[Reader-list] shuddhabratas response]
Shuddhabrata Sengupta
shuddha at sarai.net
Fri Mar 2 02:13:50 IST 2007
Dear Emma, Iram, Rahul, Tapas, Anjalika, Dinesh, Aman (and everyone else)
Now this is really getting interesting. :)
In fact far more interesting than what was going on when Vedavati and
Abhik were trading charges.
The question of dignity is actually worth a real discussion, so maybe we
could get down to it one of these days, and while we are at it we should
also talk about robustly multi-coloured categories such as humiliation.
I am in complete agreement with Emma D when she says that "even pimps
have more dignity than certain bong men" and I am including myself in
the category of the bong man, once more, in agreement with her when she
ends the above statement by saying 'like shuddha'.
One cannot escape what in bengali we call 'bongshodosh' (the misfortune
of our descent, to which I could add the curse, or mixed blessing, or
'bad luck hi kharab hai' - of one's gonads, though it appears that
surgery and modern medicine bring hope to many, especially to those
nominally XY chromosomed individuals made melancholic by the misfortune
of inappropriate gendering)
So, some pimps have a great deal of dignity. Certainly.
But let's make things a little more precise and complicated at the same
time. Some bong men (not all, some) may have as much dignity as your
common or garden pimp, and an insignificant few may in fact have more
dignity than the average pimp. It's incredible, I know, but it has been
known to happen. I have in fact met one or two incredibly dignified,
refined, erudite, and slightly mad, very sad, bong men in my life. (And
none of them are now or ever have been, relatives of mine. Dignity is
probably a recessive gene in the case of my extended lineage and kinship
network.)
This is also further complicated by the fact that there are several
pimps who also happen to be bong men. I mean, you dont even need to
stroll down Shonagachi to know that gentlemen who might answer to names
such as 'Tokai','Jhonta' 'Deb-dulal', 'Mortaza moshai' 'Gomes' and 'Boro
Photik' are bong, men and pimps. They smell of kashundi, parshey maacch
and make their money as only they know best. Some, maybe, such as
Deb-dulal, Mortaza Moshai, Gomes, and Boro Photik are honourable and
dignified pimps, 'oder baajaare naam-daak acchey', others, such as Tokai
and Jhonta are what we would call 'cchoto-lpk, raskel (rascal) and luj
(loose) character'. Mairi bolcchi, Dignity comes striated, even when it
visits pimps.
It is not yet established as to whether all bong women have as much
dignity as pimps or bong men. It is also not yet known as to whether
bong women who pimp retain as much dignity as others who don't, and
other men who do. This is a matter of ongoing investigation. Being a
bong man, I am possesed about an ontological certainty about myself and
others like me. But I cannot speak with any certainty about bong women.
Perhaps the bong women on this list might like to undertake their own
self-reflexive auto-critique.
But let me not stray. Once again, some women sex workers in genteel semi
retirement who do not get to the position of being the 'madam' or
'mashi' sometimes have to make do with being 'ejent (agent)' or 'didi'
or dalal, or pimp. This happens, and some, who might be called 'Komola',
or 'Mrinmoyee' (Minu) or 'Fatema-bi', or 'Agnes' might be actually women
possessed of great honour and dignity. On the other hand, it is quite
likely that others who might have names like 'Elokeshi' and 'Paanchi'
might have cheated a lot of sex workers (their own erstwhile comrades)
of their due.
"Kono shala maagi ba dalaaler maathaye morjaadar hishep aanka
nei.Maathai tilok kaata bamun-thakur hoyto-ba morjaadar naap ta nitey
ebong ditey paaren, kintu aamar moto dalaaler eto baar ekhono baareni je
haamesha inchi tape niye nijer morjadar aaga-paanch-tola doirgho-prosto
nepey berabo. Shomoye'r boro obhab, memshayeb, boro shonkot. Aar ta
cchara, koto jinisher hisheb jey ekhono baaki."
yani-ke
"Kisi raand ya bharue ke maathe par uske maryada ka naap-tol likha nahin
hota. Maathey pe tilak kaat kar maryaada ko pongey-pandit naapte honge,
lekin mujh jaise bharuey ki itni aukaad nahin hai ki mai hamesha inchi
tape leke apney maryaade ke lambaai-chaaurai ke maujuda haal ka khabar
detey firun. Time-time ki baat hoti hai mem'saab, aur hamaare paas time
kam hai. Aur bahut kuch baaki hai naapne ko. "
Apologies, readers, for the untranslatable, which must remain more or
less as such. But since ethnic references have come into play with such
full force, I thought it might be interesting to ask how we gloss
'pimping' which describes an activity in relation to 'bong' which
describes the accident of birth, language and to some extent, geography.
I can see quite easily how one can put 'pimps' with 'commission agent'
or 'negotiator' or 'adjuster' or even 'accountant' or 'public relations
professional' in one sub set and 'mallus' with 'bongs' and 'uplas' in
another. One is a vocation or profession or calling, and the other is a
description of the language one speaks, or the cultural matrix one
inherits, embedded in, or trapped by.
But the mathematics that allows us to construct a calculation that
involves both 'bongs' and 'pimps' as indices that can be read off each
other in terms of the intensity of dignity is somehow opaque to me. I
want to understand how we can actually conduct this operation, how
'pimp' and 'bong' can be made to stand together as terms with
interchangable valence in the same equation. (How else would we be able
to make a quantitative comparison between these two vis a vis that
enigmatic third term - 'dignity')
Instinctively, I have a sense that what Emma D is saying is right. "Even
pimps have more dignity than certain bong men". But I want to understand
what makes this sentence so accurate. I really do. I will be grateful if
Emma d or anyone else, can shed light on this matter.
warm regards, benche thakun, I hope none of you will take amiss my
sincere effort to understand all that is being said, by everyone concerned.
Shuddha,
emma d wrote:
> Thought of what?! I still believe that even pimps have more dignity than
> certain Bong men like Shuddha!
>
> And, yes thanks for the "moderator" advice
>
>
> On 3/1/07, Iram Ghufran <iram at sarai.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Dear Emma,
>>
>> You should have thought of that before you make statements like - "Even
>> pimps have more dignity than some Bong men, some Bong men like you!" on
>> a public list.
>>
>> Anyway, I do hope your anxieties regarding list 'moderation' are
>> satisfied.
>>
>> Best
>> Iram
>>
>>
>> emma d wrote:
>> > Get a life man! Is there any point in going on and on about Shuddha's
>> > response to Jogis' posting! Seriously, get a life! Besides, I
>> > certainly believe you ought to re-read Shuddha's response entirely
>> > again, wherein he expresses how he "understands" that weirdo's
>> > response to Jogi's crazed posting!
>> > The end? Amen?
>> > On 3/1/07, *Iram Ghufran* <iram at sarai.net <mailto:iram at sarai.net >>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > Emma,
>> >
>> > I think you are confusing issues.
>> >
>> > A) "don't you have anyone to fuck" is not a nice thing to say to
>> > anyone but these sentiments were expressed in a personal mail by
>> > Abhik.
>> > I chose not to comment on those.
>> >
>> > B) "awaiting moderator's approval" is an AUTOMATED response to
>> > TECHNICAL
>> > glitches. As far as I know, it has nothing to do with the content
>> > of the
>> > mail (unless there are attachments)
>> >
>> > I think you need to read posting protocols again. They have been
>> > sent on
>> > this list before and I will forward them to you in a separate mail.
>> >
>> > C) By the way, I think Shuddhabrata's response did express concerns
>> > regarding Abhik's unfortunate statement to Vedavati's provocative
>> > statement. You should read it again.
>> >
>> > "Let me clarify at the very beginning that I find the contents of
>> the
>> > exchange between Vedavati and Abhit (which we have all been
>> > subjected to because of Vedavati's forward, with comment, of
>> > Abhik's off list email to her) sad and deplorable. While Abhik's
>> > language betrays an
>> > unfortunate misogyny, Vedavati's postings and responses are not
>> > exactly exemplars of liberality and tolerance."
>> >
>> > Best
>> > Iram
>> >
>> > emma d wrote:
>> > > Dear Iram, It would have been nice if you could have expressed
>> > > similar concerns when the "don't you have anyone to fuck" first
>> > > appeared on the list! Where did the "awaiting moderator's
>> approval"
>> > > thingy disappear then! Emma
>> > >
>> > > On 3/1/07, *Iram Ghufran* < iram at sarai.net
>> > <mailto:iram at sarai.net> <mailto:iram at sarai.net
>> > <mailto:iram at sarai.net >>>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Dear list members,
>> > > Please refrain from making personal/ individual statements
>> > regrading
>> > > other list members and communities on this forum. The reader
>> > list
>> > > is a
>> > > non moderated public list. And I guess thats where the
>> challenge
>> > > lies -
>> > > How do we - as members of this list (of more than 1200
>> people)
>>
>> > > exercise
>> > > our freedom of speech? How will our speech acts be
>> > remembered by the
>> > > archives of this list and read/ understood by people who
>> > browse our
>> > > public archives in future? No one can stop a list member
>> > from writing
>> > > what they like but its a personal request - please think
>> > before you
>> > > click the send button.
>> > > Best
>> > > Iram
>> > > (co - member of reader-list)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > emma d wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Alright guys enough is enough! This is not to condone the
>> > > outrageously
>> > > > content of the blog Vedvati wanted us to visit, or to
>> condone
>> > > Abhik's
>> > > > response to the same (makes me wonder what kind of a
>> > background he
>> > > > comes from), but Shuddhabrata you really take the cake. A
>> > pseudo
>> > > like
>> > > > you seems to "understand" Abhik's posting! Even pimps have
>> > more
>> > > > dignity than some Bong men, some Bong men like you!
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >
>> > > > _________________________________________
>> > > > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>> > > > Critiques & Collaborations
>> > > > To subscribe: send an email to
>> > reader-list-request at sarai.net <mailto:
>> reader-list-request at sarai.net
>> >
>> > > <mailto:reader-list-request at sarai.net
>> > <mailto: reader-list-request at sarai.net>> with subscribe in the
>> > > subject header.
>> > > > To unsubscribe:
>> > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> > > > List archive:
>> > <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
More information about the reader-list
mailing list