Comments on: Slumdog-mania is Officially Over http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/ All that flavorful brownness in one savory packet Sat, 30 Nov 2013 11:11:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Mustafa http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269757 Mustafa Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:02:11 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269757 <p>Slumdog is a slur,</p> <p>Although Islam came to India via conquest of the Sindh initially by Arab armies that invaded adjacent Iran (Baluchistan was not part of India historically, but Iran). Throughout Indian history, subsequent invasions of the subcontinent followed. However, the bulk of the Muslim population of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh are indigenous converts to the faith of Islam. While some converted by force, the majority converted by choice. Islam for some was a means to escape the Hindu caste system, in the same way that some convert to Christianity or a means to join the mores of the dominant culture of the day.</p> <p>The Indian Ocean was known by some European explorers as the "Muslim sea" because Islam was the dominant cultural force from East Africa to Indonesia. Islam served as a cultural conduit that changed and shaped what we now define as "Indian" culture from henna being imported from the Middle East, to the present form of the kathak incorporating Persian dance moves and Central Asian dress, to the Perso-Arabic script of Urdu, to dome construction as exemplified by the Taj Mahal, to Muslim innovations to the sari by introducing the petticoat for women and groom wear for Indian men. Even contemporary Hindi has numerous loan words from Arabic, Farsi, and Turkic languages which bears witness to former Muslim rule.</p> <p>Not all Muslim rulers of India were enlightened, but Buddhism in India was largely driven off the subcontinent by belligerant Hindu reactions to the Sakyamuni's challenge to the Vedic traditions.</p> <p>Culture changes and Indian culture is no exception.</p> <p>To me Slumdog Millionaire was a excellent means of representing India and its complexicities to a Western audience. India is no perfect society, in a society of 300 million middle class consumers, India is still home to a large concentration of poverty, child labor, corruption, sectarian violence, social dislocation, uneven distribution and concentration of wealth, and social biases against a chai walla.</p> <p>Indians seem defensive about their country and how it is portrayed. This is really no different from Muslims in Pakistan who are unwilling to confront the issue of terrorism in their midst. The Taliban was created by Pakistan's ISI to control neighboring Afghanistan. Now the policies of supporting jihadi groups has backfired as recent bombings in the main cities of the Punjab and Sindh have proven deadly.</p> Slumdog is a slur,

Although Islam came to India via conquest of the Sindh initially by Arab armies that invaded adjacent Iran (Baluchistan was not part of India historically, but Iran). Throughout Indian history, subsequent invasions of the subcontinent followed. However, the bulk of the Muslim population of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh are indigenous converts to the faith of Islam. While some converted by force, the majority converted by choice. Islam for some was a means to escape the Hindu caste system, in the same way that some convert to Christianity or a means to join the mores of the dominant culture of the day.

The Indian Ocean was known by some European explorers as the “Muslim sea” because Islam was the dominant cultural force from East Africa to Indonesia. Islam served as a cultural conduit that changed and shaped what we now define as “Indian” culture from henna being imported from the Middle East, to the present form of the kathak incorporating Persian dance moves and Central Asian dress, to the Perso-Arabic script of Urdu, to dome construction as exemplified by the Taj Mahal, to Muslim innovations to the sari by introducing the petticoat for women and groom wear for Indian men. Even contemporary Hindi has numerous loan words from Arabic, Farsi, and Turkic languages which bears witness to former Muslim rule.

Not all Muslim rulers of India were enlightened, but Buddhism in India was largely driven off the subcontinent by belligerant Hindu reactions to the Sakyamuni’s challenge to the Vedic traditions.

Culture changes and Indian culture is no exception.

To me Slumdog Millionaire was a excellent means of representing India and its complexicities to a Western audience. India is no perfect society, in a society of 300 million middle class consumers, India is still home to a large concentration of poverty, child labor, corruption, sectarian violence, social dislocation, uneven distribution and concentration of wealth, and social biases against a chai walla.

Indians seem defensive about their country and how it is portrayed. This is really no different from Muslims in Pakistan who are unwilling to confront the issue of terrorism in their midst. The Taliban was created by Pakistan’s ISI to control neighboring Afghanistan. Now the policies of supporting jihadi groups has backfired as recent bombings in the main cities of the Punjab and Sindh have proven deadly.

]]>
By: cc http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269756 cc Wed, 17 Mar 2010 06:12:00 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269756 <p>Why not? You have nothing else to do.</p> <p>I don't think Slumdog is a slur, but if you post a few more times I'll be convinced that "Slumdog is a slur" is a slur.</p> Why not? You have nothing else to do.

I don’t think Slumdog is a slur, but if you post a few more times I’ll be convinced that “Slumdog is a slur” is a slur.

]]>
By: slumdog is a slur http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269754 slumdog is a slur Wed, 17 Mar 2010 02:57:44 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269754 <p>So everytime a slur is discussed it must be written with !@#$, or else it is not a slur! What reasoning! That means that anyone can write out a slur and that it will thenceforth cease being a slur! Or was it a freudian slip on my part and I do not really consider that slumdog to be a slur? hmmpph........</p> <p>Please search jindal and slumdog and see common usage of the term/slur/whathaveyou "slumdog." Or do I need to post examples on this august board?</p> So everytime a slur is discussed it must be written with !@#$, or else it is not a slur! What reasoning! That means that anyone can write out a slur and that it will thenceforth cease being a slur! Or was it a freudian slip on my part and I do not really consider that slumdog to be a slur? hmmpph……..

Please search jindal and slumdog and see common usage of the term/slur/whathaveyou “slumdog.” Or do I need to post examples on this august board?

]]>
By: Yoga Fire http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269751 Yoga Fire Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:50:33 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269751 <p>[quote]Your opinion...i believe the Brits were in India for about 150yrs and Islamic colonialism? I wouldn't call it that...we know Islam "colonized" Iran, others parts of the Middle East, Africa, many indigneous religions wiped out. That's quite sad to me. I see a lot more "inferiority" complexes in other areas of the world, which reflects the state of the country's institutions since their hegemonized or colonial past. Islam is part and parcel of India and alongside Islamic rulers were also Hindu and Sikh rulers...no biggie. All of Europe is like that as well as South America - the way you put it you act like India is one of the few regions of the world that have had come under an empire lol. But maybe many of those indigenous religious didn't have 1000 year old writings, have not been heard about since the new cultural powerhouse overtook them.[/quote] The British did colonize India first, so they were still conducting some experiments in how to govern the country. As a result they did have men like Lord Curzon there who built some schools and a civil service and attempted to create infrastructure to the benefit of the Indian people (even if it was partly misguided and mostly overshadowed by the overall mercantalist attitude of the Parliament and racist attitudes of the Brits themselves.) By the time they got to Africa, though, they concluded that the whole "White Man's Burden" thing was more trouble than it was worth and anything they did build was primarily and solely to facilitate the orderly extraction of wealth and natural resources.</p> <p>So while colonialism in India did suck, it sucked less hard than it did for the Africans.</p> [quote]Your opinion…i believe the Brits were in India for about 150yrs and Islamic colonialism? I wouldn’t call it that…we know Islam “colonized” Iran, others parts of the Middle East, Africa, many indigneous religions wiped out. That’s quite sad to me. I see a lot more “inferiority” complexes in other areas of the world, which reflects the state of the country’s institutions since their hegemonized or colonial past. Islam is part and parcel of India and alongside Islamic rulers were also Hindu and Sikh rulers…no biggie. All of Europe is like that as well as South America – the way you put it you act like India is one of the few regions of the world that have had come under an empire lol. But maybe many of those indigenous religious didn’t have 1000 year old writings, have not been heard about since the new cultural powerhouse overtook them.[/quote] The British did colonize India first, so they were still conducting some experiments in how to govern the country. As a result they did have men like Lord Curzon there who built some schools and a civil service and attempted to create infrastructure to the benefit of the Indian people (even if it was partly misguided and mostly overshadowed by the overall mercantalist attitude of the Parliament and racist attitudes of the Brits themselves.) By the time they got to Africa, though, they concluded that the whole “White Man’s Burden” thing was more trouble than it was worth and anything they did build was primarily and solely to facilitate the orderly extraction of wealth and natural resources.

So while colonialism in India did suck, it sucked less hard than it did for the Africans.

]]>
By: PS http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269746 PS Tue, 16 Mar 2010 19:07:54 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269746 <p>1000 year bout with British Christian and Islamic colonialism..a lot of Indians have internalized an inferiority complex</p> <p>Your opinion...i believe the Brits were in India for about 150yrs and Islamic colonialism? I wouldn't call it that...we know Islam "colonized" Iran, others parts of the Middle East, Africa, many indigneous religions wiped out. That's quite sad to me. I see a lot more "inferiority" complexes in other areas of the world, which reflects the state of the country's institutions since their hegemonized or colonial past. Islam is part and parcel of India and alongside Islamic rulers were also Hindu and Sikh rulers...no biggie. All of Europe is like that as well as South America - the way you put it you act like India is one of the few regions of the world that have had come under an empire lol. But maybe many of those indigenous religious didn't have 1000 year old writings, have not been heard about since the new cultural powerhouse overtook them.</p> 1000 year bout with British Christian and Islamic colonialism..a lot of Indians have internalized an inferiority complex

Your opinion…i believe the Brits were in India for about 150yrs and Islamic colonialism? I wouldn’t call it that…we know Islam “colonized” Iran, others parts of the Middle East, Africa, many indigneous religions wiped out. That’s quite sad to me. I see a lot more “inferiority” complexes in other areas of the world, which reflects the state of the country’s institutions since their hegemonized or colonial past. Islam is part and parcel of India and alongside Islamic rulers were also Hindu and Sikh rulers…no biggie. All of Europe is like that as well as South America – the way you put it you act like India is one of the few regions of the world that have had come under an empire lol. But maybe many of those indigenous religious didn’t have 1000 year old writings, have not been heard about since the new cultural powerhouse overtook them.

]]>
By: turnip http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269745 turnip Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:18:54 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269745 <p>@cc: I lol'd.</p> @cc: I lol’d.

]]>
By: cc http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269744 cc Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:40:02 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269744 <p>If you really felt slumdog was a slur, you'd call yourself s*****g is a slur, or at least sl<em>md</em>g is a slur. Since you proudly display the word "Slubdog" in your handle, it proves you have no real opinion about it and are just striving for attention. Now, get back into your tenement, cur!</p> If you really felt slumdog was a slur, you’d call yourself s*****g is a slur, or at least slmdg is a slur. Since you proudly display the word “Slubdog” in your handle, it proves you have no real opinion about it and are just striving for attention. Now, get back into your tenement, cur!

]]>
By: slumdog is a slur http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269743 slumdog is a slur Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:23:36 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269743 <p>Sue, thanks for the backup. Due to India's 1000 year bout with British Christian and Islamic colonialism, a lot of Indians have internalized an inferiority complex. Even outright abuses seem to be praises to high heaven.</p> Sue, thanks for the backup. Due to India’s 1000 year bout with British Christian and Islamic colonialism, a lot of Indians have internalized an inferiority complex. Even outright abuses seem to be praises to high heaven.

]]>
By: Sue http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269708 Sue Sun, 14 Mar 2010 13:53:36 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269708 <p>As an African American, I can sort of understand the indifference or dislike some Indians expressed about Slumdog. It's a reaction similar (in my opinion) to the discomfort some African Americans (including me) have expressed with the depiction of the lead characters in "Precious". A Black colleague of mine, when asked about "Precious", just rolled her eyes and said, "Yeah, yeah, same old, same old". And yet this is the same film that has been critically lauded, won a ton of awards, and has some prominent African Americans backing it. I think that the concerns expressed are similar: fetishization of the "other" by films that seem to be aimed at a predominantly white audience and present a picture of the way these "others" live their lives in a manner that just perpetuates the same tired stereotypes.</p> As an African American, I can sort of understand the indifference or dislike some Indians expressed about Slumdog. It’s a reaction similar (in my opinion) to the discomfort some African Americans (including me) have expressed with the depiction of the lead characters in “Precious”. A Black colleague of mine, when asked about “Precious”, just rolled her eyes and said, “Yeah, yeah, same old, same old”. And yet this is the same film that has been critically lauded, won a ton of awards, and has some prominent African Americans backing it. I think that the concerns expressed are similar: fetishization of the “other” by films that seem to be aimed at a predominantly white audience and present a picture of the way these “others” live their lives in a manner that just perpetuates the same tired stereotypes.

]]>
By: shilip http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2010/03/08/kavi/comment-page-3/#comment-269702 shilip Sun, 14 Mar 2010 05:13:04 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=6118#comment-269702 <p>"I did not the movie offensive since I liked the story of a Muslim in contemporary India. I am Muslim and though the film is fiction, I thought it was bold to depict to a Western audience the sectarian violence which plagues the nation from time to time."</p> <p>That just happens to only show one side of that "sectarian" violence.</p> “I did not the movie offensive since I liked the story of a Muslim in contemporary India. I am Muslim and though the film is fiction, I thought it was bold to depict to a Western audience the sectarian violence which plagues the nation from time to time.”

That just happens to only show one side of that “sectarian” violence.

]]>