Thus, we have people defending the opposition to Hussain saying he “hurt Hindu sentiments” by painting Hindu goddesses in the nude, without outrightly condemning the threats he faces or the violence he has had to face at his exhibitions.

Then you have those opposed to Taslima Nasrin saying that what she said about Islam and the Prophet is factually incorrect when discussing the violence her article provoked.

Others object to comparing Hussain and Nasrin because they think the calibre of the work is so different, one cannot compare them.

I may think Hussain’s paintings are superior to Nasrin’s writings, but that is neither here nor there as far as this debate is concerned. On the debate aired on NDTV today, only Javed Anand seems to have understood this and kept forecefully reiterating this point.

Everyone has their own opinion on the quality of the work. But that is not the point. The point is that they (Hussain and Nasrin) should be free to express through their paintings and writings what they want to and we should be free to criticise their expression, without resorting to violence and threating a person’s safety or destroying their work.

As for our “sentiments” (what an awful word) these days, whether Hindu or Muslim, they seem to be remarkably weak, wishy washy creatures. Time to start working on these easily outraged emotions perhaps, before we start attacking people for what they write and paint.

On Hussain’s being granted Qatari citizenship Umm, who lives in Doha, has said it best.

Share/Save

There can be no greater travesty of justice than this incident, and it once again demonstrates how willing state power in India is to dance in tandem with bigots. It happens in BJP ruled Gujarat, it happens in Congress ruled Andhra Pradesh. It happens in (see below) Left Front ruled West Bengal.

He also quotes Nasrin’s essay, Homeless Everywhere:Writing in Exile:

Just like in West Bengal today, my books have been banned earlier in Bangladesh on the excuse that they may incite riots. The communal tension raging through South Asia is not caused by my books but by other reasons. The torture of Bangladesh’s minorities, the killing of Muslims in Gujarat, the oppression of Biharis in Assam, the attacks against Christians, and the Shia-Sunni conflicts in Pakistan have all occurred without any contribution from me. Even if I am an insignificant writer, I write for humanity, I write with all my heart that every human being is equal, and there must be no discrimination on the basis of gender, colour, or religion. Everyone has the right to live. Riots don’t break out because of what I write. But I am the one who is punished for what I write. Fires rage in my home. I am the one who has to suffer exile. I am the one who is homeless everywhere.

Dilip D’ Souza writes:

(In parentheses: this kind of attack hurts the sentiments of my community which, including me, consists of one person. Why don’t you give a damn, Akbaruddin Owaisi, or anyone else out there? This is a serious question.)

I would like to pose that question too.

He asks:

What is it with us Indians? Are we really becoming more bigoted and intolerant by the day, maybe by the hour? Are we really that unable and unwilling to see thuggery for what it is? Are our sentiments really that gossamer-like? Is our faith in our various faiths really as shallow as these incidents demonstrate?

Share/Save