Rather than a universal understanding of the term “independent,” Shweta Kishore argues for a local perspective that needs to be contextualized historically and spatially, and her readable book begins with references to two “icons” of independent documentary filmmaking practice in India – Vikalp and Anand Patwardhan. It may be difficult to imagine another Vikalp Film Festival in the current situation, but it continues to exist as an important platform for “over 300 documentary filmmakers scattered across India” who communicate through the Vikalp Films for Freedom list. However, the term “independent documentary” was coined in the mid-1970s when a state of emergency declared by then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi threatened the country’s democratic political foundations. Through “guerrilla filmmaking on a borrowed Super 8 camera, improvised editing, and underground exhibition,” Patwardhan developed his unique form and practice of political cinema. His 1975 film Kraanti Ki Tarangein (Waves of Revolution) is a paradigm for the conscious positioning of filmmaking practices outside the Indian Film Board, the “nationally dominant state agency for the production and distribution of documentaries.”

Subsequently, the term “independent” has long been largely associated with politically conscious (if not activist, see Arvind Rajagopal and Paromita Vohra, On the Aesthetics and Ideology of Indian Documentary Film: A Conversation, BioScope, and privately produced documentaries that were distributed and screened outside the organized structures of state or commercial cinemas. But, as Kishore convincingly argues, the distinction between independent and “mainstream” or “commercial” production has become increasingly blurred over the past four decades (what category, for example, would NGO-sponsored films fit into?), and the same is true for the diversification and blurring of genre boundaries. Accordingly, Kishore has selected filmmakers for her study who reflect the current diversity of individuals, positions, artistic forms and aesthetic practices of independent contemporary cinema in India: Rahul Roy (New Delhi), Amudhan RP (Chennai), Paromita Vohra (Mumbai), and the film’s co-production partners Anjali Monteiro and KP Jayasankar (Mumbai).

However, rather than focusing on the textual level of their films, Kishore explores the specific practices, relationships, techniques and evolving structures that form around the independent way the filmmakers in the spotlight make films. All of these aspects contribute to changing the concept and meaning of cultural production and the relationship between visual culture, cultural producers, and society. In the five chapters of her book, the author draws on a wide range of cultural theory, sociology, and media studies, and thus offers new perspectives on a field of study that has long been under-theorized. Fortunately, over the past 10 years, a number of important books and scholarly articles have begun to fill this gap.