Why does Modern-India lack artistic figures!?
S3kgdi
No.605
We don’t have a great filmmaker (no debates here, by great I mean internationally acclaimed and someone culturally significant) or a great writer (no, Arundhati Soy isn’t one).
Why is that so?
>because muhh pajeet are dumb
I don’t think so. Take a loot at ancient Indian literature, Kalidasa’s Shakuntala caused a whole shockwave in Europe when it was translated into English. Goethe (regarded as Europe’s finest intellectual OAT) even wrote a literal poem just to praise it.
And if you come to modern times; Ray and Tagore were brilliant men. I know they were Bengali and ray was a bit cucky, still they did represent a new-born independent India.
Their works are KINO.
>no audience
I don’t think so. In a billion people nation, there have to be some people who are into these stuff. There are enough cinephile and lit-heads.
I really can’t come up with a good reason, why is this the case. Help me out, fellow bhach chads.
rfU8k/
No.610
>>605(OP)
Modern day artists are making memes and shitposts on bhach
MqNFDI
No.614
>>605(OP)
there is not enough capital to justify purely artistic pursuits. No south east asian nation for this reason produces kino. The japanese and korean do because they are rich to do so. Indians did have an intellectual class that consumed kino(which is why satyajit ray, ghatak etc.) But this lost their relevance as the common indian audience formed post liberalisation and more 'baser' productions were given priority to earn profit. People will do that which earns money.
>Great writer
same reason as above, though this is an easier task. What you must ask is, why haven't been great writers as of late? what writers in the last millenium are great? Foster Wallace? I can't really name anyone else.
fHmYLT
No.616
>>614
>there is not enough capital to justify purely artistic pursuits
Valid argument. I completely agree. Though it has to be more nuanced than that.
Take Andrei Tarkovsky for example, he was making kino films in poor Soviet Russia.
And even all those kino directors like Godard or Lynch that cinephiles suck off, made movies for a certain percentage of population.
India has a small percentage of upper class and upper-middle class people. Even dehatis have an idea on who Nolan is. So my question is, can’t we produce movies for just those people? The profit shouldn’t be low as they are really huge in number, man.
fHmYLT
No.618
Bumpy
RhaHp7
No.620
>>614
Michel Houellebecq is probably the best living writer in my opinion. You should try his books.
RhaHp7
No.621
>>605(OP)
Anurag Kashyap was probably the guy who could be our guy that elevates the medium of film, though just like his mentor RGV he has gone mental and narcissistic. No Smoking, Dev D and Gangs of Wasseypur are probably the best movies we have made in last two decades or so. I doubt that he'll ever make a good film again.
kGeAE/
No.642
>>605(OP)
Because entertainment industry is running by nepobaby and most indian audience are braindead marvel masala watcher who worship literal abbos
ebx5pd
No.669
>>605(OP)
I think no audience is absolutely the correct reason. With most people watching nothing but dehati movies growing up, what do you expect them to create anything other than than?
The few cinephile and lit-heads who make anything different isn't creating for masses to have any large impact.
Muc88c
No.670
>>605(OP)
Main banunga agla great writer India ka. I am working on this book for a few weeks now. I will finish it up before 2026 and then approach publishers. Wish me luck.
QRZHfP
No.672
>>670
Good luck anon, hope you make it.
MqNFDI
No.675
>>674
Tolkien was 60 years ago. Baudrillard mogs and its not even close
ebx5pd
No.676
>>670
Good luck. I wish there was places on Indian internet for web novels like in East Asia.
