|
|
No room for bigotry
October 20, 2007
|
Making monkeys of themselves: the spectators who were ejected from the Wankhede
© Getty Images
|
|
In Vadodara and Mumbai, Andrew Symonds, the only non-white, Afro-Caribbean
member of the Australian side, was heckled by spectators who called him a
monkey, and made ape-like motions in case he hadn't got their point. The Sydney
Morning Herald published a photograph of two middle-class, middle-aged
Indian men making like monkeys. Symonds, his captain, his team mates, and
Australian newspapers thought this was as patent a form of racism as you
were likely to witness on a cricket field and said so. The ICC wrote to the
BCCI expressing concern.
Sharad Pawar said he hadn't received the ICC's letter. He borrowed the theme
of cultural difference that Ricky Ponting had used earlier in the series in
another context - that of sledging - to make his point. In the days that followed, this
became something of an Indian theme: the Australians had misunderstood the
crowd's gestures. There was no racism intended. The police commissioner in
Baroda even supplied an alternative explanation: the monkey chants were no
more than the spectators invoking the simian god, Hanuman.
The non-official reaction was similar. The newspapers were slow off the
mark. Some suggested that Indian crowds had always jeered combative
cricketers like Symonds; the monkey business was volatility, not racism.
Indian crowds had been known to call West Indians "kaliyas" or "hubshi" and English cricketers "goras" because they were, respectively, black and white.
The implication was that Symonds with his dreadlocks and face paint, more or
less invited the heckling by turning out in a contemporary version of
blackface. Looked at reasonably, it was possible, the argument ran, to see
it as no more than a kind of empirical teasing where unsophisticated
spectators named what they saw: gora, kaliya, bandar.
Some opinion pieces struggled with the large question: are Indians racist?
And if they are, are they racist in the same way as white people who are racist?
Critics referred to the Indian obsession with being light-skinned, a
preference happily specified in classified matrimonial ads and further borne
out by the sale of fairness creams. One writer described this preference as a form of "soft racism", an attitude similar to notions of white superiority in western societies, but different in two ways: a) there was no republican history of state sanction for racist prejudice, unlike in white settler colonies like Australia and South Africa in the past b) the variation in skin colour within networks of caste and kinship in India made "hard" bigotry, genetic racism, difficult. Others made the point that caste discrimination,
specially the practice of "untouchability", was as vicious a form of discrimination as apartheid or segregation.
As the days passed a pattern emerged in the public response to the taunting
of Symonds. The reaction after Vadodara was defensive. After the Mumbai match,
where Symonds was booed at the prize-giving, and where the monkey
taunts were repeated, the Indian response changed: the police evicted the
worst offenders and charged them in court, Pawar denounced racist behaviour
as unacceptable, and newspapers carried editorial mea culpas. It was Hamish
Blair's brilliant photograph of two middle-class Indian men in the Wankhede
stands, trying to look like apes and succeeding, that swung Indian public
opinion away from denial towards an acknowledgment that there was a problem
that needed to be named.
It's silly to look for anthropological
explanations that will turn racist behaviour by Indians into something
subtly different. Cricket writing by Indians in English sometimes makes the
mistake of thinking of the "average" Indian fan as non-English speaking and
therefore naïve and unsophisticated. This assumption makes it possible for
"us" to explain "their" behaviour away as a kind of unschooled brutishness
that is unfortunate but not wicked
|
And its name is racism. It's silly and deluded to look for anthropological
explanations that will turn racist behaviour by Indians into something
subtly different. Cricket writing by Indians in English sometimes makes the
mistake of thinking of the "average" Indian fan as non-English speaking and
therefore naïve and unsophisticated. This assumption makes it possible for
"us" to explain "their" behaviour away as a kind of unschooled brutishness
that is unfortunate but not wicked. This is why Blair's photograph is so
important: it shows you upwardly mobile men - who probably discuss the
virtues of one malt whisky over the other, who possibly holiday abroad, whose
children certainly go to private schools that teach in English - using one
of the many international codes they've learnt in their cosmopolitan lives,
the Esperanto of bigotry. The mudras they're making aren't derived from
Kathakali : they're straight out of the international style guide to insulting black men.
It's hard for Indian fans to cede moral advantage to an Australian team.
They are so much better at the cricket that outrage is often the only
consolation we have. It's hard to fault the Australians' behaviour on the Symonds
affair: they've made their point, done the BCCI the favour of not lodging an
official complaint, been appreciative of the board's belated denunciation of
racism, and have signalled their willingness to move on. The Indians, after a
slow start, have redeemed themselves by booking the bad guys. To keep up the
good work, we need to do the same again. And it doesn't have to be a racial
insult the next time round: it could be, given our versatility in the matter
of prejudice, a religious slur.
To say this isn't to concede some civilisational defect but merely to point
out that we can't enjoy the glow of self-righteousness without the rigours
of self-examination. Our virtue as a nation is that we committed ourselves
to an inclusive pluralism. Our aim as a cricket-playing nation ought to be
to live up to that ideal.
Mukul Kesavan is a historian, novelist and essayist based in New Delhi
© Cricinfo
 Read Comments (74)
|
|
Comments have now been closed for this article
|
|
James Sutherland, the Cricket Australia chief executive, said that he did not think Panesar being called a "stupid Indian" was racist during England's three-day match against New South Wales at the SCG.(Ref. Cricinfo article November 17, 2006) "I don't think there's too much racist about that" and Symonds himself referred Sreesanth to a Goose "His carry-on in this series has been way over the top. We don't mind blokes having a go and standing up for themselves, but he has gone above and beyond what's acceptable. Information in this game travels and people remember when someone is carrying on like a goose." (Ref. Cricinfo article October 14, 2007). When professional people like Sutherland and Symonds who represent their countries do not understand what it is to be ridiculed then how can they expect the general public to act any better.
Racisim, discrimination, ridicule exists almost everywhere in different forms. If its not based on race then based its sex, wealth etc.
Posted by prajayindia on October 23 2007, 07:34 AM GMT
|
|
I think it was all much ado about nothing. I am for a minute not suggesting that racism doesn't exist in india. By god it does. For guys who don't believe, go look at all the african students in various parts of the country. They have been denied accomodation, made fun off and even searched by cops for drugs. Not all people with dark skin are drug peddlars. Indians are no angels but this is case of crowd hysteria (Jerks) and not really racism.
Posted by Gauth09 on October 22 2007, 14:43 PM GMT
|
|
I find it amusing that some Indian cricket fans continually point at past indiscretions by some Australian players as somehow justifying the taunts directed at Symonds (and just a reminder that Darren Lehman copped it from the press here which is more than one can say for the Indian presses reaction). All this denial just makes it worse. Even more ridiculous are claims that Indians aren't racist - I've spent years working in Fiji, and some the Indians there certainly aren't adverse to refering to the Indigenous Fijians in a racially offensive manner. Racism exists in all societies - accept it. And we'll all enjoy giving you a hiding in the Test series this summer!
Posted by Calexico on October 22 2007, 11:13 AM GMT
|
|
Its all the mistake of two cricket teams who failed to show good relationship between them from the beginning of the series. Its started by Andrew when he commented on the welcome given to Indian team. Its their wish to celebrate their own victory in the home. Second it became the word war when ponting expressed his views on our victory (that too in our country) and our players replied them aggressively. These continues to happen in the game infront of 30000 audience. Our indian peoples just supported our team and expressed their emotions. I will promise that if both team were maintained close & good relations the our peoples might encouraged the visitors for their play. We are all human and we need to learn for the happenings (both good and bad)
Posted by Logan on October 22 2007, 09:15 AM GMT
|
|
So far the responses to Mr Kesavan's timely article have either been (a) the moronic 'They are racists so it is ok for us to be racists back'; or (b)the more reasonable 'one should not generalise about all Indian fans from the actions of a few bigots. As an Indian cricketer and a fan who has played and watched the game in India and England, I can assure you that racism and other forms of bigotry are present among significant numbers of Indians whether they are cricket fans or not. Those fans who were caught on camera in Mumbai were performing a racist action. All forms of racism should be legislated against, everywhere. People trying to excuse it, as opposed to analysiong it, are also aiding and abetting racism. No excuses. End of story.
Posted by neruda on October 22 2007, 04:57 AM GMT
|
|
Mukul.it seems you are party to the rationale that aussies seek respect and dignity from fellow teams when they themselves are averse to part with it. Its travesty of justice at its very best. Australian allrounder Symonds by his churlish comments at the onset of the tour fomented trouble. It was not his domain to comment on Indias celebration upon Twenty twenty triumph or indian players appearance in television commercials.Its nobodys case that indian crowd is a bunch of saints but symonds well and truly played into their hands. The aussies are poor losers and its high time that indian media stop short of singing hosannas for white skin. Glancing through australian media reports during the unsavoury episodes its ludicrous how low levels they stoop to glorify their team and players. We too need to salvage pride for india and an young ,aggressive team promises just that. Kudos india.
Posted by Jinesh_Thampi on October 22 2007, 04:44 AM GMT
|
|
Indian crowds racist??? We only found a way to categorize entire communities and treat them like crap for 2000 years. We generalize populations and treat individuals like caricatures of that generalization. You don't believe this occurs, see what happens in a hotel or store owned by an indian when a black man enters. So those of you who still feel that these chants were not racist, try that in one of stadiums in America and see how many would make it out alive.
Posted by aripadmanabhan on October 22 2007, 03:50 AM GMT
|
|
It is disturbing to read the numerous responses here that condone and excuse racism when it is perpetrated by Indians.
Racist comments are made by Australians at sporting events, but in Australia it is recognised as a problem by the organisers and attempts are made to stop it. Compare this is to the attitude of complete denial by many Indian fans and officials.
It is also ridiculous that some comments here compare India and Australia by stating that India is a country where many various religions live side by side in peace, with the implication that this is not the case in Australia. We know the history of Hindus and Muslims in India, and there are no race riots in the streets of Australia as some seem to want to believe, so I do not see any validity in such comments.
People also need to understand that merely being abusive or insulting, without mentioning race, colour or culture, does not equate to racism. It may not be nice but being confrontational does not make one a racist!
Posted by Rooboy on October 22 2007, 03:05 AM GMT
|
|
Wonderful article, Mr. Kesavan. What irks me most about some of the Indian fans is that they cite past racial abuse directed against them as reason to racially abuse another person. They are foolish to ignore that such abuse was directed against them by some ignorant white men (certainly not all), and not by black men! To racially abuse Symonds, whose ancestry appears to be partly black, is simply an act of cowardice of these characterless few. All said and done, Indian players in the past have held up admirably against hostile treatment dished out to them which have ironically spurred them to greater heights. Youngsters like Sreesanth ought to learn from the examples set by the heroic Rahul Dravids, VVS Laxmans and Sachin Tendulkars.
Posted by sprakash72 on October 22 2007, 02:29 AM GMT
|
|
I very much support what all other guys have written above.
The media is making a mess of the whole episode. I believe its foolish to think that making faces is racism. If that is the case - then all the people in the world are racists.
Remember, all of us at some point of our life might have made faces towards our family member or friends.
Was that wrong ? Was it racism?
Come on Aussies and Media please grow up! Just dont make some small pranks a big issue.
If at all there is racism - then the White people r practising it.
Ofcourse we all know how umpire Hair treated asian players (that was a perfect racist behaviour).
Yes - The masti at Mumbai could be a little bit under control. I agree with that. Remember, our players also will go abroad to play.
Symonds provoked the Indians n he deserved it.
I hope Aussies learn something now - They want to do all the talking,bullying,sledging etc- and they dont like it if someone gives it back to them. Pretty Childish!
Thank
Ven
Posted by Harry on October 22 2007, 02:25 AM GMT
|
|
|
Read all 74 Comments  |
| Top ^ |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
