
In what I call as ‘status message survey’ of mine today, I found this in the gtalk status of one of my close friends, the story of a guy mistakenly interviewed live on BBC.
The entire atmosphere of the ‘accident’, the imagination of what must have gone on in Guy’s head and his priceless expression, all had a compounded effect manifested in we colleagues literally rolling on the floor laughing.
What followed was a ‘localization’ of the joke, including asking each other to imagine what would have happened if any of us were called for a job interview and been taken to a very make up room, of all the places. The laughter, the smiling to myself and then the thinking about it later gave way to striking thoughts.
How come no one raised an objection to what was being said in the very interview? Rather, it is almost surprising to notice that there indeed is nothing objectionable in the interview given by Guy, and any composed, sane person would have been able to handle such a situation equally well! Looking thus at the ‘value’ of such a high profile interview on BBC which was pretty much successfully handled by a totally clueless guy Guy, did certainly make me think of what is happening all over the slew of media channels today, aka “aap ko kaisa lag raha hai?” and the jazz. I think Guy had a very fitting response to the overkill meted out today, just because we have the air, and can make the gadgets that can handle the frequency. Why does this smell to me of ‘growth for the sake of growth’?
More interestingly on the other hand, Guy belonged to Congo, widely regarded as belonging to one of the ‘developing’ regions of the world.
Would it have been any different if it were someone from, say, Paris or Washington DC instead of Mr Guy Goma?
A seemingly unrelated memory surfaced at this moment. In his book ‘The Outliers’, Malcolm Gladwell very aptly describes how the qualities of being assertive, outspoken and confident are passed on as part of legacy in a family. Gladwell gives us an example of an extremely brilliant person ‘failing’ to be educated in the popular sense of success apparently because he could not convince his teachers to let him take classes that were logistically and financially more feasible for him to take. On the other hand, a child belonging to a wealthy family is raised while being instructed to speak up for himself.
It would have been perfectly acceptable for Goma to stand up and clearly ask ”Are you sure you are looking for jee-ow-em-ey Goma? I think you got my last name wrong” and this funny accident would not have happened.
What struck me here is that Guy didn’t do this, and rather quietly conceded to the possibility of his last name being pronounced wrongly.
Wait a second.
‘Goma’ being pronounced ‘Kewney’?
That again reminded me of Freakonomics, ‘shaw-teed’ being spelt as ‘Shithead’ and the related incident and the theory presented there.
What, if not deep rooted diffidence, made Goma to so quietly concede to that his name could be SO wrongly pronounced at the BBC?
That he didn’t actually, did do him (and ultimately us, laughing) some good indeed, but still; why?
RSS - Posts


