Of Bootfluenza and the Fourth Estate

Mr. Shoe is gaining in popularity as a political missile. Mr. Shoe might have been thrown-in to 'meet' people before. But in his new found avatar, Mr. Shoe has caught the imagination of the media and the public alike. Suppressed grievances are brought to the fore by giving Mr. Shoe some air!

Feeling helpless? Go chuck him at someone! After Muntazar Al-Zaidi bootslapped Bush, Mr. Shoe in flight has become the weapon of the powerless.

Compared to a bullet or a bomb, the shoe is as harmless as a flower(only as long as your olfactory nerves are jammed!). Its impact is mild, its range is limited(no stilettos please). It is the common man’s weapon or missile where ever or whenever his shoe pinches. There are times when even pebbles or stones may not be readily available, unless you have hidden them in your pocket, to be used against political adversaries as a part of advance planning. But the shoe is there under one’s foot always ready to fly, if lobbed by the wearer as an impromptu release of ire. Indeed, Mr. Shoe has grown in eminence!

There is a time and place for everything. For the shoe throw, the venue of a press conference, attended by a dignified authority or person seems appropriate. In the present climate, shoe throwing has become a winsome gesture, a stunt that surely wins some (un)deserved publicity. Afterall, it takes quite a lot to remove your footwear and bear those pungent heavens while your footwear lies close to the cynosure of the public assembly!

The thrower may be pardoned, if lucky, or if the social or political gap between the thrower and the person targeted is wide enough for a show of magnanimity. Or the law may take its course. But the thrower is amply compensated by the publicity netted. The shoe throw requires no skills; no training. The shoe need not even hit the person. But its direction should leave no one in doubt about the person intended as victim.

Some say demand for easily removable shoes has increased, after the recent events. Those wearing boots no longer tie the lace, to save time when a throw is needed. Suspicions about the inclusion of the up-to-the-minute "shoe-a-thon" as the shoe-stopper in the 2010 CW Games are rife!

The next parliament may legislate on the issue of the shoe. America should ban the sale of easily-removable-and-throwable shoes for not every President is as adept at dodging Hush Puppies(and other concerns) as Bush. For attending functions where dignitaries are present, people may be required to leave their shoes outside before entering the premises. Do we not remove footwear when entering temples and certain marked areas, even though there is no law but only convention?

I don’t say shoes have not been hurled at each other by people earlier. But what makes it sensational are the personalities, occasion, context, issue involved etc. There is a time and place for every thing. Changes in these can create sensations. Throwing a shoe on a common man walking on the road is no great event. Who cares?

The shoe industry may undergo drastic changes in the light of the shoe throw politics. The design, weight, color and many other parameters may need attention.

In the past, rotten eggs, tomatoes, pebbles, paper weights, books, cups, bottles, plates and anything which can be lifted and thrown have been used as projectiles. But the shoe throw is different. Oiling the wheels of this much-acclaimed endeavour are sites like www.shoeandawe.com which choose to pay homage to those great men-at-"arms".

Here the shoe is used as a symbol of religious or political dislike and hatred. The contrast between the humble shoe and the ambitious throne it wants to occupy makes for much publicity. Above all there is the surprise element involved. It should be most unexpected and sudden. Some applaud the feat in private, while condemning it openly. Media display it as if it were a heroic deed!

It is an insult to the intellegentsia to equate shoe-throwing with democracy. At best, these shoe chuckers are attention-seeking individuals. They give bad name to the virtue of.

While it might be true that the ban on Jagdish Tytler owes its existence to everyone's recent interest in a certain someone's shoes, this embrace of vigilante justice is an extremely dangerous trend and one which is truly unbecoming of a healthy democracy. A true democracy hinges on the dictum of public opinion formed not as after-effects of a shoe-gate but of the analysis carried out by free-thinking men. Politicians should be wary of commiting atrocities not because they fear being hit by a shoe in public but because they should fear being exposed and excommunicated from the entire politcal setup.

If the journalist who threw his size-nine Reebok at the Home Minister was just an ordinary citizen who took such action on one of Delhi’s streets then perhaps it could be argued that he simply has no decency. But for a news reporter to take such action is a matter that should be condemned. That he chose to use shoes over words, forgetting that journalism does not debate and communicate using violence and vulgarity is an insult to the profession of journalism and an indicator that the nature of journalism has been misunderstood.

These words are not in defense of Chidambaram; they come in defense of our culture that does not approve of such behavior. These words are for defending the profession of journalism that is beginning to suffer from a lack of professionalism. A journalist is expected to voice his concerns by posting pithy, quick witted questions, aimed at facilitating cognitive thinking. However this journalist, who today has the right to ask questions and to hold a politician responsible and remind him of his lies, decides not to do that; he decides that shoes were powerful than words, reason and argument, as this is some people’s idea of democracy. No civilized society can forgive this way of expressing disapproval in a democracy.

If it is a sign of the times, then it is time to change! This again is a case of wrong means to reach the right ends. Can we change? What would you do if you were in Jarnail Singh's shoes?

Ponder.

Au revoir!