“We need to be having these conversations about these prickly issues if we are going to find a way to live harmoniously together,” says Singaporean author Sudhir Thomas Vadaketh about race. Mr Vadaketh posted a video on his Facebook page yesterday (9 August) in which he talks about the issue of race and racism in Singapore, relating it to the recent brownface saga.

What happened?

E-payment website epaysg.com released an ad recently featuring Mediacorp actor and DJ Dennis Chew impersonating different races. We see him dressed as a Malay woman in a headscarf, a Chinese man in a moustache, and as an Indian man with darkened skin.
The ad didn’t go down well with the public. People criticised the company for not simply hiring people of different races to portray each character.
In response to the ad, Singaporeans comedian and influences Preeti Nair, known as Preetipls, released a rap video with her brother Subhas Nair, a rapper. The video called out epaysg.com for being racist.
The rap video, titled “K. Muthusamy” contained offensive language with phrases such as “Chinese people always out here f***king it up”, and the lyrics condemned Chinese Singaporean for being racist and exploiting minorities for money. The rap also pointed out that this ‘brownface’ incident isn’t the first in Singapore. Previously, there was Deepavali advertisements with a Chinese man dressed up as a Sikh man.
However, at the end of the video, Preeti included a disclaimer to say “not all Chinese people are racists, only the racists ones”, indicating that the duo were not slamming every Chinese Singaporean in the country.

The government’s double standard response

While the government was lenient with Mediacorp for their distasteful ad, simply accepting an apology, a police report was lodged against Preeti and her brother for their response rap.
“The police will not tolerate any offensive content that causes ill will between races,” the police said while highlighting that they are investigating the matter.
Law Minister K Shanmugam also come forward to say that while the epaysg.com ad was done “in poor taste”, Preeti’s video crossed the line.

The problem of race in Singapore

Following these incidents, Mr Vadaketh released his video on his Facebook page to outline both sides of the argument around brownface in Singapore.

On the argument that brownface isn’t actually a big deal, Mr Vadaketh said that no offence was meant by the epaysg.com ad as Indians weren’t portrayed in a demeaning way. He also noted that Singapore has a long history of people acting as other races such as the famous Phua Chua Kang, a Chinese character played by a Sikh man. Cheekily, he also mentioned President Halimah Yacob as another example – seemingly referring to the fact that Mdm Yacob, an Indian Muslim, was elected President during the election that was reserved for the Malay community.
Mr Vadaketh also noted that brownface has no specific historical context in Singapore, indicating that some people would argue that the colouring of skin is only a problem where there is such baggage. For example, blackface in the US.
On the flip side, Mr Vadaketh point out that brownface is a problem because it exaggerates the physical attributes of Indians. On this point, he says that Gurmit Singh’s portrayal of Phua Chua Kang isn’t offensive because he didn’t paint his face yellow or walk around with exaggerated slit eyes.
Moving on the Law Minister’s slippery slope argument against Preeti’s video, Mr Vadaketh turned it around and asked why Mr Shanmugam didn’t also criticise his own government’s racism in using brownface.
He said, “If we allow brownface now, what’s next? Let’s place a Jew, let’s give the Jew a really big nose. Let’s play an African, let’s given the African really thick lips and a really big bum.“
He recounted the incident years ago at the Beijing Olympics when China featured their 56 official ethnic groups. He explained, “It was later discovered that a lot of the minorities were actually Han Chinese. They were simply dressed up as minorities. China didn’t actually recruit kids from the 56 groups. Now some people found this offensive, other’s thought it was ok.”
On that note, Mr Vadaketh explained that racism is subjective and dependent on culture and time. What was acceptable 100 years ago might not be acceptable today.
He said, “In tiny Singapore, we have 5 million different views of racism. And we have so many different cultural influences from Chinese blackface to Aziz Ansari in Hollywood. This diversity is what makes Singapore such a fun, exciting place for us to live in. But at the same time, we need to be having these conversations about these prickly issues if we are going to find a way to live harmoniously together.”
Mr Vadaketh certainly has a point. Discussion and debate is the way forward. Nuance cannot be ignore. But at the same time, double standards have no place in a civilised society.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

《防假消息法》已宪报

据了解,《防止网络假信息和防止网络操纵法案》已在本月25日下午五时发布于宪报。 今年4月1日,《防假消息法》正式提呈国会,并在5月8日,经过两天的激辩,晚上10时20分结束前,以72票赞成,九票反对,三票弃权三读通过,并在6月3日提呈予哈莉玛总统批准。 在5月8日的第105次国会会议,《防假消息法》在国会引起朝野激烈辩论,工人党议员表态反对,相续对《防假消息法》提出观点,其中也包括质疑何以新法赋予部长取缔假信息的权力,以及为何绕过司法审讯,由部长先行裁决假消息并采取行动。 人民行动党72议员投下赞成票,工人党的六名议员:毕丹星、林瑞莲、刘程强、方荣发、陈硕茂和费沙,三名非选区议员:贝理安、吴佩松和陈立峰则投下反对票。 《防假消息法》备受争议 该法自提呈国会以来即备受争议,不仅政界人士,包括国内外学术界、媒体、公民组织等都已对该法提出质疑。 任何部长都长或政府部门,都可以委任一个“主管当局”(Competent Authority)来执法。媒体研究学者施仁乔教授(Cherian George)形容,这种权限是很罕见的,因为一般仅让特定部长有法律权限。 再者,也没有安排监督机构,来监管如何裁定消息真伪。 防止假消息法允许部长对媒体机构/网站或个人发出更正指示,基本上足以下命令把所谓“虚假”的内容完全删掉。 甚至,部长还可以发出“终止通讯”指示,阻止相关个体或单位继续传播有关消息。发出这样的指令,甚至媒体人都没有机会去求证和更正消息。…

Despite Singapore Government’s assurance of change, much will be status-quo

the following is a statement delivered by Ms Braema Mathi, President of…

Unprecedented orders issued to TRS to shut down

In an unprecedented move on Sunday, the Media Development Authority (MDA) of…