Latest news with #GenevaGraduateInstitute
The Print
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- The Print
Palace dramas are the new OTT soaps. Real royals are just embarrassed
'The irresponsible prince spending his time womanising and partying; Palaces crumbling while the family is given to personal extravagance; Women spending their time draped in jewels waiting to be rescued by the men – these tropes have existed for 200 years,' said Tripurdaman Singh, senior research fellow at the Geneva Graduate Institute, who is currently working on a project exploring decolonisation in India's princely states . It's a classic case of the emperor being outfitted with new clothes. The big-budget shows on modern-day aristocrats were released within 10 days of each other. They are riding the wave of popularity drummed up by shows such as Downton Abbey (2010) and The Crown (2016). But their voyeuristic take on the rich and fabulous lives of dethroned kings and queens and their heirs is missing the mark. Instead of offering viewers something new, they are reinforcing stereotypes. New Delhi: A cash-strapped prince with a penchant for removing his shirt and an ambitious CEO flit and flirt in Netflix's new rom-com, The Royals. At the same time, three millennial scions are mired in intrigue, murder and drugs in Jio Hotstar's Kull: The Legacy of the Raisingghs. Both are lopsided, lampoonish, and ludicrous. After overdosing on the Mirzapur template of gritty, saucy small-town dramas, the next frontier for streaming platforms is extravagance. With the wildly successful The Fabulous Lives of Bollywood Wives (2020), the other island of decadence and excess is royal families. India's royal stories are more muted, especially compared to the reservoir dogs' climactic drama of Nepal's palace murders, but it has unlimited soap opportunities too. Netflix has dropped details of Season 2 of The Royals, while producer Pranjal Khandhdiya is developing a web series on the life of the late Maharani Gayatri Devi. On bookshelves, a surge of both fiction and non-fiction is capturing royal intrigue—from historian Anoushka Jain's highly-anticipated Badass Begums to British author Tasha Suri's romantasy, The Jasmine Throne. The appetite for palace drama, whether on screen or in print, is only growing. Aviraaj Singh (Ishaan Khatter) in The Royals has the urge to disrobe at the drop of a hat—whether he's dancing in his room or astride a horse while playing polo. Indians absolutely have an appetite for palace plots. Just look at our soap operas. Palace plots are nothing but that, on a larger scale–with chiffons, pearls, and history thrown in. But unfortunately, unlike Downton Abbey or The Crown, political and social context is almost entirely absent in shows like The Royals–which seems like an extended Instagram reel rather than well-crafted television – Tripurdaman Singh, historian At the other end of the spectrum, Raisinggh prince Abhimanyu (Amol Parashar) is more likely to be snorting cocaine in his room. Not too long ago, there was that Fawad Khan-Sonam Kapoor movie Khoobsurat (2014) – an embarrassment of royal proportions that left the real-life maharanis and maharajas of India's erstwhile princely states gobsmacked. 'This is not how we live,' said Brijeshwari Kumari Gohil, daughter of the titular Maharaja of Bhavnagar, Vijayraj Singh Gohil. 'I cannot imagine or know anyone who would play polo shirtless. It is not fictionalisation, but a caricature and simply ridiculous,' she said. It's a missed opportunity. According to Ormax Media estimates, Kull and The Royals garnered 3.1 million and 2.5 million views, respectively, on just the first weekend of their release. The two web series have also made it clear that, when it comes to the representation of Indian royals, makers often fall back into the comfort zone of exhausted stereotypes. 'Indians absolutely have an appetite for palace plots. Just look at our soap operas. Palace plots are nothing but that, on a larger scale–with chiffons, pearls, and history thrown in. But unfortunately, unlike Downton Abbey or The Crown, political and social context is almost entirely absent in shows like The Royals–which seems like an extended Instagram reel rather than well-crafted television,' said Tripurdaman Singh. Kull vs The Royals Netflix's PR machinery was quick to compare The Royals with its hugely popular show Bridgerton (2020), an alternative rom-com set in the United Kingdom's Regency period from 1795 to 1837. But Bridgerton is rich in its storytelling as well. The Royals focuses on the relationship between Maharaja Aviraaj Singh of Morpur and Mumbai-based startup CEO Sophia Kanmani Shekhar. The royal family lives in Motibagh Palace in Rajasthan, which has seen better days, and wants to climb out of debt. Enter Sophia, a CEO who wants to convert the palace into a 'Royal B&B'. But the push and pull between Sophia with Aviraaj is tedious. 'Think of it as a Barbara Cartland novel rewritten by a social media intern who just discovered the word 'situationship',' wrote senior film critic Saibal Chatterjee in his review of the web series. Audiences, too, have shared their verdict through edits, videos, and reviews of the highly publicised show. Everything in it has been scrutinised and found wanting – from Khatter's endless shirtless scenes to Pednekar's acting and the limited screen time allotted to the legendary Zeenat Aman, who plays Aviraaj's grandmother. 'To me, the most problematic aspect of The Royals was showing them as young people latching on to the past,' said Anshu Khanna, founder of Royal Fables, a platform that promotes the art, heritage, and lifestyle of Indian royalty through exhibitions. 'To begin with, a bit of homework and research, a more honest portrayal, and less flamboyant costumes would have helped.' This is not how we live…I cannot imagine or know anyone who would play polo shirtless. It is not fictionalisation, but a caricature and simply ridiculous —Brijeshwari Kumari Gohil, daughter of the titular Maharaja of Bhavnagar Despite mostly poor reviews, the show climbed to the number one spot on Netflix's list of most-watched non-English shows. Stories of modern royalty have been explored in films such as Shyam Benegal's Zubeidaa (2001), Shashanka Ghosh's Khoobsurat, and Sooraj Barjatya's Prem Ratan Dhan Payo (2015). OTT shows such as The Empire (2021) and Taj: Divided by Blood (2023) focused on reinterpretations of Mughal history. And until The Royals and Kull, streaming platforms have, for the most part, limited themselves to documentaries or fictionalised interpretations of historical events. If The Royals is light and breezy, then Kull is its dark but equally flawed counterpart. Co-created by Ekta Kapoor and directed by Sahir Raza, Kull veers into soap opera territory. Scandals and secrets unravel within the tall, gilded walls of a palace in the fictional town of Bilkaner, as a power struggle brews between three royal siblings: Indrani (Nimrat Kaur), Abhimanyu (Amol Parashar), and Kavya (Riddhi Dogra). ''Kull can be compared to Shakespearean dramas that are dark, gritty, suspenseful, and tragic with a touch of melodramatic soap operas,' wrote Prachi Arya in her review of the series. Everything in the show seems to have been inspired by Game of Thrones (2011) – from the haunting theme song to the death of a king in the beginning. Kavya is a young entrepreneur who has a major stake in her father's hotel business. She is shown dressed in crisp formals, brokering deals about a show about her illustrious family. With streaks of blue in her hair, she is portrayed as the embodiment of a 'modern royal'. Her brother Abhimanyu is a drug addict and spendthrift who relies on his older sister Indrani – married to a politician's gay son – to bail him out. Both shows have opulence, lavender weddings, and sibling rivalry – and are set in Rajasthan. 'It is as if royalty does not exist anywhere outside North India. Isn't it tiring to just show Rajasthan over and over again?' asked Khanna. There are, however, logistical reasons for choosing Rajasthan—throw a stone and you'll hit a heritage haveli or a palace hotel. 'I think a reason why Rajasthan becomes the location of choice is because the permissions are easier. Most of the palaces in the state also have very strong Instagram hooks, because creators keep going there. Sometimes, it's simply the budget,' said a member of Kull's creative team who did not wish to be named. Also read: Is the golden age of OTT over? Censorship, stars, and the shift to 'safe' content What real royals do There's a scene in The Royals when the dowager, the queen, and the princess proudly declare that they don't work. That's not entirely true in real life. The scions of some erstwhile royal houses do lead lavish lives, but they're running businesses, becoming actors and models, or have become prominent politicians. Brijeshwari Kumari Gohil was born and raised in Mumbai, has a bachelor's degree in archaeology and art history from the University of Nottingham, and a master's degree in heritage management and conservation from Durham University. Now, she has dedicated her life to preserving the art, architecture, and cultural history of her ancestral hometown in Bhavnagar. Akshita M Bhanj Deo from the royal family of Mayurbhanj in Odisha is an entrepreneur, communication strategist, and the editor-in-chief of a lifestyle magazine. 'I'm not hosting a durbar—I am visiting boardrooms,' she said in a 2021 interview. Urvashi Singh of Khimsar, Rajasthan, is a publisher, hotelier and entrepreneur. And modern-day princess Padmaja Kumari Parmar from the Mewar dynasty, which traces its ancestry back to 730 AD, is the executive director of Business Development for the HRH Group of Hotels, a philanthropist, and the global ambassador for Breakthrough T1D. Radhikaraje Gaekwad, the titular Maharani of Baroda, shared a lengthy post on Instagram on 29 May with the caption, 'What watching The Royals elicited in me'. She wrote about the challenges faced by Indian royals, from the dissolution of monarchy to the abolishment of privy purses. 'The 'real' royals, meanwhile, have rolled up their sleeves and are running India's best-known music festivals, museums, hotels, even constituencies and states–an impressive number being the ladies of the house–Gwalior, Jaipur, Bikaner and Kotah to name a few. Ouch to purdah and patriarchy!' wrote Gaekwad. After Independence, India's royal houses traded their palaces for politics—from the Scindias of Gwalior to Karan Singh of Jammu and Kashmir. That legacy continues even today with Dushyant Singh (Scindia-Shinde lineage), Vishvendra Singh (the titular Maharaja of Bharatpur), Diya Kumari (the granddaughter of Man Singh II, the last ruling Maharaja of Jaipur) and the newly elected Yaduveer Wadiyar of Mysore. However, the prominence of these royal figures and their work in the public domain has not necessarily translated into well-researched shows or films. Khatter's role in The Royals is seen as a reference to Padmanabh Singh, head of the former royal family of Jaipur. Lovingly called 'Pacho', the maharaja has been modelling since he was 17, walking the ramp for Dolce and Gabbana, U.S Polo Association, and other big brands. Like the character of Aviraaj – who is alternatively called 'Fizzy' in the series – he studied at New York University and plays polo, though not shirtless. His Instagram account, with half a million followers, documents his modern life. 'Royal families stay relevant through social media, but there also needs to be actual work being done to have that relevance for posterity. It is not enough to say, 'We are royals',' said Gohil. Not every social media royal narrative is necessarily true. 'Young royals, if one can call them that, have taken to social media to become visible and recognisable in the public eye. This is particularly so because they have easy access to props that help produce Instagram-worthy content: fairy-tale palaces, vintage cars, fabulous jewels, priceless objets decoratifs, etc,' said Tripurdaman Singh. But even their edited, perfect lives on Instagram are more authentic than the shows based on them. Also Read: Panchayat to Laapataa—villages on OTT are Gandhian simplicity or Ambedkar's den of ignorance 'Talk to us for spicy stories' There's another big regal project underway. But producer Pranjal Khandhdiya, the force behind biopics such as Soorma (2018) and Super 30 (2019), is not looking to reinterpret India's millennial royals. He's working on a web series on the life and legacy of 'Rajmata' Gayatri Devi, the third maharani consort of Jaipur, and a Lok Sabha MP. 'Some stories are best told without the classic tropes of a Bollywood film. The story is not her biography – it is through her that we see a royal point of view of history, which spans over 90 years. We know the British version, but it is time to actually get inside the royal lives,' said Khandhdiya. The web series is currently under pre-production, with extensive time dedicated to researching the finer details of the celebrated queen's life. 'Combined with the richness and grandeur of royalty, it's a visual spectacle to recreate the era which could give The Great Gatsby a run for its money,' added Khandhdiya. The producer, however, acknowledged the challenges of creating a show around a more recent historical period, which, for him, involved extensive meetings with historians, royal family members, and government officials. For now, royals are waiting to be part of the storyboarding and research for shows and films supposed to be based on them. 'If they come to talk to us, we could give them a lot of spicy stories and dramas. It would help to have some variation in that, too,' said Gohil. (Edited by Zoya Bhatti)
The National
18-04-2025
- Business
- The National
Cautious optimism ahead of second round of US-Iran nuclear talks
The second round of talks between the US and Iran in Rome on Saturday could lead to a framework for future negotiations on an agreement to curb Tehran's nuclear programme, experts told The National The talks, which are being mediated by Oman, began last Saturday in Muscat after US President Donald Trump vowed to fully exert his 'maximum pressure' policy on Iran. Tehran is seeking relief from economic sanctions that have severely affected its economy. 'Both sides will try to establish what the baseline for the talks are and hopefully, set up a framework from which they can probably reach an initial deal,' Farzan Sabet, managing researcher at the Geneva Graduate Institute, told The National. They can then 'set out the guidelines for negotiating a longer term agreement which would, on the one hand, restrict Iran's nuclear programme and, on the other, provide a large measure of sanctions relief,' he said. Western countries including the US have long accused Iran of seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, but Tehran has consistently denied the claims, insisting that its programme is for peaceful civilian purposes. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Friday confirmed that he would lead his country's delegation at the talks in Rome, while Mr Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff is expected to once again lead the US contingent. 'Although we have serious doubts about the intentions and motivations of the American side, in any case we will participate in tomorrow's negotiations,' Mr Araghchi said at a press conference in Moscow after talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. 'If there is similar willingness on the other side, and they refrain from making unreasonable and unrealistic demands, I believe reaching an agreement is likely. We are fully prepared to pursue a peaceful resolution for Iran's peaceful nuclear programme,' he said. Mr Lavrov said Russia was willing to help the two sides to reach a deal. Mr Araghchi said Iran was receiving 'contradictory and inconsistent' messages from Washington. Mr Witkoff said in a post on X this week that Iran ran 'must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponisation programme'. Only hours before that, he had said a new deal could allow Iran to enrich uranium up to 3.67 per cent – the limit set in the 2015 nuclear deal that expires later this year. Mr Araghchi responded by saying the 'issue of enrichment is non-negotiable'. Iran began breaching that limit in 2019, a year after Mr Trump, in his first term as president, pulled the US out of the 2015 pact, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which eased sanctions on Iran in exchange for curbs on its nuclear activity. Tehran has now increased its enrichment to 60 per cent, a short technical step from producing weapons-grade uranium, and has stockpiled enough highly enriched uranium to produce a nuclear weapon, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Its director general, Rafael Grossi, visited Tehran on Wednesday and held talks with Mr Araghchi and Mohammad Eslami, the head of the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran. 'We know we don't have much time. So this is why I'm here. This is why I'm in contact with the United States as well,' Mr Grossi told Iranian media. Joost Hiltermann, programme director for Middle East and North Africa at the Crisis Group, said there was lack of consensus in Washington about what its approach should be, which could affect the outcome of the talks. 'Their differences are on public display. If that continues during the second round of talks, then the outcome can't be good,' he told The National. 'Iran has indicated what its red lines are. If the US rejects these, then the talks will end without result and the possibility of war will increase dramatically.' Mr Trump has taken a carrot and stick approach to dealing with Iran, calling for a diplomatic deal while also voicing plans for a military attack with 'bombing the likes of which they have never seen'. He has said 'Iran is going to be in great danger' if the talks are unsuccessful. 'The US has the upper hand for now because of the impact of sanctions and because it can wield the stick of superior military power,' Mr Hiltermann said. However, 'attacking Iran's nuclear programme will not necessarily bring down the Islamic Republic, and may cause only a temporary setback to the nuclear programme and indeed harden the leadership's determination to proceed,' he said. Seyed Emamiam, assistant professor at Tehran Polytechnic University and a founder of the Governance and Policy Think Tank, said that to increase the chances of reaching a deal 'both sides should avoid using destructive language and extend the scope of the talks beyond nuclear militarisation'. 'Building upon the scope of the JCPOA experience, Iran seems uninterested in getting lost in the mess of sophisticated US-sanction machinery. Instead, Iran is keen to safeguard a certain level of economic gains out of any likely deal, Mr Emamiam said in comments to the Italian Institute for International Political Studies. Mr Sabet pointed out that Iran was experiencing 'a lot of domestic economic issues, some of which are linked to sanctions, some of which are linked to broader issues of governance, mismanagement and corruption'. 'I'm still confident that it's within the power of the two sides to reach an initial deal that would put some restrictions and scale back the current advanced state of the Iranian nuclear programme,' he said.
The National
03-04-2025
- Politics
- The National
US and Iran walk a fine line between leverage and war
Live updates: Follow the latest on Israel-Gaza The approach by US President Donald Trump's second administration to Iran has been a high-stakes exercise in brinkmanship, combining military escalation, economic strangulation and diplomatic manoeuvring in an effort to force Tehran to the negotiating table under new terms. Mr Trump has been backing his rhetoric with military muscle through continued air strikes against Yemen's Houthis and the deployment of additional assets in the region. The goal appears twofold: to degrade Iran's regional proxies while simultaneously conveying that Washington is prepared to take more direct action should Tehran push its nuclear programme beyond a certain threshold. Iran, in turn, has warned against US provocations, with supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei saying that Tehran will respond to any threats. Mr Khamenei's senior adviser, Ali Larijani, said that Iran would be forced to acquire a nuclear weapon if attacked by the US or its allies. These exchanges have escalated tension in the already volatile region, devastated by the Gaza war. Yet, even as the disputes grow more heated, analysts believe indirect talks between Washington and Tehran are set to continue, with both sides manoeuvring to strengthen their negotiating positions, despite the risk of miscalculations that could lead to war. 'Talks are very likely to take place, if they aren't already,' Farzan Sabet, managing researcher at the Geneva Graduate Institute, told The National. 'Iran, however, has fundamental problems with the way the Trump administration is conducting diplomacy: Tehran insists on focusing talks on the nuclear issue and JCPOA framework, whereas the US seeks to move beyond it and include topics like support for the 'Axis of Resistance' network.' The nuclear deal agreed in 2015 between Iran and western powers, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), aimed to curb Tehran's nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief. Mr Trump withdrew the US from the agreement during his first term as president. He argued that the deal was flawed and did not address Iran's ballistic missile programme or regional influence. Following the withdrawal, the US reimposed severe economic sanctions on Iran. 'The Iranian leadership trusts the US even less than before in abiding by any commitments they make in negotiations, and they are loathe to enter direct talks while the other side is escalating pressure on the economic and military front,' added Mr Sabet. It is believed that neither the US nor Iran is interested in military confrontation, each for a different reason. 'The pro-diplomacy camp in Tehran is doing its best to find a way to prevent a worst-case scenario,' Hamidreza Azizi, non-resident fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, told The National. 'But the most complicated issue now is how President Trump is going to perceive and respond to the preference for indirect diplomacy. The central question is whether securing a deal and avoiding military confrontation with Iran matter more to President Trump than the public optics of such an agreement.' The US military's campaign against Yemen's Iranian-backed Houthis shows no signs of abating. Suspected US air strikes battered rebel-controlled areas of Yemen this week, with the Houthis saying the attacks killed at least six people across the country. On Thursday, the US struck a car in Saada governorate's Majz district, Al Masirah TV reported, indicating a shift towards targeted assassinations. Meanwhile, Houthi rebels say they have continued to launch attacks against US warships in the Red Sea, including the aircraft carrier USS Harry S Truman, which is carrying out the majority of the strikes on the Houthis. The Trump administration has linked its air strikes against the Houthis to a broader pressure campaign against Iran, suggesting that the rebels' missile and drone attacks in the Red Sea serve as a proxy battleground in Washington's confrontation with Tehran. In a significant military build-up, the Pentagon on Tuesday deployed additional air squadrons and extended the Truman's mission in the Middle East. Another aircraft carrier, USS Carl Vinson, now in Asia, is on its way to the region. The Pentagon has also sent at least six nuclear-capable B-2 bombers – 30 per cent of the US Air Force's stealth bomber fleet – to the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, in another message to Iran. Observers say that while these deployments highlight Mr Trump's willingness to act militarily, they do not necessarily signal imminent strikes on Iran. Any such plans would likely be kept highly classified to avoid triggering Iranian countermeasures that could complicate a military campaign. 'President Trump will probably exhaust his other options first, including snapback of sanctions at the UN Security Council, before pivoting to a more serious conflict footing,' said Mr Sabet, adding that prospects for a strike will steadily rise over the course of this year. Mr Azizi sees that the US military build-up in the region is President Trump's way of pursuing coercive diplomacy – diplomacy backed by military force and a clear demonstration of US power. 'The real danger lies, though, in potential miscalculations, which could trigger a larger conflict or even an all-out war, something both parties are clearly trying to avoid.' In a phone conversation with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, Kuwait's Emir Sheikh Meshal Al Ahmad Al Sabah said that his country would not allow any act of aggression to be launched from its territory against another country, according to Iran's Mehr News Agency. Kuwait did not confirm this part of the report, although its national news agency said that the call took place. Mr Pezeshkian also spoke with the Presidents of the UAE and Bahrain, although their call readouts made no mention of military escalation. While Gulf leaders view Iran's regional influence with deep suspicion, they are also keenly aware of the potential fallout from a direct military confrontation involving Washington and Tehran. 'Saudi Arabia and its neighbouring Arab states oppose and fear the Islamic Republic's regional influence, but they also fear that in the event of US or Israeli strikes on Iran, the violence could spill over and directly affect them,' Thomas Juneau, associate fellow with the Middle East and North Africa Programme at the UK-based Chatham House think tank, told The National. 'They fear, in particular, that Iran could retaliate against' their interests, he added. President Trump said the first presidential trip of his second term would likely include visits to Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar as well as additional stops. 'It could be next month, maybe a little bit later,' Mr Trump said on Monday in the Oval Office. Official rhetoric will likely focus on investment and economic partnerships, but behind closed doors, the region's leaders are also expected to exert efforts to de-escalate tensions between the US and Iran, or at least delay an open conflict. In a call with the International Atomic Energy Agency director general Rafael Grossi on Tuesday, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi urged the agency to intervene over threats issued against his country's nuclear facilities. Mr Araghchi has reinforced Tehran's position by emphasising that Iran has remained committed to its 2015 nuclear deal pledge not to seek nuclear weapons. '10 years after signing the JCPOA – and 7 years after the US unilaterally walked away from it – there is not one shred of proof that Iran has violated this commitment. Even DNI Gabbard recently made this abundantly clear,' Mr Aragchi said in a post on X, referring to the annual threat assessment of the US intelligence community. The report says that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon. Tehran understands that it will lose in a direct confrontation with either the US or Israel, or both, said Mr Juneau. 'This was clear when Israel attacked Iran directly in April and October 2024,' he added. 'On the American side, President Trump has long expressed his scepticism about engaging the US in another war in the Middle East. But this does not mean he will not support future strikes.'
