Pakeezah
is a rather dramatic film that tells a story about a young woman born
into the life of a courtesan from a young age despite being the
daughter of a wealthy nobleman, Shabbudin, and a courtesan, Nargis
whose relationship was forsaken by Shabbudin's father thus compelling
Nargis to slowly kill herself alone in a graveyard. The rest of the
story follows the life of their daughter, now young woman, Sahibjan
and her life within the kotha or brothel. Sahibjan represents an
archetypal role to that of the courtesan in distress that can soon
escape the confines of the kotha in which she lives and works at the
aid of Salim and also his and technically her familial ties to
Shabbudin. Despite what Veena
Talwar Oldenburg
says
in her essay “Lifestyle as Resistance: The Case of the Courtesans
of Lucknow.” the reputable courtesans being the “influential
female elite” they were, they were still essentially property
rather than employees as the birdcage given to Sahibjan symbolizes
and also what the scene where Sahibjan is returned to the palace
after crashing on the houseboat insinuates as her owners go searching
for her not necessarily out of fear for her safety but fear for their
loss in a trained and sought after financial prospect.
These
courtesans are largely still trapped under the thumb of the
patriarchy but
the very existence of the kotha run solely
by women
and the presumable amount of the wealth they sustain in this field of
work shows the power that these women have that combats the
traditional views of women as being subservient That
said, examples like these are repeatedly contested or qualified by
patriarchal figures, showing how simplistic and irreverent the men
are towards women in the film.
The
element of these women's
lives that speaks the loudest to the impinging growth of female
presence to
become a steadfast act against the waves of a normative patriarchal
society is that these women in the koth have reached a level of
notoriety and status as their own business owners, exercising their
entrepreneurial spirits. The problem with this victory is that it can
only be made by objectifying women further and also by perpetuating
roles of dominance between men and women as men are the ones keeping
these women in business because they are selling themselves. This is
problematic for feminist
struggles toward independence and equality to men as they are still
set back in a place with limited power. In the very beginning of the
film, Shabbudin's father denounces Nargis, a courtesan of high
caliber simply because of her job title. Her death is then a literal
representation of the patriarchy's squelching of this feminine
transgressivity in society.
Oldenburg
states
that these women “celebrate
womanhood in the privacy of their apartments by resisting and
inverting the rules of gender of the larger society of which they are
part” and
this is a genuine resistance to patriarchal values but this
traditional patriarchy demands such control over women that the only
way in which women can express themselves as they see fit and not as
the normative societal values mandate is to do so within their own
microcosm of women.
Again,
within this microcosm Oldenburg suggests in her essay, “Lifestyle
as Resistance: The Case of the Courtesans of Lucknow,”
“female
sexuality has the chance of being more fairly and fearlessly
constructed by women.”
A
strong critique against the traditional patriarchy is also the
character Salim as well and the existence of color symbolism. Salim
is seen numerous times in mostly colorful clothing or the black that
we seem him initially in the train car. Conversely, the vast
majority of male oppressors or people that are seen shouting “whore”
to Sahibjan towards the end of the movie, wear white clothes to
symbolize their “purity” ironically. The only time that Salim is
seen wearing all or mostly white clothing is when he is with Sahibjan
and simultaneously Sahibjan is then also seen wearing white rather
than her usual colorful and embroidered garb. This is a critique
against men as they traditionally view themselves as being pure and
ultimately the ideal sex, whereas the male protagonist Salim, one of
the few men with any redeeming qualities, wears these many colors
from time to time and courts Sahibjan. His existence in this regard
is a critique of traditional patriarchy.
The
last two scenes that show this critique begins where Salim brings
Sahibjan atop
a large plateau to get married and where Sahibjan can run away from
her complicated yet oppressive life within the koth to be viewed as
an object for sexual entertainment. Sahibjan panics and runs away
from the marriage back to the koth where she at first expresses her
acceptance of her position but performs one last miraculous dance to
purify herself because she knows that Salim can't do that for her
just through marriage. She must save herself in this way. Wearing all
white, Sahibjan dances over broken glass, her feet bleeding. This
scene shows, as professor Ghosh mentions in her blogpost, that “her
feet are cleansed if you will by her own blood that replaces the
alta.”
By
the end of the film, we're then left with a woman free from this
objectifying and oppressive profession, again wearing white, standing
along side a pillar looking outward on her old home with the narrator
referring to her, saying “only then comes the one, truly worthy of
praise” one last testament against the looming influence of
patriarchy as we hear that Sahibjan, a woman, is the only one worthy
of any praise.
Nathan, I think that you're conflating the film courtesan with the historical figure in your post. Oldenburg is discussing the power and autonomy of the historical courtesan which is quite at odds with how the film portays the courtesan figure. The film does subscribe to the patriarchal ideology in representing Sahibjaan as under the control of her aunt or her male patrons. Come to think of it, will she be free after marriage to Salim?
ReplyDeleteNathan, I think that you're conflating the film courtesan with the historical figure in your post. Oldenburg is discussing the power and autonomy of the historical courtesan which is quite at odds with how the film portays the courtesan figure. The film does subscribe to the patriarchal ideology in representing Sahibjaan as under the control of her aunt or her male patrons. Come to think of it, will she be free after marriage to Salim?
ReplyDelete