A recent
essay by Wendy Doniger on the website of The Christian Post (December
30, 2010) is titled: Is Yoga a form of Hinduism? Is Hinduism a form of
Yoga? Which leads me to ask: Is American anthropology a form of
Donigerism?
Or does Doniger manifest a form of American anthropology? More amazing
to me than Doniger's inventiveness is
her reputation as an infallible authority on Hinduism. Many Americans
would sooner turn to her than to a Hindu for answers on Hinduism, even
if
the latter were a scholar. Anyway, what is someone with Doniger's
personal and publishing
history doing on a conservative Christian website that publishes
strongly
anti-gay viewpoints? Hoping she won't be
noticed, perhaps?
Like
many whose responses roiled the blogosphere, I was outraged by Joel Stein's columnin
TIME magazine (July 5, 2010)
in which he described how Indian immigrants have altered his hometown of Edison, New
Jersey. But
when I shared the letter of protest I sent TIME's editors, I found to my
surprise that several on my email list thought I had overreacted to the column.
I found similar sentiments reflected in the Wall Street Journal blog IndiaReal Time. A
commentary
on the furor by Pranay Gupte appeared in the Indian newspaper, The Hindu. (July 1 2010). In it, Mr.
Gupte says "I know Mr. Stein well, and he is scarcely a racist." I'm
sure that is true. I'm sure too, that Mr. Stein has soft puppy-brown eyes; that
he is kind to his grandmother; and that he writes columns that many find
hilarious. All of the above does not change the fact that the column in
question is just plain offensive.Which
is why it baffles me when, instead of rapping him on the knuckles for knuckleheaded
writing, fellow Indians jump up to provide more creative excuses for Stein than
does Stein himself.
There is an old story involving French artist Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec. It is said the artist once noticed a woman staring at one of his paintings with a particularly disdainful expression. The painting in question showed a woman with her coat partly off her shoulders; and a man standing behind looking fondly at her, holding the coat in both hands. "How vulgar!" this visitor is said to have exclaimed. The artist asked "Why is it vulgar, madame?" The woman said it was quite obvious from the painting that the woman in it was a prostitute, since the well-dressed man was shown taking her coat off."What if I told you madame, that the man in the picture is the woman's husband; that he is putting her coat on, not taking it off; that his wife has just recovered from a long illness, and he is tenderly helping her get dressed so that he can take her out?"
