A few days back, on Twitter, Vijay Sankaran shared an article, that led to a brief but heated debate. By the time I joined in, fun time was over and people had moved on, but i still manage to butt heads with Surekha for a while. Since the 140 character format was a constraint, we left the argument in a safe place and I said that I’d share a post soon with my consolidated view on the matter.
The matter was of course “SRK: Now playing at an airport near you”. No, don’t yawn yet. After evading ‘gyarah mulkon ki police’, this is exciting stuff – the discovery of a continent where the words “Rahul/Raj, naam to suna hoga” don’t mean a damn, and an ordeal which lasted (depending on who you speak to) 2 hours/ just over an hour. That makes me wonder whether SRK started off with ” Sattar minute hain tumhare paas, shayad tumhare zindagi ke khaas sattar minute”. In any case, by the time it ended he must’ve been saying “Babuji ne kaha gaon chhod do, sab ne kaha paro ko chhod do, paro ne kaha sharaab chhod do, please aap mujhe chhod do”. Ok, ok, sorry. I am not really an SRK fan, but I have to admit, I admire the journey from Fauji back in 1988 – a hard fought climb to the very top. An amazing trip. And when the ego was forced to land at Newark, even if it was for a brief period, it must’ve been painful.
Fingers have been pointed (including mine, initially) about how it was a good promotion for the upcoming movie ‘My Name is Khan‘. But from online sources, the release date for MNIK is 2010. This would be way too premature, and despite his faults, I can’t remember SRK doing publicity stunts like this. (correct me if i have forgotten something) He himself brushed off the incident later and said that they were doing their job, and when compared to an ex-president, (Kalam getting frisked) he was a nobody. I’m inclined to say that maybe he wasn’t guilty of making it a great deal, but the media and us consumers of media were. (Yes, even this post is a case in point, eh? 🙂 )
But all this was just an introduction. The article i mentioned earlier (and which you didn’t bother to click) is by Govindraj Ethiraj and is titled ‘The Idea of Injustice”. It centers upon whether the detention of SRK was unfair, unjust, both or neither. The writer gives various examples of injustice that we experience/see around us in our daily lives – from the politician’s convoy that disrupts our commute to the people sleeping on the roadside outside Hard Rock Cafe. He goes on to say that “Young India actually lives on with the most amazing amalgam of principals and values. Where justice and injustice have little or no co-relation to our real lives or that of others. Where denial of a right to education, livelihood or food has no bearing on our notion of justice.” The title of the article relates to Prof. Amartya’s Sen’s “The Idea of Justice”, and the article also cites some of his views.
Surekha felt that the comparison was harsh and unfair and fans are entitled to their expression, and countering every protest with questions on outrage against poverty, corruption etc won’t get us anywhere. While I agreed that fans could express themselves anyway they wanted, I felt the comparison was valid and the sense of injustice that some felt when SRK was detained was connected to the injustice that the child living in poverty faced. (What he makes out of it later/destiny etc is a different debate) To me, it is not a comparison, but a connection nevertheless. Saying that it is not connected reflects our contextual sense of justice that I kept mentioning. We are affected when the things we hold dear (from family to property to film stars) are affected, the rest is someone else’s problem. We relate to our immediate context, and would like justice in that bubble. We are totally unaffected by the rest of the world’s misery. Yes, we do like the candle marches, and protest groups on Facebook, they are easy ways to placate our conscience. But ‘our’ experience of injustice is more pertinent than anyone else’s, and we turn a blind eye to things that will not affect our bubble.
Forget the rest of the world, when we have an argument with someone close, how many times do we try to be genuinely conscious of the other person’s point of view/perspective? Aren’t we always right in the stories we tell about ourselves to ourselves? Aren’t our actions always warranted, just, fair? Can’t we always justify? Heh, to ask the same us to reflect a bit on the world’s inequities when we aren’t even conscious of our own motivations and sense of right and wrong would be asking for too much, huh? Right, wrong, justice, injustice, fairness, unfairness are all subjective, basis our perspectives. Think about it, shouldn’t unfairness and injustice be absolutes, and not relative to any individual’s perceptions and perspectives? But we’ve built an entire society and its accompanying systems and laws based precisely on this. From communities to joint families to nuclear families to the individual, our concern ‘circle’ has been becoming smaller all the while. And everything from world wars to strife in personal relationships is because of our narrowing concern. But this is not a commentary on society, for after all, if change has to happen, it has to be at the individual level.
Bura Jo Dekhan Main Chala, Bura Naa Milya Koye
Jo Munn Khoja Apnaa, To Mujhse Bura Naa Koye
~ Kabir
Objectivity. To see things unhindered and uninfluenced by the baggage we carry around. To go beyond our conditioning – self imposed and otherwise and look at ourselves first, and then the world around us as absolutes. Why? Selfishly- because it can un-complicate us, selflessly- because it makes us more humane. When we can do that, perhaps we’ll understand the connection and what justice and fairness is all about.
until next time, ego messages
PS. The thought continues….
Manu, really nice article. Have felt the same way many a time, all we’re bothered about is our little bubble. Thank you!
thanks 🙂
that’s an interesting take on the issue, manu. the fact that despite not caring for SRK and his antics, and believing the airport incident was ridiculous and blown out of proportion by all of us, calling the comparison drawn in the BS article unfair perhaps shows there is some sense of justice 🙂
on a more serious note, the reasons why i called the BS article harsh and unfair, and i think i am sticking to my point of view, are three-fold:
– the author did not own up to media’s role in the nation “seething in anger” over the incident when media (including social media) played a catalyst role in whatever happened.
– the author takes an impractical, idealistic standpoint, and in a gross generalisation, points fingers at others, and makes safe assumptions that those who protested against the incident have not supported any social cause.
– in the generalisations made, the author ignores the fact that these outraged fans could well have included some from the very same people sleeping on the road that he refers to. their sense of loyalty towards celebrities is not always very different from those with a roof over their heads.
that is my view on the article per se.
on the other interesting points you raise, my personal opinion is that “unfairness and injustice” need not be absolutes, and need not be “independent of the individual’s perceptions and perspectives”. infact commitment to justice and fairness require the strength of passion which can only stem from experiences one can relate to. i believe there are enough of us with diverse experiences to support causes that we personally have been affected by. that would be a more practical stand to take to truly bring about a positive transformation. this is not to say we turn indifferent to issues that do not have a direct bearing on us. but all of us need not qualify in our mental make up to become judges to do justice. while it makes for a great theory, it is just not practical.
as for SRK, i think prem panicker summed it up rather well in this post:
http://prempanicker.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/memo-to-shah-rukh/
hmm, the author may have defined the scope of the article and its perspective from an ‘SRK and us’ pov… in that sense, he need not bring in media…
its not just others he’s pointing fingers, its himself too, and while there may have been people who support social causes etc, that’s just one of the perils of generalisation…
perceptions-perspectives-passion-causes.. for me objectivity is still important.. because otherwise one way of partial/contextual justice is is being replaced with another…
shall read up Prem P’s article..thanks for sharing 🙂
That was superbly written. Enjoyed!
thanks naren 🙂