The Nina Paley Show! Sunday, November 7, 2004

Hi Nina, just thought I'd mention how much I've enjoyed seeing your Sita films progress through Asifa screenings. This still art looks like the ending will be quite fantastic! Keep up the beautiful work :)

Hey Nina --
We were booth neighbors back at the '92 ComiCon in San Diego...
You signed a copy of "Depression is Fun": To my close personal friend and mentor - Joe...

We had never met but it was only my second show and your book still makes me laff.

Best!
Joe King
http://www.wonder-books.com/toon-guy

Maisnon and I were just discussing the whole "Sufferin' Sita" thing about an hour ago.

Good stuff. :-)

Its funny, some colleges and universities use Native American heritage in sports mascots and team logos.

The practice is widely viewed as explotation.

What makes you Nina, different, in using Indian Epics?

Let me guess, you're a very spiritualashasness person who enjoy power hatha yoga extreme tai chi kickboxing; so you have an interpretation.

I love the new lyrics Nina! Brilliant, brilliant interpretation! Just love it and the visual of "Mother Earth" an Indian take on Wagner's Arda? Just thrilling! You must be so exalted and proud! Am I missing something -- I haven't seen you're "new" work developing? On another blog or site? Had naturally assumed you'd keep it under wraps. But if you do and are genrous to let see folks see your developing stuff I'd kill for the chance.

Marcus.

I'm not putting any new episodes online for now. The film is over halfway done, if I can just finish it I can release it for real. I don't want to kill the thing with overexposure before its official release in 2008. Still, that's a long way off, I may post a few tiny bits and pieces before then. But not the whole thing!

I have to agree with Akash. I think to get over my own personal demons I'm going to write a story about how the Roman emperor and Pontius Pilate were actually wise and just, while Christ was a short sighted evil bastard, or just a no good dirty hippie. I'm sure no one will be offended, and if they are, well fuck them, because the bible is actually "secular, global literature" right? I mean people don't have any right to be offended by an outsider's convolution of their culture, do they? Nothing is sacred anymore.

BidiSmoker, I would LOVE to read such a story, as would many other people. The only thing I don't get is the "well fuck them" you wrote. Art isn't "fucking" anyone, and works inspired by existing literature - including religious literature - don't degrade or take away from said literature nor its more traditional variations. My film isn't preventing anyone from reading a traditional Valmiki or Tulsidas book, or watching the Doordarshan series. If anything, it may encourage more interest in traditional versions.

Satire has been part of American culture for a long time. People have created unique variations on religious literature for decades, and although they're often met with some protest, they're generally accepted. Some popular Bible-based works include Not The Bible (very popular in Urbana when I was growing up), The Last Temptation of Christ, and Dogma. Can you imagine a Veda-based movie like Dogma enjoying wide release in India? No way. But in the US, in spite of some minor protest, the film was widely distributed in mainstream theaters. "Sita Sings the Blues" is an unabashedly American cartoon. Its humor means no disrespect, although I understand it is considered insulting by some not as immersed in American/Western culture. Again, I insist it is not intended to insult or degrade Hindus or anyone else, and I regret offense taken - but not to the point of censoring myself.

hi nina
I am very glad to see this perspective on ramayana. Your drawings are also super-cute.

But I've a fear that your impression with the character of Rama may be premature. Do write to me if you have any questions. (vakibs on gmail)

Ramayana is filled with idealism. Each character has a specific ideal attribute. As you have rightly pointed out, Hanuman is the ideal servant and Sita is the ideal wife. Lakshman is the ideal brother (which you did not mention). Now, is Rama the ideal husband ? Definitely not. Living with such a husband is an ordeal.Most women would use stronger terms than "jerk" to such a husband. :)

Rama is the ideal son. He has unparalleled devotion to his parents. Also, in ancient India, the motherland is considered to be the same as the parents. So, Rama has an unparalleled devotion to his motherland (Ayodhya) Rama lives his life, not for the sake of himself, but for the sake of his parents.

All his actions are explicable from this point of view. His exile in the forest, his battle with Ravana and his estrangement with Sita. The final episode of leaving Sita doesn't make sense unless you look at it from the point of view of Ayodhya (citizens) asking Rama to leave his wife.

For the record, Rama has always deeply loved Sita. He never took any other woman for his wife. After his estranegment, Rama's suffering is as equally harsh as was the suffering of Sita.

Now when you compare your plight with that of Sita, you should check if your ex-husband has the same qualities as Rama. Is he still devoted to you and loves you as deeply as Rama loved Sita ? Did he take another woman after he left you ? In that case, you should not compare him with Rama.

In ancient India, women longed to have a husband like Rama - somebody who is a devoted son, even if he is not a devoted husband. These values are changing with the modern times. Nothing wrong with that, but please look at Ramayana with the right perspective.

To this date, I have never heard a story which is sweeter than this- the most ancient epic.

PS : Please exercise your creativity, and do not sacrifice your freedom for the sake of offending some hard-religious nuts.

Thanks for your comment, Kiran! I agree with what you wrote - from Rama's point-of-view, he was genuinely following his duty, genuinely following a right path. That's what makes the story so tragic.

I think most people are genuinely trying to do right from their point-of-view. I think Valmiki's message was, among others, that life is hard; even gods suffer when incarnated on the human plane. There's a poignant scene in Valmiki wherein Sita assumes she committed a terrible sin a previous life to deserve such suffering. Surely she (or someone) must have done wrong, she thinks (like Rama, she is unaware of her own divinity). But no, it's just human life. Suffering is as much a consequence of right action as it is of wrong.

Here's a question: if Rama had to banish Sita out of duty, could he have done so differently? Could he have told her he loved her and explained why she had to go? Could he have driven her himself instead of ordering Laxman?

Or, could Rama have considered his duty to Ayodhya inclusive of women? Sita's banishment was predicated, after all, on a dhobi's right to beat his wife for taking shelter in a male relative's house. That cause was made explicit by Valmiki; that is the righteous order Rama saw as his duty to preserve. What if Rama had, instead of banishing Sita, protected the dhobi's wife? Could Rama have decreed that abusing an innocent woman is wrong? What limited Rama's sense of duty to just men? Was it his humanity, or his divinity? (I'd argue the former)

Here are a few Manushi articles about Sita and Rama you might like:
Lady Sings the Blues
Yes to Sita, No to Ram