Pontificating on racism
One strange aspect of the editorial responses was the ambivalence. One leader writer could not decide whether the fuss was justified or not.
You don`t say!
Darius Nakoonwala
It was the sort of issue leader writers dream about - easy to write and vacuous to boot. The Shilpa Shetty affair brought forth several editorials and everyone except the Business Standard missed the point, which is that individuals not only have a right to be prejudiced, there really isn`t much that anyone can do about it.
So to be a racist - or for that matter, a casteist, communalist, misogynist etc - is a matter of individual preference, a preference that others may fund vile, but there it is. That is why the more important problem is when governments behave in a racist manner and pass it off as being in the national interest.
The Business Standard, therefore, had this to say, and I quote at length. " The British government has a device called the Direct Airside Transit Visa. This visa is required if you are merely passing through any British port or airport. It… applies overwhelmingly to coloured people, or 47 countries…. Indian diplomats will tell you that in
The Indian Express also took a sensible view. "There`s no need for concerted national outrage… the TV programme in question is designed to bring out the worst in participants… That Ms Shetty happens to be an Indian celebrity should not therefore automatically engender a pan-national narrative… such prejudiced drivel is best ignored…
The Pioneer took the High Road to make a low point. "…Such abusive language as is being heard on Celebrity Big Brother also brings to the fore the ugly underbelly of European, in this case British, society that can`t be hidden behind designer labels; nor can the stench of supremacism, which pervades all similar encounters between the West and the East, be overwhelmed by expensive perfumes purchased at the best high street stores."
One strange aspect of the editorial responses was the ambivalence. One leader writer could not decide whether the fuss was justified or not. So the Express wrote, " Indian responses should also factor in our own record on prejudice. Western societies have a better institutional mechanism to deal with prejudice… one of the unfinished tasks of Indian institution building is to develop similar sensitivities. The Indian elite has to do some introspection every time it accuses the West of racist bias." And the Pioneer delivered itself of this gem. " Many Indians are as racist as those who are pitilessly ridiculing Ms Shetty for the colour of her skin, her accent and her mannerisms. We love to disguise our racism as snobbery, but that does not minimise either intent or purpose."
By and large though everyone focused on the incident itself but wrote in a vein that trivialized the issue. Thus, the Telegraph which doesn`t seem to know that the Raj ended 60 years ago said, " It is a pity, though, that nobody seems to know for sure whether the bleeped-out word of abuse directed at Shetty was genital or racial. For it is certainly amusing to reflect on a form of political correctness that is willing to take sexist venom in the spirit of a game, but must find a racial slur unforgivably wicked."
The Deccan Herald asked "Of course, some of the questions that come up are whether the comments made on a commercial reality show, where contestants, as many media watchers suspect, are paid to be rude to each other so as to push up the ratings, ought to be taken seriously."
The Hindu, displaying unusual shyness, refrained from comment last week but since he weekend was thin on editable topics, it also wrote one. What it said was as ambivalent as anything can be, which is surprising considering how firmly the paper takes stands on other issues.
Subscribe To The Newsletter