How not to Hear

Dear Abhishek,

Thanks for investing your time to respond to my post on the recent judgement relating to M.F. Hussain.

You misread my entire post by asking me not to speak for you. Upon reading your post, it seems that I should speak for you because you haven’t correctly heard whatever I spoke. What I find more amazing is that given your penchant for investment number-crunching, you have utterly failed to read my post completely. Else, you wouldn’t have selectively quoted what you call my “conclusion.” Before the said “conclusion,” I say

The judgement apart, I personally think the fault to a great extent, lies with the plaintiffs for filing the suit. In a nation where public discourse is perverted beyond repair…

Does that answer your question on why aesthetics etc shouldn’t be the subject matter of courts? You come across as really humourous when you say

I for one, can judge for myself, what I would consider aesthetically pleasing. If you seek to impose your standards of beauty on me through the courts, you patronize me to say the least. Husain’s art may offend, please or do nothing for me, but I will defend my right to judge that for myself. I will also defend Husain’s right to paint whatever he pleases.

Where in the entire post have I said or implied something to the contrary?

And the investment thing was just a remark by the way. My dear friend, do me a favour. Please read ALL the material on my blog where I’ve spoken at some length about Hussain’s “art.” For starters, this. As for this:

I am sorry, Sandeep, but I have to revoke your license to represent me for you stole it while I wasn’t looking, let alone without asking me.

You can’t blame me for carelessly dropping it: I didn’t make that yawning hole in your shirt/trousers, which everybody except you can see.

Here’s a parting tip to you: make sure you do your homework really well before jumping into an argument.

And a challenge to test your comprehension: read my post again and tell me in two sentences what I’ve said there.