— Juanita Rose Thomas
Gokul KS is a third-year PhD student in the HSS Department of IIT Madras, conducting research, under Dr Sonika Gupta, on the politics of contemporary Tibetan cinema and film-making. Gokul co-curates ‘Tibetscapes’ and is a contributing author to ‘Global South Colloquy’
Three years into your studies at IIT Madras, can you name any major strengths as well as drawbacks of being a student here? Did you find it difficult to adjust to an institute that gives more importance to technical arenas in general?
The interesting thing is, apart from some basic information, I didn’t know much about IIT Madras in the beginning. I practically jumped from my masters to PhD. It was only after getting into the program that I started to inquire more. Nevertheless, I felt very welcomed here from the get-go. Despite not knowing a lot about research, I found a healthy support system here in IITM in the form of supervisors, doctoral committee members and faculty. At the same time, considering that IITM is a research-oriented institute that is too much involved in academics, it lacks the vibrant environment that some other universities like JNU or UOH possess. Students coming from such campuses may find it difficult to adapt to the academic system here.
Also, despite me feeling welcomed here from the beginning, I found that it was not the general case in the department. Many students didn’t get that welcoming environment from the department. That is to say, even before the current physical distancing owing to the pandemic, some other sort of distancing was already present. There were visible lines of hierarchy within the department and generally in the institute. The experience as a collective is actually very lacking. However, it needs to be said that these hierarchies are not exclusive to IIT Madras. It exists everywhere as a reflection of our society. But I believe, we can and need to actively work towards overcoming these pervasive forms of hierarchies by promoting solidarity among ourselves.
Other than that, although the institute gives prominence to technical courses, the humanities department of IITM is really good and well-known across the country. I was really impressed by the range and content of courses provided, especially, in the M A program. The students are also very much driven by the course.
What does the schedule of a PhD student look like? How would you rate your discipline in keeping up with your schedule?
Recently I saw a meme that goes like this: I don’t like 9-5 working hours. In order to avoid that I took a PhD degree. Now I work 24/7. This sort of summarises the life of a research scholar. It is certainly not a cakewalk as it asks for a prolonged commitment to one specific research question for 4-5 years. At the same time, it is a personal process. You will have your own struggles to face. But this need not be a hard struggle if one is interested in the topic of research and excited about the whole thing. Then again, the matter is very subjective and changes from one to the other.
For me, the whole process was really enjoyable even if it was filled with multiple procedures and deadlines. It felt more like an exploration than a learning process. In the first eight months, whenever I did something unrelated to my research, I used to feel that something was wrong or not functioning properly. Later as I got adapted to it, I found my own time to enjoy other things or just to be free.
What are your areas of interest outside research?
Most of my interests are related to cinema: reading about it, talking about it, writing about it. I enjoy all kinds of movies. I am also quite interested in reading- both fiction and non-fiction. After getting into research, I read more non-fiction but recently, I have been re-reading Harry Potter.
Your research topic, On the Margins of State: Politics of Contemporary Tibetan Cinema and Filmmaking tries to analyse how the statelessness and subsequent loss of identity of the exiled Tibetans are portrayed in filmmaking. What drove you to this particular topic of study?
Since my MA dissertation was on the topic ‘Politics of Visual Narratives: Israeli- Lebanese Conflict and Political Cinema’, I was already interested in visual IR. But it was Dr Sonika Gupta who, while looking at my resume, actually inspired me to go forward with it. At that time ma’am was working on a project related to Tibetan exile and democratization. Till then I had always thought I had watched different range of movies but it struck me how oblivious I was to Tibetan exile cinema or a cinema in the margins. Soon I began to read up on it and found it very interesting considering how those cinemas emerged from the most unexpected spaces. I was also able to be part of a comprehensive course on Tibet by Dr Gupta that year. It helped me get a better picture of Tibet. Also, we have always considered statelessness as a legal category, however, I understood that it is also an experiential condition derived from a specific lived reality. So my journey began with the question of how to understand and interpret statelessness as an experiential condition and how to portray this condition. There have always been aesthetic sources such as literature, music, poetry and cinema to portray the same and I chose the last one.
As I said earlier, visual studies were part of my MA dissertation. However. It was just a textual analysis and I couldn’t go beyond the formalistic boundaries. This time, I wanted to access more than that. My idea was to conceptualize the filmmaking process. We usually see the visual as a gateway. Behind it, there are a whole lot of processes involved: technical decisions, aesthetic choices, thought processes, creative ideas, ways of expression etc. I connected this filmmaking process with statelessness.
How do you plan to approach and identify the politics of Tibetan cinemas as well as the process behind making one?
Scholars using visual methods have adopted different ways to access the filmmaking process. I am planning to use three methods to do the same. Some of the movies I focus on have been released a long time ago. I intend to revisit those movies mainly by interviewing the directors, the actors, the technicians or people who were in any way associated with the film. As I said before, I can understand the thought processes, aesthetic and political choices behind each scene through them. That is one way of approach. The second way to access behind the scenes is to be an actual part of such a film crew in various capacities and roles. This will give first-hand access to the everyday things that occur as part of the lived reality. Unlike international relations where we focus mainly on grand events, in the specific case of statelessness, negotiations happen at different levels on an everyday basis. If I am in a film set, I can always look at the film through these everyday mundane but significant processes. The third way, and the most important aspect of my research, is collaboration. Rather than saying that I am studying about this community, it is high time we say I am studying with this community. They are also co-producers of the knowledge that is being generated in the process. We have to acknowledge the power relations, politics of extraction and representation in order to try and overcome this hierarchy. While I haven’t finalised the exact ways to materialise this collaborative work, I intend to make use of such open-ended approaches for the study.
Can you name some of the films that piqued your interest in the politics of filmmaking? Also, any possible movie recommendations for those interested in knowing more about Tibet and the state of statelessness?
The movies that took me to the politics of filmmaking would be the Battle of Algiers by Gillo Pontecorvo; Roma by Alfonso Cuarón; Touki Bouki by Djibril Diop Mambéty; Parasite by Bong Joon-ho and Shoplifters by Hirokazu KoreedaMy recommendations for knowing more about Tibet and the issue of statelessness would be The Sun Behind the Clouds by Tenzing Sonam and Ritu Sarin; Rituals of Resistance by Tenzin Phuntsog and Joe Dietrich; The Sweet Requiem by Tenzing Sonam and Ritu Sarin. There are also movies such as Seven Years in Tibet by Jean Jacques Annaud, Kundun by Martin Scorses and Little Buddha by Beranardo Bertolucci which are non-Tibetan representations of Tibet and Tibetans.
In one of your photo essays on the Monasteries of Mundgod, Doeguling Tibetan settlement, you quoted the words of Benyamin in Goat Days, “the lives we don’t experience are mere myths for us”. How different was the Tibetan life you experienced during field trips from the one you had read and studied?
I was quite fortunate in that case. I joined IITM in July 2019 and my first field trip happened two weeks after. I had not really prepared for a proper field trip. People usually would have pre-arranged everything with a tight schedule. Since that didn’t happen in my case, I was pretty free to do whatever I wanted. So without having any preconceived notions or prejudices, I went to the Tibetan settlement. Of course, there will always be a limit on what we can understand as outsiders to specific experiences or locations. But reaching that limit is very important. We say the same about cinema: for a film, a spectator is always an outsider. No matter how much I try to get involved, it stands independent. Fields are also like that in the sense they carry diverse experiences, subjectivity, and their own politics, geography as well as history.
But even so, my experience with a movie before and after I went to the places it portrays are vastly different. Fieldworks make us see things in a different light. For example, the opportunity to be able to attend the 2019 Tibet Film Festival in Dharamshala and watch it with the Tibetan community there made me realize that all these visuals, narratives and sounds represent something beyond the textual boundary.
I hope and believe that these fieldworks are gradually helping me gain familiarity and move more towards the limit I earlier mentioned.
Do you think that Tibet as a major topic in International Relations is losing its significance and can we possibly view these films made in exile as an attempt at reminding the world of their growing indifference to those left stateless?
In the specific case of Tibet, there was a time when everyone was speaking about the plight of Tibetans. But the situation has definitely changed, especially with China growing into a potential superpower. They are now able to change narratives in the way they need. This is not confined to Tibet. The same happens in Xinjiang and Hongkong. Tibetans have had one of the longest struggles for self-determination across the world. Their modes of protests have also changed over time. We are now living in a world of visuals. As Roland Bleiker argues, the global political landscape has undergone visualization. From what I have understood from my interaction with the Tibetan filmmakers and community in general, visuals or cinema has become the new platform for protests. However, contrasting with International Relations where grand events grab importance, contemporary Tibetan cinema is not just about the history of their struggles and protests for their long lost place. They also show seemingly insignificant events and realities that surround them, which sometimes defy the stereotypes that are usually circulated about Tibetans. They portray gender issues, personal problems, everyday struggles as well. So Tibetan cinema is about their struggles and history of protest but it is also much more than that.
Considering how important field work and direct interactions must be for a research topic such as this, how badly has the Covid-19 pandemic affected your progress? Also, how helpful do you think a research guide can be in such instances of exhaustion?
Covid-19 has very much affected the resources for the research. The core information is first-hand experience that comes from the field, through the conversations and interactions. In the initial stages I was really clueless about how to take this forward. But I believe research is also about challenges; it is also about how we navigate through these challenges. So, I started looking for alternative ways and began digital field work. I talked with many directors through zoom calls, and attended various film festivals online. But it can never replace the collective and personal experience one otherwise gets. So once any sort of normalcy is back, I am looking forward to continuing the field work.
And about how helpful a supervisor can be in such instances: it’s not just about the pandemic. From the very beginning there has been a lot of conversations and vibrant discussions that helped me get multiple vantage points and understand different dimensions of the topic. These conversations have especially helped me through the exhaustion of the pandemic.
In case the pandemic recedes, what are your expectations of 2021?
Apart from the vivas that are upcoming, I am really really looking forward to the field work. It’s almost been 20 months and I hope to go on one soon.
What do you suppose are the major woes in the research field that discourages students from doing a PhD?
There is a major misconception in society that PhD is very difficult and exhausting. It can be. But from my experience, it can also be a rewarding process. If the area you have decided to study drives and encourages you, it can be very exciting. Another common misconception about PhD is that it is very boring. Like what I said, it need not be, if the question you have decided to ask interests you.
What would be your piece of advice to any student beginning their PhD studies?
Throughout the years, you have been handed out a lot of knowledge and information. Research is a field where you finally get to practice them. Here, you are taking a journey on your own terms. You get to produce your own knowledge. You get to think for yourself. If anyone is interested in that, there is nothing that should worry you about taking your PhD.
Article 19 