US Hindus' issues over "Love Guru"

[Saddle Bronc 124]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7460522.stm

Hindus upset over Hollywood film

By Frances Harrison

BBC religious affairs correspondent

against a Hollywood comedy, saying the film will hurt the religious sentiments of millions of Hindus worldwide.

More than 5,000 people have signed an online petition protesting against the film Love Guru, starring actor Mike Myers and due to be released on Friday.

Some Hindu groups are considering a boycott of Paramount Pictures which produced the film.

Paramount says the film does not make reference to any particular religion.

The company says Love Guru portrays a purely fictional faith.

Good point

In the film, Myers plays the main character, Guru Pitka - who is raised by gurus in an ashram in India and then moves to the US to seek fame as a self-help coach resolving the marital problems of a Canadian hockey player.

The film includes a character played by the British Iranian comedian Omid Djalili called Guru Satchabigknoba and a hockey player called Coach Cherkov.

'Mythical creation'

The argument that it's slapstick and farce rather than real religion doesn't wash with Hindu activists in the US.

They say that in the West so little is known about Hinduism that even a parody like Love Guru could be misinterpreted by teenagers and give them a skewed view of the religion.

Let alone the West, even many Indians are actually unaware of the definition of "Hindu"¹

"They should draw a line when it comes to people's faith," says Bhavna Shinde of the Sanatan Society in the US.

She is upset that the main character wears sacred Hindu saffron robes and carries holy prayer beads.

Mike Myers himself has described the religion he lampoons as a "mythical creation - it's like the Force in Star Wars".

And Paramount Pictures have quoted the spiritual teacher Deepak Chopra rebutting criticism of the film based on only the two-and-a-half-minute trailer.

"The premature outcry against the movie is itself religious propaganda," said Mr Chopra.

also good point; the outcry assumes that Hinduism is a uniform faith--when it is not²

'Hindu concepts'

But Bhavna Shinde is not convinced - indeed she says it's ironic the film company quotes a man who doesn't even consider himself to be a Hindu.

"We all know when you show a person with a sari and a mark on their forehead that will be associated with Hinduism."

She argues that terms used in the film like "guru", "karma" and "ashram" are "signature Hindu concepts" clearly pointing to Hinduism.

"Which other religion are they talking about?" she asks.

So far it's only the trailer that's caused concern - two Hindu groups in the US have complained that they were promised an early screening before the film is released but were never shown it.

In the UK, Paramount Pictures says it will arrange a pre-screening for Hindus before the film opens in August.

Hindu activists in the US have appealed to the rating body to change the classification for the film - which warns some material may be inappropriate for children under 13 years of age - to make it impossible for anyone under 17 to see it.

They've also written protest letters to the Indian Film Censor Board.

They say they would have been happy with some kind of disclaimer at the start of the film explaining that it is not a proper representation of Hinduism but complain their views were not listened to.

1. The term Hindu has never been tightly-defined:
   • prior to 1000 AD, not defined at all
   • from 1192 - 1345, applied to all desis (natives of Sub-continent), irrespective of religion, by Delhi Sultans--who were of Turkic origin
   • 1345 - 1800, applied to all non-Muslim desis (including Sikhs, followers of a religion formed during this period)
   • 1861-1926 tightest definition, excluded Sikhs, Parsis, Buddhists (very few), Christians (the even-fewer-than-Buddhists Indian Jews lumped into this category), Muslims, indigenous tribals, dalits--but includes areligious
   • 1926 - present; due to 1926 lobbying by K.M. Munshi, now includes dalits and indigenous tribals--and still includes areligious
   Ebenezer Sunder Raj, The Confusion Called Conversion, 1990
2. ibid

Edited June 18, 2008 by CherryXS

[Gallowglass 0]

Two words.

"Father Ted".

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Two words.

"Father Ted".

That was a great series.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Was that similar to the US series "Father Murphy"?

[almaty 19]

2 words..f##k them

[Gallowglass 0]

Was that similar to the US series "Father Murphy"?

Was it like "Father Murphy"????

Oh, hell no...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_Ted

It was possibly the most irreverent thing on Irish TV in the mid-1990s. And it was a work of absolute comedy genius. I LOVED it.

Bringing the DVDs with me when I move next month....

Edited June 18, 2008 by Gallowglass

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

And the Sikhs were burning ####### down yesterday over an MTV poster... a poster!

I really hope Hindus and Sikhs in India stop talking smacks about Muslims and the Danish cartoons now.

[almaty 19]

good point brother arijit...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Was that similar to the US series "Father Murphy"?

Was it like "Father Murphy"????

Oh, hell no...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_Ted

It was possibly the most irreverent thing on Irish TV in the mid-1990s. And it was a work of absolute comedy genius. I LOVED it.

Bringing the DVDs with me when I move next month....

I loved the episodes where they tried to write a song for the Eurovision song contest, and the one where Ted is accused of racism.

[Alex+R 0]

When I saw a preview for The Love Guru, I was pretty shocked. I couldn't believe it had been allowed to be made. It was obviously a pretty ignorant brand of comedy. But people keep saying there's no need to criticize the film, as it will speak for itself when it comes out and that will accomplish pretty much the same thing.

Another one of those issues that leaves me torn... people definitely deserve to live the way they want to.... but all religions definitely deserve to be lampooned on a regular basis. Still not sure why we treat religion as a sacred cow (apologies) when it comes to comedy.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

... but all religions definitely deserve to be lampooned on a regular basis. Still not sure why we treat religion as a sacred cow (apologies) when it comes to comedy.

Why say all religions deserve to be lampooned and then apologize for using the phrase sacred cow?

[mawilson 2,133]

Still not sure why we treat religion as a sacred cow (apologies) when it comes to comedy.

We do? What about Dogma?

[Alex+R 0]

How many other Dogmas are there?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Still not sure why we treat religion as a sacred cow (apologies) when it comes to comedy.

We do? What about Dogma?

What about this?

[Alex+R 0]

... but all religions definitely deserve to be lampooned on a regular basis. Still not sure why we treat religion as a sacred cow (apologies) when it comes to comedy.

Why say all religions deserve to be lampooned and then apologize for using the phrase sacred cow?

rofl, cuz it was a bad joke