Nirad Babu's Ghost
Prodyumna Goutam July 1, 2008
#9 Posted by TOLKININ on July 5, 2008 6:47:45 pm
Pradyumana Gautam C Chaudhry ?
A hindutva endorsing biased view.Just a opinion of the 'Greatest ' brown saheb of his time .Hindi is better than opposed to megalominacilly Fixated Bengali on Rabindro Baose Viveka Nanda shyama prasad trying to replace British in India . Mcaleys children
A hindutva endorsing biased view.Just a opinion of the 'Greatest ' brown saheb of his time .Hindi is better than opposed to megalominacilly Fixated Bengali on Rabindro Baose Viveka Nanda shyama prasad trying to replace British in India . Mcaleys children
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#8 Posted by pgoutam on July 4, 2008 2:50:12 pm
To truth100:
Thank you very much for taking the time to read this article and for posting your insightful comments!
With regard to your last post, there are a few things that I would like to point out:
1. In my humble opinion, I think that the approach of the foreign journalists towards covering India is not surprising. I guess its a matter of cost effectiveness. These journalists have only a few days to finish their pieces and when faced with the overwhelming complexity of a country like India, they turn to the "experts" on the country. Not only do they get the "local" opinion from celebrity intellectuals, they also save a lot of time(and money). Its simply a matter of economics!
2. In reference to the relation between the article you so kindly posted and my article on Nirad C. Chaudhuri, I would like to direct your attention to his book 'Continent of Circe.' In the first few pages of the book, there is a clear description of this approach of foreign journalists. Not only that, he extends this mode of behaviour to Indian writers as well. He states that most Indian writers publishing books in the English language ON INDIA, turn to foreign sources and accounts for their material.
Once again, thank you for your comments!
Sincerely,
Prodyumna Goutam
Thank you very much for taking the time to read this article and for posting your insightful comments!
With regard to your last post, there are a few things that I would like to point out:
1. In my humble opinion, I think that the approach of the foreign journalists towards covering India is not surprising. I guess its a matter of cost effectiveness. These journalists have only a few days to finish their pieces and when faced with the overwhelming complexity of a country like India, they turn to the "experts" on the country. Not only do they get the "local" opinion from celebrity intellectuals, they also save a lot of time(and money). Its simply a matter of economics!
2. In reference to the relation between the article you so kindly posted and my article on Nirad C. Chaudhuri, I would like to direct your attention to his book 'Continent of Circe.' In the first few pages of the book, there is a clear description of this approach of foreign journalists. Not only that, he extends this mode of behaviour to Indian writers as well. He states that most Indian writers publishing books in the English language ON INDIA, turn to foreign sources and accounts for their material.
Once again, thank you for your comments!
Sincerely,
Prodyumna Goutam
#7 Posted by truth100 on July 4, 2008 8:56:26 am
The news paper you must have suspected. Hint: owned by Bennet & Coleman
#6 Posted by truth100 on July 4, 2008 8:54:13 am
Nkg,
You should read Nirad Babu's nausiating articles in supplements on Sunday circa 1979-81. Utter spineless whiter than white brown sahib. It's because of these people, in the west India meant Caste, Cow and Curry. I have utter contempt for these Bachelor of Farts. We still have their progeny active, even on this esteemed website, I suspect. I am new to this site so take it with appropriate dose of salt.
Please read following, esp the bottom para:
The Jaundiced Eye of the Western Media
S. Shankar looks for the reasons behind the negative attitude of the Western media toward India
In the last two decades India has emerged as the world’s top-most victim of international terrorism but if you evaluate the media coverage and analysis of the academic bodies of America and Europe about the problem, you will hardly find any positive or sympathetic mention of our country.
So much so that now they have started counting Pakistan – where a huge number of terrorist camps and their sympathizers exist – as a victim of terrorism but the name of India remains missing from the list.
In the last seven to eight years, there is hardly any terrorist incident in the world whose links cannot be traced back to Pakistan. This kind of country is declared suffering from terrorism by the Western analysts and reporters, but all the endless terrorist violence and mass killings of Hindus in all corners of India are said to be “allegedly due to terrorist activity� implying that the real reasons may lie elsewhere.
When Jaipur blasts occurred, CNN covered these in a way that implied that Indian government was merely alleging that these were due to terrorist activity. With this type of attitude, CNN projected to the whole world that, first, it had no idea about the nature of the blasts and, second, that Indian government’s stance that the blasts were because of some terrorist activity did not look very convincing to its reporters. CNN throughout pretended to be confused about the nature of the blasts in Jaipur and what may have triggered them.
This kind of behavior is neither an exception nor limited to only one Western news channel. Indians of today remain buried neck-deep in cheap entertainment, Bollywood and circket. If they can spare some time from these fantastic pursuits to pay some attention to how Western media and commentators portray their country, they will find the scenario quite worrisomea and irritating.
Western journalists not only show indifference and unconcern to the terrorist incidents occurring within India. In their analysis of international terrorism, they only worry about organizations such as Al Quaida, Hamas and Taliban. There is almost no discussion about Jaish-e-Mohammad, Harkat Ul Mujahadeen, Lashkar-e-Toiba, Huji, Simi and so on, despite the fact that these organizations have many times shown to have deep international links.
Even huge terrorist attacks in India are either not registered by the Western media or they get buried in the inside pages of its newspapers. People who keep a track of Western media such as CNN, BBC, Time and Newsweek find that the kind of news chosen to be published about India and how these are presented to the audience reek of rampant hostility and arrogance of their editors.
These Western media outlets regularly publish sympathetic and soft articles full of goodwill for even absolute dictatorships such as China, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, it is almost impossible to find an article or commentary about India that can be termed as positive.
Sometimes even in news stories related to India’s impressive economic development or scientific achievements, there is such an undercurrent of negativity and hostility shown by the Western reporters that the readers and viewers end up sympathizing with India’s supposed plight!
“Times� projected the dreaded terrorist Mohammad Sheikh who killed Daniel Pearl and who was involved in 9 / 11 attacks in a very positive manner, labeling him as “nice,� “helpful� and a “soft-talker.� To adorn his personality with such wonderful traits, the testimony of his brother was considered sufficient and irrefutable proof by the Times journalists.
What a touching and honest faith in the words of a terrorist’s brother! These people couldn’t comprehend that even if the said terrorist had these sterling personal qualities, they have absolutely no relevance to the issue at hand and it is stupid to drum these up to their readers.
When the Western media portrays Islamic terrorists, one can easily discern a very sincere and respectful attitude in the tone of the reporters. Even if one reviews everything that has been written and shown about Osama Bin Laden in the last ten years by the Western press, the personality that emerges of his is that of a respect-worthy man who has an air of authority around him.
The Nexus and Abrupt U-turns
There is an absolute and perfect match between the editorial policy of the American newspapers and TV channels and the foreign policy of the American State Department, both of whom seem to work as players of a single team with a single objective.
For example, when Pervez Musharraf captured power in Pakistan, “Newsweek� ran a caustic story that highlighted how Pakistan had been in the grip of military dictators for much of its history and how these leaders have been suppressing the Pakistani people. Surprisingly, its tone abruptly changed in the very next issue. That issue carried a story about the “Gentle General� and projected such a golden image of Pakistan’s future with him at the wheel, that one could only stare in amazement at the U-turn. It was a delicious irony that the reporter and editor of both the stories were exactly the same!
Communist China was till 1979 projected as the mortal enemy of the Western countries by their newspapers. But when Richard Nixon attempted to pull China into the American camp against the Soviet Union and gave it the “most favoured nation� status, the Western media again made an abrupt U-turn. The American reporters developed a permanent goodwill for China.
Even today, China is treated with utmost respect by American reporters despite that fact that it is still the same country where the same Maoist leadership still rules which executed tens of millions of ordinary citizens, where there is a one-party dictatorship, where free press is banned, where there is a brutal repression going on in Tibet, where nuclear arms are proliferated to rogue states with impunity, where the Christian missionaries are strictly controlled and where the Pope is not allowed to set foot within its borders.
The Reason
The same Western media leaves no stone unturned in showing India in a bad light, ridicule and mock it and criticize it for various real and imagined failings. What is the reason for this attitude of the White journalists toward our country which is a free democracy with rights guaranteed to the citizens? Why do these people behave like this regarding India while they grovel in front of banana republics and absolute dictatorships?
The answer to this is quite sad. When the Delhi-based foreign journalists are questioned about their deliberately negative and hostile coverage about India, they say without hesitation that they write and show exactly the same things that our own intellectuals, journalists and commentators say about India. Then they start recounting the names of some well-known Indian “liberal and secular� as well as communist propagandists and media men.
This means that it is our own so-called “secular and liberal� or communist Indians who provide the Western journalists with hateful propaganda about India that the latter then expertly use to badmouth our country and blacken our faces in front of international audience.
You should read Nirad Babu's nausiating articles in supplements on Sunday circa 1979-81. Utter spineless whiter than white brown sahib. It's because of these people, in the west India meant Caste, Cow and Curry. I have utter contempt for these Bachelor of Farts. We still have their progeny active, even on this esteemed website, I suspect. I am new to this site so take it with appropriate dose of salt.
Please read following, esp the bottom para:
The Jaundiced Eye of the Western Media
S. Shankar looks for the reasons behind the negative attitude of the Western media toward India
In the last two decades India has emerged as the world’s top-most victim of international terrorism but if you evaluate the media coverage and analysis of the academic bodies of America and Europe about the problem, you will hardly find any positive or sympathetic mention of our country.
So much so that now they have started counting Pakistan – where a huge number of terrorist camps and their sympathizers exist – as a victim of terrorism but the name of India remains missing from the list.
In the last seven to eight years, there is hardly any terrorist incident in the world whose links cannot be traced back to Pakistan. This kind of country is declared suffering from terrorism by the Western analysts and reporters, but all the endless terrorist violence and mass killings of Hindus in all corners of India are said to be “allegedly due to terrorist activity� implying that the real reasons may lie elsewhere.
When Jaipur blasts occurred, CNN covered these in a way that implied that Indian government was merely alleging that these were due to terrorist activity. With this type of attitude, CNN projected to the whole world that, first, it had no idea about the nature of the blasts and, second, that Indian government’s stance that the blasts were because of some terrorist activity did not look very convincing to its reporters. CNN throughout pretended to be confused about the nature of the blasts in Jaipur and what may have triggered them.
This kind of behavior is neither an exception nor limited to only one Western news channel. Indians of today remain buried neck-deep in cheap entertainment, Bollywood and circket. If they can spare some time from these fantastic pursuits to pay some attention to how Western media and commentators portray their country, they will find the scenario quite worrisomea and irritating.
Western journalists not only show indifference and unconcern to the terrorist incidents occurring within India. In their analysis of international terrorism, they only worry about organizations such as Al Quaida, Hamas and Taliban. There is almost no discussion about Jaish-e-Mohammad, Harkat Ul Mujahadeen, Lashkar-e-Toiba, Huji, Simi and so on, despite the fact that these organizations have many times shown to have deep international links.
Even huge terrorist attacks in India are either not registered by the Western media or they get buried in the inside pages of its newspapers. People who keep a track of Western media such as CNN, BBC, Time and Newsweek find that the kind of news chosen to be published about India and how these are presented to the audience reek of rampant hostility and arrogance of their editors.
These Western media outlets regularly publish sympathetic and soft articles full of goodwill for even absolute dictatorships such as China, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, it is almost impossible to find an article or commentary about India that can be termed as positive.
Sometimes even in news stories related to India’s impressive economic development or scientific achievements, there is such an undercurrent of negativity and hostility shown by the Western reporters that the readers and viewers end up sympathizing with India’s supposed plight!
“Times� projected the dreaded terrorist Mohammad Sheikh who killed Daniel Pearl and who was involved in 9 / 11 attacks in a very positive manner, labeling him as “nice,� “helpful� and a “soft-talker.� To adorn his personality with such wonderful traits, the testimony of his brother was considered sufficient and irrefutable proof by the Times journalists.
What a touching and honest faith in the words of a terrorist’s brother! These people couldn’t comprehend that even if the said terrorist had these sterling personal qualities, they have absolutely no relevance to the issue at hand and it is stupid to drum these up to their readers.
When the Western media portrays Islamic terrorists, one can easily discern a very sincere and respectful attitude in the tone of the reporters. Even if one reviews everything that has been written and shown about Osama Bin Laden in the last ten years by the Western press, the personality that emerges of his is that of a respect-worthy man who has an air of authority around him.
The Nexus and Abrupt U-turns
There is an absolute and perfect match between the editorial policy of the American newspapers and TV channels and the foreign policy of the American State Department, both of whom seem to work as players of a single team with a single objective.
For example, when Pervez Musharraf captured power in Pakistan, “Newsweek� ran a caustic story that highlighted how Pakistan had been in the grip of military dictators for much of its history and how these leaders have been suppressing the Pakistani people. Surprisingly, its tone abruptly changed in the very next issue. That issue carried a story about the “Gentle General� and projected such a golden image of Pakistan’s future with him at the wheel, that one could only stare in amazement at the U-turn. It was a delicious irony that the reporter and editor of both the stories were exactly the same!
Communist China was till 1979 projected as the mortal enemy of the Western countries by their newspapers. But when Richard Nixon attempted to pull China into the American camp against the Soviet Union and gave it the “most favoured nation� status, the Western media again made an abrupt U-turn. The American reporters developed a permanent goodwill for China.
Even today, China is treated with utmost respect by American reporters despite that fact that it is still the same country where the same Maoist leadership still rules which executed tens of millions of ordinary citizens, where there is a one-party dictatorship, where free press is banned, where there is a brutal repression going on in Tibet, where nuclear arms are proliferated to rogue states with impunity, where the Christian missionaries are strictly controlled and where the Pope is not allowed to set foot within its borders.
The Reason
The same Western media leaves no stone unturned in showing India in a bad light, ridicule and mock it and criticize it for various real and imagined failings. What is the reason for this attitude of the White journalists toward our country which is a free democracy with rights guaranteed to the citizens? Why do these people behave like this regarding India while they grovel in front of banana republics and absolute dictatorships?
The answer to this is quite sad. When the Delhi-based foreign journalists are questioned about their deliberately negative and hostile coverage about India, they say without hesitation that they write and show exactly the same things that our own intellectuals, journalists and commentators say about India. Then they start recounting the names of some well-known Indian “liberal and secular� as well as communist propagandists and media men.
This means that it is our own so-called “secular and liberal� or communist Indians who provide the Western journalists with hateful propaganda about India that the latter then expertly use to badmouth our country and blacken our faces in front of international audience.
#5 Posted by dost_mittar on July 4, 2008 8:20:25 am
nkg:
When I say that the British left too soon, it is only because the successors did not fully exploit the advantages of a well-developed physical and administrative infrastructures they inherited.
When I say that the British left too soon, it is only because the successors did not fully exploit the advantages of a well-developed physical and administrative infrastructures they inherited.
#4 Posted by nkg on July 3, 2008 11:16:35 pm
Truth100..
Utter stupid comment....Are you moslem? ( then such comment is justified)
DM...
I have observed similar behaviour from one of our college professors also (who was very much respected). While in Department, he is pure western dressed and seldom used any non english word. At home, he is pure brahmin. Personal life and workplace/social ethics are to different stuff. And I really support this. If Nirad Babu goes out in London streets wearing dhoti and angvastra, it will make him look something like a joker. The way these moslems create attention ( like funny animals) in different part of world. The social ethics/dress code should be maintained.
Regarding Brits arrival in India, they had come in proper time. Apart from some part of Bengali and South Indian society, we failed to exploit their expertise to revive our civilisation (which was going down from 12th/13th century) to large extent...
Brits had to leave India as early as possible, after 2nd world war. After formation of UN, you can not justify the ruling of another country from 7000 kms apart.
Indians were not quick enough to reap the benefit of British dominance in education and industry. The education and social reform, Iswar Chandra Bandopadhya/Swami Vivekananda/ Dayananda Saraswati started, should have spread large part of North India (Bihar,UP,MP...).
To:Prodyumna Goutam
Nirad Chaudhury have witnessed history through his closeness to Bose family (he was PA to Sarat Bose, elder brother of Subhas Bose). His opinion should not be ignored...
Utter stupid comment....Are you moslem? ( then such comment is justified)
DM...
I have observed similar behaviour from one of our college professors also (who was very much respected). While in Department, he is pure western dressed and seldom used any non english word. At home, he is pure brahmin. Personal life and workplace/social ethics are to different stuff. And I really support this. If Nirad Babu goes out in London streets wearing dhoti and angvastra, it will make him look something like a joker. The way these moslems create attention ( like funny animals) in different part of world. The social ethics/dress code should be maintained.
Regarding Brits arrival in India, they had come in proper time. Apart from some part of Bengali and South Indian society, we failed to exploit their expertise to revive our civilisation (which was going down from 12th/13th century) to large extent...
Brits had to leave India as early as possible, after 2nd world war. After formation of UN, you can not justify the ruling of another country from 7000 kms apart.
Indians were not quick enough to reap the benefit of British dominance in education and industry. The education and social reform, Iswar Chandra Bandopadhya/Swami Vivekananda/ Dayananda Saraswati started, should have spread large part of North India (Bihar,UP,MP...).
To:Prodyumna Goutam
Nirad Chaudhury have witnessed history through his closeness to Bose family (he was PA to Sarat Bose, elder brother of Subhas Bose). His opinion should not be ignored...
#3 Posted by dost_mittar on July 3, 2008 9:18:02 am
truth100#2:
I presume that he wore dhoti at home when he was in India as well because he felt more comfortable in it; on the other hand he thought that dhoti was not a formal enough costume to wear outside. If so, he was consistent even if one did not agree with him.
I presume that he wore dhoti at home when he was in India as well because he felt more comfortable in it; on the other hand he thought that dhoti was not a formal enough costume to wear outside. If so, he was consistent even if one did not agree with him.
#2 Posted by truth100 on July 3, 2008 8:58:59 am
"It is interesting that while he was criticised for wearing a tie and solar hat in the summer heat of Delhi, he used to wear traditional bengali dhoti at home when in England."
So that he can get all the privileges of white sahab!
Dhoti in his bedroom in England because nostalgia hits hard when you are far away and near death. Did he meet queen in dhoti? Looking at him one can quickly understand why the british rule started in Bengal.
So that he can get all the privileges of white sahab!
Dhoti in his bedroom in England because nostalgia hits hard when you are far away and near death. Did he meet queen in dhoti? Looking at him one can quickly understand why the british rule started in Bengal.
#1 Posted by dost_mittar on July 3, 2008 8:24:18 am
Ms Goutam:
I fully agree with your assessment about Nirad Chaudhry. He is arguably the best Indian author since independence. He was a true iconoclast with, to borrow a phrase from Khushwant Singh, malice towards one and all. I for one agree that the British left India too soon; whether or not they should have come here in the first place is a different issue.
It is interesting that while he was criticised for wearing a tie and solar hat in the summer heat of Delhi, he used to wear traditional bengali dhoti at home when in England.
I think that Chaudhry would have had something to celebrate the turn India has taken in taking a non-ideological approach to national development.
I fully agree with your assessment about Nirad Chaudhry. He is arguably the best Indian author since independence. He was a true iconoclast with, to borrow a phrase from Khushwant Singh, malice towards one and all. I for one agree that the British left India too soon; whether or not they should have come here in the first place is a different issue.
It is interesting that while he was criticised for wearing a tie and solar hat in the summer heat of Delhi, he used to wear traditional bengali dhoti at home when in England.
I think that Chaudhry would have had something to celebrate the turn India has taken in taking a non-ideological approach to national development.
Interact Index
Similar Articles
- Interview: Nafisa Haji Ras Siddiqui
- The Other Wonders of Khanpur Rakesh Mani
- A Brief Survey Of Pakistani Novels In English Kumar Manoj
- Book Review: Daniyal Mueenuddin "In Other Rooms, Other Wonders" Wasiq N Khan
- Post Colonial English Language Writers William Dalrymple
Swat: Paradise Lost
Get Chowk RSS FeedLatest Interacts
- SPY: Re: # 26 Goldfinger:... The Jehadi Frankenstein
- Skeptical: This could have been... NRO Is Just a
- Goldfinger: Re: # 24 spy...I still... The Jehadi Frankenstein
- Goldfinger: Re: # 21 harish...you will... The Jehadi Frankenstein
- SPY: Re: # 16 Goldfinger... The Jehadi Frankenstein
- raziasq: excellent comment.... Crowning of a Crony
- majumdar: Harishbhai, ....However, please take enough... The Jehadi Frankenstein
- harish_hyd: ...install a friendly government... The Jehadi Frankenstein
