tramp.