USAGE: Calling an Indian woman a 'widow' in the Wash Post

I was going through this Washington Post roundup--of how Obama's success in the Democratic primary has generated excitement around the world, when I came across what I thought was a very strange use of the word "widow." The article refers to a female interviewee, Sunila Patel, 62, as "a widow encountered on the streets of New Delhi." From "Democratic Primary Boosts U.S. Image Around the World":

Overseas, Excitement Over Obama - washingtonpost.com via kwout

The article was written by Kevin Sullivan of the Washington Post Foreign Service, with reporting by Rama Lakshmi in New Delhi (and other reporters in other parts of the world). Why call Patel a widow, rather than simply a woman? I went through the rest of the article, thinking that perhaps she was meant to be seen as an outsider of sorts, living on the margins of society. But that one quote was the sole reference to her, and there's no reason to believe that being a widow had anything to do with her view of Obama.

So was this merely sloppy editing, or could it be that her being a widow adds flavor to the story? And does being "encountered" add texture and a physical dimension? Or does it suggest (as I at first thought) that she was some sort of vagrant, who just happened to be quite well read?

What do you think? Post your comments below.

Comments

[Melvin]

The word "widow" tells you a little more about her than just "woman." And "widow" doesn't carry the baggage in America that it does in India.

As for "encountered," I think it's just supposed to indicate that she was a random person on the street.

[Justin Clark]

One could equally well ask why we journalists use the word woman instead of simply "person."

[Rahul]

Melvin -- I disagree about the baggage: I can't imagine a reporter writing "a widow encountered on the streets of New York". How did the reporter know she's a widow? If he/she asked, why? And why is it relevant?

[Bombay Beuaty]

She's clearly too well spoken to be a vagrant -- that speculation doesn't make sense in an Indian context. What must be remembered is that traditionally widows in India dressed in a way clearly to identify themselves -- we've all seen women in white saris, minimally adorned. Perhaps she was dressed as such and hence the identification. BB

[Arun D.]

This is a symptom of an illness I like to call overdescripto-journalitis, which is sadly prevalent in newsrooms everywhere. It flourishes when overbearing editors or journalism professors (no offense meant) work with insecure and/or pretentious reporters who are led to believe that writing has to be dressed up with a ton of color, strong descriptions and active verbs. This is actually a legitimate goal, but the problem is that it's often taken too far for no other reason than to make reporting sound more "literary," whatever the heck that means...

There is nothing wrong with adding description, details, color, etc. to enliven a piece of writing. But it should be done to strengthen the journalism, enhance context and add nuance.

I suspect that the "widow" usage was an attempt at all this, though in this case it just ends up sounding out of place and irrelevant.

This is like the use of "adopted child" and "child of her own" that offends my sister (who is mother to an adopted daughter) in stories where adoption is irrelevant. (i.e. Nicole Kidman has two adopted kids and one "of her own" on the way -- implying the adopted ones aren't "her own.")

Of course, it's possible the WP story was originally meant to make the "widow" usage relevant but that got lost in editing or rewriting. It's interesting to note the many persons involved in its reporting.

It's also possible when the woman was asked to describe what she does or who she is *she* simply answered she's a widow, who knows?

[A.]

What matters here is the relevance of the woman's marital status to
the story. Why isn't the marital status of the others not mentioned
in the story?

Does the writer want to convey a sense of the exotic of an Indian
widow? Like one of those from the movies? Does he do that because he
thinks a widow in India being able to speak knowledgeably about
politics is an aberration? If so, he hadn't met my mother or
grandmother! Or millions like them.

Bottomline: In US journalism, the norm is not to get into marital
status unless it's relevant to the story. In this case it's just
plain sexist -- as if the woman has no other identification than
being a widow.

[Raghu Rao]

My guess is this woman was not wearing "bindi" which is a major sign of being an Indian for white people. Hence, the writer threw that in like Sherlock Holmes would guess so many things about a person based on their physical image and attire.

[Mira Kamdar]

It takes a subtle reader to notice a detail like that, and I commend your reading acumen! There is no possible reason I can think of to identify the woman as a widow since it is not mentioned anywhere else in the article and does not seem relevant to the story at all. I agree with you that "encountering" a "widow" evokes images of social exclusion in an India meant in this piece to be strange and exotic. Now, we all know that widowhood is an unenviable state for most widows in India. The film Water does a poetic job of evoking that, for example. But this article isn't about that at all, so there is no reason under the sun (so to speak) for the word "widow" to be used. I wager most American readers with no knowledge at all about India would gloss over it. Only readers who know (or think they know) something about India would get what the term seems to be suggesting. Fascinating post, and again - congrats on the close reading.

[Kishan Putta]

Arun, you are awesome, man. I always wonder if I'm the only one who scrutinizes little things like this... QUESTION: the contributions were by an Indian-trained journalist, right? Is it common in Indian press (in India) to mention widowship even when the relevancy is not very high? Is it common in any part of the world?

[Mayank Chhaya]

The way the story uses the word widow makes it sound as if it is an accomplishment that women roaming the streets of Delhi flaunt. It is as if her being a widow gives her special insights into race relations and the politics of race in America. The usage is so manifestly superfluous to the point being made that it is hard to respond to it in any cogent way. Having said that though, I know for a fact that widow has been used in the Indian media, including to describe Sonia Gandhi in the aftermath of Rajiv Gandhi's assassination.

Mayank

[Jaya Kamlani]

Just a fleeting reference to 'widow' makes no sense. If the journalist wanted to really say something about her, he could have said 'the widow in white (sari)' to show the Indian customs. Still, it is meaningless in this context because it does not add to the story.

Would the journalist have said "Mr. Sunil Patel, a widower" if he had encountered a man? I doubt it. So to refer to Sunila as a widow is belittling her, especially since widows are looked down at in Indian society.

Jaya Kamlani

[Vineet]

I think that "widow" is being used here as a stand-in for occupation as an identifier.

"John Smith, a travel agent, said that he was concerned about Obama's diet..."

"'Who wouldn't be upset?' asked Kathy Jenkins, 54, a retired gymnast..."

The idea of a 62 year old woman being defined by her "occupation" as a widow (perhaps she was a housewife before her husband passed away?)is probably not as jarring in the Indian context as it is to us in the west.

I do think, however, that when combined with "encountered on the streets of New Delhi" the reference seems to evoke imagery of abandoned widows helplessly wandering the streets of Delhi (bumping into cows maybe?).

[Shilpa]

shoddy editing. shoddy reporting. end of story!!

[khan]

As a copy-editor who is ultra sensitive to such references (why are eastern bloc retirees always called pensioners?), I think in this case, we are overreacting. It's standard for age and occupation to be included when doing street interviews. In this case it seems that the reporter probably asked the woman what she does, and she probably responded, I'm a widow. As for "encountered" I agree with a previous poster this is just to indicate that it was a person on the street interview, not someone at some think tank reached by phone.

[khan]

But to clarify, while i might have let widow stand, if I had additional information, I probably would have changed encountered to something else indicating what it was she was doing.

[Veena Oldenburg]

Well, aren't all widows burnt alive with their husbands' funeral pyres? This would make an encounter with the one live widow in India remarkable!!!

More seriously, although there are more than 45 million widows in India it is 'suttee'--social evil that the British tried so hard to eradicate!--that informs outsider perceptions of Indian women.
I think the word 'widow'is an irresistible signifier for Indian women in the western imagination. They can't get over it.

[Jaya Kamlani]

If Arun Venugopal had not brought the word 'widow' to our attention, I may have not noticed it if I were reading the article, because my concentration would have been on what the she says "A black President of the U.S. means that there will be more American tolerance for people around the world who are different."

We are just concentrating too hard on the word 'widow' (including me), when what she says is much more significant then her identity. So can we switch gears, and discuss what she says, because she makes a very valuable point. i.e. She believes people of all races and color will now be treated as equal in America. She did not think she would see this miracle in her lifetime.... I agree with Ms. Sunila Patel's comment.

Jaya Kamlani

[K Thomas Oommen]

Had one of my MASCOM students made the "widow" identification, I would have asked the reporter whether "virgin" would be an acceptable identification in his/her next story.

I think this is what happens when the insistence in American journal-
ism on description as a form of identification is taken inanely and carelessly to produce such gems as "30-year-old dwarf" or
"40-year-old barfly."

It might be useful to find out whether the "widow" in the article can be traced to Kevin Sullivan or Rama Lakshmi.

[CS]

the funny thing is "widow encountered on the streets of Delhi" makes it sound as if she was killed in an encounter on Delhi streets and it was her ghost speaking.

but yes, certainly a case of sloppy editing because there is no context to how her status as a widow affects her views.

[Kayla]

There is significance to the fact that the Indian woman in the article is identified as a widow. Widows in India ARE outsiders and DO live on the margins of society. They are shunned by their families and abandoned to widow houses or are forced to beg on the streets. It is considered taboo or bad luck to be near them. They are seen with shaved heads, wear all white, and have ash "painted" down their noses.

A google search with the words "widows India" will provide more information. Also, look for the article: "Shunned from society, widows flock to city to die."

A couple of films have been made about the situation as well: Water and White Rainbow.