Although much of the recent criticism of Malala Yousafzai’s Nobel win has been lazy and predictably contrarian, Tabish Khair makes a convincing case that the committee should have waited to honor the young advocate:
What kind of burden rests on her 17-year-old shoulders now, I wondered? Is it fair to put that sort of burden on such a young person? Is it fair to award the prize for what might be achieved, rather than what has been achieved – because, unlike [Global March Against Child Labor founder Kailash] Satyarthi, Malala has not had the time to organize anything of substance, despite her brave personal example and her visibility as a symbol. To date, Satyarthi and his organization are credited with rescuing and educating about 100,000 such child laborers in India. She has not had the time to rescue 100,000 children from the darkness of Taliban and its ilk.
Now she might never get that chance. The adulation of well-meaning but largely ignorant people has put her beyond the pale. One original reason why she became such a fresh and enabling symbol – unlike the thousands of men or women who share her opinions in Delhi or Karachi or New York – was that she was “in the field.” Real change – in Pakistan or elsewhere – will be brought by people in the field, as Malala was when she was shot, as the anti-polio workers and hundreds of educators continue to be. …
Now, I realize, Malala has been taken over by the superior circles. I won’t call it the West. I call it the superior circles – people with lots of good opinions, and the inability to operate in the field.
Update from a reader:
Tabish Khair seems to be nitpicking. A girl who had been shot by the Taliban and lived to become an activist might have been an internet sensation for a few days, a la #saveourgirls. The Nobel selection process has brought lasting attention to her cause. Those “people with good opinions and the inability to operate in the field” are called rich people and their support can buy many supplies and operatives. Whether that support is due to the merits of the cause or the cachet of a Nobel is irrelevant.
The Dish 