Just when I uploaded that post defining an Indian Liberal do I read this rather puzzling piece on India Uncut.
Amit Varma pushes his political correctness to a new pitch. If this piece were written by an ultra-secularist, it would definitely be titled Hindu Fascism in Baroda or its other infinite equivalents.
It is easy to chuck words like Fascism without thinking about its relevance in the Indian context. Amit unthinkingly links to the Wikipedia definition of the term with great approbation. I can show how every single criterion applied to define Fascism there is inapplicable, misleading, and even downright false in the context of Hindu nationalism. This definition is exactly the stock-in-trade of our more popular Hindu baiters.
Not that I condone violence in any form. I’m more concerned about the paintings themselves: what exactly did Chandramohan paint that provoked violence? I cannot provide a fair commentary unless I see the other side, which is in such cases, invariably concealed.
Millions of Hindus find no offense with, or vulgarity in Hindu erotic art. Personally, I relish the whole ambit–painting, sculpture, and (erotic) literature. Yet I despise M.F. Hussain for reasons explained elsewhere in this blog. In a line, Hussain’s “art” is designed to offend. Perhaps Chandramohan’s wasn’t.
Questions for Amit:
1. You take issue with Neeraj Jain & company’s goondaism and I fully support you. That was their way of expressing dissent and it’s entirely disgraceful. But–do you take exception to the violence on the grounds of its unacceptability in civil society, or do you uphold Chandramohan’s provocative paintings in the name of free expression?
2. Did you actually see those paintings (scanned/photographed versions) before writing your piece? If yes, can you forward them/post them on your blog?
3. Why did these paintings provoke Neeraj et al while they’re perfectly okay with say, Khajuraho, Hindu erotic miniatures, and the Kama Sutra?
75 Comments on “Short of Hindu Fascism”
You can track this conversation through its atom feed.
Jain would be happy. He has provoked people to run through their every fantasy about phalluses, pubic hair, copulation, child abuse and wotnot, all on one web page.
Congradulations, Sandeep.
Posted on May 16, 2007 at 9:16 PM.
>>>“what exactly did Chandramohan paint that provoked violence?â€
One picture is here-
http://cbcnn.blogspot.com/2007/05/christian-aggression-labelled-hindu.html
It is a painting of christ with his element protruding out, and, apparently, body fluids dripping in the commode lying beneath.
The other pic(I couldn’t find it)as reported in Pioneer, is of a Goddess (labelled Durga) giving birth with the female birth canal wide open and shown as such.
I must agree, Chandramohan is an equal opportunity offender, except that he forgot to put in a muslim character to complete a communal harmony theme. Perhaps he was just willing to risk his artisan parapharnelia but not his life, which is understandable.
Posted on May 16, 2007 at 9:37 PM.
>>>child abuse and wotnot
Another case of hyperbole indulging in dishonesty. None of the fantasies delineated above mention child abuse. Please point it out specifically.
Methinks the free-speech mafia will be happier than Jain with spate of peaceful measures taken through fantasized artwork. That people are willing to offend each other peacefully is not progressive? C’mon the pleasure is all of Jain’s detractors. Free speech pontificators should be proud.
Full Disclosure: I fully support free-speech but just NIMBY about it. I am offended certain times, and not other obviously.
Posted on May 16, 2007 at 9:47 PM.
Jain would be happy. He has provoked people to run through their every fantasy about phalluses, pubic hair, copulation, child abuse and wotnot, all on one web page.
Hey, thanks for dropping in, Dilip.
Dilip D’Souza, everybody. He’ll be here all week.
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 1:01 AM.
Wow 47 comments!
Want to add two points:
a) A civilisation that constrains academic and artistic freedom is a civilisation that has lost its way. The fact is almost all political parties not only agree that this freedom needs to be checked, but have actually gone about doing so.
b) Moynihan’s test: the amount of human rights abuse in a country is relatively, inversely population to how much it is written about. I suspect it applies to freedom of expression in Indian states as well. In other words, there are many states where such abuses occur, but no one gets wind of it.
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 8:51 AM.
A very informative article from ToI by the esteemed journalist Anil Dharker who features prominently in these comments.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Beauty_And_The_Beast/articleshow/2055679.cms
Note the passing reference to Christian and Muslim protests, the absence of the Danish cartoons is conspicuous. There is also no mention that the Hindu “loony fringe” does not issue death threats like 51 crore award for the Danish cartoonist. Has Dharker forgotten that Salman Rushdie lives with a fatwa on his head under constant security? What about Taslima Nasreen, who is not granted Indian citizenship on “secular” grounds ?
Pseudo-secs like him will be the first ones nailed to the wall when the revolution comes :P!
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 9:40 AM.
Once distinct group identities form, a civilization is doomed anyway. Game theory 101.
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 9:46 AM.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/31107.html
All freedoms of expression are equal, but some are more equal than others. Notice the tone of the article which makes this artist’s freedom of expression akin to a crime.
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 9:51 AM.
People who talk about First Amendment (of America? And what the hell is it and why does it matter to us?) clearly haven’t lived in the country long enough. Our first Amendment was made to deprive economic freedoms for most middle class people, take that I-want-to-live-in-a-make-believe-country!
While you guys want to import another country’s constitution, why not China’s or, better yet, Saudi’s?
There are no absolute freedoms in India. As recently as last month, Indian SC ruled freedom of expression can be curbed if state feels it’s warranted.
Our own PM, in his official capacity, protested to Danes when the cartoon issue became news. Apparently we don’t support absolute freedom of expression. But UGC wants to withdraw license to this university in Baroda, per Arjun’s agnya, unless it continues to offend Hindus. Apparently this means we are not a secular country or a Hindu country but an Islamic country?
And what is this fascination with penises and vaginas in arts community? With total blackout by MMS (so much for freedom of expression), we need a right of center TV network in the country to show the pictures on television to understand the reaction of ordinary people. I am sure secularists will be front and center of every media to defend garbage with labels peddled as art.
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 1:23 PM.
The Acorn » Moynihan’s Law says:
[...] Busy week. But here’s something that should illuminate some of the current discourse on artists, freedoms and intolerance. Here’s the Wikipedia entry on Moynihan’s Law:” The amount of violations of human rights in a country is always an inverse function of the amount of complaints about human rights violations heard from there. The greater the number of complaints being aired, the better protected are human rights in that country.” [...]
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 2:14 PM.
“Yes, I agree there is a definite appeasement-ist bias about the outrage. When muslims are offended, the matter is treated with kid gloves.”
I wouldn’t fault the govt. completely. Muslims have forced others to respect their sentiments. Remember we are talking of a community here which rioted and killed Hindus in Sholapur when the late Rev. Jerry Falwell called prophet Muhammad a terrorist from the heart of redneck America. This is the same community which rioted and killed people in Mumbai over Satanic verses, ignoring the fact that India was the first country to ban that book. In Hyderabad the Muslims attacked Hindu shopkeepers who refused to close their shops when Muslims were protesting the cartoons+Bush’s visit. So even if the kufar appease the Muslims, the Muslim might still decide to teach the kufar a lesson, the consequences of confronting them means more dead people, mostly the kufar.
Then there are the useful idiots, suppose the cops pump some lead into the angry Muslims, the likes of Dharker, Setelvad, Shabana will start screaming “genocide, genocide!”. Many would have noticed the latest leftist trend of protesting the application of law to the Muslims, the only place where the left would be happy to see the Hindus overrepresented and Muslims underrepresented are the jails.
The govt. really doesn’t have much of a choice, a crackdown on Muslim thuggery means a bad press and secular condemnation and a crappy law and order situation, humoring the Muslims is the easy way out.
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 4:44 PM.
On a slightly related note,
A lot of Sikhs are on the rampage in Delhi and Punjab - Atleast this is the feelng I get when I read the IBNLive.
Headlines say
“Punjab Boils”,
“Map: Punjab fire spreads, Sikhs panic”,
“Sikh factional war spreads to Delhi”,
“India 360: Are Sikhs over-religious? ” - This one is a porgram question hosted by a useful idiot called Sagarika Ghose.
I wonder why we did not have programs which said the same thing about the “Religion of peace” and the “Religion of love”
Acorn has just mentioned about Moynihan’s law in his post.(http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2007/05/17/moynihans-law/) I think the same logic applies here. Hindus/ Sikhs/ etc. have much talked about their religion and idiots can afford to host such shows because the reality is mild. The reality is much graver in Abrahamic religions in India. (In the West, there are several critics of the religion of love, so I assume, the ground reality is milder) Or is it competitive intolerance (word coined by Acorn)?
Help me understand this outrage of the Sikhs….. As I se it, a man (himself a Sikh, belonging to a particular sect) dressed up as Guru Gobind Singh. I do not see this as an insult to the great Guru, infact imitation is the greatest form of flattery. The poor guy was merely trying to depict a scene from the life of Guru Gobind Singh, that too, in no manner which would insult the Guru. And he has profusely apologized to everyone if he has hurt any sentiments
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 7:38 PM.
Because people feel frustrated at their inability to counter the leftist propaganda, they resort to defending people like Neeraj Jain who value political power and nothing else.
Dilip, you here again? Keep visiting, please?
It’s the great Dilip D’Souza, ladies and gents. Dcubed himself. Posing as two people on this page, no less! Thanks for dropping in, Dcubed.
Posted on May 17, 2007 at 9:05 PM.
Blogospheric Debates and Free Speech Arguments on Art Censorship says:
[...] Sandeep’s blog has been a host of some interesting debate [61 comments so far] on the issue of so-called fascism in Baroda. If you have been following his blog, he is unabashedly a fierce proponent of the Indian Right. But I largely disagree with his opinions on the Baroda issue. His contention that art that is intended to offend should be reprimanded is going down the proverbial slippery slope. We have plenty of idle minds who actively seek an opportunity to be offended and then resort to clearly criminal acts of violence in order to voice their disagreement. [...]
Posted on May 18, 2007 at 2:31 AM.
@Mayuresh:
Sikhs are facing a severe identity crisis. This angst ridden community is trying to figure out what makes someone a Sikh. There appears to be a consensus on one thing : that the Sikhs are not Hindus. But such a negative identity is clearly not satisfying. It seems are large section of them are creating an religious identity modeled on Islam. Scriptures are to be interpreted literally, any sign of deviancy is not tolerated. As my Sikh colleague informed me a few days ago, the Udaisis are not Sikhs (Guru Gobind Singh was against asceticism), neither are the Nihangs (they take intoxicants), etc. The attacks on the Saccha Sauda folks shows how Abrahamic the Sikhs have become in their outlook.
Posted on May 18, 2007 at 10:48 AM.
Sandeep,
The professor of IISc - Prof. Abi - is showing us that while his bleatings about ‘freedom of speech’ etc., are in the Mega and Giga range, his willingness to be examined or accept criticism is in the Nano and Pico range. The guy does best what commies are best at (well, he is no commie, but unfortunately under their spell) - deleting comments that embarrass.
http://nanopolitan.blogspot.com/2007/05/outrage-at-ms-university-baroda.html
Posted on May 18, 2007 at 8:21 PM.
Sandeep,
Left a post here about our professor at IISc who is getting hot all under and deleting comments. Looks like this ‘liberalism’ is a cheap wannabe variant of Voltaire’s - simply skin-deep.
Posted on May 19, 2007 at 5:27 AM.
I left this on Prof Abi’s blog Prof Abi it is hard to “tone down rhetoric” before a hypocrite. Read this post every time to remind yourself how far you are from what you profess. It would be OK if you were a journalist or some chatterati. You are a person of learning hence you are obliged to uphold the highest standards of fairness. This post on this thread is about you and your standards of fairness. As long as you ignore this question I will continue to post on this thread. This is your blog. You can hit the delete button as many times as you want to. But there is no delete button to quell your own self. Let’s see what the good professor does about it.
Posted on May 19, 2007 at 8:46 PM.
Hi Amit,
Interesting discussion here. Been travelling and missed a lot of fun!
You said:
“you may wish to note that I also spoke out in favour of the Danish cartoonists”
Excellent! I applaud your spirited defence of freedom of expression!
You also said:
“If I had the resources to organise protests, I would do so for each of these events.”
Here is where you err! You do have the resources to organize protests. You have your blog. A blog is a powerful medium, especially a blog like yours, which seems to be attracting quite a bit of attention. Indeed, the internet, being a relatively democratic medium, allows all of us to organize protests.
May I suggest that you host the Danish cartoons prominently on your blog in protest against the censorship and the thuggery imposed on them? I’d really love to see them on your blog, and, if comments are enabled, would like to leave a comment too, in appreciation of your defence of freedom of expression. Thanks!
Posted on May 21, 2007 at 12:16 PM.
Hey guys,take a look at Vir Sanghvi taking on the pseudo-liberals..it’s for real!
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=ebce8724-1e20-44f8-9e29-9a0f03fa3881&MatchID1=4464&TeamID1=10&TeamID2=6&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1109&MatchID2=4466&TeamID3=2&TeamID4=4&MatchType2=1&SeriesID2=1110&PrimaryID=4464&Headline=Art%2c+tolerance+and+religion
Posted on May 21, 2007 at 1:17 PM.
Hello there again Amit,
As I am getting familiar with this issue, I am uncovering facts I have not known earlier.
Question for you: Does freedom of expression itself need to be defended with falsehoods, and with suppression of information that is vital to making reasonable judgements about the issue? For that is what you and some journalists in the media seem to be doing!
You claimed in your blog:
>>
An internal evaluation of students is on at the Fine Arts Faculty in Baroda
>
Contrary to an erroneous impression being created, the paintings were not on display at a private gathering but, rather, at an exposition open to walk-in visitors.
>
A BJP leader named Neeraj Jain storms in with a bunch of gundas. He has a problem with some paintings by a student named Chandramohan that use religious imagery.
>
A large cross depicting Christ with his penis hanging out, semen dripping from it into a commode.
A nude woman with a baby attempting to push its way out of her vagina. The caption below the painting reads: “Durga Mata”.
>
“Jain and his gundas beat up Chandramohan, and abuse faculty members and students.”
>
“A group of irate Hindus, led by Niraj Jain, a BJP activist, also marched into the exhibition venue. Jain, who had complained to the police about the apparently blasphemous nature of the “art”, demanded the paintings be removed.
Chandra Mohan and the Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts, SK Pannikar, refused. Pannikar turned down a request from the university’s vice-chancellor as well and was quoted as telling mediapersons that the Faculty of Fine Arts was like his “personal bedroom” and he was free to do and display what he wanted.
After persuasion from the police, the paintings and other works of “art” were taken down and locked up in a room. Despite the anger of Jain and his compatriots, there was no major violence, no damage to university property and Chandra Mohan’s creations were left untouched. They are still safe in that room.
Posted on May 21, 2007 at 1:50 PM.
Sandeep, for HTML reasons, my comment is not appearing as it should. Please ignore the previous one and approve this instead:
Hello there again Amit,
As I am getting familiar with this issue, I am uncovering facts I have not known earlier.
Question for you: Does freedom of expression itself need to be defended with falsehoods, and with suppression of information that is vital to making reasonable judgements about the issue? For that is what you and some journalists in the media seem to be doing!
You claimed in your blog:
**
An internal evaluation of students is on at the Fine Arts Faculty in Baroda
**
But Ashok Malik writes in The Pioneer:
**
Contrary to an erroneous impression being created, the paintings were not on display at a private gathering but, rather, at an exposition open to walk-in visitors.
**
You said in your blog:
**
A BJP leader named Neeraj Jain storms in with a bunch of gundas. He has a problem with some paintings by a student named Chandramohan that use religious imagery.
**
You avoided mentioning what kind of “religiou imagery” this was. Was it unitentional? Or were you in blissful ignorance yourself, fired as you were, no doubt, by the opportunity to fight fascism? Malik explians:
**
A large cross depicting Christ with his penis hanging out, semen dripping from it into a commode.
A nude woman with a baby attempting to push its way out of her vagina. The caption below the painting reads: “Durga Mata”.
**
And you claimed:
**
“Jain and his gundas beat up Chandramohan, and abuse faculty members and students.”
**
Whereas Malik says:
**
“A group of irate Hindus, led by Niraj Jain, a BJP activist, also marched into the exhibition venue. Jain, who had complained to the police about the apparently blasphemous nature of the “art”, demanded the paintings be removed.
Chandra Mohan and the Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts, SK Pannikar, refused. Pannikar turned down a request from the university’s vice-chancellor as well and was quoted as telling mediapersons that the Faculty of Fine Arts was like his “personal bedroom” and he was free to do and display what he wanted.
After persuasion from the police, the paintings and other works of “art” were taken down and locked up in a room. Despite the anger of Jain and his compatriots, there was no major violence, no damage to university property and Chandra Mohan’s creations were left untouched. They are still safe in that room.
**
From Malik’s narration of events, the following sequence emerges:
1. The paintings were grotesque and offensive.
2. Neeraj Jain first complained to the police about them.
3. The vice-chancellor asked the dean to remove the offensive paintings. The dean disobeyed the orders of his boss.
4. Then Jain organized his own protest. While this protest was not very quiet and peaceful, it was not what it was claimed to be in the media either. I suspect there must have been some heated exchanges at the protest, some pushing and jostling perhaps, and probably the threat of breaking out of violence must have hung about in the air. At any rate, there was no violence, and it is not certain whether the so-called artist was beaten up at all. The police arrive, persuade the exhibitors to remove the offensive paitings, and defuse the situation.
I return to my question to you: does freedom of expression need to be defended with falsehoods? Does fascism need to be fought with suppression and censorship of crucial information? I hope your answers are in the negative, and I also hope that in your hunt-a-fascist zeal, you were misled by your colleagues in the leftwing media.
Posted on May 21, 2007 at 1:54 PM.
OT, you write: “You do have the resources to organize protests. You have your blog.”
I did protest it on my blog. But the resources you need to organise a real-world protest involves tons of time, volunteers to make banners etc, someone to organise a venue etc, and I do not have all this, especially time. All I have is the blog, and my post in support of the Danish cartoonists is one of my most-read posts ever.
As for Ashok’s piece, Ashok is a good friend of mine, but he lives in Delhi, and my post was not based just on other press reports but also on first-hand reports from people at the scene in Baroda.
Posted on May 21, 2007 at 4:48 PM.
Seriously Sandeep » …the Fascism Debate Continues Here says:
[...] My questions to Amit Varma’s fascism post stirred up quite a debate. Work kept me from responding to Amit’s responses. [...]
Posted on May 21, 2007 at 10:00 PM.
HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY SEEN CHANDRAMOHAN’S PAINITNGS? CAN YOU PLEASE PUT IT UP ON THE WEBSITE??
Posted on June 2, 2007 at 12:36 AM.