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: <412@crystal.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 10-Mar-85 11:44:43 EST
Article-I.D.: crystal.412
Posted: Sun Mar 10 11:44:43 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 12-Mar-85 20:33:40 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.