RSVP: Sania weds Shoaib – by Bahadar Ali Khan
The entire Pakistani public pervaded into a jubilation and, apparently, in a triumphant phase after Shoaib betrothed with Sania Mirza. Personally, I would like to offer my blessings for the couple. However, ( here goes the cynicism, again ) the intriguing impact of this otherwise platonic dispensation, is the underlying patriarchal discourse of the sub-continent. To support this thesis, let us presume, that Sania Mirza is not an Indian but Pakistani girl and please also imagine that Shoaib Malik is an Indian lad. How we would see it now? The intensity of the jubilation fades away, the moment you imagine this unholy thought. Why it is so?
In our tribal cultures, for centuries, the blood feuds have been settled by giving away young girls into marriage with the family of grieved arch-rival family as a token of peace. The subcontinental man’s respect lies in the character of his women, most importantly in his wives, also not excluding his sisters and mother. The bottom line is that identity of woman, is not as human, but as a ‘thing’. All of us are told, that the ‘men’ fight over three ‘things’- land, wealth and women ( zar, zan and zameen ).
Interestingly, this thought has remained the corner stone of Indian cinema as well. Back in 1991, Zeba Bakhtiar played the role of a Pakistani girl who fell in love with an Indian man, played by Rashi Kapur. And more recently, in the movie Veer-Zaara, a Pakistani girl, Zara Hayat Khan’ played by Preety Zenta, falls in love with an Indian Air Force Officer, Shah Rukh Khan. Both guys finally were managed to get their ‘Pakistani’ girls to India under the loud cheer of cinema audience. The director and cinema-goers both felt a relief over this happy ending. Of course, Pakistani cinema which is under the spell of constant erosion since the days of Mard-e-Momin Zia-ul-Haq, also produced some rebuttal with the similar ending just favoring curry on Pakistani guy with an Indian girl. Though in Pakistani movies, this remained confined to elopement of Sikh girls with Pakistani guy. Sikh factor was welded in the movies to cater to the cravings of strategic depth( Eastern Division) weaved by our establishment in the form of Sikh Khalistan movement back in turbulent 80s.
Talking of the movies, the Indian cinema though always favoured Pakistani girl for an Indian guy, has unique taste vis-a-vis Goras ( White guys ). Almost always, in many movies, when the circumstances pitch a Westerner against an Indian, the director and film-audience have no qualms in sending away their Nari with the White guy. But they don’t do this honour to any Pakistani guy. This seems defeating my premise of sub-continental patriarchal argument. What can I do, can somebody please help? Of course, Shoaib tried to help in understanding the story writers and directors that if West is the only criterion then, at least geographically, Pakistan also lies in the West of India.
Getting back to our celebrity couple, both are wonderful sports personalities and allude to a pivotal fact that joint hearts are beating across the border. I pray this may prove a blessed omen for the 1400 million souls living in the sub-continent who want peace and prosperity in the region so that their countries can transform into welfare states from the ugly and belligerent security states.
Brilliant stuff Bahadar.
Regarding this:
” Almost always, in many movies, when the circumstances pitch a Westerner against an Indian, the director and film-audience have no qualms in sending away their Nari with the White guy. But they don’t do this honour to any Pakistani guy. This seems defeating my premise of sub-continental patriarchal argument. What can I do, can somebody please help?”
I suggest you look at Frantz Fanon’s “Black Skin, White Mask”. It is essentially a Freudian analysis of relations between the colonial subject of color vis-a-vis the white master. His analysis is particularly concerned with notions of masculinity of the colonial subject, and he racializes psychoanalytic concepts and complexes.
Nice article and ‘apt use of word’ analysis by Khawer, great.
By watching Indian media, far and wide, they are deeply influenced by ‘white skin’ rather pretty complexed. They feel pride in imitating the whites and consider marrying their daughter with a white as an ‘opportunity’.
@Khan
Khan, you are misreading me. I by no means tried to insinuate that Indians consider marrying their daughters to “whites” to be an opportunity.
I will say that attitudes towards race and skin color are similar across south asia.
@Khawer
Yes, I agree with you but may be the Indian media is projecting it, as it is and may be our media is not portraying it, as it is, but I agree this phenomenon, far & wide, is similar across south asia.
My favourite by far is the Pakistan Tennis Federation (PTF) President Dilawar Abbas, breathlessly hoping Sania will play for Pakistan because “Asian women traditionally follow their husbands, which is why I’m hopeful that someday she would be inspired by Shoaib to play for Pakistan.” There you have it: traditional Asian brides following meekly in the footsteps of their consorts. I doubt if the mini-skirt wearing Mirza would be able to play for Pakistan, let alone want to.
http://blog.dawn.com/2010/04/03/couldn%E2%80%99t-she-just-find-a-nice-indian-boy/
Media ethics Dawn Editorial Friday, 09 Apr, 2010
The Shoaib-Sania is not headline news in a country that is struggling to make ends meet. –Photo by Ap http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/editorial/media-ethics-940
Sections of Pakistan’s electronic media need to take a close hard look at their priorities and the frivolous manner in which they sometimes operate.
Take, for instance, the tone and tenor of the coverage given to Pakistani cricketer Shoaib Malik’s impending marriage to Indian tennis star Sania Mirza. When the story was first confirmed by the two families it was flashed over and over again as ‘breaking news’.
Later, it was Ms Mirza’s successful attempt to secure a Pakistani visa that dominated the headlines on some television channels. And then came the field days — or appalling lows, depending on your viewpoint — when Mr Malik’s alleged previous marriage to another Indian woman became the news du jour. Coverage of the eventual out-of-court settlement ostensibly involving a divorce was just as sensational and an equally poor advertisement for Pakistani journalism.
In the race for ratings, media ethics, contextual significance and perhaps even common sense were thrown out the window. What we saw on our screens was tabloid journalism of the sort usually purveyed by the dregs of the profession. Media organisations are businesses of course but the ethos of journalism demands that ethics must not be sacrificed at the altar of the bottom line. Good taste also comes into it, though that is a more subjective issue. But consider this: in a country racked by militancy and terrorism, should a celebrity marriage dominate the news on a day when dozens are killed in suicide attacks? Should gossip about what is at best a footnote in the day’s events be deemed more important than the serious socio-political problems facing the country? News involves information, not sordid entertainment, and the line differentiating the two must be redrawn if the industry is to retain its integrity. It is not a news network’s job to titillate its audience or provide the kind of catharsis offered by film or channels dedicated to entertainment.
Yes, the Shoaib-Sania story is news, especially in the context of the strained relations between Pakistan and India. By no stretch of the imagination, however, is it headline news in a country that is struggling to make ends meet.
Sections of Pakistan’s electronic media need to take a close hard look at their priorities and the frivolous manner in which they sometimes operate.
Take, for instance, the tone and tenor of the coverage given to Pakistani cricketer Shoaib Malik’s impending marriage to Indian tennis star Sania Mirza. When the story was first confirmed by the two families it was flashed over and over again as ‘breaking news’.
Later, it was Ms Mirza’s successful attempt to secure a Pakistani visa that dominated the headlines on some television channels. And then came the field days — or appalling lows, depending on your viewpoint — when Mr Malik’s alleged previous marriage to another Indian woman became the news du jour. Coverage of the eventual out-of-court settlement ostensibly involving a divorce was just as sensational and an equally poor advertisement for Pakistani journalism.
In the race for ratings, media ethics, contextual significance and perhaps even common sense were thrown out the window. What we saw on our screens was tabloid journalism of the sort usually purveyed by the dregs of the profession. Media organisations are businesses of course but the ethos of journalism demands that ethics must not be sacrificed at the altar of the bottom line. Good taste also comes into it, though that is a more subjective issue. But consider this: in a country racked by militancy and terrorism, should a celebrity marriage dominate the news on a day when dozens are killed in suicide attacks? Should gossip about what is at best a footnote in the day’s events be deemed more important than the serious socio-political problems facing the country? News involves information, not sordid entertainment, and the line differentiating the two must be redrawn if the industry is to retain its integrity. It is not a news network’s job to titillate its audience or provide the kind of catharsis offered by film or channels dedicated to entertainment.
Yes, the Shoaib-Sania story is news, especially in the context of the strained relations between Pakistan and India. By no stretch of the imagination, however, is it headline news in a country that is struggling to make ends meet.
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/editorial/media-ethics-940