Hillary’s quote that was heard around the world  (or on the blogosphere) was not from the heated debate with the Indian environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, nor from the various deals brokered. It was about Bollywood. The Secretary of State said:

“Anyone who watches Bollywood movies will think Indian lives are very dramatic with happy endings. Hollywood, on the other hand, makes people believe that we don’t wear clothes and that we are always fighting with one another.”

Ouch, Madame Secretary. You touched a sore spot. Indeed, Bollywood definitely conveys such a message to the world. I just don’t care for it. She definitely pinned Bollywood correctly (and I thank her for leaving out the part that all of our movies have songs and dances). But, I want Bollywood to be more than that. I want diversity in genres, in plots, in themes. Bollywood shouldn’t imitate Hollywood, nor does it need a complete makeover. All Bollywood needs is a face lift.

No more rona dhona (crying dramatically) or songs in the Swiss Alps or cliche story lines. Let’s make movies that represent the changing dynamic of India. Let’s open our minds and make progressive films that can still be funny, still have songs, or have none at all. There can be unhappy endings, movies without love stories, even movies that are (gasp!) less than two hours long. We see the change already happening, we just need to speed things up. Next time Hillary visits, let’s aim for a visit to the local movie hall, where she could watch a Bollywood film that’s really Indian, possibly (gasp again!) without a happy ending.

That didn’t happen, obviously. But, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited India, she met up with Aamir Khan. Before you scratch your heads, it’s because Khan is the brand ambassador for The Times of India’s Teach India Initiative. Why is a Bollywood star the brand ambassador for the program? Because he made a movie about a dyslexic child’s struggle with the Indian school system.

Before you think I’m pulling an Arundhati Roy and think it’s ridiculous for actors to voice their opinion or take a stance with social issues, let me tell you that I think what Khan’s doing is brilliant– and here’s why.

Years ago, I wrote an opinion editorial about Lage Raho Munnabhai’s incredible achievement of reviving Gandhi’s teachings in India (yes, Gandhigiri was so forgotten that it needed reviving). I thought it was incredible– and I thought, this is why Bollywood is great. Everyone watches mainstream Bollywood films. And if made right, they really can have an incredible social impact. Aamir Khan’s directorial debut Taare Zameen Par was one such film that highlighted a huge problem in Indian society. I’m not sure how much of an impact it had, if any, on the educational system in India, but it was definitely a topic that needed the limelight.

Khan and Clinton had an important conversation on the many problems in Indian education, like the lack of diversity in majors students pursue, or the style of teaching that the majority of teachers use. Usually, talks about education in India center around the need to make sure rural areas and women are getting a good education. Of course, that’s a topic of utmost importance. But a focus on the current methods of teaching that will impact future students must also be reviewed.

Aamir Khan, as many Bollywood actors, have been criticized for their support of different social issues (such as the Narmada dam). If Bollywood stars are capable of bringing important topics to focus, then I’m all for Bollywood stars getting active with social issues.