Has Manish Malhotra jumped the shark?

Manish Malhotra has come out with a new “Indo-Persian” collection called “Zween.” I had never heard of the word before but apparently it’s Arabic and means beautiful.

Image result for zween arabic

Image result for zween arabic

I thought I would share some pictures from an actual “Indo-Persian” culture since I can’t find Iran in the above pictures; just Bollywood wearing a few floral motifs..

Image result for bunto kazmiImage result for aarij hashmi

Image result for bunto kazmi

Manish should have simply titled his exhibition; “back to Pakistan” or something such rather than unnecessarily exotify it with “Zween” and Indo-Persian. Like any good Delhite Punjabi he feels the tug of that hypnotic rich Mughlai high culture that has miraculously endured in Karachi..

However unfortunately Pakistan has failed as a country  and is rightfully perceived as a basket-case. On the hand the rise and rise of India continues..


70 thoughts on “Has Manish Malhotra jumped the shark?”

  1. I don’t care particularly about fashion, but I have to ask one question.

    What was the need for the concluding line “Pakistan has failed as a country”? We all know about Pakistan’s problems (some of which are also shared by India). I find such comments gratuitous and borderline offensive. This is like when “Pakistani psychosis” was being freely used here a few months ago. “Indian psychosis” was considered to be too much.

    As for the pictures you shared, they look like typical Pakistani bridal wear to me.

      1. As a standard of success Pakistan per capita should have been 20k USD and the gini coefficient to be reasonable as per Western standards.

        Israel has managed to do that..

      2. I don’t know why you expected Pakistan to be “a light unto the nations”. We are a South Asian country which has a lot of issues (some of which India shares). I agree with you that the constant tension with India doesn’t help the average Pakistani.

        Comparisons with Israel don’t make sense. If Israel had not gotten the level of Western (and specifically American) support that it did, it would be not be what it is today. Also, I don’t think Pakistan should be like Israel. Running an Occupation regime is not particularly attractive.

        I do feel that it is OK to be anti-Pakistan on this site but not OK to be anti-India. Maybe you felt you had to balance your love of Mughlai culture with a dig at Pakistan.

          1. I don’t think it is right to compare two different countries with two different histories.
            On the other hand , it is right and proper to compare what a country has done against what it’s founding ideas were.

            Israel was founded as a Jewish state to protect Jews; that they are doing very well. They send planes to Africa to smuggle out Falashas who were badly treated. Any Jew can migrate to Israel especially if they feel discriminated in their country.

            Pakistan – don’t get me started

            On that basis Israel gets 100% mark and Pakistan -100%

          2. “Israel was founded as a Jewish state to protect Jews”–On someone else’s land. You probably wouldn’t be such a big fan had the Zionists decided that India belongs to them. But since it’s Arab land that they stole (and are continuing to steal) you are defending them.

            Whatever your feelings about Pakistan, it is different from Israel in the sense that it was the result of a negotiated compromise between the party that represented the Muslims of British India, the party that represented the Hindus and the British. Pakistanis did not land up in South Asia from Europe, we are descendants of British India’s Muslims. We also don’t have citizenship laws that allow Muslims from anywhere to become Pakistanis.

            I find it incredible that people on BP will still defend a country which has just passed a “Nation-State Law” defining itself as the “State of the Jewish people” and removing Arabic as an official language (Many Israelis are actually protesting this law). If Israel were a normal country it would define itself as the state of the Israeli people, regardless of the religion that they practice. It seems to me that this defense of Zionism comes from a shared antipathy to Islam and Muslims.

            I don’t want to derail this thread into another “debate” about Israel, so this is the last comment from me.

          3. “You probably wouldn’t be such a big fan had the Zionists decided that India belongs to them.”

            This does not make me a fan of Zionism, that is my observation on success of movements and what is success. Honour is when you redeem your promise – whatever the means. Dishonour is when you fail , miserably fail, on your promises to your constituency – like Pakistan.

            OTOH, I quite agree with you if anyone wants to make a country different from India on parts of India – like Pakistan trying to grab Kashmir – my reaction is negative , to put it mildly.

          4. Kashmir is not part of India. It is Disputed Territory according to International Law. As an Indian nationalist, you are free to think otherwise. It doesn’t change the reality. Kashmir belongs to Kashmiris, not to people from mainland India. And the vast majority of Kashmiri Muslims want out.

            As for Israel: I don’t think it is honorable to achieve your aims through immoral means. Continuing to Occupy land that doesn’t belong to you is immoral at least according to my definition.

          5. US or any other non-Indian citizens lecturing on what is and what is not part of India is bizarre to say the least. It is completely in the hands of India and Indian citizens. If you are so keen on lecturing countries , please start with Pakistan to vacate Baluchistan, Kashmir , and get back parts of Kashmir it donated to China.

          6. Now you have lost the plot.

            I am ethnically part- Kashmiri Muslim. This is my homeland you are talking about. I have the right to express my concern at how your country treats my people. The UN has just written a report about the human rights situation there. Sorry, you don’t get to shut people up when you don’t like what they have to say.

            Balochistan is not internationally disputed. It is a province of Pakistan according to International Law. Conflating Balochistan with Kashmir is a ridiculous move.

            Pakistan had the right to settle its border with China. In any case, the treaty states that China will make a final settlement with however owns that territory once the issue is resolved.

  2. Yes I think you are being unnecessarily critical of Pakistan Also the irony of a supposedly Persian thing named in Arabic

    1. I agree. It is not proper to keep calling Pakistan a failed state . If that is what history has in store for Pakistan, it will happen anyhow, whether we talk about it or not. It is better to deal with today’s realities . Leave tomorrow to tomorrow.

      1. Vijay,
        One line of thinking indicates that Pakistan is a failed state already. The day BD seceded. Do you think we have to wait for it to happen again? With regards.

        1. What is this strange pleasure you guys seem to get by denigrating Pakistan?

          People have called India a “flailing state” but if I were to go on about it, you all wouldn’t like it very much.

          Perhaps if you don’t have anything nice (or even neutral) to say about Pakistan, you don’t have to share your hatred of it?

          1. It is a strange obsession I have noticed in some quarters of Indians. I think it strengthens or requalifies their own political stands in the internal Indian scene. They like first doing India Pakistan equal equal (7:1 population ratio?) And then bashing Pakistan for whatever marginal socio economic measure where India is 2.5 standard deviations behind world average and Pakistan is like 2.7. It also helps mitigate the problematic understanding for “Indian” Muslims and they feed into some myth that Indian Muslims must be some uber Indian nationalist community that “chose” India over Pakistan. In my view (and not uniformly shared across Hindutva type that I find myself aligned with), Indian Muslims exist only as humans with human rights and dignity that Indian govt and society should maintain and provide for, but the boat for accommodating any political Islamist or Muslim identity derived grievance… that boat sailed in 1946 when they voted and rioted into fruition Pakistan. They became Indian Muslims because except for east Punjab Sikhs and a few other tit for tat fights in Hindi heartland, Hindus did not uniformly or by large decide it was time for the Muslim neighbors to pack up and leave.
            You couple that in with other absurd ideas this Indian pseudo secularist have from negligible knowledge of Islam and they latch on to Wahabiism as the supposed real bad boy and Sufism is the Hinduized syncretic Bharatiya Islam. Latter may be true (partially and that too in subcontinent context), but bulk of anti Hindu Islamist struggles in colonial and post colonial Indian subcontinent have come from so called Sufi masses. Matter of fact another reason the entire Khilafat movement and most Congress Muslims of 1940s flopped is because they were Wahabi/Deobandi or puritanical in their Islamic orthodoxy and the petrodollar had not come into effect yet among the lay Muslim.

            Either way, history is hodge podge and myths never stand the test of truth. India’s pseudosecular myth gulpers enjoy bashing Pakistan because they are still in 1940s Congress vs Muslim League election mode… as if any day now, after having proved online that Pakistan is such a disaster (as if they are comparing United States to Liberia), the aam Pakistani janata is going to say “oh yes great Indians we messed up in our Pakistan project, it is time to reintegrate”.
            In my own opinion, India should compare itself to China or United States or Russia. Maybe this comparison depresses a great many in India, hence the need for Pak bashing.

          2. Whatever the reasons behind it, I find the constant denigration of Pakistan incredibly boring and borderline offensive. If this goes on for much longer on BP, it may be time for me to abandon ship.

            It’s fine to legitimately critique Pakistan on substantive issues. But a lot of the rhetoric on this forum mostly seems to be driven by displeasure at the fact that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan even exists as sovereign country. As you say, no matter Pakistan’s troubles, Pakistanis are not going to want to “rejoin” a Hindu majority country.

  3. “Kashmir is not part of India. It is Disputed Territory according to International Law.”

    Indian citizens and Indian government beg to differ with this statement.

    “Balochistan is not internationally disputed. It is a province of Pakistan according to International Law.”

    It doesn’t have to be an international issue always. BD was not a disputed territory when it got independence. Balochs are in the same situation.

    1. To me, both Kashmir and Balochistan are identity politics taken to the extremes. People wanting to separate for no cogent reason other than that they have a difference of identity, either in religion or in ethnicity, with the rest of the country. (I mentioned on this forum a while ago that I considered Kashmiri Muslims’ separatist claims to be akin to no-fault divorce.)

      Bangladesh was qualitatively different: the ruling regime was trying to kill off or drive out its own citizens. Even otherwise, it wasn’t ready to give the people their democratic due. None of that applies in Kashmir. I’m not aware of any such thing happening in Balochistan either, but I don’t really know much about that region.

      1. Baluchistan is in no way comparable to Kashmir..

        Kashmir is an indigenous uprising; Baluchistan has extremely complex politics.

        Just met up with a Balochi friend (Leghari tribe)..

        1. Kashmir has very simple politics. It will be free soon. I will throw a huuuge party when that happens. All pundits invited. RSVP.

      2. “Bangladesh was qualitatively different: the ruling regime was trying to kill off or drive out its own citizens.”

        Numinous, that is a factual agreeable statement. I have a take-off on that. Does Pakistan routinely bomb parts of Balochistan and other tribal areas with planes?

        1. @hoipolloi

          Of course Pakistan Airforce has routinely bombed Balochistan and Pashtun lands

          2008 to 2011 PAF has conducted 5000 raids over FATA


          From the days of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto PAF has been used to crush Balochi nationalists – with mixed results so far


          The sporadic fighting between the insurgency and the army started in 1973 with the largest confrontation taking place in September 1974 when around 15,000 ethno-separatists fought the Pakistani Army and the Air Force. Sensing the seriousness of the conflict, Pakistan Navy dispatched its logistic units under the command of Vice-Admiral

          With Pak govt support , US Airforce has conducted hundreds of air operations , drones is their preferred weapon.

          ““Only” 2,260 Baluch fled their villages in August to escape bombing and strafing by the US-supplied F-16 fighter jets and Cobra helicopter gunships of the Pakistan air force, ”

          Pakistan as a country is maintained by immense force and military operations, thousand times more than Kashmir.

          1. Yes, Khalistan is still an issue.

            Honestly, Indians should look at their own problems before constantly trying to put down Pakistan.

          2. @Zack Zavidé
            How can you make an equivalence between some people shouting in Trafalgar Square and people being strafed by helicopter gunships and fighter jets , as if both represent the same thing

      1. The UN resolutions have never been withdrawn. The India-Pakistan question continues to be on the UN’s agenda. It is a different matter that the resolutions cannot be implemented.

        The UN just released a report on Human Rights in Kashmir which the Indian government typically went into denial mode about, calling it “motivated”. It seems hard to deny that many young people have lost their eyesight through pellet guns, which India only uses in Kashmir not in any part of “India proper”. There was also the case of the civilian tied to the army jeep.

        Asides from the UN resolutions, the tallest leader of your country (Pandit Nehru) promised before the entire world that India would not hold Kashmir by force. Of course, you are free to argue that that promise was meaningless.

        1. tallest leader of your country (Pandit Nehru) ?? I think JN was only 5ft 6 inch. That prize may goto Charan Singh

          1. Pakistan is not doing anything until India agrees to hold a plebiscite. Which will never happen because you know that Kashmiri Muslims will never vote to join a Hindu-majority country, especially after the Indian Army has committed so many atrocities against them.

            You will never get “POK”– Azad Kashmir and G-B. Those areas have never been part of India since 1947 and the people there have no desire to join a Hindu-centered polity.

      2. “Seventy years have passed, so their continued validity is unclear:”

        Arjun, I also think that the Indian Kashmir is not a disputed territory in spite all the harping on BP which is not a forum for such discussions. Was there any discussion in the UN in the last 10 years? Also disputed does not mean it is not part of India. That is a false argument. Kashmir issue if there is one is double edged. Why only focus on Indian side. Why the POK is never part of the discussion? I am tired of ad hominem comments on this blog trying to use this as a means of Kashmir liberation, whatever that means. The whole ambience of this blog is derailed by one or two persons, IMHO.

        PS: I did not get a chance to open the links in your comment.

        1. I don’t see where Kabir has been rude.
          He has been technically correct about the Kashmir issue; unlike Bangladesh, Baluchistan or even Kurdistan it is an international/bilateral issue.

          Azar Kashmir is not in military lockdown; there aren’t 1mm troops holding it together. In fact Gilgit & Baltistan wanted to become a part of Pakistan proper.

          1. The mountains and valleys of Gilgit reverberate with Pakistan ka matlab kya, la illaha il Allah. We know how true democracy is when even mountain breeze speaks Pakistan’s name ….. Paaaaa-hhhhh-ki-sssss-taaaaan-hhhhh

            (May Allah Pak and China Pak bless the chosen people of Pakistan for evermore)

          2. Yes, the people of G-B rebelled against the Dogra in 1947 and they have been asking to be given all the rights of Pakistani citizens ever since. However, since G-B was part of the erstwhile Kashmir State, it cannot be made a Pakistani province without prejudicing the final solution to the Kashmir Dispute. Shamefully, this means that the people of G-B are not represented in the Pakistani parliament. AJK has its own parliament and its own prime minister.

          3. Of course he is not technically correct. Pakistan Occupied parts of JK using Taliban like proxies and even the UN has asked it to vacate it in 1948. Just because someone throws a stone in your house doesn’t give him property rights in your house.

        2. “POK” is an offensive term. The place is called Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. You can call it Pakistan-Administered Kashmir if you prefer (that is the official UN term as is Indian-Administered Kashmir). These areas are very much part of the dispute. Yet civilians are not constantly dying there nor is there a freedom struggle. That is the difference between the Indian and Pakistani controlled areas.

          As for who derails this blog, I think it is the Internet Hindus with their constant sniping against Pakistan. We get it, you don’t like Muslims or Pakistan. You don’t need to go on about it.

          1. China has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is the Internet Hindu’s need to denigrate Pakistan in every single conversation, whether it is relevant or not.

            It’s just getting boring now and creating a hostile environment on BP.

          2. The saddest thing is that Christians, Chinese, Budhists, Europeans, Noth Americans, Jews, also don’t seem to like Muslims. Clearly there is something wrong with everybody.

          3. Shafiq,

            The topic of this thread was the Internet Hindu’s dislike for Pakistan and Islam. Your generalizations that everyone hates Muslims and therefore the fault must lie with Islam are really not warranted.

          4. Kabir, I really fail to make heads or tails of the argument, “The topic of this thread was the Internet Hindu’s dislike for Pakistan and Islam. Your generalizations that everyone hates Muslims and therefore the fault must lie with Islam are really not warranted.” I am very confused and seem to be missing something in the logical chain. Can you please explain it to me like I am a five year old?

          5. Shafiq R, I also don’t understand what Kabir meant and would value a clarification.

            “The saddest thing is that Christians, Chinese, Budhists, Europeans, Noth Americans, Jews, also don’t seem to like Muslims. Clearly there is something wrong with everybody.”

            Isn’t this not true for Sufis, liberal muslims, atheist muslims? Don’t nonmuslims love these muslims? Isn’t it only Islamists that nonmuslims have an issue with? Maajid Nawaz estimates that only 25% or 400 million muslims are Islamists.

          6. Shafiq,

            I have made my point. I am fed up by the fact that the Internet Hindus seem to delight in taking potshots at Pakistan and at Muslims whether it is relevant to the topic or not. That was the issue at hand, not China’s treatment of Muslims or whether anyone else likes Muslims or not.

            These anti-Pakistan and anti-Islam rants are creating a very hostile environment for me. I would ask Zack to take note.

          7. Zack,

            The Mughalophobia is part of the general Islamophobia and anti-Pakistan feeling.

            A simple request: Can we please find some new topics and give Pakistan and Muslims a break for a while?

            Let it be noted that on this particular post, I was not the one who brought up the K-word first.

    2. Hoipolloi,
      The Indian government can believe whatever it wants and the Indian Parliament can pass laws claiming “POK”. The fact remains that there is a Line of Control in Kashmir and not an International Border. That would suggest that it is Disputed Territory. This is a factual statement not a value judgement.

      India was able to help East Pakistan to secede. However, it is no longer 1971. At this point, the International Community is very loathe to break up sovereign states. Balochistan is constitutionally part of Pakistan. No other country has a claim on this land. Also, Pakistan did not have nuclear weapons in 1971. For India to attempt to break off pieces of Pakistan is a very dangerous game that will not end well for anyone.

      1. POK is an offence term? Nonsense. Pakistan is occupying a portion of J&K TO which it has no legal or moral right. That’s why it is called Pakistan Occupied Kashmir.

        1. That is your position. We call the part you have Indian Occupied Kashmir. That is why it is a Disputed Territory.

          1. The whole of Kashmir is Disputed Territory, whether you like it or not.

            You are entitled to your own opinions, not to your own facts.

  4. Kabir

    Majority of India doesn’t want Pakistan to “come back” to India. Even the right wing. Its like one of those “there-should-world-peace’ type of things.

    1. India has problem assimilating 170 Muslims within her borders, who in the right mind want to add another 200 million or another 160 million (Bangladesh)? I think dreams of a akhanda Varat went down exponentially after partition. You are right that it has become a virtue signaling mantra for general people. You say it so that you don’t betray the soul of Indian civilization or whatever. However, very few people actually think about it or want it.

      1. Sadguru recently said that India should consider letting Bangladesh join India and take responsibility for economically developing Bangladesh. I think Sadguru has a point. Bangladeshis and Indians share a common heart and common soul.

        1. How about you ask the Bangladeshis first? My guess is they don’t want to join a Hindu-majority country. But perhaps I’m wrong.

    2. I think Kabir has a point about this sniping though. As valid as the case of the Republic of India’s is over J&K or even against the 2-nation theory, there is no real use in rehashing and fighting over terminology etc. Folks from India or Indian origin folks, especially non Muslim Indians or non partition affected Indians (non Bengalis/Punjabis/Sindhis/Kashmiris) really can and should strive to avoid the negativity that comes with partition.

      Multiple political sovereignties spanning the territory of South Asia or historical India or Indian subcontinent or Akhand Bharat however one wants to term it is never a new phenomenon. Today’s map is not going to be there in hundred years, wasn’t there hundred years ago etc.

      The pain folks have is the population exodus and ethnic cleansing. We have this pain at the human level, and it manifests itself in political narratives etc. For the large part of subcontinent if they can avoid the partition from their own mental state it is better.

      Btw I am new on brown pundits, can anyone give what is the gist of this platform? I have been on several other online groups where folks of varied Indian subcontinent origins come together (from days of Orkut whoever remembers that) and they all tend to go down same slippery path of tu tu main main and folks getting triggered by some side argument and missing the woods for the trees in someone’s writing. I am not above this myself. So I am asking what is the platform about? What are the old timers getting out of this? What mechanisms are agreed upon that old stuff is recognized as old stuff and rehashing old stuff is ignored, whereas new or innovative lines of thought are debated with care? Does such mechanism exist or is it possible to exist?

    3. Saurav,

      So that is one thing on which Pakistanis and Indians agree. We are better off with separate countries. Happy Independence Day.

Comments are closed.

Brown Pundits