By William Markiewicz

Chitrita Banerji's article, "Poor Calcutta", appears in today's NewYork Times. First of all, I'm surprised that the paper published an accusatory article about bad intentions without proofs. According to the text she was "a saintly European crusader whose work could succeed only if it was disproportionately magnified." She is labelled "a religious figure who was as shrewd as any fund-raising politician." So her sincerity is put in doubt. "… Mother Teresa's charity also evoked the colonial past – she felt she knew what was best for the third world masses…" She was "a missionary who had never allowed her compassion to be de-linked from Catholic dogma." To achieve something did she have to deny being herself?! That would be without precedent for any institution or individual! The author writes that others "work for the needy without the glamour of a Nobel Prize or of impending sainthood." Is an honoree 'guilty' for his/her deserved awards? …"She furthered her mission by robbing Calcutta of its richly nuanced identity while pretending to love it." With this "pretending" the author ends her 'analysis' with slander.

Back to the index of the Vagabond
© Copyright 2007 E-mail to: William Markiewicz