The recent news of
Qatari citizenship being offered to renowned Indian painter MF Husain had
generated cacophony among a section of the society. There have been prolonged
debates and obituaries written about liberal Indians being relegated to the
list of endangered species and that liberal arts are under grave threat from a
rising section of intolerant Indians.
This is certainly an issue which evoked lot of concern in the print and visual media. There has been a considerable amount of prime time devoted to mourn the ‘death of the liberal Indian’ with intellectuals, artistes of all hues, cultural guardian angels composing requiems and taking part in the funeral orations to mark the ‘demise’ of the liberal Indian.
Some years back India also had witnessed some groups announcing cash awards to blacken Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen’s face at the Kolkatta book fair and also to humiliate Salman Rushdie during his visit to Mumbai for their alleged blasphemous writings. There has been a spurt in activities by fringe groups seeking to intimidate artists and scholars and writers and it has been noticed that sometime government meekly gave in to their unjust demands.
There have been several instances when the state chose to be ambivalent on some issues and shied away from addressing core issues concerning freedom of expression and used to resort to ban. The Rajiv Gandhi government went ahead and banned Salman Rushdie’s novel ‘The Satanic Verses’ following pressure by some sections of the Muslims. The Hollywood film ‘The Last Temptation of Christ’ met with a similar fate for allegedly being blasphemous and hurting religious sentiments.
This is not to deride legitimate grievances of certain sections of the society who do question misrepresentations of their faith and values. What has rather turned the entire issue concerning MF Husain accepting Qatari citizenship is the manner in which an individual’s right and choice’s concerning commercial interests have been projected.
Firstly agreement between Husain and the Emirate is purely of commercial nature running into millions and not a litmus test for the Indian state or society. Husain was certainly harassed by various cases but the Supreme Court had ensured by its earlier judgment that any kind of frivolous cases are not filed against him. Husain in other words has let down many of his liberal supporters and has chosen to defend his right to freedom and expression.
This is certainly an issue which evoked lot of concern in the print and visual media. There has been a considerable amount of prime time devoted to mourn the ‘death of the liberal Indian’ with intellectuals, artistes of all hues, cultural guardian angels composing requiems and taking part in the funeral orations to mark the ‘demise’ of the liberal Indian.
Some years back India also had witnessed some groups announcing cash awards to blacken Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen’s face at the Kolkatta book fair and also to humiliate Salman Rushdie during his visit to Mumbai for their alleged blasphemous writings. There has been a spurt in activities by fringe groups seeking to intimidate artists and scholars and writers and it has been noticed that sometime government meekly gave in to their unjust demands.
There have been several instances when the state chose to be ambivalent on some issues and shied away from addressing core issues concerning freedom of expression and used to resort to ban. The Rajiv Gandhi government went ahead and banned Salman Rushdie’s novel ‘The Satanic Verses’ following pressure by some sections of the Muslims. The Hollywood film ‘The Last Temptation of Christ’ met with a similar fate for allegedly being blasphemous and hurting religious sentiments.
This is not to deride legitimate grievances of certain sections of the society who do question misrepresentations of their faith and values. What has rather turned the entire issue concerning MF Husain accepting Qatari citizenship is the manner in which an individual’s right and choice’s concerning commercial interests have been projected.
Firstly agreement between Husain and the Emirate is purely of commercial nature running into millions and not a litmus test for the Indian state or society. Husain was certainly harassed by various cases but the Supreme Court had ensured by its earlier judgment that any kind of frivolous cases are not filed against him. Husain in other words has let down many of his liberal supporters and has chosen to defend his right to freedom and expression.
Secondly Indian polity
and society remains an arena of contending politics, interests and as well as
victimhood. So in terms of arts and creativity it is the individual who might
be targeted and not his/her creed. Hence the claim of Husain or his supporters
that India does not need him or is indifferent towards him remains a hallow
claim. So are the publicity stunts by certain arm chair cultural activists
about the prevalence of an alleged Indian version of ‘McCarthyism’.
The recent violence in Karnataka had claimed two lives and resulted in damage of public property worth crores over republication of an article allegedly written by Taslima Nasreen. Incidentally few years ago the progressive Left Front government of West Bengal chose to ban Taslima Nasreen’s book Dwikhandito, which is a cause of concern and calls for an urgent need to check social censorship, and save shrinking space for a civil way to resolve competitive discourses.
Taslima’s life is under severe threat and is not being ‘hounded’ by litigations but by the religious chauvinist male driven social order. This is something which a rational liberal has to confront if citizenship of a theocratic state accepted by MF Husain offers better creative environs and artistic freedom than a democratic nation with a heterogeneous identity.
While the Indian polity has the potential to get surcharged given the vote politics practiced by party politics, but it doesn’t prevent the liberal Indians from defending the right of expression and also promote the resolution of differences in a democracy having pluralist ethos.
The recent violence in Karnataka had claimed two lives and resulted in damage of public property worth crores over republication of an article allegedly written by Taslima Nasreen. Incidentally few years ago the progressive Left Front government of West Bengal chose to ban Taslima Nasreen’s book Dwikhandito, which is a cause of concern and calls for an urgent need to check social censorship, and save shrinking space for a civil way to resolve competitive discourses.
Taslima’s life is under severe threat and is not being ‘hounded’ by litigations but by the religious chauvinist male driven social order. This is something which a rational liberal has to confront if citizenship of a theocratic state accepted by MF Husain offers better creative environs and artistic freedom than a democratic nation with a heterogeneous identity.
While the Indian polity has the potential to get surcharged given the vote politics practiced by party politics, but it doesn’t prevent the liberal Indians from defending the right of expression and also promote the resolution of differences in a democracy having pluralist ethos.
No comments:
Post a Comment