Images : Godey's Lady Book and the Cult of Domesticity. (1830-1878)

Damsel in Distress Syndrome

Reading Jane Eyre over the weekend, made me appreciate the novel for its avoidance of the conventional story telling climaxes, of a woman in need of saving. Jane despite her hardships molds herself into a woman whose past experiences make her stronger. With this in mind I can't help but think about how the damsel in distress syndrome, has manipulated and involved itself into certain issues over the years. One of the reasons why I avoid 24 hour news channels is because of their misinformed and lazy reporting over the socioeconomic issues of the Global South. I am most bothered when they highlight the plight of women in certain countries mainly Asia and Africa. The discourse centers around the idea of saving third-world women from third-world men. The interference of imperial nations on third-world bodies has been the pre-cursor to colonization and slavery. Feminists have been berated by naive critics who accuse them of not paying much attention to third world issues ,such as criticizing inequalities in Islamic communities etc.. With  the failures of second and third wave feminist movements, these feminists are aware of the dangers of universalizing women's issues.

The Damsel is distress syndrome is something that bombards us through the media and other mediums of society. Reading books like Jane Eyre enables you to think about the way women have been portrayed in society. Jane doesn't use her beauty or feminine charm to get where she needs to, and is never afraid to speak her mind. Despite her tribulations she reaches for the skies and makes a place for her in a world that deeply favors men.

Cashing in on the Doomsday Paranoia

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/us/21doomsday.html

Using Movies as a Medium for Cultural Understanding.

Growing up most people usually watched movies as a form of escapism.This rings true especially for people situated in the regions of the Global South,  one of the many ways you can escape from the harsh realities of life is to spend a bit of your hard earned money at the cinema.Recently the emergence of social networking sites and new mediums of entertainment such as Netflix and Youtube there have been various movies online, which are conveniently available for your viewing. In this era of Globalization there is a certain anxiousness about cultures that are different from the ones we grew up in. To better understand a culture many people turn to foreign cinema as a way of becoming acquainted with that particular culture. Many would argue that this is a step to cultural understanding and mutual respect, as opposed to the earlier ethnocentric sentiments about American movies that many people had. Another issue with using movies to become better acquainted with a different culture is watching such films to cement any previous prejudices you have had other cultures. This is significant when dealing with sensitive issues such as the plight of Women in Islamic countries. With the various movies that have been been put out in the past few years highlighting these issues, many of its viewers leave the movie with sentiments that are far from understanding the topic.An abundant of these social networking sites are filled with reviews that reek of racist and bigoted comments, towards that culture they claim they are trying to understand. Irshad Manji suggests that its important for Americans and Westerners to come out and speak out against Islam and the treatment of Women in those nations. She states that being a relativist equates to being a coward and pluralism is the only way to come to mutual understanding. The many people that form the demographic of Manji's readers are far from pluralistic and are often right wing members who use people like Manji as a way to get their bigoted views about Islam across.

Appropriating the 911 Movement

This morning I came across a letter that was written by Bollywood Actor and Producer Saif Ali Khan.  The letter was in response to the 26/11 Mumbai attacks. Before i go on I would like to make the disclaimer that I am not a supporter or apologist for any kind of violent movements around the world. I however have a bone to pick with Mr Khan’s letter. He begins the letter with how as an Indian he feels the need to be the voice of liberal Islam and how he is afraid that the religion would be blamed for the attacks. He then urges on Indians  to stick together as citizens and come together as one people to help fight terrorism through peaceful means. Surprisingly enough his sister Soha Ali Khan sent a similar letter to the media and her friends. What bothers me is the fact that Muslims in India despite having a stake in the country (privileged ones at least) feel the need to appease people and apologize on behalf of Muslims worldwide. Why should Mr Khan and his sister bear the brunt of the Mumbai attacks? I have come across countless media organizations labeling the attacks as India’s 9/11 though they coincidently share the same last two digits. Why are politicians cashing in on the Terrorism Industry? The answer is simple! its to find support for waging war on other nations. One of the gunmen found on the scene admitted that his motifs for attacking the hotels was that he was brainwashed into committing the act for money in return. Hailing from an impoverished background he was an attractive candidate for the Jihad brigade. History has proven that if  members of a society have no stake in it, they resort to all forms of rebellion. Sabiha Sumar’s movie Khamosh Pani (Silent Waters) touched on this subject by telling the story of  how young men from impoverished backgrounds  in Punjab, Pakistan became constituents for General Zia Ul Haq’s fundamentalist campaigns. Ajmal Kassab the noted attacker then told the Indian authorities that if India had offered him a large amount of cash he would have the done the same for them. This reaffirms the notion that though religion was used to recruit young men like Kassab, the terrorists  are only successful in recruiting the ones who are not fond of societal hierarchies.

The Terrorism Industry has pierced its way into the hearts of Indians who see Americans as kindred spirits in the fight against the global terrorist movement. Obama’s visit to India late last year reeked of rumors that he wanted to place an Indian peace keeping force in Afghanistan. Has India become  captive to  the West’s intentions of Neo-imperialism in the sub continent? It bothers me that the 2002 attacks in Gujrat have not garnered the same attention. Three thousand people mostly Muslims were killed by communal riots and the government chose to turn a blind eye against the atrocities. The Chief Minister of Gujrat Narendra Modi was said to have ordered many of the attacks and even refuses to acknowledge any involvement despite hard evidence against him.  I hope that Indian government given its recent induction on to the world stage would not fall under the thumb of the West and can hopefully emerge from this tragedy by acknowledging the root causes of the problem and by not resorting to fear-mongering tactics. The Pakistani Indian conflict should be solved by both parties without the influence of outsiders. Cashing in on this Terrorism Industry would only make people more defiant, because citizens like Mr Khan who is supposed to be a respected member of society feels the need to apologize for the attacks despite not having any part in it.

Frieda Pinto and the Colorism Brigade

The dusky model from Mumbai was first seen on the Hollywood big screen when she was cast alongside Dev Patel in Danny Boyle’s Slumdog Millionaire. Frieda a very talented and conventionally good looking woman seems to have a great line up of movies in her kitty . This year she will be seen in Julian Schanabel’s Miralwhere she portrays a young Palestinian orphan who is caught in between the crossfires of the first Intifada. On multiple online blogs there is an outrage about Frieda’s casting in the motion picture, the main reason being is that she is a dark-skinned Indian who is portraying a “White” Palestinian. There have been Indians/South Asians who have portrayed Palestinian characters in the past most notably Noureen DeWullf who was seen in the West Bank story. The difference between Noureen and Frieda is that the former doesn’t look like a stereotypical “dark Indian” and so her casting wasn’t an issue for the masses. However the people arguing about Frieda’s casting are not purists by any means. While i disagree with Hollywood’s stereotype of people from the Asian continent. This movie is a sensationalized account of the Intifada and the people caught in between it. The dialouge is largely in English and isn’t purist at all.  Coincidentally the woman who Freida is portraying and her share a striking resemblance including the same skin tone. So the people who are against Freida’s casting have an issue with the portrayal of tan Palestinians being brought out into the mainstream. They seem to have been drinking the Kool-Aid of the USian census in which Arab  Americans are classified under the Caucasian tab.  The whole Colorism issue that plagues minority cultures have been in place for some time. Fair skin was equated with aristocracy and beauty for a while and was made worse by the colonial ventures of the 19th centuries. Millions of women of Asian and African descent spend fortunes on skin lightening creams to achieve that much wanted fair complexion. Frieda has bore the brunt of having people accuse her of not being a good looking Indian Woman as opposed to the fair Bollywood actresses when in reality Frieda looks like any regular Indian woman.  Many  people don’t want her to be a representation of India in the western world because she isn’t the idealized Indian beauty and her ventures in Hollywood is a problem for them.