Boys and girls -
This is a piece I've recently got published on why I'm puzzled by the personal and sometimes racist nature of barbs against Dubai by the British Press...it's bound to ruffle some feathers as it already has and I'm looking forward to a huge debate with Jonnyboy at the end of it.
I would like your erudite feedback on the same so do give it a butcher's...
Govi*
Sand, Spit and Ink by G Dhar
Full Version: In the press
Okay, I'll bite.
I think my initial thought is that I hadn't personally noticed any particularly racist vibe from the British press regarding Dubai, but then again I don't read The Daily Mail so I guess it could easily have passed me by.
I was pretty much with you until you brought the dread words 'class war' into it. I'm sorry to say it, but any argument that reduces to 'it's the long-running British class war' immediately sets off my bullshitometer. In my view, the reason that British fat cats who go and work in Dubai are derided is because they are pretty much the definition of 'mercenaries'. They have moved halfway across the world purely in order to get richer than they already are. I guess if you want to shoehorn those people into a social class and say that it's class war then you can, but I think you're just playing with words. I wouldn't argue that there isn't an element of jealousy involved (inevitable when it comes to money), but at the same time I think most people would be being truthful in saying that they wouldn't move to Dubai just to make money.
So why else would you move to Dubai? Putting aside the obvious lure of potential hugs from Govi*, I would say that there isn't really another reason from a British point of view. I'm sure that UAE, like all countries has its own rich and varied cultural history and identity. From the outside however, it's difficult to see how Dubai, a city ruled by money, reflects that fact.
People move to Dubai for the money. Not for the art, culture, or even weather. Money.
Don't get me wrong; I don't think that this is anti-capitalism. Most people are pro-capitalism, whether they realise it or not. However, I would say that in general most British people prefer their capitalism in a subtler flavour. Dubai comes across as gaudy; it shouts 'CAPITALISM'. It seems like an eastern Las Vegas, somewhere you can go to worship money, the 'Mecca of money' if you like. Even an atheist/capitalist like me would take the real Mecca over that. Please also note that saying 'I think Dubai is superficial' is not a racist statement in the same way that saying 'I think Las Vegas is superficial' is not an anti-American statement. People would feel the same way about Dubai if it had been built in the English countryside by Richard Branson. Probably more so in fact.
In terms of the article itself, I liked it, but I think it could have definitely done with more on what Dubai means to you. Without that I think your argument struggles as you have not provided an alternative to the 'views of the British Press'.
How's that?
I think my initial thought is that I hadn't personally noticed any particularly racist vibe from the British press regarding Dubai, but then again I don't read The Daily Mail so I guess it could easily have passed me by.
I was pretty much with you until you brought the dread words 'class war' into it. I'm sorry to say it, but any argument that reduces to 'it's the long-running British class war' immediately sets off my bullshitometer. In my view, the reason that British fat cats who go and work in Dubai are derided is because they are pretty much the definition of 'mercenaries'. They have moved halfway across the world purely in order to get richer than they already are. I guess if you want to shoehorn those people into a social class and say that it's class war then you can, but I think you're just playing with words. I wouldn't argue that there isn't an element of jealousy involved (inevitable when it comes to money), but at the same time I think most people would be being truthful in saying that they wouldn't move to Dubai just to make money.
So why else would you move to Dubai? Putting aside the obvious lure of potential hugs from Govi*, I would say that there isn't really another reason from a British point of view. I'm sure that UAE, like all countries has its own rich and varied cultural history and identity. From the outside however, it's difficult to see how Dubai, a city ruled by money, reflects that fact.
People move to Dubai for the money. Not for the art, culture, or even weather. Money.
Don't get me wrong; I don't think that this is anti-capitalism. Most people are pro-capitalism, whether they realise it or not. However, I would say that in general most British people prefer their capitalism in a subtler flavour. Dubai comes across as gaudy; it shouts 'CAPITALISM'. It seems like an eastern Las Vegas, somewhere you can go to worship money, the 'Mecca of money' if you like. Even an atheist/capitalist like me would take the real Mecca over that. Please also note that saying 'I think Dubai is superficial' is not a racist statement in the same way that saying 'I think Las Vegas is superficial' is not an anti-American statement. People would feel the same way about Dubai if it had been built in the English countryside by Richard Branson. Probably more so in fact.
In terms of the article itself, I liked it, but I think it could have definitely done with more on what Dubai means to you. Without that I think your argument struggles as you have not provided an alternative to the 'views of the British Press'.
How's that?
To add to what Jboy mentioned, I would have liked more concrete examples and detailed text analysis of the racist overtones you mentioned. Some of the examples given seem less racism directed at Dubai and more what could be termed a *typical* response to any country that sees something *outside* buying up easily recognizable pieces. So, there, I guess, I felt more it was a failing of the examples to demonstrate an ability to play nice with anyone as opposed to some specific racism directed at a certain group of people. And, one of the articles you quoted is a review of a book on government and culture where Dubai is used as an example in the book, so I wasn't sure how the reviewer was demonstrating a personal bias against Dubai by referring to them in the review. (How different is this response than when those Russian oligarchs came over and bought up a bunch of stuff? Does art/culture/etc coming out of other countries get more favorable press? I think that comparison could have been interesting.)
I also thought that mentioning the BBC and Sky but then neglecting to provide specific examples worked against you as it felt like there might be a gap in the argument. This feeling of a possible gap continues to work against you when, for instance, someone goes to read the "Independent" quote and, while it is still slightly shady, the entire point of the article seemed to be that, because the money from oil was so fluid, ways had to be found to spend it, in order to show a product from the profit (which was in real danger of, at some point, disappearing)-which is what the quote says (although, again, I'm with you on the going overboard with the imagery, but I think it's more about "black gold" and oil imagery than anything else). It's always dangerous taking quotes out of context because, while I agree that some of the response is the "old money" response to the new comers arriving and, god forbid, acting as if their money is the same, some of it seems to be sheer stupifying surprise at all of the things one could find to spend money on. And, again, I'd be interested to see if there is a difference in language in the response to other spending sprees.
Another gap comes with your acknowledgment that some of the journalism is accurate, but, again, there is no detailed comparison as to what the differences might be. Is the BBC et al more comfortable reporting corruption for the same reason they are uncomfortable with having a football team owned by someone from the region? And are you asserting that the British press is wrong to be uncomfortable with the fact that the reputation of English tourists and expats is less than great?
I'm with you on the art article though, that was ridiculous. But, again, it seemed more like the entire art world was ridiculous than the journalism (that piece came across, I thought, as a publicity puff piece for the various artists and dealers involved as opposed to reporting)--and I've read similar things said about Singapore (being a "cultureless country" with no understanding of art and etc). I guess, in the end, you didn't convince me that it was deliberate racism as much as shoddy journalism.
I'd agree that perhaps Dubai isn't getting the most accurate portrayal, but, then again, I'm from California where gangs are taking over the cities (according to Times Online) and "There are apparently striking similarities between Iraq and California"--which both belittles and obfuscates the issues in both areas. You'd also think, from the search results of "United States" that we have a real active interest in football. Which, not so much.
I think you've got a point, though, and from the comments you've clearly hit a nerve and started a discussion that needs to be continued, and it never hurts to remind the press that, while they're writing for a home audience (and thus may slant some of those puffier pieces a bit), they should always be aware of and aiming for neutrality and fairness.
I also thought that mentioning the BBC and Sky but then neglecting to provide specific examples worked against you as it felt like there might be a gap in the argument. This feeling of a possible gap continues to work against you when, for instance, someone goes to read the "Independent" quote and, while it is still slightly shady, the entire point of the article seemed to be that, because the money from oil was so fluid, ways had to be found to spend it, in order to show a product from the profit (which was in real danger of, at some point, disappearing)-which is what the quote says (although, again, I'm with you on the going overboard with the imagery, but I think it's more about "black gold" and oil imagery than anything else). It's always dangerous taking quotes out of context because, while I agree that some of the response is the "old money" response to the new comers arriving and, god forbid, acting as if their money is the same, some of it seems to be sheer stupifying surprise at all of the things one could find to spend money on. And, again, I'd be interested to see if there is a difference in language in the response to other spending sprees.
Another gap comes with your acknowledgment that some of the journalism is accurate, but, again, there is no detailed comparison as to what the differences might be. Is the BBC et al more comfortable reporting corruption for the same reason they are uncomfortable with having a football team owned by someone from the region? And are you asserting that the British press is wrong to be uncomfortable with the fact that the reputation of English tourists and expats is less than great?
I'm with you on the art article though, that was ridiculous. But, again, it seemed more like the entire art world was ridiculous than the journalism (that piece came across, I thought, as a publicity puff piece for the various artists and dealers involved as opposed to reporting)--and I've read similar things said about Singapore (being a "cultureless country" with no understanding of art and etc). I guess, in the end, you didn't convince me that it was deliberate racism as much as shoddy journalism.
I'd agree that perhaps Dubai isn't getting the most accurate portrayal, but, then again, I'm from California where gangs are taking over the cities (according to Times Online) and "There are apparently striking similarities between Iraq and California"--which both belittles and obfuscates the issues in both areas. You'd also think, from the search results of "United States" that we have a real active interest in football. Which, not so much.
I think you've got a point, though, and from the comments you've clearly hit a nerve and started a discussion that needs to be continued, and it never hurts to remind the press that, while they're writing for a home audience (and thus may slant some of those puffier pieces a bit), they should always be aware of and aiming for neutrality and fairness.
Yeah, Jennie said it better.
I also agree with both you and Jennie on the art bit. In fact, I think that there was room for you to go into that more. In particular, the fact that Asian and Arab art sells better than British art in Dubai could provide just one of many possible counters to my 'Dubai is all about the money' rant.
I guess in summary, rather than the slightly vague (and, in my view, unfair) accusations of racism in the British press I would rather have seen this:
1. "The British press believes that Dubai is a superficial city full of greedy philistine fat cat playboys whose only purpose seems to be to steal our art and football teams"
2. In depth evidence to support the above claim.
3. "The British press is wrong about Dubai, for the following reasons..."
I also agree with both you and Jennie on the art bit. In fact, I think that there was room for you to go into that more. In particular, the fact that Asian and Arab art sells better than British art in Dubai could provide just one of many possible counters to my 'Dubai is all about the money' rant.
I guess in summary, rather than the slightly vague (and, in my view, unfair) accusations of racism in the British press I would rather have seen this:
1. "The British press believes that Dubai is a superficial city full of greedy philistine fat cat playboys whose only purpose seems to be to steal our art and football teams"
2. In depth evidence to support the above claim.
3. "The British press is wrong about Dubai, for the following reasons..."
...and Govi* misses his first opportunity of having an actual Arts discussion in " The ARTs!!!!!!!!!!" thread.
Ah well - I am sure another opportunity will arise in the next few years.
Ah well - I am sure another opportunity will arise in the next few years.
...and Govi* misses his first opportunity of having an actual Arts discussion in " The ARTs!!!!!!!!!!" thread.
Ah well - I am sure another opportunity will arise in the next few years.
Ah well - I am sure another opportunity will arise in the next few years.
Hello Peeps and thank you for the lengthy responses - I only wish you'd post some of this on the site so that a more respectable feedback could adorn the comments section - a total twat has laid seige to it and he sounds like a total numpty.
Right - let me give you some background to this - I noticed an icreasing flurry of some outrageous things being said about Dubai by news anchors, radio presenters and then in the press. While I'm with most of what's been said about dubai (it's mercenary, culturally vacuous, flamboyant, and vulgar) what rankled me was how, amidst the more digestable commentary on Dubai, there seemed to be some racist and condescending jibes made at the city. I can understand censure - I cannot understand namecalling and personal scorn.
I couldn't cite all the examples and get into comparisons simply b/c of lack of space. But essentially it seemed to a lot of us that the Brit press couldnt help itself - they had it in for Dubai and it almost became second nature to every report we saw flood in. There are several people in this town who think the same (editors and columnists for some of the leading broadsheets were writing their own columns on the same when mine got published) and a stream of others have made it to the papers here too (The National, Gulf News, etc.). Several British expats here wrote pretty nasty responses to Johann Hari's Independent article on Dubai and they'd even started commenting right across blogs, letters to editors and on the radio that Britain's press was taking it too far. Dubai and its Brits were/are feeling it alright.
The root of it all was to work out why so much of the press seemed to take Dubai's flamboyance so personally. It was almost a sort of 'well you're all philistines with new money anyway so we're going to jeer at you because we're refined and don't like new money or its flagrant wielders' but we're doing it with the frustration of someone who's directly been affected by it. You didn't see the British press going after new money in India, China, Singapore, Brazil or Russia as consistently or frequently as they did Dubai. Nor do they take it so personally if one has fireworks displays or opens another mega uber silly mall.
After much contemplation, the reason I came up with was that Britain has always been invested in Dubai quite heavily. Furthermore, a rather substantial section of British taaaaaaaaaanies had made a fair bit of cash in Dubai and were gleefully tarnishing the British image abroad and then inviting a variety of disdainful looks when overheard saying at home that they'd just come back from Dubai, much as if they'd said they'd come back from the gaff in Costa Brava. So essentially, hating Dubai seemed part and parcel of the ever-present class war (sorry Jonnyboy) that's prevalent in Britain. I couldn't work out why else the press was so vengeful in their sneering. Jealousy becomes more palpable when you can witness expat flamboyance as festooned in Hawaiin shirts and smelling of new money...is kind of what I meant.
Bear in mind this is an op-ed so whilst its peppered with facts, it bears heavily on opinion. It's not an essay but an observation based on what I've seen and heard. It's my little theory out in the cosmos and had I more room I'd allay all your doubts with the deftness of a hidden tiger in a monkey dragon.
Thank you all for your feedback. Anything else please do ask.
Right - let me give you some background to this - I noticed an icreasing flurry of some outrageous things being said about Dubai by news anchors, radio presenters and then in the press. While I'm with most of what's been said about dubai (it's mercenary, culturally vacuous, flamboyant, and vulgar) what rankled me was how, amidst the more digestable commentary on Dubai, there seemed to be some racist and condescending jibes made at the city. I can understand censure - I cannot understand namecalling and personal scorn.
I couldn't cite all the examples and get into comparisons simply b/c of lack of space. But essentially it seemed to a lot of us that the Brit press couldnt help itself - they had it in for Dubai and it almost became second nature to every report we saw flood in. There are several people in this town who think the same (editors and columnists for some of the leading broadsheets were writing their own columns on the same when mine got published) and a stream of others have made it to the papers here too (The National, Gulf News, etc.). Several British expats here wrote pretty nasty responses to Johann Hari's Independent article on Dubai and they'd even started commenting right across blogs, letters to editors and on the radio that Britain's press was taking it too far. Dubai and its Brits were/are feeling it alright.
The root of it all was to work out why so much of the press seemed to take Dubai's flamboyance so personally. It was almost a sort of 'well you're all philistines with new money anyway so we're going to jeer at you because we're refined and don't like new money or its flagrant wielders' but we're doing it with the frustration of someone who's directly been affected by it. You didn't see the British press going after new money in India, China, Singapore, Brazil or Russia as consistently or frequently as they did Dubai. Nor do they take it so personally if one has fireworks displays or opens another mega uber silly mall.
After much contemplation, the reason I came up with was that Britain has always been invested in Dubai quite heavily. Furthermore, a rather substantial section of British taaaaaaaaaanies had made a fair bit of cash in Dubai and were gleefully tarnishing the British image abroad and then inviting a variety of disdainful looks when overheard saying at home that they'd just come back from Dubai, much as if they'd said they'd come back from the gaff in Costa Brava. So essentially, hating Dubai seemed part and parcel of the ever-present class war (sorry Jonnyboy) that's prevalent in Britain. I couldn't work out why else the press was so vengeful in their sneering. Jealousy becomes more palpable when you can witness expat flamboyance as festooned in Hawaiin shirts and smelling of new money...is kind of what I meant.
Bear in mind this is an op-ed so whilst its peppered with facts, it bears heavily on opinion. It's not an essay but an observation based on what I've seen and heard. It's my little theory out in the cosmos and had I more room I'd allay all your doubts with the deftness of a hidden tiger in a monkey dragon.
Thank you all for your feedback. Anything else please do ask.
QUOTE
You didn't see the British press going after new money in India, China, Singapore, Brazil or Russia as consistently or frequently as they did Dubai. Nor do they take it so personally if one has fireworks displays or opens another mega uber silly mall.
Isn't it just because Dubai is the silliest by far? And I personally mean that in a complimentary way. I'd love to see the stuff they've come up with. That mile-high tower idea (not the puny burj) looks just stupendous.
Just look at it!
Dubai is easily the silliest by far - I had these in originally but had to chop them cos the article got too long - they were considering air conditioned beaches (the sand) and a Greco-Roman upside down apartment tower with another right way up beside it - are just some of them...(the latter was a client of mine)
Upside down tower
And the mile high tower is in Saudi I believe - the difference is they still have the money to do it.
Boo hah!
Upside down tower
And the mile high tower is in Saudi I believe - the difference is they still have the money to do it.
Boo hah!
http://www.boredpanda.com/top-33-worlds-strangest-buildings/
never realised the crazy architecture that is out there!
whole site about them as well:
http://www.strangebuildings.com/
never realised the crazy architecture that is out there!
whole site about them as well:
http://www.strangebuildings.com/
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.