In this essay, I return to the soap opera – but in a context hardly ever explored – an urban Indian city in the 21st century. Deriving insights from an empirical study that make interpretive negotiations of a specific Bengali television text its analytical object, this article argues that interpretive practices around the broadcast media texts act as resources in understanding lived media cultures in a historical frame and therefore provide a continued impetus to keep audience analysis on the map of communication and cultural studies without prematurely proclaiming its race is run in the age of digital media.
Abu-LughodL (1997) The interpretation of culture(s) after television. Representations59(59): 109–134.
2.
Abu-LughodL (2005) Dramas of Nationhood the Politics of Television in Egypt. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
AngI (1985) Watching Dallas: Soap Opera and the Melodramatic Imagination. London: Methuen.
4.
AngI (1996) Living Room Wars: Rethinking Media Audiences for a Postmodern World. London and New York: Routledge.
5.
AngI (2007) Television fictions around the world: Melodrama and irony in global perspective. Critical Studies in Television2(2): 18–30.
6.
CavalcanteAPressASenderK (2017) Feminist reception studies in a post- audience age: returning to audiences and everyday life. Feminist Media Studies17(1): 1–13.
7.
Coronation Street(1960–present) ITV. Granada, Media City Trafford Wharf.
8.
Dallas(1978–91) CBS.
9.
DasRGraeferA (2017) Provocative Screens: Offended Audiences in Britain and Germany. London: Palgrave (Pivot).
10.
EcoU (1979) The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts. London: Indiana U.P.
11.
Erao Shotru(2009-11) Zee Television. Zee Bangla.
12.
FeuerJ (1984) Melodrama, serial form and television today. Screen25(1): 4–17.
13.
GeraghtyC (1981)Continuous serial – a definition. In: DyerR (ed), Coronation Street. London: BFI, pp. 2–26.
14.
GeraghtyCWeissmannE (2016) Women, soap opera and new generations of feminists. Critical Studies in Television: The International Journal of Television Studies11(3): 365–368.
15.
HallS (2001) Encoding/decoding. In: Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks, pp. 166–176.
16.
HobsonD (1982) Crossroads: The Drama of a Soap Opera. London: Methuen.
17.
HobsonD (2003) Soap opera, Polity.
18.
Janmabhoomi (1997–2002). Doordarshan.
19.
KimY (2005) Experiencing globalization: global TV, reflexivity and the lives of young Korean women. International Journal of Cultural Studies8(4): 445–463.
20.
La PastinaAC (2004) Selling political integrity: telenovelas, intertextuality, and local elections in rural Brazil. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media48(2): 302.
21.
LiebesTLivingstoneS (1994) The structure of family and romantic ties in the soap opera: an ethnographic approach to the cultural framing of primordiality. Communication Research21(6): 717–741.
22.
LiebesTKatzE (1990) The Export of Meaning: Cross-cultural Readings of Dallas. New York: Oxford University Press.
23.
LivingstoneS (1991) Audience reception: The role of the viewer in retelling romantic drama. In: CurranJGurevitchM (eds), Mass Media and Society. London: Edward Arnold, pp. 285–306.
24.
LivingstoneSM (1998) Making Sense of Television: The Psychology of Audience Interpretation. London: Routledge.
25.
MankekarP (2012) Screening Culture, Viewing Politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press Books.
26.
MazzarellaW (2012) ‘Reality must improve’: 1 The perversity of expertise and the belatedness of Indian development television. Global Media and Communication8(3): 215–241.
27.
ModleskiT (1984) Loving with a Vengeance: Mass-Produced Fantasies for Women. New York and London: Methuen.
28.
OngJC (2015) The Poverty of Television: The Mediation of Suffering in Class-Divided Philippines. London: Anthem Press.
29.
OrtnerSB (1995) Resistance and the problem of ethnographic refusal. Comparative Studies in Society and History; Comp Stud Soc Hist37(1): 173–193.
30.
ParameswaranR (1999) Western romance fiction as English- language media in postcolonial India. Journal of Communication49(3): 84–105.
31.
PressAL (1990) Class, gender and the female viewer: Women’s responses to Dynasty. In: BrownME (ed.), Television and Women’s Culture: The Politics of the Popular, pp. 159–180.
32.
PuriJ (1997) Reading romance novels in postcolonial India. Gender and Society11(4): 434–452.
33.
RadwayJA (1984) Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy and Popular Literature. Chapel Hill and London: University of North Carolina Press.
34.
RadwayJ (1988) Reception study: ethnography and the problems of dispersed audiences and nomadic subjects. Cultural Studies2(3): 359–376.
35.
Rani Kahini (2009-11) Zee. Zee Bangla.
36.
RajagopalA (2000) Mediating modernity: theorizing reception in a non-Western society. In CurranJParkMJ (2000) De-westernizing Media Studies. London: Routledge, pp. 293–304.
37.
ScraseTJ (2002) Television, the middle classes and the transformation of cultural identities in West Bengal, India. Gazette (Leiden, Netherlands)64(4): 323–342.
38.
SilverstoneR (1994) Television and Everyday Life. London: Routledge.
39.
SinghalA (1988) Pro-social Learning from Soap Opera Models in India. Ph.D. Pre-Dissertation Thesis, University of Southern California (Everett M. Rogers, Advisor).
40.
SkeggsBWoodH (2012) Reacting to Reality Television: Performance, Audience and Value. London: Routledge.
41.
SoodSSenguptaMMishraPR. (2004) Come gather around together: an examination of radio listening groups in fulbari. Gazette (Leiden, Netherlands)66(1): 63–86.
42.
ValdiviaAN (2004) Latinas as radical hybrid: transnationally gendered traces in mainstream media. Global Media Journal3(4): 4.
