Thread discusses Indian fan's offense at Gandhi reference in episode, with other posters arguing satire is fair game and encourageing the original poster to lighten up.
Being an Indian who has much respect for the Mahatama, I find the reference to him in yesterday's episode quite insulting. I agree that it might all be in light vein, but there can be no denying that this was a sensitive topic to tread upon. This can be equated to belittling the pope or Mother Teresa and was totally unwarranted. Frankly, I am disappointed in the show and some of the obvious faux pas!!! Tighten you laces, Jerry. You are treading on thin ice here!!
AND WHAT'S WRONG with belittling the Pope, or Mother Teresa?????????? All celebrities, dead or alive, good or bad, holy or evil, place themselves in the line of fire for satire and jest.
AND WHAT'S WRONG with belittling the Pope, or Mother Teresa?????????? All
celebrities, dead or alive, good or bad, holy or evil, place themselves in
the line of fire for satire and jest.
I too am Indian with a lot of respect for the Mahatma, as well as for Mother Teresa and the Pope. I was initially offended or at least shocked by the reference, but I agree with Scott in that it was for jest, and the very idea of such a great person indulging in something that George would do, was really hilarious.
All in all, it goes with Seinfeld's racy subjects - Contest, Outing......
Probably such a reference in SNL would not be taken seriously, but I did not expect it on Seinfeld.
Actually, being an Indian, I found the episode absolutely hillarious with the obvious highlight: reference to Gandhi...my American boyfriend, on the other hand thot the denture in the garbage d. was the funniest part...I rest my case.
In reply to this particular comment. I think Mr Arun has every right to be upset. It is true that the joke was done in humor but it cannot necessarily be classified as good humor. So what if he is dead, making fun of dead people is again not good humor.
As for me I am personally offended by the fact that you can't spell Gandhi right. It is G-A-N-D-H-I with a stress on DHI and not Ghandi. As for the joke I could swallow it easily because I have heard people make even more controversial jokes than the one on Seinfeld. ROCK
I agree. I can also see how this could have been offensive to Mr. Arun. I found the joke to be very humourous although it was in poor taste. It is a lot like making a joke about the pope being promiscuous.
Is it? Did he really take a vow of celebacy? I didn't know that. Also, who says the pope couldn't have heen promiscuous before he joined the church? And what's wrong with being promiscuous? Geeze people, lighten up. It's not like either of them are a Supreme Being (tm), and if they were, who are we to judge them? zombie
Coming back to what I initially wrote on this, I may have felt less anguished if this had apeeared in one of the lesser shows but for all the admiration that I have for Jerry and co., it was unwarranted and not something he shd have done. Anyways, come thursday and I will be ROFL again!! Arun Vaidyanath
Now please don't take offense to this, but your post has made me think... if someone had said something like this about, say, Thomas Jefferson, I don't think it would have bothered me that much...if it had been on a foreign show, it might have bugged me a lot more...I wonder if it's the fact that it's an American making the joke that's the problem. What do y'all think?
In the last couple of weeks, in addition to Ghandi, SEINFELD has made light of:
facially disfigured elderly folk
2. cosmetic breast surgery (in real life many women have sufferred enormously because of this.)
Golda Meir ("the ugliest world leader")
4. bereavement (there may be viewers who have sufferred a death in the family recently)
So if you found any or all of the above (and others) funny, it seems that you have no problem laughing at ridicule of **other people's** sensitive topics. Furthermore, I think that in the irreverence with which SEINFELD dealt with these topics was funny in a disarming way, and in no way would encourage insensitivity or bigotry.
I thought the whole part of humor was to make light of a heavy situation. Especially when the humor is at the cost of someone else. We are all victims of it, and we all do it. NTTIAWWT
Hey! I happen to be Thomas Jefferson, dave's sister and I am thinking of going on a hunger strike to end British rule!!! and I am offended by all this posting about me! ONLY Seinfeld can mention me, and only if it is humorous!
i don't think you understand to what extent mahatma gandhi is revered in india. try to imagine what would have happened if seinfeld had said something like that about jesus christ or martin luther king. NBC would have been inundated with angry phone calls. --- later, sunil
You forget that NBC is also the network that allowed "Dateline NBC" to totally disillusion the public about GM pickup trucks exploding. So, NBC would not have cared about all the phone calls. THE POINT IS>>>>>>>> You are in America and you can say whatever you want about whoever you want.... it may offend someone.... so, go board yourself up in Waco if you want to avoid dealing with America's values! IT WAS A JOKE!!!!!
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 09:13:24 CST From: William H Temps III Message-ID: Newsgroups: alt.tv.seinfeld Subject: Re: Gandhi!! Distribution: world,local References:
I may have mangled some quotations a bit; this is a fairly user-hostile system ...
Some people get offended by things, and some don't ... personally, I consider myself very hard to offend: why should it matter to ME that some bozo has an opinion that conflicts with mine? I have to wonder, do some people have self-images so fragile they have to depend on agreement from people they don't even know to feel their opinions are valid?
Sometimes, misinformation--as opposed to jokes--can be dangerous. For example, I would be offended if someone suggested that black males are all dangerous, violent, or unemployable. That's the kind of thing that can actually have a detrimental effect on people's lives. Jokes can also perpetuate that kind of negative stereotype, or can be degrading. That what makes ethnic humor offensive (even though it may also be at that same time funny).
I'm not entirely clear on what was being stated or implied in the reference to Gandhi: that he had at one time had sex? How would the lives of anyone--inside India or out--be affected if this were in fact true? Why exactly is this a problem? Can you be certain it is NOT true? Remember, Gandhi was not a god, he was a man. In fact, from what I've heard, he was at one time a fairly loose kinda guy. Even the Buddha was a man, and before his conversion, he was a rich man, he drank and consorted with prostitutes. Is that bad? Does it affect in any way his accomplishments? Ask yourself why it is difficult for you to accept the suggestion that Gandhi may have had sex.
As for Jesus Christ, having sex WOULD be inconsistent with his character (which is one reason there are so many sexual problems in the Christian world). However, I personally wouldn't be offended by the suggestion; in fact, it's been done ('The Last Temptation of Christ', or much better in 'Behold The Man').
One mistake people seem to make frequently is confusing the messenger with the message (confusing levels of abstraction, as Korzybski would say). Suppose--hypothetically!--someone suggested that Martin Luther King, Jr, drank a lot, beat his wife, and had extramarital affairs. Would that affect in any way the value of what he said, or what he did? On the other hand, what if someone suggested MLK was being paid by J Edgar Hoover to keep them uppity blacks quiet? I think there's an important distinction between the two. I'm not sure either has any bearing on the philosophy of non-violent resistance, or civil disobedience.
On the other hand, I guess I don't want to suggest that there's anything wrong with saying you're offended; that's a valid point of view.
Now, if you were to suggest the Intel 86-series CPUs are better than the Motorola 68000s--those are fightin' words!
'An insult is like a drink--it affects one only if accepted.' (Robert Heinlein, in 'Glory Road').
i don't think the objection was to the implication that Gandhi had sex. of course he had sex- he had quite a few kids. i think what offended Indians was the ridiculous picture painted of Gandhi- smearing oil on his bald head and rubbing it on the woman's tummy- not a very dignified picture. --- later, sunil
Ignore the following if you are a liberal pinhead:
In article [email] (Arun Vaidyanath) writes:
Since you are in America now there is something that must be explained to you. In celebrating the first amendment guarantee to freedom of the press, our young self-congratulating comedians may make one of three levels of attacks on all persons in the public eye:
1) Anything at all may be said, the more viciously said the better, whether true or untrue, about:
a.) all Republicans
b.) Democrats whose behavior is so outlandish that to not
attack them means missing easy material (e.g. Kennedys, Gary Hart)
c.) religious leaders of all non-Jewish faiths (nuns, priests,
evangelists, Shirley MacLaine)
d.) corporations
e.) elderly people
Gentle fun may be poked at:
a.) all other Democrats
b.) foreigners (Asians, Mexicans, Russians, etc.)
c.) people without perfect bodies (fat, bad complexion, etc.)
d.) news media
3.) No jokes at all may be made about (unless the comedian IS one):
a.) blacks
b.) Jews
c.) homosexuals
d.) handicapped people
Some dare try #3 (Andrew Dice Clay) but they are quickly destroyed by gang-banging critics.
These lists are not meant to be exhaustive but instead to give you some idea of what types of folks the entertainment industry holds in contempt and which kinds they accord special treatment to. You should be glad that Gandhi only came in for a Type 2 attack. Relax and understand that although Seinfeld's writers were irreverent they meant no actual harm to the Mahatma. Virtually every person or thing I hold dear to my heart has been attacked mercilessly by the entertainment industry. The only TV I watch is Seinfeld and Home Improvment (take that Red Baron!). Jerry Seinfeld is a clever enough observer of human nature not to have to resort to profanity and virulence to entertain. On the other hand, if the remark about Gandhi makes you that angry, write a letter to NBC and the show's sponsors and tell them you are going to quit watching the show and that you will no longer patronize the products you see advertised.
In American society there are things that cannot be said or the liberal thought police will go wilding on you. However we can fight back against their orthodoxy with the power of the purse. When they say things that offend you cut off their money supply. Our Constitution guarantees the right to print any political or religious thought we may want but it does not require that all thoughts be published, read, agreed with, and financially supported.
Giving offense in this nation is the true pastime. Politeness and manners are virtually unheard of anymore. Welcome to America.
I hope Salmon Rushdie has an extra bed for Jerry if things get ugly.
I hate to bring this up but...Andrew Dice Clay *is* Jewish and from New Jersey for that matter. His whole Brooklyn Italian Schtick is just another angle to get himself some attention...
Marcus Haupt Columbia Univerisity Dept Of Computer Science
Spare me the tedious details of your over-sensitivity.
Gandhi was a good and brilliant man, who did and said a lot of wonderful things. He _was_ a man, however. I remember hearing something about him being a somewhat passionate type, but don't remember where I heard or read that. Can anyone confirm this? Perhaps this was the basis for the Seinfeld jokes about him.
I think people should remember that great thinkers, leaders and speakers are usually human beings. Sex isn't actually a bad thing, maybe you should try it sometime.
YES HE WAS THE PASSIONATE TYPE. HOW ELSE COULD YOU EXPLAIN THE FACT THAT HE HAD WOMEN AROUND HIM ALL THE TIME? ANYWAY ENOUGH OF THE GANDHI DISCUSSION. WHAT IS DONE IS DONE?
PLEDGE: I SHALL NO LONGER WRITE TO THIS GROUP TILL ANOTHER INDIAN LEADER OR THE INDIAN CULTURE IS MADE FUN OF ON SEINFELD. MOST OF MY REPLIES WILL BE TO PROVOKE INTERESTING AND SUTTLE REPLIES NOT MASSIVE FLAME WARS. SO DO NOT TAKE SERIOUSLY ANYTHING I WRITE.
ROCK
ITS BEEN INTERESTING GUYS!!! SHALL MISS WRITING HERE!! [address]!