Caption This

Posted on by

The following image was sent to me by email; it comes from the Times of India; I don’t know the artist or the original context in which it was printed:

okrishna radhillary.jpg

Please provide a caption or title. avoiding the use of the word “kala.”

I should acknowledge that at least one conservative Hindu website has declared that they find the above image offensive. Do readers agree?

(As I understand it, images of deities in the Hindu tradition are widely appropriated and reinterpreted in the culture. They don’t have the same “forbidden” status that they do in, say, Islam. While I can definitely see how a nude image of a Hindu deity not normally represented as nude might be offensive, I think a comic or satirical gloss on a revered story from the tradition, as in the image above, isn’t that uncommon. I am, as always, open to hearing other points of view…)

151 thoughts on “Caption This”

  1. This picture doesn’t offend me. But it does disappoint me that you are willing to publish cartoons that could offend Hindus but not do the same for Muslims. Just becasue one group is more vocal/violent, doesn’t mean that their sentiments are more important, or justified for that matter.

    Indians (this is a Hindu culture thing) have long been a self depracating bunch. We’ll be the first to point out our own shortcomings and are much more willing to mock our own history and culture than other groups. The rapid rejection of religion amongst Hindus is a clear example of this. (Im not saying that this in itself is necessarily a bad thing but its reprocussions for India and its image go far beyond.)

  2. If this was a certain other religion there would be riots all over the world and people would be making death threats and some young person might even blow himself up to show there anger.

    Not everyone from that religion, just a few of them who don’t always represent the billions out there.

    And why am i not surprised that you always have to have a dig as in many other previous posts to that religion…always ready to bounce on that bandwagon.

  3. I’m assuming this pic will be considered as bad taste along with the om prints on bikini bottoms that got withdrawn, and numerous ganeshes in nightclubs.

    And i applaud hindus for not running onto streets to burn effigies for things like this if they don’t feel like it…

  4. well, i suppose if some folks find this portrayal disrespectful, one should pay heed. in this case though, given this pic originated in india and was probably crafted by someone with a more than a superficial understanding of hinduism, i would say the intent was not to denigrate or to mock. i cant even detect any trace of sarcasm or of gratuitous america-bashing. i genuinely believe this was an affectionate portrayal – the american political process set against hindu mythological backdrop.

    [meta mode alert] i also think this is something of an intellectual coming out for indian media, in using hindu mythology in popular indlish writing, as opposed to the convent school tripe that smears the TOI pages [like the gosh! geewhiz! grub! garbage cia archie comics]. it ook me some time to catch on – but this is more than a convenient overlay and i believe some thought went into this. Here’s my take. I believe the portrayal indicates the raslila between Lord Krishna and Radha. Krishna’s Shyam-varna [I’m not getting in hte kala-shala debate] is not coincidental, and neither is the fact that Radha is occasinally regarded as the primary deity, and the shakti to Krshna. But the broader message is that there is a mating dance of sorts going on in the D-primaries and the indian media, having the benefit of distance, generally regards it positively.

  5. chachaji, nice..

    BHO is using his mojo on HRC, ab kya karegi bechari radha!

    Of the people taking offense, is it on behalf of all hindus or is there something personally offensive in that? Fail to see anything offensive.. bad analogy maybe, but then what do you expect from TOI.

  8. that there is a mating dance of sorts going on in the D-primaries and the indian media, having the benefit of distance, generally regards it positively.

    i apologize for saying ‘mating dance’ in my translation of ‘raaslila’, and in that it seemingly equated the primaries to a sexual union. it is grossly inaccurate in either case and i realize it is offensive for different reasons to different readers. so i apologize. my read of the ‘raslila’ in this context is more subtle but it’s hard to put in words.

  9. “madhuban mein obama kisi super-delegate se mile, radha kaise na jale”

    Thats hilarious 馃榾

  11. If this was a certain other religion there would be riots all over the world and people would be making death threats and some young person might even blow himself up to show there anger.

    The Liveleak Fitna (linked on the News tab) clip just got pulled due to death threats against the Liveleak staff…

  15. But it does disappoint me that you are willing to publish cartoons that could offend Hindus but not do the same for Muslims.

    oh come on. you can track amardeep down. you think he wants his wife to be worried about muslim nutters tracking him down for insulting islam? the risk is low, but it’s a risk. i get crap from those close to me about insulting muslims and islam because of the fear of violence (again, the probability is low, but it’s a real fear). of course most people i know think islam is a nutty religion, but they’re cautious about saying it publically since free speech isn’t part of shariah (though it’s totally cool to mock cow-dung eating hindus who worship snakes among muslims, trust me 馃槈 anyway, here’s a photo of a koran in a pig’s mouth i republished on my blog. enjoy 馃槈

  16. It is just a “cartoon” and not offensive. There are probably many other more offensive “products” for both trivial and non-trivial reasons.

  17. this might warrant another post entirely, but what about the offensiveness of mike myers new film the love guru? the offense possibilities within that film put this to shame.

  20. 44 脗路Suki “If this was a certain other religion there would be riots all over the world and people would be making death threats and some young person might even blow himself up to show there anger.

    But what I’ve seen of hindu’s. They don’t act that way over there religion to that level.” No need to talk in riddles, just say Islam. I think the anger of people in that religion would mainly be because ANY sort of iconic representation of the prophet/god/etc is prohibited in Islam, regardless of whether they were depicted in a good or bad way.

  21. Is this picture offensive…

    I don’t know…if this piece is about the possibility of running on a joint ticket…it’s actually kind of funny. But if not, then its just annoying cause then its not even witty-someone just wanted a cheap laugh.

    I don’t mind the use of hindu icons in satirical pieces (and I say this as someone who considers herself a practicing hindu) but at times when it just seems gratituitous, then its irritating.

    As for the person who is from Bombay-that’s great if westernized indians in bombay like to mock religious figures, do what you like…but India is a large country and there’s still quite a few places where people still do respect traditional religious iconography, I don’t see how it’d kill anyone to be more respectful of that.

  22. I think the anger of people in that religion would mainly be because ANY sort of iconic representation of the prophet/god/etc is prohibited in Islam, regardless of whether they were depicted in a good or bad way.

    It is prohibited for Muslims to depict Mohammad within Islam. Just as it is prohibited for Muslims to consume alcohol but it doesn’t matter if non-Muslims do so. The reason Muslims are angry is because the Danish cartoons were a derogatory depiction of Mohammad and by association Islam.

    Some Hindus may view this cartoon as being a derogatory depiction of Krishna and Radha and by association Hinduism.

  23. See, I think that’s just funny, and Indian newspapers regularly put different celebrities into deity-like poses. These are desis making fun of American candidates, or putting them in a desi cultural-religious framework, not an American making fun of desis, and is meant for desi consumption, so those “what will my neighbours think of my religion now” concerns in the States hardly seem relevant.

    (For a caption, how about “Sab ka dil churaya hai, bas yeh ek gori rooth gayi” – though I like Chachaji’s best)

    I can’t see why this would be considered offensive except in the context of competitive American “so you think it’s OK to make fun of us because we’re a minority religion” stakes. Conservative Hindu websites and especially conservative Hindu identitarian associations in the West would probably get offended by a basic temple statue if it were made by a firang. I don’t take them too seriously.

  24. 13 脗路 Al beruni said

    literal meaning of krishna in sanskrit – black, he is literally the black god. Both Rama and Krishna are black in the ancient indian imagination. Because of more and more northern peoples invading/visiting/settling in india, they have become lighter skinned over the last 1000 years..

    Thanks Al for that. And that’s the only grouse I have against Ramanand Sagar’s otherwise brilliant Ramayan. He had a lily white Arun Govil play Rama, instead of a strapping TDH type – Rama and Lakshmana were supposed to be over 7 ft tall with arms reaching down to their knees!

    Correction. Krishna in ancient Tamizh lore is none other than Maayon or the one of Maya whoplays hide and seek with the weather, brings on storms when least expected, and is dark as the clouds. Krishna continues to be the dark one. Srinathji, Jagannatha, Panduranga Vithala, are all dark. In tamizh Karuppiah is Krishna – Kanna karyaniravanna – and Vellaichami or the white one is ParmaSivan, AnbeSivam. Nothing has changed.

    There is a lot more to the Radha-Krishna romance, levels within levels, and while people paint these icons, I would be happy if they explored these themes lightheartedly. Have fun, but stay back for some more – kalakhand, kachori, and tea!

    And if some Hindus are going to take offence let us not judge them unfairly. They too have a right to voice.

    See, I think that’s just funny, and Indian newspapers regularly put different celebrities into deity-like poses. These are desis making fun of American candidates, or putting them in a desi cultural-religious framework, not an American making fun of desis, and is meant for desi consumption, so those “what will my neighbours think of my religion now” concerns in the States hardly seem relevant.

    (For a caption, how about “Sab ka dil churaya hai, bas yeh ek gori rooth gayi” – though I like Chachaji’s best)

    SP says, I can’t see why this would be considered offensive except in the context of competitive American “so you think it’s OK to make fun of us because we’re a minority religion” stakes. Conservative Hindu websites and especially conservative Hindu identitarian associations in the West would probably get offended by a basic temple statue if it were made by a firang. I don’t take them too seriously.

    Could get offended? So now you want to condemn people even if nothing has happened? How openminde!

  25. It is prohibited for Muslims to depict Mohammad within Islam. Just as it is prohibited for Muslims to consume alcohol but it doesn’t matter if non-Muslims do so. The reason Muslims are angry is because the Danish cartoons were a derogatory depiction of Mohammad and by association Islam. Some Hindus may view this cartoon as being a derogatory depiction of Krishna and Radha and by association Hinduism.

    Yep, you’re absolutely right but if I go out & make an “As It Happened” type documentary about the life & times of Mohammed, I doubt you’d get a lesser uproar. Sure, some may be intrigued, but still mostly angry. So from your alcohol example I guess you mean that it doesn’t matter if non-muslims depict Mohammed in anyway. Yes, it doesn’t but it would still generate a reaction from Muslims when pulished.

  26. This happens to Christianity all the time. I’m disappointed that

    It’s not the same. In the US, everyone is well aware that it IS indeed a caricature.

    Anyway, this picture is not offensive, it’s just meaningless. Whats the statement here, that Obama is God and Hillary worships him? doesn’t make sense.

  28. Jyotsana, it’s called a “hypothetical,” and is a rhetorical tool. You might also want to look up “sense of humour.”

  29. 72 脗路 penco said

    I think the anger of people in that religion would mainly be because ANY sort of iconic representation of the prophet/god/etc is prohibited in Islam, regardless of whether they were depicted in a good or bad way.
    It is prohibited for Muslims to depict Mohammad within Islam. Just as it is prohibited for Muslims to consume alcohol but it doesn’t matter if non-Muslims do so. The reason Muslims are angry is because the Danish cartoons were a derogatory depiction of Mohammad and by association Islam. Some Hindus may view this cartoon as being a derogatory depiction of Krishna and Radha and by association Hinduism.

    Yaa, but they wont kill people for that.

  30. 73 脗路 SP said

    Conservative Hindu websites and especially conservative Hindu identitarian associations in the West would probably get offended by a basic temple statue if it were made by a firang. I don’t take them too seriously.

    key word: probably. where did you get that info from? any proof that right wing hindus have been offended by firangi made murtis?

  34. 78 脗路 SP said

    Jyotsana, it’s called a “hypothetical,” and is a rhetorical tool. You might also want to look up “sense of humour.”

    Oh yeah! As Elvis said, “If my aunt had xxxxx she’d be my uncle,” and pretty much pointless.

  36. Am I the only one offended?

    This offends me not just because I am Hindu, but because I see Obama and Clinton as the faces of evil and a threat to the future of my country.

    This however is not enough to turn me into a murderer like the Islamists

  42. 52 脗路 DR1001 said

    <

    blockquote>If this was a certain other religion there would be riots all over the world and people would be making death threats and some young person might even blow himself up to show there anger.

    Oh and you forget the Shiv Sainiks and their Valentine’s day (violent) antics? Granted they have not stooped to open declarations of murder, but in their violence deaths can be easily caused.

  43. Unfortunately, I don’t have a witty caption to contribute at the moment.

    I will say, though, that I’m a bit unsettled by the numerous unwarranted references and comparisons to Muslims and violence… Can we not enjoy this without stooping to that level?

  47. this caption in braj will suit them

    Kanha Barsaane main aay jaiyo, bulaay gayin Radha Pyari…

    Which translates to… Obama Come join our side, Hillbill herself is inviting you.

  48. I was going to respond to Raja’s, Catholic/Christian caps rant, but Anna brought the fire. Damn, that was hot. (No pun intended)

    P.S.

    I had to look up hyphy & yay in Urban Dictionary. Thanks from dropping some knowledge Anna.