Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site crystal.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!uwvax!crystal!ravi From: ravi@crystal.UUCP Newsgroups: net.nlang.india Subject: Re: indians in the US Message-ID: <410@crystal.UUCP> Date: Sun, 10-Mar-85 11:38:03 EST Article-I.D.: crystal.410 Posted: Sun Mar 10 11:38:03 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 12-Mar-85 20:33:16 EST References: <1276@ut-sally.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept Lines: 72 > > i have been following, with a great deal of pleasure, the heated discussion > about india and the media. regardless of the validity of the points made, > it has brought into sharp focus many of india's problems, and more to the > point, the role of US-resident indians in resolving some of those problems. > > i'd like to see a discussion on the role of US-indians on a broader scale. > what do we perceive as our roles in the future of india? just what influence > does this perception have (as opposed to monetary, professional and other > personal factors) in our career decisions? remember, we may be small in > number, but we are a very significant part of our country's educated and, > in particular, technological manpower. Good idea! However, in the hope of first provoking some more discussion on our attitudes here, I would like to bring up again the question of what our self-perceptions are. It occurs to me that our attitudes may very roughly be grouped into three categories (or in some cases, even three stages). These seem manifest most clearly in our attitudes to the media coverage of India. I: Anger at negative coverage. More common among Indians who have spent no more than 2-3 years in this country. People who feel this way are more likely to write letters to the Editor, or give vent to their anger in the company of friends. Most likely to say "I'm definitely going back" with conviction or vehemence. Perceive this environment as very alien, and are not willing to simply make their peace with it and let things just be. When Dan Rather says "In what MAY be the largest electorate in the world..." on the news on election day, Dec. '84, they are furious. II: "Indifference" to negative coverage: More common among people who have been here longer? This attitude may often be the result of frustration with having had attitude I for too long, and may be an attempt to cope with the ensuing feelings of impotence to do anything to change the media image here. They have begun to rationalize their feelings and frustrations. When Dan Rather says "...may be the largest electorate in the world...", they attempt to laugh it off. People who feel this way are more likely to say "It doesn't really matter to me. Why should I bother myself? There's nothing one can do". At the same time, they may say "I have plans of going back", with somewhat less vehemence. Also, distance and media coverage may now have started changing their self-image. III: "Acceptance" of negative coverage: Another way of coping with frustration and impotence? Such people are may have attitude II at some point. They are most likely to say: "Now let's be objective about India. After all, there is some truth in what the media says." Perhaps they are also angry with India for giving them reason for such embarrasment. This is perhaps the most drastic way of rationalizing feelings. The stronger this attitude of "acceptance" becomes, the stronger the image of India as a sinking ship. When Dan Rather says "... may be ...", it may not make any impression at all. They are unlikely to say "I do have plans of going back" with much conviction. Clearly, self-image is not high. I don't know if this attitude is most common among people who have been here the longest. Perhaps not. In extreme cases, they are not even inclined to view India's problems in the perspective of the complexities of our society, and simply judge India on the basis of what is reported in the media. They may then say "I don't really see any hope for India". I don't know how much one's attitude changes with the length of time spent here. I know people who have been here for years and years, and still feel strongly enough to write Letters to the Editor. On the other hand, I suspect that there is some correlation between time spent here and a shift to attitude III. It would be interesting to see what the perceptions of others on this issue are. This obviously can't be a complete characterization of the attitudes of Indians here. But there may something in it. At least, that has been the reaction of other Indian friends of mine here.