|
| Smug morality, slippery stings | | NETERATI |
| Jai Arjun Singh / New Delhi Apr 25, 2009, 00:49 IST |
|
A few weeks ago in this space I mentioned a wag who had suggested that serial child-collector Angelina Jolie might wish to adopt the entire cast of Slumdog Millionaire as they stood on the Oscar stage. Now the darker side of that possibility is upon us with the News of the World “scoop”, which alleges that the father of Rubina Ali, one of the film’s child stars, was ready to sell her to a sheikh from Dubai (or rather, a tabloid reporter masquerading as a sheikh from Dubai). This has opened a can of worms in online debate: the topics being discussed on blogs include moral relativism between social classes, the ethical slipperiness of sting operations, the condition of poor people in less developed countries…and even, ahem, Original Sin: don’t all of us bear ultimate responsibility for the plight of Rubina and her father (they ask soul-searchingly)?
Most of the early reactions were uncomplicated, expressing visceral disgust for the father’s actions. But soon the conversation gained nuance. What’s the inside story here, asks author Amitava Kumar on his blog (http://tinyurl.com/dlvgsm). “What is the real drama that we don’t have access to? A rich woman from the fabled Middle East appearing and saying to you, amidst the glitter of a five-star hotel, I will take care of your child and give her a future. A father or a mother thinking this will be good for the child and for us all. And then the revelation that it was a farce.”
Blog commenters are divided between those who decry “smug middle-class morality” — pointing out that people who can afford to lead a comfortable life are in no position to pass judgement on the poor — and those who are adamant that there can be no justification for a man giving his daughter up for money. Film director Shekhar Kapur (http://tinyurl.com/c4clnl) condemns the sting for “going to a man who doesn’t know where his next meal is going to come from, and dangling a few hundred thousand pounds in front of him to entice him into a negotiation”. The comments section on his blog also touches on the permissibility of sting operations in general. Are stings acceptable when they trap politicians into accepting bribes, since this involves national security? Where do you draw the line?
The Rubina case has also sparked off two varieties of extreme reactions that mirror the simplistic reactions to Slumdog Millionaire itself. First there’s the foreigner who thinks every little Indian girl or boy lives in danger of being sold off by avaricious parents. This in turn begets an over-defensive response from an Indian. “I have been brought up lovingly by my parents in all the comforts and have seen the beautiful things of life,” writes a commenter on the original News of the World article (http://tinyurl.com/ceq6mt), in an attempt to prove that life in India is nothing other than a bed of roses. Clearly, one’s personal experience is the only reality that counts.
As always, there’s much glorious silliness floating around too. On the L A Times blog The Dish Rag (http://tinyurl.com/db7qs8), someone tries to dilute the nastiness of the story by comparing it with the worst that can happen in America. “At least Rubina’s father did not try to rape her or kill the family with a gun a la the Maryland family kill (sic) in the good old US of A.” And the News of the World article has a little side-discussion about whether the poor should procreate. “Rubina’s father has 3 children,” observes a poster. “Why have children if you cannot take care of them? Hopefully someone will step forward and pay for a vasectomy for him VERY SOON!!!”
(jaiarjun@gmail.com)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Read Business news in |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Content Guide
