Not fair at all

Ratna Raman

THERE is a bizarre scene in Macbeth, involving the three witches who prophecy Macbeth’s future. They proclaim paradoxically that ‘Fair is foul and foul is fair’. This draws attention to the play’s central theme where ugly manipulations are planned by those in power who display outward composure. Only through such juxtaposition of contradictions can what is fair (just, beautiful) become foul (incorrect, ugly) and vice versa.

The truth of how beauty can be made ugly has been brought home by the continued marketing of fairness creams in the Indian cosmetic market. ‘Beauty is skin deep and light in colour’ believes the cosmetic industry. To achieve this, fairness creams continue to be peddled. Here, the ‘fair’ refers to the ‘complexion’ thereby constricting meaning and rendering it superficial. The expression ‘cosmetic change’ also refers to transformation at the surface level. This is the hallmark of the cosmetic industry whose products endorse ‘facades’ (outward appearances). 

 Fairness creams marketed by the cosmetics industry present normal shades of brown as ‘foul’ and undesirable. Although most skins have tough epidermises, thin-skinned people continue to be scammed by fairness creams, which rather successfully whip up the angst of the oppressed dark-skinned colonial subject, dominated by superior whites. Oddly enough, Draupadi, a significant female protagonist in the Mahabharata was admired for her dark complexion and called Krishnaa (Sanskrit; black).

In fact, the male god Gopala, also known as Krishna,  possessed a blue-black hue before porcelain figures made in Europe and calendar art inspired by European painting gave us godly figures and forms in pastel hues of pink and blue, deflecting our earlier preference for the gods represented in countless ancient temples  through stunning black granite idols. 

 As long as Indians continue to remain unhappy with the varying shades of brown they are constituted of, fairness creams will continue to rule the roost; convincing us that fair skin is the window to beauty, employment, success and attractiveness in an unjust and cruel world.

 The attempt to introduce ‘gender parity’ (equality of the sexes) by bringing out fairness creams for men as well, makes things ‘more foul’.   

Focusing on  an extremely limited understanding of the word fair, the  advertisement informs prospective male clients that the world is an ‘unfair place’. The darkness  is not because of the absence of colour but because of unjust and unequal lives. Having communicated this profound truth, the ad endorsing the cream  effectively shrinks the meaning of the wor(l)d through its assertion that regular use will enable male clients to  become ‘fair’ in an unjust world.  

Expectations of ‘fair play’ and ‘fair weather’ are reasonable but sellers of cosmetic products are merely ‘fair weather friends’ who will be the first to jump ship on sensing turbulence. The entire fairness cream industry offers are ductive interpretation of ‘fair’ and ‘fairness’.

Meanwhile, NDTV’s year-old decision to ban ‘fairness cream advertisements’ on its channel is ‘fair and square’ (straightforward). Terming the obsession as racist, the refusal to host the sponsors of fairness creams is a great step forward. NDTV has chosen to forgo large sums of money through clamping down on prime time advertising, choosing instead to highlight the issue of discrimination based on colour. All will only be fair when trade and advertising incorporate ethical practices.