My fascination with the blurring of boundaries between the real and the unreal goes hand in hand with my fascination for the age of self-conscious living. This is the third or fourth time I am writing about it. trying to articulate the ideas in my head. Recently I read an article in Time, about Oprah. Now, I admire Oprah, and the writer of this article does too, as he writes about not Oprah in particular, but her new cable channel, OWN -- Oprah Winfrey Network. I do not know where to start! The ideas that ran in my mind as I was reading this article! virtual wild horses waiting to be caught! and tamed! familiar ideas that sounded almost crazy suddenly turned probable and real!
Oprah embodies the spirit and substance of "celebrity". As I said before, we all want to be 'celebrities" in our own ways. The writer of the above article concludes his article thus, "your best self, it turns out, is a self with a show on Oprah's network." What is your "best self'?" We have read and heard a million answers for that. A host of religions attempt to teach you that. But in the present world of democratized media, what constitutes "best self"? To me, that would be a self whose existence has been validated, is being validated. Who validates it? Myself, I could say, like a million self-help books tell me, but i would say it is others. My existence is validated by other selves, the world. And what better way than being in the media? No wonder these reality-tv shows are not going away anytime soon.
And you cannot say that celebrities are just twinkling stars that do just that -- twinkle. it takes a George Clooney to bring Sudan to your attention. It is his idea about the satellite in the sky over that troubled spot that is being put to work right now. His voice is heard, his movements are followed, and there is his power to make things happen. Like Oprah. So the age of self-conscious living , the age of TV living is here as a natural evolutionary force in our existence. I do not know the "real" Oprah. I just know the "virtual" Oprah. And this virtual Oprah changes lives. Inspires others to be life-changing celebrities.yes, your best self is your virtual self!
Now, in this age of self-conscious living, we are all characters in a virtual world. We are heroes -- tragic at times, with one great flaw, comic at other times laughing at ourselves. Movies are made of our thoughts, ideas and what we see. Great or funny music accompanies us, those same thoughts and ideas. We are significant beings whose existences are valid. Valid enough to be seen and heard on a global platform by other valid beings.We are all walking movies, at the same time, we are all moviemakers. We are the "best selves" living in a "self-conscious" world of which we are very aware, a world which has to notice us in turn.
... just saying.
Showing posts with label george clooney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label george clooney. Show all posts
Friday, January 7, 2011
Sunday, March 7, 2010
"Third world" woes
This is the post-postmodern age. we all know that. in this age, we abhor racism, sexism etc. We are enlightened beings, or on the way to being so. esp. celebs. Almost all of them have causes to work for. and we are grateful that their famous faces bring the attention of people with money to the fate of the underprivileged.
And we hope that that would bring some long awaited changes in the lives of the disadvantaged and the dispossessed.
These celebs of course are compassionate, they want to help these unfortunate people. But at some point, the problem peeps out. the fact that in their heart of hearts, they don't see these human beings as their equal. "all are equal, some are more equal" comes true here. oh, i hear protests.
We hear casual references like "something that may happen in a Third World country", to denote the speaker's disbelief at a pathetic occurence in a rich country. ( that was the great humane do-gooder George Clooney). Or "showing that even the tall, blonde foreign lady wanted to use it" when a celeb is describing her philanthropic work in a certain Third World country ( this is from an article in Vogue). The funny thing is the lady here doesn't have a clue as to what an average Third Worlder thinks. The Third World woman, for instance, has so many other important immediate matters to think about and deal with -- like her daily bread, her children, and her family to mention a few, that the 'blonde lady" shouldn't have to worry about what we think. We do not have any concept of your blinding beauty just because you are tall and blonde. Well, if you were really beautiful with a loving smile, then, yes. But not if you were arrogant, and condescending. Anyway, most probably, if they are anything like us Malayalis, they will look on you as just an alien, as a totally different kind of being -- not necessarily angelic or intelligent. Some of them may be even laughing behind your back. Of course there will be those who fear you like they fear ghosts.
So -- What do these unthinking, (maybe) by the garden-variety philanthropic celebs tell a person like me? that is, someone of average intelligence? I get the idea that the celeb concerned has inadvertently revealed his or her sense of racial superiority. in the second quote, she might as well have added "Aryan"! I do not know why these people think that we like the name-calling? or that we must like it? It is like using the N- word, dear people! That you have deigned to stop using. Why keep using this? Of course, once you stop using this particular word, another word or phrase will take its place, which for a while will be fine with us third worlders -- for a time. after a while we may or may not protest against that too. that is our privilege. and dancing to our tunes is your burden. :) after all, third worlds did not appear overnight on their own. we know our faults, our lacks, our situation better than you. we will call ourselves names, you do not have that right.
It is this uncomfortable, distasteful mixture of compassion and contempt of the white race toward the so-called Third World, that makes some of us and many of the underprivileged, distrustful of these white good samaritans. this is why the whites see hatred in the eyes of many of the poor, even as they accept the numerous kindnesses. somehow they know, because they are not stupid. and particularly because the precedents are not that good. Historically, the advent of the white man into the Third World countries has not been advantageous to the Third Worlder. In fact, they know that it is this "discovery" by the white man that played a huge role in making them Third in the first place. These modern day human rights activists are the descendants of people who made grabbing what belonged to others, an art. And no matter how much the outward trappings may change, inside, most of them are the same as their ancestors. Unless they acknowledge this contradiction/self-delusion, and change -- from the inside.
I have seen this in a university setting, where the ideas of equality and justice are accepted as everyone's birthrights. Professors who strive to be fair, non-racist, evolved beings, gay men who try the same thing, but at some point,one can see through the pretense -- conscious or otherwise. They delude themselves into thinking that they are highly enlightened regarding the race issue, just because they are afraid to be mean to the black students, or because they are in the field of arts and humanities, or because they are outside the mainstream as they are not heterosexual. But that doesn't naturally make them non-racists.
Now, there is a white man who acknowledges this uncomfortable truth in his writings. Henning Mankell. That is just one thing, and one very important thing -- that makes him better and different from all other great white writers or scholars, in my eyes. and he is an Aquarian too! :)
PS : A variation of this covert racism is parallelled in the area of sexism. Thus we see even educated men stoop to harping on annoyingly inane jokes that make use of outdated notions about women's nature. That there are men who find such types of jokes even remotely intelligent or funny, in this age, is unbelievable. The basic reason here too is the contempt that they hold in their heart of hearts for women, underneath all that pretense of respect and honor.And also the fear that women are getting ahead, that tradition and mores made by men may not be able to keep women suppressed for much longer.
And we hope that that would bring some long awaited changes in the lives of the disadvantaged and the dispossessed.
These celebs of course are compassionate, they want to help these unfortunate people. But at some point, the problem peeps out. the fact that in their heart of hearts, they don't see these human beings as their equal. "all are equal, some are more equal" comes true here. oh, i hear protests.
We hear casual references like "something that may happen in a Third World country", to denote the speaker's disbelief at a pathetic occurence in a rich country. ( that was the great humane do-gooder George Clooney). Or "showing that even the tall, blonde foreign lady wanted to use it" when a celeb is describing her philanthropic work in a certain Third World country ( this is from an article in Vogue). The funny thing is the lady here doesn't have a clue as to what an average Third Worlder thinks. The Third World woman, for instance, has so many other important immediate matters to think about and deal with -- like her daily bread, her children, and her family to mention a few, that the 'blonde lady" shouldn't have to worry about what we think. We do not have any concept of your blinding beauty just because you are tall and blonde. Well, if you were really beautiful with a loving smile, then, yes. But not if you were arrogant, and condescending. Anyway, most probably, if they are anything like us Malayalis, they will look on you as just an alien, as a totally different kind of being -- not necessarily angelic or intelligent. Some of them may be even laughing behind your back. Of course there will be those who fear you like they fear ghosts.
So -- What do these unthinking, (maybe) by the garden-variety philanthropic celebs tell a person like me? that is, someone of average intelligence? I get the idea that the celeb concerned has inadvertently revealed his or her sense of racial superiority. in the second quote, she might as well have added "Aryan"! I do not know why these people think that we like the name-calling? or that we must like it? It is like using the N- word, dear people! That you have deigned to stop using. Why keep using this? Of course, once you stop using this particular word, another word or phrase will take its place, which for a while will be fine with us third worlders -- for a time. after a while we may or may not protest against that too. that is our privilege. and dancing to our tunes is your burden. :) after all, third worlds did not appear overnight on their own. we know our faults, our lacks, our situation better than you. we will call ourselves names, you do not have that right.
It is this uncomfortable, distasteful mixture of compassion and contempt of the white race toward the so-called Third World, that makes some of us and many of the underprivileged, distrustful of these white good samaritans. this is why the whites see hatred in the eyes of many of the poor, even as they accept the numerous kindnesses. somehow they know, because they are not stupid. and particularly because the precedents are not that good. Historically, the advent of the white man into the Third World countries has not been advantageous to the Third Worlder. In fact, they know that it is this "discovery" by the white man that played a huge role in making them Third in the first place. These modern day human rights activists are the descendants of people who made grabbing what belonged to others, an art. And no matter how much the outward trappings may change, inside, most of them are the same as their ancestors. Unless they acknowledge this contradiction/self-delusion, and change -- from the inside.
I have seen this in a university setting, where the ideas of equality and justice are accepted as everyone's birthrights. Professors who strive to be fair, non-racist, evolved beings, gay men who try the same thing, but at some point,one can see through the pretense -- conscious or otherwise. They delude themselves into thinking that they are highly enlightened regarding the race issue, just because they are afraid to be mean to the black students, or because they are in the field of arts and humanities, or because they are outside the mainstream as they are not heterosexual. But that doesn't naturally make them non-racists.
Now, there is a white man who acknowledges this uncomfortable truth in his writings. Henning Mankell. That is just one thing, and one very important thing -- that makes him better and different from all other great white writers or scholars, in my eyes. and he is an Aquarian too! :)
PS : A variation of this covert racism is parallelled in the area of sexism. Thus we see even educated men stoop to harping on annoyingly inane jokes that make use of outdated notions about women's nature. That there are men who find such types of jokes even remotely intelligent or funny, in this age, is unbelievable. The basic reason here too is the contempt that they hold in their heart of hearts for women, underneath all that pretense of respect and honor.And also the fear that women are getting ahead, that tradition and mores made by men may not be able to keep women suppressed for much longer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)