From Spectacle to Subject: A Critical Reflection on Disability Representation in Indian Media By Larissa Lobo

Disability, as we see it today as individuals who are abled, often form our perceptions of it through the representation and visualisation projected onto us by visual media- namely movies, books, poetry, etc. However, there is a heavy lack of representation of disability in the first place, in addition to quite a misplaced idea of what disability entails and how
individuals are supposed to perceive it. Moreover, the motto that keeps the gap even - “Nothing about us, without us”- seems to be lost on the general media producers, who have turned into a narrative prosthesis, where the disabled body is used as a prop to correct a broken storyline, instead of being presented as a genuine, legitimate subject with its own
agency.

When I joined the National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP) as an intern last summer, and subsequently served as a professional rapporteur at a national disability conference, I had signed up with the assumption that I understood disability advocacy, merely due to the Psychology of Disability elective I chose in that
semester and the active discussions I took part in within the classroom set up. I had read about the Social Model, I could differentiate between impairment and disability, and I could critique the Medical Gaze in theory. However, what the conference and the Universal Design Awards (UDA Annual Awards hosted by NCPEDP) taught me, sitting in that hall listening to activists who had spent decades being spoken about rather than spoken to, was something my Psychology of Disability course could not quite enlighten me about: that representation- on screen, in policy, in public imagination- is never black and white. It is always doing something beyond surface-level comprehension. Every issue is intertwined with several other grassroots and systemic concerns that go unaddressed. Not to mention, there is a stark contrast in the manner of discussion that goes on in a classroom filled with non-disabled individuals, and in a conference room filled with disability rights activists who face the day-to-day challenges society flings at them every moment, ranging from healthcare, education, policy design, or even aid during disaster management and the upcoming digital census’s
accessibility concerns. 

I chose to focus on media representation in this critical, reflective analysis, as it plays a vital role in shaping societal perceptions. As a Psychology major with a minor in Sociology, I understand media as a “socialisation agent” that does more than just reflect social life. I understand how it also constructs reality by providing “raw material” for interaction among people. It holds the power of normalisation, which could reinforce patterns of exclusion and selective inclusion, feeding visual narratives before one can form their own opinion about the existing realities. By applying the Social Identity Theory to analyse these visual narratives, I can identify how this misplaced idea of disability is systematically produced and ultimately dictates who can occupy the space of the “ordinary”. By using the provided course material,
specifically Priyam Sinha's work on screenwriting and disability in New Bollywood, and Michele Friedner's analysis of disability as "feel-good" diversity, in addition to my own drawn examples from other sources of visual media, I have attempted to explain my own understanding of Indian popular media constructs disability, who benefits from those constructions, and what it would actually mean to do this differently.

Narrative Prosthesis and the "Feel-Good" Diversity Machine

The concept of Narrative Prosthesis (Mitchell & Snyder, 2000) suggests that disability is fitted into a story not on its own terms but as a structural device, i.e., a crutch that props up the narrative's emotional architecture. When I read this paper after our 6th session, I instantly thought of the shows MasterChef India, India’s Got Talent, and Indian Idol. While I
never explicitly questioned it before, I always did observe how there would usually always, every season, be a contestant with a visible disability- a missing limb, a hearing impairment, or sometimes a chronic illness. While this in itself is not something that should set off alarms, it is the editorial framing and the idea that there would always be just a specific number of 1-2 participants who fit into this category in all these shows every season. The slow-motion
shot, the feels-inducing background score that one of my friends once accurately described as "sad music on a loop”, and the cutaways to other contestants, audience, judges and the host with trembling lips and misty eyes, with the final grand standing ovation.

Friedner’s argument aptly captures this sentiment in her work, How the Disabled Body Unites the National Body. By demonstrating how disability acts as a form of non-threatening “feel-good” diversity in urban sectors of India, she elucidates how disability serves to act as a unifying spectacle, unlike the other institutional structures carrying political
and historical nuances, such as caste, religion, gender, etc. The disabled MasterChef contestant is not there to win a cooking competition. They are there, as Friedner would put it, to make non-disabled Indians feel good as Indians.

Therefore, it is particularly appalling to witness these shows celebrating the person for climbing over a wall, rather than asking why the walls exist in the first place! The inaccessible kitchen sets remain the same, the interpreters remain absent, and the barriers are just as heavy as before. Sadly, the contestants’ achievements are distinguished from the
systemic exclusions that hindered them throughout their journey. At the end of the day, neither do the tears and emotional displays address concerns about universal design and accessibility, nor do they spark discussions on the treatment the disabled communities face in their day-to-day lives. This Broken Chain of Accessibility explains how these barriers are not just random accidents- they are a connected chain of obstacles that start with broken physical
access and end with society's failure to even recognise disabled people as equal, ordinary individuals.

The Aspect of Survival as a Spectacle

If we were to look beyond the editorial ‘sad music’, close attention must be given to the agency- or lack thereof- of the contestants themselves. We have already established how the media uses them as a narrative prosthesis to prop up an emotional arc. However, for the contestant themself, this act of visibility could be a calculated survival strategy. Reality TV serves as a rare platform, albeit exploitative, for social capital in contemporary reality, wherein society comprises of ‘extraordinary exclusions’ and the broken chain of accessibility bars disabled individuals from traditional employment, social security, and other basic amenities. Drawing on the provided papers, research into the lived experiences of disabled workers in India’s neoliberal economy can provide a background for why many sign up for such shows, not just for the sake of competitive spirit and skill display, but to actually secure a better lifestyle through public recognition after their appearance. After being so systematically devoid of resources, they are practically forced to make a spectacle of their disability as a transactional exchange in order to transcend the sad state of affairs dealt to them their entire lives. It is a disturbing situation wherein the individual is consenting to being an object of pity on television to gain basic human rights of being seen and supported off-screen. It seems to be an overall desperate attempt for a seat at a table that never had a place for them, unfairly.

"New Bollywood" and the Production of Representation

Priyam Sinha’s work on disability performativity has shed light on how, in New Bollywood, representation is not limited to what appears on the screen. However, it involves negotiations within the industry, along with its pitches, commercial pressures, etc. When disability is presented through the lens of ‘stylistic addition’, or even a calculated marketing
hook, disability performativity comes into play, cycling through production and circulation, leaving behind actual traces of lived experiences. This could include caste dynamics, social relationships, and other institutions in the Indian context, which are merely incidental to the film's skeletal and fleshy being.

Applying this understanding to the movie Taare Zameen Par as well, it is deeply unsettling to me that I only realised the hidden nuances of its background post this course and the discussion on Sinha’s paper. As a movie that makes me cry to this day, I am now conflicted after learning the movie's original intention and Gupte’s regrets about ‘losing to a
star’ by sacrificing his own agency, despite years of research on dyslexia and an empowering message of self-sufficiency and growth. In hindsight, I feel disappointed that, along with many others, I considered it an exemplary movie depicting inclusion. Now, my awareness is heightened towards the silencing of the most authentic voice in the production- the
screenwriter, as well as how the “supercrip saviour” narrative turned a lived reality into a commercial spectacle, as I share my frustration with Amol Gupte. 

Conclusion and Reflexive Note

My key takeaway from this course, layered over my internship experiences of actually working with individuals with various and varying degrees of disability, has highlighted one crucial fact to me: to look beyond the masked and fabricated visual representation that is thrust onto me, and look beneath the layers of superficial “feel-good” diversity, actually to acknowledge the structural failures that they hide. Now that I am hyper-aware of how far removed these representations are from lived realities, I am more inclined to understand the ‘broken chain of accessibility’. I am also grateful for the opportunity to have my eyes opened towards these sad truths. As a student who wishes to learn, grow, and be an active changemaker in contemporary society, this course has definitely brought me a step closer to
fulfilling that goal.

References

Friedner, M. (2017). How the disabled body unites the national body: Disability as ‘feel good’diversity in urban India. Contemporary South Asia, 25(4), 347–363.

Mitchell, D. T., & Snyder, S. L. (2000). Narrative prosthesis: Disability and the dependencies of discourse. University of Michigan Press.

Sinha, P. (2020, June 20). Margarita with a Straw: Female sexuality, same sex love, and disability in India. Economic and Political Weekly Engage, 55(25).

Sinha, P. (2024). Scripting disability as the ‘new’ Bollywood: Pitching, reflecting, researching and negotiating. Media, Culture & Society, 46(4), 725–744.