Between “Percy Jackson and the Olympians” starring Aryan Simhadri as Grover and “Mean Girls” with Avantika as Karen Shetty, we are in the midst of a stark rise in representation of Indian-Americans in mainstream Hollywood entertainment.
Recently, Netflix’s “Bridgerton” had the Sharma sisters played by Indian actresses Simone Ashley and Charithra Chandan, which was a massive deal for viewers. The series, known for its love-centered, lustful plot lines, portrayed the sisters as beautiful, desirable, and lovely—traits usually reserved for white women as only they were protagonists in romantic films. Further, in the series, Kate Sharma’s love interest Anthony was enamored by her scent of lilies, sensually inhaling the air as she passed by, which objected to the stereotype of Indian people as having an unpleasant smell.
Karen Shetty (formerly Karen Smith) from “Mean Girls” had similar boundary-breaking implications. Avantika’s character at her core was meant to be unintelligent, playful, and frivolous. To see an Indian woman play a character that so directly contrasts the general perception of Indians being extremely smart and nerdy attacked that limiting stereotype. As a South Indian, I grew up with most of these common perceptions hanging over me. Regardless of whether they were “uplifting” or outright derogatory, a stereotype in itself categorizes groups of people and forces them to conform to societal expectations—it’s never a “positive” or “good” force.
Clearly, the representation we see today has been challenging these stereotypes, contrary to before. A key difference between today and the past is the target audience for media with Indian representation; while actors like Dev Patel as Jamal Malik in “Slumdog Millionaire” and Irrfan Khan in “Life of Pi” had great opportunities in cinema, their films weren’t meant for children. As kids, our only representation was Ravi played by Karan Brar on Disney’s “Jessie”. However his character had a thick, comical Indian accent and adhered to every stereotype imaginable, such as being nerdy and awkward. While this character may sometimes represent reality, Indian people, like other groups, are much more diverse. When there’s only one example of a certain personality type like Ravi’s, a whole group can be confined to a single narrative.
Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, a Nigerian novelist, explored this in her 2009 Ted Talk, “Danger of a Single Story”. Her main assertion is that having one outlook on a group of people is quite damaging, as it discounts their true complexity. She references a family she had encountered growing up, reflecting, “All I had heard about them was how poor they were, so it had become impossible for me to see them as anything but poor,” (Adichie 2009). She then speaks about how Western media focuses on the challenges faced in Africa rather than their triumphs, concluding that, “To insist on only these negative stories is to flatten [her] experience” and “make one story become the only story.” Finally, a statement I found powerful: “It is impossible to engage properly with a place or a person without engaging with all of the stories of that place and that person…it emphasizes how we are different rather than how we are similar.” Although mainly talking about literature, Adichie’s rhetoric makes a great point about why having few examples of representation, though potentially accurate, can overshadow the other types of people that makeup a community. Characters like Ravi reinforced Indian stereotypes, contributing to our “single story”. However, as Adichie preaches, having diverse, inclusive representation benefits everyone by helping us focus on our similarities—the biggest one being our individuality as humans. Some people have questioned the importance of representation, arguing, “Why can’t someone relate to a character that looks different from them?”
That’s a valid thought—and it’s certainly possible to be relatable while being different; human feelings and emotions transcend physical characteristics. However, there is a notable factor that produces a barrier. My English Professor, Dr. Karen Gaffney, taught a course last semester where the idea of looking through a window vs. into a mirror came up. This analogy sets up the perfect answer to clarify why representation is important. When American media has extremely diverse viewers but predominantly white subjects, there is a discrepancy that affects people’s perception about their place in society and most importantly themselves. It contributes to feeling marginalized, unimportant, and undervalued in society as a whole.
Sure, as a viewer I will root for the characters and feel connected to them. Yet no matter how I relate internally, I will believe that I cannot be part of that world presenting who I really am. Representation matters because it shows people that they can have these experiences depicted in movies and TV and that they aren’t just for white people. That way, when kids watch media, they feel as though they are looking in the mirror, at themselves and their lives reflected back to them, rather than through a window that overlooks a life they feel like they will never have. Representation makes people feel valid and appreciated as an integral part of society.
Aside from rebelling against stereotypes and allowing people to feel included, representation is an empowering force that bridges people together rather than dividing them into subcategories. I am deeply excited for the next generation of children that could have the representation I always wanted growing up. Moving forward, I am hopeful to see the representation for Indians, and all other groups, grow tremendously in the film industry during the years to come.
