The Indian society is ''in-between'' tradition and modernity. Religious archetypes and subsequent social and gender stereotypes prevail in many respects but they are in a process of dynamic changes. Conceptualizing identity still faces the shadow of the colonial heritage. An independent national discourse may not, however, always overcome marginalization inside the society, both the gender and ethnic ones. Some Indian feminists do not see Hinduism as a religion principally subjecting women; they stress the tradition of a strong female element in mythology and its appeal on community solidarity and sharing. Others rather strive for secularism, often connecting feminism with a political left (namely in Bengal). The law in the Indian Republic forbids any form of discrimination. Each group has a legitimate right for a political representation. But who will represent and be listened to is mostly a matter of the power decision (see G. C. Spivak and C. T. Mohanty). As Spivak maintains, a basic prerequisite for removing discriminations of the marginalized is the cooperation on creating a space, where the subaltern can themselves articulate their voice.
The paper presents an analysis of Deepa Mehta’s film trilogy (Water, Fire, Earth) through the concept of a border identity. The Protagonists of Deepa Mehta’s Film Trilogy may serve as examples of border identities or identities “in-between” (cf. Homi Bhabha). The “in -betweeness” is illustrated through the lens of various categories and their intersections – especially those of gender, sexuality, social status, religion (religious community) and tradition/individual freedom in general. For all the films, overstepping traditional taboos is typical, be it the mythological taboos, those of collective communal identities, traditional gender roles and stereotypes or compulsory heteronormativity. Within these frameworks, the dominance of the power discourses and the (in)visibility of the marginalized ones is thematized. While the main characters of the three film stories are female, they (in some cases) only seemingly play a leading role and the real acting heroes are the men. The most obvious example is the story of the Earth where the moral conflict takes place between the two male heroes. The author also notices the figuring of the females as mostly victims of the social order and male violence. However, this critical remark is not articulated to question the real aspect of the discrimination, but rather to point to the risks of a simplified picture of victimization of women which have been, in the context of Asian studies, analyzed by Chandra Talpade Mohanty and other postcolonial theorists., Blanka Knotková-Čapková., and Obsahuje bibliografii