Gandhiism vs. Gandhigiri: the Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma

This paper, which contrasts Rajkumar Hirani’s Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006) with Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi (1982), is as much a celebration of Bollywood as of Gandhi. It is to the former that the credit for most effectively resurrecting the Mahatma should go, certainly much more so than to Gandhia...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Makarand R. Paranjape
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN ES
Publicado:	Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 2014
Materias:	Gandhi goes to the movies; Hollywood/Bollywood; Rajkumar Hirani; Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006); Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi (1982) General Works A
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/a2b13bf7cb1543f99647efe046a09cbe
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:a2b13bf7cb1543f99647efe046a09cbe
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:a2b13bf7cb1543f99647efe046a09cbe2021-12-02T06:57:26ZGandhiism vs. Gandhigiri: the Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma2339-85232339-8523https://doaj.org/article/a2b13bf7cb1543f99647efe046a09cbe2014-04-01T00:00:00Zhttp://revistes.uab.cat/indialogs/article/view/v1-paranjape/pdfhttps://doaj.org/toc/2339-8523https://doaj.org/toc/2339-8523This paper, which contrasts Rajkumar Hirani’s Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006) with Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi (1982), is as much a celebration of Bollywood as of Gandhi. It is to the former that the credit for most effectively resurrecting the Mahatma should go, certainly much more so than to Gandhians or academics. For Bollywood literally revives the spirit of Gandhi by showing how irresistibly he continues to haunt India today. Not just in giving us Gandhigiri—a totally new way of doing Gandhi in the world—but in its perceptive representation of the threat that modernity poses to Gandhian thought is Lage Raho Munna Bhai remarkable. What is more, it also draws out the distinction between Gandhi as hallucination and the real afterlife of the Mahatma. The film’s enormous popularity at the box office—it grossed close to a billion rupees—is not just an index of its commercial success, but also proof of the responsive chord it struck in Indian audiences. But it is not just the genius and inventiveness of Bollywood cinema that is demonstrated in the film as much as the persistence and potency of Gandhi’s own ideas, which have the capacity to adapt themselves to unusual circumstances and times. Both Richard Attenborough’s Oscar-winning epic, and Rajkumar Hirani’s Lage Raho Munna Bhai show that Gandhi remains as media-savvy after his death as he was during his life.Makarand R. ParanjapeUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaarticleGandhi goes to the movies; Hollywood/Bollywood; Rajkumar Hirani; Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006); Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi (1982)General WorksAENESIndialogs: Spanish Journal of India Studies, Vol 1, Pp 103-122 (2014)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN ES
topic	Gandhi goes to the movies; Hollywood/Bollywood; Rajkumar Hirani; Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006); Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi (1982) General Works A
spellingShingle	Gandhi goes to the movies; Hollywood/Bollywood; Rajkumar Hirani; Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006); Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi (1982) General Works A Makarand R. Paranjape Gandhiism vs. Gandhigiri: the Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma
description	This paper, which contrasts Rajkumar Hirani’s Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006) with Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi (1982), is as much a celebration of Bollywood as of Gandhi. It is to the former that the credit for most effectively resurrecting the Mahatma should go, certainly much more so than to Gandhians or academics. For Bollywood literally revives the spirit of Gandhi by showing how irresistibly he continues to haunt India today. Not just in giving us Gandhigiri—a totally new way of doing Gandhi in the world—but in its perceptive representation of the threat that modernity poses to Gandhian thought is Lage Raho Munna Bhai remarkable. What is more, it also draws out the distinction between Gandhi as hallucination and the real afterlife of the Mahatma. The film’s enormous popularity at the box office—it grossed close to a billion rupees—is not just an index of its commercial success, but also proof of the responsive chord it struck in Indian audiences. But it is not just the genius and inventiveness of Bollywood cinema that is demonstrated in the film as much as the persistence and potency of Gandhi’s own ideas, which have the capacity to adapt themselves to unusual circumstances and times. Both Richard Attenborough’s Oscar-winning epic, and Rajkumar Hirani’s Lage Raho Munna Bhai show that Gandhi remains as media-savvy after his death as he was during his life.
format	article
author	Makarand R. Paranjape
author_facet	Makarand R. Paranjape
author_sort	Makarand R. Paranjape
title	Gandhiism vs. Gandhigiri: the Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma
title_short	Gandhiism vs. Gandhigiri: the Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma
title_full	Gandhiism vs. Gandhigiri: the Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma
title_fullStr	Gandhiism vs. Gandhigiri: the Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma
title_full_unstemmed	Gandhiism vs. Gandhigiri: the Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma
title_sort	gandhiism vs. gandhigiri: the life and afterlife of the mahatma
publisher	Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
publishDate	2014
url	https://doaj.org/article/a2b13bf7cb1543f99647efe046a09cbe
work_keys_str_mv	AT makarandrparanjape gandhiismvsgandhigirithelifeandafterlifeofthemahatma
_version_	1718399652031627264

Gandhiism vs. Gandhigiri: the Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma

Ejemplares similares