In October 1995, while reviewing Christopher Hitchens’s controversial book on Mother Teresa, The Missionary Position, for the London Review of Books, I had said, “It is interesting that the poor whom Mother Teresa attends to never speak. They have no social backgrounds or histories, although it is precisely history and social background, and the shifts within them, that create the poor. Instead of speaking, the poor in the photographs look up at her silently, touch her hand, are fed by a spoon.” In the almost two decades since then, I have had no occasion to change my views on this subject. Let me quote a few paragraphs I’d written then.
“Silence is a strange attribute to ascribe to the noisiest and most talkative city. Calcutta, capital of India and second city of the Empire for 138 years, until 1911, was a crucible of Indian nationalist politics.... Bengal’s history has also been one of political unrest and even tragedy. In particular, there were the famines, the last of which, in 1943, was not caused by a real food shortage at all. It was partly created by the unscrupulousness of local traders and by the diversion of staple foods, such as rice, to the British army.... With the famines came an influx into Calcutta of the rural poor. Many of the poor to whom Mother Teresa would have ministered when she opened her first slum school in Calcutta on December 21, 1948 (she had been teaching geography in a missionary school in the city from 1929), would have been victims of the famine or their children. The number of poor people in Bengal is always being added to, and in 1948 Mother Teresa would also have encountered a huge surge of homeless refugees from East Pakistan.
“My own mixed feelings about Mother Teresa were born sometime in the early ’80s, when I was an undergraduate in London. There was a film about her on television (not Malcolm Muggeridge’s Something Beautiful for God); the only things I recall are the large number of affluent, admiring British people in it in close proximity to Mother Teresa, and the latter smiling and saying, more than once to the camera: ‘We must sell Love.’ I couldn’t see in what way, except the most superficial, these affluent and photogenic Europeans had anything to do with the poor in Calcutta. Nor could I see how ‘selling Love’ was going to help the poor.
“One of the things that has struck me ever since about the publicity concerning Mother Teresa is that it has less to do with the poor than with Mother Teresa. The poor are shown in a timeless, even pastoral, light: Muggeridge even claims that the interior of the Home for the Dying appeared in his film in spite of insufficient light because of a ‘miraculous light’ that emanated from Mother Teresa. The ‘miraculous light’ seems to be a metaphor for the ahistorical; it fixes the Bengali destitute in a timeless vacuum; it further uproots from community, background and identity those who have already been uprooted from community, background and identity. In blocking out history, the ‘miraculous light’ also blocks out one’s proper empathy with, and understanding of, the poor. While it may be true that the poor are people like you and me because we were all created by God, it is only through an understanding of a country’s history, and the history of the poor, that we can begin to appreciate that, indeed, the poor were people like you and me before something happened to them.
“Hitchens’s book examines, with the acuity of a literary critic, a portfolio of photographs, each showing Mother Teresa with a dubious character—either with people known to enrich themselves at the cost of others and to terrorise the powerless, like Michele Duvalier, wife of Jean-Claude Duvalier of Haiti, or big-time crooks like cult leader ‘John Roger’, ‘a fraud of Chaucerian proportions’. These people have donated money, at one time or another, to Mother Teresa’s organisation.
“For all that, there is no evidence in The Missionary Position to suggest that Mother Teresa has used any money from donations for her personal material benefit—in this much, at least, she stands apart from most modern godmen and television evangelists, as well as from Chaucer’s Pardoner. Money might have helped her operations in Calcutta to expand into a ‘missionary multinational’, but conditions in her ‘homes’ are hardly opulent—indeed, if anything, they are unnecessarily austere. Hitchens’s contention is that Mother Teresa’s ambitions aren’t material at all, ‘in the ordinary sense of that term; her aim is to establish a cult of austerity and suffering’.”
(Amit Chaudhuri’s latest book is Calcutta, Two Years in the City.)
Apropos Amit Chaudhuri’s On the Same Page, Christopher Hitchens was in bed with the neo-cons in America and was one of the staunchest supporters of the second Iraq war. For Hitchens, people like Mother Teresa were villains, and George W. Bush, Rumsfeld and that personification of evil, Wolfowitz, are the true saints.
H.M. Siddhanti, Richmond, US
The Canadian report tries to evaluate Mother by the standards of a CEO of a sophisticated organisation. Luckily, she was not, and never attempted to be that. She never sought the media, the media came to her.
Matthew Adukanil, Dharmapuri
The all-powerful Communists, known for their official atheist stand, and non-appeasement of religious groups, were in power in West Bengal and had no issues with the Catholic nun. Jyoti Basu, in fact, gave her a lot of moral support and government help. They had only one problem: they refused to accept her so-called miraculous powers.
G. Anuplal, Bangalore
Probably the author is not aware that this character Hitchins was in bed with the neo-cons in America and was one of the staunchest supporters of the second Iraq war. For Hitchins, people like mother Theresa are villains, and W. Bush, Rumsfeld, and that personification of evil Wolfowitz are the true saints. What more needs to be said?
WTF? Amit Chaudhuri "gave" his "vote" to Hitch?
AC giving his vote to Hitch is like a pgymy giving his vote to a giant. It doesn't matter.
Besides, whats all this mush about "ahistorical" folks blah blah blah. Say it like it is: None of us who are old and/or dying, given a choice, would voluntarily choose to go spend our last days at a Missionaries of Charity hospice. Those filthy ghettos of death are not good enough for us. And if they are not good enough for us, why would they be good enough for anyone else.
What we need are good, clean, affordable institutions for the poor, sick and dying, not some seedy network that fetishizes suffering.
Cool down. Just Joe KIng and D L Narayan are the same troll. trolling under different names. Their fan base is right wing, One acts as a teenager, another as 60ish. Their knowledge of religion or for that matter any topic comes from pamphlets of illumination, mentioned in news.outlookindia.com/allfeedbacks.aspx . They lack depth . They also troll as secular under different names. There also they lack depth. Now cool down. I have insulted the whole bunch much more effectively than you could have. They are playing a silly game at best, and possibly a dangerous game by fuelling hatred.
i am quite sure you are a mental retard barking like a mad dog.
//there is no evidence in The Missionary Position to suggest that Mother Teresa has used any money from donations for her personal material benefit//
is Hitchens saying that, or is he pointing to the love for suffering that Catholics have, very much like communists.
Commies have much in common with the religious retards
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT