"Social Consciousness and Vogue India's gross miscalculation"
ARTICLE BY NIVEDITA GUNTURI
There’s something about this notion of globalization that makes people seem to think that we are not all responsible, as citizens of a nation and of the world, for being socially conscious and aware. Many seem to be blindsided by the rapid progression and economic boom hitting the world, and India in particular, to the point of truly becoming blind to what is appropriate and what is utterly unacceptable.
A friend in London brought this to my attention, and frankly I thought it was a joke.
For those of you who haven’t seen this particular issue of Vogue, take a look at the NYT article linked to in the previous paragraph. When challenged by the NYT, Vogue India editor Priya Tanna told folks to lighten up. She states herself that fashion magazines are not where one should look for social consciousness and “saving the world.” Amen, sister. But here’s the thing. Where do we draw the line? Whom are we allowed to exploit? Who is allowed to do the exploiting? The men and women depicted in the shoot are not referred to by name, merely as “lady” or “man”. I appreciate the egalitarianism, but is there anyone who truly believes that given the choice, if woman is living in a leaky hut with her husband who earns barely enough money to feed her 4 children and not enough to send them to school so only the boys go to school and they eat meat once in two weeks, after saving up, and they all share one 3 rupee cup of tea because they can’t afford milk for the children, she is going to save up for maybe 4 years and buy a Prada handbag? If you’re out there, you lofty dreamer, get in touch with me because I’d love to pick your brain.
I understand the thematic approach: anyone can be pretty, you can aspire to these great heights if you really want to, blah di blah, et cetera, et cetera. But do you mean to tell me that these people that are in these pictures have heard of Gucci? That the children write to St. Nick asking for a Versace backpack for Christmas? I don’t think anyone can be so deluded as to think that the ‘lady’ and ‘man’ and ‘boy’ depicted in the shoot know anything about haute couture. And if they don’t, then why are they the subject of the pictures?
Frankly, I am personally appalled that an Indian can subscribe so shamelessly to a neo-colonial mindset. So now that we don’t have foreign invaders in our country anymore (well we do, but more on that in a moment), it’s time for us to behave imperially towards fellow citizens? Beautiful, Priya Tanna. Bravo. Maybe next time we can show an auto-walla driving a Jag. If Louis Vuitton and Hermes are no longer a rich man’s privilege, maybe Bentley and Ferrari aren’t either. Maybe those of us who still believe that poverty may be holding some people back are living in the history books. Maybe we should open our eyes and look around.
The sad truth is, however, that enough of us are NOT looking at our surroundings with as close an eye as we should. The human beings around us have become part of the landscape. We see them but we do not notice them. They have become important to us purely in a utilitarian manner. I wonder many things about the people chosen to become models for this shoot. How were they compensated? Did anyone really learn their names? Were they treated like other models? Or no because they were amateurs? Or even - maybe - because they were poor? (gasp!)
I think it’s important that we as the residents and citizens of India - nay, the world - owe it to ourselves and our fellow citizens to pay attention to what’s going on. And even more importantly, the media has a strong role to play in this. The first thought I had when I saw the NYT article (after my Britain-dwelling friend sent it to me) was ‘why haven’t I already heard of this, living in India?’ And that is the first thing that is wrong with the Indian social consciousness. If you pick up any well-regarded Indian newspaper, you will see one page devoted to local news, one page for national news, and one page for international news. There’s maybe one page for general human interest stories, one page for business, and approximately 10 pages for celeb gossip and of course there’s the supplement with the society pages and full body shots of hot, famous women. I happen to glance at the papers almost everyday, and I’m online quite a bit. But neither me, nor any of my friends and colleagues who do read the newspaper everyday, had heard anything about it. Why? Because the media believes - rightly - that not enough people care to make it worthwhile news.
It’s time for us to make these things worthwhile. We should know, we should make it our duty to know, what’s going on around us. If we really want to turn a blind eye to the state of affairs, then we are doomed to a very difficult life. The cotton, dye, stitching, and embroidery for the clothing we wear, the raising, growing, harvesting and transporting of the food we eat, and every other kind of handiwork we take for granted, is done by the poverty-stricken people that we so blithely dismiss. Priya Tanna and her cohorts have committed a true travesty by allowing this to happen.
Here’s what I read in The Independent:
“Leading Indian fashion designer David Abraham jumped to the magazine’s defence.
“This kind of juxtaposition is always there in India - the servant who serves a glass of wine which costs more than his monthly salary,” he said.”
True, it’s always there. And I believe we should all be doing whatever we can to narrow the gap. But fine, even if you don’t agree with my brand of egalitarianism, I don’t see the legitimacy of propagating and highlighting such juxtaposition. The tragedy of seeing a homeless man lie, sick and hungry, in front of a glamor-ridden, blindingly minimalist Marks and Spencer store never escapes me. Photographing that image highlights the juxtaposition enough for me. Capture that image, and as an artist, display the dichotomies in our society. I would gladly support that. But what is the need for creating such inequalities and then publishing them for the world to see?
It seems to be an inherent problem in the way we think. The interesting point here is that I don’t think Tanna or her colleagues ever intended to hurt, offend or harm anyone. But as individuals who have the power to reach out with a message to so many people, I think that whether or not they accept it, members of media outlets do have a social responsibility, to be at least minimally aware of injustices and ignorance that are present around them. To me it truly seems reminiscent of old-timey Indian exoticism as “captured” by the British. We should not allow ourselves to be colonialized and imperialistic within our own society. By forcing so-called signs of prosperity onto people who cannot dream of ever being in such a position, I do not think we do ourselves a favor. I do not think it is acceptable for women like Editor Priya Tanna, who should be a beautiful example of the success of the Indian woman, to degrade and exploit her fellow Indian in such a way.
Instead of declaring that fashion is no longer a rich man’s privilege, why not we take the opportunity to share with the public that education is no longer the rich man’s privilege? That is actually something to spread the message about. When India has reached a point where we can say that every person has the bare necessities, food, water, a means of sustenance, a place to live, and if they’re lucky, the chance for an education, then we can move on to bringing high fashion to the masses. Until then, let’s try and keep our priorities straight. When the last little girl has two pieces of clean, whole clothing that she can wear proudly, then let’s start thinking about teaching her fashion and style.
The hierarchical, classist ignorance shown by Vogue India and its supporters is disdainful. I urge everyone to make their views known to the editorial staff so that they think twice before making a similar gaffe in the future.
From my blog, Informed Activism in India.
Labels: article, perspectives