[Reader-list] "The New Muslim" in Hindustan Times

[Yousuf]

Dear Sadan
Of course the difference of perception is there and I
can't help it - can't shut my eyes. And its not just a
two-level difference - there are so many levels to it.
A lot of grey area in between, which is probably being
erased too. You know what, some of the HT reporters
wrote back to me saying that "its the sheer number of
people they are talking about - there are so many "New
Muslims" that people like you don't count - you would
be unacceptable among your community - so why should
we listen to your views" (the quoted text is not their
exact words - but a gist). And that's why I was
worried - my shock was not to see the euphoric Muslim
response (I already knew how they'll respond), but the
fact that it is a medium like HT which is the most
powerful at the end of the day. They have just created
a new truth (one reader says "thank you for giving
birth to the new muslim", some NRIs have offered
dollar donations for the New muslim!).

So, going back to the "difference" - even if people
like us wrongly (and arrogantly) assume that we are at
the top of this intellectual hierarchy, we are
helpless, it doesn't provide us any power. HT remains
the most powerful finally. I know that they recieved a
whole lot of negative criticism too about this series
but they ignored most of it, highlighting only the
euphoric emails. Also because they wanted to match
this story with the surging stock market, I guess.
That's what today's media all about - no space for
nuances and subtleties. If they had published equal
amount of negative or different-type-of criticism,
maybe it could help reduce this difference we are
talking about.

Yousuf

--- "sadan at sarai.net" <sadan at sarai.net> wrote:

> Dear Yousuf,
> I agree with you and certainly do not find these
> reportings in the series
> 'cool' or anyway acceptable. I think i mentioned
> this in my first mail too.
> I in my first mail tried to address your anxiety at
> another level and this
> was in a way related to the methodology ( i know
> t5his is a loaded word yet
> using it).
> You were upset by the way in which some of the
> readers found these images
> cool and away from thed ominant media image of
> muslims as terrorists. This
> leads to a difference between how you or Sohail look
> at these images and
> how people who do not have nuanced and critical
> orientation (like you two
> have or certain others may posses). From your first
> post, what I gathered
> was your difficulty to come to terms with this
> difference.
> We know that mainstream media constantly bombards
> images producing muslims
> as Others. Kabir Khan in Chak de India lives in a
> locality full of
> symbolism and markers that on the one hand confirms
> to these dominant Hindu
> image of how a muslim locality should look like.
> Now, a lot of people did
> not find any objectionable on the ground that
> mainstream commercial film
> main itana to chalta hai. I found it quite
> problematic on different
> grounds. And my concern was not merely about what
> was shown but with the
> degree with which these scenes are accepted as a
> kind of compromise that we
> unconsciously attain with our critical outlook while
> watching a mainstream
> movie.
> Coming back to Hindustan Times series, I would
> suggest to maintain the
> difference between yourself and how others percieve,
> between your
> discomfort and others celebration and between your
> rejection and others
> acceptance. I would personally try to address this
> difference rather than
> keep going back to the logic in which images are
> produced. It is this
> difference that allow us not merely to reject
> communal images but also
> provides us analytical space to understand why
> people accept such images.
> wishes,
> sadan.
>   
>   
> 
>  
> On 10:23 pm 10/30/07 Yousuf <ysaeed7 at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Dear Sadan
> > Thanks for your comments. I will try to clarify on
> > the use of certain words that you mentioned from
my
> > letter. When I say "dishonest images of Muslims" I
> > don't mean to say that there is something called
> "the
> > honest image" and I know it – certainly not. You
> and I
> > know that some images in the popular media are
> > definitely dishonest as their intention is to
> vilify a
> > certain community. But in the case of the New
> Muslim
> > series in HT, I found many images problematic or
> > naively dishonest since the author assumes that to
> be
> > a Muslim is to be deeply religious and to be
> coming
> > out of a ghetto, and so on. In fact, someone asked
> me
> > if I have a problem with these images (in HT),
> then
> > what is my ideal and honest picture of the
> Muslims. I
> > said the only way to portray an honest picture of
> > Muslims (or any other community) is to portray
> them
> > not so conspicuously at all - let them be ordinary
> > people trying to live ordinary lives. And I think
> > that's what should answer your question about
> > objectification. Why make them objects or museum
> > specimens on the front page.
> >
> > You may be right about the aspirations. Yes, most
> > readers who liked these writings find them at par
> with
> > their aspirations. And I don't know about my
> > aspirations, but my discomfort is mostly due to
> the
> > generous use of religion and the newly defined
> jihad
> > and so on, that is shown to be their aspiration.
> Do
> > you find that cool? Should we promote such role
> models
> > for the Muslim community’s future?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Yousuf
> >
> >
> > --- "sadan at sarai.net" <sadan at sarai.net> wrote:
> >
> > >  Dear Yousuf,
> > >  thanks for sharing your anxiety about Hindustan
> > >  Times series on 'the new
> > >  muslim'. I have been following your postings (
> on
> > >  reader list) and your
> > >  work on religious posters as well as
> representations
> > >  of muslim steriotypes
> > >  and hence thought to respond to you by raising
> few
> > >  questions back to you.
> > >  This may help you to think about your anxiety
> from a
> > >  different vantage
> > >  point. If so I would be happy.
> > >  You have used certain words and I want you to
> go
> > >  back to them. these are
> > >  'dishonest images' and objectified community (
> > >  'objectification'). While I
> > >  can , to some extent, anticipate your anxiety I
> am
> > >  not certain about why
> > >  you have used this word dishonest image. Do
> mean to
> > >  say that these images
> > >  are not true representatives of the social
> realities
> > >  they are trying to
> > >  convey? What is true representation? what is
> honest
> > >  image? Can we portray
> > >  this 'true' this honest picture?
> > >  We both know ( i hope so) that this would be a
> > >  dream. I think your anxiety
> > >  is not about the truthfulness of these images
> but
> > >  the way these reports,
> > >  this series bracket muslim identity and portray
> an
> > >  image that are
> > >  fossilised within majoritarian politics of
> > >  representing 'muslim subject'.
> > >  The series claims to break stereotypification
> but
> > >  accroding to you it fails
> > >  to do so and actually caters to the same
> mindset.
> > >  So, in a way you have
> > >  deciphered a set of meanings, certain politics
> that
> > >  operate there.
> > >  However, many readers prefer this image. They
> > >  receive this series
> > >  differently then you. Now, to say that they
> cant
> > >  understand the politics
> > >  that you can would be unfare. At the same time,
> you
> > >  cant not say that
> > >  because some readers like it as iconoclastic
> images
> > >  the purpose of this
> > >  series is achieved.
> > >  This is all about aspirations that an image
> > >  generates. You have your own
> > >  aspiration and your own criticism. Other
> readers
> > >  have their own way of
> > >  looking at same representation. And your
> anxiety
> > >  comes from the fact that
> > >  you do not find a voice that can echo your
> > >  viewpoint, your anxiety.
> > >  Having said this, I must say that I fully agree
> with
> > >  your concerns, your
> > >  anxiety that this series certainly produces
> another
> > >  set of otherness and
> > >  hence politically quite problematic and
> difficult to
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com