For want of a shoe, the horse was lost. For want of a horse...the battle was lost.” This well-known nursery rhyme tells us that shoes can change the fortunes of a battle. Shoes are in the news today in the context of a different type of battle, the battle of the ballot.
The sequence of shoe-throwing started in Iraq in December. A media person aimed a shoe at then US president George Bush. Bush ducked and dodged the shoe. From there, the “let my shoe speak my mind” show has spread to India. In the weeks preceding India’s grand election, protesters have hurled shoes at the Prime Minister, the chief minister of a state and electoral aspirants on both sides of the divide.
Throwing a shoe at someone is one way of registering your protest against that person’s views or actions, and often his failure to live up to his promises. But shoes carry several symbolic associations, not all of them derogatory. In the East, removing one’s shoes symbolizes submission and keeping them on symbolizes dominance. Brewer’s dictionary tells us that in England, Scotland and elsewhere, people threw shoes at the bride and bridegroom when they left the bride’s home. This signified the parents’ consent to give up all rights on their daughter.
In October 1960, there was a famous footwear incident on the international stage. In the UN general assembly, Nikita Khrushchev was listening to the Filipino delegate Lorenzo Sumulong, who said Russia had no right to decry colonialism after swallowing the whole of East Europe. In a fit of fury, Khrushchev took off his shoe and started banging the table with it. He called Sumulong “a jerk, a stooge and a lackey of imperialism”.
Also Read V.R. Narayanaswami’s earlier columns
I have not come across any report of a flying shoe in Parliament. But other missiles have been flung: tables, chairs, microphones and parliamentary documents. On the slightest provocation, members rush into the well of the House and stop short of coming to blows. Often, the speaker adjourns the House as no business can be transacted in the prevailing chaos.
The frequency of hate speeches in public rallies has been increasing. Many politicians have been facing court action for inflammatory speeches that could lead to violence. Even the less venomous speeches are disappointing. The budhiya (old woman) and gudiya (doll) jokes that we have been hearing appear flippant and puerile. So do the jokes about jadoo ki jhappi (magical hug) and pappi (kiss) targeted at Mayawati.