Also out in the U.S. this week: Anupama Chopra’s King of Bollywood: Shah Rukh Khan and the Seductive World of Indian Cinema. As the title suggests, King of Bollywood is a full-length book meant for a general readership, looking back at the life and career of Shah Rukh Khan — aka, the “Badshah”. Chopra traces the various changes in the Bombay film industry in the 1990s, and argues that Shah Rukh is in many ways the face of the new, Yuppified, transnational Bollywood. From earlier conversations on SM, I know that some readers are a bit sick of Shah Rukh, though I would argue that Amitabh Bachchan has been far more over-exposed in the past few years (Shah Rukh has been only doing about one movie a year). The question Chopra is interested in isn’t “is Shah Rukh Khan a great actor,” it’s “how and why has Shah Rukh been such a success in the Bombay film industry given his outsider status?”
Derived nearly entirely from face-to-face interviews, there’s a lot of factual material about Shah Rukh Khan in Chopra’s book that I didn’t know — and I suspect that all but the most diehard fans won’t know most of it either. For instance, I found Chopra’s account of Shah Rukh’s early acting career particularly interesting. This is the period before 1988, when he landed a major part in the TV serial Fauji — and became a star almost overnight. After graduating from college, Shah Rukh started work on a Master’s in Economics, but his real energy was spent working on his acting with a high-brow theater group in Delhi called the Theater Action Group. This drama company was based at the prestigious Lady Shri Ram College, and was led by a British hippie named Barry John. For nearly three years, Shah Rukh played smaller parts in serious, avant-garde plays, while other actors got top billing. Shah Rukh was also somewhat overlooked in Arundhati Roy’s experimental film, In Which Annie Gives it Those Ones (1988); he tried out for the protagonist role, but was only cast as an extra.
To me all this was surprising because I’ve always thought of Shah Rukh as a “fun” actor; I’m having a hard time picturing him doing — or at least trying to do — all all this highbrow theater work.
One of the strengths of King of Bollywood is the way Chopra casually slips in paragraphs of analysis as she tells the story of Shah Rukh’s ascent. Though this is a book aimed at a popular audience, she manages to make many of the points an academic film historian might make — with a much lighter touch. For instance, take the following paragraph:
A few years later, Shah Rukh would tell journalists that as an actor he had only five expressions but he was a success because his rivals had only two. From the time he started performing professinoally, Shah Rukh’s acting was as much about charisma as craft. ‘Shah Rukh may not have been the best actor of his period,’ Sanjoy Roy said, ‘but even then he was a star.’ The debate about Shah Rukh’s skills started during his TAG days — when a performance when acutely over the top, his friends joked that Shah Rukh ‘had broken the roof.’ It continued long after he became a globally recognized actor. If Amitabh Bachchan was defined by a mercurial intensity, Shah Rukh’s keynote was innate buoyancy. An energetic determination tinted every role he played.
Here, I like the way Chopra delicately acknowledges that Shah Rukh is, as she puts it, “more charisma than craft” — that is to say, he’s no Lawrence Olivier. But he nevertheless brings something uniquely appealing to the table, a “happy” quality that has carried him from one superhit to the next. At his peak in the mid-90s, Shah Rukh was never sexy (like the relentlessly shirtless Salman Khan); if anything, he was charming. (More recently, I’ve felt that he’s been riding a bit on the fumes of his earlier success, though it looks like he’s about to turn the page in his career, and actually act his age in the upcoming Chak De India.)
Another interesting chapter in Shah Rukh’s career happened just after he started getting roles in big Hindi films. In 1992-3, Shah Rukh did a sexually explicit scene in an adaptation of Madame Bovary, called Maya Memsaab. The filmi magazines were all over it — an anonymous article in Cine Blitz even went so far as to suggest that Shah Rukh and actress Deepa Sahi (both of whom were married at the time to other people) were having actual, unsimulated sex in the scene. Shah Rukh was, needless to say, mortified — he picked a fight with a reporter at the magazine, which went on for months. Since that time, he’s never even done a kissing scene in any of his films. To me, this is interesting because it suggests that censorship in Bollywood derives not just from the censor board and the presumed conservatism of the masses, it’s also in a sense the media that covers the industry that polices it.
Anupama Chopra also addresses the rather tedious rumor that Shah Rukh Khan is gay. This is something I’ve heard many straight Indian men repeat, as if it were a known fact — though as far as I know there’s no shred of evidence whatsoever to support it. Shah Rukh isn’t even particularly ‘femme’, in my view, though it’s certainly the case that he’s willing to be less manly than either of the other two Khans. But there’s more than one way of being a heterosexual man, isn’t there?
Chopra does acknowledge that there’s a special relationship between Shah Rukh and director Karan Johar, but her characterization of it is worth quoting:
This enduring professional and personal proximity led to rumors that Shah Rukh and Karan were lovers, to which Shah Rukh replied with his typical wit, ‘So how did I have two children? Heavy petting?’ In fact, Karan was closer to Gauri. Karan treated Shah Rukh with a near-fanatical reverence, but Gauri was his mate. Karan helped her navigate the treacherous shifting loyalties in Bollywood and adjust to her newfound status of superstar wife. ‘It was easy for me because Karan was there,’ she said. ‘I didn’t miss Shah Rukh at all. With Karan, time just passed.’
Chopra seems to be implying (indirectly, of course) that Karan is in effect Gauri’s gay best friend — and that they both worship Shah Rukh. According to her account at least, Shah Rukh has always had eyes only for his wife, Gauri, whom he married after overcoming her parents objections, as well as her own reticence. He fought to get her, and he’s been a fiercely possessive husband and father ever since.
There’s more interesting stuff in this book — including interesting chapters about Shah Rukh’s family background (his grandfather was a freedom-fighter), as well as his career after his mid-90s peak era (KKHH, DDLJ), including resounding flops like Phir Bhi Dil Hai Hindustani. But I’ll leave off, and let readers get the book…
*
People may know Anupama Chopra from her various articles in the New York Times and other papers. For one thing, she’s director Vidhu Vinod Chopra’s wife. Chopra has also written two earlier books on Bollywood-related themes, including a full-length study of Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge, and another on Sholay. But King of Bollywood is different, in that it’s getting released on a major commercial press; the DDLJ book was on a British academic press, while the Sholay book was on Penguin India.
UPDATE: Check out a great group interview with Anupama Chopra at Filmiholic.
If I’ve gone to the effort of straightening my hair for him, the dude had better be (apparently) white.
49,
Huh?
Portmanteau ,
I heart Sushmita Sen and think she is way better in every way than TMBWITW
Runa said
I agree, but I would say she gave an excellent performance in Raincoat. BTW what is TMBWITW? As you can see I am new to SM 😐
TMBWITW = The Most Beautiful Woman in the World Okay so Aish was good in Raincoat but have you seen Sush in Samay?
Apparently, you never saw her cavorting her in the hay in a halter top with the minimal amount of back scaffolding required at an impressionable age. Amidst the subtle analysis of the implications of sibling rebirth on Amrish Puri’s health, the movie, Karan Arjun, also finds time to explore the early inclinations of a mulleted SRK to dart his head sensitively towards a conveniently located wall or pillar to indicate his intense longing, the competitive heaving of Mamta Kulkarni and Kajol, the hitherto unknown sartorial splendor of an unbuttoned gilded Nehru jacket over Salman’s manly waxed chest, and the unique woodenness Rakhee effortlessly brings to her performances.
And apparently neither is acting ability. He chews scenery with a gusto that makes Al Pacino seem like a mere Kobayashi to his Joey Chestnut.
Much love to the resplendent, brilliant, now-retired (no thanks to you, Jyoti Randhawa!) Chitrangada Singh, who rocks a saree like no one since Smita Patil.
I just heard a promo on WNYC radio for tomorrow’s Leonard Lopate show announcing that he’ll be looking at the Bollywood superstar Shahrukh Khan, which means Anupama Chopra must be his guest (she’s in the US at the moment).
Read somewhere that SRK’s favt. book is H2G2 and frequently uses ’42’ as the answer to everything. ’nuff said.
I have no problem with actors being in commercials.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOCTeS5OZp4
| Much love to the resplendent, brilliant, now-retired (no thanks to you, Jyoti Randhawa!) Chitrangada Singh, who rocks a saree like no one since Smita Patil.
Way to go to Rahul dude. As soon as I started a massive google image search on Chitrangada, did I realise the Jyoti Randhawa connection.. doh!
here, too. they did another movie together after that, but it’s only been on some film circuits – no theatre release as yet. i still can’t believe somebody so talented gave up her career to tour with her husband – why couldn’t JR have married somebody like TMBWITW and spared us all her cinematic angst?
rahul, perhaps i have under-rated kajol, since i haven’t yet seen karan arjun? despite that exemplary film, she kind of missed the boat on good cinema, and then ‘came back’ with fanaa…btw mr. shiney was also present in that atrocity of a movie, as was tabu – it would have been more enjoyable if, even given the terrible story and dialogue, those two had played the leads. maybe then i wouldn’t have laughed for the entire movie….
no, i do mean his face – it is captivating; i don’t care what else goes on with his body, so long as that face remains. though, in sins, he was in a dhoti for a good part of the film – very yummy.
For those of you in New York, there’s a free showing of “Kal Ho Naa Ho” at the Socrates Sculpture Park in Long Island City tomorrow night, and Anupama will be making an appearance. Check out http://www.socratessculpturepark.org for more information.
If the author of this book (wife of Vidhu Vinod Chopra) is presumably a friend of Shah Rukh’s, or at least moves in the same circles, can we feel confident that the book is objective and hard-hitting? It’s doubtful she wants to become enemies with Shah Rukh. On the other hand, an unauthorized biography by someone with no links to SRK or cooperation from SRK, could be full of errors and incorrect information and rumors.
Why am I not in NYC tomorrow????? 🙁
For those of you interested, I encourage you to watch the documentaries “the Inner World of Shah Rukh” and “The Outerworld of Shah Rukh”..both British doc’s that follow him around in India and the U.S. respectively. Loved them!
You can watch both documentaries for free on You Tube…just follow the links below and click on the consecutive parts (I think there are 6 for both).
Innerworld of Shahrukh Khan Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5
Outerworld of Shahrukh Khan Part 1, Part 2, Part 4 (I think 3 is missing?), Part 5, Part 6
Rahul, Since I live under a largish rock, I did not know anything about Hazaaron … Thanks. Also, did you say Smita Patil?
Cant stand bollywood. Tamil and Malayalam movies on the other hand used to be wow – but now 🙁 🙁
Pravin – take a look at the malayalam movies of the pre – mid 90’s era. Many of them were made very well. Quite sad that the newer movies are made so badly.
Barry John! Now there’s an immortal. You will have to take my word for it, but he was directing plays at that very Lady Shri Ram college you mention, back in 19–you younglings can take a deep breath here–71! Seeing as how I feel creaky in the joints myself some days, I had assumed BJ would be in some happy theater of the afterlife by now.
I wouldn’t throw him out of my bed.
I thought it was a fantastic movie, probably the best Hindi movie I’ve seen since Jaane Bhi do Yaaron.
Yes (01:44).
i totally love srk he is the best no one can be better than
Rahul,
Right on. Hazaron… is an excellent movie. Introduced me to Shiney, Kay Kay and Chitrangada, all of them brilliant actors. Hope Kay Kay doesn’t get type-cast; too bad for Chitrangada for having retired (forced to?) from the industry; Shiney is good in Gangster as well. And the singer from Bangladesh, James, is fast becoming my favourite (Bheegi Bheegi – Gangster and Rishtey– Life in A Metro).
And Jane Bhi Do Yaro..?…thorra khao, thorra phenko… 🙂
Et tu Rahul? Le sigh. I saw Hazaaron Khwaishen Aisi a second time recently (good movie BTW), and she is mahvellous!! I seriously hope she makes a comeback – it’s cinema’s loss!!
Camille, that’s a matter of perception, and I beg to differ. 🙂
Is there another instance of a film-maker debuting with his best movie (so far) that has reached the status of classic? The Mahabharata stage-play scene is worth the price of rental. Also, there were homages to Antonioni in the movie – Blowup and the park named after him.
is this where they got the phrase happy ending?
fyi : barry john now teaches acting in bombay…
Amit, I’ll let this slide on the assumption that AB’s fansite is not your homepage. 🙂
I read “happy ending” completely differently. Wow I need coffee.
You mean you haven’t checked out my blog yet? 😉
Naah. It was my younger brother who was an AB fan, while I cheered for Vinod Khanna. But that was a long time ago. If I ever built a fansite homepage (unlikely), it’d probably be for Om Puri, not AB.
Now I have! Actually, I wasn’t even expecting you to build a fansite (just have one as your home page), but the thought of someone building one freaks me out a little.
i think you need more than coffee, camille 😉
Is that what the kids are calling it, these days? 😉
I don’t know if this is mentioned before or not ( please delete if it is) but NPR’s The Leonard Lopate Show will be talking about this today August 08,2007.LINK:
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/lopate/episodes/2007/08/08 sorry i posted in a hurry @ work.
Women really want men with feminine features and a great complexion. Mr Macho is out.
shah rukh khan’s “gayness” is very similar to Jackie Chan’s, whose in turn is very similar to Douglas Fairbanks’s from the 20s. Then you figure out what it is. It’s less about him being homosexual in any marked way than about being boyish, which in its own way is definitively unmanly. Shah Rukh is different because he is supposed to be desireable for the girls, where Jackie Chan and Fairbanks usually have no interest in girls other than in winning them, but what makes him endearing and “suspicious” is that he’s a grown man playing a boy.
I was going to Socrates Park tonight, but the train service here in New York City is in chaos. However, on Friday, DJ Rekha will host Bollywood in Brooklyn at 7:30pm. Her Bollywood Disco will precede “Hum Kisi Se Kum Nahin”. Scroll down to Friday, August 10th on the Celebrate Brooklyn link for directions and more information. The suggested donation is $3.
SRK acts best when he plays someone evil. I do miss his Baazigar persona, although he indulged it a bit in Asoka.
just a quick side note: “femme” doesn’t necessarily equal gay. lots of butch gay men out there. check out the pride parades–most of them start out with the bikers in full leather gear and metal stud collars. having said that, may be slightly “femme” to the western eye, though i tend to think that most non-american men come across as more feminine to americans. the american image of masculine seems to lean toward the pitbull-type with an ak-47 slung over his shoulder, decimating populations across the water. compared to that, yes, i guess srk’s singing to women on makeshift rafts (hum tumare hai sanam) or in fields of mustard (ddlj) might seem a bit feminine.
sorry, it’s late. meant to say, “having said that, srk may be slightly ‘femme’ to the western eye…”
Never heard of him
I love this book, Anupama is such an incredible writer, eloquent and full of life. Her style is so informal yet controlled. Love this book! and her previous work- Sholay: Making of a Classic
tahseen ahmad 255,sutlej, jnu new delhi-67
May God bless you. you are really great.
stardom or not this guy is absolutelly charismatique! I find him a good actor,and intresting as personality. I believe also that is a good person too.
I really like him as an actor as a person as a peronnality Very talented,and charismatic is Shah Rukh. The book seems intresting to me. In my humble oppinion Shah rukh will be with the age more intresting like a man ,a person,an actor, a human being, he is someone who has evolution in his blood. He has been so succesful that he can take a distance from all this and have a clearness mind about life. God bless him.
Hi, all friends
Sharukh Khan, the NO 1 hero and actor in the Bollywood today, The debut of the Khan in to the Bollywood was a phenomena. He had no godfather,
no love story for him to begin with but quite amazingly a negative characterisation
which he had to check himself with. Might be – who knows he opted for that but
what an exhibition of a skill! It’s not just one skill he actually posessed – but an
ocean of skills. An all round capacity and versatility of skills.
http://desidirectory.com/desi-indian-blogs/
NO comments
only one thing nobody is there after shahrukh
well i don’t think shahrukh is the king of bollywood. I never like his acting, movies are different because it has the contribution of many people. Not only me, all of my friends have the same opinion for him. People change their names and vote for him repeatedly which is disgusting. so plz stop calling him king of bollywood. he is an avg looking guy and mediocre actor.
I am big fan of srk. Infact people started watching bollywood movies because of srk. Srk is the King and will be king for many many years.
CNN News, ABC News, NBC News, all over US News channels, Gaudian UK, Bloomberg, NDTV, CCTV, Geo TV, Plus all over the World’s Publishing, Magazines, Golden Globe Awards, Tittled SRK is the King of Bollywood. UK, Germany, Franch Films Fastival calls SRK- King of Bollywood, Even Google, Wikipedia,Yahoo wiki search says same things. Well, most of Indian Actors are very good.