No doubt many readers will
be keen to know more about president Asif Zardari's current situation
and condition. For one thing, my guess is as good as yours. For another,
as history has shown presidents come and go but the Marilyn Monroes
stay forever. I'm assuming that Veena Malik will appreciate the
comparison and the compliment.
The case of the nude FHM cover is a curious one. When I read about the 'expose,' I began following the online debate on the issue. Many Pakistanis were weighing in, as were some Indians. The Pakistani debate was as follows: Veena Malik is either a tramp or a woman wronged by a crass and thoughtless publication . The Indian comments were in this vein - Veena Malik is a hero, a champion of liberalism and of freedom of expression.
Malik has led the charge against FHM claiming that the photographs have been manipulated, that she never posed for the magazine. Even before the publication hit the newsstands in this city, Hayat had filed off a lawsuit accusing FHM for having falsified the photographs. There is news that the magazine has counterattacked with its own lawsuit.
Let's first tackle the issue of the shoot: was it or was it not? Sadly, I neither know Veena Malik nor anyone who can positively confirm the reality of the situation. I suspect it may be a combination of publicity stunt and save-myselffrom-home-front-rage-lest-Iend-up-dead . Some who are more schooled in type of shoot claim it isn't even a nude shoot since nothing is actually truly visible. I turned to the valuable Oxford Dictionary for help. According to it, the noun 'nude' refers to 'a naked human figure, typically as the subject of a painting, sculpture , or photograph.'
The cover's nude status is speculative but it's quite clear that the inside photographs don't reflect a nude shoot. It is, however, a rather provocative and daring stunt for a woman from Pakistan who wouldn't be able to pull it off at home where such publications don't exist, at least in the public domain or on newsstands. (This of course, doesn't mean that there isn't an active and thriving blue cinema industry and a ready availability of all sorts of underground material for sale).
If it's true that Malik did pose for the folks at FHM, it's also quite plausible that she could deny it. Certainly many commentators in Pakistan, actively participating in the blogosphere, were of the opinion that Malik's reputation - which matches, in some sense that of her Indian counterpart , Rakhi Sawant - had been compromised by the illmeaning publication. All publicity helps as we know and after all is said and done, the FHM covers will live on.
Given the Indian chants for Rah-Rah Veena, I decided to get myself acquainted with Debonair, having recently put down the wonderful 'Lucknow Boy' and read about the challenges that editorship of such a publication posed for a serious editor. One must compare apples to apples after all if freedom and liberalism are to be evaluated. The chastity belts were firmly secured and the raciest material was from the 'farang' contingent - in this issue the former Indian bride, Liz bountiful Hurley. I'm not sure if this then means that Indians are not liberal or progressive. However , bandying about lofty terms is a particular specialty of us South Asians.
If my own two cents can be added to the debate, I'm happy to offer them. The first cent is that Veena Malik or not the woman on FHM's cover has a killer body. Second if liberalism is being measured by FHM shoots we've got to go back to the drawing board to figure out what exactly liberalism means. And finally, since one plus one equals three, if there were more Veena Maliks we could happily balance the equation of extremes in Pakistan, a reality every Pakistani should covet and pursue.
The case of the nude FHM cover is a curious one. When I read about the 'expose,' I began following the online debate on the issue. Many Pakistanis were weighing in, as were some Indians. The Pakistani debate was as follows: Veena Malik is either a tramp or a woman wronged by a crass and thoughtless publication . The Indian comments were in this vein - Veena Malik is a hero, a champion of liberalism and of freedom of expression.
Malik has led the charge against FHM claiming that the photographs have been manipulated, that she never posed for the magazine. Even before the publication hit the newsstands in this city, Hayat had filed off a lawsuit accusing FHM for having falsified the photographs. There is news that the magazine has counterattacked with its own lawsuit.
Let's first tackle the issue of the shoot: was it or was it not? Sadly, I neither know Veena Malik nor anyone who can positively confirm the reality of the situation. I suspect it may be a combination of publicity stunt and save-myselffrom-home-front-rage-lest-Iend-up-dead . Some who are more schooled in type of shoot claim it isn't even a nude shoot since nothing is actually truly visible. I turned to the valuable Oxford Dictionary for help. According to it, the noun 'nude' refers to 'a naked human figure, typically as the subject of a painting, sculpture , or photograph.'
The cover's nude status is speculative but it's quite clear that the inside photographs don't reflect a nude shoot. It is, however, a rather provocative and daring stunt for a woman from Pakistan who wouldn't be able to pull it off at home where such publications don't exist, at least in the public domain or on newsstands. (This of course, doesn't mean that there isn't an active and thriving blue cinema industry and a ready availability of all sorts of underground material for sale).
If it's true that Malik did pose for the folks at FHM, it's also quite plausible that she could deny it. Certainly many commentators in Pakistan, actively participating in the blogosphere, were of the opinion that Malik's reputation - which matches, in some sense that of her Indian counterpart , Rakhi Sawant - had been compromised by the illmeaning publication. All publicity helps as we know and after all is said and done, the FHM covers will live on.
Given the Indian chants for Rah-Rah Veena, I decided to get myself acquainted with Debonair, having recently put down the wonderful 'Lucknow Boy' and read about the challenges that editorship of such a publication posed for a serious editor. One must compare apples to apples after all if freedom and liberalism are to be evaluated. The chastity belts were firmly secured and the raciest material was from the 'farang' contingent - in this issue the former Indian bride, Liz bountiful Hurley. I'm not sure if this then means that Indians are not liberal or progressive. However , bandying about lofty terms is a particular specialty of us South Asians.
If my own two cents can be added to the debate, I'm happy to offer them. The first cent is that Veena Malik or not the woman on FHM's cover has a killer body. Second if liberalism is being measured by FHM shoots we've got to go back to the drawing board to figure out what exactly liberalism means. And finally, since one plus one equals three, if there were more Veena Maliks we could happily balance the equation of extremes in Pakistan, a reality every Pakistani should covet and pursue.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment