Hindus Upset Over Posters Portraying Jimi Hendrix as Deity

[DreadFish]

So, today in a Malaysian paper, I read an article titled the same as this post saying that many Hindus are upset over some posters of Jimi Hendrix depicted as a Hindu deity. The posters were sold at a recent book-fare in the area.

Now, the article does not mention that the posters in question are actually the album cover of the 1967 album, Axis: Bold as Love, so I take it that these people were not aware of the album's existence and thought that someone just put Jimi's head on the body of Vishnu to make a poster. Taking into account that these posters are of an album cover, it makes sense that they would be sold at a book-fare. For background: when the album was going to be released, Jimi said he wanted an album cover that showed his Indian ancestry. He meant his Native American ancestry, but this was misunderstood and the cover was made of him appearing like Vishnu on the cover.

The head of a local Hindu NGO (non-government organisation) said that the posters were an insult to the Hindu faith and have offended Hindus the world over and urged the company that sold them to issue a public apology.

So, my question is to the Hindus of our community: Do you find this offensive in any way? Is this really insulting to Hindus the world over? Or is this an overreaction, perhaps based on a misunderstanding, to an album cover that has been around since the '60s?

 

[StarryNightshade]

So, my question is to the Hindus of our community: Do you find this offensive in any way? Is this really insulting to Hindus the world over? Or is this an overreaction, perhaps based on a misunderstanding, to an album cover that has been around since the '60s?

As a white Hindu, I'm not sure how much my opinion is worth, but here goes.

I can see it as an issue of appropriation (especially in context of an artist using an image that is not culturally or religiously related to him in any way), especially when many Indians see westerners only having an interest in Eastern culture/religion due to it being "strange" or "exotic". One need look no further than the decade in which Mr. Hendrix hailed from: the 60s. Hippies taking an interest in Krishna, meditation and yoga without really understanding the deeper religious or cultural meanings of the aforementioned. Many of whom dropped it altogether once it didn't work for them or as soon as the next exotic thing came around.

However, is it really offensive? As in it really hurts the sentiments of the faith and culture? I can see how it is annoying, but I really don't think it's that offensive in the long run.

 

[DreadFish]

As a white Hindu, I'm not sure how much my opinion is worth, but here goes.

I can see it as an issue of appropriation (especially in context of an artist using an image that is not culturally or religiously related to him in any way), especially when many Indians see westerners only having an interest in Eastern culture/religion due to it being "strange" or "exotic". One need look no further than the decade in which Mr. Hendrix hailed from: the 60s. Hippies taking an interest in Krishna, meditation and yoga without really understanding the deeper religious or culturally meanings of the aforementioned. Many of whom dropped it altogether once it didn't work for them or as soon as the next exotic thing came around.

However, is it really offensive? As in it really hurts the sentiments of the faith and culture? I can see how it is annoying, but I really don't think it's that offensive in the long run.

This is about how I feel. While I identify as a Buddhist, I easily relate to Hinduism and could easily consider myself a Hindu if I felt the need to "convert".

That said, I wouldn't find it insulting; I consider it a non-issue. However, I am not a native Hindu and this is not the culture and religion that I grew up in and intimately identify with, so this issue is less personal to me and I can see that Hindus may not agree with me on it. In the Buddhist sense, I would not be insulted if it was Jimi depicted as a Buddha or some other deity used in Buddhism and would probably think it funny.

 

[Jainarayan]

I can see it as an issue of appropriation (especially in context of an artist using an image that is not culturally or religiously related to him in any way), especially when many Indians see westerners only having an interest in Eastern culture/religion due to it being "strange" or "exotic". One need look no further than the decade in which Mr. Hendrix hailed from: the 60s. Hippies taking an interest in Krishna, meditation and yoga without really understanding the deeper religious or culturally meanings of the aforementioned. Many of whom dropped it altogether once it didn't work for them or as soon as the next exotic thing came around.

So much this. ^

However, is it really offensive? As in it really hurts the sentiments of the faith and culture? I can see how it is annoying, but I really don't think it's that offensive in the long run.

People will always do stupid things and offend others; people will always be offended by others. Sometimes events like this can raise awareness. We can't go back in time to change or eradicate it, but we can learn from it and hope these things don;t happen anymore.

 

[Poeticus]

I was offended when they made one for
Sachin Tendulkar, and when they made a
mandir for Sonia Gandhi.

By offended, I strictly mean: an epic .​

 

[Vinayaka]

I am rarely personally offended by much at all. Saddened, maybe. But if anyone, or any community feels offended, then the offender should stop doing whatever it is. It should never be up to the offender to decide.

 

[Poeticus]

So, today in a Malaysian paper, I read an article titled the same as this post saying that many Hindus are upset over some posters of Jimi Hendrix depicted as a Hindu deity. The posters were sold at a recent book-fare in the area.

Now, the article does not mention that the posters in question are actually the album cover of the 1967 album, Axis: Bold as Love, so I take it that these people were not aware of the album's existence and thought that someone just put Jimi's head on the body of Vishnu to make a poster. Taking into account that these posters are of an album cover, it makes sense that they would be sold at a book-fare. For background: when the album was going to be released, Jimi said he wanted an album cover that showed his Indian ancestry. He meant his Native American ancestry, but this was misunderstood and the cover was made of him appearing like Vishnu on the cover.

The head of a local Hindu NGO (non-government organisation) said that the posters were an insult to the Hindu faith and have offended Hindus the world over and urged the company that sold them to issue a public apology.

So, my question is to the Hindus of our community: Do you find this offensive in any way? Is this really insulting to Hindus the world over? Or is this an overreaction, perhaps based on a misunderstanding, to an album cover that has been around since the '60s?

But we must be realistic here, and I mean this in no apologetic way:​

Did Hindus go berserk ?
Were there riots ?
Were people physically hurt when Hindus became upset ?
Or was it just a Hindu NGO asking for the issuing of an apology ?
Did it become Salman Rushdie-status ?
Was it Babri Masjid-status ?​

If it's no to all of these ... I have a question to ask:

Are Hindus held to a certain pedestal ?​

For example, "Dear John Doe, we expect Christians and Muslims to go bonkers, but not these timid Hindus! How could they have become upset ? They have done the whole universe a disservice by asking for the issuing of an apology! How dare they ?"​

 

[Madhuri]

I am not personally offended by it at all.

 

[DreadFish]

But we must be realistic here, and I mean this in no apologetic way:​

Did Hindus go berserk ?
Were there riots ?
Were people physically hurt when Hindus became upset ?
Or was it just a Hindu NGO asking for the issuing of an apology ?
Did it become Salman Rushdie-status ?
Was it Babri Masjid-status ?​

If it's no to all of these ... I have a question to ask:

Are Hindus held to a certain pedestal ?​

For example, "Dear John Doe, we expect Christians and Muslims to go bonkers, but not these timid Hindus! How could they have become upset ? They have done the whole universe a disservice by asking for the issuing of an apology! How dare they ?"​

They are just insulted by it and want an apology as far as the article said.

I, by no means, intend to insinuate that Hindus are timid, I've never had that idea. Somehow, I guess I just thought that Hindus were not as easily offended by things like this. However, im not really easily offended, so most things that offend other people surprise me. That's why I wanted to get direct feedback from Hindus not just read an article saying that Hindus are offended by this.

 

[Poeticus]

They are just insulted by it and want an apology as far as the article said.

I, by no means, intend to insinuate that Hindus are timid, I've never had that idea. Somehow, I guess I just thought that Hindus were not as easily offended by things like this. However, im not really easily offended, so most things that offend other people surprise me. That's why I wanted to get direct feedback from Hindus not just read an article saying that Hindus are offended by this.

Oh, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I was in no way stating that
you insinuated that Hindus were/are timid. And you are right, many
Hindus are not easily offended by things like this, since the Dharmic
paradigm allows lots and lots of room for criticism.​

 

[YmirGF]

I am not personally offended by it at all.

Indeed. Hendrix was the nearest thing to god we have seen in a good many years...

 

[DreadFish]

Oh, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I was in no way stating that
you insinuated that Hindus were/are timid. And you are right, many
Hindus are not easily offended by things like this, since the Dharmic
paradigm allows lots and lots of room for criticism.​

No problems.

Yeah, I guess I just see Hinduism as bigger than all that.

 

[DreadFish]

Indeed. Hendrix was the nearest thing to god we have seen in a good many years...

My old band's practice room actually had this very poster on the wall. It was like 5-foot by 3-foot and I used to humourously think of him as being the ishta-deva of our band, watching over and inspiring us with his powers of creativity

 

[Aupmanyav]

So, my question is to the Hindus of our community: Do you find this offensive in any way? Is this really insulting to Hindus the world over? Or is this an overreaction, perhaps based on a misunderstanding, to an album cover that has been around since the '60s?

Not that we would announce a prize for killing the singer, but I think Hindus do feel it to be in bad taste, something which should be avoided.

 

[Poeticus]

...but I think Hindus do feel it to be in bad taste, something which should be avoided.

Personally, I'm not offended. I too, however, find it also to be in bad taste.
But I'm more concerned with the radical labeling of even the slightest form
of discomfort to be seen as close-minded. That's the real concern, IMO. Many
instances of where Hindus exclaim their displeasure in events such as these
are valid from socio-cultural perspectives, which are usually shoved under
the rug of perspectives purported indirectly and/or directly as either subjectively
or objectively superior.​

 

[Nyingjé Tso]

I do not think it is a bad thing that they asked for an apology. It is important not to send to anyone the message of "Oh it's okay, they won't raise any fingers, we can do what we want with their religion and culture"

It's normal that some people are offended and some not. Personally I am not offended

I was offended when they made one for
Sachin Tendulkar, and when they made a
mandir for Sonia Gandhi.
​

But I am offended by this ^

And also offended by this ^

And by this also ^


I think the intention is important. It is also important that Hindu raise some voice, at least to say "please, it's our religion, have respect". Most people I have talked to in many countries of europe do not even see Hinduism as a "real" religion, but some kind of ancient tribal cult fashionized. This is sick and must change.

 

[Windwalker]

I do not think it is a bad thing that they asked for an apology. It is important not to send to anyone the message of "Oh it's okay, they won't raise any fingers, we can do what we want with their religion and culture"

The only thing in this instance is that this is in effect asking for an apology for something created close to 50 years ago during a time of our cultural ignorance (America was barely waking up to multicultural awareness, let alone sensitives). There are many things which American culture did in the past that by today's standards are offensive, such as the ways we portrayed Blacks and Native Americans. It's kind of like asking an adult to apologize for something he did when he was five years old. If the adult is still doing those things, then of course, they should acknowledge their actions and apologize.

And also offended by this ^

And by this also ^

Those are pretty foul. I agree. It screams that person is an idiot who created those. I despise any sort of commercialization of the sacred. I mean seriously, can you imagine taking portraits of Jesus and using them to sell hamburgers as "divine"? There would be no end to the outcries here. Hindus should object to this. I certainly am offended by it.

 

[Vinayaka]

My understanding from the article was that the Malaysian government had already confiscated many of the posters in other areas, and the Hindus were saying, 'Oops, you guys missed this incident."

In Malaysia, (predominantly Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and Christian minorities) the government is a censor for a lot of stuff, but in particular anti-Islamic stuff. So they are saying, 'If we stop insults to one community, then it's only fair we do it for all communities.'

 

[Jainarayan]

I do not think it is a bad thing that they asked for an apology. It is important not to send to anyone the message of "Oh it's okay, they won't raise any fingers, we can do what we want with their religion and culture"

It's normal that some people are offended and some not. Personally I am not offended

But I am offended by this ^

[snip for space]

I think the intention is important. It is also important that Hindu raise some voice, at least to say "please, it's our religion, have respect". Most people I have talked to in many countries of europe do not even see Hinduism as a "real" religion, but some kind of ancient tribal cult fashionized. This is sick and must change.

I'm offended by those pictures too. It's subjective. Like Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said about pornography "I can't define it but I know it when I see it".

James Cameron said when was developing the movie Avatar, he chose the name of the movie and the color of the Na'vi on the Hindu deities, for whom he always had a respect for and fascination with. There was an episode of Xena Warrior Princess called The Way. She went to India and met Hanuman and Krishna. Krishna instructed her in her dharma, hence the title The Way. She fought Indrajit, who won and killed her, but she was reincarnated as Kali, who defeated Indrajit.

Now, what's the point of all this? Well, the producers put a voice-over at the end of the episode saying they wanted to treat the subject matter with the utmost respect because Hinduism is a living religion. Personally I liked the episode. Some Hindu groups praised it, especially because of the intention to be respectful. Other groups got their skivvies in a twist. “You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time but you can never please all of the people all of the time.” - Abraham Lincoln. I think it's all about intention.

 

[DreadFish]

My understanding from the article was that the Malaysian government had already confiscated many of the posters in other areas, and the Hindus were saying, 'Oops, you guys missed this incident."

In Malaysia, (predominantly Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and Christian minorities) the government is a censor for a lot of stuff, but in particular anti-Islamic stuff. So they are saying, 'If we stop insults to one community, then it's only fair we do it for all communities.'

Ah, yes. This makes sense.