When a jewellery advertisement becomes a cultural debate
A Raksha Bandhan advertisement featuring Bollywood actor Kriti Sanon has triggered a debate that goes far beyond fashion. What began as criticism of an Indo-Western outfit has now turned into a larger conversation about tradition, women’s autonomy, changing cultural practices and the tendency to judge a woman’s values by her appearance.
The controversy erupted after Kriti appeared in a jewellery advertisement celebrating Raksha Bandhan. Dressed in a contemporary fusion ensemble featuring a bralette-style blouse, cape and draped skirt, she was seen participating in the festival’s rituals. A scene involving her tying a rakhi to a pet dog also drew criticism from sections of social media. The campaign was accused by some viewers of trivialising or misrepresenting a traditional Hindu festival.
The criticism gained further momentum when actor-politician Kangana Ranaut questioned the choice of attire, arguing that a festival such as Raksha Bandhan offered several traditional styling options. Her comments transformed what might otherwise have remained an ordinary social media debate into a national conversation.
But Kriti Sanon’s response has perhaps become more significant than the advertisement itself.
Her central argument was simple yet powerful: the essence of a festival lies in the emotion, meaning and values attached to it—not merely in the clothes a person wears. She pointed out that in her own family, she and her sister tie rakhi to each other, reflecting their belief that women too can protect one another. She also explained that her pets are treated as family, which is why the idea extended to them.
Her larger message was unmistakable: culture is lived in the heart, not displayed through a dress code.
The problem with measuring culture by clothing
India has always had a complicated relationship with modernity and tradition. We celebrate technological progress, global exposure and changing lifestyles, but often become uncomfortable when these changes affect familiar cultural symbols.
Women, unfortunately, continue to bear the burden of this contradiction.
A man can wear jeans, shorts or Western attire while celebrating a festival and rarely face questions about whether he respects Indian culture. But a woman’s neckline, sleeve length or choice of blouse can suddenly become a measure of her morality, family values and cultural loyalty.
This is where Kriti Sanon’s response strikes a chord.
The debate is not really about whether one personally likes her outfit. People are entitled to dislike the styling of an advertisement. They can argue that a traditional festival deserves more conventional representation. Criticism of advertising concepts is perfectly legitimate.
But criticism crosses into moral policing when clothing becomes a test of cultural legitimacy.
One may dislike the outfit and still respect Kriti’s right to wear it.
One may prefer a sari or salwar for Raksha Bandhan and still accept that another woman may choose something different.
Culture cannot survive if it becomes so fragile that a modern blouse threatens its existence.
The irony of such controversies is that Indian culture itself has always evolved.
Fashion has changed through every generation. The sari has been draped differently across regions and centuries. Blouse styles have changed dramatically. Jewellery has moved from traditional family heirlooms to contemporary fashion statements. Festivals themselves are now celebrated through social media, digital greetings, video calls and destination gatherings.
Yet, every generation tends to believe that its version of tradition is the authentic one.
The younger generation is often accused of changing culture. But in reality, culture has always changed because people change.
What matters is whether the emotional core survives.
Raksha Bandhan is fundamentally about affection, protection, responsibility and emotional bonds. Kriti’s interpretation—that sisters can protect each other and that family can include beloved pets—may not be traditional for everyone, but it represents a contemporary understanding of relationships.
That does not necessarily mean older traditions must disappear. India is large enough to accommodate both.
Advertising, however, must understand cultural sensitivity
There is also another side to this controversy that should not be ignored.
Commercial advertising frequently borrows cultural and religious festivals because emotion sells. Raksha Bandhan becomes a jewellery campaign. Diwali becomes a shopping campaign. Karwa Chauth becomes a beauty campaign.
Brands have the right to reinterpret festivals creatively. But they must also understand that cultural symbols carry emotional weight. When advertisements attempt to be fashionable, progressive or unconventional merely to attract attention, they can sometimes misread the sentiment of the audience.
Therefore, the criticism of the advertisement itself cannot be dismissed entirely.
Viewers are consumers of culture as much as consumers of products. If they believe a campaign does not reflect the spirit of a festival, they have every right to say so.
The crucial distinction is this: criticising an advertisement is different from policing a woman.
The first is a discussion about creativity and cultural representation.
The second is a discussion about control.
And India must learn to recognise the difference.
A festival should not become a dress code
The strongest lesson from the Kriti Sanon controversy is that festivals should unite people through values rather than divide them through appearances.
If Raksha Bandhan represents protection, then perhaps society should also ask why women still need protection from constant scrutiny.
Why is a woman’s clothing examined more closely than her intentions?
Why is her cultural identity reduced to the amount of fabric she wears?
And why does every discussion about a woman’s freedom eventually become a debate about whether she is “traditional enough”?
Kriti’s response has reopened these uncomfortable questions.
The debate will continue, as it should. Some will prefer traditional representation. Others will welcome contemporary interpretations. That diversity of opinion is healthy.
But the real danger begins when culture is used as a weapon to control personal choice.
A woman can wear a sari and be modern.
She can wear Western clothes and remain deeply connected to her traditions.
She can celebrate Raksha Bandhan differently from her grandmother and still respect the festival.
Culture is not a uniform. Tradition is not a fashion police manual.
Kriti Sanon may have been defending her choice of outfit, but the debate she has triggered is much larger. In a rapidly changing India, the challenge is not to choose between tradition and modernity. The real challenge is to allow both to coexist without turning one generation’s preferences into another generation’s moral failure.
Perhaps that is why her argument resonates beyond this particular advertisement.
Culture does not disappear when fashion evolves. It disappears only when society forgets the values that gave tradition its meaning in the first place.
And no neckline can determine that.