A Port Wine Stain Story - Girl With the Red Face

Once upon a time, not very far away, there lived a Girl. Born in a simple middle class Indian family, she was born with one side of her face covered with a red birthmark. And to make it clear in the beginning itself - No, she had not been burnt or slapped or suffered an acid attack or painted or got her face colored with pakka Holi colours (These happened to be the explanations people gave themselves when they stared at her as if she had 3 heads). She suffered from a medical condition called the Port Wine Stain (PWS). It is estimated that out every 1000 kids, 3 have a PWS. And out of every kid born with this birthmark, only 1 has the PWS on his/her face. She happened to be the one who was chosen in God’s ‘Lucky Draw’.

Now, for all those who have decided to continue reading such a seemingly saddening write-up, let me tell you this is not going to be a sob-story (I hope!). Because the Girl happens to have a life filled with a lot more joy than many others. She has been born in the most beautiful family, has the best sort of friends she could’ve had, has received the best kind of education and can give people a run for their money for quite a few things. Yes, there are moments of self-pity and anguish. Times when people crib and cry about their problems and she can’t help but think that they are in a better position than her. Moments when she walks on the street and people gape at her and never forget to nudge the person beside them to encourage them to gape as well. They point fingers, snicker, laugh, sympathise, go into the ‘Oh-poor-girl-whose-face-God-has-destroyed; Sniff-sob’ mode. At times she is not, as we Indians call it, velli or ‘un-busy’ enough to notice and then there are times when she notices and choses to act like it doesn’t affect her.

But, it does. Quite a lot. And when it does affect her, the ‘why-me’ syndrome catches on, tears are shed, thoughts are thought and then a little realization crops up. Realization of the fact that she has been blessed with a lot more than many others and that there are people whose adoration is not affected by the way she looks. And if none of these realizations work, Google comes to aid. Call this sadism, but seeing pictures of people suffering from worse PWSs gives her a sense of being ‘lucky’ that her case is not that bad.

When I talk about the ‘why-me?’ syndrome, the tear shedding and hours of thinking, I might as well add, that all of these happen when she is alone. Assumed to be a strong and confident person by many, the idea of this image being broken by the revelation of her real thoughts about the Mark disturbs her. She has NEVER talked about this with anyone. She was never asked anything about the way she looks and more importantly how it makes her feel.  Some never cared enough to ask and the ones who do care were probably too scared to ask, lest they offend/hurt her. When sometimes fate threw the issue in a public arena all that it received was an uncomfortable silence. Long story short, this is one aspect of her life which is captive of just her thoughts, ideas, assumptions and perceptions.

Microsoft Word’s word count tells me that I have written about 581 words till now, but I still can’t pinpoint why exactly it is important for me to write this ‘story’. It is probably because I feel there are many unspoken words of the Girl which need to reach out to somebody. My blog is still in the stage of infancy. Probably this write-up will reach very few people. But, I want it to reach some, if not all, of those people who care enough to ‘Google’ birthmarks. They probably will understand the ‘protagonist’s’ feelings better. They will know that every person with a birthmark does not really need to be stared at or mocked. Initial curiosity for a different looking person is understandable but gaping at them is not. It is not cool. It is not acceptable.

Photographically Challenged

26^th February 2012 – One of the most ‘iconic’ days of my life. I have received indications from the current state of my Facebook profile that 6 days from today, Facebook might just murder my choice of NOT having a timeline.  *sigh*

Now while for most of the people of my age and particularly my gender, Facebook is providing a subtle and golden opportunity to convincingly flaunt their pouts and poses & cleavages and tattoos, it is also causing a minority population of people, whom I’d like to call –‘photographically challenged’, a great deal of trouble! By now most of my readers must have classified this as an “anti-FB Timeline” article. But, its more about the camera-unfriendly population. These are the kind of people who slap their heads when everyone around them goes like “Aww! This is a ‘Kodak moment’, where is the camera? Come on everyone, Smile! Eeeee!” ; the kind of people who  fake a headache or slyly hide the camera or volunteer to be the photographer just to avoid getting clicked. My reason of doing these things is simple – I rarely, and trust me I’m not being modest, get good pictures. My pictures usually have my hair messed up, my spectacles sitting diagonally on my nose just like Harry Potter, a slouching posture or if none of these just a silly, weird expression. And then before you can even figure out which picture you are going to hide and never let it see the light of the day… Ta-da!!... They are there on Facebook for the world to see!

Till now I only had to go through the pain of coming up with a Profile picture. Now I’ll have to worry about choosing a cover picture too! Just my luck!


My friends say that I’m over-conscious about my photos and I might someday make them translate the ‘over-conscious’ statement into ‘self-obsessed or finicky. But, I can’t help it. If the camera hates me and makes me look super-weird, not my fault!

But, then there is a flip side to the story too. No matter how much I whine and crib about photos, I cannot deny the fact that a photo does recreate moments. They say eyes are nature’s camera with unlimited and ever-lasting memory. But, this ‘camera’ does not allow us to share the pictures of on our mind. And that’s where a real camera comes into the picture. A photograph might make you look a douche, but the memories it brings along are at times worth the embarrassment.

On that note, I’ll try and find a picture that Picasa can make presentable, put it up as the cover picture and let it be there to rust away throughout eternity!
Ciao!

(P.S. I still have a few tabs open where I’m pestering Google to find ways of getting rid of the timeline. Old habits die hard!)

Sensationalism - Creating 'News' from Thin Air

“Making a mountain out of a molehill” – a idiom that has been known to us since decades, but which has been redefined and put to practical use by the media. With the facility of instant news brought by Television news channels the access to happenings of the world has increased exponentially. However, with liberalisation of television as a medium the number avenues for news have increased as well, thus bringing along the rat race of TRPs. With more than 100 news channels battling it out to grasp the audience’s attention to keep their economic and profit structure intact, the editorial content and quality of the broadcasted programs has suffered a heavy blow.

We have reached an era when our TV news channels are resorting to cheap tactics and not to forget irresponsible journalism to make sure we do not touch the remote control after we switch to their particular channel. And to make sure that this happens, “Sensationalism” is the easiest method they adopt. So we have entire slots of broadcast time devoted to repeatedly played clips of Bigg Boss contestants’ tantrums, modern day Swayamwars, Bollywood link-ups and break-ups, cricket match losses(important to note is the fact that a hockey or football game lost is not considered important enough to be pondered over. It is just cricket which gets the fortunate or unfortunate privilege), publicity hungry men and women, snakes being worshipped and shoe-throwing incidents. This trend has been going on for quite some time now and it still continues.

What encourages the channel heads is the fact that their TRP increases when they “spice-up” a news item, which is immediately translated into acceptance by the masses. However, this is not the case. The increase in TRPs can be used as an indicator of popular approval for a news item only to an extent. Thereafter, it is only a matter of lack of choices for the viewer. It is a fact that a report full of ‘exciting and entertaining’ details does attract people who through such reports get a break from their monotonous lives, but this does not mean that the news item presented has been liked by the audience. And with more or less all the news- channels going the path of sensationalism, the masses have limited or no alternatives. It is important to remember that an overdose of hyped ‘facts’ leads to the news channel losing its credibility.

A few days back I saw reportage on the news channel India TV about a child whose hand was amputated. It was, to say the least, preposterously disgusting to see this report being given the headline – “Yeh haath kyun kata Gabbar?!”  Not only was this headline absurd but highly insensitive. Sure, it did manage to catch a few eyeballs but the question remains- Are we going to allow our news channels to repeatedly assault the Journalistic ethics and morals simply on the grounds that they need to make profits to keep their boats sailing?

The problem is not just that facts are spiced up and presented, the real problem comes along when news is created as per what the audience supposedly likes. The Indian cricket team loses a series and reputed news channels shame their profession by coming up with stories titled “Doob maro”, “Shame Team India”, “Katwa di Naak” and what not! The limit gets crossed when a certain ex-player who happens to have been present at the match venue or a player’s spouse/girlfriend is tagged as “unlucky” and held responsible for the loss. Subjects like poverty, child-labour, education, health and sanitation, unemployment, etc. are very conveniently labelled as ‘soft news’ and are talked about maybe once in a fortnight or even less.

The real problem is that the news channels have gross misconceptions about the intelligence of their audience. Following the thought process of a master propagandist, our channels assume people to be unintelligent masses who are highly gullible and completely incapable of analysing or rejecting a news item presented before them. This misconception makes them present sheer nonsense on television and hope that it will be well-received. Moreover, our news channels need to direct their attention towards their moral responsibility towards the society and the government. It is easy now-a-days to demand one’s right for Freedom of Press, what is difficult is to gracefully and carefully carry the baggage of responsibility that comes along with this right.

Reality Television aka “Bare-it-all” Television?

Yelling, jumping, fighting, public display of emotion, dancing, singing and not to forget the various kinds of innovative and out-of-the-box abuses which are “covered-up” by the means of beep sounds – these are the ingredients of a primetime so-called reality show. Television channels have always been reluctant to show scenes with sexual content in their fiction shows or have characters using abusive language. Channels, through daily soaps, preach morals and values with full vigour. But these same channels have allegedly scripted reality shows lapped up with sexual and objectionable content. The point I wish to raise here is not the content but the hypocrisy of these channels.

The idea of moral policing is not what the writer personally favours. What is moral for me may be immoral for you. And in a land of free speech and expression I cannot dictate the parameters of morality. However, having said this, I also wish to point out that free speech and expression comes with strings attached. My ‘free speech’ cannot assault or clamp-down others point of view or for that matter others right to have an opinion. I cannot present views and ideas, which are consistent with a minority, as a general trend. Reality shows need to be a lot more sensitive to the kind of audiences exposed to their work. Very often, the things they show are taken to be in synchronisation with the behavioural patterns of an entire generation of people. Such generalisations are uncalled for.

Sometime back a certain channel came up with a show which helps you to ‘axe your ex’. The concept of this show involves the makers of the show publicly humiliating people for having ended their relationship with the participants of the show by the means of disgusting pranks and practical jokes. Another show takes up the task of being the agency which gives out tags of loyalty and disloyalty. The question of whether the person targeted by the makers of this show have given in their consent or not is somehow never raised. These shows have time and again have brought out individuals’ extremely private and intimate moments on the small screen. The line of demarcation between private and public is becoming finer and is coming to the verge of disappearance. Makers of a famous reality road show, when questioned about the content of their show, very conveniently retort back saying, “Viewers have the remote control in their hands. If they object, they are free to change the channel.” I see this attitude somewhat similar to saying that if a road has a pothole you wish to avoid, you’ll have to take another road. The fact that the pothole needs to be mended is ignored.

When a person talks about the content of such shows, an obvious question which comes up is what is and what is not acceptable and moreover, who decides the acceptability. Again this question brings us to the issue of moral policing. All I would like to put forward in this context is that the reality show makers need to maintain a certain degree of inclusiveness in terms of its content. As in, parents should not be put in a position where they fret about the fact that their children might see a certain reality show and their ethics and morality might be “harmed”. I do not advocate banishing sexual or violent content, I advocate show-casing it with sensitivity with respect to the various sections of the society.

Bhartiya Naari – Perceptions of the Idiot Box

Heavily bordered and embroided shiny saarees, atleast 5 inches wide patch of vermillion, one as long as the torso “mangalsutra”, permanently intact make-up and not to forget helplessly efficient tear-buds- THIS is the prime time Bhartiya Naari whose presence is more than enough to make people forget everything from Lokpal to 2G scam. As the clock ticks 8.00, the tellywood overshadows every other aspect of a common man‘s life. The various soap channels meanwhile enjoy the TRPs and claim to be the platform for “mirror image of true Indian Women”.

So basically, anyone whose existence is like that of a doormat, who practically spends all her life as a living sob-story and ofcourse whose tongue perpetually remains tied up is a “bhartiya naari”. This happens to be the approach which is the cornerstone of tellywood. What amazes me the most however, is the fact that a character who is bang-on, who knows how to use the tongue and has the potential to point out right from wrong is VERY creatively lapped up as a vamp with tonnes of voice-overs and ever-lasting plots and scandals up her sleeves. Technically, any female character with an ounce of strength (and in the writer’s personal opinion BRAINS) is maligned as an incessant b*tch who deserves nothing more than being looked down upon.

For reasons beyond my intellect, a lady who has the attributes of respect, family honour, dignity and honesty,  and who at the same time is strong-willed, intelligent, outspoken and most of all HUMANLY is somehow never viewed as fitting into the big picture of an ideal Indian woman. Probably because she does not bring along enough “masala”! The over exaggeration and pointless drama, which is often wrapped with taglines like “ek aam ladki ki kahani” and “yeh kahani hai aapki aur meri” are probably the most unique forms of a white lie! I haven’t till date come across a “aam ladki” who always stays shut n takes it all when she is tortured because of the colour of her skin, her infertility, her husband’s infidelity, her in-laws’ torture and the other “day-to-day traumas” of life! The reason? We DO NOT live in the times of our ancestor Eve! This is the 21st century where even the most illiterate women, unlike our highly “educated” protagonists, are capable of responding to the basic mortal instinct. Much to the disappointment of the script-writers, these are not instances of the life of a common girl.

The fact that serials like “Hum Log”, “Tamas”, “Buniyaad” were not only responsible for initiating the trend of T.V. serials in India, but also made international soap stars turn their heads to these concrete Indian dramas is well known. “Mahabharata” and “Ramayana” compelled people to literally worship their television sets because of authenticity that they carried. Following the suite of these critically acclaimed shows, many channels have turned their attention towards mythology, history and the various social evils prevalent in our society. Shows based upon themes like child marriage, casteism, widow remarriage, female foeticide/infanticide have come up in recent times. However, many viewers complain that the actions and reactions given by the characters still lack the element of logic.

The intention behind this piece of writing is not to blot the Indian television industry. My mere intention is to point out that probably one of the few things that haven’t changed from the 80s and 90s to the present day is the want for realism in our prime time shows. The “entertainment value” should not be the cover-up for passing out wrong notions and ideologies to the Indian masses. It is necessary to remember that this medium of entertainment often is an important tool in opinion-building.

However, pushing the entire blame on the big soap giants is unfair. We must remember that they ARE at the end of the day (or we could say, at the end of the prime time slots), business houses which seek profit through whatever means which wouldn’t earn them a legal notice. They come up with these shows because there happens to be an audience for it. And the audience is us. As the popular opinion goes, ‘Portrayal of women on TV might be regressive but people are voting for this portrayal with their remotes, right?’ In times like ours when an act of reviling a person can end up in legal hassles, the fact that women’s collective identity, historically studded with characteristics like sacrifice, power, grace, strength, etc. is now being politely mocked is depressing. The grand tag, however, for the saddest part goes to the irony that main audience for these saas-bahu sagas are WOMEN themselves. I would like to end in the words of Nicholas Johnson - “All television is educational television. The question is, what is the teaching?”

An edited version of this article has also been put up at websites Youth Ki Awaaz and Viewspaper .