The question of who an artist is .. revisited

Before her retirement from Stella Maris College, Dr.Hilda Raja used to write columns regularly in The Hindu. It is conjectured that even after retirement, she used to write once in a while. Though she has sent the following letter to Ram in personal capacity, she sent copies to some of her friends.

For those who may not know, Mr. N Ram is the chief editor of the famous news paper The Hindu.

The following is the text of her letter.

Dear Ram,


I have taken time to write this to you Ram-for the simple reason that we have known you for so many years- you and The Hindu bring back happy memories Please take what I am putting down as those that come from an agonized soul. You know that I do not mince words and what I have to say I will-I call a spade a spade-now it is too late for me to learn the tricks of being called a ‘secularist’ if that means a bias for, one, and a bias against, another.



Hussain is now a citizen of Qatar-this has generated enough of heat and less of light. Qatar you know better than me is not a country which respects democracy or freedom of expression. Hussain says he has complete freedom-I challenge him to paint a picture of Mohammed fully clad.



There is no second opinion that artists have the Right of Freedom of expression. Is such a right restricted only to Hussain? Will that right not flow to Dan Brown-why was his film-Da Vinci Code not screened? Why was Satanic Verses banned-does Salman Rushdie not have that freedom of expression? Similarly why is Taslima hunted and hounded and why fatwas have been issued on both these writers? Why has Qatar not offered citizenship to Taslima? In the present rioting in Shimoga in Karnataka against the article Taslima wrote against the tradition of burqua which appeared in the Out Look in Jan 2007. No body protested then either in Delhi or in any other part of the country; now when it reappears in a Karnataka paper there is rioting. Is there a political agenda to create a problem in Karnataka by the intolerant goons? Why has the media not condemned this insensitivity and intolerance of the Muslims against Taslima’s views? When it comes to the Sangh Parivar it is quick to call them goons and intolerant etc. Now who are the goons and where is this tolerance and sensitivity?



Regarding Hussain’s artistic freedom it seems to run unfettered in an expression of sexual perversion only when he envisages the Hindu Gods and Goddesses. There is no quarrel had he painted a nude woman sitting on the tail of a monkey. The point is he captioned it as Sita. Nobody would have protested against the sexual perversion and his orientatation to sexual signs and symbols. But would he dare to caption it as ‘Fatima enjoying in Jannat with animals’?



Next example-is the painting of Saraswati copulating with a lion. Here again his perversion is evident and so is his intent. Even that lets concede cannot be faulted-each one’s sexual orientation is each one’s business I suppose. But he captioned it as Saraswati. This is the problem. It is Hussain’s business to enjoy in painting his sexual perversion. But why use Saraswati and Sita for his perverted expressions? Use Fatima and watch the consequence. Let the media people come to his rescue then. Now that he is in a country that gives him complete freedom let him go ahead and paint Fatima copulating with a lion or any other animal of his choice. And then turn around and prove to India-the Freedom of expression he enjoys in Qatar.



Talking about Freedom of Expression-this is the Hussain who supported Emergency-painted Indira Gandhi as Durga slaying Jayaprakas Narayan. He supported the jailing of artists and writers. Where did this Freedom of Expression go? And you call him secularist? Would you support the jailing of artists and writers Ram –would you support the abeyance of the Constitution and all that we held sacred in democracy and the excessiveness of Indira Gandhi to gag the media- writers- political opponents? Tell me honesty why does Hussain expect this Freedom when he himself did not support others with the same freedom he wants? And the media has rushed to his rescue. Had it been a Ram who painted such obnoxious, .degrading painting-the reactions of the media and the elite ‘secularists’ would have been different; because there is a different perception/and index of secularism when it comes to Ram-and a different perception/and index of secularism when it comes to Rahim/Hussain.



It brings back to my mind an episode that happened to The Hindu some years ago.[1991]. You had a separate weekly page for children with cartoons, quizzes, and with poems and articles of school children. In one such weekly page The Hindu printed a venerable bearded man-fully robed with head dress, mouthing some passages of the Koran-trying to teach children .It was done not only in good faith but as a part of inculcating values to children from the Koran. All hell broke loose. Your office witnessed goons who rushed in-demanded an apology-held out threats. In Ambur,Vaniambadi and Vellore the papers stands were burned-the copies of The Hindu were consigned to the fire. A threat to raise the issue in Parliament through a Private Members Bill was held out-Hectic activities went on-I am not sure of the nature and the machinations behind the scene. But The Hindu next day brought out a public apology in its front page. Where were you Ram? How secular and tolerant were the Muslims?



Well this is of the past-today it is worse because the communal temperature in this country is at a all high-even a small friction can ignite and demolition the country’s peace and harmony. It is against this background that one should view Hussain who is bent on abusing and insulting the Hindu Gods and Goddesses. Respect for religious sentiments, need to maintain peace and harmony should also be part of the agenda of an artist-if he is great. If it is absent then he cannot say that he respects India and express his longing for India.



Let’s face it-he is a fugitive of law. Age and religion are immaterial. What does the media want-that he be absolved by the courts? Even for that he has to appear in the courts-he cannot run away-After all this is the country where he lived and gave expression to his pervert sadist, erotic artistic mind under Freedom of Expression. I simply cannot jump into the bandwagon of the elite ‘secularist’ and uphold what he had done. With his brush he had committed jihad-bloodletting.



The issue is just not nudity-Yes the temples-the frescos in Konarak and Kajhuraho have nude figures-But does it say that they are Sita, Sarswati or any goddesses? We have the Yoni and the Phallus as sacred signs of Life-of Siva and Shakthi-take these icons to the streets, paint them -give it a caption it become vulgar. Times have changed. Even granted that our ancients sculptured and painted naked forms and figures, with a pervert mind to demean religion is no license to repeat that in today’s changed political and social scenario and is not a sign of secularism and tolerance. I repeat there is no quarrel with nudity-painters have time and again found in it the perfection of God’s hand craft.



Let me wish Hussain peace in Qatar-the totalitarian regime with zero tolerance May be he will convince the regime there to permit freedom of expression in word, writing and painting. For this he could start experimenting painting forms and figure of Mohamed the Prophet-and his family And may I fervently wish that the media-especially The Hindu does not discriminate goons-let it not substitute tolerance for intolerance when it comes to Rahim and Antony and another index for Ram.



I hope you will read this in the same spirit that I have written. All the best to you Ram.





Dr Mrs Hilda Raja,



Vadodara

Let us congratulate Mrs. Raja for making a point so well. It is a lady once again who has to come to the fore. It was Ms. Shobha De who had exhibited great courage (I guess Ms. Simi Grewal too), though both of them later chickened out, as they were being hounded out. It is a pity that there was no man who supported them.

Coming back to this letter, it reads nice. However, being a very cultured and a sensitive lady, Mrs. Raja has still minced words. She has, in a very friendly note, merely pleaded with Mr. Ram to exhibit reasonable fairness.

In my opinion, Mr. N. Ram, the chief editor of The Hindu is not just a DF, he is a coward, national-cultural suicide inciting DF. Hypocrisy is his art.

I also disagree with Mrs. Raja on her recommended constraint of artistic freedom. I would rather request to articulate a principled stand on the freedom of expression, which does not thwart truth. Having been a contributor to the MSM (Main Stream Media), she must surely be capable to doing this.

I also do not wish Hussain any peace in Qatar. May he be cut to pieces! May not even these pieces not rest in peace!!

The convoluted logic of RSS exposed once again ....

In a recent press gathering, the chief of RSS, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has said:

1. “He who is an Indian is a Hindu and he who is not a Hindu is not an Indian.”

2. RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat on Sunday said that those who were Indians were Hindus and if one was not a Hindu he could not be an Indian.

3. "For us the word Hindu did not mean any religion but a way of life,"

We need to look at it a little closely to find out what MB must have meant by this. Some of my friends tell me that this has always been the stance of the RSS.

There are some very interesting consequences arising out of this. Firstly, since MB(RSS) has not defined what a Hindu is, and what an Indian is, this statement is like "Something that we do not know" is same as "Something that we do not know". Fair enough. MB and RSS have enough space for maneuver.

Therefore we have some interesting questions for the RSS. What is the way of life that is called by the name Hinduism? And who is an Indian? Let us try and analyze what these terms can not mean.

Let us call the present geopolitical entity India as India-GP. Similarly let us call the so called geographical Akhand-Bharat of the RSS India-AB. The passport holders of India-GP as Indian(s)-GP. Let us call those who live south-east of the Hindukush valley and in the peninsular region as Hindu-GP. If we add the Tibetan region to this Hindu-GP, we term it as Hindu-AB. Let us call the yet to be defined "way of life" WOL, and those who are Hindus by this way of life Hindu-WOL.

There are two interesting observations to be made here. India-GP, India-AB, Hindu-GP, Hindu-AB are geographic regions. Hindu-WOL is not a geographic definition.

MB's statement consists of two parts besides mentioning that by the term Hindu, MB meant Hindu-WOL.

a. Every Indian is a Hindu,

and

b. A person who is not a Hindu can not be an Indian.

We have following questions:

0. How do we determine who is a Hindu-WOL?

1. Are there Hindu-WOL residing outside India-GP? If yes, then in what sense does MB mean that they are Indians? Does RSS advocate issuing Indian-GP passport to them?

2. Are there people who are not Hindu-WOL within India-GP? If yes, what does RSS recommend towards non-Hindu-WOL living in India-GP? For example, are they to be thrown out of the India-GP?

3. What is the attitude of the RSS towards the government representing the India-GP state?

There is one easy path that RSS can take. They can define that a Hindu-WOL respects all religions. This leads to a funny situation that a Hindu-WOL need not respect Hinduism-WOL, and yet can be a Hindu-WOL . The compulsion to respect Hinduism-WOL is absent because Hinduism-WOL is not a religion!

Another question is: Does a Hindu-WOL have to respect those religions who are bloodthirsty against them, for example those who have vowed to destroy Hindu-WOL?

Mr. MB, now the time is here to stand up and be counted. Your convoluted language will not work. The least you can do to allay these misgivings is to make your notions of Hindu and Indian very very clear, preferably giving examples. Hiding behind the veil of secrecy and ambiguity will be counterproductive.

Who among these two are artists? MF Hussein or Tasleema Nasreen, or both?

Ms. Taslima Nasreen is known to be an ardent critic of certain practices in Islam. A Kannada translation of her article has sparked violence leaving two persons dead and many injured. The news is here.

Now the question is, if MFH can paint whatever he wants to paint, why can't Taslima write whatever she wants to write? And where is the Main Stream Media, Ms. Sharmila Pataudi, The Artists of India, The Government of India? Why aren't they expressing outrage and anger? All of these are conspicuously absent, though their silence is eloquent. Of course it was only yesterday that this happened. But I bet that the whole of this bunch will remain silent.

I am anxiously waiting for the reaction of the BJP, and the RSS on this. I surmise that the BJP and the RSS will advocate restraint in artistic freedom lest it should hurt the sentiments of any section of society. The MSM, The Government, The artists will term the publisher of the translation and the translator as mischief monger and antisocial elements. However, before they have opined, we can still give them a small benefit of the doubt against all odds. However, don't be disappointed if you are disappointed!

But don't forget to ask the question: Who among these two are artists? MF Hussein or Tasleema Nasreen, or both?

Where is our country going?

I was under the wrong impression that I was being outrageous while describing our MSM (Main Stream Media), The Government, The Political Leadership as Dumb Fucks (DFs). I realize that I have been, in fact, understating the facts. What else can explain the following?

Recently, when MF Hussein was conferred Qatar citizenship, the "whole nation" rose in support of the nonagenarian.

Exhibiting their DF-ness are: The Center, Artists from India, Sharmila Khan Pataudi, The Center once again, The inimitable N. Ram, and none other than Mr. Mohan Bhagwat, the chief of RSS!

All these asses cite "Freedom of Expression" as their argument. Well, OK, MFH needs to be allowed to publish nude pics of Hindu deities due to this clause.

Now, watch the contrast. Another "artist", by name Macha Laxmaiah alias Krantikar, also a civil rights activist, wants to warn his fellow countrymen, nay, fellow human beings in the world, of a stinker of an ideology in his book titled "Crescent over the world - is a boon or the silent Holocaust?". It results in a protest, claiming that it contained quotes from "banned" books "The Satanic Verses", and "Lajja" by authors Mr. Salman Rushdie, and Ms Taslima Nasreen. The result(?) is the "arrest" of the author and his two "helpers". I wonder, if "The Hindu" even reported this. What are MFH's "protectors", The Center, Sharmila, Artists, N. Ram, Mohan Bhagwat and so on doing?

Are Salman Rushdie, and Ms Taslima Nasreen any less artistic than MFH? Why should MFH have the "freedom of expression" but not SR or TN, or anyone else including Mr. Macha Laxmaiah?

Mark my words, I am not being outrageous when I call this whole group starting from The Center to Mr Mohan Bhagwat, a bunch of DFs. I am understating the facts.

And, I am not being outrageous even when I say that: I wish this ninety year old stinking shit-pack of a painter goes to say hello to another departed shit-pack, pain in the backside, Mr. Jyotirmoy Basu.

Where is our country going? O my people, come and save this country.

Budget 2010: Is Pranav a Mukherji or a Murkhaji (Foolish)

It doesn't require a genius to observe that Mr. Finance Minister is a DF(Dumb-Fuck). Well, at least as far as the individual income tax is concerned. Our bright man from Bengal has bettered another DF from his state, the Railway Minister Ms Mamata Banerji. One wonders if the members of this government are ministers or sinister(s).

While Mamata presented the Rail Budget of West Bengal, not of the Indian Union, Pranav presented the budgetary insight of a damn fool. Coming to brass tacks, leaving the zero tax limit for an individual to the previous limit of Rs. 1.6 lac is moronic. Mr FM possibly wants to better sadistic performance of his bong senior Monsieur Jyotirmoy Basu, who fortunately logged off after tormenting his motherland for about nine decades.

An "ideal balanced family" of six - grandfather, grandmother, husband, wife, and two children (a son and a daughter) - requires, at the very least, about Rs. 30,000 every month for a decent living. This makes it, Rs. 3.6 lac per annum. A small allowance, for occasional luxury should make it about Rs. 4 lac an annum. Now, circa 2010, this should be the zero tax limit. And if, as usual, other sinister members of Mr. PM's cabinet conspire to perpetrate the present inflationary trends, by circa 2011 this limit has to be pushed to Rs. 5 lac per annum.

Now, instead of this, the DF moron has "relaxed" the tax-regime, by upping the other slab limits, making some of the tax slabs wider.

We must understand a few things very clearly. The taxes are way too high, even now anyway; so widening of the slabs, albeit necessary and hence welcome, is not enough. Meaning therefore, that this government is merely reducing its sins, and is still far from being virtuous by even sufficiently low standards. And finally, the absence of any relaxation in the zero tax limit, even this penitence effect is grossly undermined.

This clearly shows that this government intends to bloody rob the "hardest working" Aam Aadami population and subsidize and sponsor the luxurious life styles of its over-sized "twittering" ministries along with the cartel of goons who will be the "real" recipients of all the affirmative action programs which this government proposes to undertake using the tax-collections.

Mr PM, FM and the accompanying DF's, where is your promise to be the government of the "Aam Aadami"?