I wish I could say that if most people were geneticists/molecular biologists, then most of these race/ethnicity-driven issues would disappear. Sadly, I can’t. In fact, one of the papers focusing on the close relationship between Jews and Palestinians was subsequently retracted by the editors of the journal it was originally published in, not because there was any fault with the science, but because the authors had used terms like “colonists” instead of say, the less loaded and more neutral “settlers”. And if we venture out of say genetics/molecular biology into some of the more softer sciences, things become even more bizarre: Japanese anthropologists, for instance, have notions about the origin of (non-Ainu) Japanese which seem much more informed by politics than actual research.

Shaad, I don’t disagree with you at all. And I’m sure what you’re saying is correct. But it really amuses me that genetic studies always seem to counteract cherished notions. For example, the Aryan Invasion Theory. Or the notion that the people of England are descended from Germanic invaders. Or, as Razib has pointed out, that many American Black people who think they have Native American blood, actually don’t have any. Most Afrikaaners believe they are pure European but genetic studies say they are not. Etc. etc. Sometimes, the way these studies always seem to contradict national myths, they almost appear to have a political agenda. I know that’s nonsense, but still…

Also, learnt behavioral patterns and attitudes. Values, cultural tendencies. Type of family structure, and way of looking at the world. Habits and cuisine. There are a lot of things which make Bengalis distinct in the Indian context (as there are for every Indian sub-ethnicity). Whether there is any genetic basis to Bengaliness, I’m sure Razib could tell us. Probably there is to an extent, although with strong overlaps with neighboring peoples such as Biharis, Oriyas, Assamese, etc.

As for the book, let’s just say that I preferred her Interpreter of Maladies to The Namesake. The entire identity issue in the latter was a touch too angsty for me. That said, I’m not an ABCD. And I can certainly see the self-identity issues of the novel resonating with SM posters and readers who are.

And I don’t have any issues with non-Bengalis playing Bengalis. Frankly, while we generally tend to talk about Bengali-ness as an ethnicity, my personal view is that it is merely a cultural identity based largely on language, history, and the myths we tell ourselves. As such, someone can easily use those tropes to convey a sense of Bengali-ness. Mind you, I didn’t particularly like Kal Penn (sp?) in that role; I just thought his performance (as well as those of the women playing Max and Moushumi) was not as nuanced as that of his “parents”. Was the movie “crap”? No, but I didn’t think it was that spectacular either.

Oh, back to point. The book was crap and the movie with the no-name gujju bhai as lead is even crappier. Even Kaavya made-up a better plot.

I saw Namesake at UCLA and we sat on these foldy chairs all parralel to each other in an auditorium. Thus, when the subtitles came on, no one could read the subtitles because they were blocked by the people in front of us. My friend sitting next to me would lean over ask what they were saying. I understood about 80% of what was being said. So I’d translate, but I’d miss a few here and there. I missed a sentence and the friend two seats away translated it into English for me. I was impressed, “I didn’t know you could speak bangla!” I whispered over. “I can’t! I can read English.” Apparantly, she was sitting taller then the rest of us.

Anyhow, lame story to basically explain, yes, I understood most of the bangla (what i didn’t understand where specific words that we didn’t use in our house). The dialect didn’t sound different at all then what I’m used to. BUT, I’m guessing that dialect is class driven in bangla. My grandfather was schooled in Calcutta (pre-partition) and that side of the family (I’m closer to) was in Pakistan for a while. My dad’s side of the family I have a harder time understanding – lower ‘class’, more village talk, street talk, harder sounding. But then again, I saw Yoni Ki Baat here in LA last week and there was a piece all in Bangla that I also couldn’t understand, but that’s because it was really proper and formal Bangla. I dunno, I guess that since the Bangla I used was really with my mother or grandparents, it has to be used within that limited context (words, dialect) for me to understand.

In Conclusion. I had an easier time understanding Bangla in The Namesake then I do in Bangla natuks (TV sitcoms/soap operas).

sounds like Chakrabarti’s into her. he needs some acknowledgment from her, and maybe he regrets it didn’t work out the 1st time. maybe now that she’s famous his interest is peaked b/c her combo of brains/looks/fame make her a perfect trophy for a NY intellectual.

or maybe lahiris was into chakrabarti this whole time and stole his life story as a passive-aggressive way of getting his attention. now she’s paying him no notice, not even giving him the pleasure of acknowledging that he’s not the inspiration. maybe she threw herself at him the 1st time but now she really knows how to play the game.

or maybe i’ve watched more SATC than any hetero-male should.

i’m sure there are more scenarios, but i need to turn my attention to desperate houswives.