Especially if given to a Mallu child whose siblings are Paul and Penelope? ;)

Anna-mol sounds pretty good to me :-)

Anna.....don't worry about the Trolls who'll insist on crapping. "Desi"ness isn't about religion, though some nuts would like the world to believe it is. Most people in India (and by this, I mean most people) don't care, really. They have much more important things to do...like earning a living....to care. I wonder why the desi's in the states care so much.

Good thing I haven't been commenting much lately... my handle probably causes ire all around. :)

And that’s when the “confusion” first reared its shitty, unwanted head. Could I be “Indian” without being Hindu?

I've had the same thought re: not speaking Hindi (and at my university, not speaking Punjabi.)

For what it's worth, long before I ever visited (or had any reason or desire to visit) India I met a disproportionate number of Keralites in San Francisco, all of whom had "Christian" names. And then the only India I did visit was Kerala itself. So such names seem as "Indian" to me as any.

Ironically, some people have assumed I'm desi because of my first name. Online only, of course - I'm blindingly pasty in real life.

Oh ! Boy ! what did I start. just to clarify -not that I can do anything now to redeem myself -I was responding to a post where I felt religious identity was being used unnecessarily.

i can throw out a " my best friend is a christian" but won't bother. ;)

I did learn a few things though

1. sarcasm is not my strong suit
2. Stay away from religion even in jest

complicated topic. hope it will spur informed rather than primitive comments. but i will say this, when i was a child, and less explicit about my atheism and lack of religious affiliation or affinity, i did get the distinct feeling that brown muslims were never muslim enough for arabs, turks or persians, and never brown enough for non-muslim (which usually meant hindus) browns. there are lots of angles to approach these identitarian issues, especially for those who espouse particular regional and universal identities simultaneously (ie; membership in a world religion and a local ethnic identity) though i think the central tendency of SM is to go broad church*...primitivism is a marginal end of the range....

* obviously there are skews in terms of who actually participates in the comments or reads, but, i don't get the feeling that anyone is explicitly excluded.

Now that the depths of my soul have been searched by the exceptionally gifted people on this blog and I have been declared a troll I ask you to read the full

post">http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/002133.html#comments>post

Also, read the post I was replying to

actually my post is

The brown muslims in South Asia are over 400 million and are the biggest single group in Muslims by far.
You would think they would be more secure in their identity.

Keralites in San Francisco, all of whom had "Christian" names.

Isn't it funny that I have exactly the opposite prob from Anna-chechi? I'm sick of people that assuming I'm Christian b/c I'm Malayalee.

Speaking of names, people assume I am a jihadi/islamic radical because of my jihadi name ;).
Speaking of jihad, I do know quite a few people(actually 2 now that I think about it) in the US who have 'jihad' as their first name.......shudders...

Cicatrix wishes to reveal the fact that she was not named after a Sex in the City character, by god, so would people please stop asking if that was her real name!

Anna,

Very moving post : must've taken a lot of courage to pour your heart out like that. Very well written and lots to think about, loved the notion of hairy monsters lurking in our inner rainforests.

I get the same reaction from people when I tell them my name is DeCruz..

"no way.. that's not your real name.."

"he's just ashamed of his Indian name"

Lord...

I did get the you-look-brown-but-your-name-doesn't-sound-so at my University by quite a number of people. I have seen a number of Chinese students taking on western names to make it easy for people - maybe thats what caused people to assume that my name wasn't my real name either.

Incidentally a lot of desi Christians(or at least Catholics) that I know of, name their kids after Saints(while others look for Biblical names) most of whom have western-sounding names. Although of late a number of them are breaking away from that tradition.

When my daughter was born last year, we gave her an American (i.e., Biblical->French->English) name. Almost everyone we know had a question or dozen about it. Desis asked what her real name was and assumed by themselves that she was named a desi name closest in sound to her real name. Others always reacted with "so you gave her an American/Anglo name? Why not a Pakistani name?"

Arent most Jewish americans have taken preety much standard "american" names as opposed to their Israeli brothers ??? In Israel you here all kinds of Hebrew name. So if the Jews did it why not us ??
Good post indeed on a very complex issue.

We all have our biases that come out in different circumstances.

these issues are so messed up. i mean, isn't it kind of strange that chinese people and african christians often think "david" is a european origin name when it is hebrew-semitic? a friend of mine was at med school and he started dating this brown chick, and he was like, "by the way, her last name is 'thomas,'" which of course told me she was probably of malayalee origin, but my friend thought it was kind of weird and couldn't move past it :)

when it comes to identity i don't think anyone owns one prima facie in any fundamental fashion. people own things by conquest, verbal or otherwise. one of my main disagreemants with saurav when he was taking issue with the perspective on this weblog is that i don't think anyone has a right to have their voice heard, they must shout and claw their way to the table. it's how it's always been, always will be.

as i have said on my blog there are a certain subset of individuals, who i identify with, who simply cut their own self-images out of formless cultural rock. i have more affinity with confucius or hume than i do with sankara or muhammad, no matter what ancestral blood and belief implies. here in the united states a substantial number of white americans have unmoored themselves from ethnic identification and mix and match aspects of their identity however they wish too. racial-ethnic minorities do not have quite the same liberties and are not given the same choice, we are slotted into a particular box. i once had a jewish origin zen buddhist tell me sternly that my family should practice hinduism not islam because they were brown (the fact that i told him i was an atheist of course made this lecture totally irrelevant to me). but i think that non-whites who want to recreate their identity need to take a step and grasp that right vocally and without compromise, without apology.

the history of the human race is about recreating yourself. i have had hindus tell me that they couldn't understand how my ancestors could leave their religion and go worship a semitic sky god, but i simply responded that it is quite likely that their own ancestors (like mine) abandoned their gods of wood and water and their small sacrifies for the hindu religion with its dichotomy between folk devotion and brahmanical ritual and philosophy, and before that they probably abandoned desert gods which had no utility in their new monsoonal homeland.

with all that being said, there aren't 6 billion individuals in the world that we can recognize. i decided to append "the_atheist" to my handle because i'm not ready to change my name and i simply wanted people to stop assuming i was muslim. it terms of conditional probabilities it is quite reasonable to assume that someone with the name "razib" will be a believer in allah, and this weblog has gotten too popular for my fame to mitigate that perception. if i do have children i am unlikely to give them first names like muhammad or fatima in part because i'd rather not have people assume my kids were muslim (perhaps if gave them the middle names "the atheist" that would help, how does muhammad t.a. khan sound?). it seems highly likely that muhammad and fatima will be "muslim" names into the indefinite future. on the other hand, if you look at a list of byzantine emperors you note that in the early 9th century you have the first ruler with a hebraic name (michael), after which this becomes a common pattern (john and michael being the dominant ones). so over time the conditional probabilities can change....

it seems highly likely that muhammad and fatima will be "muslim" names into the indefinite future

A number of Indian Christian women have Fatima as their first name. Also, women named Maria are often called Mariamma in the South which sounds a lot like Mariam (which I am presuming also has a middle-eastern influence?!)

The brown muslims in South Asia are over 400 million and are the biggest single group in Muslims by far. You would think they would be more secure in their identity.

if jews had converted to christianity and preserved their ethnic identity within the religion (ie; christians who spoke hebrew and maintained some jewish customs) i strongly suspect that non-jewish christians would have a mild inferiority complex structurally because the savior was a jew.* as it is, jews rejected jesus, and no gentile people really has a good claim as being more fundamentally christian than any other. not so with islam, the arab tribes took to islam and it seems from even the islamist literature (which is more universalist than say arab nationalism) there is an implicit understanding that the people of the prophet have a special central role in the order of things.

* there is often scholarly discussion of a conflict between jewish christian and gentile christian factions in the early church. it seems that explicitly jewish (often characterized as the church of peter and james) christians (as opposed to jewish converts to the predominantly gentile christian church) were destroyed by the roman response to the two jewish rebellions. in the case of islam, the abbassid revolt was often characterized as one of the malwalis, converts, who backed the rebellious faction because of ummayyad arab chauvinism. but in the end, even when power shifted to non-arab peoples the primacy of the arab language preserved their place in islam.

A number of Indian Christian women have Fatima as their first name. Also, women named Maria are often called Mariamma in the South which sounds a lot like Mariam (which I am presuming also has a middle-eastern influence?!)

yeah, there is overlap between "muslim" and "non-muslim names." some zoroastrians have names like faroukh, in mongolia 1/3 of the people are khans and they are all buddhist, while the vast majority of the world's khans are muslim (by a quirk of history). and of course, semitic names often have a common root, so that there are "christian," "jewish" (hebrew) and "muslim" (arabic) forms of names, though many arab christians simply use the arab ("muslim") forms. even not semitic names, like "sikander" have become islamicized, sikander being the arabicized form of the greek name alexander.

ultimate, weight of numbers matters. if all brown people named their kids "eric" and "erica" than M&M would have to change his lyrics!

oh, btw, i had a german american friend with the last name "gross." since that is a common jewish american last name he often had jews assume he was jewish. he went to a catholic school (his family was catholic btw) and he got tired of jews at his dad's country club asking him if it was hard being a jew at a catholic school.

Try being half-Mallu, having the last name of Abraham and having to explain to your non-desi friends why people in your family take their father's first name as their last. It's sometimes worse with desis who think my mom(Tamil/Kannada) is the Mallu and my dad(Mallu) is the Tamilian. But such is life.

I studied in a muslim minority (ironically, a term populary used for institutions in India where one specific group are majority in number) college in Chennai, where I used to wonder why my muslim friends have names like 'Harris'. Razib's comments gives a good explanation... Man I am awed by your knowledge. Keep up the good work.

Somewhere I read about partition --> In the good olden days when Punjab was one. Muslims used to have 'Hindu' Names and viceversa

I don't think there is an overwhelming "Hindus-only" attitude on SM, but I do think this site cultivates a certain competitiveness regarding who is more "Indian" that invariably causes people to make such comments when they have nothing to say (I count three directed at me since I started reading). I do, however, think there is a general disdain for Christians on this site, in part due to the evangelical nature of certain types of Christianity (in the U.S. and India), it's vocal alliance with the "right" (and cultural anomalies such as Bobby Jindal), and ultimately, who can claim greater minority status in the U.S. and thereby moral authority. It's a fiery mixture that seems to hit all the sweet spots here and thus, when any one of those topics come up, there's always one or two people that love to hit the "Hindus-only"-angle via wholesale condemnation of Christians (which of course include the Indian ones). I haven't seen it as much for Muslims, in part because the conversation about such a thing is so much deeper and does not bear the mantle of illegitimacy that so many people slap onto Christians due to colonialism...

Personally, it irritated me when I first started posting here to have people bring religion or my "Biblical" name into the conversation, or, just spout off about Christianity. But eventually there seemed to be no point to argue with them because the number of people that believe otherwise are greater and ultimately, I don't want to find any way to silence their comments because then there's no way to address or see the problem.

I appreciate that you brought this up, it's an interesting question to ask or consider and while there's been a lot of commentary on general attitudes, there's been only one or two directed at the specific dynamics of this site. We should discuss it as this site is pretty much a test-tube for all kinds of things and since most of are us 1st and 2nd gen. experiments...

We should discuss it as this site is pretty much a test-tube for all kinds of things and since most of are us 1st and 2nd gen.

exactly. american brown isn't going to be made in south asian studies depts, iz going to be made by people like manish, vinod, abhi, cic and anna.

as i have said on my blog there are a certain subset of individuals, who i identify with, who simply cut their own self-images out of formless cultural rock. i have more affinity with confucius or hume than i do with sankara or muhammad, no matter what ancestral blood and belief implies.

Don't mean to be "snarky" but if that is true, why spend so much time on this blog? Thats like me going on a chinese blog and insisting to everyone that I'm not chinese.

I'm not saying get out or anything like that obviously. Its just a curious phenomenon to see bloggers on desi blogs proclaim and insist they dont identify themselves as desi, etc.

one of my main disagreemants with saurav when he was taking issue with the perspective on this weblog is that i don't think anyone has a right to have their voice heard, they must shout and claw their way to the table. it's how it's always been, always will be.

whoa. are you serious? Does that philosophy apply with respect to public discourse in general? Enfranchisement? Acess to public channels of discourse/benefits?

I think we are seeing in New Orleans what every man for himself gets you.

My name is Santosh - no h in the middle, like some other people. It's how it's been since I was real tiny. Out in Texas, people drop the "h" at the end thinking it's a mistake, and take me for Mexican. Then they ask me how come I have Santos as a first name, coz it's usually a last name. So then the Brazilians come in and say that I'm Brazilian. When I tell them I'm Indian, they're real happy to find an Indian guy with a Brazilian name.

I find that it takes far too much time and results in a great deal of confusion to explain that Santosh is, in fact, an Indian name ...

And then there's that group of Desis that berate me when they hear me being called "Santos", and ask me why I'd want to change my name ... I tell em I didn't - everyone else kept doing it!

re: the mild "hinducentrism" of some commenters and such. i'm not christian, and my median attitude is mildly anti-christian,* so i'm not primed to note the bias, but i've seen it several times too, but decided not to say anything because it seemed like it would take the threads in directions i wasn't willing to follow through on with a lot of argument. but, i think, to the first approximation that being a hindu** is a sufficient validation of brown authenticity, while being a christian or muslim is not. that is, hinduism is an organic outgrowth of south asian culture, the term for indian was hindu before the rise of a large self-consciously non-hindu minority of muslims in south asia. if you are hindu there is a 99% expectation you are brown, if you are muslim there is only a 1/3 expectation you are brown, if you are christian there is a less than 2% expectation you are brown. if you are brown there is a 65% chance you are hindu, a 35% chance you are muslim, a trivial chance you are chrisitan. so, to the first approximation it makes sense that hinduism gives one a prima facie imprimatur of brown authenticity. the holy places of the hindu religion are in india, and the great events of the hindu religion occurred in india, and india is sacred ground for the hindu religion. it is not sacred for the other world religions aside from buddhism (which has a relationship to hinduism).

that being said, it seems clear that there are multiple ways one can partake of the brown american identity. neither anna or vinod are hindu, but they are enthusiastic and full participants in the social community which SM is an outgrowth of. hinduism might be a sufficient condition for brown authenticity, but it is not a necessary condition (in my opinion, i think brown amerian identity is being made, so consensus opinion will translate into fact at some point in the future).

additionally, in america hinduism is often termed by evangelical christians a cult, it is ridiculed and mocked in a fashion that is unthinkable with judaism or even islam***. i watched a 700 club show about 15 years ago where they basically argued hinduism was a demonic cult descended from the satanic religion of babylon and that it will serve as the base for the hordes of the anti-christ in the end of days. i'm not a hindu, but since i "look hindu" i've had people mock hinduism (usually evangelical christians) to my face frequently. now, i've laughed along, because i generally mock religion in general, and for every ganesh-the-elephant-god joke i will tack on a jesus-the-dead-man-on-a-stick joke, which seems to burst the jovial bubble. so it doesn't surprise me that hindus occassionally express resentment of christian browns, because christian browns have an "in" of respectability and a "brother and sisterhood in christ" with the american mainstream that hindu browns will never have with western christians. remaining hindu imposed costs during the mughal period, and to some extent it imposes costs in the united states (a hindu piyush jindal would not have been elected to congress in louisiana, catholic bobby jindal was). all browns have probably experienced racism in the united states, but at least christian and muslim browns can assert that they don't worship monkey gods and the like****, while i don't know how hindus respond to these sort of queries and jokes. all this does is explain not excuse the sort of behavior that breaks out on these message boards.

i don't think there are black and white answers. i've heard brown evangelicals ridicule hindus in vile terms, and if i had a penny everytime brown muslims would talk about how dirty hindus were i'd be rich. this isn't all muslims or christians, but the aforementioned people do call themselves the same name as people who are far more respectful.

* no one should take this personally after all, hate the sin, not the sinner!

** and sikh and jain.

*** imagine the outrage if hindu priests were sucking baby penises

**** no offense intended, i'm actually not trying to make fun of hinduism here, just imparting the tenor of the taunts i've experienced.

***** i was a member of intervarsity because i liked to debate biblical stuff and was interested in dating korean american chix, so i met some brown evangelicals who were happy to start talking shit about hindus and how they are going to india to convert the heathen, before they found out i was an atheist of muslim familial background.

Don't mean to be "snarky" but if that is true, why spend so much time on this blog? Thats like me going on a chinese blog and insisting to everyone that I'm not chinese.

my girlfriend asks me about brown shit all the time. i got tired of it, so i check this place out partly to glean the zeitgeist and pick up on the pop culture related shit so i can give her something.

oh yeah, like i said, brown is being made here. i don't have a long term stake in it (posterity and all), but i have a short term interest since my friends who are progressive and shit are interested in what being "desi" is all about and pin the label on me.

Its just a curious phenomenon to see bloggers on desi blogs proclaim and insist they dont identify themselves as desi, etc.

also, i am of the philosophy that "know thyself" doesn't actually mean just explore all the stuff that you are can relate too. it means exploring the full range of human experience, belief and passion. so yeah, i really don't get "desi" and other assorted identities on a personal-emotional level, but it is an interesting anthropological dynamic that i enjoy watching and playing out. i mean, christians are always confused as to why i read so much of the bible and know church history, chinese people want to know why i know chinese history, scandinavians why i know so much about asatru (if they know what asatru is), neo-pagans why i know so much about lage paganism, and so forth. this is no different.

i hope you can get a grip of that sort of mentality :)

oh yeah, and of course manish and vinod are friends.

Hi razib:

I like your reference to the Socratic counsel (know thyself). Can you say that your wish to study these various and (seemingly) disparate disciplines is motivated by this?

Also, since I have children, I want to offer a bit of counsel of my own. Don't give them the middle name "the atheist." The unintended consequences will be more than even your impressive learning can surmise.

Enjoyed reading your thoughts on this topic.

Anna,

The man who, on learning your name, does not genuinely express his delight and tell you it is beautiful, has yet to learn the basics in life.

When appreciation is the simple appropriate response, inquisitiveness is stupid.

From my "honky bitch" perspective (sorry, did anyone else see Dishad Husain's short film on C4 last night?) ;) with no defined culture in need of preservation, I've always kinda dug seeing "mixed-up" names. I've known plenty of Chinese and Korean-Americans with English first names. Heck, I've met several blondes named Maya, and I bet no one asks them what their real names are. This morning I was reading about these child computer geeks, one of whom has what I think is the perfect Brit Asian name -- Piers Sharma. (yes yes, I'm sure Piers is French, but here it seems posh English)

We're globalized now, baby! Pick and choose! Eat your enchiladas, wear your cholis and jeans, listen to Arabic rai rap and name your kids Kwan Yin or London. ;)

Can you say that your wish to study these various and (seemingly) disparate disciplines is motivated by this?

my interest in religion is definitely motivated by inability to comprehend how intelligent people could believe in such things. interestingly, i just read the synoptic gospels + john in the past few days, and i came away even more baffled on an emotional level (especially the gospel of john).

re: the name maia/maya, it has indian and greek antecedants. i actually knew about the greek goddess before i found out my mother has a cousin by that name :)

my interest in religion is definitely motivated by inability to comprehend how intelligent people could believe in such things.

Razib,

I want to understand your answer.

You are more motivated by learning about the other/s, than about yourself? Is it possible to "know thyself" through investigation of the other? This is not a merely quizzical line of inquiry. I am interested in your answer based on your experience and not on the kinds of data (very valuable) you disseminate in the course of a discussion.

If I'm pressing here, please forgive the discourtesy.

re: the name maia/maya, it has indian and greek antecedants. i actually knew about the greek goddess before i found out my mother has a cousin by that name :)

Perhaps you know that Ananda Coomaraswamy is very good on this (cross-pollinization/parallel philosophical developments between/in India and Greece). If you can get your hands on the three volume selected papers ed. Roger Lipsey (Bollingen)you will have a mine of information.

"american brown isn't going to be made in south asian studies depts, iz going to be made by people like manish, vinod, abhi, cic and anna."

Razib,

That one sentence got my interest like nothing else I have read on this site did. (I have been reading it for days now)

That is owning up to a wonderful responsibility and is very encouraging.

This is indeed a wider thought than I read in most other posts/articles.

Am curious about one thing though. In your view, does the identity of American Brown (I have no experience of what that means) differ from that of an Indian?

I am not sure how you (and your friends here) perceive the difference.

That difference (or similarity) may be key to many things.

Am very interested in knowing how you perceive these differences(or similarities) as related to desis from desiland(namely India)

To add to it, what takes precedence in defining the Brown American identity, the similarities or the differences, or both?

(Warning: some logical landmines ahead.)

Sumita, (in all sincerity.)

"Could I be “Indian” without being Hindu?"

The answer is very obvious, from your blog and people's experiences.

Similarly, in Bush's America, many people ask the question whether it is possible to to be American without being a Christian or a caucasian. They use the constitution ((and American History) to arrive at the answer.

Am interested in knowing how you arrive at the answer. That process is of grat significance

Sumita

Sumita,
It depends on how you define 'Hinduism'.
Hinduism is India's cultural identity, not national and certainly not political. You simply cannot shake off the cultural aspect no matter what religion you follow. As a St. Thomas/Syrian Christian I can tell you that aspects of Hinduism is found in our religion too, ask the Moslems of Indian and they will tell you the same.

Anna,
I had the same exp. "So are you Jacob or Joseph?"
The easy option would have been to do what the rest of the family did, call your self, PC Thomas or PJ Joseph etc.. The more difficult option would have been to go back to your Syriac name, as in Chruch like 'Chacko' or 'Ousep' etc. followed by the family name.

"Could I be “Indian” without being Hindu?"

For 's sake, why not?

Annakutty dear, regardless of what you call yourself now or at any other time, we all love you :)

I am getting a bit exasperated at this particular line of discussion, we seem to be building up yet another divisive wall within us brownies (as if there weren't enough already).

And did I say what my current religious affiliations are?

Salsa dancing. Yes. I'm a total Salsa evangelist. I shall spread the Salsa gospel in India when I visit this winter. Methinks some fellow SMers shall not complain :)

i don't have a long term stake in it (posterity and all)

Will you kill yourself if your kids turn out to be more brown than you are ;)

Jacob

I am interested in knowing how Anna defines herself.
Her distinction(I may be entirely mistaken here) between religious and cultural identities was not very clear to me.

Your response is very clear and makes a lot of sense to me. However, as you will soon discover,(after your post) there are those who will disagree with you vehemently.

This disagreement is of interest to me. It is not as simple as it seems

Sumita

Razib wrote: the name maia/maya, it has indian and greek antecedants

I always thought it was Indian and, like, I dunno, Aztec or something. :) Some googling gives me definitions and baby name sites claiming it's also Spanish, Russian, German, Hawaiian and Japanese! I'm sure there'd be more if I kept looking. :)

There's a girl's name that's spelled the same in Hindi and Celtic (but pronounced differently) that I'm saving up should I ever manage to have any half-brown babies, some day in the distant faraway future. ;)

There's a girl's name that's spelled the same in Hindi and Celtic (but pronounced differently)...

Kiran/Keiran?

No, I'm not telling you, I'm saving it! :) That's interesting, but not the one I'm thinking of. Of course now I'm curious how many there might be...I remember being surprised that me and my Indian friend both have younger brothers named Neal/Neil.

Freckled and proud

"Maya" as in the aztec reference is not the same as the others. First of all, Aztec and Maya are regional manifestations of probably the same civilization(by one theory) which had Asian origins. Some accounts also localize this migration from South East Asia. (this is unconfirmed but wonder what genetic data would bring up)

But Maya in this regard actually stands fo Ma-ja(thats how its really pronounced) which stands for "me no more." When the Spanish burnet their manuscripts, the mayans exxclaimed this, thereby creating an identity. Before this they did not identify themselves in any other collective form other than tribes.

Its interesting an external aggression created a (non) identity.

This history lesson was a recent benefit of a decadent caribbean vacation (and resulatant research). Could not resiste the urge to share it.

Sumita

No, I'm not telling you, I'm saving it! :)

I remember being surprised that me and my Indian friend both have younger brothers named Neal/Neil.

Yes.. I have a cousin Neal too. I know of at least one Maia with no sepia ancestry incidentally.

Unfortunately my name doesnt cross the divide so well - I could put it in greek - that would be Ouranos - sky, water etc. - still the same. And no... Uranus doesnt quite do the same thing. :-)

desi is as desi does.

anyway, anna, out of curiousity, why was the ISA at UC Davis banned? what'd they do?

anyway, anna, out of curiousity, why was the ISA at UC Davis banned? what'd they do?

what a truly rare group of brown people this is, that no one has asked about THAT yet. ;)

i *heard* that the ISA was banned in the spring of '92 b/c of the mini-riot which went down after the fashion show at "India Night" that year. apparently, one of the models walked down the runway, pulled an Indian flag out of his pocket, threw it on the ground, spat/stomped on it and then screamed "Khalistan Zindabad!" or similar.

the other version of the story is that he pulled out some type of "Free Khalistan" banner or flag (?) and started chanting before being, ahem, removed from the stage. no matter which version is true, a mad melee resulted. damage to facilities due to desi drama meant that Davis would ban ISA until my Senior year (1995-96).

i participated in Bhaisakhi night and wore my first lengha ever in '93 or '94, in a fashion show where i had to walk down the aisle with Cami Bains. 5'10, aquamarine eyes and pale golden skin. truly Yuba City's foine-est. lucky me. ;) suuuure. put me next to the most gorgeous girl in the show, i'm just an insecure, scrawny (5'6, 110 lbs) 18 year-old who's hoping her Dad doesn't catch her strutting about in a black northie outfit when she's allegedly "studying". ;) that was my one "cultural" event from my freshman year until the mid/end of my senior year.

Why Bhaisakhi? it was the only place where i was "welcome". i got filed under "Sikh" after the Indians at UCD bitterly divided down Hindu/Sikh lines, apres the disaster of 1992. oh, and it was not b/c i was monotheistic; it was b/c my college sweetheart was a hulking Jat. that and since i wasn't Hindu, the overwhelmingly north indian population at school weren't quite sure what to do with me. for a while, i might have been the only mallu/christian among the brown kids at davis. mind-blowing, right? silly, trifling, college drama. sigh. :D

the Khalistan issue was huge back then, all the punjabi boys i knew had pictures of the victims of "police brutality" up on their walls, with the words "never forget" scrawled on them, bumper stickers which shouted "India out of Khalistan!" etc. now you know where i got the title for my last post. ;) Davis was full of Sikhs, since it's the closest UC to Yuba City and it's the only Ag school in the UC system. (once upon a time, davis was uc berkeley's farm school. go bears!) we had all the scions of Yuba City farming/central valley orchard/vineyard empires there, studying ag econ or enology.

by the time i was a senior, the rabidly-pro-khalistan jat sikh kids i mention above had all either graduated or transferred. in '96 the ISA/ICA was back and that stupid, imaginary line between hindu and sikh kids had vanished. thanggod.

There's a girl's name that's spelled the same in Hindi and Celtic (but pronounced differently)...

Anita/Anita?

I work for an MNC headquartered in the USA. People call me 'manju'(fullname Manjunatha) without much difficulty(though Chinese find it hard to pronounce). However, my colleague being 'manu', people generally get confused with our names while writing or addressing. Just other day, my manager asked me to change my name(it was teleconference and I'm not sure whether she was really serious). Couple of years back my Korean manager advised me to change my name to some Western sounding name so that whole world would be comfortable with it. So I started wondering about my Western name(or Christian?). And I found it. Till now I was using first half of my name as my nickname. How about using the later half, 'natha'. Add another 'n'. Nathan. Oho! You see nobody can question my Indianness as Nathan is an Indian(mostly Tamil) name. Nathan is a Western name too. But I suppose not very common.

Trivia: Manjunatha is quintessentially a kannadiga( Kannada speaker)name. Since linguistically I'm a Malayalee, by Malayalee convention it should be 'Manjunathan'. So actually, I don't have to add that extra 'n'. No change at all. Shiva would be really pleased to know that one of his names can be used very harmoniously with two cultures.

There's a girl's name that's spelled the same in Hindi and Celtic (but pronounced differently)...

you should've never posted this, now EVERYONE is going to try and guess it and it's going to drive them (and me) nuts. ;)

There's a girl's name that's spelled the same in Hindi and Celtic (but pronounced differently)...

It is Tara isn't it?

also, i am of the philosophy that "know thyself" doesn't actually mean just explore all the stuff that you are can relate too. it means exploring the full range of human experience, belief and passion.

i hope you can get a grip of that sort of mentality :)

Does...not...compute.... You mean to say there is life outside desi-ness?!

hehe

Siobhan is pronounced like Shivan(i) which is infinitely prettier but the bastards don't have in their database.

There's a girl's name that's spelled the same in Hindi and Celtic (but pronounced differently)...

hm, a girl's name. Then Surajananranganathan is out...

Great post, Anna. Reminded me of the first time I encountered the confusing (and for a little kid, a bit scary) "What's your ***real*** name" barrage. All thanks to my Malayalee parents' decision to give me a very Celtic-sounding name (no, it's not Tara - that would have been confusing on many levels!).

You poor little desi yuppies. How you are being victimized and the world doesn't seem to care.

Thank god you at least have a blog to discuss these neanderthals who assume you are this or that. How dare someone assume you belong to a particular religon just because 85% of the people from that country belong to that religion. And how cruel of them to even ask the question. Don't they realize that it might leave an indelible mark on your tender psyche. After all you want to be accepting of everyone and everyting but these guys are just too rude.

And some of them are even your own kind! Well , some people in the desi community do change their names to more western sounding names, but don't they realize that you are not one of them.

Get out your BMW and have a frappucino from the nearest starbucks.

"Could I be “Indian” without being Hindu?"

'course you can. I've been one all my life. Here in Mumbai, most people dont give a shift. Most of the guys in my basketball team - St.Peter's Flying Apostles, are Hindu. They celebrate Christmas with me,heck, some of them can sing 'A man will live for ever more...' better than me.

Hi to everyone at SM.

A number of Indian Christian women have Fatima as their first name. Also, women named Maria are often called Mariamma in the South which sounds a lot like Mariam (which I am presuming also has a middle-eastern influence?!)

Duh, that's because of the vast amount of tradition shared by Muslims, Jews and Christians. Most of the characters of the OldTestament are metioned in Isalm traditions too - eg: Abraham/Ibrahim. Jacob/Yakub. Joseph/Yusuf. Adam/uh, Adam. Ishmael/Ismail. They are all 'Nabi's (prophets) in Islam. Heck, Jesus is also considered a 'Nabi' - Isa Nabi.

And yes, Anna, Im a Mallu Catholic who has an Indian ( not necessarily Hindu) first name. Okay, it's Ajith. My second name is, like all true-blue Mallus', my father's first name, which is a Biblical name. Since I came over here and has started mingling mostly with North Indians, I face this *smirk* Is he really Indian? *smirk* thing a lot. This was never a problem back in Kerala, which has only actually 23% Christians, ( Whatever else I hate abt the place, I have to say Mallus are the best in terms of rligious tolerance. Seems like its not gonna last, tho) or Bangalore, where I used to work. I have to say that most Hindus do think that you have to be Hindu to be Indian. But hey, we Xtians have it a lot better than the Muslims. A lot of Hindus truly believe that they belong only in Pakistan.

Heh, what about names that don't give you a clue about gender? The number of times that I've had folks send me email that starts with:

Dear Ms. Madhu

that leads immediately to an exchange in which folks are informed that Madhu is as gender neutral as you could want it to be. And more often than not, desis get it wrong.

people never know how to pronounce my full name, so i cut it to its appearing version...and people still pronounce it wrong.

i hear the violins...for my problem

i'm going to cry, while driving my bike to the public bus, and then the public metro to my low-paying job....and then i'm going to steal my co-worker's tea bags and drink tea with DC tap water....yes, because this is one of the only way my concerns with my name are legit.

man.

Could I be “Indian” without being Hindu?

I have the exact opposite problem, that is, can I be Hindu without being Indian?

I have been informed (by peoples of all hues) on many an occasion that I can not.

Never mind that "Indian" is a national identity (and that too a colonial construct*) I don't identify with, never mind that when my ancestors left the sub-continent there was no "India," never mind that I'm third generation BORN in East Africa.

Am I desi/South Asian (or just plain Asian in some circles)? Yes. Hindu? Check. Gujrati, even? Check. I am also Kenyan (not African), East-African Asian, and both fiercely so :)

The question here is that in this increasingly global world, where individuals/families migrate multiple times in the span of a few generations, can we really be tying ourselves down to identities that aren't as fluid as our lives, or as diverse as our names? How many times do we/can we hyphenate our identities before it becomes ridiculous? Am I now Kenyan-American? Does that make me African-American (I think it's a loaded term that I have no right to claim, not to mention that most immigrants from Africa (black, brown or white) will name their respective countries, not the continent as their identity marker).

I grew up celebrating Eid and Diwali with the same gusto. I went to Catholic school, sang hymns (that I still remember), went to mass and took communion (gasp, shock, horror!! The priests and nuns never told us we couldn't/shouldn't, and we assumed it was like prashad, food blessed by God, to be eaten by all). My friends (or all religious persuasions and hues) and I could never understand why adults who did not live in India or Pakistan (and had no real connections with either country) felt the need to divide up in support of these countries based on religion...

Identity is such a complicated thing. Made more so as people traverse the globe in search of their fortunes. I wonder what people will say when I name my first girl Ayesha Nyashie**? What will they make of her? Identity politics on a whole 'nother dimension.

/random musings
*The argument can be made here that Kenya is also a colonial construct, but it's one I CAN identify with.

**Nyashie is a Luo*** name

***Luo is a tribe in Kenya

Will you kill yourself if your kids turn out to be more brown than you are ;)

honestly, if i stay with my current gf she is much more likely to inculcate brownness in them than i am because it seems likely she'll be the one interested in teaching them bengali (she's good with languages and has learned some bengali, and i speak baby bengali anyway*). so i'll have her to blame! but as long as they don't go get religious i doubt i would care too much about what identity they created.

You are more motivated by learning about the other/s, than about yourself? Is it possible to "know thyself" through investigation of the other? This is not a merely quizzical line of inquiry. I am interested in your answer based on your experience and not on the kinds of data (very valuable) you disseminate in the course of a discussion.

chris, it's a hard thing to say, i'm not a particularly introspective person :) i also have a somewhat underdeveloped "theory of mind" so i tend try to understand people by systemetizing their outward behavior and identifications (ie; i can't intuitively make character judgements based on speech, manners, etc. very well). humans are social creatures. operationally i'm an egoist, but that egoism is not really relevant outside of a social context. like many people i'm a bit strange, so i've learned i can't naively extrapolate from myself to the rest of the world to model things, i have to ask, read and observe people around me. humans are embodied in social reality, i might personally not under evangelical christianity and find most apologetics and religious experiences a ludicrous waste of time, but as an american it has great salience for my life and i meet people who identify as such, so i take an interest so that i can understand what they are trying to say when they talk to me.

* she's a person who was happy that the beilstein organic chemistry reference was in german because it would make people learn other languages!

here is census india's report on the % of christians per state. kerala is 19% christian.

here are the % of some north indian states

haryana 0.1%
dehli 0.9%
rajasthan 0.1%
uttar pradesh 0.1%
bihar 0.1%

i think the trivial frequencies in these states explains the north vs. south divide on whether "christian indians are really christian." the syrian christians of kerala have a 1500 year history...certainly it is offensive and ludicrous to ask if they are "indian" after all this point, but, north indians' reflexive association algorithms have been feed indian != christian because of statistical realities.

Razib, you sure you don't have Asperger's?? :)

Razib, you sure you don't have Asperger's?? :)

well, that syndrome is all over the place diagnostically. but in general, i don't think so, i'm really outgoing and i get along with people and i am really good at maintaining the illusion that i'm a mundane :) ie; i don't have "marked deficiencies in social and communication skills," only in very close relationships do my peculiarities manifest themselves. if you want me to be precise, i have serious difficulties with empathy, and one reason i do well in social situations is that i'm very unself-conscious and the only person whose opinion matters to me is me. to give an exemplary contrast, when someone dislikes my gf she tells me that she wonders what it is about her that person X might dislike. i don't get this, my first response when someone dislikes me and i find out about it is to simply confront person X, utter a stream of profanities and invective and simply assume they are jackasses for not liking me and of course i never speak to them again. i'm told that my behavior is atypical. for me "self-esteem" is a pretty plain tautology.

btw, as i've said several times that "american brown is being made here," it might be interesting if SM had an online symposium on the topic with the people making that identity. mostly to make things more explicit in my opinion and have an easy link for those not in the know, i think that a lot of people get into arguments precisely because they have different ideas in their head and are talking past each other.

I was just teasing you Razib :)

I was just teasing you Razib :)

and in the process added a data point for aspergers, huh? :)

I was genuinely and sincerely curious.

and in the process added a data point for aspergers, huh? :)

*cough!*no, me?*cough!!*not at all!*cough!* ;)

"american brown isn't going to be made in south asian studies depts, iz going to be made by people like manish, vinod, abhi, cic and anna"

nice, great to see the revolution is taking the form of an artificial counterweight to academic pettiness. wow. let it rain!

american brown is being made here

hi, long time reader, first time writer. love the blog.

just a question for the southies out there that have lived with this "father's first name is my last name" deal. my husband, a southie, and i are expecting our first child and were wondering whether to continue this tradition. over the course of his life (and even prior to it), the family name has changed several times due to immigration and other reasons, so we are not particularly attached to it. plus, the last name gets confused with an american boy's name - nathan (which is understandable, but annoying since everyone assumes the first name is nathan and the last name is the obscure indian name). since the whole nathan thing gets confusing, and since i love my husband's first name, why not just give the first name as my child's last name? any thoughts? just want to know if a child can adjust well to the tradition being raised in america, or if it will be just as annoying as keeping the last name as nathan.

american brown is being made here

Did you mean this blog?

He means right here at our headquarters. We've got a beryllium laser, a belt sander, some beer and some members of the opposite sex. That's all it takes ;)

He means right here at our headquarters. We've got a beryllium laser, a belt sander, some beer and some members of the opposite sex. That's all it takes

We in the poorer parts generally leave out the laser and the belt sander. No issues with the beer and members of the opposite sex.

as someone who played tecmo bowl, i remember a football player named tony nathan. i don't think nathan is that strange at all, there are people with messed up german and polish names that don't anglicize them. you can do a yahoo people search or something for last names like nathan, they even show up in idaho (i looked).

and some members of the opposite sex.

Get Mirza to infuse the gene pool

I'm not south indian but tamils in sri lanka do the same thing, i dont plan to though, i dont see the point

oh and chai theres one plus about having a hard name, teachers never call on you in class

oops, the above was in response to niralis question about name switching

kenyan Desi --> Your situation is much simillar to Teresa Heinz Kerry, Portugese by origin, born in Mozambique, went to college in South Africa, later became the famous wife of John Kerry. Well does that make her an African American being a white. Will she accept such a tag with her name ?

How about Whites from South Africa, do they like being called African Americans, if they are in America.

I am sorry, if I am deviating from the topic...kind of curious...like to have some inputs on this...

just a question for the southies out there that have lived with this "father's first name is my last name" deal. my husband, a southie, and i are expecting our first child and were wondering whether to continue this tradition. over the course of his life (and even prior to it), the family name has changed several times due to immigration and other reasons, so we are not particularly attached to it. plus, the last name gets confused with an american boy's name - nathan (which is understandable, but annoying since everyone assumes the first name is nathan and the last name is the obscure indian name). since the whole nathan thing gets confusing, and since i love my husband's first name, why not just give the first name as my child's last name? any thoughts? just want to know if a child can adjust well to the tradition being raised in america, or if it will be just as annoying as keeping the last name as nathan.

Many tamilians take their fathers first name as last name. Back in the day, the grandfather usually had a longish first name like govindarajan, muralinathan, thiagarajan etc. the father has a longish last name. But nowadays many people have short first names like Rajesh, Kartik, Murali, Prabhu etc. Thus, kids nowadays have two short names - their first name, dad's short first name. ex. Rajesh Mani, Murali Kartik, etc. Some people retain just the nathan part or the un-nathan part (keep nathan or murali last name instead of keeping the whole muralinathan)

Am curious about one thing though. In your view, does the identity of American Brown (I have no experience of what that means) differ from that of an Indian?

I am not sure how you (and your friends here) perceive the difference.

That difference (or similarity) may be key to many things.

Am very interested in knowing how you perceive these differences(or similarities) as related to desis from desiland(namely India)

To add to it, what takes precedence in defining the Brown American identity, the similarities or the differences, or both?

I'm surprised that no one (including Anna, razib) has responded to this.

It seems to be central. The questions are composed with the sophistication (not sophistical, however)of a professional interviewer conversant with the issues.

Is anyone willing to treat this line of inquiry?

chris, it's a hard thing to say, i'm not a particularly introspective person :) i also have a somewhat underdeveloped "theory of mind" so i tend try to understand people by systemetizing their outward behavior and identifications (ie; i can't intuitively make character judgements based on speech, manners, etc. very well). humans are social creatures. operationally i'm an egoist, but that egoism is not really relevant outside of a social context. like many people i'm a bit strange, so i've learned i can't naively extrapolate from myself to the rest of the world to model things, i have to ask, read and observe people around me. humans are embodied in social reality, i might personally not under evangelical christianity and find most apologetics and religious experiences a ludicrous waste of time, but as an american it has great salience for my life and i meet people who identify as such, so i take an interest so that i can understand what they are trying to say when they talk to me.

Hi razib,

What you are describing here is not the Socratic "know thyself." You should be aware of this since you quoted the exhortation. In fact the Socratic process probably describes the opposite - renunciation of knowingness.

Introspection is a psychological behavior. Self knowing includes but is not limited to this. It also includes the soma (since I am a classically trained musician, I have spent a lifetime acquiring this kind of knowing), the emotions, and being.

You might be interested to read the American philosopher Charles Taylor on this. In Sources of the Self he discusses identity via social knowing with insight.

very best,
Christopher

"There's a girl's name that's spelled the same in Hindi and Celtic (but pronounced differently)..."

Sheila?

like many people i'm a bit strange,

razib,

In my view, this is the starting point for self-knowing, not any organized or systematized body of external inputs (helpful, necessary, limiting).

just a question for the southies out there that have lived with this "father's first name is my last name" deal. my husband, a southie, and i are expecting our first child and were wondering whether to continue this tradition. over the course of his life (and even prior to it), the family name has changed several times due to immigration and other reasons, so we are not particularly attached to it. plus, the last name gets confused with an american boy's name - nathan (which is understandable, but annoying since everyone assumes the first name is nathan and the last name is the obscure indian name). since the whole nathan thing gets confusing, and since i love my husband's first name, why not just give the first name as my child's last name? any thoughts? just want to know if a child can adjust well to the tradition being raised in america, or if it will be just as annoying as keeping the last name as nathan.

Nirali-

As far as I know, other than Tamil Brahmins who use “Iyer” or “Iyengar” as a last name, most Tamilians have one name preceded by initials. Depending on which caste you belong to, the initials usually denote your place of origin and/or father’s name, grandfather’s name etc. As you pointed out, when migrating it sometimes becomes necessary to have a last name because it is the norm, so a lot of Tamilian families, mine included, just take the father’s first name as a last name (my dad’s name is “Muthiah, so now our family name is “Muthiah”). I guess my point is that I don’t think its a traditional thing (I could be wrong). As far as adjusting to having your father’s name as a last name in the US, I’m not sure how that works, but from my experience from living in Australia and PNG, it didn’t really make a difference, people just thought my dad’s name was Muthiah Muthiah.

Also a long time reader who just popped my writing cherry – nice blog.

thanks for the comments on the nathan last name thing.

my issue with the last name is that my husband and i pronounce it "naa-than" - the way it is meant to be pronounced, but here, people will pronounce it "nai-than". like i said, it is understandable that people assume it is pronounced "nai-than" in this country, but i think eventually i will feel sad when my kids start referring to themselves as 'rahul "nai-than"', or whatever first name we decide on, simply to make it easier on themselves.

i know many eastern europeans names are not anglicized, and i like that they retain their own spelling/proper pronunciation. it makes the whole immigration experience more real.

i don't want to anglicize our last name either. it may seem like a small thing to most people, but the meaning and ancestry of the name is lost when it is pronounced improperly. regardless of whatever intermixing that may happen in the future generations of our family, it would be nice to realize the last name has a tamil ancestry. for this reason we thought if we followed the southie tradition of giving my husband's first name as the kid's last, the name that will be retained for generations (if the southie tradition is no longer followed) would have a more authentic link to the subcontinent.

Am curious about one thing though. In your view, does the identity of American Brown (I have no experience of what that means) differ from that of an Indian?

hmm..it's a loaded question, though asked innocently enough. I think no one wants to tackle it for fear of triggering yet another ABCD vs. FOB (NRI vs. Resident?) debate.

Here's my thought on the matter:
I'm Sri Lankan, not Indian. There's a difference, and one that I'm sure the Pakistani and Bangladeshi readers/lurkers here will appreciate.

I lived in SL for 13 years before moving to the US, and remember thinking, when my 'American brown' cousins came to visit, that they were Sri Lankan by virtue of their parents only. Now after living in the US for a long time, I can't honestly call myself Sri Lankan in the way that I used to...I've adapted to my new home. It's changed me.

A direct, "this is the difference/there is no difference" answer is impossible. But I think, if anything, that American Brown means a sort of across-the-board South Asian acceptance. (Hold the outrage until I'm done? thanks!)

I know more about the subcontinent now than I ever did while living a sneezing distance away from it. And the Indian-American kids I've met seem to know quite a bit more about Sri Lanka, in turn, than Indian FOBs. So that's one pretty great thing about American(and Brit! let's not forget our Euros) Brown-ness. But yeah, given the variety of influences, American Brown means not knowing all the details that come from living in India (or Pakistan/Banglades/SL). It's filtered through lenses - parents, America, visits and trips back and the memories each generated. It can be more detached. It can be cluelessly (ahem) rabid.

In short,I don't think it's an identity tied to a location as much as that of the person living in India.

Much has been said and argued about this question, from name-calling here to academic conferences, but the bottom line is that this is all murky. Who can judge another's identity? We all know how we view ourselves, and would prefer others to view us. And that really is the only certainty. Although maybe some of us are confused. And visit SepiaMutiny for answers :)

Roger: Well, I'm not... I'm not at all surprised they feel that way.
Phoebe: You're not? See, that's why you're so great!
Roger: Actually it's... it's quite, you know... typical behaviour when you have this kind of dysfunctional group dynamic. You know, this kind of co-dependent, emotionally stunted, sitting in your stupid coffee house with your stupid big cups which, I'm sorry, might as well have nipples on them, and you're all, like, "Oh, define me! Define me! Love me, I need love!"

touché, R.S.V.N.K. Padigondla. Tou-effn-ché.

Sorry if this bores everyone, but while we're on the subject, would someone mind explaining Sinhalese naming conventions to me? (cicatrix maybe?)
When he came to the U.S., my father listed his given name as his "official" last name, and made what I thought was his last name and his "ge" name into his first and middle name, respectively. But then a couple months ago, he said that his last name was actually Perera, which was the first either I or my mother had heard of that being his surname. Then my mother started talking about how they both also had another name given to them by the town elders or something, which was distinct from the "ge" name, the ancestral name (surname?), and the given name. By the time they finished trying to explain everything, it sounded to me like they each had about five different names, half of which I had never even heard them mention before. If someone could explain all of this in terms that an ABCD could understand, I would be grateful.

Oops, I just reloaded the page, and it looks like we're not on that subject anymore, but I guess I'll post this anyway.

Anna, you could have the opposite problem, most americans dont even try to pronounce my name and then they want me to change it to something easy..Katie. I have thrown tantrums about it and my fav response is, I can say your name so you might as well learn mine! Its Kajal damn it!

as someone who played tecmo bowl

Ok, you had me there for a minute.
When you said Tecmo Bowl, my mind raced to all the teams in Pac 10 and the bowls they go to as I know you are somewhere in the North West.
Alas I find out that its a computer game and for a minute I was all impressed that our very own Razib got to play in a bowl game for the Ducks or something.
Btw does anybody know of any browns playing college football ?

ads, I think those naming conventions come from an amu Sinhala tradition that I'm too far away from, at this point, to remember very clearly. Let me try a bit now, and get back to you? Hopefully someone more linguistically inclined will have stepped in before then ;)

ge denotes possesion. Just like "mah-ge" means "mine." So X-ge, means "belonging to X".. this is pretty remarkably similiar to Tamil naming conventions if you think about it.

The ancestral name tends to indicate a town or village of origin..impossible to decipher (at least for me) in Sinhala because they're Pali (or some other older form) based. Mine, for example, has the sinhala word for "sun" clearly in it, but actually refers to some village on a stone or a rock by the water near the...honestly, my aunt, a Pali professor, tried to explain but I never remember how it ever made sense to anyone.

By the given name, I assume you mean the name parents actually get to choose. Oh wait, no they don't. The astrologer does ;)

I don't know about the town-elder bestowed name. Never heard of that one, but maybe it's a custom specific to your family's region?

Perera came from the Portuguese. They went on a naming spree and now we're got Fernandos, De Silvas, and Correas all over the place. Some families passed down their orginal names, covertly or otherwise, during the periods of colonization. But others held on to the Portuguese.

I'm sorry if I've confused you more! It's hard to figure out without the actual names, so email me if you want and maybe I could give it another crack. At least until someone who actually knows this stuff shows up to correct my mistakes ;)

Dutch last names in SL, btw, weren't handed out. They're indicative of mixed ancestry since the Dutch gave their names to any offspring with the natives. Sometimes married. So that explains any Bartolemew, Muller, Van De Whatever names you might come across.

Actually it's... it's quite, you know... typical behaviour when you have this kind of dysfunctional group dynamic. You know, this kind of co-dependent, emotionally stunted, sitting in your stupid coffee house with your stupid big cups which, I'm sorry, might as well have nipples on them, and you're all, like, "Oh, define me! Define me! Love me, I need love!"

Love (whether it is erotic, familial, fraternal, etc.) between human persons presupposes identity. (Though this needn't be a strict sequence as more personal refinements are acquired - since love requires an object in order to prima facie be - the gross presence of an indentifiable human personality is a priori.)

You were on the right track. Your conclusion/implication needs adjustment.

Your conclusion/implication needs adjustment.

You need more Friends ;)

Btw does anybody know of any browns playing college football ?

This guy is half-brown and he used to play for UCLA.

Am curious about one thing though. In your view, does the identity of American Brown (I have no experience of what that means) differ from that of an Indian?

Am very interested in knowing how you perceive these differences(or similarities) as related to desis from desiland(namely India)

After being in this blog for a week, one thing that drives everybody to this site, is that BROWNESS (oh! did I discover something new). Atleast there is something common that drives all us here. Thats a great identity. Yes be a proud brown. Even though we have so many differences, the aim of this blog is to look into our identity, know it, understand it and march forward.

Me as a desi from desiland (I like this name desiland), when I landed here for my masters, I really didnt have a clue about how to interact with my fellow countrymen from India. Me being a Tamil, never stepped that much out of TamilNadu, proud about being a Tamil, ocassional visits to Bangalore and Thirupathi. The main barrier is the language in interacting with other fellow desis. Even though I studied Hindi (courtesy: Hindi Prachar Sabha). Never had the guts to communicate in Hindi, fear of being ridculed. I took the easiest path, started moving more with Tamils. You could see a whole big Telugu group and then the hindi group among FOB's in universities. I always wanted to move with others from India. When I did move with others, my Tamil friends will look (smirk and comments) at me in a way like 'what I am doing there'. Being ridculed from both the sides, I decided that I dont want any links with any particular group. Me as an individual I am more than this language differences and decided to live my own life.

After finishing my masters, not getting any real time job, decided to venture out on my own. I moved to Ocean City, MD. Started working in Hotels, restaurants over there. Lived there for an year. Started interacting with Russians, Romanians, Estonians, Lithuanians, turkish(all those baltic countries), cameroonians, Nepalis. Yes students from all over Europe, they come to Ocean City during each summer. They work their ass of, earn money and go back to their country once the summer is over. Wow, now I really enjoyed living with new people. No language barrier. The quintessential English helped me in making new friends. Sudden respect, sudden confidence, sudden new me. Wow I loved that experience.

Now , I got my job in my area of study. Working. living with people from bombay. Interacting with people in Hindi. Even sometimes cracking jokes in Hindi One thing I learned from my Ocean City experience is look people as human beings and not as what color he is and dont try to limit him into the color boundary and by that process dont limit yourself. Explore who you are. Thats very important. Enjoy the whole experience. Thats what matters.

Am I really that boring, Sorry if I am. Just thought of sharing my experience in this wonderful blog.

Dont look at the glass, look beyond the glass

FOBish,

Man, you are not Desi (can't be), you have guts. I am sure you see things with a wider prism.

Write a blog on your Ocean City experience.

Kush,

I love reading others experiences, so that I could learn something from them.

Me writing my own blog. That a good idea...I am thinking of one...may be down the line....

Rajeev Srinivasa Venkata Narayana Krishnamoorthy Padigondla:

i would've found the "FRIENDS" quote cute and hilarious had you not been so rude earlier. no one is whining, it's just a discussion that obviously needed to occur, since we're in the triple-digit comment mark. if it's not relevant to you, move on.

nearly every brown kid who's grown up here has SOME story about their name, how it was mangled, forcibly changed, remade in to an insult, a source of joy etc. let people talk. why be such a jerk about it? also? there's nothing wrong with any car which has a little propellor in front of it. and some frappuccinos are GOOD. so there.

nirali,

I know of people who decided to have their kids' last names be their gotra names, even though they themselves did not have it as their last names.

i would've found the "FRIENDS" quote cute and hilarious had you not been so rude earlier

Did I upset you! Is it still worth continuing to live. I will figure out how to win your approval or will die trying.

let people talk. why be such a jerk about it?

Let me pose the question back to you. I thought I was also talking. Or do I have to echo excatly what others were saying. You might have a problem with my tone but I couldn't stand the self absorption froth. Yes, I could have moved on but the better angels lost out to the other side. but honestly,I do take a certain pleasure in muddying the waters.

Have a nice weekend.

chris, re: "know thyself" i was actually just making a generic allusion to the motto at the oracle of delphi, not socrates (wiki says socrates picked it up from there though).

re: brown. i'm brown cuz:

1) i look brown (how people perceive me and my genetic-historical origin).
2) i eat brown (spicier than most browns from what i can tell).
3) i have a fair # of derived brown characteristics which aren't central to my self-image and which i will not likely pass onto my children. to give an example, my muslim familial origin means that i don't like eating ham because it was always a taboo meat*, but i'm not attached to that preference (which is good, my lady has made it clear if we stay together and have kids they will eat pork chops at least once).

nevertheless, in real life (face to face) i don't really socialize with browns (there aren't that many in my area), and i've lived in 90%+ (often 99%) white areas most of my life. i subscribe to a lot of the psychologist judith rich harris' ideas in the nurture assumption, so i think peer groups are often determinative, and my peer groups were not brown, and likely won't be (at least dominantly or consciously).

brown identity formation does have some impact on my life. many people view me through a brown prism, so what brown becomes in the american mind (as browns develop a post-immigrant identity) is of relevance to me. i am concerned that it not become antagonistic to the central tendency of american culture (as i see to some extent among some of my asian american "activist" friends or among some latino "aztlan" types). but reading this weblog for the past year, and becoming a more frequenter commenter, i haven't seen much of that at all. so most of my concerns have been allayed on that angle (this is partly i think due to the higher SES skew of people around here, so there is less material alienation to serve as fodder for the fire).

i have little first order connections to or resonance with the brown popular culture motifs that many here allude too (brown books, bollywood, etc.), but i am interested as an outsider, in part because i can speak in a more authoritative fashion to my non-brown friends and acquaintances when they look to me for brown non-book learning wisdom (though i give them standard caveat that it is vicarious data, not direct experience). from an anthropological perspective it is interesting to watch people from various parts of south asia, who (or whose families) had a loose affinity with each other that was implicit be thrown together as a relatively unitary category in a land where brownness is salient in a way that it wasn't in south asia. i am curious as to what norms will come out on top, and what identity characteristics will become modal. i think in the end that the final identity, if it is not epiphenomonal, will be brown flavored american, rather than american flavored brown.

p.s. i have siblings who are 10-15 years younger than i, and one of them watches hindi films, so there is variation within my own family as regards to the centrality of brown identity characteristics.

* food taboos often crystallize early in childhood. but if a something has pork in it (like a sausage) but it doesn't seem "piggish" in texture and feel, i have no aversion to it.

razib,

"Know Thyself" is not a generic allusion. It is a direct quotation. I don't think I have to explain the difference.

But let's be generous and forget the labelling mistake.

You seem to now say that you meant to generically allude to the motto of the messenger of the God Apollo? If so, isn't that enough of a voluntary dose (via allusion or no) of mysticism to fatally toxify "the atheist" several times over?

Better to have stuck it out with Socrates - the process he innovated was rational.

You will not gain a meaningful knowledge of the ancient world through wiki.

very best,
Christopher

i've never grapled with who i was. people in my family have anglo names and i wonder how they feel. i myself have considered an anglo name as a easier way to go about things. but in my heart i know and like who i think i am, independent of anything else. my identity is a mixture of family lore, reading history, my faith as a sikh, and the general attitude of how i grew up. i am a punjabi jat sikh and i love that, and am totally comfortable with it. i may dress in whatever clothes, eat whatever food, partake in any holiday, date whoever, although i like jattis, and i will always love being a jat sikh from punjab.

i think this is similiar to udham singh or bhagat singh, who lived lives far removed from what a normative jat sikh from punjab was, but they ended up being almost part of the normative

i have never questioned who i was or where i came from, or the value of that virsa.

it gives me a chill to even type the word virsa

its not even a question of forgetting that heritage, my ma boli. even if i remember only a sentence, until my last breath thats all i need to feel those chills. i've matured regarding identity, but i will always feel chills when i think about sada desh punjab. i don't have a vision of punjab as a perfect place, it certainly is not. but it is where my blood sprang, and i may never live there again, but punjab will always live in me

i'm not jingoistic about it, and certainly i'm no chauvanist. i'd like for everyone to know and love who they are, whatever that may be, if its tied to a cultural or geographical identity or not

razib,

Maybe you can help me make the modifier "generic" fit with the noun "allusion."

Are there, in the vernacular, instances of generic allusions that could suitably presented in a rhetoric class?

Or is this a logical Loch Ness (the monster).

Allusions are indirect but their target meanings are always precise.

Since you use wiki, you might try a look at the entry for allusion.

In another post you mention an affinity with Confucius. Perhaps you know this passage:

...wanting good government in their own states, they first established order in their own families; wanting order in the home, they first disciplined themselves; desiring self-discipline, they rectified their own hearts; and wanting to rectify their hearts, they sought precise verbal definitions of their inarticulate thoughts...

from The Great Digest (translated by Ezra Pound)

emphasis added

this is in the context of ethnic identity. if there is no context of that, i try to think of myself by my acts and motivation; who i love and what i love

wow, you are a major league asshole chris. precise enough for you?

razib,

I'm quit to admit that I am(a major league asshole)and worse than that.

Since I am a father of three, you can be assured I've already received this instruction.

My infinite discredit doesn't fix your imprecisions.

Razib,

I have been watching with interest your effort to respond to Christopher, wondering if it was his non-brown name that got him the enagagement that my post didnt( I noticed we posted in sequence, but you chose to respond to only one).

Faced with the fear of logical inconsistency, the degeneration into calling names was very quick(much faster than I anticipated) This is why I (fairly) pointed out, there could be logical landmines ahead( as your logical weakness was evident to me from your initial post)

Many uninformed here seem to follow your posts, being driven by the data, not realising its vacuousness. I have been discussing/debating on the internet for many years and have never found a situation that will quickly bring out the mutinous violent streak in me. You have a long way to go Razib.

Maybe this portal is aptly named.Those who love gentle, intelligent, cogent ways of questioning their identity should rethink their participation.

Sumita

PS( Unless the 6 who run this site look into this unprovoked random emotional lashout, it may become a signature for this environment)

PPS Lest you guys think am a troll, I'd like to share am a mom of two kids,( 9 and 5 ) who is interested in writing that will help me learn what it is to grow up without an identity in the US, and how one can prevent this situation, for the sake of my kids. I am encouraged, my 9 yr old could debate this with greater vigor and more consistency and openenss than many here, and yet I humbly submit, no credit to me. Moderators, this scathing critism has been earned. There are things you must rethink.

Another point

The apppropriate response when one finds onself cornered in an intellectual discourse, is to admit one's gap graciously. It provides opportunity for both parties to learn and go one step forward( My years of experience in debating, and success in academics and worklife has taught me this)

One does not take a brick, if one is a human, and beat the other on the head. Abusive language is the internet equivalent of that animal heritage we all share. We hope to use our minds to overcome it. Hopefully, saner minds here would agree with me.

Thanks

"Unless the 6 who run this site look into this unprovoked random emotional lashout, it may become a signature for this environment"

Flaming? On the Internets? My goodness, I'm sure they'll look right into it. Please submit an F.I.R... 8-)

I have been watching with interest your effort to respond to Christopher, wondering if it was his non-brown name that got him the enagagement that my post didnt( I noticed we posted in sequence, but you chose to respond to only one).

i'm not that interested in what christopher wanted me to explore. what you see isn't an inability to respond, but a lack of engagement. and the fact is, i've seen him try to shove his own preoccupations down people's throats in abhi's thread on psuedoscience. i don't play that game.

all i take from this exchange is that greater age and children do not impart onto people wisdom as they seem unable to understand that other people might not share their preconceptions or interests. myself, i prefer harsh quick insults to patronizing puffery when i am met with the latter. but hey, a sample of 2. i won't go that far :)

the only one of your comments that made much of an impression was the one on the name maya. it wasn't chris' western name but the fact that we had previously had a long-winded exchange that made me note his comments, though i will be passing them over now.

Silly people, how are Tara and Anita and Sheila pronounced differently in the East and West?

Well, since my brown boyfriend is completely mad and will probably never give me a coffee-colored baby, I'll tell you.

Radha. In Celtic it's pronounced "row-a" and means "vision." In Sanskrit it's "rad-ha" and means "successful." Happy now? Sheeeeez. :)

oh, and

Am very interested in knowing how you perceive these differences(or similarities) as related to desis from desiland(namely India)

you can lecture me about logic, but you shouldn't take umbrage with me for ignoring you. it isn't my place to explore how i really see the differences, because regular long time readers (which you stated you weren't) will know that i am ambivalent at best to any particular 'desi' identity for myself and as i noted above i'm also pretty detached from the social realities of brown american culture. when i say that 'american brown' is being made here, i mean it is the posters and some of the other commenters who are identified with brown american culture. i'm a marginal observer, and, as you noted, i throw in facts where i think they are necessary (ie; for example, i simply went to the census india site and cited the % of christians after seeing several people throw out approximate guestimates and impressions).

Razib

Thank you for acknowledging my knowledge about Maya. It is not something which I take any credit for. Anyone with the luxury of time and resources to travel can learn this if they also have the luxury of time. I am truly fortunate and grateful to my husband for all these luxuries. I will pass on the fact you were impressed, to him. He will not care. He does not know you.
In case you missed it was sarcasm at the egoistic stance people take on data. I dont do that, though I could cite data way faster and way better than you could. Vacuity is not my occupation.

Am entirely unimpressed by your knowledge. Anything you write, any intelligent person here can google in the age of the internet( and do).Knowing data is no example of erudition. Interpreting it to understand one's reality is a first step towards knowledge. There are many other steps. You will find out when faced with a low moment, where data will be of no help. As people in New orleans are finding out.

Yes, age and having children, by themselves is of no consequence. Animals and mentally retarded people can reach that state too.I am aware of the logic and find commonality with you there. I shared my personal data to provide strength to the fact I am not a troll.Thats all. Nothing more.

I do not mean to lecture you. There is no obligaition I have on that subject, for you, or for anyone else. If you felt that way, my sincere apologies.

However, if there is something inconsistent, I do have a right, to assertively express my point of view.

Your answers would have interested me only if they exhibited any logic.

Unfortunately, that is missing.

Nice to meet you too!!

Sumita

i have serious difficulties with empathy

i'm told that my behavior is atypical. for me "self-esteem" is a pretty plain tautology.

Hate to get personal but you seem to have broached the issue so here goes...

And how is it that you maintain a girlfriend with such a healthy ego and a concomitant lack of empathy? I don't suppose she lacks any of the assertedly tautological self-esteem that you seem to exude?

i'm not that interested in what christopher wanted me to explore.

Sumita,

If you read you will see that I very deftly backed razib on to the horns of a dilemma of his own fashioning, all the more worrisome for him because it involves gods and introspective spookery and other kinds of hooey.

Now that he's run through, he feigns apathy. A corpse is not able to engage. The name calling grunt at the end was a death belch. (Why waste dying neurons on longwindedness.)

My experience in philosophical encounters is that my defeated counterparts complain of "longwindedness" and "puffery" while trying to figure out a way to lick their wounds and disguise their embarrassment.

I suppose this is razib's way of "scratching and clawing to the table". Since he's been de-clawed he better hope his competitors yield to a pitiable look.

What happened here is instructive.

Razib tried to add too much prestige to his comments by using a cornerstone phrase of western inquiry: "Know thyself". (This is what triggered my participation: his presumption) Since I know a little about this, being a student of the ancient world since childhood, I pressed him on it just a little. He showed himself to be clearly out of his depths, and instead of admitting an innocent mis-step, he made an even sillier retreat. His attempt at sophistry with the phrase "generic allusion" was actually an idiot's oxymoron worthy even of Dubbya.

Hey, there's an idea, maybe razib can get a speechwriting post at the White House. He can mumble data and improvise nonsensicals just like the guy in the chief office. He can also provide sound coaching in "operational egoism."

Until then, as a special support to him in this new endeavor, readers of SM might want to read razib's posts with that same mixture of nervous disbelief and distressed/disgusted wonder that all self-important frat-boy incoherencies evoke.

. Anything you write, any intelligent person here can google in the age of the internet( and do).Knowing data is no example of erudition. Interpreting it to understand one's reality is a first step towards knowledge. There are many other steps. You will find out when faced with a low moment, where data will be of no help. As people in New orleans are finding out.

this is the second time new orleans has come up on this thread. personally, i think it takes a lot of gall to lecture other people about logic and then interject such a contemporary tragedy into dumbass rhetorical dispute. logic my ass, look up non sequitur.

though I could cite data way faster and way better than you could.

you sound like you're seven by the way.

And how is it that you maintain a girlfriend with such a healthy ego and a concomitant lack of empathy? I don't suppose she lacks any of the assertedly tautological self-esteem that you seem to exude?

self-cultivation. what comes 'naturally' to others i have to strive toward.

Heh, what about names that don't give you a clue about gender? The number of times that I've had folks send me email that starts with:

Dear Ms. Madhu

When I was applying for jobs, I received many letters that started "Dear Mr. Maisnon" SO IRRITATING!! The worst was the "Mr." letter I received after interviewing.

Guess I made quite an impression! ;)

chris, i'm really not interested in the same things as you. you have a hard time (from the previous encounter about intelligent design) letting go of particular topics when other people don't want to address them (or you keep trying to turn them into a particular direction). you turned a offhand comment into the height of intellectual warfare.

as for all the rest, whatever. this is an important blog, but not for talking philosophy, mysticism and the plumbs of your depths. i assume most SM readers don't give a shit about my comments in the first place, so i think your coup is falling on deaf ears dude!

Nice post razib, the more you post, the more you exhibit a lack of civility.

"Logic my ass"

Is a wonderful sequiter? am not sure why undesirable parts of anyone's anatomy must feature in a discussion. Or do you think its an example of an argument that is logical? Ok then.

I have lived through a tragedy like New Orleans personally and speak through direct experience and empathy. You self admittely do not admit to that emotion.

Let it go. You are way out of your depth here.In that you will earn mine and everyone else's respect.

Sumita

I have lived through a tragedy like New Orleans personally and speak through direct experience and empathy.

well, if you lived through such a tragedy it can't be all that bad if you cheapen it by using it as a talking point on a weblog debate in the wee hours of saturday morning.

Could I be “Indian” without being Hindu?

My own 5 cents as follows:

- Despite the Persian origin of the term to describe everyone living east of the river Indus/Sindhu, "Hinduism" in its genuine context is a religion, not an ethnic, racial, or national affiliation.

- Not everyone in (or whose ancestry is from) India is necessarily either a Hindu or a Muslim. Sikhs being the obvious example. (And no, Sikhism is not a branch or subsect of the Hindu religion, regardless of what the VHP, the RSS, or certain sections of the Indian media -- like Ekta Kapoor's serials on the Star Plus cable/satellite channel -- may be repeatedly stating these days).

- Having ancestors who are Hindu does not necessarily make a person Hindu himself/herself if they or some of their more recent ancestors converted to another religion. Again, Hinduism is a religion not an ethnicity, and your affiliation to it is defined by your own religious beliefs, not your ancestry.

- Not all Muslims in or from the Indian subcontinent are necessarily descended from Iranians, Pathans, Arabs, or any other groups from Islamic-dominated regions of the world; therefore, those whose ancestors converted to Islam are as Indian as the wider Hindu majority. Those Muslims of mixed ancestry are of course Indian in the nationalistic sense and (being pedantic) partially-Indian in the ethnic sense; it depends on how long a person and his/her descendents have to live in India until you regard them as being Indian.

- Even if the bigoted types still repeat that only Hindus are Indians because Hinduism is geographically Indian in origin (unlike Islam and Christianity) and has the strongest cultural influence on Indian society, that still doesn't address the question of people belonging to other indigenous faiths such as Sikhism, Jainism, or Buddhism.

- In a nationalistic sense, none of us living outside India are technically "Indian" (especially those of us born here), but it is of course perfectly possible for such individuals to be Indian in the ethnic sense (and yes I know Indians are not a homogeneous ethnic/racial group, I'm speaking generally). It depends on which context one is using the term "Indian", ie. nationality or ethnicity/ancestry.

I guess I'm partially paraphrasing Razib's post #30, but this is my own stance on the matter anyway.

Razib : Regarding the ego and lack-of-empathy issue...

Control your ego and the empathy will come naturally, especially as you subsequently become more sensitive to your, well, own sensitive emotions (including the more painful emotions which can make some people feel uncomfortably vulnerable). Simultaneously make an effort to feel warmth and compassion towards others, both people you know/meet and people in general.

Ego and empathy are two diametrically-opposing forces. Subdue the former and the latter will come to you.

Please note, I am making a distinction between "ego" and "self-confidence/self-assurance". The former, especially when it crosses the line into arrogance, is both self-destructive (it can severely distort one's judgement and clarity of thought, along with fanning the flames of such negative emotions as anger/rage, jealously etc) and can also wreak havoc on the people around you.

Also bear in mind that lack of empathy (coupled with lack of remorse for one's malicious actions) is a key symptom of a psychopathic mental disorder -- by no means am I saying you are a psychopath (far from it !), and I do enjoy reading your posts as many of them make a lot of sense -- however, it would be wise to take action before drifting too far in that direction. Ego is a dangerous drug, and the violence of human history is a testament to those who have become addicted to it.

well, since i'm here, and will put my google-powers to use!

i think one should be cautious of creation axiomatic definitions of what X is. my personal impression is that hinduism blurs the boundaries between religion and nationality. i know people who eat beef and are atheists who reject an afterlife who identify as hindus. to me, that sounds ludicruous, but who am i to say that they aren't hindus? i think if enough people assert hinduism as a cultural-ethnic identity, than it is. if not, than it isn't. certainly something can be a religion and an ethnicity, judaism being the archetype, but shintoism and now zoroastrianism fall into the same operational category.

re: muslims, the highest bound for genetic ancestry of muslims outside south asia post-1000 is probably 5% (and this is high). the older genetic studies that looked at autosomal (just normal DNA) didn't discern any big difference between muslims and hindus in a given region (during the heyday of racial science in the early 20th century there was some surprise that craniometry showed muslim and hindu bengalis to be indistinguishable). some of the Y chromosomal studies do show west asian DNA, which makes sense if there was a strong male bias in migration from iran and central asia (and might overrrepresent west asian ancestry because of social selection for particular prestiges west asian patrilineages).

also, i think there is some utility is distinguishing non-hindu religions with an indian cultural origin, like buddhism and sikhism, with islam and christianity. buddhism comes out of the same milieu, and is often thought of as a child or sibling of hinduism. sikhism is often thought of as hinduism with strong monotheistic syncretic tendencies. my impression is that the buddhist conversions in maharashtra among after ambedkar in 1956 have not drawn the same hostility as conversions to islam or christianity (and buddhist dalits get gov. benefits). i think this is due to the fact that buddhism can be slotted into the hindu worldview (i believe buddha is an avatar of vishnu?). buddhism even uses some of the same terminology as hinduism (if with its own spin).

to recapitulate my ideas i alluded to above, i think that there are a host of traits that can define american brownness. to use an analogy, consider someone with the last name "neilsen." that name by itself is a sufficient condition to say someone is of danish origin (at least paternally at some point). i think being hindu is the same for being brown/indian. on the other hand, consider the german actress franke potente. follow the link and you will note that IMDB offers that she is 1/16 italian, ergo, the latinate name. the lack of a german surname in this case is not enough to say, "oh, she's not german." she's 15/16 german genetically. she speaks german. she was raised in germany. and so forth. so just because someone doesn't have an important characteristic, there are other traits that can still imbue one with a general essence of "brownness."

you turned a offhand comment into the height of intellectual warfare.

razib,

You are careless with "offhand comments" and then seek any means of retreat when it is exposed.

The correct view is that the issues of identity, of naming, of the misunderstandings surrounding these, and of self-knowledge are all closely linked. If you studied this with more intelligence you might concur.

Your hapless attempt to marginalize my contributions to this discussion and to the other (pseudoscience)is only tactical.

In the other blog you stated "We come here to bury ID." Who is that we at the gravesite? Could you have been any more presumptuous?

I guess this is what you mean by "self-cultivation." But I've already remarked on what this really is: self-display. (in pseudoscience)

In this blog you made a "generic allusion" (Oh, how I love that silly, silly phrase!) to the oracle and then tried to evade the responsibility for it.

You can "scratch and claw" with my pleasure, but when your ignorance emerges in the tumble, you will read about it.

You also deserve special censure for characterizing my sincere statements of interest as "patronizing puffery." (If indeed, you were doing so.)The fact that you would elevate spineless vulgarity over genuine interest is notable.

Jai,

For your post no 130# the only personal way I can express my appreciation is by saying I hope my chidren grow up and retain this wisdom. ( It takes a lot for a mom to say this)As kids they naturally are egoless and empathetic but its so easy to trade it for fear, sensitivity and harshness as is evident all around us.

Thank you for making my Saturday morning lovely with that thought!!

Sumita

i've apologized when i'm an ass. let me be frank, my IQ might be too low to understand you because half the fucking time i don't know what you're trying to say (sorry if the vulgarity offends).

i did not interpret this as sincere interest. but hey, didn't i say you won?

it would be wise to take action before drifting too far in that direction.

never fear about the direction of that vector! :)

Even if the bigoted types still repeat that only Hindus are Indians because Hinduism is geographically Indian in origin (unlike Islam and Christianity) and has the strongest cultural influence on Indian society, that still doesn't address the question of people belonging to other indigenous faiths such as Sikhism, Jainism, or Buddhism.

and

And no, Sikhism is not a branch or subsect of the Hindu religion, regardless of what the VHP, the RSS, or certain sections of the Indian media -- like Ekta Kapoor's serials on the Star Plus cable/satellite channel -- may be repeatedly stating these days

Do I see a paradox here? I mean if you consider Hindu bigots = RSS, VHP.

Dear Sumita ji,

Thank you for your message. My thoughts were just a combination of common sense, personal life experience, and (especially) the result of basic humanitarian Sikh teachings which I've done my best to put into practice in the context of my own relatively liberal and Westernised life. I take no personal credit for any wisdom this may have subsequently generated.

Be a source of strength, support and compassion for your children -- rather than exhibiting the stereotypical desi parental traits of exerting power for its own sake or for personal ego, or being unncessarily judgemental, intolerant and autocratic -- and I'm sure they'll turn out fine as they grow up.

Thank you very much for your kind words anyway, and I'm glad to hear I managed to make your morning a little better in my own small way ;)

Warm regards,
Jai

Do I see a paradox here? I mean if you consider Hindu bigots = RSS, VHP.

Manju, I'm not quite sure what you mean here, ie. why is there apparently a paradox ? Could you please clarify/expand on your question.

Many thanks.

Kind regards,
Jai

Jai,
Would you please let me know how to get those vertical dotted quotes?

Bigoted Hindus don't need to address the questions on Indianness of Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains. Since it's these people who are questioning their Hinduness. Perhaps, there are no questions to be answered. By the way, why did you assert that "Sikhism not part of Hinduism"? You brought a couple and one more unrelated variables to the discussion. Don't you think the discussion is valid only for Muslims and Christians? This problem arises only because of bigoted Hindus. I don't think bigoted Hindus have problems with Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism. Little bit of digression(okay, a complete digression), sometimes I feel Ambedkar somehow let down Dalits by converting to Buddhism instead of Islam.

sometimes I feel Ambedkar somehow let down Dalits by converting to Buddhism instead of Islam.

well, from what i've read, he considered islam but thought buddhism a better fit for people of indian cultural origin since it was indigenous (originally) to the region and an exogenous importation (though they had to bring in monks from thailand and sri lanka).

When my brain is in a desi context, I admit I generally parse "[a]nna" as a title rather than as a name (in Telugu and Tamil, it means "older brother")... my younger sister still calls me anna despite our being well out of our parental home. This may also have to do with seldom coming into contact with Indian Christians during our suburban Chicago upbringing. (Of course, now that I'm in New York, it's all good.)

My surname has repeatedly been parsed as being Italian (in both the US and the UK). They do, after all, call Telugu the "Italian of the East". (It's the vowels, I think.)

And no, Sikhism is not a branch or subsect of the Hindu religion, regardless of what the VHP, the RSS, or certain sections of the Indian media -- like Ekta Kapoor's serials on the Star Plus cable/satellite channel -- may be repeatedly stating these days

Chris/Razib, It wouldn't be stretch to say that nobody else here is following what the hell you guys are trying to say (lack of comments). You guys are assuming a common understanding of terms and language which is not true, something about shadow boxing that razib refered to (I think). Ooops, hope I haven't fallen into Plato's cave and have to endure a lecture on light, shadows and perfect forms from either one of you. Both will be wise to get out more and heed Wittgenstein

Also, Sumita == Christopher John in drag? same languid, deceptive prose. Great joy in planting logic landmines and jumping with glee on their explosion...

They do, after all, call Telugu the "Italian of the East". (It's the vowels, I think.)

I thought it was also because of the music (and musicality of the language?). Like Italian opera, a lot of carnatic music is set in Telugu. Key composers wrote songs in telugu esp the trinity (Thyagaraja, Syama Saastri, Muthuswami dikshitar - the first two were telugs I think).

buddhism a better fit for people of indian cultural origin since it was indigenous

Perhaps, Ambedkar forgot to consider few things. He was a scholar and brilliant person. But not his people. Low self-esteem and inferiority complex were never part of his life. Not with his people. Being a scholar he could differentiate between atheistic Buddhism(in its original form and not its later Hinduised form) from Hinduism. Not majority of Dalits. A religion which gives them pride without any attachement to Hinduism would have been better. Well, every Hindu bows before Buddha's statue. What's the difference? If Ambedkar really part of a religion that is truly Indian(I wonder whether this attitude was shaped up because of divisive movement of Indian muslims) he could have continued to be Hindu. All that was needed was calling the brahmin bluff and standing upto feudal middle castes. I suppose Tiyya(Ezhava)s and Nadars in South India have done that.

manju, i think there are details also have to do with mahar identity perhaps. don't know.

re: hindu/jain/sikh/buddhist/christian/muslim, exogamy rates might be a good way to gauge these things. though you'd have to control for numbers, my impression is that jains intermarry a lot with hindus (at least in the US) because there aren't too many jains around. i get the impression that there are a fair number of sikh-hindu marriages.

Little bit of digression(okay, a complete digression), sometimes I feel Ambedkar somehow let down Dalits by converting to Buddhism instead of Islam.

The plight of "lower caste" muslim converts was all around him to see. Doing the same shitty jobs and leading the same desparate lives since their hindu caste oppression days. Hard to make a case that, after partition, becoming another "lower caste" muslim convert was wise. Buddhism, was at least a fresh start and he could have molded the religion to do social reform (which was the main goal) and was relevant. He could have made huge changes and not be bound by anybody else's blessings (as in the case of Islam). Too bad he died soon after his conversion. It was a desperate situation for him and I don't think imagined possible the progress being made in Independent India on eradicating the caste problem.

Sumita, if you read the Indian constitution, it makes it easier to understand the difference. According to it, any human can be an Indian and remain one as long as he/she doesn't takes up the nationality of another. 'Hindus' are refered to as people who are not members of any other organised religion (Christians,Moslems, Parsi, Sikh, Jews, etc) this is why most tribals and other small groups in India are automaticaly considered Hindus for the purpose of identifying their religion.

From a cultural aspect, no matter what religion you are there is a strong element of 'Bharatiya' or 'Hindu' element in it.

The plight of "lower caste" muslim converts was all around him to see.

Probably, I agree with you in the case of North India. But in South India muslims have made a good progress. They are a lot better than Dalits. But as Razib mentioned his decision to join Buddhism wasn't plight of muslims but Indianness of Buddhism.

any human can be an Indian and remain one as long as he/she doesn't takes up the nationality of another.

What has happened to dual nationality?

Maybe this has some relevance to the original post.

Manju,

Would you please let me know how to get those vertical dotted quotes?

You highlight all the relevant text with your cursor/mouse and then click on the first icon next to the "Comments" header.

By the way, why did you assert that "Sikhism not part of Hinduism"? You brought a couple and one more unrelated variables to the discussion.

I just mentioned it because I noticed that the controversy seemed to be targetting just Indian Christians (or people with Christian-sounding names) and Muslims.

Don't you think the discussion is valid only for Muslims and Christians ?

I was playing Devil's Advocate. Why should the discussion only be relevant for these 2 groups ? -If someone is asserting that "Only a Hindu can be Indian", the counterargument -- logically-speaking -- would obviously involve other Indian groups such as Sikhs, Jains, etc.

I don't think bigoted Hindus have problems with Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism.

Depending on the specific person/group, I expect that's because they either regard these religions as being part of Hinduism, or there is some xenophobic issue regarding the fact that Christianity and Islam are of "foreign" origin.

sometimes I feel Ambedkar somehow let down Dalits by converting to Buddhism instead of Islam.

Apparently one of his first choices was Sikhism but some dubious politics within the Sikh religious leadership at the time, regarding the somewhat un-Sikh issue of caste, ended up pushing him towards Buddhism instead.

Babloo,

The VHP/RSS activities in this area are fringe

Perhaps (although the VHP did recently put out a public pronouncement stating "Sikhism is a sect of Hinduism"), but there is a lot of deliberate religious distortion about Sikhs and Sikhism currently being repeatedly -- and regularly -- depicted in some of the aforementioned popular Indian serials. Sikh characters are shown taking part in all kinds of religious practices which have nothing whatsoever to do with Sikhism -- although they are a part of conventional Hinduism -- and totally misrepresent how Sikhs conduct themselves in such matters in real life. Depicting practising Sikhs as taking part in "havans", praying to murtis of Ganesh, or (worst of all) repeatedly praying towards paintings of Guru Nanak and erroneously referring to him as "Waheguru" (even though Sikhism does not believe in avtaars, and the term Waheguru does not actually actually mean Guru Nanak) is as realistic a portrayal of the religion and its adherents as it would be to show Sikhs praying towards Mecca five times per day or taking part in the Catholic communion ceremony.

Santana Dharmic view of the religion then Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism are branches

I understand your point of view, but by that logic every single religion on earth is a part of the Sanatan Dharma view -- including Islam, Christianity, Judaism etc. So are all those people Hindus too ?

My original comments were just a "side-bar" as this topic had focused purely on Christianity and Islam, and were not intended to initiate any in-depth debate about Sikhism vis-a-vis Hinduism. It was just an example.

Jai,
Thanks for your tips. I suppose my mozilla firefox is not displaying the button. I can only see "Comments:"

You commented each and every point of my post but left out the most important and the fundamental one.
This problem arises only because of bigoted Hindus.

hindu/jain/sikh/buddhist/christian/muslim, exogamy rates might be a good way to gauge these things.

In Kerala, Hindu-Christian marriages are not uncommon. I don't have the statistics. But I have seen my Malayalee friends getting married. And I don't think it's skewed up in any direction. I wanted to marry a Kottayam Christian girl but I had settle for a Kottayam Hindu girl...hmmm.

I understand your point of view, but by that logic every single religion on earth is a part of the Sanatan Dharma view -- including Islam, Christianity, Judaism etc. So are all those people Hindus too ?

No, Islam, Christianity and Judaism are not Dharmic religions (ie share the sanatan dharma view). They don't have a concept of dharma/dhamma, reincarnation or inclusivity of other paths to salvation, among other things. The three you have mentioned are usually classified as Abrahamic religions.

Manju,

You commented each and every point of my post but left out the most important and the fundamental one. This problem arises only because of bigoted Hindus.

Actually I did answer that part too, as part of "Depending on the specific person/group, I expect that's because they either regard these religions as being part of Hinduism, or there is some xenophobic issue regarding the fact that Christianity and Islam are of "foreign" origin."

I'm trying to get my head around the reasons why the aforementioned bigoted Hindus don't regard Indian Christians and Muslims as actually being Indian. Is it because they think that people belonging to these 2 groups are "all" descended from foreigners ? Or are they having problems accepting the fact that, centuries ago, large numbers of indigenous Indians also converted to these religions (for one reason or another) ?

Babloo
Great joy in planting logic landmines and jumping with glee on their explosion...

I can only speak for myself. That is an incorrect assumption. My joy lies in good discussion, with substance an no unnecesary inflammation of emotion. This is happening now.

Your points are mine too. Wittgenstein is someone I have been studying in this regard.

Am curious to see why you found my posts deceptive. I am quite willing to clear anything not clear, If a question was posed. None were. So how did you arrive at the label of deceptive?

Again, this is a sincere question. It merits an honest answer. I would like to learn from your response.

Sumita

Islam, Christianity and Judaism are not Dharmic religions (ie share the sanatan dharma view). They don't have a concept of dharma/dhamma, reincarnation or inclusivity of other paths to salvation, among other things. The three you have mentioned are usually classified as Abrahamic religions.

Interesting point of view. So technically, that makes the present Dalai Lama a Hindu too, along with all Buddhists worldwide. I wonder if he is aware of this perception.

No need to repeat khalistani arguments that only serve as political tools....The danger is that the with lessening differences, instead of seeing each other as equal terms, rabid ideologies start which aim to go back to the 'pure' form of sikhism and try to create differences when none exist.

Khalistan has absolutely nothing to do with it. It's very important to get past the typical desi black-and-white, "you're either with us or against us" point of view; please bear in mind that if someone says their religion is not actually a part of Hinduism -- regardless of the Sanatan Dharma concept -- then that does not automatically make them "pro-Khalistan" or "anti-Hindu/anti-Hinduism".

I can understand why proponents of the Sanatan Dharma worldview would regard Sikhism (and some other faiths) as being "branches" of this interpretation of Hinduism, but if the founders of Sikhism itself said that they were not Hindus, that their teachings -- while all-embracing in the sense of being for the benefit of all mankind irrespective of their official religious affiliation -- were not a branch of the mainstream Hindu religion in its organised form, and that tens of millions of Sikhs worldwide (perfectly ordinary, moderate people, with no relation to "rabid ideologies" or Khalistan) insist that they are not Hindus...then one cannot ignore their objections and insist that they are in fact following a sect of Hinduism.

Sikhism does indeed have various things in common with Hinduism, but it also has common elements with the more positive aspects of other faiths too, including the aforementioned Abrahamic religions. Remember also that the Sri Guru Granth Sahib includes large numbers of verses by Sufi saints. This does not mean that Sikhism is a "Hinduised" sect of Islam, for example (something which has been argued by some Pakistani Muslims purely because Guru Nanak visited Mecca during his travels and also possessed a shawl with Quranic verses on it). Sikhism has a lot in common with some versions of Sufism but that does not mean that one is an offshoot or branch of the other.

What all this does mean, however, is that what is fundamentally "True" in all these faiths -- both "Indian" and Abrahamic -- comes from the same divine source. One could in fact say that individuals from both of these two groups who believe in certain key concepts enshrined in Sikhism regarding the nature of God and "ideal" human conduct (regardless of what their official religious affiliation may teach) are, to a lesser or greater extent, "allies" of Sikhism if not necessarily Sikhs in the formalised sense. Remember that the Sikh Gurus had both Hindu and Muslim followers (including Sufi saints, along with Mughal generals who switched sides in the middle of battles).

So is Sanatan Dharam an unofficial branch of Sikhism in its true all-encompassing sense, or is Sikhism a branch of Sanatan Dharma ? Ahh, that's the controversial question, isn't it ? *wink*

I think we've sidetracked this discussion enough, but I hope you now understand why, from a Sikh perspective, it's important not to restrict Sikhism to a localised "Indian religion/branches of Hinduism" interpretation, because the faith does not view matters that way (neither did its founders).

*along with Mughal generals who had joined them by switching sides in the middle of battles).

Jacob,

Thank you again for your cogent response.

"no matter what religion you are there is a strong element of 'Bharatiya' or 'Hindu' element in it."
This may be your view. I am not sure many other non Hindus share this point of view.

Therein lies opprtunity for inquiry which must first
1. Acknowledge this inconsistency
2. Discuss it unemotionally based on data and facts, not feelings.
3. With a goal for arriving at a commonality and inclusiveness.

Any identity that chooses exclusiveness over inclusiveness will become the subset.
besides idenitties that are dirven by others perspective will always be powerless(hence I am not comfortable with the skin color thing.In any case, someone said, in 50 years the world might as well be beige, the rate at which folks are intermarrying)

However, superficial concepts that do not take into account millions of people's subjective reality of religion cannot be a way of sweeping the problem under the carpet

Secularism is one such concept. It is too vague, too undefined (in the Indian context) to provide this umbrella we all seek.

We must make an effort to find a different framework. This cannot be easy. I do understand that, but that does not mean we cannot try.

Sumita

Jacob,
I typed your name in the poster field by a genuine mistake. Am sorry if it causes confusion

Sumita

Jai

Part of my husband's family comes from the sikh faith.One person in my family has converted to Buddhism.I was raised Hindu and find no difficutly with any of these realities.

There are differences. They are important

But more importantly, there are similarities.
What exaclty are these differences and simialrities. This discussion becomes an emotional one as religion is always a subjective experience.

What is this commonality of a subjective reality vs an objective reality? This is a true challenge. However, it is not insurmountable( So I hope and think)

So I can ask questions, learn and explore and find what is my personal point of happy peace.Thats all I can do.

Sumita

Sumita,

Sikhism is an interesting paradox, in the sense that -- in the form consolidated by Guru Gobind Singh -- its adherents are encouraged to maintain their separate identity yet to simultaneously identify with their fellow human beings without any recognition of religious, ethnic, or national differentiation. Perhaps one way of defining it would be "exclusivity within the wider context of inclusivity".

This isn't a way of promoting the view that Sikhs are "separate" from the rest of mankind (and certainly not "superior" or exalted above everyone else), but it's to ensure that there is no distortion of Sikh scriptures and teachings by misguided or malicious members of other faiths, especially religious figures. It's also one of the reasons why Sikhs react so negatively to claims that their faith is actually part of another religion, or to attempts by members of different organised religions to hijack/appropriate Sikh teachings and the Gurus and claim them as their own. This independence is also important in order to prevent any claims of religious authority over Sikhs by other faiths (or by their religious leaders).

Someone who knows enough about Sikh tenets and history would be aware that, in essence, it's not actually an organised religion in the exclusive are-you-Hindu-Muslim-or-Christian--tick-the-right-box way at all; as the faith teaches that God does not differentiate between different religious groups but is more concerned with your conduct as an individual and the subsequent impact on your soul -- your "heart", basically -- the aim of Sikhism has always been to create an alliance of like-minded, good-natured, idealistic individuals for the whole world, cutting right across any formalised, official religious boundaries. Hence it does indeed promote the cultivation of an inclusive attitude and worldview towards one's fellow human beings (ie. try to look for what you have in common rather what differentiates you, which I believe is what you're alluding to). Another consequence of this is that one "adopts" Sikhism rather than formally converting to it, with the exception of the most committed adherents who go for the whole 5Ks Amrit ceremony.

Jai

dear lord, i think i preferred the guy who hates yuppies in their BMWs. you know, Rajeev Srinivasa Venkata Narayana Krishnamoorthy Padigondla? the one who wants us all to get him a frappuccino? at least reading him didn't make me want to gouge out my own eyes.

please come back, oh multi-named pseudo-prick. muddy the waters! insult whiny desi yuppies and mock their need to navel-gaze! be even meaner, i won't mind...your words would be a welcome respite from the nauseating blather put forth by those whose sense of humor apparently dissolved the moment they procreated. i mean, thanks for killing a wonderful, enlightening thread where everyone felt safe enough to share their experiences which were relevant to THE ACTUAL POST. geez louise.

anyone up for a rousing chorus of "smelly cat?" no? darn.

Dear Rachel

"wonderful, enlightening thread where everyone felt safe enough to share their experiences which were relevant to THE ACTUAL POST"

oooohhh!! sorry to burst your bubble!!

your "safe" bubble.

God!!Talk about whiny folks. Nothing's more icky than whiny!!!I am looking for happy folks.

yeah!! I sense that "Love me, love me!!" sense emanating from you too.
Am sure someone here will...have fun...didnt men to spoil your party!! Spread the fun and the joy.

Laters...

My favorite blog was the one about the ring, though.

Sumita

Thanks for the explanation, cicatrix. I could be pulling the town elder-bestowed name-thing out of my ass, but I seem to recall my parents bickering about whether such a thing existed (My mom, who claims that it does, is from a village near Gampaha, if that means anything).
One thing I still don't get about the "ge" name, though. Since the "ge" is possessive, do siblings all get the same "ge" name, or do they get different ones? (Sorry if this is a dumb question; I've never heard most of my cousins' full names and don't have a "ge" name myself, so I'm still confused about where the part of the name that precedes the "ge" comes from, and whether the "ge" name is a distinct category, apart from the other types of names that you mentioned.)

"I do think this site cultivates a certain competitiveness regarding who is more "Indian" that invariably causes people to make such comments when they have nothing to say "

I sense it more along the well-worn "FOB/ABCD" divide.

First of all, I found razib's comment #30 spot on. Secondly, I am disturbed and angry at the lack of civility displayed by Christopher and Sumita, as they pile on him accusing him of lack of civility and other crimes.

It seems that Christopher is saying that Razib's perhaps inappropriate use of "Know Thyself" was a central point of the post it appeared in, and invalidation of this usage invalidates Razib's whole viewpoint. Whereas I saw it as a throwaway comment whose invalidation does not invalidate Razib's central point or perspective.

And many of Sumita's comments seem to be along the lines of "I have spent a lot of time thinking about this. It is more complicated than you think." without enumeration of what exactly her perspective is. For one thing it is not at all self-evident to me why all Razib's assertions are flawed, as it is to Sumita.

Sumita, I know why I did not respond to your post full of questions earlier. To me, an American Brown, ABCD, or whatever, they appear to be simplistic and vague, although I think I can imagine why to you they may appear precise and meaningful. So, let me take a look at them now, and maybe in my answers you can come to see why your questions seem to me to be poorly-defined in relation to the realities of "American Browns." (I do mean this criticism of your questions non-judgmentally).

Am curious about one thing though. In your view, does the identity of American Brown (I have no experience of what that means) differ from that of an Indian?

I don't think there is or will be one "American Brown" identity. But, I would say that if you could make some sort of plot of "identity," the identities of American browns would cluster fairly separately from the identities of browns in "desiland." The cluster separability would be due to life experience in a land where your genetic background and your (or your parents') cultural background are not in the majority.

I am not sure how you (and your friends here) perceive the difference.

I think that the difference that any "American Brown" may feel between his/her identity and that presumed of a "desiland Brown" is caused by the fundamental difference in life experience due to "American Browns" growing up as a minority (as I said above). Now, what that difference is/(those differences are) perceived to be will vary from person to person. (Any perceived similarities would also vary from person to person.)

That difference (or similarity) may be key to many things.

I don't know what you mean by "many things," so there's not much I can say here, although dimly I feel that recognition of similarities between American Browns and desiland Browns does and will play a role in self-definition of many American Browns.

Am very interested in knowing how you perceive these differences(or similarities) as related to desis from desiland(namely India)

Two examples:

I might venture that one common difference between American Brown and desiland Brown identities is the AB's generally greater willingness to generalize multiple desiland identities into "Indian," or "South Asian," or "Desi." In other words the AB is often more likely to note a global similarity between the multiplicity of desiland identities. (This is not always true; sometimes an AB identifies tightly with the specific desiland identity of his/her parents, being for example caste-conscious in a way which is not common among urban Indians.)

I might also say that desiland Browns, from my American Brown perspective, often seem to view American Browns (NRI's or ABCD's) as lacking some commitment to/pride in the homeland and their ancestral backgrounds - and this in their view forms the basis of the difference between AB and dB identities.

But again, I think you'd have to take a poll of large numbers of AB's and dB's to get their specific, personal answers rather than looking for one person to give you one total and universal answer.

To add to it, what takes precedence in defining the Brown American identity, the similarities or the differences, or both?

This is kind of neat. Well, SM here exists, and lots of us come here, Hindus, Christians, Muslims, atheists, Sinhalese, Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Northies, Southies, etc. (I'm not marginalizing those of you who I haven't mentioned, I'm just tired!) If most of us didn't perceive our American Brown identities as at least somewhat defined by the similarities between AB's and dB's, this whole blog wouldn't be happening.

I personally would say the perceived similarities take precedence in the process of defining our AB identities, because those bring us to the table in the first place. But then the perceived differences kick in to help each of us refine the process of self-definition.

So now, via my answers you may be able to refine or reword your questions to better convey to me what you might actually be seeking? Unless I've actually won the lottery and hit it here?

Razib mentioned somewhere (I think in this thread, but maybe not) that people from different viewpoints tend to do a lot of talking past each other due to insufficiently explicit definition of terms. I agree.

Razib, don't leave. Keep up the good work, you have at least one fan. :)

Razib, don't leave. Keep up the good work, you have at least one fan.

Deepa

Thank you for your response.

My first post was triggered by the statement Razib made.

"American Brown" was being made here, , even as he also stated he is not concerned with this identity.

I am trying to raise children who, while being in school here for many years, do not yet display an awareness of an identity based on skin color. Please note that I say yet. I have been encouraged by this. But clearly here, more people seem to see themselves together more because of cutaneous similarities, rather than philosophical or ideological or religious etc....having lived, worked and interacted in the US for many years, also my color has not been my defning identity, hence I was struck by that remark and was curious to explore what exactly it meant. I was also wondering if my children would exhibit an identity based on color and what could I do to prevent it.(I do have the choice to live anywhere on the globe I want, even maintain multiple residences in different countries, if I wish)to make informed decisions, an understanding of such identities is key.

Hence Razib's comment got my attention.

My familiarity with many African american writers works on the issue of identity based on skin color, was behind the question, which were completely sincere. However, I sensed from Razib's responses, (and from yours) that some may perceive it as an attack.

Its not. It is an attempt to examine and debate. However, if a different point of view seems to be threatening, then I am quite fine with being silent. MY hope was, that all here are confident enough for self examination of concepts and identities.

If its a group of young people who want to have a good time and are together because they feel comfortable in their similar ideas, then my posts were clearly misplaced.

I dont think"American Brown" is a meaningful or precise identity to begin with. I am not even sure why color must become defining rather than ideas. I am also curious about the name of the site as the history of 1857 is very conflicted and probably stands for failings rather than victories. Rudrangshu Mukherjee's book on the rising uses the term "pondies" which I have been familair with since childhood. It is not a favorable term and yet in a name based on mutiny might very well be associated with this term. Hibbert's work, as well as Dalrymple touches upon these issues. Am guessing that these fine details are of not much concern here, even that most may not be aware of them.

Yes, your answers were very clear and did answer what I was looking for.(*smile* you did hit the jackpot there) This is what I wanted from Razib, and did not get. But I did not show any lack of civility to him, rather was subjected to questionable language. In my world, "logic my ass" is not a civil answer. I am learning, in certain worlds it may be. For me, its good learning.For that, am grateful.

I write on issues of identity as an observer Hence am always observing, and clarifying stands of different demographics, rather than make leaps of judgements. As a constant student and observer, any contentiuous questions stem from clarifying what seems to be strong statements.

This will be my last post in this serious note. I prefer to stick to information on popular media (books, films etc) rather than ideas and philosophy. On no account do I mean to challenge anyone.

Thank you for taking time to reply. I really appreciated it.

Sumita

And many of Sumita's comments seem to be along the lines of "I have spent a lot of time thinking about this. It is more complicated than you think." without enumeration of what exactly her perspective is. For one thing it is not at all self-evident to me why all Razib's assertions are flawed, as it is to Sumita.

Sumita, I know why I did not respond to your post full of questions earlier. To me, an American Brown, ABCD, or whatever, they appear to be simplistic and vague, although I think I can imagine why to you they may appear precise and meaningful.

AMEN. i agree totally. i also think there is a "you are not as wise as i, you silly young people who cannot debate me"-vibe.

I dont think"American Brown" is a meaningful or precise identity to begin with. I am not even sure why color must become defining rather than ideas. I am also curious about the name of the site as the history of 1857 is very conflicted and probably stands for failings rather than victories. Rudrangshu Mukherjee's book on the rising uses the term "pondies" which I have been familair with since childhood. It is not a favorable term and yet in a name based on mutiny might very well be associated with this term. Hibbert's work, as well as Dalrymple touches upon these issues. Am guessing that these fine details are of not much concern here, even that most may not be aware of them.

if only your comments weren't so suffused with this obvious smugness. i think someone once brilliantly said the following about you:

"it's hard to have an exchange of ideas with someone making declarative statements.

you say you are attempting to examine, clarify, debate...it really seems like you are trying to nitpick, split hairs and assert a position of superiority. if people ignore your "brilliant" questions, that is why.

Hi Sumita,

You may not end up reading this as you have decided to stay away from such topics in future, but just in case, I will respond. I'm glad we communicated a little regarding your questions. I didn't see the questions themselves as an attack, but didn't answer them initially because for me it would be retreading old ground ("ABCD 101"). It may be as you spend more time at this non-Indian-born dominated site that you will arrive at your own answers, and you can probably see from the answers I gave that I feel that that would be the best way for you to arrive at those answers.

No, the perception that you were attacking came from comments like:

Let it go. You are way out of your depth here.In that you will earn mine and everyone else's respect.

I could cite data way faster and way better than you could.

Anything you write, any intelligent person here can google in the age of the internet( and do).

Maybe this portal is aptly named.Those who love gentle, intelligent, cogent ways of questioning their identity should rethink their participation.

Some of these are in response to comments by Razib which with the exception of one or two, were serious responses to comments of yours. Others are your response to the discussion between Razib and Christopher. Razib and Christopher have a conversational history which extends to at least one other thread, and their responses to each other tend to reflect that history rather than only what has just been said. (Frankly, with Christopher's strategy of nitpicking "know thyself" and ignoring the main point of Razib's answers, I don't blame Razib for shutting off the discussion...but that's their conversation, not yours or mine.)

And I guess it must be in another thread, but I remember reading a comment of yours saying that your 9-year-old could give better analysis than most or all people on this blog. That is a pretty "attacking" comment (and untrue). So is the following, made to someone else upthread who I thought had a point about the discussion of names and "legitimate" identity as desi having been killed:

God!!Talk about whiny folks. Nothing's more icky than whiny!!!I am looking for happy folks.

Enough about that. The other issue I see is that you want others here to do a lot of self-explanation, but give these types of comments as justification:

Am interested in knowing how you arrive at the answer. That process is of grat significance

This disagreement is of interest to me. It is not as simple as it seems

It would be only fair to explain yourself as thoroughly as you feel others should explain themselves. I at least, when seeing someone asking me detailed questions but providing no detailed exposition of their own, do not feel a desire to answer those questions.

MY hope was, that all here are confident enough for self examination of concepts and identities.

I think the questions about non-Indian-born "brown" identity are constantly being explored here - usually implicitly through the discussion, erupting into explicit discussion sometimes. The questions you have are not new to nIbb's (non-Indian-born-browns). Everyone has in some way dealt with them before, and come here with those thoughts/experiences as a basis which they don't usually feel the need to explicitly rehash. So all the posts, comments, etc. here are an extension of the basic, explicit discussion of identity in which you are interested. The discussion at SM is there for you to read and participate in, but is happening on its own terms, with which you may or may not feel satisfied.

I am trying to raise children who, while being in school here for many years, do not yet display an awareness of an identity based on skin color. Please note that I say yet. I have been encouraged by this.

having lived, worked and interacted in the US for many years, also my color has not been my defning identity,

Well, your and their lack of skin color-based identity is interesting. I don't know what type of schools or workplaces you have. I think many of us who grew up in America, UK, etc. have skin-color consciousness because we are part of societies with many skin colors and because we experience being labeled as "other," discriminated against, etc., purely because of our skin color.

As a side note, when I was 9 I felt I was "Indian," with my life in the US only an accident of birth. I couldn't say the same thing when I was 21. So your young children's answers may seem very clear now, and may become less clear as they age and become more engaged with the society they live in.

am trying to raise children who, while being in school here for many years, do not yet display an awareness of an identity based on skin color.

well, fortunately for them it's not the 1970s anymore, so maybe nobody's called them Dot Head yet to bring about such awareness in them. We didn't view color as an issue in our house, but if you have a "weird name" and get asked enough questions about if your dad wears a turban or if you've ever eaten snakes... well it becomes a quick topic at home after all...

well said, Deepa. thanks for that.

deepa,

hear hear, your comment was wonderful. i think i lurve you more than ross right now. ;)

Alot of excellent points Deepa.

As a side note, when I was 9 I felt I was "Indian," with my life in the US only an accident of birth. I couldn't say the same thing when I was 21.

When I was 9, my Canadian peers would ask me where I was from. The direction of this question towards me, when it was not directed towards anyone else, made it a leading question. If kids are asking me this question, I must be from somewhere else, and that place is India. Very simplistic idea of identity, but that's how a child's logic works.

Now, as time goes on, and we begin to understand discrimination and racism, and ideas (from mostly caucasians) that we are less Canadian or less American than them continue to be directed towards us, we understand that this is unfair. Because this ignorant idea is really prevalent, we have to fight it. That's why we say, "Hey, being born and raised here, we're just as American, Canadian etc. as you; we just happen to be brown. Don't hate, don't discriminate, we've been here all our lives. We have a right to participate politically, socially, culturally, economically. We have a right to be seen as citizens."

Now, that doesn't mean that your kids can't have a rich cultural life. I don't know what I'd do without tandoori chicken and shrimp korma! But please, at the same time, don't allow them to harbour the belief that they are less American than anyone else. This will ensure that they can stand up confidently to counter any accusation, that they shouldn't be allowed to do this or that because they are less American than their caucasian peers.

There was a report about 10 years ago, on the CBC program, THE JOURNAL, in which the "dilemma" of caucasian kids not faring as well as their "asian" counterparts in high school performance, was addressed. Now, these east asian, south asian kids were all born in Canada. White kids and parents were upset they weren't able to compete and that these "immigrants" were going to get into better schools. Their implicit argument was that immigrants shouldn't be allowed to get into the best schools before their own Canadian citizens. I watched the program, and realized all the kids they were featuring weren't immigrants - they just happened to be visible minorities and they WERE Canadian-born. I also battled such ignorance, personally. It's situations like these that made me realize it's time to battle this dumb idea of what a Canadian is.

That's just one argument. It's not even the best one. I'm sure it's already been beaten to death that being born in the West, we are exposed to Western culture daily in many subtle, implicit ways. Explicit teaching about India, or even coming to this board to learn more, isn't going to change that. A culture is so much more than simple exposure to facts, rituals, books, and ideas: It is so much richer than that. It's really hard for me to say I'm Indian, when I haven't even been there - does that make sense?? And even if I had, a 1 month visit isn't going to make me fully understand the culture of India - I may understand facets of it, but I can't say what it truly means to be Indian. However, I do know what it means to be Canadian, especially one with a desi heritage. That's why so many of us non-immigrants come here and chat it up. We share a special, unique bond, and can understand one anothers dilemmas of being a visible minority, and other pressures and issues unique to us.

My mom understands this now that we are full grown. She used to have ideas that she could protect us and place us in a vacuum of all things Indian. Now, she understands that there's no way you can do that, and we turned out pretty awesome anyways.

Angie, good points. For all of Canada's genuflection at the altar of multi-culturalism, there is an implicit acceptance by the majority that "immigrants" must start at the bottom rung. Anything evidence to the contrary, such as the achievement of higher education by minority groups, and expect to overhear more conversations about the "white man" being the most endangered of species in the employment jungle.

the history of the human race is about recreating yourself. i have had hindus tell me that they couldn't understand how my ancestors could leave their religion and go worship a semitic sky god, but i simply responded that it is quite likely that their own ancestors (like mine) abandoned their gods of wood and water and their small sacrifies for the hindu religion with its dichotomy between folk devotion and brahmanical ritual and philosophy, and before that they probably abandoned desert gods which had no utility in their new monsoonal homeland.

I think this is an excellent point, and the same goes for CULTURE. Think of it not as something that can easily break, if one strays too far from the "pure" origin, but as malleable, and ever-changing. I'm pretty sure my grandparents don't know alot about Turkey, or wherever else, we supposedley "came from". And I'm not too worried, either. Culture is something that makes life more enjoyable and rich, and it isn't static.

At the same time I can sort of understand why some groups want to preserve their culture and identity... i.e. Native Americans/Canadians. THIS is where they are from. They don't have a zillion people keeping desi culture alive on the subcontinent like we do!

i.e. Native Americans/Canadians.

Clarification: Aboriginal American Indian/Canadians.

Peace:)

Angie,

please, at the same time, don't allow them to harbour the belief that they are less American than anyone else.

This is a very good point and also one that's extremely important -- because in its most extrapolated form you risk ending up with Western-born South Asians like those that caused 7/7 here in London (and those that support such a mindset). Considering that both Sikhs and Hindus have grown up here a) facing racism from the majority community for many years, and b) hearing their parents and many others in the older generation continuously saying "saala gaura this, gaura that" and so on (use your imagination -- antipathy towards Western society isn't always limited to just the Muslims), I often think that the only reason they didn't follow a similarly violent path as the London bombers is because the scriptures and tenets of their respective faiths give them relatively little material/justification to violently act on their feelings of alienation, along with their resentment towards how they may have been mistreated over the years. Thank God for that.

Also, making sure that your children don't feel like they "don't really belong here" and that their "real home" is somewhere thousands of miles away also prevents (or at least mitigates to some degree) the cultural schizophrenia that many Western-born desis have suffered. Some people handle it okay, others -- as we all know -- become very confused indeed, resulting in all kinds of misguided and extreme behaviour. You can imagine the psychological impact it has on people when they receive negative information continously from their elders (especially over the course of many years) and can't deal with it appropriately.

I think this is an excellent point, and the same goes for CULTURE. Think of it not as something that can easily break, if one strays too far from the "pure" origin, but as malleable, and ever-changing

Exactly. The problem is that many Indians -- particularly those from the older-generation -- regard Indian culture as something sacred. This is the point -- religion (or at least spirituality) is sacred, "culture" is not. Culture is vague, man-made, artificial, dynamically-changing, and is not inherently sacred (it has both positive and negative points). One needs to be very careful indeed with regards to the psychological and physical lengths one goes to in order to enforce it; all manner of injustices are carried out in the name of desi culture, regardless of whether it's actually morally correct to do so, because the people perpetrating such actions exalt their culture to such a disproportionate degree.

The bottom line is, one shouldn't treat Indian culture as some kind of sacred cow (apologies for the unintentional pun).

Rachel Green,

i think i lurve you more than ross right now. ;)

You should have found a way to make your relationship with Joey work, dammit ! You two gave up too easily ;)

This is a very good point and also one that's extremely important -- because in its most extrapolated form you risk ending up with Western-born South Asians like those that caused 7/7 here in London (and those that support such a mindset). Considering that both Sikhs and Hindus have grown up here a) facing racism from the majority community for many years, and b) hearing their parents and many others in the older generation continuously saying "saala gaura this, gaura that" and so on (use your imagination -- antipathy towards Western society isn't always limited to just the Muslims), I often think that the only reason they didn't follow a similarly violent path as the London bombers is because the scriptures and tenets of their respective faiths give them relatively little material/justification to violently act on their feelings of alienation, along with their resentment towards how they may have been mistreated over the years. Thank God for that.

The bottom line is, one shouldn't treat Indian culture as some kind of sacred cow (apologies for the unintentional pun).

Amen to that! And on that final note, South Asians, Western Browns, (be your name Angie or Anjali or Zak or Amardeep or Jacob) are a diverse bunch, and it's no one's business (but yours) to tell you who you are or how to invest/celebrate in your culture.

and it's no one's business (but yours) to tell you who you are or how to invest/celebrate in your culture.

Absolutely on the money!!

Which is why, there are many wonderful ways to express oneself apart from color, Of course, if folks feel that color is their defining USP(unique selling proposition) then so be it. It may even be a strength( as it has been for whites). But it stands a danger of segregating us from other colors, for instnce yellow, or black or white, if one wants to eventually take this to bigger frameworks.

As someone said, in 50 years we may all be "beige"

Sumita

Which is why, there are many wonderful ways to express oneself apart from color

Agreed!

Of course, if folks feel that color is their defining USP

I don't know of any non-desiland-born-desi (whatever) who defines self solely by color, but I would postulate that one who does, would not have had any exposure to their parents' cultural background.

...Actually, I do remember a couple of girls I knew, neither of which knew much about their "Indian" background. The first was lighter colored and identified with latino culture, and the second was darker colored and identified with african-american culture. But that was some years ago, in an area where there were very few desis (12 at our school).

Ok I get it now - this is brown Friends. Makes sense...would be more fun to watch if you folks were a little less self-conscious.
And a few more declarative sentences (since I'm not interested in debate !)
Razib - you sound very smart but I can understand Christopher John's curiosity to push your buttons and see if you jump. Nice to see that you do. However you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time at this site which is definitely a bad sign.
Christopher John - big bore. Accusations of pettifogging perfectly justified.
Sumita - bigger bore. If you are interested in improving your children's upbringing start by losing the pomposity.
Jai Singh - you sound conflicted. Sikh-ness is probably too large a part of your identity.
Thank you all for an afternoon's entertainment.

Sumita - bigger bore. If you are interested in improving your children's upbringing start by losing the pomposity.

FINALLY! Someone had the guts to say it. :P

Nacheez,

Jai Singh - you sound conflicted

Not at all.

Sikh-ness is probably too large a part of your identity.

It can never be too large a part of anyone's identity, Sikh or not, my friend ;)

FINALLY! Someone had the guts to say it. :P

I did! I did!!!

well, not really. I just piled on ;)

Everyone lay off Sumita -- she seems like a nice person and, from what I can tell, just tries to be objective about matters and analyse the various issues dispassionately as per her own viewpoint. I guess there's sometimes an element of playing Devil's Advocate too.

Sumita: You're probably a fair bit older than many of the people who take part in SM discussions, as you've rightly mentioned yourself a few times, but it may be worth bearing in mind that this isn't necessarily the case with regards to many other participants. For example I'm in my early 30s, MD is approaching 40, and so on*. Obviously I don't think you've ever been condescending towards me -- far from it -- but it may be a good idea to keep in mind that the people you're swapping messages with here on SM may not always be as young as you may presume.

*The evergreen ladies' man Uncleji is another prime example of the "silver surfer", of course. They don't call him the "Tom Jones of Jalandhar" for nothing....A perennial favourite of the over-60s bingo-hall aunties, who love throwing their underwear at him -- just like his Las Vegas-loving alter ego -- whenever he jumps on the karaoke stage to sing "Apna Punjab". Although Uncleji, the human purple Punjabi viagra pill, prefers to indulge his 20 year old groupies who like to learn from the more mature gentleman with a bit more "experience" (about 50 years worth of experience in this particular case). *wink*

Listen up sweathogs! This discussion is DONE (and beaten up more than Horshacks's face... or Epstein's face for that matter).

am i supposed to know what that last comment meant? i'm 30 and i feel like kotter was before MY time. sheesh. :)

Hey maan, re-runs inspire me.....

that show rocked. great song

this post is about smells, not sounds. ;)

The evergreen ladies' man Uncleji

Gidda ! Somebody mentioned me ?
Somebody hassling my Laaaady Sumita....

YOu should do what my old man with my younger brother mispell his name, so that is totally bizarre and sit back and await a lifetime of hate and madness.
His name should be Sandeep but it's spelt on his
birth certificate as Sudip and for years he wrote Sudeep . So naturally we call him Rick.
Its all so very Johnny Cash

my goodness Uncleji...as if you weren't already irresistible enough, now you're including johnny cash links in your always-hilarious comments? i'm going to swoon. :)

I know this was written a long time ago and probably no one will still be reading this, but I just discovered this post and it's eerie how much I can relate. A few days ago an Indian classmate of mine was talking about a tradition her family had, and said it was something "all Indians do." When I said it obviously wasn't all Indians, because I don't practice that tradition, she said, "Well, you're Catholic, so you're not really Indian."

Her ignorance just shocked me. She didn't say it in a mean way, but matter-of-factly, as if it was common knowledge that Indian Christians weren't really Indian and that was that. The whole day I felt this righteous indignation, but I also felt a little bit like an outsider. I mean, I've been asked questions about why I don't have an "Indian" name or why I eat beef, but never has another Indian said anything like that. If other desis couldn't accept me. . . it was just a horrible feeling.

And then I read this, and it's just nice to know that other Indians have felt that feeling of not being Indian enough. So thanks for writing this, even if it was like six months ago and I'm a little late here. :)