summary of Deshpande's article

After reading the text"India turns 50", i found that it was mainly focused on how we portray images of other countries. The text mainly focused on how we as americans see other countries thru the magazine "National Geographic" and how we portray them in our own minds. I understand what the writer is saying, specifically because he referred to terms as the people of India were possing for these pictures. Overall it was a description of NG's look at how we as society take a look at other countries. I find that he is saying that "Western Culture" is demonstrated as high and mighty, and we view other countries strictly through what we see in the magazine instead of what we see in person, and have an unfair judgement.
Accoridng to Deshpande," The "innocent" attractiveness of the photography of National Geographic, its ambiguous representation of the knower and the known as the most "natural" and inevitable parts of our world are what have made for the success of the magazine. " (Despande1) I see how Deshpande is taking the role and explaining why society is being judgemental especially " Western Culture" and as how the magazine has amazing success based on how we percieve the world, not how it actuallly is. I see Deshpande reffering to "Western Culture" as being better than, and supposed to feel self pity for other cultures, also giving us a false view of other countries cultures, which gives society a completely unfair view and judggement of other cultures. This is a major point is describing National Geographic, but also stays as a majorly controversial path. Following up later in the article, Despande says accordingly, "Power to transform the most repulsive results of human actions around the world into images that are digestible is what makes for the culture of National Geographic."(despande2) After reviewing the text, i see all the supporting evidence of how Despande is saying that national Geographic, is taking the worst situation, and ultimately making it look appealing to our eyes. This is very confusung to me, why he would come with different claims, but i can see his view. In my opinion, this article is very confusing. I understand his side, but taking a second look at the article, he touches on the subject of transfering grotesque images into reasonable images. I tis confusing, but at the same time I see his point of how National Geographic is based, and how they ultimatley are making their magazines, conversions of digital media, and forms of video text. Thats all folks.