'Fire', 1996

My senior year of college, I took this awesome class called ‘Global Gays in the Global Gaze’ - clever, right? Anyways, one of the movies our teacher had us watch was ‘Fire’, directed by the Indo-Canadian filmmaker Deepa Mehta (1996). The movie tells the story of two Indian women, Radha and Sita, who are sisters-in-law and are each unhappy in their respective relationships. Sita’s husband Jatin shows little care for her and spends his time with his Chinese girlfriend, while Sita must stay at home and care for his mother Biji (with Radha’s help). Radha herself has grown miserable in her marriage to husband Ashok; she feels guilty for her infertility, and she and her husband Ashok haven’t had sex in 13 years (ever since he learned from a local preacher that sex should be saved for procreation). The two women find solace in each other, and Radha slowly begins to let go of her ties to tradition.

Some things I liked: Mehta is such a talented filmmaker, and this film (the first she wrote and directed) demonstrates it. The two main characters (and their respective marital situations) are likeable, especially Sita, whose independence prompts Radha to let go of her subservience and her devotion to what is expected of her.

Some things I didn’t like: There wasn’t anything I didn’t like about the film (despite its unfavorable male characters, and the social constraints that the two women face). These constraints echo the conditions that existed in India at that time (and today); the film’s release (two years later in India) was followed by protests, bans, and violent attacks on the movie theaters that showed the film. However, the movie was critically acclaimed internationally, and remains a powerful cinematic piece to this day.

The five words I would use to describe this film: tender, incendiary, brave, liberated, smoldering

My queer take: ‘Fire’ is certainly a notable film in terms of LGBT+ representation in India, but Mehta expressed frustration in interviews that it was constantly described as a ‘lesbian’ film. "Lesbianism is just another aspect of the film...Fire is not a film about lesbians," but rather about "the choices we make in life." Despite her intentions, the film will likely always be branded in this way, but is that necessarily a problem? The movie does touch on many other themes, including social customs, female liberation, and family dynamics, and sparked LGBT-rights activists in India to become more vocal about their existence (and the erasure of queerness from India’s history). ‘Fire’ has much to offer to viewers, even more than 20 years later.

(Not-so-)fun fact: Historically, homosexuality is abundantly present in Hinduism; the criminalisation of homosexuality in India was a result of British colonialism. Gay activist Ashok Row Kavi has pointed to evidence of lesbianism in Indian tradition, saying "If [conservative groups] think [two women having sex] doesn't happen in the Indian society they should see the sculptures of Khajuraho or Konark."