Nobel winning Indians

An article which kind of validates what I was talking about in my first post.

Chidanand Rajghatta writes in TOI.

When will we learn?

Criticism or Racism

Discussing my previous post, a friend mentioned that our tendency to be defensive and sensitivity to criticism is not always our fault. She recalled some painful experiences where Indians were stereotyped as being lazy, lacking commitment or plain stingy.

What I was talking about is criticism - which usually has a justifiable basis and is applied to one person or a small group. What my friend mentioned was racism - which generally emanates from making generalizations about an entire populace based on a small subset of people who are being observed only in one capacity.

Life today is (or maybe it always has been) highly compartmentalized such that we generally interact with a set of people only within a pre-determined environment. Colleagues are for office and occasional weekend nights out. House-mates enter the picture when there are bills to be settled or a house to be cleaned. Activities which help people repel the insanity that professional life brings - things like gymming, joining a dance or sports club, reading a book, etc. are either done alone or with people who are normally not prominent in other parts of our life. There might be some overlap for sure, but generally we form opinions about individuals with enforced blinkers on.

Ideally speaking, judgments should be made only after observing people under a variety of conditions - relaxed, pressured, worried, happy etc. Of course, given the humdrum of everyday life, this is not possible and hence our proclivity for arriving at half baked conclusions, which in turn becomes the root cause of racism.

So all Arabs are terrorists, all Indians are funny (this is what a colleague told me once) or arrogant (read this in a blog), all Chinese are as hard working as a hot dog vendor in a fat guy convention, all Americans have single digit IQs and all Englishmen have upper lips stiffer than a piece of cardboard. Of course such blatant stereotyping can be funny at times but more often than not it is a malaise that causes unbelievable amounts of damage.

Blatant racism obviously cannot be condoned and should be stood up to but perceived racism like the one I mentioned in the previous post reeks of insecurity and brings with it an element of self-pity. Criticism is generally in two forms - directed at an individual only or directed at an individual who is representative of an entire people. Sreesanth is a public figure which is why any criticism he receives is taken as a personal affront by all Indians. Now, if criticism of an individual is extrapolated and applied to a bigger group it is racism. However, if criticism of a public figure is seen as criticism of an entire public then it is racism perceived.

It is the latter which I wish we would move away from. Thoughts?

Why dost thou fear India?

Indians at the best of times are not the most understated people. Colourful celebrations, exaggerated dances, a cacophony of noise are Indian trademarks, especially in the current age where we toast any success which has even a semblance of Indianess in it.

You just have to look at the furore in India surrounding Sunita Williams' mission to space and then the visit to her native village in Gujarat to understand that. Born to an Indian father and a Slovenian mother, she is the latest darling of the population, feted by the media and the masses alike. I have no gripe against Ms Williams, may she inspire a generation of Indian kids to perform even more remarkable deeds. What I do hold a grudge against is the way we cling onto anything that can be connected to us and spin it as 'New India', 'India Shining' or a plethora of other phrases that the media never tires of churning out. Any success story anywhere in the world is scoured for an Indian element and then fed to the hungry masses as another example of India's rising stature in the world. Now, I am all for patriotism. If India sends a man to the moon or wins 10 gold medals in the next Olympics, I will be the first person to put on my party hat and compete with the next guy in trying to drink our body weight in beer ( I am very light - so the advantage will be with me). But this incredible and ridiculous whirlpool of excitement generated over someone born and brought up in another country, someone who made excellent use of the infrastructure provided by that country to etch her name in the history books, proves nothing. Well ok, it proves that genetically Indians are as smart and as capable of achievement as any other colour of the spectrum (I know, I know, white is a mix of colours and black is not really a colour but you get my drift), but really, do we still need to satisfy ourselves that this is indeed true?! If so, it is a sad commentary on the regard in which we hold ourselves.

India is supposed to be a young vibrant nation (the median age is 24), full of confidence. Why then the paradoxical sensitivity to criticism of India or anything Indian? I will draw upon an example from the allegory of India, cricket. In one of the recent test matches between India and England, the former English captain Mike Atherton suggested that the beamer thrown by Sreesanth might have been deliberate. He was subjected to such vitriolic feedback that he mentioned criticising the Indian team or any player has actually become life threatening! Now I think Atherton was being a pompous, hypocritical, whining idiot, but it would have been far classier to ignore these comments than go ballistic with cries of racism, accusations of dirt-in-pocket et al. This is only one of many occasions when the whole populace has gone up in arms at the slightest hint of disproval shown by a foreigner at the state of India or anything Indian. We have transitioned from an almost reverent deference to all things and individuals foreign to scathing red hot replies to any white person who has the audacity to question us. Talk about balance. Only when we grow impervious to criticism by developing thicker skins can we call ourselves mature, developed or other terms which are bandied about with gay abandon.

India, at this juncture, is noveau riche. By this I do not mean we have solved the mountain of problems facing us. But India is growing economically which, given the capitalist nature of society we live in, means that we have found a voice several decibels higher than it used to be . And as with any individual who has climbed to the next level of the social ladder, India and Indians are unsure of how to react to these changing times. Too loud and boisterous, and we run the danger of being labelled cocky, arrogant - unable to mix it with the 'big boys'. Too taciturn and controlled, we run the risk of being marginalised...again. The key therefore lies in picking our battles, choosing the right ones to fight, ignoring the other rubbish which comes our way. Unfortunately, economic growth is not an automatic precursor to emotional growth which again takes time and experience to develop. Does that mean we continue acting the same way and wait for things to take their natural course? This is rhetorical of course, because when experience is in short supply, self assurance has to lead the way. I don't mean the swagger of a bully behind whose aggressive visage reside more issues than can be resolved by $200 an hour psychiatrist, but the glowing confidence of a young man armed with education, knowledge and the infallible trust in his own ability to change the world. It may sound over-the-top and exaggerated but just to make a point, Indians can sell ice to the Eskimos, sand to the Bedouins and maps to an 18 year old American. In the face of such remarkable and almost frightening capabilities, why the fear?