INDIA and INDIAN-NESS

As a member of the Caribbean Diaspora, I also consider myself a part of the Indian Diaspora (albeit via the Caribbean). I often use this as one of the optics through which I do my theologising, reflecting and writing. I have never been to India, yet India occupies my imagination in a number of complex ways. Over the years (especially here in the UK) , I have had reasons to give more thought to what it means to be a member of the Caribbean Diaspora and at the same time to reflect on my East Indian heritage. Quite often I am mistaken for an Asian until I start talking. I am always struck by the way Asians in Birmingham would respond to me. This usually takes the form of a movement in there parts: recognition/solidarity (I am visibly Indian); confusion (I have a strange Caribbean accent and Guyana is not in India); distancing (I cannot be figured out and besides I do not think like a "proper" Indian).

Two recent incidents have caused me to rethink my identity and relationship with India (be it that this relationship has always been in my imagination). The first is the recent incident in the India-Australia cricket match in which Harbhajan Singh was accused of making racist remarks to Symonds (with total denial from the Indian team). India made a counter claim that an Australian player made racist remarks. They also refused to continue the series as they felt they were treated unfairly by the decisions of the Caribbean umpire Steve Bucknor (the most senior and experienced umpire in the game) with the result that Bucknor was eventually removed as an umpire. While I understand that wrong decisions have been made in the game, and India has been on the receiving end, the fact that Bucknor, a Blackman from the Caribbean, was axed raises in my mind a number of questions. Besides the fact that the Indian player was found guilty and then later in an appeal the charge was toned down, I cannot rule out the the possibility that the present Indian cricket team has the potential to display racist attitudes. After all, the Indian Cricket team and Board can hardly defend itself against the charge that it excludes Dalits from its club.

India, of course, is a powerful nation and cricket is big money – which may be one reason for the removal of Bucknor. If India sneezes too hard the West is going to catch a bad cold! Money and profits dictated that the game must continue. And the sacrificial lamb was Bucknor in a similar way that the Dalits get sacrificed daily so that Brahmins can luxuriate in wealth they are entitled to even before conception. Hence, the caste system they built to support it.

Which brings me to the second event. This is the news over the millions of pounds that have been raked up as a result of the deal over the IPL and India’s Twenty20 Premier League. The deal worth over £370 million pounds sees three Bollywood film stars as part of the Consortia buying into this lucrative deal, with four top Indian iconic players expected to make loads of money. It would seem that moneymaking Brahmins will continue to rake up wealth without even batting an eyelid over the millions in their own country who live in abject poverty. How much of their wealth serves the cause of Philanthropy in their own country will make for an interesting story that some Indian journalist may wish to take up. The point here is that India has become so powerful that she does not represent for me an oppressed nation; nor can I identify with the image of Mother India, as Bollywood would have the Diaspora believe. India has now become a goliath and if I think of what happened to my ancestors who were brought to the Caribbean, she is one mother who continues to sacrifice her “untouchable children” in the global economic race. They continue to be expendable.

I am waiting to see how Indian theology responds to all of this. Certainly, the rhetoric they used to reel out against the West will now have to change. Capitalism has come home to roost and lots of golden eggs are being laid but mainly in certain caste quarters. In the meantime the Dalits, women, various tribal communities continue to be excluded, marginalized and live in abject poverty.

For me, India will remain in the imagination. I will continue to look Indian. But my heart will be Caribbean, for in that intermingling of the various impulses: Indian, African, European, and Native Caribbean lie the beauty of that which cannot be nailed down and locked up in one particular category. And I thrive on that. In the meantime, I will continue to signify on India and Indians. Just as Rohan Kanhai did when he hammered the bowling of the Indians in his great double innings (not out) in Calcutta: every stroke was a comment on India’s collusion in the exploitation of its own people (our indentured ancestors).

copyright jagessar

Photo Credit www.indiatribune.com

EXPOSED!

I am rediscovering photography – not only taking pictures, but also enjoying the excellent photography of others. With my new digital camera, loaded with unexplored functions, I am once again turning to a hobby that got lost for a number of reasons, including the cost factor of processing films. I can now store my images, delete, select, edit and work magic with such ease that would make all the deceased local photographers in my small village turn in their graves. My head is buzzing with ideas as to what I can do with these images - as you can see from my images section.

One would think that with the advent of digital photography that photographers from the South would be better placed to present their own realities through their optics. But this is not necessarily the case. I refer here to Shahidul Alam’s piece in The New Internationalist (August 2007) in which he noted that when he confronted the organisers of “Eight Ways to Change the World” exhibition as to why all the photographers were white and from the West, he was told that photographers from his part of the world (the majority world) “didn’t have the eye”. Even Charities (including Christian ones), bent on squeezing funds from the rich over here, work with the conception that local photographers cannot be trusted to understand and do this.

The irony, as Alam notes, is that before this event when photographers from the Majority World asked why they were not used by mainstream media and development agencies, the answer was that they did not exist. Now that they exist by making themselves visibly present, they have to prove that they have the eye for the task. This sort of argument has a familiar ring for those of us who challenge institutional racism in the UK, especially where the visible lack of minority ethnic people in the decision making level of organisations (including the churches) has been put down to their non-existence (not the excluding policies including the often subtle ones). And when they do become articulately visible, other means are engineered to ensure their continuing sidelining.

Change, however, may be just around the corner in terms of the photographic eye of the locals. Yet it remains costly for them. The multiplying of very dangerous situations (quite newsworthy) means that it is best to have the locals get the pictures and run the risk of getting killed. Certainly, Charities may need to rethink its practices and they may want to consider the implications of the motto of one NGO, which runs like this: We believe in life before death!

The question is: life for whom?

copyright jagessar

image credit: Michael N. Jagessar

AUGMENTED REALITY

The more I follow and read of the lastest technological developments, the more suspicious and cynical I become. I keep wondering where all this will eventually take us. As usual my hermeneutic of deep suspicion takes over. My sons, on the other hand, point out that this is not about suspicion or even cynicism. They contend that perhaps I am quickly passing my sell-by date. This may be so. Yet, being the progressive and radical thinker I think I am, I could not take such comment sitting down. Soon we were in a heated philosophical and ethical arguments about the pros and cons of a new technique referred to as "augmented reality" (AR) or "augmented vision" that the discussion zeroed on.

In a nutshell the technique called AR can be described as involving the following: Why leave computer grapics only on the screen of our computers? Why not superimposed it on the real world thus augmenting the world around us with virtual texts, graphics, peoples, animals: you name it for the the potential is mind-boggling. Just imagine that doctors will soon be able to use AR in their live surgery: instead of looking down at the patient and then at a screen, the whole works of the area can be superimposed or overlaid in one place giving the surgeon x-ray powers that would allow more efficient tinkering of our bodyparts. You can then expect NHS success rate to soar and people to live longer: that is if they do not mix up patient details! Drivers who are going on long trips can soon have a Sat Nav that will actually paint the road with all the marking and signs to show the driver which way to go. And if you are concerned about your looks do not worry, AR is there to affirm you: just look into those specially designed mirrors that will let you see and try out a variety of hairstyles and even designer wear. I am already feeling good about this!

For Churches that are worried about closure, salvation is at hand: AR can make "fresh expressions" look like Middle Ages stuff. Do not bother if your faithful few are unable to upkeep that listed and historic building. No need for fancy and costly refurbishing: you can invest in an AR sighting viewer (VSS) that will delight tourists with an augmented view of the historic site - as it used to be. You can even invent what it used to be. They can view what you want them to see: even adding bits for historic effect: with priests, side altars, choirs and the numerous faithful at worship. And if you can feature Satan somewhere in there or Harry Potter as the vicar all the better: your ratings with the young would jump up overnight. Queues will run all the way to the outside. And do not worry if your church is not that historic: you can turn it into a virtual safari park. All you will need to do is just load up the tourists with AR binoculars glued to their eyes in a small train that runs around the length of Church (with heights for rollercoaster effects of feeling). This will cretainly turn those once dying complexes into thriving businesses and ministers would even get delirious from counting the thousands that will cross the threshhold of the Church.

One can even get biblical with this stuff. Forget reading a "traditional" bible. Now is the chance to make all those reading optics viewable : select the stories and superimpose the virtual texts and graphics and watch your attendance soar. The whole liturgical works can also be included: hymn singing, praying, preaching, intercessions for the numerous battlefields around the world, the eucharist, baptism and even a wedding. And if your are worried about attendance at your funeral those AR binoculars can come in handy at the cremetorium. Who wants reality when it is so depressing? Why not augment it?

Life, however, is more complex and will remain so in spite of all our attempts at trying to give the good feel through AR. Augmented reality (AR) will not have the answers for real world/life complexities and the only experience gained will be that which has been set up and enclosed by those who have designed the reality. Would it help us to better understand what it means to human and how to make moral choices for the common good of all? At the heart of human waywardness is the love of power and AR, for all the good it may bring in some areas, further encourages the human ego to assume its self-sufficiency and self-mastery.

copyright jagessar

image credit
www.media.mit.edu

WE SHOP, THEREFORE WE ARE

We avoid shopping like a plague during Christmas. Why waste time in long queues and in shops that you can hardly move around without stepping on another person and with other humans breathing into your face? In fact, our motto is to shop only if necessary. Necessity and what you think you need should always be in conversation. One commentator re-wrote the 1st line of the 23rd Psalm to read: "God is my shepherd, I will not want more than I need". Spot on! We also try not to let price nor brand determine where we shop. This is never easy - especially if your credit-ability will determine whether it is the farmer's market, M&S, Lidl, Waitrose, TESCO, the Pound Shop or Charity Shops.

Businesses would do their utmost to ensure that we worship over their counters. Why, for instance, would people queue up in the early hours of Boxing Day to stampede for a bargain? And without even batting an eyelid we would end up in debt thinking we have struck a bargain. I wonder if the millions spent their Christmas night just thinking of what they would go for in that stampede rather than enjoying their holidays, their time with family and the celebrations? A news item on French Television noted that because thousands of people are disappointed with their Christmas gift a new online company offers a service to help you exchange these gifts. Somebody will be minting millions from our insatiable wants. Shopping has become a deadly and costly ritual, in spite of all the new talk about its spirituality.

The situation has become so ridiculous that the BBC had one of its reporters giving tips as to how one should be prepared for the shopping onslaught: ensure that you have a handbag full of water for dehydration; pills for headache and a banana for energy, among other things. And in case you are proper and decent this will not be the place for you, as it will be a “dog eat dog” situation with the need to use your elbow, instead of your feet, to get the bargain items you think you badly need. We shop, therefore we are. The depression, however, sets in by mid-January when the credit card statement arrives.

Businesses, of course, vie for our custom and will go at lengths to pamper us with loyalty cards, points, incentives and bargains. And like Pavlov’s puppies we salivate to these in remarkable ways. We keep returning, with wagging tails to these new gods who are only after our money. What goes unattended is the length to which these new gods will go to keep a tab on us. The gods of businesses have got us well shackled.

Take supermarkets, as one example: they spend millions of pounds studying the psychology of us shoppers, rethinking the layout of their aisles, and where products are best located to get us to spend. They even invest in surveillance gadgets that are used to track the habits of those of us who walk through their doors and along their aisles. And, they certainly know how to recoup that sum spent on these and make billions of pounds in profit. We shop excessively, therefore they profit.

Have you ever given thought to why supermarkets know exactly what kind of offers and discounts to send to us? They know what aisle we visit, where we do out pit stops to load up our carts, what range of products we go for. Churches may wish to take a leaf out of supermarkets’ manual to re-read their communities before they become totally obsolete. The moment, we pass through the threshold of our nearest supermarket they already know which aisle we would visit, what shelf level we would reach for and will even listen in to our conversations. The latter I do not mind as I am sure they would be turned off by my constant talking back to their tricks, quarrelling about their excessive plastic-wrapping of almost everything and my cynical/dubious comments about their organic range. This may be one reason why ever so often the products on the aisles I visit are shifted around and located at different levels!

Supermarkets are not daft. They know exactly how to let us know that they care for loyal and committed customers. And, in an individualistic and impersonal society they know the place of valuing, pampering and affirming us. So we stick with them believing that we do matter. In fact they prey upon our individualism, for that is when we are most vulnerable. What really matters for them is our credit-ability.

What can we do to break this cycle? In spite of the post-Christmas rush to purchase ten handbags and twenty pants, how can this trend be countered? Little acts matter and count. For instance, try shopping less (including all those internet offers); try reducing the number of times you visit the supermarket; switch off your TV and try not to look at the ads (they help create needs); do not be fooled by the offers and if you go for them do so with another friend or neighbour (then it becomes a deal); make your corner shop work for you and your neighbours; support the local farmers’ market; start your own vegetable garden (or do so with a group). And when you do visit the supermarket (as we all will do) subvert the tracking and talk back to given the eavesdroppers much food for thought.

Why not try this as a New Year challenge? And do not bother that you may not be able to keep it. One can only try!

copyright jagessar

Image Credit
www.cynical-c.com/.../Gardner8_320x350.jpg

EXPOSING PHOTOGRAPHY

I am rediscovering one of my hobbies - photography. Photography came my way through my now deceased paternal uncle who had the only camera in the village in which I grew up. With my new digital camera, fully loaded with unexplored functions, I am once again turning to an early fascination that got lost for a number of reasons (including the cost factor of processing films). I can now store my images, delete, select, and work editorial magic with much ease. My head is buzzing with ideas as to what I can do with these images.

One would think that with the advent of digital photography, photographers from the South would be better placed to present their own realities through their optics. But this is not necessarily the case. Photography is still largely controlled by the richer nations. Shahidul Alam writing in The New Internationalist (August 2007) noted that when he confronted the organisers of “Eight Ways to Change the World” exhibition as to why all the photographers were white and from the West he was told that photographers from his part of the world “didn’t have the eye”. What they actually meant is that the natives are unable to capture images that they want to make big dollars on!

Alam notes that yrears ago, when photographers from the Majority World had asked why they were not used by mainstream media and development agencies the answer then was that they did not exist - even though there were local photographers. In the eyes of the West they did not exist! Now the tune has changed: their presence cannot be denied, but now they have to prove they have the eye for the task. And it is the West that will determine that!

For me, what is disturbing about Alam’s essay is how Charities, bent on squeezing funds from the rich in their countries, tend to subscribe to the view that local photographers cannot be trusted to understand this in order to get the right image that will move the conscience of the rich westerners.

The good news is that that things seem changing, but for the wrong reasons. In those especially dangerous situations it is best to have the locals get the picture and run the risk of getting killed. They are expendable!

copyright jagessar

KEEPING FAITH or PRACTICING FAITH

Recently, I heard a sermon where the preacher reflected on one of the pastoral epistles with specific reference as to how the faithful were urged to "keep the faith". This was appropriately located in the context of declining Christianity in UK and Europe and specifically in the United Reformed Church (URC) - which according to predictions will cease to exist as a church by 2015.

With the rapid decline of members this prediction seems more than probable. Yet, the occasion for the sermon was one church's celebration of family sunday. It was a packed congregation with the Caribbean British families constituting a significant proportion of those attending.

I was intrigued by the admonition to "keep the faith" and the very good reflection by the preacher. I wondered why and how the church has reached this stage in terms of its present demise and especially since the "keeping the faith" slogan is reflected in numerous hymns sung over the years, in the the theology and ethos of the URC. What went wrong?

The faithful have been "keeping the faith" - but perhaps in a different or wrong way. Or maybe the problem is with our understanding of what it means to "keep the faith".The Oxford dictionary informs us about the pedigree of the word "keep": to have continuous charge; retain possession of; save or hold on to; retain or remain in a specified condition, position, course etc. Herein one can locate a possible reason for what went wrong. Christians may have been "Keeping it to themselves" or "Keeping it away from people who did not look like them or fit into their company" or preserving (or even worst conserving) the faith in an imagined form of authenticity. Or more significantly: "keeping the faith" may have meant that little or no emphasis was placed on "practicing or living the faith".

If you ask me, I prefer "practice" (before faith) as such a habit offers a more realistic space for my insufficiences and all the ambiguities associated with my fragile humanity. It helps me to focus on making this a discipline that I need to continuosly strive after. It is not about holding on to or posessing something in a closed way. Moreover, given our ecclesial and cultural diversity there will certainly be "variety" in the practice of faith.

A related problem is that while interpreters may have noted the connection between "practice and keeping", our translations of the bible have been so conservative that we have never thought of revising "keeping the faith" to read "practicing the faith".

May we practice our faith in 2008 and beyond!

copyright jagessar

Image Credit
jagessar 2007