Dezavantajlı Grupların Beyaz Perdedeki Temsili: Aamir Khan Sineması Örneği

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, gerek ‘oyuncu’ gerek ‘yönetmen’ kimliği ile Hint sinemasının (Bollywood) önde gelen isimleri arasında yer alan Aamir Khan ve filmleri özelinde dezavantajlı grupların sinemada temsil edilme biçimlerini tespit etmektir. Popüler kültürün ve modernitenin bu denli yaygınlaştığı günümüz dünyasında Hint sineması toplumda ‘dezavantajlı’ ya da ‘kırılgan’ olarak nitelendirilebilecek kesimlerin beyaz perdeye aktarılmasında büyük ve oldukça önemli bir rol üstlenmektedir. Bu kesimler içerisinde kadınlar, öğrenme güçlüğü çeken çocuklar, engelliler, yoksullar vb. gruplar ön plana çıkmakta ve sinemaseverlerin beğenisine sunulmaktadır. Çalışmada nitel analize veri sağlamak amacıyla Aamir Khan’ın oyuncu olarak yer aldığı filmler seçilmiş olup, ilgili filmler içerik analizi yöntemi kullanılmak suretiyle bilimsel olarak analiz edilmiştir. Bahse konu filmlerin tümünde dezavantajlılığa neden olan faktörler sonuçları ile birlikte analiz edilmiş, dezavantajlı grupların nasıl avantajlı hale geldiği tüm boyutları ile tartışılmıştır. Çalışma geneli itibariyle üç ana bölümden meydana gelmektedir. Bu yönüyle birinci bölümde dezavantajlı grupların tanımı, içeriği ve boyutlarına değinilmiştir. Çalışmanın ikinci bölümünde ise araştırmanın yöntem ve veri toplama biçiminden bahsedilmiştir. Çalışmanın son kısmında araştırmanın sonuçları ve bulgularına yer verilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dezavantajlı Gruplar
• Sosyal Politika
• Sinema
• Aamir Khan Sineması

Representation of Disadvantageous Groups in Cinematography: Evidence from Aamir Khan’s Cinema

Öz

The objective of this study is to ascertain the manner in which disadvantageous groups are represented in cinematography and on the basis of the movies of Aamir Khan, who are leadingIndian cinema (Bollywood), with his role as an actress and director. Nowadays and within an atmosphere where popular culture as well as modernity is so common, Indian cinema plays a crucial and fantastic role in portraying those referred to as disadvantageous or fragile groups in motion picture industry. In these groups, women, children with learning disabilities, disabled people, the poor, and etc., come to fore, and all these catch the attention of cinema fans. In this study, the movies in which Aamir Khan played as an actress were selected to provide data for qualitative analysis, and these movies were scientifically analyzed using content analysis research method. In these movies, the factors paving the way for a disadvantageous environment were analyzed by means of their results as a whole, and the manner in which these groups were converted into advantageous individuals was discussed with all its ins and outs. The paper mainly consists of three sections. From this perspective, and in the first part, the definitions, content, and dimensions of disadvantageous groups were presented. In the second section, the research method and the method of data collection were verified. In the last part, the research findings and results were mentioned.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Disadvantageous Groups
• Social Policy
• Cinema
• Aamir Khan Cinema

Kaynakça

1. Abeysekera, S. (1989). Women in Sri Lankan Cinema. Framework: The Journal ofCinema and Media, 37, 49-58. google scholar
2. Agajanian, R. (1998). ‘Just for Kids?’: Saturday morning cinema and Britain’s children’s film foundation in the 1960s. Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, 18(3), 395-409. google scholar
3. Ahmad, A. (2019). A Critical Analysis of Bollywood Actor Aamir Khan’s Selected Movies. International Journal of Media, Journalism and Mass Communications, 5(2), 7-13. google scholar
4. Aldridge, J. (2014). Working with vulnerable groups in social research: dilemmas by default and design. Qualitative Research, 14(1), 112-130. google scholar
5. Altuntaş, B. (2014). Dezavantajlı Gruplar ve Sosyal Politika. 1. Baskı, Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık. google scholar
6. Anggraini, R. (2020). An Analysis of Intrinsic Elements in Taare Zameen Par’s Film by Aamir Khan Production. In International Conference on the Teaching English and Literature, 1(1), 210-217. google scholar
7. Ayisi, F, & C. Brylla. (2013). “The Politics of Representation and Audience Reception: Alternative Visions of Africa.” Research in African Literatures 44 (2): 125-141. google scholar
8. Bal, M. D. (2014). Toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizliğine genel bakiş. Kadın Sağlığı Hemşireliği Dergisi, 1(1), 15-28. google scholar

9. Bautista-Hernandez, D. A. (2020). Commuting inequality, role of urban structure, and identification of disadvantaged groups in the Mexico City metropolitan area. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 13(1), 159-183. google scholar
10. Ben-Ghiat, R. (2001). The Italian Cinema and the Italian Working Class. International Labor and Working-Class History, 59, 36-51. google scholar
11. Bir Zamanlar Hindistan’da (Lagaan, 2001, Ashutosh Gowariker). google scholar
12. Botha, S., & Harvey, C. (2024). Disabling discourses: contemporary cinematic representations of acquired physical disability. Disability & Society, 1-23. google scholar
13. Castellino, J. (2009). The MDGs and international human rights law: a view from the perspective of minorities and vulnerable groups. The International Journal of Human Rights, 13(1), 10-28. google scholar
14. Castillo, G. (1997). Soviet Orientalism: Socialist Realism and Built Tradition, Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Review, 8(2), 33-47. google scholar
15. Chapman, A. R., & Carbonetti, B. (2011). Human Rights Protections for Vulnerable and Disadvantaged Groups: The Contributions of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 33(3), 682-732. google scholar
16. Charlton, J. (1998). Nothing about Us Without Us, California: University of California Press. google scholar
17. Chivers, S. & N. Markotic. (2010). The Problem Body. Ohio: Ohio State University Press. google scholar
18. Church, D. (2011). Freakery, cult films, and the problem of ambivalence. Journal of Film and Video, 63(1), 03-17. google scholar
19. Dangal (2016, Nitesh Tiwari). google scholar
20. Datta, S. (2000). Globalisation and Representations of Women in Indian Cinema. Social Scientist, 28(3/4), 71-82. google scholar
21. Dixon, J., Tropp, L. R., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. (2010). “Let them eat harmony” prejudice-reduction strategies and attitudes of historically disadvantaged groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(2), 76-80. google scholar
22. Droogendyk, L., Wright, S. C., Lubensky, M., & Louis, W. R. (2016). Acting in solidarity: Cross-group contact between disadvantaged group members and advantaged group allies. Journal of social issues, 72(2), 315-334. google scholar
23. Ekin, N. (1989). Endüstri İlişkiler, 5. Baskı, İstanbul: İstanbul Üniversitesi, İşletme Fakültesi Yayın No 208. google scholar
24. Ellerson, B. (2015). Afrıcan Women In Cınema: An Overvıew. In J. Mistry & A. Schuhmann (Eds.), Gaze Regimes: Film and feminisms in Africa. Wits University Press,1-9. google scholar
25. Elo, S., & Kyngas, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal ofadvanced nursing, 62(1), 107-115. google scholar
26. Esen, E., Soylu, Y., Siyez, D. M., & Demirgürz, G. (2017). Üniversite Öğrencilerinde Toplumsal Cinsiyet Algısının Toplumsal Cinsiyet Rolü ve Cinsiyet Değişkenlerine Göre İncelenmesi. E-International Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 46-63. google scholar
27. Fernandez, R. M., & Rubineau, B. (2019). Network Recruitment and the Glass Ceiling: Evidence from Two Firms. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 5(3), 88-102. google scholar
28. Frieden, S. (1990). Women’s Cinema in West Germany. Monatshefte, 82(3), 276-285. google scholar
29. Gauci, V., & Callus, A. M. (2015). Enabling everything: scale, disability and the film The Theory of Everything. Disability & Society, 30(8), 1282-1286. google scholar
30. Goethals, T., Mortelmans, D., Van den Bulck, H., Van den Heurck, W., & Van Hove, G. (2022). I am not your metaphor: frames and counter-frames in the representation of disability. Disability & Society, 37(5), 746-764. google scholar
31. Gül, G., & Eren, B. (2018). The Effect of Chorus Education in Disadvantageous Groups on the Process of General Education-Cultural Awareness and Socializing: The Sample of Gypsy Children. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(1), 125-133. google scholar
32. Gümüşoğlu, F. (2008). Ders kitaplarında toplumsal cinsiyet. Toplum ve Demokrasi Dergisi, 2(4), 39-50. google scholar
33. Haberfeld, Y., & Izraeli, D. N. (2002). Gender Inequality in Majority and Minority Groups in Israel. Race, Gender & Class, 9(2), 156-175. google scholar
34. Her Çocuk Özeldir/Yerdeki Yıldızlar (Taare Zameen Par, 2007, Aamir Khan). google scholar
35. Hershfield, J. (2010). Women’s Cinema and Contemporary Allegories of Violence in Mexico. Discourse, 32(2), 170-185. google scholar
36. Hussain, S., & Ahmad, N. (2016). The impact of the Indian movie, Three Idiots (2009) on attitudes to education. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 21(2), 242-246. google scholar
37. Icelandic Human Rights Centre, The Human Rights Protection of Vulnerable Croups (2009), available at http://www.humanrights.is/the-human-rights-project/humanrightscasesandmaterials/humanrightsconceptsideasandfora/Undirflokkur (Erişim Tarihi: 22 Şubat 2024). google scholar
38. Ieta, R. (2010). The New Romanian Cinema: A Realism of Impressions. Film Criticism, 34(2/3), 22-36. google scholar
39. Imrie, R. (2014). “Space, Place and Policy Regimes: The Changing Contours of Disability and Citizenship”. In Disability, Spaces and Places of Policy Exclusion, edited by K. Soldatic, H. Morgan, and A. Roulstone, 13-30. London: Routledge, 13-30. google scholar
40. Kaur, R. (2013). The nuclear imaginary and Indian popular cinema. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, 36(4), 539-553. google scholar
41. Kayboluş (Fanaa, 2006, Kunal Kohli). google scholar
42. Kılıçkıran, C. A. (1997). Women in Turkish Cinema. Insight Turkey, 11, 89-111. google scholar
43. Kivlighan III, D. M., Drinane, J. M., Tao, K. W., Owen, J., & Liu, W. M. (2019). The detrimental effect of fragile groups: Examining the role of cultural comfort for group therapy members of color. Journal of counseling psychology, 66(6), 763-770. google scholar
44. Koven, M. J. (1999). Feminist Folkloristics and Women’s Cinema: Towards a Methodology. Literature/Film Quarterly, 27(4), 293-300. google scholar
45. Kunze, P. C. (2017). “We Don’t Die, We Multiply”: Bebe’s Kids, Hip-Hop Aesthetics, and Black Feature Animation. Black Camera, 8(2), 226-242. google scholar
46. Laal Singh Chaddha (2022, Advait Chandan). google scholar
47. Layton, M. L., & Smith, A. E. (2017). Is It Race, Class, or Gender? The Sources of Perceived Discrimination in Brazil. Latin American Politics and Society, 59(1), 52-73. google scholar
48. Leong, A. (1984). Socialist Realism: Cinema and the Arts. Studies in Comparative Communism, 17(3/4), 157-161. google scholar
49. Long, G. T. (2012). Delivering Social Protection to the Poor and Vulnerable Groups in Vietnam: Challenges and the Role of the Government. ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 29(3), 245-258. google scholar
50. Longmore, P. (2003). Why I burned my book. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 131-146. google scholar
51. Lori Uscher-Pines, Patrick S. Duggan, Joshua P. Garron, Karron, R. A., & Faden, R. R. (2007). Planning for an Influenza Pandemic: Social Justice and Disadvantaged Groups. The Hastings Center Report, 37(4), 32-39. google scholar
52. Mansbridge, J. (1999). Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent “Yes.” The Journal of Politics, 61(3), 628-657. google scholar
53. Markotic, N. (2012). Play the Facts and the Truth: Disability in Documentary Film. Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, 1(2), 1-18. google scholar
54. Maule, R. (2010). Women Filmmakers and Postfeminism in the Age of Multimedia Reproduction: A Virtual Archive for Women’s Cinema. Framework: The Journal of Cinema and Media, 51(2), 350-353. google scholar
55. McBride, S. (1989). The Female Gaze? Looking at Women in Popular Cinema. Circa, 44, 19-21. google scholar
56. Mechanic, D., & Tanner, J. (2007). Vulnerable people, groups, and populations: societal view. Health Affairs, 26(5), 1220-1230. google scholar
57. Milner, L.. (2014). Labour Culture on Screen and Online: Union Films as Mobilisation Strategies. Labour History, (107), 181-196. google scholar
58. Mitchell, D. T., & Snyder, S. L. (2001). The uneasy home of disability in literature and film. Gary L. Albrecht, Katherine D., Seelman, and Michael Bury (Eds.): Handbook of Disability Studies. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 195-218. google scholar
59. Moitra, S. (2009). “Reality Is There, but It’s Manipulated”: West German Trade Unions and Film after 1945. In V. Hediger & P. Vonderau (Eds.), Films that Work: Industrial Film and the Productivity of Media . Amsterdam University Press, 329-346. google scholar
60. Nelson, J. A. (1994). Broken images: Portrayals of those with disabilities in American media. İn Nelson, J.. (Ed.) People with Disabilities, the Media, and the Information Age, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1-17. google scholar
61. Norden, M. F. (1994). The cinema of isolation: A history of physical disability in the movies. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. google scholar
62. Mumbai Günlükleri (Dhobi Ghat, 2010, Kiran Rao). google scholar
63. O’Dell, E. J. (2015). From Leprosy to the Willow Tree: Decoding disability and Islamic spirituality in Iranian film. Disability & Society, 30(7), 1123-1126. google scholar
64. Ötgün, C. (2008). Sanat Yapıtına Yaklaşım Biçimleri, Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 2, 159-178. google scholar
65. Paranjape, M. S. (2007). Uneven Distribution of Education in Maharashtra: Rural-Urban, Gender and Caste Inequalities. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(3), 213-216. google scholar
66. Peroni, L., & Timmer, A. (2013). Vulnerable groups: The promise of an emerging concept in European Human Rights Convention law. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 11(4), 1056-108. google scholar
67. Qadri, M., & Mufti, S. (2016). Films and religion: An analysis of Aamir Khan’s PK. Journal of Religion & Film, 20(1), 1-29. google scholar
68. Parks-Yancy, R., DiTomaso, N., & Post, C. (2005). Social Capital Resources and Social Programs: Advancement Mechanisms For Disadvantaged Groups. Michigan Sociological Review, 19, 115-137. google scholar
69. Radke, H. R., Kutlaca, M., Siem, B., Wright, S. C., & Becker, J. C. (2020). Beyond allyship: Motivations for advantaged group members to engage in action for disadvantaged groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24(4), 291-315. google scholar
70. Ray, R., & Lancaster, G. (2005). On Setting the Poverty Line Based on Estimated Nutrient Prices: Condition of Socially Disadvantaged Groups during the Reform Period. Economic and Political Weekly, 40(1), 46-56. google scholar
71. Richler, D. (2016). Cinema, Realism, And The World Accordıng To Jia Zhangke. Revue Canadienne d’Etudes Cinematographiques / Canadian Journal of Film Studies, 25(2), 6-38. google scholar
72. Riley, C. A. (2005). Disability and the Media: Prescriptions for Change. London: University Press of New England; Boyd, N. (2016). The warped mirror: the reflection of the ableist stare in David Lynch’s The Elephant Man. Disability & Society, 31(10), 1321-1332. google scholar
73. Ross, S. (2001). American Workers, American Movies: Historiography and Methodology. International Labor and Working-Class History, (59), 81-105. google scholar
74. Safran, S. P. (1998). Disability portrayal in film: Reflecting the past, directing the future. Exceptional Children, 64(2), 227-238. google scholar
75. Schmitt, M. T., & Branscombe, N. R. (2002). The meaning and consequences of perceived discrimination in disadvantaged and privileged social groups. European review of social psychology, 12(1), ss. 167-199. google scholar
76. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Qualitative content analysis in practice, USA: Sage Publication. google scholar
77. Serdar A. B., (2018). “Sosyal Politika Kavramı. Tarihsel Gelişimi ve Türkiye’de Sosyal Politika”, Ed. Aysen Tokol ve Yusuf Alper, Sosyal Politika, 9. Baskı, Bursa: Dora Yayıncılık, 1-78. google scholar
78. Stemler, S. E. (2015). Content analysis. Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences: An Interdisciplinary, Searchable, and Linkable Resource, 1-14. google scholar
79. Stigsdotter, I. (2019). Women film exhibition pioneers in Sweden: Agency, invisibility and first wave feminism. In I. Stigsdotter (Ed.), Making the invisible visible: Reclaiming women’s agency in Swedish film history and beyond, Kriterium, 65-96. google scholar
80. Süperstar (Secret Superstar, 2017, Advait Chandan). google scholar
81. Tezcür, G. M., & Gurses, M. (2017). Ethnic Exclusion and Mobilization: The Kurdish Conflict in Turkey. Comparative Politics, 49(2), 213-230. google scholar
82. Üç Ahmak (3 Idiot, 2009, Rajkumar Hirani). google scholar
83. Van Fleit, K. (2022). The “Conscience of Bollywood” in China: Aamir Khan and Transnational Spreadable Media. A Companion to Indian Cinema, 456-472. google scholar
84. Wang, L. (2015). Wang Ping and Women’s Cinema in Socialist China: Institutional Practice, Feminist Cultures, and Embedded Authorship. Signs, 40(3), 589-622. google scholar
85. Whittington-Walsh, F. (2002). From freaks to savants: Disability and hegemony from The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1939) to Sling Blade (1997). Disability & Society, 17(6), 695-707. google scholar
86. Woods, M. N. (2015). Calcutta and the Modern Woman: Reading the Films Mahanagar and Kahaani. The Global South, 9(2), 85-102. google scholar
87. Yalan Çemberi (Talaash, 2012, Reema Kagti). google scholar
88. Yung, B., & Lee, F. (2014). “Equal right to housing” in Hong Kong housing policy: perspectives from disadvantaged groups. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 29(4), 563-582. google scholar
89. Yüksel, H. (2020a). Güncel Gelişmeler Işığında Sosyal Politika, 2. Baskı, Bursa: Ekin Yayınları. google scholar
90. Yüksel, H. (2020b). Sendikacılık ve Sinema Teori ve Pratik, Bursa: Ekin Yayınları. google scholar
91. Yüksel, H. (2021). Endüstri İlişkiler Disiplininde Sinemanın Yeri ve Önemi 1965-1980. Çalışma ve Toplum, 2(69), 1005-1048. google scholar
92. Zarowsky, C., Haddad, S., & Nguyen, V. K. (2013). Beyond ‘vulnerable groups’: contexts and dynamics of vulnerability. Global Health Promotion, 20(1_suppl), 3-9. google scholar
93. Zola, I. (1985). Depictions of disability-metaphor message, and medium in the media: a research and political agenda, Social Science Journal, 22(4), 5-17. google scholar