As you guys would know well, IF you knew me well (my loss, seriously… but what can we do!), I ask a lot of non-rhetorical questions with an extremely rhetorical intent. Like “Do you think I should have that bowl full of microwaved french fries at 12:04 AM?” Or alternately, “Would you like to know what stands at #13 on my list of most irksome things not enough people question?”
Though the answer to both the questions is a No… first one said in a I-don’t-really-care-but-if-you-ask-me tone and the second in a Seriously-do-you-really-think-I-or-anybody-else-would-say-Yes-to-that tone…. I will go ahead and eat that bowl of soggy hot potato product, and tell you about the Big #13.
It all starts with the blue color used for certain characters in graphic retellings of Indian mythology. We have Rama as blue, Krishna is blue… come to think of it in quite a few representations Vishnu and Shiva are partially or fully blue.
So what do the artists want to say… that these individuals/deities were of the one skin color which is close neigh impossible, unless they were:
a) Heavy-duty proponents of the Celestial Tattoo-ing Industry; and/or
b) Had been bitten by some poisonous snake, and/or
c) Ingested some similarly potent toxin, and/or
d) Had the fumes of the chemicals referred to in (b) or (c) fall all over their body.
What? Some of you tried to mark options b, c and/or d as the right answer? Again… not your mistake… as I said you guys don’t know me that well. As I had informed in advance (in Sentence 1 of Paragraph 1), I tend to ask non-rhetorical questions in a rhetorical fashion.
Please indulge me, and let’s say the answer is a handwritten “(e) None of the above”. OK… deal? Good.
So… what if, the color “blue” is an euphemism for a different skin color, which is considered not “fit” for a positive or good character.
Let’s look around and see if there are some other similarly improbable skin coloration cases in the same milieu.
One example that comes to mind is the red skin color of Hanuman. Gotcha… the same set of this well-read audience shouts out. We know the story, you exclaim… you don’t?? OK. Let’s assume you did, and take it from there. C’mon I need some support, storytelling is a performing art, and depends on some feedback. Agreed?
OK. So back to the thread of thought you guys so unfeelingly wrenched out of my grasp. #MainBhiDraamebaaz
The “cover” story given for Hanuman’s red skin colour is that when told by Sita that a pinch of sindoor made her more desirable to Lord Rama, Hanuman took a leap of logic/faith, and decided to put sindoor all over his body to make Rama like him more.
Seriously? That’s the best they could come up with? What if this too was a backstory (retcon?) to explain away a skin colour which could not be ignored, but could not be condoned as a natural skin colour for someone who is “good”.
I have a theory that explains these aberrant skin colourations more suitably. The way, as you may be aware (afraid?) of by now, would go through a few more way stations than a slow local train from CST to Virar. What… you don’t have time for 26 stops, you say? THAT was a simile in the figurative sense, and not to be taken in literal or numerical sense. Phew!
Let’s start with, I hope, a not very surprising statement. It is thus:
WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, ARE RACISTS!
We are more racist than any other people in this world (not a contest… so the Americans can please ease off!).
Where the world discriminates in BLACK and WHITE; we Indians discriminate between different shades of fuchsia brown.
That’s the reason fairness creams and lotions are major money spinners for FMCG players in India. There are advertisements that (with a straight face) talk of fairness powders to make you instantly, even if a tad temporarily, fairer and hence more desirable. Where matrimonial advertisements ask for FAIR brides and in CAPS to boot (the word “fair”, not the brides. They are supposed to be more fashionably dressed with embroidered ghoonghats and mostly bare feet as the groom ain’t that tall on the average). No? Not interested? Fine…
So, where did it all start from?
Let’s talk of this next time. See, I am learning how to segue to the next Episode. There is still hope!
Random Mythoscopy 
Blues have been so much part of our lives, on Monday all of us have it, on Friday’s all of us wear it (Denim), we play our cricket in it and surprisingly when the most enlightened being Yo Yo Honey Singh describes even the colour of water to be.
When colours are so distorted, with Orange is the new black, I guess we should prepare ourselves to see the context or the symbolism that is used to spread the message and the not the colour of the wrapping used. But unfortunately, the wrapping has wrapped us for so long & deep, we started living with the blues.
A man who speaks must tell the source of his spoken words. Here is the link, and portraying contexts can be convenient too, Virar train from Churchgate (Not CST) will have different contexts on every station it stops but the human struggle is to keep the message same in all contexts.
[edited to add the link of source on the word “source”]
LikeLike
Well said buddy!
Notwithstanding what the Bearded Preceptor says, I have a (wholly unfounded) belief that stories start off simple, and add complexity… and not the other way round. e.g. a story may start off with a description of a good archer firing normal arrow… then change to of an archer with superhuman skills, firing thousands of arrow per second… and then the archer having weapons-of-mass-destruction in the form of arrows, with the storyteller making the story more and more fantastical, mostly to hold the fickle attention of his audience. So the “blue” colour could be about aura’s and such like, or even due to the individuals being of off-world provenance with their blood being based on copper rather than iron based active cell (yes there IS such a theory).
But may be… may be it is as simple as assign a color however fantastical, but not the color which you have been telling your audience is of the Others.
Again, as a story is meant to pass on the message… I chose this story of the past to pass on a message of the present… and possibly a better future.
AND… board the slow train at CST, change at Dadar. Just because it is not direct, does not mean that there is no way. In life, in thoughts and in Mumbai local travel!
Oh… and I shifted the link in your message of the Youtube video behind a word, openable as a new tab. Hope that’s ok!
LikeLike
Damn interesting. For this statement:
“explain away a skin colour which could not be ignored, but could not be condoned as a natural skin colour for someone who is “good”.”
It’s obviously a puny explanation of the sort that you need to give, when you cannot really speak the truth. Isnt it more likely though that it isnt a puny explanation of the skin colour, but of the man, or his, let’s call it ‘unusual personal traits’, that could neither be ignored but nor obviously could be condoned or accepted in the mainstream either? A man of ‘pride’, too politically powerful to be jeered at, but completely unacceptable to be made a role model of? What do you think?
LikeLike
Nice! Let’s have a long talk someday. I still wait for the Kaikeyi story!
The way history is “refashioned” (not using the word “distorted” here) is based on what is acceptable in the present. A quick example not in the epics (yet). Say there was a Head of Government, who was (i) mostly inebriated even when in the parliament, (ii) had highly racist views, (iii) advocated use of chemical warfare on civil populace, (iv) caused death of 3 million (or more) in a country under him, and (v) had proven cases of corruption (~ US$ 300,000 bribe in current value). This same historical person, based on the part he played in the last great victory his country can claim, was voted as the Greatest Ever from His Country. Initials of WC. Middle name Leonard Spencer. 😀
So may be instead of choosing the role models, history white-washes the victors (or at least the players from the side which is telling the story… so mostly the victors) and removes and/or bowdlerizes the more unsavory parts of their character, so that he/she becomes more acceptable as a role-model.
UK: He wasn’t a “mean drunk”, but “a lovable chap with quick wit… who liked his tipple”.
M Story: He wasn’t a “womanizer who used his fame to get sexual favors” he just “married the women for a night, a week, a month… and then moved on”.
IN: He wasn’t “politically naive and a bad administrator” he was a “visionary ahead of his time and delegated the day-to-day mundane tasks to others”.
The color part is too in the face, hence pointed out.
LikeLike