Animal Ancestry of Man

If Darwin were alive today, it would have been a cakewalk for him to prove the animal ancestry of man! That is, if Darwin were to use Indian subjects such as personalities from Indian media who are a part of the new genre of reality shows and so-called talent hunts.

Before I get into the flow and let my thoughts take over, let me forewarn the reader (as I always do) that I will speak my mind and therefore if I seem to cross the line, it will be because I intended to do so! For those like me, who cringed at the sight of a 16 year old girl being hectored by so-called ‘responsible’ adults, it is time to introspect and investigate the root cause of such animalistic behavior on part of the judges.

Yes, the Shinjhini Sengupta incident has sparked off a National debate regarding the sanctity of so-called talent hunts and reality shows. When the judges of a dance show (telecast in a Bengali TV channel) rebuked a 16 year old girl with impunity, they betrayed the basic essence of a human being, i.e., being humane. The only conclusion that can be drawn from the episode is that, may be we are the closest link to the apes. After all, have we not aped the West in every aspect? Was it not enough that we copy the concept of hit shows such as ‘Dancing with the stars: Nach Balliye’, ‘American Idol: Indian Idol’, ‘Are you smarter than a 5^th Grader? : Kya aap panchvi pass se tez hain?’ etc? Did we really need to ape the Western/America essence and should we not have at least made these shows more Indian?

To answer most of the questions above, let me point out the root cause of such vituperative remarks by the judges of various talent/reality shows that has become a commonplace. The name is Cowell, Simon Cowell! Who you ask? Mr. Simon Cowell is one of the three judges of the hit FOX musical reality series; The American Idol. Despite all the talent on display, it is Mr. Cowell’s harsh putdowns of the participants that viewers look forward to. The popularity of the show lies in the sadist pleasure that a majority of the audience derives from the humiliation that some of the participants face. This is not just my opinion, but a conclusion that can be derived from pure numbers. More than 23 million viewers follow American Idol (and some Indians on Star World) and Simon Cowell is one of the highest paid Television personalities in the US. I am sure that most of our Indian judges would have done an Anu Malik, i.e. aped Mr. Cowell to pump up the TRP ratings of their respective shows. The term ‘aped’ is what made me ruminate; is there any reality/talent shows that we have not aped from the West? Did the conduct of the judges and their curt remarks to a 16 year old find its roots in Indian culture? At least for the latter question, I can say a firm ‘NO’! However, sadly that only makes me conclude a firm ‘YES’ for the former question.

Perhaps some of us (so-called human beings) are still evolving and have been fooled by our physical resemblance to the most advanced of the species. For what else can justify our animalistic instincts? We have been aping everything Western: movies, lifestyle, culture, etc.

Nothing comes closer to proving the animal ancestry of man than ‘The Roman Colosseum (originally known as the Flavian Amphitheatre) that has witnessed some of the bloodiest battles between exotic animals and between gladiators and wild animals, with the latter being the most popular. Now, let me juxtapose the events witnessed at the Colosseum with what we regularly witness in the so-called reality/talent shows. The similarity is quite striking as you might conclude from below:

1. Gladiators were people who had to fight against their will as mostly they were prisoners of war who were given the choice to fight or be slaves. Juxtapose that with today’s participants of the reality/talent shows and at the first instance one would feel that sure they have a choice! Or do they? In the cut throat competition that we experience today in every field as a result of abundance of talent or due to problems of plenty, these shows become a platform to get noticed. Often, for this reason the likes of Shinjhini Sengupta will find themselves performing in a Colosseum like atmosphere, ready to be taken apart by the exotic animals, i.e., the judges.

2. The few Gladiators, who managed to survive, enjoyed great popularity. History tells us that women would pay large sums of money so that they could spend a night of passion with one of the Gladiators. Juxtapose that with the popularity (minus the part about women for I cannot vouch for that) that the likes of Abhijit Sawant (of the Indian Idol fame) enjoy. Surely there is no harm in that.

3. The defeated gladiator (often wounded and on the brink of unconsciousness) would plea for merci. The audience at the amphitheatre shouted either in favor of the Gladiator’s plea to let him live or in favor to put him to death. The emperor would have the final say on whether the Gladiator lives of whether he is put to death. Juxtapose that with what a participant faces at the end of a performance; often wounded by the judges, a participant would plea to the audience to vote for him/her in order to live to fight another day.

With the passage of time, the civil society abandoned those parts of the games that included the death of humans. However, history seems to be repeating itself and today Colosseums are replaced by grand stages and the exotic animals by judges such as Simon Cowell. The judges (likes of Cowell) wounded Shinjhini to such an extent that she suffered a paralytic attack. Surely man has evolved to a stage where such acts on the part of the judges will be condemned equivocally.

Surely we have left behind the animal ancestry of man and become human beings. Or have we?

Media at War!

English Professor to a Sardarji: And what is your name?
Sardarji to the Professor: Ranjit Singh
English Professor to a Sardarji: Which Country?
Sardarji to the Professor: Punjab!

The above is an excerpt from the hit show (Mind your Language) of early 1990s that got imbibed in my memory for all the wrong reasons. I assumed Punjab is a country and as a teenager with limited exposure to the outside world (unlike the teenagers of today) I may have been excused for the infantile assumption. After all the concept of the show was to depict the comic situations that arises when a motley bunch of student from diverse backgrounds attempt to learn a foreign language.

It was after I watched recent re-run of the episode that I realized the egregious abuse of freedom by the foreign media that pandered to the difference of race and sect. In a lay man’s terms, I did not find it funny! However, it is not a one off incident that can be ignored. Despite the growing economic and political importance of India, some of the leading news channels continue to focus on the squalid sites of our country. It is perhaps consistent with their image of India as a Nation of lackeys that was once ruled by the British. This kind of positioning for India by the foreign media has been going on with the acquiescence of Indians all over the world.

One might say that true journalism knows no boundaries and a journalist is essentially neutral. This is one concept that will require some hard selling to convince Indians who followed the recently concluded Cricket series in Australia. The difference in the reporting of Indian and Australian media and the methods employed that bordered on tabloid journalism would have thrown the theory of journalists as ‘neutral’ out of the window. The Australian media worked hand in hand with their cricketers to target certain Indian players who were viewed as a threat and had gotten under their skin. Luckily the young Indian cricketers were impervious to the criticisms by the Australian media and came back as victors. A loss for India would have been a victory for the Australian media. The Indian media supported the Indian cricketers throughout the series and effectively ensured that BCCI could not ignore National interest and had to stand by its players. In effect, the Indian media helped to level the playing field.

A strong nation needs a strong media as much as it needs the Army, Navy, and the Air Force as not every battle can be won by force. The pen (or keyboard in today’s context) is mightier than the sword and it has never been more relevant than as witnessed during the cold war. The US has won the Cold War and is able to assert itself not only because of its might, but also because of the reach of its media that imposes the ‘America Way’ across diverse cultures. A journalist faces as many challenges as a soldier does when at war. The name that immediately comes to mind is that of Daniel Pearl (American Journalist) who was kidnapped and brutally murdered. It was also reported that Pearl may have been killed because he uncovered a nexus between ISI (Pakistani Inter Service Intelligence) and Al Qaeda. Since then there have been many more Pearls fighting the war for Media in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kargill, amongst many others.

Reporting has become increasingly onerous and ideally the journalists work should be free of parochial biases. Yes, on occasions the media crosses the line and obfuscates the facts for various reasons. The media can be forgiven for that as it is always at war and as they say, “All is fair in love and war”. As long as the war is for a just cause and in the National interest.

This entry was posted on Monday, March 17th, 2008 (I migrated from blog.co.in)