Commentary / Dilip D'Souza
Imminent Inanity in Bangalore
One day about two years ago, a good friend of mine,
a thoughtful, bright young man, told me that two young ladies had 'put
India on the map.' Their achievements had got the rest of
the world looking at us, he went on. India was being taken more
seriously; these two women had sent our image in the world skyrocketing.
So earnest was my friend, so sure of what he was saying --I could
not help believing him.
I met another friend of mine a few days ago. Her parents emigrated
to the USA several years ago. She was born and grew up there and
has now chosen to come to India for a research project. I asked
her if she had heard of either of the two women who had 'put
India on the map.' She had not. So much for being taken more
seriously, even if my poll sample of one is somewhat small.
And who were these two achieving ladies? Sushmita Sen, Miss Universe
in 1994, and Aishwarya Rai, Miss World that same year. That year,
these two lovely ladies won the world's splashiest beauty contests.
It was the first time an Indian had won either crown. Perhaps
it was also the first time both titles had gone to women from
the same country. I don't know.
Here in India, we went through
a year of celebrations and hype, typified by my friend's comment
about the world taking us more seriously. If you were reading
only the Indian press that year, you could be forgiven for concluding
that little that was of any significance happened anywhere in
1994.
In 1996, we're going one step further. This November, India is
going to actually hold the Miss World Contest itself, in Bangalore.
Yes, dozens of beautiful women from all over the world will descend
on India's Garden City in about a month, parading themselves before
judges, showing great camaraderie in the teeth of fierce competition,
smiling nonstop for the cameras that will be everywhere, offering
streams of -- forgive me, my cynicism is showing -- profound inanities
('As Miss World, I will work to end my hunger -- sorry, world
hunger) for our consumption.
Only, they will jet off to the Seychelles for the swimsuit competition.
I am sure that as you read these words, there are tears being
shed in Bangalore over that.
Swimsuits or not, the Miss World contest has produced decidedly
mixed feelings across our country. Groups ranging right across
the political spectrum have denounced it angrily. Other groups
ranging right across the political spectrum have also welcomed
it heartily. If opinion polls in major newspapers show overwhelming
support for the show, there are women who have threatened to immolate
themselves to stop it from happening.
All of which leaves me entirely confused.
Take what we hear from the people who are promoting the contest,
those who want it to happen. They are using the same language
my thoughtful friend used two years ago. Staging the Miss World
show will 'put Bangalore on the map' (wasn't it there
before?); it will 'show that India has arrived' (where?);
it will 'build our image in the eyes of the world' (what
image is that?).
What's going on here? Surely we must have other, more substantial
accomplishments to shout about from our rooftops? Surely our image
cannot depend on one glitzy event? But no: it's a bevy of svelte
women that a lot of people believe is going to define India --
for Indians, for the world. The very idea that we think we need
a Miss World contest to get the world to sit up and notice India
is galling. For that reason alone, I feel like picketing the show
myself.
But who are the people ranged on this side of that particular
fence? And why are they there?
Professor Rajendra Singh, head of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh,
the militant organisation that's behind the so-called Hindu
revivalist movement of recent years, offered his view on this
the other day. The 'parading of half-naked girls' in
the Miss World contest, he said, was a 'complete violation
of Indian values and culture which view the woman as a motherly
figure.' People who are otherwise stridently critical of
the RSS and its brethren in the Hindu fold have expressed similar
views.
Make of all that what you will. But dissent is closer than Professor
Singh probably bargained for. On the very same day, Bal Thackeray,
head of the Shiv Sena, which also says it is the protector of
Hindu culture, ridiculed those who were opposing the contest.
How much that has to do with his known closeness to the organiser
of the contest, I'll leave you to speculate on.
But as you see, opposition to the contest is on the hallowed grounds
of 'culture.' Really, what culture are we talking about
here? I don't know about motherly figures, but I do know that
we view girls with a definitely jaundiced eye. They are aborted
before birth, not fed as well as their brothers, not educated
as well and seen as liabilities because of the pernicious dowry
system. All of which helps explain why we are one of the few countries
that have less women than men: at last count, abbot 927 women
for every 1,000 men.
Is this unhappy fact also our culture?
Pursuing this elusive culture some more, pick nearly any popular
Indian film. You'll find women in it parading about in skimpy
or conveniently wet clothes. You'll find cleavage measurable by
the yard, suggestive songs and dances.
We love this stuff so much
that we have spawned a whole new art-form based on it: performing
kids who get up on stage at parties and duplicate the dances,
lip-synching the songs as they go, their parents watching proudly.
We give these children prizes depending on how closely they reproduce
what we've seen on screen dozens of times. This happens in India,
it happens among expatriate Indians around the globe.
Is this our culture too?
What's the point? Just this: culture is not some remote ideal
that's set in stone, forever immutable, forever virtuous. Culture
is what's happening all around us today. It's sublime, it's vulgar,
it's ordinary. It's joyous, dismaying, uplifting. It defies every
definition, every straitjacket. And that's precisely why it is
so powerful. If our culture encompasses the films we make and
flock to see, it certainly has space for a Miss World contest.
So when I hear that our culture is being threatened by the arrival
of Miss World aspirants, that's galling too. For that reason alone,
I feel like trying to get a ticket to the show.
Is it any wonder that I am so confused?
But in the end, I fervently wish the show would just go away somewhere
else. There are two reasons for that: Neither has to do with our
culture.
The first concerns the huge sums of money that will be spent on
the contest. I wish the wealthy, powerful men behind it would
instead spend the money in some other way that leaves a lasting,
beneficial effect on the country: drinking water, health care,
food, education. I realise that's probably an unpopular suggestion
in an age of mobile phones and Visa power. But let me offer this
thought: Imagine the effect that would have on our image in the
world.
The second reason is more personal. If the contest vanishes, at
least there will be a few less inanities I'll have to hear. Whether
it is the 'I want to help the world's children' variety
or the 'we will put Bangalore on the map' variety.
|