Ruling Class And Revolution Clash In Sumptuous 'Indian Summers'
Set in 1932, Indian Summers is a tale of two communities. The British rule India, and in their annual tradition, they retreat into the hills — with all their Indian servants — to stay cool during the summer. But while the British gossip over gin and tonics, the Indian streets are brewing with calls for independence. The new 10-part British TV drama — about empire and race and relationships that cross those lines — has just had its U.S. debut on Masterpiece on PBS.
Series creator Paul Rutman tells NPR's Robert Siegel that the inspiration for the show came to him during a family vacation to India. "My wife is Indian, and so we go back from time to time," he says. The family was traveling through Darjeeling and they went into a boarding house that had been turned into a very fine hotel.
The manager wanted Rutman to see something: "She opened this cupboard and out fell this sort of giant treasure trove of old photographs of how it was back then in the '30s and '40s," he says. The images showed ordinary Brits, dressed up and living grand lives. In the background were their Indian servants — "none of whom seem to be allowed to look directly to the camera," Rutman says. "They were always looking down, looking off."
Interview Highlights
On how the British — even if they were not high in the class system — lived very privileged lives in India
It was expected of people in India, and it was very much understood that, you know, a minimum of 12 servants to run a household, was recommended, and anything less than that was tricky. ...
What we've depicted is small-fry compared with the reality. ... People used to ... journey from Kolkata all the way up to Simla which would take over three days, carrying all their worldly goods and chattels on elephants and horseback with lines of coolies — as they were known — carrying them all the way up to the hills. And people did because they could, because they could get away with it. It was an exhibition of their power and supremacy.
On Julie Walters' character, Cynthia, who runs the club which is the social center of this British community
I was talking to Julie about this the other day, and we both get very upset when people describe her as a sort of monster, or purely wicked. I think she's a very compelling character. There's a rather sort of bitter survival instinct in her. You know, she'll do anything to protect her patch. I think she's someone who is willing to kind of say the things that other people won't say. ...
She's a sort of Cockney East End girl, a military wife. And has made a life for herself out here in India. And I think for her and for many people like her, home is India now. It is her club, and so she's there. She's hanging onto her life and to this idea of empire in a very personal way. Because if Britain loses India, then she has no home.
On the sexual encounters of the era
When the Brits first went out in the beginning of the 19th century, it was fine; British entrepreneurs gladly took Indian wives and nothing was thought of it. It was only towards the end of things after the mutiny in the middle of the 19th century, in those last years, that actually the British changed their attitude.
They decided that this was not the way to carry on and we had to be much more defensive about the way we lived out there. And the Indians should be kept at arm's length. And increasingly they were seen as something perhaps as a little more dangerous. So I think it was a live front line. And I think it was probably considered more acceptable for British men to have Indian mistresses, and rather less acceptable for British women to explore romantic encounters with Indian men.
On the way the show is received in England
I think the interesting thing is that we tend to sweep the whole thing under the carpet. The British are very uncomfortable talking about the Empire. And so in fact, the show when it came out did begin a bit of a debate here about that sort of thing. But I think in general people on the sort of the right wing, politically, tend to look back on the Empire as a rather wonderful thing, as a sort of grand episode in our history. And people on the left see it as something that we should castigate ourselves over.
And so in a way, it's sort of that rather kind of bipolar response to the whole thing makes it quite fertile territory. It makes it an uncomfortable viewing over here in the U.K. But you know, I think the story of Empire is in general is something that many different countries can respond to. That sense of kind of waning power of having let go of something. I think it haunts the British still. I think we're still bothered by it. We still have this feeling that maybe we were bigger, better people then, or a greater power then.
9(MDE1MTIxMDg0MDE0MDQ3NTY3MzkzMzY1NA001))
Transcript
ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:
And now a lavish tale of two communities. "Indian Summers" is a new 10-part British TV drama that had its American debut on PBS this past weekend. It is set in 1932. The British rule India and, as is their annual tradition, they retreat into the hills to stay cool during the summer.
(SOUNDBITE OF TV SHOW, "INDIAN SUMMERS")
UNIDENTIFIED CHOIR: (Singing) I want to meet him with his new sweetheart.
SIEGEL: But while the British sip gin and tonics and other refreshing spirits, surrounded by servants and gossip, the Indian streets are brewing with calls for independence.
(SOUNDBITE OF TV SHOW, "INDIAN SUMMERS")
UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS: (As Character) A nation.
UNIDENTIFIED CROWD: (As Characters) Yeah.
UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS: (As Character, chanting foreign language).
UNIDENTIFIED CROWD: (As Characters, chanting foreign language).
SIEGEL: "Indian Summers" is a modern TV show about empire and race and relationships that cross those lines. And joining us from London is the series' creator, Paul Rutman. Welcome to the program.
PAUL RUTMAN: Thank you very much.
SIEGEL: What was the inspiration for "Indian Summers"?
RUTMAN: The inspiration was a holiday I took with my family. I should say my wife is Indian, and so we go back from time to time. And we were travelling through Darjeeling. There was a hotel I'd always wanted to stay in. It used to be, in what they call the British time, an old sort of boarding house. And anyway, it's now a hotel.
I got talking to the manager there, and she said, oh, let me show you this thing. She took me to this cupboard. And she opened this cupboard, and out fell this sort of giant treasure trove of old photographs of how it was back then in the '30s and '40s. And it was pictures of just ordinary Brits from all over the place dressed up for tea dances and dinners and living this life of sort of dukes and duchesses, you know? And it struck me. Often there were Indian servants in the background, none of whom seemed to be allowed to look directly to the camera. They were always looking down, looking off. And also, you had this sense that these were just ordinary people. You know, they weren't grand.
SIEGEL: But part of what "Indian Summers" is about here is that the Brits in India, as you say, came from all over the ladder of the British class system, but in India, they lived like very privileged people and enjoyed a very grand situation.
RUTMAN: That's absolutely right. I think it was expected of people in India. And it was very much understood that, you know, a minimum of 12 servants to run a household was recommended, and anything less than that was tricky.
SIEGEL: Would the British actually move all of their goods into the hills for the summer season, as its depicted here?
RUTMAN: Absolutely. You know, in fact, what we've depicted is small fry compared with the reality. You know, originally, Delhi wasn't the capital of India. It was Calcutta. And people used to make a far greater journey from Calcutta all the way up to Simla, which would take, you know, over three days, carrying all their worldly goods and chattels on elephants and horseback with lines of coolies, as they were known, carrying them all the way up to the hills. And people did because they could, 'cause they could get away with it. It was an exhibition of their power and supremacy.
SIEGEL: I want to ask you about the character Cynthia.
RUTMAN: Sure.
SIEGEL: It's Julie Walters - is the actress who plays her. She runs the club which is the center of social existence of this British community in the hill station during the summer.
(SOUNDBITE OF TV SHOW, "INDIAN SUMMERS")
JULIE WALTERS: (As Cynthia) To all of you strangers up for the first time, welcome. And as for the rest of you...
(LAUGHTER)
WALTERS: (As Cynthia) ...Cheats, adulterers, slaves of empire here to rule this great nation for another glorious six months...
UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: (As Character) Absolutely.
WALTERS: (As Cynthia) ...I want no moaning about my milk punch.
(LAUGHTER)
SIEGEL: She is a - very devious. She's a schemer. She's, like many of the Brits around her, a racist. Do you think she's seen as a sympathetic character by audiences at all or utterly, a villainous one?
RUTMAN: (Laughter). It's interesting you ask that because I was talking to Julie about this the other day, and we both get very upset when people describe her as (unintelligible) of monster or, you know, purely wicked. I think she's a very compelling character. There's a rather sort of bitter survival instinct in her. You know, she'll do anything to protect her patch. And so I think she's someone who is willing to kind of say the things that other people won't say in the interest of staying on.
SIEGEL: And she is an example of a character who is not bred of the gentility from England.
RUTMAN: That's absolutely right, yes. She's a sort of cockney, East-end girl, you know, a military wife and has made a life for herself out here in India, you know? And I think for her, and for many people like her, you know, home is India now. It is her club. And so she's there. She's hanging onto her life and to this idea of empire in a very personal way, you know, because if Britain loses India, then she has no home.
SIEGEL: The story of "Indian Summers" isn't just about the Brits in India. It's about the Indians who are still 15 years away from independence. And often, the ways in which the lines between those two communities are crossed is through sexual desire, to put it bluntly. How much transgressive sex was there during the Raj, do you figure?
RUTMAN: I think that there were a number of examples of people who did enjoy that kind of transgressive sexual encounters. I think that the sort of larger point, though, is that when the Brits first went out at the beginning of the 19th century, it was fine. British entrepreneurs gladly took Indian wives, and nothing was thought of it. It was only toward the end of things, after the mutiny at the mid of the 19th century - in those last years that actually the British changed their attitude and they decided that this was not the way to carry on and we had to be much more defensive about the way we lived out there and the Indians should be kept at arm's length.
And increasingly, they were seen as something, perhaps, a little bit more dangerous. So you know, I think it was a live front line, and I think it was probably considered more acceptable for British men to have Indian mistresses and rather less acceptable for British women to explore romantic encounters with Indian men.
SIEGEL: I think when Americans see a program about India that's come from Britain, the assumption is that in Britain, they really know a lot more about this; they're much more connected. Is the British audience still savvy about the subcontinent, or is it so long ago that the empire ended that?
RUTMAN: I think - no, that's a great question. I think the interesting thing is that we tend to sweep the whole thing under the carpet. the British are very uncomfortable talking about the empire. And so, in fact, the show, when it came out, did begin a bit of a debate here about that sort of thing. But I think on the - in general, people on the - sort of the right-wing politically tend to look back on the empire as a rather wonderful thing, as a grand episode in our history. And people on the left see it as it as something we should castigate ourselves over, you know?
And so, in a way, it sort of - that sort of - that rather kind of bipolar response to the whole thing makes it quite fertile territory. It makes it quite uncomfortable viewing over here in the U.K. But, you know, I think the story of empires, in general, is something that many different countries can respond to, you know? That sense of kind of waning power, of having let go of something. It's - I think it haunts the British still, you know? I think we're still bothered by it. We still have this feeling that maybe we were bigger, better people than - or a greater power than - and that we have to kind of strut on the world's stage a little more than perhaps we have any right to (laughter).
SIEGEL: Well, Paul Rutman, thanks a lot for talking with us about the show.
RUTMAN: It's a pleasure. Thank you very much.
SIEGEL: Paul Rutman, who spoke to us from London, is the creator of "Indian Summers." Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
300x250 Ad
300x250 Ad