Mangal Pandey: The Rising

Rajasthan

While at a bus stop in the middle of nowhere Rajasthan, a very old woman saw my friend and I and asked if the British had returned. Although the people at the bus stop laughed at her, I was struck by the incongruity of her question, or rather, by the distance between us. It was sometimes easy to forget that the Raj ended more recently than WWII- but maybe only for me.  

Plenty of Hindi-language films have been made about the end of the Raj, from Rang de Basanti (2006), to Bandini (1963), to 1942: A Love Story (1994). Comparatively few have been made  about 1857 (the obvious stand-out being Satyajit Ray's 1977 Shatranj Ke Khilari ); this is the only film I have ever seen which depicts the First Anglo War in Afghanistan, despite the terrible cost in human life and the importance of the conflict to regional and world history. This film is based on the real-life figures of Mangal Pandey and Col. Gordon Ramsey, who both served in Afghanistan and were actors on the South Asian stage in the conflict 1857, although liberties have obviously and openly been taken. 

For readers not familiar with the events of 1857 (alternately called the Sepoy Rebellion and the First War of Independence) the basic facts are as follows- in 1857 the East India Company (EIC) introduced new cartridges which were greased with the fat of hogs and cattle, haram and sacrilegious for Muslim and Hindu sepoys respectively. This, combined with many other concerns, not the least among them being the EIC annexation of Oudh in 1856, resulted in a series of uprisings against the EIC in central and northern India, the first beginning in the cantonment in Meeruit on May 10 of 1857. The EIC reasserted control in India with the fall of Gwalior on June 20, 1858. Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last Mughal ruler of Delhi, was deposed and sent into exile in Rangoon, Burma, and the Crown assumed control of the subcontinent, establishing the British Raj. Queen Victoria was crowned Empress of India in 1877.

Set against this backdrop, Mangal Pandey: The Rising (2005) revolves around the relationship between sepoy Mangal Pandey (Aamir Khan) and Col. Gordon Ramsey (Toby Stepehens*), survivors of the First Anglo War in Afghanistan and BFFs. Together they wrestle with the injustice inherent in the systems in which they are invested- social, economic, political, gendered- and make life-changing decisions about what to do about these injustices.** In Bollywood there are good Britishers and bad Britishers; Toby Stephens plays a good Britisher. Both men also fall in love (Pandy with slave and sex worker Heera and Ramsey with rescued widow Jwala), dance a bit, and do a surprising amount of growing as leaders and human beings.

The music, inevitably by A.R. Rahman, provides opportunities for the relationships between Pandey and Heera (Rani Muckerji) and Ramsey and Jwala (Ameesha Patel) to develop, and for the mood and moment in history to be established. The song "Rasia" juxtaposes the private relationship between Jwala and Ramsey and the public lives of Pandey and Heera. I dont know why Jwala cries (maybe she wanted the lights on), but by the end of the sequence the Bollywood taboo of including anything particularly explicit –and outside of marriage, no less- has been flaunted, albeit with the bodies of a virginal widow and a Catholic Scottish colonialist. The song's entire sequence is notable for the extreme sexualizing of India's nomadic peoples- the two women dancing together is particularly lacking in subtly. I have long believed orientalism in Bollywood film (here, for example) would make an excellent dissertation topic, and this sequence would be a good place to start.

The song "Main Vari Vari", in addition to being catchy, is consequently a problematic reflection on the public gaze. The viewer is watching Heera, but the viewer is also watching the EIC watch Heera. The viewer is meant to condemn the leering men visually consuming the body of a slave, who is singing about the deadly power of her beloved's gestures; but while the viewer is condemning the EIC, we are equally guilty of viewership. However, this self-reflexive judgement is completely absent in the objectification of the Indian tribal women dancing during the erotic "Rasia". Is objectification acceptable, or isnt it? The film seems to answer "it depends on the women."   

There are other problems with the film. The music is not up to A.R. Rahman's usual standards. There is a Holi scene, complete with song and dance. Why is there a Holi scene, complete with song and dance? Why not, I guess, although it seems cruel to make Toby Stephens dance. There are some explicit moments between Pandey and Heera, which seem more-or-less gratuitous. Reviewer Raja Sen went so far as to call the film "inane". A New York Times reviewer complained that, "the racial hatred seems rabid and cartoonish, the political discussions of the opium trade become preachy, and the romance feels more like a cause for dance-offs than an exploration of intimacy." These reviewers miss the point. The second in Amir Khan's trilogy of patriotic epics (the others being Lagaan (2001) and Rang de Basanti (2006)), Mangal Pandey is making a lot of points that are not inane, cartoonish, preachy, or cause for dance offs. (Really? Dance offs?) 

Yes- British cruelty, personified by one of Ramsey's fellow EIC officers, is on full rabid display. I am curious as to what he thinks colonial rule looks like. More to the point, Pandey's caste-hatred for his untouchable neighbor is on equally rabid display. The EIC is shown to be inherently unjust-therefore, it must be dismantled, by violence if necessary. But if the resulting world is to be more just than the one ruled by the EIC, so too must caste hierarchies be torn down. Pandey cannot be the leader the sepoys (and occupied India) needs until he learns to overcome his own prejudices.

An even bolder rejection of prejudice is made in Pandey's choice of love interest. Heera is a slave and tawaiff, and therefore a completely unsuitable wife for explicitly upper-caste Pandey. In a region where marriage, women's sexuality, and caste boundaries are rigidly intertwined, a national hero marries an explicitly lowest-caste sex worker- and a mouthy one at that. Given the high premium placed on the purity of national heroes everywhere, this choice is nothing short of shocking. Remember- we are all still waiting for the Hollywood blockbuster about Thomas Jefferson's affair with Sally Hemings, his slave and dead wife's half-sister. This aspect of the film was so controversial the BJP called for the film to be banned, claiming the film was guilty of character assassination. The government of UP considered banning the film unless changes were made; there were also sit-ins, protests, and damages to a shop selling CDs and DVDs of the film.

Ramsey's choice of widow Jwala is less controversial. He was a white colonial and she was a virginal widow saved from sati; neither are invested in the caste system's purity strictures or concerned with the sanctity of Hindu marriage. More interesting is the film's approach to the issue of sati (also transliterated as suttee) itself. When Ramsey and Pandey see a funeral complete with sati in the works, it is Ramsey who insists on intervening; Pandey is shown reluctant to get involved in ending the outlawed tradition, just as Ramsey was reluctant to get involved in the slave trading he witnessed. Both men have some learning to do along their path to becoming national heroes. However, on the issue of sati Ramsey- and by extension the EIC- is shown to be in right. More than a battle of Indians vs. Britishers, this film explores the battle of justice against injustice, in all forms and from all sides. The romance in this film is not about intimacy or dancing. It is about social politics.

As to the preachy criticism... well, yes. It gets a bit preachy. The messages could have been more subtle; but given that the Times reviewer missed most of them, perhaps it is best they were not. Do not be dissuaded- Mangal Pandey: The Rising is ultimately an extremely entertaining celebration of national myth, with solid performances by beautiful people in beautiful settings to beautiful music. The solidly progressive, if somewhat heavy-handed, messages should be viewed as an added incentive.      

As a final note, although it is certainly a nice touch to have Heera join the fight with her very own violence (hooray agency!), I am still waiting for a film about India’s real-life female freedom fighters. There are some films about modern-day women terrorists, including Dil Se… (1998) and Dhoka (2007- ghastly) but a film about women who participated in early anti-British movements could be fascinating and inspiring. Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi (2019) was recently made about the life of Lakshmibai, Rani of Jansi but was plagued by very real complaints of right-wing political bullshit, but Noor Inayat Khan (1914-1944), an unsung heroine who spied against the Nazis in occupied Paris during WWII would be another excellent choice. In spite of some hopeful signs in the direction of female-centric films, most cinema- in every industry- concerns itself mostly with men.  

For a fascinating discussion of the First Anglo War in Afghanistan I recommend Return of a King: The Battle for Afghanistan, 1839-42 by William Dalrymple. It lays out the conflict within the context of Afghan, British, and Great Game politics, as well as explaining the consequences of the conflict on the events of 1857. There are probably other resources, but  I cant imagine any are more readable. Dalrymple’s The Last Mughal: The Fall of a Dynasty: Delhi, 1857 is also an interesting read , although I must add a caveat- most South Asianists take umbrage with Dalrymple’s academic work. Everyone loves City of Djinns: A Year in Delhi.

Film: Mangal Pandey: The Rising (2005)

Director: Ketan Mehta
Writer: Farrukh Dhondy
Runtime: 151 Minutes
Language: Hindi
Country: India

*Evidently Stephens had to learn his lines phonetically; his accent is unusually good for a white guy in a Bollywood film. 

**They also wrestle with one another in a manner that can only be called homoerotic.

×