The article makes a biopolitical study of commercial surrogacy in India through the case studies of Bollywood celebrities prioritizing bioengineered babies through surrogacy. Drawing upon the theories of the culture industry and neoliberal subjectivity, the entanglement between the cultural economy of celebrity and the medico-industrial complex is decoded. The study attempts to focus on the existing popular public discourse using newspaper articles, tabloid press, interviews, and journal articles to investigate how Bollywood celebrities, as bioconsumers in the neoliberal surrogacy market, further genetic essentialism and neoliberal eugenics. Celebrities, as agents of new reproductive subjectivities, invite critical forays into bioeconomies of intensity, intimate life and belongings through the affective bonds of familial ties and kinship. Examining the moral economy of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in India, the study highlights the exploitative use of the reproductive labour of surrogates, who are treated as effaced entities and as collateral ‘prosthetics’ in the ART industry.
AgarN (2004) Liberal Eugenics: In Defence of Human Enhancement. Oxford: Blackwell.
2.
AllonF (2011) ‘Home economics: The management of household as an enterprise. Journal of Australian Political Economy68: 128–148.
3.
AppelJM (2012) Toward an ethical eugenics: The case for mandatory preimplantation genetic selection. JONA’S Healthcare Law, Ethics, and Regulation14(1): 7–13.
4.
AtwoodME (1998) The Handmaid's Tale. New York: Anchor Books.
BharadwajA (2016) The Indian IVF saga: A contested history. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online2: 54–61.
8.
BoorstinDJ (1962) The Image, or What Happened to the American Dream. USA: Atheneum.
9.
BourdieuP (1986) The Forms of Capital. In: RichardsonJ (ed) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Westport, CT: Greenwood, pp. 241–258.
10.
BousonJB (2014) Brutal Choreographies, Oppositional Strategies and Narrative Design in the Novels of Margaret Atwood. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
11.
BuchananAE (2000) From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CollinsS (2007) Traversing authenticities: The West Wing president and the activist Sheen. In: KristinaR (ed) Politicotainment: Television’s Take on the Real. New York: Palgrave, pp. 181–211.
14.
CooperME (2008) Life as Surplus. Biotechnology and Capitalism in the Neoliberal Era. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.
15.
CoreaG (1985) The Mother Machine: Reproductive Technologies from Artificial Insemination to Artificial Wombs. New York: Harper & Row.
16.
CroninBShawD (2002) Banking (on) different forms of symbolic character. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology53(14): 1267–1270.
17.
DeomampoD (2013) Transnational surrogacy in India: Interrogating power and women’s agency. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies34(3): 167–188.
18.
DhaouadiM (2017) Review of Jerusalem: The Spatial Politics of a Divided Metropolis, by A.B. Shlay and G. Rosen. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews46(2): 213–215.
19.
DillawayH (2008) Mothers for others: A race, class, and gender analysis of surrogacy. International Journal of Sociology of the Family34(2): 301–326.
20.
DoudnaJ (2018) The ultimate life hacker. Foreign Affairs97(3): 158–165.
21.
DrakeP (2018) Celebrity, Reputational Capital and the Media Industries. Oxford: Routledge.
HunterEBurgersHDavidssonP (2009) Celebrity capital as a strategic asset: Implications for new venture strategies. In: Lumpkin GT and Katz JA (ed) Entrepreneurial Strategic Content Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, Vol. 11. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, pp. 137–160.
37.
JasanoffS (2003) Technologies of humility: Citizen participation in governing science. Minerva41(3): 223–244.
38.
JonesEJouleV (2018) Intimacy and Celebrity in Eighteenth-century Literary Culture: Public Interiors. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
39.
KarmakarMParuiA (2019) ‘These were made-to-order babies’: Reterritorialised kinship, neoliberal eugenics and artificial reproductive technology in Kishwar Desai’s Origins of Love. Medical Humanities46(3): 323–332.
40.
KingDS (1999) Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and the ‘new’ eugenics. Journal of Medical Ethics25(2): 176–182.
41.
KroløkkeCHPantS (2019) ‘I only need her uterus’: Neo-liberal discourses on transnational surrogacy. NORA – Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research20(4): 233–248.
42.
KuhlmannA (1999) Alte Eugenik – neue Eugenik? Die Zukunft der Fortpflanzungskontrolle und die ‘Selektion’. Frankfurter Rundschau, 15November.
LimkiR (2018) On the coloniality of work: Commercial surrogacy in India. Gender, Work & Organization25(4): 327–342.
45.
LutherJD (2021) The Karan Johar playbook: The open secret, male same-sex sexuality, and the ‘big-brand’ in Bollywood. South Asian Popular Culture19(2): 193–214.
46.
MajumdarA (2014b) The rhetoric of the womb: The representation of surrogacy in India’s popular mass media. In: DasGuptaSDasguptaSD (eds) Globalization and Transnational Surrogacy in India. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, pp. 107–123.
47.
MajumdarA (2014a) The rhetoric of choice: The feminist debates on reproductive choice in the commercial surrogacy arrangement in India. Gender, Technology and Development18(2): 275–301.
48.
MarshallPD (1997)Celebrity Value: Introduction. John Wiley and Sons, Inc, pp. 155–160.
49.
MenonN (2012) Seeing Like a Feminist. New Delhi: Penguin India.
50.
MillsC (2011) Futures of Reproduction: Bioethics and Biopolitics. New York: Springer.
51.
NayarP (2008) Seeing Stars – Spectacle, Society and Celebrity Culture. New Delhi: Sage.
PetersenTS (2005) Just diagnosis? Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and injustices to disabled people. Journal of Medical Ethics31: 231–234.
64.
RobertsK (2015) 'Woman or Machine? International Surrogacy and the Rights of the Surrogate Mother’ Conference: 3rd Annual Capital District Feminist Studies Conference. University of Albany.
65.
RobertsonJA (2005) Ethics and the future of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Ethics, Law and Moral Philosophy of Reproductive Biomedicine1(Suppl. 1): 97–101.
66.
RödelM (2015) Geschlecht im Zeitalter der Reproduktionstechnologien. Natur, Technologie und Körper im Diskurs der Präimplantationsdiagnostik. Bielefeld: transcript.
ThompsonC (2005) Making Parents: Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
84.
Van KriekenR (2012) Celebrity Society. London: Routledge.
85.
VoraK (2013) Potential, risk and return in transnational Indian gestational surrogacy. Current Anthropology54(7): S97–S106.
86.
VoraK (2015) Re-imagining reproduction: Unsettling metaphors in the history of imperial science and commercial surrogacy in India. Somatechnics5(1): 88–103.
