Image-makers redux
Just to clarify why I’m so intent on dubbing the HappyDent luminous-elastic yogis as kitsch:
With six arms, Hindi Bendy can achieve positions most yogis wouldn’t even attempt on this spiritual plane. With a red dot on his forehead and fingers forming sacred circles, this 6″ tall solid rubber Hindu is the limb-laden friend of our famous Happy Bendy. Hindi Bendy’s long road to enlightenment is chronicled on the back of his package [link]
I’m not really certain what’s on the back of Hindi Bendy’s package, but I can tell you that I grew up with this stuff (courtesy of Archie McPhee’s in Seattle), and would really rather not see India import this distorted-export back to itself. That said, if anyone wants a Hindi Bendy, I have a whole box of them, so…
on Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 11:03 am in Dummies, Humor, Media › 
Email this
› 
Facebook this
› 
Reddit this
› Link
› Reader links
Check out some similar toys.
The link Manish posted in his comment has some real enraging stuff. The language of the so called song is downright disgusting. GRRRRRRRRRRR!
Sorry to sound cliched but this is carrying freedom of expression a bit too far. who the hell is this songwriter-any clues, Manish.
on a lighter note this sounds funny : Hindi Bendy with a Bindi.
anyway, do we see another Kaavyagate here (Hindi Bendy thingy features in Manish’s link too) Chuckle, chuckle :))
Peace :)
if it’s ok to make cute animations of indian gods, why isn’t it ok to make toys and finger puppets?
as for the song lyrics, i’m certain kartik, rather than ganesh, felt pretty much along those lines when his brother got to marry the two chicks he’d been eyeing all because of a technicality. =P
if it’s ok to make cute animations of indian gods, why isn’t it ok to make toys and finger puppets?
It’s not the same, is it? I mean, the animations are still created with respect for the cultural and thereby, religious identity, (albeit in a less-formal manner), but the finger-puppets are meant to just be irreverent playthings that intentionally mock the cultural or religious significance. Same holds true for the Jesus-crap thats out there…
“I mean, the animations are still created with respect for the cultural and thereby, religious identity, (albeit in a less-formal manner), but the finger-puppets are meant to just be irreverent playthings that intentionally mock the cultural or religious significance.”
these are a series of assumptions about intent which we can’t prove. the point is not the intent (which is a personal thing) but rather the form. there is very little separating animation from finger puppets in terms of form. whether an animation is offensive depends on the storyline. whether the finger puppet is offensive will depend, i guess, on what you do with that finger. =D
True enough, but it seems fairly obvious from the descriptions on the Archie McPhee site that the finger puppets et al do mock, albeit subtley. Most animations, save the ones by Virgin Comics, don’t alter meaning or make light of the religious importance of gods. In the case of Hindi Bendy et al, I don’t think form can be separated from intent, especially when both form and intent are so clearly framed by the context of Hinduism–they wouldn’t be “kitsch” if they weren’t poking just a bit of fun at the religion.
In the end, I don’t really have a problem with the puppets, Jesus playing basketball, Buddha smoking pot, whatever, in part because I believe such things (like South Park), are a dying and somewhat low-brow form of cultural criticism. Sometimes I actually think they’re funny and other times, I think about the connection between things like Hindi Bendy and twisty-bendy yogis in the HappyDent commercial (both of which seem to be made for Western audiences), and wonder why any Indian would participate in such a thing. Most days, I just babble aimlessly, like a brook on its way through summer…