"Class Dismissed" - Short documentary on Swat Valley, Pakistan

After watching this 14 minute documentary chronicling the last hours before an 11-year old girl's public school in Swat Valley, Pakistan, is closed, I must say, I am very saddened and depressed by the whole situation. I've been reading news about how schools are closing down, week after week, by the dozens, but it never really hits you until you see visuals. Thanks to the documentary, I now appreciate the struggle of women the world over who yearn to be educated.

Ziauddin is not your typical male, and his daughter - or family, in general - are not your typical family. He is a social activist who wants his daughter to be a politician. She, on the other hand, wants to be a doctor. And both dont want to leave Swat! I salute their courage. Not much is left of their once serene valley. I had the pleasure of visiting the northern areas of Pakistan, specifically Swat and some other cities nearby, in 2001, and was blown away. Such beauty! Those images will be eteched in my mind forever.

Tragically, Balakot - the city which is traditionally considered a gateway to the North - was destroyed nearly completely in the October 2005 earthquake. And Swat - well, we know what's happening there now.

My hope is that the New York Times and other media outlets continue to focus on this story. No one should ever live in fear. Please take a moment to thank the Times for this video. I dont agree with a lot of their journalistic viewpoints and policies, but when any one does good, a little encouragement goes a long way.

"Indian film focuses on women in 2002 riot"

This article's title really intrigued me, and it goes without saying that I was definitely going to read it, but my real question was - which women? - Hindu, or Muslim?

The article is a simple news piece, but a real work of genius when you think of how different terms and language have been used.

Take, for example the title itself: "Indian film focuses on women in 2002 riot". The film is most certainly "Indian", yet the "women" in the film he refers to are Muslim - so why not mention that in the title? Instead, we find out only in the second paragraph that the protagonist is Muslim. If the focus of the film is this 23 year old pregnant girl, at least she deserves to be identified as a Muslim - the very reason for the violence she was victim to.

Then, towards the end of the piece, the writer did something I really detest - he called the film a "Hindi" film. Now, i'm pretty sure my criticism is directed appropriately, because many writers do this: they refer to Indian films as Hindi films. Why? I will never know. yet he still goes on to use "Indian" in the title of the article, but "Hindi" in the body. Very interesting!

Usually, what they're trying to say is that it is an Indian film, yet Hindi denotes the language of the film, and those of us familiar with South Asian cinema know all too well that Urdu is used almost always more often than Hindi.

But on that count, I may be mistaken, because the title of the film is kya hum jinda hai? with jinda being the hindi term for an urdu word, zinda - alive.

Anyway, semantics and use of language in unique ways never ceases to amaze me.

Forgive me if I have erred, and do leave comments if this spurs a discussion.