clouds of the west— sun there half an hour high

And then, on the other hand, you've got "Shockingly, this life-altering treatment that massively impacts how the patient is perceived by others in all facets of life is primarily supported by observational studies, as opposed to the enormous violations of bodily autonomy and human dignity necessary to perform a true randomized control trial. We recommend that treatment ceases immediately because you don't understand how evidence-based medicine works." And that becomes a linchpin of the politics of multiple European countries' trans healthcare politics for the next several years.

listen, subcontinental cinema began in bombay; the very first exhibition of the lumieres' cinematographe was held there in 1896, a few months after its debut in paris, 1895. this event predates the discursive existence of bollywood and hollywood. shree pundalik and raja harishchandra, the films that are generally considered the very first subcontinental features were also exhibited there first.

subcontinental cinema under british colonialism was produced in certain metropolitan centers such as lahore, hyderabad, and calcutta; bombay was just one of them. in 1947, when the indian nation state was formally inaugurated, the idea of a "national cinema" began forming, but given the cultural and linguistic heterogeneity of the indian union, this was quite untenable. regional popular cinemas flourished well into the 1950, 60s, 70s, and 80s and various art cinemas began taking shape alongside.

under the economy that i'm going to completely elide as "nehruvian "socialism"" bombay cinema focused on broadly "socialist" themes, think of awara (1951), do beegha zameen (1953), pyaasa (1957), all of which focus on inequality in indian economy and society from different perspectives. these films were peppered in with historical dramas, and adaptations from literature, but the original stories tended towards socialist realism. reformist films centering the family generally waxed poetic on the need to reform the family, but i haven't seen enough of these to really comment on them.

the biggest hit of the 70s, sholay (1975) was about two criminals, posited as heroes fighting gabbar singh who was attacking village folk. deewar (1975) also had two heroes, and the stakes were the two brothers' father's reputation; the father in question was a trade union leader accused of corruption.

"alternative cinema" included mani kaul's uski roti (1969) and Duvidha (1973) both of which were situated away from the city. then there's sayeed mirza and his city films, most of them set in bombay; arvind desai ki ajeeb dastan (1978), albert pinto ko gussa kyun aata hain (1980), saleem langre pe mat ro (1989) which are all extremely socialist films, albert pinto was set in the times of the bombay textiles strike of 1982 and literally quotes marx at one point. my point is that bombay cinema prior to liberalization was varied in its themes and representations, and it wasn't interested in being a "national cinema" very much, it was either interested in maximizing its domestic profits or being high art. note that these are all hindi language films, produced in bombay, or at least using capital from bombay. pyaasa, interestingly enough is set in calcutta, but it was filmed in bombay!

then we come to the 1990s, and i think the ur example of the bollywood film is dilwale dulhania le jayenge (1995) which, in stark contrast to the cinema that preceded it, centered two NRIs, simran and raj, who meet abroad, but epitomize their love in india, and go back to england (america?) as indians with indian culture. this begins a long saga of films originating largely in bombay that target a global audience of both indians and foreigners, in order to export an idea of india to the world. this is crucial for a rapidly neoliberalizing economy, and it coincides with the rise of the hindu right. gradually, urdu recedes from dialogue, the hindi is sankritized and cut with english, the indian family is at the center in a way that's very different for the social reform films of the 50s and 60s. dil chahta hai (2001) happens, where good little indian boys go to indian college, but their careers take them abroad. swadesh (2004) is about shah rukh khan learning that he's needed in india to solve its problems and leaves a job at NASA.

these are incidental, anecdotal illustrations of the differences in narrative for these separate eras of cinema, but let me ground it economically and say that bollywood cinema seeks investments and profits from abroad as well as acclaim and viewership from domestic audiences, in a way that the bombay cinema before it did not, despite the success of shree 420 (1955) in the soviet union; there were outliers, there always have been.

there's also a lot to say about narrative and style in bombay cinema (incredibly diverse) and bollywood cinema (very specific use of hollywood continuity, intercut with musical sequences, also drawn from hollywood). essentially, the histories, political economies, and aesthetics of these cinemas are too differentiated to consider them the same. bombay cinema is further internally differentiated, and that's a different story altogether. look, i could write a monograph on this, but that would take time, so let me add some reading material that will elucidate this without sounding quite as fragmented.

bollywood and globalization: indian popular cinema, nation, and diaspora, rini bhattacharya mehta and rajeshwari v. pandharipande (eds)

ideology of the hindi film: a historical construction, madhav prasad

the 'bollywoodization' of the indian cinema: cultural nationalism in a global arena, ashish rajadhyaksha

the globalization of bollywood: an ethnography of non-elite audiences in india, shakuntala rao

I've tried to use product promotion or visualiser images where possible to avoid having photographs of any individual's chair; where that's not possible because visualisers don't have every option, I've tried to use photos from second-hand resellers. Image descriptions are in alt text.

Active chairs can have tall backrests.

They might be with or without lateral supports (at the sides to help keep the torso upright). Note that tall backrests often taper to free the shoulders more, so people may still push independently. Pictured: Quickie 5R with Spex Mantaray backrest, Motion Composites Apex with NXT X-Tend backrest. The Spex is much higher support than the NXT.

Active chairs can have headrests.

Nothing wrong with supporting the neck and head. Doesn't make anyone less of an independent active person if they need positioning support. Can even keep people active longer - being able to sit upright does wonders for daily activity compared to sliding into a melted puddle or not being able to hold your head and neck up. Pictured: Ki Mobility Rogue XP (blue) and Tilite Z (pink).

Active chairs can have armrests.

There's even different types, like tubular swing-away armrests and single-post armrests. They can be positioned to not interfere with propelling, or be removable. Pictured: Quickie Nitrum/Quickie Nitrum Hybrid; tubular armrest on blue chair, single-post armrest on orange chair.

Active chairs can have handles.

Sometimes they're attached to the top of the back canes (the posts the backrest is attached to), and sometimes they attach to the rigidiser bar (the horizontal bar between the back canes) or lower down the back canes to keep them out of the way of the user's shoulders. And not having handles does not prevent strangers pushing people. Pictured: Kuschall K-Series; integrated push handles on black and red chair, clamp on handles on pink chair.

Active chairs can have anti-tippers.

Yes, many active users choose not to use them because it makes wheelies easier, but they're very useful for saving you from unexpected falls, and there's nothing wrong with having them. Many are removable and some swing up out of the way to allow wheelies or going backwards down a kerb. Pictured: Tilite Z.

Active chairs can have different frame angles.

No, seriously, 90 degree frame angle can actually kind of suck. That's a really tight angle to have your knees at all day every day, and a lot of people find that painful or it can risk complications. 90 degrees is good for maneuverability, but it's too tight for most users. It's common to see angles from 90 degrees to 70 degrees. Pictured: Kuschall Champion; 90 degree angle on green chair, 70 degree angle on blue chair.

If you're wanting to understand the different parts that can make up an active manual chair, whether because you're a wheelchair user wanting to be informed ahead of a prescription appointment or someone designing a character, try tinkering with the options in Sunrise Medical's Quickie Nitrum visualiser or the several models in the Kuschall visualiser. Being able to see what the options are really helps.

(ID: Tags reading "semi odd question: do people ever sit criss cross in wheelchairs? is that possible? or are the seats made wrong or would the wheels be too close and your feet would hit them? End ID)

It's technically possible, but only while stationary. Assuming there's no anatomical reason the user couldn't sit in that position, it depends on the build of the chair - but most of the time, something will either contact the wheels or stick out far enough to interfere with propelling.

It's also dangerous to try and move in that position. If your chair was built with the assumption that your lower extremety/ies would be on the footplate, your centre of gravity was set accordingly. It expects there to be weight at the front of the frame. If you then move that weight up onto the seat, your centre of gravity moves backwards by a lot, and if you try to propel you're very likely to tip backwards. This is why centre of gravity may look different for someone who has a lower limb difference or is an amputee who cannot or does not use prosthetics. There's creative things that can be done when the chair is made to play around with this problem, like weighting the footplate or adjustable axles, but that kind of custom adjustment is intended for anatomical needs, it's not applied to let someone move with their legs up like that.