I’m bad

[F]ootball is to gridiron as baseball is to: (a) court, (b) diamond, (c) pitch, (d) stadium

Martha C. Nussbaum

The above is a typical question testing the ability to draw verbal analogies in the US Army intelligence test or standardized university entrance test Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) [1]. Prof. Nussbaum asks in the immediately following sentence: “I wonder who in my Indian audience could get that one; and yet, this is a highly intelligent audience!” She was not being condescending to the audience as she was talking to the delegates at the “[C]onference on ‘Affirmative Action in Higher Education in India, United States, and South Africa’ jointly organized by the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) and the University of Chicago.”

I am going to shift gears and race ahead to another situation, quite removed from admission tests. The company I work for recently took on the avatar as an MNC, not quite a TNC. We have been seeing some white folks in the office corridors and along with them come a host of Americanisms. The one that rankles me the most is the response to a casual query, “How’re you?” It is always, repeat always, “I’m good!”

Why does this newfound phrase irritate me so much? Prof. Nussbaum comes to my rescue. Referring to recent immigrants taking the Army intelligence test, she says, “[O]ne had to know English well (my emphasis) to take it, and also to have some basic cultural knowledge (my emphasis).”

I have a three part defense to my feeling of intense discomfort at, “I’m good!”

First, the good professor had written, “know English well.” Why did she not write “know English good”? After all, if “I’m good!” is OK, “know English good” should also be, well, good. I am not here to give any lesson on English grammar, contexts and native idioms, and the few people who do come to my space are supremely intelligent (I am condescending towards myself!) to require any tutorial from me.

Two, why this standard response? Earlier, when the company was an Indian company, it used to be a variety of responses, each having its own shades, highly nuanced and carrying more specific meanings suiting the context – Chalta hai or Bhalo (the company was, and probably still is, dominantly Bengali) as distinct from OK, I guess, as distinct from Can't complain, to Fine, to Great. Now, it is like the row of plastic smiles, of course with fault-free pearly whites, one sees on the stage at a beauty pageant. That stops the show; no hint of the direction a conversation could take. The situation has been formalized, been sterilized.

But, the third reason is the most substantive. If the responder believes that I would understand, “I’m good”, she (invariably it is a she because Indian men are slow on the uptake!) must understand, “My bad!” I tried it out on about half dozen female coworkers and, believe me, not one of them could understand what I meant (I had ensured that the context of my use was appropriate). That is, there was a lack of basic cultural knowledge.

How I wish Prof. Nussbaum had made this clear to me more than twenty years ago, when I had just recently returned after finishing my educational stint in the US. When my mother ‘was seriously nitpicking (oxymoron?) on me, I blurted out, “’cuuuse me for livin’!” apostrophes and all.

That started her out, “I never asked you not to live,” and she was furious and also inconsolably weepy, simultaneously. It took all my talents to pacify her and ever since that day I had not, no matter how irritated I might be driven to be, used that phrase to show my displeasure. Yet, now that my mother is dead and the company has gone the MNC way, I am free to say, “’cuuuuse me for livin’!” (note the additional ‘u’!) to my colleagues if the situation so warranted. Likewise the phrase, “Shame on me!” used casually.

OK, I am not arguing for Queen’s English (I wonder whether it will ever become, again, King’s English and who that King would be). What I am pointing out is when you do hear a native idiom, like “I’m good”, please do pause for a moment. No, you do not have to parse it, just to reflect casually on the context. No, not to criticize, only to make your mouthing the words more meaningful, with varying tones, stress etc.

I leave you with three such instances.

The first one is a question in the verbal portion of GRE in December 1975. The verbal analogy question went like     

Horse is to man as a gelding is to: (a) infant, (b) lame person, (c) eunuch, (d) woman

I had no idea what a gelding was and had some idea of who a eunuch was. But what is the analogy, where is it hidden? I did not have time to reflect. I am sure I just threw a dart in the dark and landed on one option; right or wrong, I never cared. So, it all boils down to my intelligence depending on the dart!

Why did I not know what a gelding was? Because I was never exposed to a horse race. When I was – after all I was in Lexington, Kentucky, the so-called thoroughbred capital of the world – I could not but know what a gelding was. This is cultural knowledge, gained over time, through fortuitous circumstances.

The second and third are from the world of entertainment. Michael Jackson taunted us with his super-duper “I’m bad!” while Mae West enticed with the eternal li(n)e, “When I'm good I'm very good. But when I'm bad (my emphasis) I'm better.” I am not bold enough to throw that question to you, a la Prof. Nussbaum – do you know the difference between the two, “I’m bad”s?

But, do allow me to wonder how my many of my colleagues will understand the imports of these lines, even as they use “I am good!” They have learnt the empty “I’m good!” They have to try harder to make it less fluffy, even as a slang! Marinate themselves in the basic cultural language of the environment they are in; learn what, “I’m bad!” means, without being bad themselves!

Raghuram Ekambaram

P.S. Is it, “I know fully well …” or “I know full well …”?

References

1.    Equalizing Access, Zoya Hassan & Martha C. Nussbaum, Oxford University Press, ISBN-10: 0-19-807505-7, p.81.