There was much tut-tn'n recently about lack of historical knowledge. Most of that has to do with the choices we have let our schools make - the other has to do with the fact that as some think The Daily Show is a place to get our news - others think Hollywierd is the place to get our history.
Ghandi is a perfect example. From back in 1983 - read it all. Here is a taste.
As it happens, the government of India openly admits to having provided one-third of the financing of Gandhi out of state funds, straight out of the national treasury—and after close study of the finished product I would not be a bit surprised to hear that it was 100 percent. If Pandit Nehru is portrayed flatteringly in the film, one must remember that Nehru himself took part in the initial story conferences (he originally wanted Gandhi to be played by Alec Guinness) and that his daughter Indira Gandhi is, after all, Prime Minister of India (though no relation to Mohandas Gandhi). The screenplay was checked and rechecked by Indian officials at every stage, often by the Prime Minister herself, with close consultations on plot and even casting. If the movie contains a particularly poisonous portrait of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, the Indian reply, I suppose, would be that if the Pakistanis want an attractive portrayal of Jinnah let them pay for their own movie. A friend of mine, highly sophisticated in political matters but innocent about film-making, declared that Gandhi should be preceded by the legend: The following film is a paid political advertisement by the government of India.Always mistrust what you see delivered through others' filters - question motivations. Seek opposing ideas and points of view. Always search for primary sources.
...
I cannot honestly say I had any reasonable expectation that the film would show scenes of Gandhi’s pretty teenage girl followers fighting “hysterically” (the word was used) for the honor of sleeping naked with the Mahatma and cuddling the nude septuagenarian in their arms. (Gandhi was “testing” his vow of chastity in order to gain moral strength for his mighty struggle with Jinnah.) When told there was a man named Freud who said that, despite his declared intention, Gandhi might actually be enjoying the caresses of the naked girls, Gandhi continued, unperturbed. Nor, frankly, did I expect to see Gandhi giving daily enemas to all the young girls in his ashrams (his daily greeting was, “Have you had a good bowel movement this morning, sisters?”), nor see the girls giving him his daily enema. Although Gandhi seems to have written less about home rule for India than he did about enemas, and excrement, and latrine cleaning (“The bathroom is a temple. It should be so clean and inviting that anyone would enjoy eating there”), I confess such scenes might pose problems for a Western director.
Hat tip VDH
Nice to see Victor Davis Hansen hat tipped on CDR Salamander. One of my favorite non-mil blogs and radio shows!
ReplyDeletethat is the sad part about some people and history. Some writers of history (I will not call them historians) feel the need to immortalize the giants by writing out all of their faults, follies and major character defects. Then, when someone does diligence and discovers them, we as a civilization are faced with a decision: cast them out (as many have tried to do with slave owning founding fathers), or ignore the bad entirely and label neigh-sayers as racists (as folks have done with MLK, Gandhi, Malcolm X, Nelson Mandella, etc).
imperfect humans are capable of effecting great change when they are leading and or working with inspired, motivated people. the change is almost always long fought, sloppy, bloody, and messy. Teaching children that the change was perfect overnight leads them to misunderstanding history, and, in turn, thinking that someone can bring "Hope and Change" one night after being elected and suddenly make the world a happier, safer, nicer place forever and ever.
back on seroious pain meds, so I hope that the above is intelligible.
ReplyDelete' Tis a cruel and hard think you ask, to " <span>Always mistrust what you see delivered through others' filters - questions motivations. Seek opposing ideas and points of view. Always search for primary sources."</span>
ReplyDelete<span>Don't forget that you should never share your findings with anyone if you don't wish to pay a personal price for heresy. </span>
<span>
</span>
Wishing you prompt recovery, the comment was crystal clear and absolutely pertinent. Best wishes/Gramps
ReplyDeleteSG,
ReplyDeleteI got the drift. BTW, did you catch the Midrats episode where we had VDH on?
It was an excellent episode and worth listening to....
ReplyDeleteYou're worrying me, SG. Hope you continue your recovery and the pain meds become less necessary.
ReplyDeleteThe reverse, of course, is true: Those whose agendas, iconclastic desires, petty jealousies, etc, cause them to write ONLY about the faults and failings of others. They have some sort of genetic defect which forces them to consistently seek to knock the marble man from his edifice.
ReplyDeleteWe are all humans, and thus fallible, but the very worst way to judge someone is through the distorted lens, IE: by judging someone according to currently morals and ethics. The honest judgement about anyone MUST be done solely within the environment in which they lived. Anything less is a disservice to both the memory of that person, and to the reader and/or student.
I am surprised that anyone who lived on a diet of lentils, rice and other vegetables, all seasoned with curry, would have ANY need for an enema.
ReplyDeleteCan't be worse than that Attenborough flick they forced us to see while in highschool some 30 years back. You know, the one with Ben Kingsley playing Gandhi.
ReplyDeleteCDR, you left out the best, cough, part of that article, the paragraph describing how Gandhi refused to let English doctors treat his pneumonia-ridden wife with a vile western medicine which might have saved her, but that that asshole did accept quinine and an appendicitis operation from the detested Brits for himself.
I don't think - scratch scratch scratch - that was in the Kingsley movie either.
Oh well. The older I get the more I realize how we've been licked for decades on end.
Hey, I thought you were referring to a 1993 Indian flick about Gandhi, but that review IS about the 1982 Kingsley movie.
ReplyDeleteUh, then you should write 'From back in 1983' instead of from back in 1993.
bwaaaaaaaahahahahahaha!
ReplyDeleteHmmmmmmm. Damn good article. From 1983 that was? Thank Allah for the Internet. And the CDR.
ReplyDeleteMefixie.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't aware of all the disreputable stuff that you cite here, but I've never had a high opinion of Gandhi or of any other pacifist. It's a philosophy that could only work in the Garden of Eden. Here in the fallen world, pacifists leave it up to better men to protect them from harm, and then they want credit for their moral courage ducking the fight. It's the philosophy of a moral idiot.
ReplyDeleteAhh yes, Kristin, dear. As Mr. Kipling noted in his masterpiece, Kim, the conversation between the holy man and the Sikh Havildar:
ReplyDelete"What profit, the killing of men?"
"Very little, as I know, But if evil men were not now and then slain, the world would not be a good place for weaponless dreamers."
Applicable to some of the commenters here, for sure.
Gandhi got one thing right - Indians shouldn't be ruled by the British.
ReplyDeleteBut he got almost everything else wrong. He was a hard-core socialist who imposed life-crushingly backwards economic policies on India. His ultra left-wing economic beliefs kept India needlessly destitute for decades and caused more suffering than the British did.
He was also basically a cult leader who, like all cult leaders, abused his power sexually. And, like many aging cult leaders, became obsessed with his own poop. (When you get old, your priorities shift.)
By the way, Mao had a similarly extreme focus on bowel movements and young girls. In Mao's case he had terrible constipation. His justification for having young girls "help" him was that they had small fingers. Yep, the girls job was digital rectal assistant to Dear Leader -- manually assisting him in his strained, painful attempt at his daily ablutions.
A case can be made that the Brits did India one huge favor: The English language.
ReplyDeleteAs for the rest of your post... that's me you hear running screaming from the room...aaaaaahhhH!
DB, I tried to ditch them a week early so that I could get back to my desk. Tired of answering the phone every 5 seconds. But, alas, the doctors knew what they were talking about when they said "clear this entire week."
ReplyDeleteI'm guessing it was Freudian based, not digestively necessary.
ReplyDeleteIf you ask our Marine friends they will say that pain is just weakness leaving the body. As you get older and leave the military you find that pain just hurts. :) Feel better.
ReplyDeletePacifism is also a philosophy/tactic that can only be successful when used against a civilized opponent. I remember reading years ago an alternative history short story about Gandhi in a Nazi-occupied India. Gandhi's pacifistic tactics worked against the European British, therefore, he reasons, they should be just as effective with the European Germans. Oops. The Nazis don't play by the same rules as the British. In response to the first Gandhi-led non-violent demonstration against them, the Nazis machine gun the protesters, capture Gandhi and his lieutenants, and execute them.
ReplyDeleteit was way more intelligible than when you were babbling in French on another thread yesterday. Now THAT made me think you were doing some serious meds! ;)
ReplyDeleteDB,
ReplyDeleteyou might argue that while the Brits did India a favor by bringing in the English language (perhaps to standardize their other 14 official languages), they did us all a terrible disservice: customer support is now entirely the domain of the Indian subcontinent!
Agree with you about running out of the room.
Grandpa Bluewater, thanks, Sir. I'm well on my way.
ReplyDeleteD'accord. Je ne sais pas pourquoi ai-je ecrit en francais? Seulement les medications......
ReplyDeleteIl semble très romantique !
ReplyDeleteWhat's goosing the girls is good for the Ghandi.
ReplyDeleteRule Britannia! Don't say Commonwealth to me, say EMPIRE!
ReplyDeleteIf I had my way the Union Jack would be flying over all those call centers. >:o
That was me. Never try to post a comment from a cell phone in a bar!
ReplyDeleteSkippy in a bar??? =-O
ReplyDeleteCareful Tim - somethings are always wrong, no matter what the local moral and ethics say....to suggest otherwise is to wander down the path of moral relativism where nothing is "bad" since everything can be justified by local ethics or mores...
ReplyDelete"Men are not potatoes...."
Skippy with a high-zook cell phone???
ReplyDeleteNo body wants to remember that Sergeant Major Gandhi retired from the Queens forces after serving in South Africa.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gandhism.net/sergeantmajorgandhi.php
All about peace when it was convenient, and all that. At least he was enlisted.
And to think that all the hoopla about "Ghandi" cheated Jost Vacano out of his richly deserved Academy Award for his camera work on "Das Boot"...
ReplyDeleteNo kidding. I have seen Das Boot in just about every conceivable format, dubbed theater release, extended Director's Cut, and restored German original. Something about submarines just sounds natural in German!!
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand I have yet to see any movie version of Ghandi.