Dear Friends: Attached herewith is the latest column "Straight-Talk" [Who cares about reality? The images is all] by John Samuel which was published in Humanscape in March 2000, which may be of interest to you. Kindly acknowledge the same. Thaking you, Yours sincerely Balram Khandare For NCAS Team. ######################################################################################################## IMAGE MERCHANTS AND CULTURE MAFIAS by *John Samuel ######################################################################################################## INTRODUCTION: In Indonesia, devout Muslim women named Gayatri or Laxmi read the Bhagvad Gita . In India too, Muslims and Hindus have shared a culture of co-existence and assimilation. But reality is buried. The image that the cultural mafia markets, legitimises and uses to subvert societies and cultures would have us believe that all Muslims are fundamentalists, all Christians are out to convert the world, and all Hindus are fanatics -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is Ganesha doing in the drawing room of a devout Muslim? How come Muslim women who pray to Allah five times a day are named Parvati, Laxmi, Gayatri or Devi? Is this a social aberration? No, it's the norm in thousands of Muslim households in Indonesia. In one of several Muslim homes I visited during my recent trip to Indonesia, I was pleasantly surprised to find a copy of the Bhagvad Gita. The volume was not just sitting on a shelf, it was being assiduously studied, with paragraphs underlined, and notes in the margin. Back in Pune, I live near an important Muslim shrine -- of Sadal Baba. Every day I notice that it's not just Muslim devotees who visit this shrine, but Hindus as well. The annual festival transcends the traditional boundaries of both religions. Likewise, in my village in Kerala I grew up on legends surrounding the ancient Syrian Christian church as much as legends about the Devi of the ancient local temple. This is the reality. The reality of co-existence, reconciliation and assimilation. But increasingly such realities are being rendered almost invisible. What matters most is the image. An image that is constructed, marketed, legitimised and used to subvert society and culture. Cultural policing is a strategy used by most chauvinistic and fanatical elements across the world. We hear a lot of criticism about bulldozing market globalisation. But knee-jerk cultural reactions are equally dangerous and counterproductive, and yet this is not a phenomenon that is being discussed. Bulldozing market capitalism and knee-jerk cultural relativism feed into each other in paradoxical ways. One significant aspect of the information and media revolution is the predominance of images in determining reality. There was a time when reality shaped the image. Reality found expression in innumerable creative ways and was transformed into powerful images and metaphors in poetry, plays, painting, art and architecture. Now the process seems to have been reversed. Images are increasingly shaping our sense and sensibilities. And images are being used to interpret and influence reality rather than the other way around. In the image-saturated streets of the globalised economies, poetry is dead and buried. There are few novels depicting the nuances of living people. Instead, there is a proliferation of images of the future, coalescing into science fiction. Playgrounds are deserted because children no longer want to run around getting their legs and hands dirty. They prefer simulated football matches and motorcycle races in a cybercafe. Markets thrive on images. So when an Indian writer gets a Booker Prize, the book is marketed more like a consumer product based on its image rather than on the merit of the work. Images of huge advances and box-office hits determine the reality of whether a novel is read, or a film watched. Ironically, the construction and marketing of stereotypical images are the strategies that are used by emerging cultural mafias across the world. We call them cultural mafias because they use culture unethically and unscrupulously as a means of amassing wealth and power to subjugate peoples and society. So when you hear the word `Islam', it is the image of the Taliban or Osama bin Laden that immediately comes to mind. Not images of the liberal, tolerant and indigenous Muslims of Indonesia, a country with one of the largest Muslim populations. When one hears the word `Hindu nationalist', it is not the image of Vivekananda, Gandhi or Aurobindo that is summoned. It is the vandalism and the hooliganism of a minority of Hindu fanatics that comes to mind. The image of the Christian in India is likewise slowly being constructed as someone with western loyalty, out to convert anybody and everybody. These images are constructed over time to conceal reality and manipulate middle class opinion in a way that would suit the needs of the cultural mafia. The Islamic Taliban, the extreme right-wing Christian fundamentalist, the Hindu fanatics and the ultra nationalist in Russia, Germany and Austria are manifestations of an emerging global mafia that seeks to subvert existing structures of power and legitimacy for their own ends. The images are built around cultural stereotypes constructed around selective images from history and the conservative social spectrum. We all know that the majority of Muslims do not marry four times or proclaim divorce at the drop of a hat. We know there have been very tolerant Muslim rulers like Akbar and reformist leaders like Dara Shukoh. But the images that are thrust upon us are based on biased interpretations and selective image construction. Hence Saddam Hussain's image in Iraq is of a courageous saviour; but according to the western media he is synonymous with evil. Both images are based on the construction of stereotypes and sweeping generalizations. There are many Jews who are successful bankers but that does not mean all Jews are bankers or moneylenders. Manipulative image construction can have very dangerous political consequences. The consequence of stereotyping is abundant in history: the stereotyping of the Jews as exploiters in pre-Hitlerite Germany, the socio-political dissents as imperialist agents in the Soviet Union, the leftist sympathies as anti-American, and the stereotyping of intellectuals as anti-national and anti-poor during the Cultural Revolution in China. Such politically manipulative steriotypes left behind unspeakable legacy of tragedies in human history. The 20th century is witness to the fact that all stereotypes tend to be lies that lead to untold misery and wretched years filled with dead bodies and destruction. Though Hitler and Stalin had a different rhetoric and logic, at the end of the day there seemed to be little difference between the two. The ordinary people of Germany had a bitter taste of the consequences of such manipulative images and the people of Russia are still suffering the unintended byproduct of Stalinism. The image-building industry is not, however, part of any grand conspiracy. It seems to emerge partly from the insecurity and paranoia of the middle classes in different countries, and partly from the tendency to present news and views as consumer products packaged with striking images and sensational coverage. Television thrives on images. Each channel uses image marketing to compete with the others. Thus trivial and insignificant personalized images like that of Princess Diana's romancing or the Clinton-Monica Lewinsky thriller ended up as global preoccupations. People got the same kind of thrills watching the bombing of Iraq as they did watching images of a boxing championship or World Cup cricket. All of a sudden Osama bin Laden became the metaphor for Islam and the Taliban the benchmark of Islamic puritanism. The new Christian missionaries have become more concerned with marketing images of Christianity rather than taking the cross in their real lives. Their enthusiasm to save the world from sin was more visible on television channel than in real life experience or action. When the marketing managers of established churches sell salvation like soap or fast food, they are basically creating and marketing images of salvation rather than spreading the real message. Highly visible marketing without any real consequences create backlashes in the form of knee-jerk cultural reactions and cultural glorification. No wonder the prevalent image of the Christian is beginning to be that of the overzealous southern Baptist out to save and convert the dark continent of Asia. And yet the reality is that most Hindus are preoccupied with survival issues -- better food, shelter and social amenities. As are Muslims, Christians, Jews and Buddhists. Every Christian is not a proselytising maniac any more than every Hindu is rabidly campaigning against Valentines day. It is the power-seeking minority that builds these stereotypical images and sells it through co-opted intellectuals ready to sell even their soul for a price. The bulldozing tendency of the globalised market does create a cultural paranoia among the middle classes across the world. This paranoia, based on dominating images and symbols, creates social and political myths based on half-truths. The regressive and politically frustrated elements in each religious and cultural stream make use of the middle class paranoia by further reinforcing cultural stereotypes and myths. Such myths are by and large based on a glorification of the past and on shifting all the blame for socio-economic inadequacies on the immediate other. The media, which is more preoccupied with its market share than long-term social responsibility, feeds the social tension by piling on more and more sensational images for more and more buyers. This is how a critical mass of social acceptance is achieved for such stereotyping. The stereotyping of the image is aggressively marketed and then legitimized by intellectuals and academicians who give a veneer of intellectual sophistication to cultural mafias across the world. That is why the Nazis made use of the work of Neitzsche and Heidegger. That is why the erstwhile leftist intellectuals in India are increasingly turning saffron. That is why erstwhile progressive editors are writing articles that legitimise stereotyped images: there's a ministerial chair in their sights. The free-floating intellectuals and cultural activists are social parasites that cling to the powerholders of the day. That is why they glorify cultural essentialism and extreme forms of cultural relativism. We need to make a distinction between cultural self-reliance and cultural jingoism. Images of Valentines day are rooted in the logic of the globalised marketing of the entertainment, greetings card and fashion industries. It's all about unhindered profits. A knee-jerk reaction to marketing of these images of modern romance is not a solution to the bulldozing market logic. The same cultural mafia which is busy wooing multinational corporations and their markets on the one hand is on the other hand questioning everything under the sun presumably because it has a foreign (read western) origin. Instead of exposing the dangerous consequences of this politico-cultural trapeze act, our intellectual and media parasites busy themselves catching fish in these muddied waters. Zhirinovsky in Russia, Bin Laden in Afghanistan and their counterparts in India are thriving because of short-term political consumerism and the emerging cultural paranoia. The response to bulldozing globalisation and knee-jerk cultural reaction should emerge out of new reform movement, locally and globally, that revitalizes the liberating, humanizing and eclectic streams of culture. A social, cultural and political reform based on real life experiences rather than marketed images and consumerist culture. Culture is a double-edged sword. In the name of culture, women are denied justice, in the name of culture untouchability is being practiced, in the name of culture the black are seen as inferior and human rights are denied. The worst atrocities in the world are committed in the name of culture. There are vultures all over the world that thrive on the destructive elements of culture. The entire social and cultural practice of the world has evolved through mutual influence, assimilation and reinforcement. That is why a Muslim child in Indonesia knows more about the Ramayana than an Indian child who is forcefed a dose of our glorified cultural past every now and then. That is why the great Indian middle class is still bothered about its English accent. That is why the Indian Constitution is considered as one of the best in the world. That is why our politicians talk about cultural purity in a parliament building constructed by the English colonialist. That is why we are still talking about democracy on our television chatshows. Culture is not an island. It is a bridge that connects people, nations and humanity. Culture is a sense of belonging, not a denial of the other's belonging. That is why we have to shake off our drawing-room complacency to redeem culture from the cultural mafia. Do we need cultural policing to reinforce our heritage? Or do we need to build our own sense of self-respect and self-worth without being swept away by the market? ________________________________ *John Samuel writes on social change. He works with the National Centre for Advocacy Studies, Pune WE HAVE SHIFTED OUR OFFICE TO: National Centre for Advocacy Studies Serenity Complex, Ramnagar Colony, Pashan, Pune 411 021 Tel./Fax : 091-20-5898003 / 5898004 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: http://www.ncasindia.org PLEASE VISIT TO HUMANSCAPE SITE http://www.humanscapeindia.org
