Racism

I have to agree with some of the posts, the film is not racist but is in fact critical of racism/imperialism. Just because a film shows racist characters does not mean that it condones their behvior.

As for Indians being "stupid", well, I know (and have known) quite a few Indians and most of them have been way smarter than pretty much anyone else I've met. . .

"My dear Norfolk, this isn't Spain - this is England!"

We are supposed to feel either 1 of 2 ways towards Dr. Aziz at the beginning of the film. We are either delighted by his subservience and take it as a form of politeness and feelings of goodwill toward the British, or we are disgusted and we see it as his submission to the ruling powers and his alienation from his Indian identity. And honestly, I felt a little of both.

As for the racism, of course this film is supposed to have elements of racism in it. I'm not going to deny that it did, because that would be denying the purpose of the film.

It's only telling the truth. During the British Colonizations the darker the Indians got the more 'Low Class' or 'Inferior' they were seen. Bizzarely specific ethnic groups such as Pashtuns or Higher Class Sikhs who were lighter in complexion (Such as Nakuul Mehta, Imran Khan Niazi) - Were held in higher regard or higher class - Like it was a breed of higher or lower dogs :S

I didn't get offended by the 'Racism' of the film because it is just showing exactly how it was. It showed the arrogance, ignorance which was portrayed in many of the British Officers residing there.

The British have a chip on their shoulder I have noticed about the way they treated people in their past colonies. Still though it may not all be about race - The Irish were White & They Were Treated even worse.

It more so had to do with the English thinking their morals/ social conduct was more superior to the South Asians at that time. Reviewers should not call it racist considering it is a fact.

Aziz sure was one naive doofus with an act as this nice, jolly, simple minded and sort of instinctively subservient native. And not just him, most other Hindus were also depicted as a pretty childlike bunch on the whole - especially these few "lawman" who utterly failed to control themselves in a formal setting and got their asses thrown out of the court. So I wouldn´t really be surprised if someone found such depiction kinda offensive, as pompous and evil as most of the British were shown to be.



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

This is a bit off subject, but I think it sheds some light on the Indian mind set. Many are not aware that the is a country that Indians basically "invaded." It is the island country of Fiji. HOwever the Indians did not take it by force. They went there basically to work as laborers in the sugar cane fields and then gradually became the shop keepers of the country. I visied both India and Fiji in the 1980s. At the time, Indians were not allowed to own property. Indeed, even the Fijians did not actually "own" property, but were given some land when they were born that reverted back to the "tribe" upon their death. The Indians, in their quiet, but persistive way, began to be elected to government positions. I haven't kept up with the political climate in Fiji, but I'm sure the Indian influence is still strong there.

maggimae83