Diwali ads sans bindi: Reflecting SoBo beliefs, not anti-Hindu sentiment

Social media activist Shefali Vaidya first started a campaign #NoBindiNo Business way back in 2021. The movement was triggered by FabIndia’s launch of its Diwali collection titled Jashn-e-Riwaaz. The campaign faced a huge backlash on social media over accusations of cultural (mis)appropriation and “de-Hinduisation” of Hindu festivals. In response to the uproar, FabIndia first clarified that the collection was not intended to be for Diwali alone but then quickly caved in and rebranded the offering as Jhilmil Si Diwali. Ms Vaidya’s hashtag, meanwhile, gained massive momentum, with her video crossing two million views in no time.

 

But the bigger thrust of the movement was that advertisers by and large were deliberately denuding the spirit of Diwali by deleting elements like diyas, rangoli, phool and bindis in their advertising. The models were being portrayed as “neutral” under the garb of contemporary fashion, modern design, and a secular look. Ms Vaidya argued that Hindus were being coaxed to spend their family Diwali budgets on ads devoid of Hindu symbolism or festive spirit — deliberately stripped of elements like the bindi. Brands, she said, want a “consumer spending spree” during Diwali but wish to overlook the spirit and symbols of the Hindu festival. Social media concurred with her in ample measure. Models — including stars like Kareena Kapoor, Anushka Sharma and Alia Bhatt — twitterati felt were being portrayed in full festive finery by jewellery and saree brands but none of them were shown wearing the traditional Hindu bindi. 

 

Was Ms Vaidya being too Hindu-phobic? One cannot really say. Social media ire has got repeatedly triggered by #NoBindiNoBusiness with multiple brands like Tanishq, Nalli Silks, PNG Jewelers, Malabar Gold, GIVA and more being impacted over the past two-three years. Supporters stress that the “bindi boil-over” is a symbol of resistance to the “homogenisation” and de-Hinduisation by some brands — consciously, and deliberately. The bindi, which has been an integral part of sanatan culture, is seen by some as carrying great significance. It’s a mark of identity, a reminder of one’s roots, and a declaration that tradition can (and must) coexist with modernity.

 

The bindi traditionally is a decorative mark worn on the forehead between the eyebrows by Hindu women.  The bindi has religious and symbolic significance, and is associated with the third eye, or ajna chakra. Hindus believe that the ajna chakra connects the individual to the spiritual world, and the bindi is used to boost its power. The custom of wearing a bindi dates back centuries, and some sources suggest it has roots in ancient Hindu rituals. Traditionally, the bindi was worn by married women to indicate their marital status. If a woman was widowed, she would remove the bindi or replace it with a black bindi. It is not that the bindi does not have any place in contemporary India. Today, the bindi is worn by women regardless of geography or age or marital status, as a fashion statement in many colours, shapes, and sizes.

 

So why don’t brands and ad agencies like the bindi? One senior lady creative director told me the bindi is regressive. Why? Because it is visibly Hindu. So what’s wrong with that? It might upset non-Hindus. So brands should advertise Hindu festivals keeping non-Hindu sensitivities uppermost in mind? Yes. So mangalsutras too should not be featured? Perhaps, yes. Conversation over.

 

A brand manager of a large multinational had a different objection. The bindi glorifies married women, he said. So is there anything wrong with that? Yes, it is discriminatory. Against whom? Those that are single or not married. But what is the discrimination? The bindi is almost a fashion accessory today — all women young and old, married and unmarried wear a bindi,  often coordinating it with their outfits. No, but we are a woke brand and the bindi is a strict no-no. Period.

 

The controversy around the bindi is not new. Over the years, similar debates have been common in advertising. In the 1980s, the Horlicks mother (epitome of tradition) would always wear a saree and her hair would be plaited or in a bun. And yes, she would sport a kumkum bindi. The Maggi mother of today is almost always dressed in jeans and a kurti. Hair fashionably open. No bindi for sure. It is not that Horlicks is (or was) Hindu or that Maggi is anti-Hindu. Each brand is trying to stereotype its customer.

 

In Diwali advertising that stereotype minus the bindi is a very SoBo portrayal. In thinking. And belief. Sans the bindi, it might hurt business in Varanasi or Tirunelveli. 

 

The writer is Chairman of Rediffusion