Ms. O'Leary takes exception to Mr. Correia's negative description of the book "Bloody Foreigners" based on the title without reading the book. My reaction to the title of the book was similar to Mr. Correia. And I was surprised that Cornell DaCosta brushed aside the language of the title by lamely calling it "unfortunate."
However on reflection, I realize that the Brits use "Bloody" and "Bugger" as every third word in their speech. To them the title perhaps does not sound as harsh as it does to an American or a native Goan. Similarly native Goans use the word "B*st*rd" frequently. And the Americans use "Son of a Gun" or "Sucks" as a matter-of-fact. This is cultural semantics. Yet, there is a difference using a word in speech and putting it in print especially in a publication by a mainstream publisher. And in today's international world it is not what a user means by it, but how the recipient / reader (person at the other end) feels about it. That is what harassment - sexual, racial or caste attitudes or discrimination is all about. If the author and the publisher did not mean what the title says, then they are using the words for its "shock value" and "AT THE COST of the FOREIGNER" to sell more copies of the book. In fact there is no foreigner except the illegal. Most are very much British (by birth and/or legal rights) as Shepard's Pie and perhaps the author. So I find it surprising that the immigrants in the UK did not raise a cry when the book appeared in print - more so, to stop future insensitive titles and texts from appearing. We condemn practices of a generation ago with harsh words (see discussion on caste). But today's practices are called "unfortunate"; and I think that is amazingly unfortunate. :=)) Kind Regards, GL Rebecca O'leary writes: What I find incredible about Mr. Correia's posting is that he has just seen the title of the book "Bloody Foreigners" and not read it but pre-judges it's content. Amazing. Best Wishes Rebecca (London)
