About the Author

Satyam

See All Posts by This Author

There Are 4 Responses So Far. »

1. 

   Comment by satyam on 14 May 2008:

   Satyam says:
   May 15th, 2008 at 8:23 am

   The whole Midday story with the price figure quoted et al was so unbelievably assinine that it would take someone really challenged on mental grounds to believe it. But Midday do print this sort of thing regularly where the Bachchan family is concerned. It’s yellow journalism of the worst sort.

   As for the comparison with peers well I do not see how you could be accused of such when you have only been ‘responding’ in each instance. This is what sometimes frustrates me about the ‘readers’ or ‘audiences’. They tend to be (assuming the criticism is sincere) as obtuse as those in the media. It is rather silly to suggest that you are trying to compare yourself to others. Of course the media made another ‘lie’ out of the entire story on the TRPs and the TAMs and so forth. Your post on the matter was if anything self-deprecating. In fact you were offering reasons why it was not a credit to yourself to have done better than your peers in this regard. I myself responded in somewhat irate fashion at the time because I felt you were going too far and that the ‘numbers’ you got were entirely because of your incomparable position in Indian cultural life. The media however ‘pretended’ that you were doing the very opposite, i.e. running down your colleagues. This ‘lie’ has been repeated in multiple outlets at this point.

   Of course there are a few other moves that the media is practising in this regard. One is to question why you have become so ‘angry’ all of a sudden, what is it that’s bothering you so much and so forth. The other one is to attribute a certain ‘whimsicality’ to you based on what they call your new career as a blogger (as if you’d given up everything else! In fact what is incredible is the fact that you are maintaining your blog so thoroughly despite everything else!). But this latest story by Midday is the lowest blow. But note how there is a common thread that runs through all these ‘narratives’. This is the attempt to delegitimize and de-voice you. It hardly serves media interests when you respond to each one of their questionable accounts. And those in the industry who are also in the habit of using the media as a political tool by having certain kinds of accounts published and so on about themselves or their rivals also have to pause a bit now. Because they know you will respond. This is what resistance is all about which is why I have been cheering this intervention of yours in the blogosphere.

   I have seen a preview of Blindness. I have my doubts about this film though it’s been directed by Meirelles (whose City of God and Constant Gardener were both impressive works) mostly because I’ve read the book by Saramago (who’s since followed it up with a sequel called ‘Seeing’; of course Saramago won the Nobel some years ago) and I would think it is somewhat unfilmable. In any case it has formed for me one of my most unique reading experiences. Saramago (who is called the most gifted living novelist by my favorite critic, Harold Bloom, and I find it hard to disagree) does something remarkable here. He writes in a way where images are blocked to the reader. Normally when one reads anything the mind conjures up images in a fairly unexceptional way. Here however this hardly happens or at least not in the same way because as one reads the book one feels that Saramago’s language is blocking one’s ability to conjure up these and hence you experience the blindness of his characters in a rather unexpected way. At the very least the images one does form come forth in a kind of haze. To therefore make a film on this subject where everything is always ’seen’ is a little odd! Nonetheless Meirelles seems to have taken this up as a challenge and your opinion on the film certainly suggests that my fears might be unfounded.

   I would lastly offer advice here. Do not apologize so much. There is nothing to apologize for. An apology must also be deserved and cannot simply be a diplomatic tool whereby you apologize because you fear that you might have inadvertently caused a misunderstanding. As I have stated before ‘readers’ also have the responsibility to ascertain the facts for themselves. Much as the media indulges in all sorts of claims either in bad faith or because they are simply too lazy to look further into the matter, similarly such a problem also afflicts the readers of your blog (much like other readers or citizens!). Every person should feel a very personal responsibility to understand what is going on and at the least try to get all the facts. As far as I am concerned those who have accused you of comparing yourself to your colleagues have been guilty of not reading what you have written in all these contexts. They are the ones who owe you an apology! Because they did not bother to read! This is a rather serious problem. It is precisely because ‘citizens’ do not read that they can easily be misled by everyone from politicians to the media. They then blame everyone but their own irresponsibility. So you ought not to apologize. Clearly there are some situations where an apology is called for but it should not be offered so casually in situations where it is not warranted. An apology should always be something rather precious. It should be guarded carefully, with a certain economy. Much like sincere gratitude…
2. 

   Comment by Tuenkens on 14 May 2008:

   The Mid-Day story was very obviously a bait, which AB unfortunately has taken. Now that this blog is very successful, it is very clear to everybody in the media how to get AB’s attention. I really hope AB realizes this soon and makes full use of this wonderful platform. I think beld mentioned before that he can use it so constructively training it on the big guns and make a real impact on the society. His take on Ramadoss had a great response everywhere in the media. Then in one other blog he also pointed about the displacement of poor people near his house but the process stopped when it came to a big corporate also in the same area. That was pretty interesting as well. I really wish he does not waste this.

   I agree with satyam he does not have to be apologetic about the “ratings” posting. I personally think he was just being a little mischievous, but it was fun.
3. 

   Comment by aby2000 on 15 May 2008:

   Satyam…I think when it comes to mentioning his colleagues in the industry he should be very careful what he says or rather not say anything at all because the media will twist it, which has been so apparent with this entire tv ratings.

   Any person reading it will understand the article for what AB was saying, but if you have a twisted mind like the media and some srk fanatics then this is the type of nonsense he is going to have to deal with. I wonder if some of the nasty comments he gets on his blogs are from certain srk fanatics!

   There was absolutely nothing wrong with what he wrote! As for him being nasty, thats what people are going to get if they think that they will attack AB and he is going to keep quiet. If standing up for yourself is called being Nasty…then you ROCK Mr B!! Some srk fanatics are trying to use this nasty nonsense to get to AB fans..and continuously insult him…hey if that makes you happy great…but it’s actually becoming pretty much a yawn…
4. 

   Comment by ILG on 15 May 2008:

   Re: Do not apologize so much. There is nothing to apologize for. An apology must also be deserved and cannot simply be a diplomatic tool whereby you apologize because you fear that you might have inadvertently caused a misunderstanding.

   Agree 100%. But do demand an aplogy from Mid Day.

Post a Response

You must be logged in to post a comment.