Artist attacked for blasphemy (Updated with images)

« In the Land of the Arizoni · Main · Blasphemous bill ejected from Parliament »

February 09, 2006

I was just reading about a painter whose work was called blasphemous and whose house was attacked by a mob of 90 militants as a result. They also attacked an art gallery that was showing his paintings and destroyed 28 of his canvasses. Two other painters whose work was displayed with his at a different gallery were also attacked. He has been the subject of repeated police investigations in the past, and was just booked by the police yesterday for offending religious sentiment.

It might surprise you to know that this is not a story of Islamic intolerance. Instead, this is a story about Hindu religious sensibilities offended by the work of one of India’s most famous painters, Muqbool Fida Husain, a man whose paintings were recently auctioned by Christie’s for $2 million a canvas.

Hindu groups objected to Husain’s pictures of Saraswati, Durga and Draupadi naked in 1996, when militants rioted, and are currently objecting to a painting of “mother India” naked:

Acknowledged as one of the living legends of Indian art, Maqbool Fida Hussain created a public furore by painting Hindu goddesses in the nude in 1996…. Hussain later apologised and said he had not meant to hurt the sentiments of any religious group. He even expressed his willingness to go before a committee of three persons - an art critic, a lawyer and a representative of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad - that could scrutinise his entire collection. Hussain said he would immediately destroy anything that the committee found objectionable. That suggestion was brushed aside as members of members of hard-line Hindu organisations ransacked the painter’s house in Mumbai and also manhandled artists outside a gallery in Delhi that had Hussain’s works on display. [Link]

… the Shiv Sena … endorsed the Bajrang Dal’s attack on Husain’s home… Bal Thackeray said: “If Husain can step into Hindustan, what is wrong if we enter his house?”… [Link]

IN the October 11, 1996 incident, a group of Bajrang Dal activists forced their way into the Herwitz Gallery in Ahmedabad’s Husain-Doshi gufa, the well-known art complex. Armed with tridents and wearing saffron scarves, they intimidated a lone guard and destroyed about 23 tapestry items and 28 paintings which were on display there. The work destroyed included Husain’s series on Hanuman, a depiction of the Last Supper and the famous Madhuri Dixit series. [Link]

WARNING: Thumbnail versions of the offending images below the fold, click to see larger versions

In addition, Husain was investigated several times by the police for his paintings, although charges were never brought against him:

A few days before Hindutva fundamentalists vandalised Husain’s paintings in Ahmedabad, the Mumbai Police had registered a case against Husain under Sections 153-A and 295-A of the IPC. (Section 295A is concerned with deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.)… [Link]

He is currently back in the news for stirring up controversy with his painting of a naked “Mother India”:

India’s most famous artist has apologised for a painting in which he represented the country as a nude goddess. Maqbool Fida Husain also promised to withdraw the controversial painting from a charity auction… India is often portrayed in popular culture and arts as a mother goddess. But the 90-year-old artist took that a controversial step further by painting the goddess without any clothes. In response, two hardline Hindu groups lodged formal police complaints. [Link]

The Vishwa Hindu Parishad has demanded that Husain be placed under arrest for hurting sentiments of the majority community. Meanwhile, state Bharatiya Janata Party president Nitin Gadkari has also extended support to the demand for Husain’s arrest, saying that the renowned painter has hurt religious sentiments. [Link]

So why didn’t these protests grow large in 1996, like those we see today in Arab countries? Well, protests have to be organized and fomented by groups - spontaneous protests are rare and don’t last very long without support. In this case, the Bajrang Dal was probably restrained by the BJP because of Husain’s high profile:

By 1955 he was one of the leading artists in India and had been awarded the Padma Shri. He was a special invitee along with Pablo Picasso at the Sao Paulo Biennial in 1971… Husain was awarded the Padma Bhushan in 1973, the Padma Vibhushan in 1989 and was nominated to the Rajya Sabha in 1986. [Link]

He was also well supported by India’s intelligentsia, and it didn’t make sense for the BJP to let this go too far. Husain also apologized right away, and his investigation by the police probably assuaged many of those who had been offended at first. By contrast, it is in the interest of Islamicist leaders in the Middle East to continue to whip up protests, and Western newspapers are continuing to insist on their right to offend. The politics of the current Danish cartoon affair go a long way to explaining the difference in outcomes between the two cases.

UPDATE:

Here is a list of paintings that Hindu groups found objectionable, their descriptions, and some links. The entire passage below is taken from a group that objected, so these are their interpretations of the photos:

The Obscene Paintings

Painting 1: Naked Sita on the long tail of Hanuman

In this painting Goddess ‘Sita’ and ‘Hanuman’ have been depicted in the nude. Sita was never rescued by Hanuman. Further, Sita is the icon of chastity for millions of Hindus all over the world. Here, Husain depicts Hindu Holy figures in violation of Hindu Holy Scriptures.

Painting 2: Lord Hanuman with His genitals pointing towards a woman having sexual intercourse

The title of the painting is Hanuman V. It shows a three faced Hanuman, and a nude couple in sexual intercourse. The erect genital of Hanuman is shown bent in the direction of the female.

(Critique of the ‘Hanuman V’ painting by noted critic, Shyamal Bagchi:
“While the brave and valiant Hanuman tries to concentrate on his meditation, the naked figures of Rama and Sita can be seen in the foreground…” Read more here.)

Painting 3: Hanuman opposite Sita sitting on the thigh of naked Ravana

This painting signed as ‘Hanuman 13’ by Husain shows naked ‘Sita’, sitting on the thigh of naked ‘Ravana’, while naked Hanuman is attacking him.

Painting 4: Naked Goddess Saraswati

Hindus regard Saraswati as the Goddess of knowledge, art and wisdom. She is worshipped as the one ‘wrapped in white, pure garment’. Showing Her naked is in violation of Hindu Scriptures.

Painting 5: Bull copulating with Parvati, with Shiva watching

Painting 6: Durga in sexual union with tiger

In this painting of Goddess ‘Durga’, she is not shown astride, but in sexual union with a tiger.

Painting 7: Naked Goddess Lakshmi on the head of an elephant

‘Lakshmi’ is also shown naked, perched on the head of an elephant.

Painting 8: Naked Krishna with His feet and hands cut off

Husain’s some other denigrating paintings of Deities (available for sale or exhibition on the Internet).

Painting of nude Goddess Durga astride the tiger
Derogatory painting of Shiv Parvati
Naked Hanuman sitting on a mountain
Obscene series on Hanuman
Naked Ganga and Yamuna relaxing in water

Politics

POSTED BY ennis @ 03:41 PM

112 comments

1 · Xfile on February 9, 2006 03:56 PM · Direct link

If someone had published the 12 Danish cartoons in India, they could have been arrested under the same clause too, i.e. 'incitement of religious hatred'. But the difference is, there would have much more public furore, esp by Leftists.

2 · Xfile on February 9, 2006 04:05 PM · Direct link

Is 'bharatmata' also a Hindu goddess??

3 · Vick on February 9, 2006 04:12 PM · Direct link

You should add following article about MF Hussain too.

Painter Maqbool Fida Husain has pulled out his movie, Meenaxi A Tale of Three Cities, out of movie theatres a day after some Muslim organisations here raised objections to one of the songs in it.

I have told my sole distributor Yash Chopra to withdraw the film from public shows with immediate effect, Husain said in a statement today. Husain who was visibily upset, however, refused to provide any reasons for his action to reporters. I have not made the film to make money, nor have I sold it to anyone. Therefore, I need not give any reason for the withdrawal of the screening of the film to public, Husain said.

Yesterday, the All-India Ulema Council kicked up a row by terming the qawwali number in the film, Noor-un-Ala-Noor as blasphemous. The council claimed that the song featuring the films main protagonist, Tabu, contained words directly lifted from the Quran. The councils statement was supported by Muslim organisations like the Milli Council, All-India Muslim Council, Raza Academy, Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Hind and Jamat-e-Islami.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040417/nation.htm#8

4 · Divya. on February 9, 2006 04:16 PM · Direct link

The sad thing is that Indian culture used to be full of naked and even erotic depictions of gods and goddesses. Somewhere along the road this new morality took hold. Anyway, protests are a part of freedom of expression and people are well within their rights to do so. If no-one ever flexed their muscles people would begin to take advantage.

Don't know what to make of Hussain - whether he's really artistically inspired or whether he just wants to provoke. I notice that he doesn't dare take liberties with his own faith which makes me a bit suspicious of him. Hindus are a soft target and if he's only taking advantage of that I have no sympathy for him.

5 · Sibin. on February 9, 2006 04:26 PM · Direct link

As Divya above points out, why is it that he never illustrates his "art" about any other religious group, especially his own ? Is he worried about the results ? Why only hindu gods, godesses, etc. ? Plain hypocrisy and some underlying attempt to demean Hindus by him ?

6 · hammer_sickel on February 9, 2006 04:42 PM · Direct link

Advisory: Frontline Magazine (published by The Hindu) is a communist run magazine. Everyone in opposition of US/Isreal is their friend and everybody else falls under 'enemy'. Read recent issues to confirm their support of Hamas.

7 · Tom on February 9, 2006 04:43 PM · Direct link

Deja Vu - II

"Behzti"

...Saturday night's protest turned violent at 1845 GMT as around 400 people gathered outside the theatre.

Interestingly the faith leaders had this compromise in mind.

The faith leaders had asked for the setting to be changed from a temple to a community centre.

The "Behzti" episode was commented on by Abhi , razib and Amardeep

Unfortunately this show had to be discontinued as the moderate voices were drowned out by the Khalistani zealots and the administration did not have the stomach for this sort of controversy. I dont know what came out of this. Did anyone follow this after it was not the front page news ?

8 · Tom on February 9, 2006 05:02 PM · Direct link

As Divya above points out, why is it that he never illustrates his "art" about any other religious group, especially his own ? Is he worried about the results ? Why only hindu gods, godesses, etc. ? Plain hypocrisy and some underlying attempt to demean Hindus by him ?

Sibin,
If you are posing a genuine question, then I will hazard a guess.
I think Hussain finds the colorful symbolisms of Hinduism inspiring. There is not other religion that I know of where the deities are depicted, decorated and exhibited with such enthusiasm. I can understand why you suspect that there is a motive behind his choice, however, IMHO he is just being an artist.

9 · Ennis on February 9, 2006 05:08 PM · Direct link

There is a long tradition of the depiction of Hindu deities, however there is no such tradition with respect to the Islamic God, and little of a tradition about painting Mohammed. Most of his paintings are not on religious topics at all though, these are simply the ones that get him into trouble. You can see a selection of his paintings on his website.

10 · bleep on February 9, 2006 05:40 PM · Direct link

I've seen many of his paintings and although I've never been a religious person, I was quite shocked and appalled. Its worse than just painting Godessess nude. He also has a painting of a naked Sita and Ravana engaged in intercourse....that offended me!

11 · Ennis on February 9, 2006 05:50 PM · Direct link

Thanks bleep! That was enough to help me find some of the images.

12 · Nina P on February 9, 2006 06:05 PM · Direct link

He also has a painting of a naked Sita and Ravana

Ennis, did you find that one? Google Images didn't turn up anything for "Hussain Sita Ravana."

13 · Ennis on February 9, 2006 06:07 PM · Direct link

You misspelled his last name. I googled "Sita Ravana Husain" and got the Sanatan.org page. While that painting isn't linked, it is described.

14 · Nina P on February 9, 2006 06:12 PM · Direct link

Ah, thanks. It was spelled with a double S here.

Looks like Sanatan's biggest objection is that the deities are depicted nude. Humans really baffle me, sometimes.

15 · Ennis on February 9, 2006 06:18 PM · Direct link

That's right. They consider this series of paintings obscene, yet in most of these the only objectionable quality is that Rama and Sita are naked. Given older Hindu religious imagery, I'm a bit confused.

They also object to this "Derogatory painting of Shiv Parvati" even though all three figures are fully clothed. Are they objecting to the mixing of animal and human features on Parvati and Shiva? They don't say.

However, I should clarify that these do not seem to have been the images that led to the riots. For example, the "Shiv Parvati" painting was pained in 1977, and the Hanuman series was painted in the 70s and 80s.

16 · observer on February 9, 2006 06:18 PM · Direct link

Tom & Ennis... going by your logic, how come he didn't paint his own family members or prophet muhammad's daughter in the nude when he did paint them (you can search for those paintings online)? I'll tell you why... because the muslim community will not accept it. Can you imagine a Hindu in a Muslim majority country painting the prophet's wife in the nude, for instance (since the prohpet himself can't be depicted in images)... he wouldn't live a single minute. Husain should have thought about this before he painted & exhibited it.

17 · Ennis on February 9, 2006 06:22 PM · Direct link

This blog lays out some of the reasons for offense, they seem mainly to be the cavalier use of religious figures without regard to the sentiments of worshippers. For example:

Protest against M.F. Husains abuse of Hindu Deities Naked Goddess Sita sitting on the tail of Naked Lord Hanuman http://www.sanatan.org/en/05/Protests/MFHusain/paintings2.php
According to the Indian History, Goddess Sita or Lord Hanuman has never been shown in the Naked form. Goddess Sita has never been rescued by Lord Hanuman. Over here Husain is interfering with the cultural principles. Not only this, he is trying to devise new imaginative indecent pictures of the manifest forms of God who are respected by millions of Hindus. Showing the use of the tail of Lord Hanuman for such an act has crossed all the limitations of indecency.

Protest against M.F. Husains abuse of Hindu Deities
Goddess Lakshmi naked on Lord Ganeshs head
http://www.sanatan.org/en/05/Protests/MFHusain/paintings6.php

According to the Science of Spirituality Goddess Lakshmi is the Goddess of Wealth while Lord Ganesh represents that function of God that translates our prayers from the language of sound that humans speak in to the language of light that deities converse in and vice versa.

Protest against M.F. Husains abuse of Hindu Deities
Examples of disgusting paintings
http://www.sanatan.org/en/05/Protests/MFHusain/paintings9.php

Apart from producing blasphemous artwork, M.F. Husain seems to have little regard for basic human norms of decency. In this picture he shows a horse having sex with a woman.

And in this he shows an elephant having sex with a woman

If we are to call ourselves civilised and we witness such obscene acts it is our duty not to turn our face away just because it does not pertain to our faith. Painters such as M.F. Husain are a hazard to society and need to be dealt with sternly. [Link]

NOTE: This group (and the blogger above) did not endorse violence:

We call upon all
* To socially ostracise him,
* Boycott his painting exhibitions
* Not purchase or hang his works and
* Get all his paintings removed from their offices and galleries where they are on display. [Link]

18 · Luscious Moon on February 9, 2006 06:23 PM · Direct link

If the Hindutvas deemed it fit to destroy Hussein's paintings in a public/private exhibition, then why don't they think its necessary to perhaps blast down the temples at khajuraho? what about rajasthani miniature paintings which depict rama-sita/krishna/radha intercourse that sell like hot cakes to tourists in cities like udaipur/jodhpur, does anyone see a blatant double standard? So its okay for Hindus to engage in this sort of depiction, but not for Muslims? Hindu fundamentalism is one of the ugliest plagues to hit India in the past century.

Besides, I don't think the observation that somebody made about him "not taking liberties with his own faith" holds any water. As Ennis pointed out, Hinduism has a long tradition of visual depications of gods in the pantheon and its very much a foundation of modern Hinduism in idol worship, image worship and so on. Islam does not have such a vibrant tradition, although as someone pointed out in a post on a previous blog, there have been a few depictions of the prophet here and there. Many Muslims in India have coexisted with Hindus for centuries, causing them to appreciate Hindu art forms, and in the case of an artist like Husein, his vast repertoire of paintings shows that he has a range of subjects to match.

19 · Nina P on February 9, 2006 06:25 PM · Direct link

how come he didn't paint his own family members or prophet muhammad's daughter in the nude when he did paint them (you can search for those paintings online)? I'll tell you why... because the muslim community will not accept it

I thought Muslims weren't supposed to paint any animals or humans, naked or not.

20 · Ennis on February 9, 2006 06:29 PM · Direct link

He started by painting signboards for films, so clearly he was willing to paint some figures:

In 1937 he reached Mumbai determined to become an artist, with hardly any money and lived m a cheap room in a by lane inhabited by pimps and prostitutes. Initially Husain apprenticed himself to a painter of cinema hoardings which he would paint with great dexterity perched on scaffolding sometimes in the middle of traffic. [Link]

21 · Harsh on February 9, 2006 06:31 PM · Direct link

Tom & Ennis... going by your logic, how come he didn't paint his own family members or prophet muhammad's daughter in the nude when he did paint them (you can search for those paintings online)? I'll tell you why... because the muslim community will not accept it. Can you imagine a Hindu in a Muslim majority country painting the prophet's wife in the nude, for instance (since the prohpet himself can't be depicted in images)... he wouldn't live a single minute. Husain should have thought about this before he painted & exhibited it.

Well, that's why Husain and everyone else in India should be grateful to have a secular, liberal democratic India. The comparison you draw doesn't shed any light on Husain or his motivations -- it just highlights that Muslim countries don't offer any freedoms and India shouldn't try to emulate them. The whole idea of this Section 295A is offensive and should be jettisoned.

22 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 06:32 PM · Direct link

Muqbool Bhai is not the only target.

The Bajrang Dal targets an organisation dedicated to the conservation and promotion of folk art and culture in Rajasthan for using posters that allegedly denigrate Hindu deities.

23 · Xfile on February 9, 2006 06:34 PM · Direct link

If the Hindutvas deemed it fit to destroy Hussein's paintings in a public/private exhibition, then why don't they think its necessary to perhaps blast down the temples at khajuraho?

FYI, there are no Gods and Goddesses shown having intercourse in khajuraho, only ordinary mortals including kings, courtesans etc.
Having said that, I uphold the "Hindutvadi" or anybody's right to protest the paintings but not wilful destruction of property.

24 · Manish Vij on February 9, 2006 06:40 PM · Direct link

Related post on Husain's $21 million art sale.

25 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 06:41 PM · Direct link

Durga in sexual union with tigerPainting 5: Bull copulating with Parvati, with Shiva watching

Thats pretty outrageous!
Has MFH lost his mind?

I think the majority of Hindus in India are pretty tolerant when it comes to mocking of Hindu gods.
Can anyone imagine what will happen in the US, if a famous painter painted Jesus getting fucked in the ass by a dog while Mary watches him and masturbates!

26 · Luscious Moon on February 9, 2006 06:42 PM · Direct link

X-file: There is a very blurry line, if there exists one at all, between god and man in Hindu beliefs. Rama, Krishna, Shiva, etc are clearly worshipped as deities but what about characters from the Mahabharata like Arjun, Karan, and so on...they have been attributed with god-like characteristics through the ages. In fact, that's one of the most interesting things about modern Hinduism, you can have faith in whatever form/shape/creature you choose. The temples at Khajuraho are considered to be one of the most famous icons of Hinduism or Tantrism which is an offshoot. As an aside: my question was purely rhetorical, I'd be shocked if it seemed like I was suggesting the temples be destroyed.

27 · Xfile on February 9, 2006 06:43 PM · Direct link

The whole idea of this Section 295A is offensive and should be jettisoned.

Yes it should be thrown out. Not only in the name of freedom of speech, but also because in practice, the law gets applied unfairly ans selectively almost always. So this ends up giving more ammunition to fundamentalists to pit one community against others.

28 · observer on February 9, 2006 06:51 PM · Direct link

Harsh,
my comparison _does_ shed light on Husain's motivations - if his intention was to explore artistic creativity, he could've explored the myths of other religions too, not exclusively Hinduism... surely he could find characters from the myths that abound in other religions? Sadly, he doesn't seem to appreciate the creative freedom he enjoys in a democratic and secular India. I drew the comparison in the second part of my post only to highlight this.

29 · Tom on February 9, 2006 06:57 PM · Direct link

how come he didn't paint his own family members or prophet muhammad's daughter in the nude

I can only guess. Maybe his Mum is uglu and he finds Islam dull and uninspiring.
I would say you this though, that there is a long tradition of Islamic Calligraphy in Islamic cultures and I have seen several beautiful caligraphy pieces. So I can only hope he will try his hand at this form of art too.

... because the muslim community will not accept it.

...he wouldn't live a single minute. Husain should have thought about this before he painted & exhibited it.

There is a possiblity that this might happen. Some people might bring Jehad to New Delhi with Bukhari of Jama Masjid leading the mob of killers.

My comments were made in abstract, where I speculated on what might have inspired Hussain to draw these paintings.

Please look at my comment #7 above, it is not necessary to have an illustration to incite a mob of thugs, provocative writing is enough. In case of Behzti episode the bone of contention was a play written by a Sikh. This play allegedly had a powerful imagery of a Sikh holy man raping a girl in a Gurudwara (Sikh temple). I have no knowledge of how many days this show ran, but it was discontinued after a mob of Khalistani thugs went on a rampage. Another case in point is 'Jo Bole So Nihal' where some alleged Khalistanis blew up a cinema hall.

30 · Kush Tandon on February 9, 2006 07:04 PM · Direct link

"Has MFH lost his mind?"

No. Hey, ALM in new incarnation.

I really like Hussian.

People like Hussian push limits of human thought. So do Picasso. So do Galileo. So Charles Lyle. So do James Hutton.

If we stop putting limits because of religious dogma, being sensitive to the thoughts of the masses - we will never have Galileo.

31 · najeeb on February 9, 2006 07:08 PM · Direct link

"Advisory: Frontline Magazine (published by The Hindu) is a communist run magazine. Everyone in opposition of US/Isreal is their friend and everybody else falls under 'enemy'. Read recent issues to confirm their support of Hamas."

Dude, what does this have to do with communism/US/Israel/Hamas?

These paintings are probably offensive - but the violence exhibited by the 'protectors' of the hindu culture is worse. I don't think MFH has any agenda though, he has painted Mother Theresa to Madhuri Dixit - nor do I think he has done it for publiciity sake. In situations like these, it seems like we, in the east, don't know how to protest without violence. People get together and one or two gets killed and that is accepted as the norm - It is ironic in the land of Gandhi. Indira's assassination, Rajiv Gandhi's assassination, Babri masjid, Gujrat, even kidnapping of kannada actor Raj Kumar - in every instance, innocents got killed.

32 · Kush Tandon on February 9, 2006 07:09 PM · Direct link

"how come he didn't paint his own family members or prophet muhammad's daughter in the nude"

BS. Maybe, on this token I should never:

a) criticize Dante because I am not a European Christian
b) nor practice Shotokan Karate, I am not Japanese
c) nor dicsuss merits of Galileo, because I am not a Catholic.
d) nor criticize algebra or algorithm, because I am not an Arabic

Come on..........There is no such entitlement.

33 · observer on February 9, 2006 07:22 PM · Direct link

Ok I'll bite.
Kush tandon: What "limits of thought" does Husain push through his paintings of deities copulating? I'd really like to know. I also don't understand how you can equate that with Galileo's work. Could you please elaborate? You also say
"BS. Maybe, on this token I should never:

a) criticize Dante because I am not a European Christian ..."

This is completely flawed logic. If I had said that only a Hindu can paint Hindu deities, your statement would be an apt analogy.

Luscious moon: Times change, and people change. Things that were found offensive centuries ago may not be so now, and vice versa. Just because people sculpted nude figures in temples doesn't mean we should ignore the sensitivities of the present day people.

34 · Tom on February 9, 2006 07:23 PM · Direct link

...if his intention was to explore artistic creativity, he could've explored the myths of other religions too, not exclusively Hinduism...

Observer,
I would not dismiss your bewilderment as a biased observation and it is rather curious why some artists embrace certain subjects while discarding others. I would still say that Hussain's finds his muse in Hindu deities, on why he chooses to stay away from subjects related to Islam (or any other religion), we can only guess.

35 · Count Dracula on February 9, 2006 07:30 PM · Direct link

on why he chooses to stay away from subjects related to Islam (or any other religion), we can only guess.

Come on, don't be such so disingenuous - you know exactly why he does not do that - because he would be dead if he did.

36 · Tom on February 9, 2006 07:32 PM · Direct link

on why he chooses to stay away from subjects related to Islam (or any other religion), we can only guess.

Come on, don't be such so disingenuous - you know exactly why he does not do that - because he would be dead if he did.

That would be a guess.

37 · Divya. on February 9, 2006 07:37 PM · Direct link

Hindu thugs and deranged hooligans recently burnt down a library in Maharshtra containing priceless manuscripts because of a book showing 'disrespect' to 'Hindu Warrior' Shivaji.

The group behind this was actually anti-hindu even though hindus have been blamed for this incident in most of the foreign media. They were actually marathas who want their own religion called Shiv Dharma.

38 · ms on February 9, 2006 07:39 PM · Direct link

This comment is not about MFH's work per se - but about a point raised by some commenters which goes something like "He chooses to offend religion X by making inappropriate depictions, why doesn't he draw something inappropriate within his own religion and then something inappropriate about a religion Y".

I have two issues with this argument - firstly maybe he is working in areas that he wants to. Its his choice to work on a particular theme - as an artist I suppose he has that freedom. Secondly assuming he caves in to your "demands", so you want him to depict something inappropriate in every religion so that everyone is equally upset and offended (not just the current set of people)?

P.S: I am not trying to say that these pictures are not offensive to Hindus and/or whoever else but just trying to understand what you are saying

39 · Ennis on February 9, 2006 07:42 PM · Direct link

Just to clarify, the violence happened in 1996. The only current part of this is the offense surrounding the naked painting of Mother India.

40 · Kush Tandon on February 9, 2006 07:43 PM · Direct link

Hmm, I glad you asked about Galileo.

Galileo's work in his time was considered blasphemy by the Roman Catholic Church but now is the core foundations of mordern science. He suffered a lot for it.

People like Charles Lyle, James Hutton (age of earth pioneers) challenged the bedrock of the Chruch and Christianity at that time - They stuck to their guns, I am glad they did. They were challenging the establishment more than Hussian will ever do.

A lot of ideas were just challenging the accepted Christian thought - sometimes through exepriments, sometimes even not that. Because they was not instrumentation to verify his ideas back then.

MORAL: Human thought (be it art, cartoons, science, philosophy) should be given a free rein to develop. Who knows what leads to what? There are no pre-conditions on who can do what. That is how human beings progress. Create something yourself, rather than being a moron (I am being generic, not you so please do not take it directed toward you.)

Human Creation = Paintings = Cartoons = Books = Science = All are equal and necessary

a) criticize Dante because I am not a European Christian ..."

Again, Because Dante's work sits on the core of Christianity. My critique should be unwarranted, since I am not a Christian. I should only discuss Hinduism, Hindu authors, and keep mouth shut in other matters. I am thinking of getting PhD on Dante, How about that?

However, at some point human thought and progress is no one's entitlement.

41 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 07:55 PM · Direct link

this is a vector, magnitude, type issue. hindus can be just as savage as muslims about these things, though pound for pound they aren't quite as bad. the fact that a muslim painter did this in a hindu majority country does say something about the nature of that country.

42 · Duur on February 9, 2006 07:57 PM · Direct link

I still don't see the point in bull copulation picture. I personally find it quite offensive and pointless.

43 · Artistic !! on February 9, 2006 07:57 PM · Direct link

I will make an artistic photo of Jesus (since he had always been portrayed on the cross) with a lady doing things to him. Using the logic of Luscious Moon, it should be perfectly alright. Lets see how people react !

44 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 07:57 PM · Direct link

by my last sentence, i mean that hindus or christians in bangladesh and pakistan would have to tread much more softly than vice versa. india isn't perfect, and the reason that these incidents are dispiriting is that perhaps it suggests we should move india from the civilized to non-civilized judgement category. if it was in the latter, and judged by the standards of the arab and muslim world, or china, it would be a paragon of tolerance still. if we hold her to higher standards, the results are more mixed.

45 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 07:59 PM · Direct link

btw, if the artist is a believing muslim, i do think it is in bad taste to do what he did. shit in your own backyard first dude.

46 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 08:07 PM · Direct link

There are aspects of India that put it firmly in the Rwanda mode and even place it below Pakistan and Bangladesh - carrying out 3 day continuous rapes and murders of minorities whilst police and politicans watch on and laugh is something unique to India.

well, it isn't unique, it is common in many uncivilized places. in a nation of 1 billion there is going to be a lot of variance, the key is how frequent barbarism is. india is certainly not equivalent to china or the arab world...but the gujarat incident shows that the whole country has not entered civilized territory either. onward and upward, god willing.

47 · Luscious Moon on February 9, 2006 08:09 PM · Direct link

Times change, and people change.

Thanks, I wasn't aware of this.

Just because people sculpted nude figures in temples doesn't mean we should ignore the sensitivities of the present day people.

Perhaps I should refer you to the discussion on the "Provocation" blog...sensitivites are relative - what might be to you is not to me...who decides what is or isn't sensitive? the perceiver of course.

48 · Xfile on February 9, 2006 08:12 PM · Direct link

There are aspects of India that put it firmly in the Rwanda mode and even place it below Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Have you ever lived in those 3 places or do u know what kind of atrocities are committed there WITHOUT CHECK??? Its orders of magnitude worse, buddy. Get your facts right.

49 · Luscious Moon on February 9, 2006 08:12 PM · Direct link

I will make an artistic photo of Jesus (since he had always been portrayed on the cross) with a lady doing things to him. Using the logic of Luscious Moon, it should be perfectly alright. Lets see how people react !

the logic might be mine, but the acccountability for the action I leave entirely to you my friend

50 · Andres Serranos - Piss Christ. on February 9, 2006 08:12 PM · Direct link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

Jesus on cross with piss in the tank.

51 · observer on February 9, 2006 08:12 PM · Direct link

Kush Tandon: Thanks for your explanation, but I still cannot imagine Husain expanding human thought by drawing offensive stuff, the way Galileo did. Think about it for a minute. If an ordinary artist drew two people copulating, it'd be called PORN. But if Husain does this and labels the characters after Hindu deities, suddenly he's pushing the limits of human thought? IMHO he's making use of cheap tricks to gain publicity and increase the value of his paintings. And self-styled liberals hail him as a great mind who could venture where others didn't !

Also you completely missed my other point. Your logic on Dante is _flawed_. It is completely different from what I said! I didn't say that only a Hindu can draw nude pictures of deities (compare it to your statement that only european christians can criticize Dante). Those statements DO NOT AGREE! Get it?

Ennis: I ask this question without any hidden agenda. The prophet's cartoon was censored when posted a couple of days back on your site (only linked to a picture on a diff. site, visible only when clicked on), but these offensive paintings find place in your site. What is the reason for that? (I'm curious, not trying to imply anything).

52 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 08:16 PM · Direct link

if it was in the latter, and judged by the standards of the arab and muslim world, or china, it would be a paragon of tolerance still. if we hold her to higher standards, the results are more mixed.

The Arab world itself is not a monolithic society either. The Human Rights situtation in Jordan, Morocco, Tunisia is a little different from the situation in Saddam's Iraq, Syria or Saudi Arabia.

53 · Manish Vij on February 9, 2006 08:16 PM · Direct link

How many Gujarat incidents have there been in China recently?

The authorities just gunned down tens of protesters in Dongzhou and covered it up.

54 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 08:18 PM · Direct link

How many Gujarat incidents have there been in China recently?

china has no freedom of press, so you won't hear about a lot of the things going on in the hinterlands. as a matter of fact, there was a massive riot in the hinterlands (sichuan i believe) between muslims and han, and the uighers are basically being ethnically cleansed from dzungharia. and we all know what has been going on in tibet for decades, the body count might not be millions, but it probably goes into tens of thousands in direct murders, and likely into the hundred thousand range in terms of byproduct deaths (starvation, disease, etc.).

and the atrocity is not absolute. compare it what the hundreds of thousands who have died in the congo in the past 10 years and it is nothing. i'm not smug, i just know that several thousand people being killed in a short time doesn't warrant attention in africa but it does in india. why? india is civilized, people don't expect such things to happen. in africa it wouldn't make it onto the AP wire.

55 · bleep on February 9, 2006 08:18 PM · Direct link

Folks,

This stuff isn't art, as far as art concerns itself with ridiculing the strong-held beliefs of a group of people. I was offended by his paintings, not because I'm religious but because I care about the people who have been upset and offended by the depiction of their deities in such a crude and uncalled for manner. You can't give me some arty excuse to make me believe that what this guy has painted isn't thoughtless and entirely innocent in its intentions. Whether its Danish newspapers offending Muslims or Muslim painters offending Hindus, anything that seeks to offend is wrong.

Lets not make excuses for this guy just because his paintings are worth 2million each, how about shifting the focus to artists concerned with building positive bridges in society through their talents?

56 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 08:21 PM · Direct link

India is civilised? Have you read the reports of what happened in Gujrart? Have you seen the pictures? Do you call a political culture that allows perpetrators of genocide to stay free, that uncovers mass graves of Muslims time after time, is that civilised?

google: de-nazification.

57 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 08:23 PM · Direct link

also, anti-zealot, india's political culture isn't that bad compared to the congo or china. are you getting hysterical because thousands of brown lives matter more than hundreds of thousands (millions) of africans? the world is a vale of tears, get some perspective. on god's list of primitive goons the hindutva types aren't at the top of the list. but yeah, india is probably on expectation half-civilized, though i suspect some parts of the country are more barbaric than others.

58 · Kush Tandon on February 9, 2006 08:25 PM · Direct link

observer,

About "significance of human thought". Please be aware I am not trying to be rude to you.

At that time, Galileo was challenging what Roman Catholic Church stood for? He was a heretic. He was supposed to go through inquisition but was later put on house arrest for rest of his life.

It is only 100s of years later we found out that he knew what he was talking about.

Picassco's Guernica is a grotesque painting and was a challenge to Spanish Civil War. Now, it is a national treasure and I know people who have openly claimed that it has had "deep life long impact" on them. It is now a symbol of freedom, ant-war, and democracy.

Maybe, Hussian is a publicity hound. Who are we put brakes on him? Don't like him, do not buy his paintings. Criticize him - But not use violence or censor him.

A lot of pioneers challenge dogmas - Maybe, Hussian is not. But on principle, he get a free pass.

Apriori we know nothing about "significance of human thought" - We cannot police such stuff

59 · Ponniyin Selvan on February 9, 2006 08:26 PM · Direct link

Alrite.. My first post in sepia mutiny..

Folks, MFHussain is 90 years old.. Give him credits for drawing at this age..

Think about this.. Actually Hindus need to be proud that such a thing (a person professing Islamic faith to draw a caricature (demeaning to some Hindus)) can happen in India.. shows its tolerance and value system. I think whoever vandalised (in 1996 though, not now), actually bring bad name to Hindus/India..

See this news item from Pakistan..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4693128.stm
....
Extra vigil follows Koran riots
Police used batons to break up Tuesday's protests
More soldiers have been deployed in the Pakistani city of Lahore a day after angry protests over reports that the Koran had been desecrated.
Protesters set fire to a cinema and burned tyres after reports that pages from the Koran had been found in a drain in a wealthy residential area
....

Do we really want this kind of stuff to happen in India?.. Read this from Arun Shourie..
...

In Hussein's case in particular, I feel that the youngsters who took offence missed a very vital point -- not just about his painting but about his life. He is and has continued to be a Muslim. Now, as anyone who has read anything about the Prophet knows, the Prophet cursed and detested those who made representations of things. He put pictures at par with dogs, and, remember, he had all dogs killed. "The angels do not enter a house," he declared on the authority of the angel, Gabriel, "which contains a dog or pictures." Abu Huraira, the source of a large proportion of the hadis, states that God's Messenger narrated that Gabriel had promised to visit him one day but didn't turn up, and so, when he came the next day, the Prophet inquired as to what had happened. Gabriel, the Prophet narrated, said, "I came to you last night and was prevented from entering simply by the fact that there were images at the door, for there was a figured curtain with images on it and there was a dog in the house. So, order that the head of the image which is at the door of the house be cut off so that it may become like the form of a tree; order that the curtain be cut up and made into two cushions spread out on which people may tread; and order that the dog be put out." "God's Messenger," the hadis concludes, "then did so." His wife, Aisha tells us, "The Prophet never left in his house anything containing figures of a cross without destroying it." She recalls how the Prophet reprimanded her for two cushions she had made because they contained pictures. The Prophet declared that those who made representations of things "will receive the severest punishment on the day of resurrection," that "Everyone who makes representations of things will go to hell." He declared them to be "the worst of God's creatures." He put them at par with "the one who kills a prophet, or who is killed by a prophet, or kills one of his parents." [ Several other hadis, and of course several instances can be cited; for the few which have been quoted see, Mishkat Al-Masabih, Muhammad Ashraf, Lahore, Volume II, Book XXI, Chapter V, pp. 940-44. ]

Hussein on the contrary has made painting images his very life. Therefore, in a very deep sense, his entire life is an endeavour to open an aperture in that wall of prohibitions. It has been a banner for liberalism, indeed for liberation.

In sum, I am for Hussein, not for his champions;

The position which Hussein's champions have taken up is just the one which our society needs;

We should hold them to their word, and have them stick by it in the case of one and all;

And we should await the day when their muse will lead them to exercise their creative urge, "that one talent which is death to hide," paint as freely and with as much abandon themes from all our religions and traditions.

60 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 08:29 PM · Direct link

Has there been any state sponsored pogroms of minorities inside Pakistan since the formation of Bangladesh of the magnitude of Delhi (Sikh riots) or Gujarat (Muslim riots)?
One reason for the lack of such state sponsored attacks might be due to the fact that there are no sizeable minorities in Pakistan living in large numbers in one area outside rural sindh.
I guess Shias are a minority in Pakistan, but the attacks against them are more random/opportunistic/terrorist like where the state itself is not complicit.

Bangladesh has had terrible Anti-Hindu riots. I dont know about the involvement of the state machinery in these anti-hindu riots in Bangladesh, but they are pretty bad and well organized.

I think India is worse than Pakistan in this regard as Pakistan has not had Members of Parliament lead mobs against a minority (Delhi), where the PM (Delhi) or the CM (Gujarat) do nothing but actually help the rioters (Gujarat) and wide scale state complicity from the planning of the riots to the execution.

61 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 08:31 PM · Direct link

Where is the de-Nazification taking place in Indian political culture Razib?

dude, you didn't get my point! if you google de-nazification you will see what a sham it was. my point was to put your horror at india's political class in perspective. god is dead and evil lives, i don't privilege the lives of muslim indian children anymore than black christian children eaten by congolese rebels in the congo. my tears are finite, and i'm not going to share your particular outrage because there are many others that rank ahead of it on the chain of evil being.

you asked about china, and i gave you examples. manish gave you more. hindutva is not the apotheosis of primitivism in this world, that is all.

62 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 08:34 PM · Direct link

debauch, i think the pakistan gov. genocide against bangladeshis was strongly biased toward hindus. even if a death toll in the millions is exaggerated (probably) it probably is big enough to count as a big credit to the "evil" bank accunt.

63 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 08:35 PM · Direct link

At a certain level, voters in Delhi are Palestinian Lite.
Voters in Delhi elected Parliamentarians who actually led mobs against the Sikhs in Delhi in the Anti-Sikh riots.
Voters in Palestine elected Hamas members who sent suicide bombers to blow up Israelis.

64 · Duur on February 9, 2006 08:35 PM · Direct link

Looks like anti-zealot has an agenda today-except it isn't really clear. I don't see how gujarat riots figure in with representations of religious icons and figures. This isn't about riots-this is related to the cartoon controversy.

Can we focus now?

65 · Xfile on February 9, 2006 08:36 PM · Direct link

you asked about china, and i gave you examples. manish gave you more. hindutva is not the apotheosis of primitivism in this world, that is all.

Well put. If some 'anti-zealots' think that this means we are in some way *excusing* the Hindutva atrocities, they need to get their logic (and head, perhaps) checked.

66 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 08:37 PM · Direct link

all the better to pat people on the head and describe them as hysterical for bringing this up.

you are hysterical if you try and compare india to china and imply that the latter is somehow not as bad as the former. the chinese have gotten bad press for executing prisoners for hong kong's organ industry for god's sake. you seem to know a lot of about atrocities perpetrated by the indian gov, but why should i care more about that than what's going in other places? time is finite, i allocate outrage.

67 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 08:40 PM · Direct link

I was wondering about a post-Bangladesh genocide which happened inside Pakistan.
I guess one could reasonably argue that the Pakistani government is complicit in the ethnic cleansing of the Pandits from the Kashmir valley.

68 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 08:41 PM · Direct link

well, you could also check the ahmaddiya websites on the web. they get shat on a lot more than shia for various reasons, and there are around a 1 million or so of them.

69 · Guru Gulab Khatri on February 9, 2006 08:52 PM · Direct link

Wow - look how fast the Hindutvadis come out of the woodwork throwing phrases like 'communist' about.

??? Frontline is a known commie rag in india. Again for some even russia wasnt really communist. Regarding mf hussain yes bajrang dal and shivsena did march in and violated his rights. Not that i care about what hussain paints he can paint what ever he wants, I dont want his work to be displayed in any function where taxpayer money or my money shows up. A proper way is to not support the schools where he shows up. He does get around and visits college, highschools. If you donate money to your schools back in india, you can see and threaten to withdraw your money(works better if you represent an alumnus org) He was stopped from visiting delhi public school this way. A few parents and a few alumsn wrote lettera saying they would consider withdrawing thier kids or their donations if he is allowed to come to school and it worked they did back down. That is the proper way, throw wrenches in any exhibition which has government support and dont support any org that decides on supporting his exhbition or him in any way. Pretty soon you'd have the frontline and arundhati paying their bills, better them than me.

70 · Duur on February 9, 2006 08:52 PM · Direct link

I don't see how mass graves are related to this- no one disputed the violence that occurred or that it was wrong.

Hindutva fascism as you call it - it is rather small scale [albeit one Hindus can do without] vs Islamic fascism on 12 rather tame cartoons of Muhammad vs bull copulation. Had it been Muhammad instead of Parvati/Shiva, all hell would have broken loose by now. And I don't recall Hindus asking Muslim religious heads of India for an apology- because the idea is absurd.

71 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 08:52 PM · Direct link

Now I know, if it is not on Razib's radar, it is 'hysteria' and relativised to the point of irrelevancy. What moral decrepitude.

ok, last comment: you tried to compare india to china as if there is a comparison between the two nations in terms of their human rights record. the implication is that somehow india is a peculiar barbarity that rises above the savage frey. my contention is simply that it doesn't, that it exhibits regional rwanda-lite outrages. in fact, india has a political/social class which actually attacks barbarism indigenously, while, to compare, china's has had to flee. you said: "The atrocity is so absolute Razib that it begs you to ask questions of the Indian polity and the total impunity with which genocidal thugs can stay in power." it isn't "so absolute" or unimaginable, there's a lot worst shit out there, that's that. you smell like you took the hindutva vector and flipped the sign, but the magnitude remains the same.

72 · Dhruv on February 9, 2006 08:54 PM · Direct link

Times change, and people change. Things that were found offensive centuries ago may not be so now, and vice versa. Just because people sculpted nude figures in temples doesn't mean we should ignore the sensitivities of the present day people.

You are correct that people change over time. Hindus need to become less prudish, more liberal, more pragmatic and less reliant on superstition and mythology if our religion is to survive.

Hussain highlights the trivial nature of hindu myths which is part of the reason why I like him even though I am Hindu.

I think the Mahabharat, Ramayana etc deserve respect as great hindu literaray works but hindus need to stop taking things literally and realize that there is much more to hindu thought.

Greater liberalism is a direction that hindus need to move into in order to be successful. I view this is a step in the right direction, though other hindus may disagree.

Face it - every desi religion has a gleam of thuggery in it.

And non-desi religions like Islam and Christianity are bastions of peace and enlightenment. Right ?

Face it, on average Indian communists are bigger zealots than hindus. If this was a painting of Mohammamed and Jesus engaging in homosexual intercourse made by a hindu artist, the communists would be up in arms overit.

73 · Guru Gulab Khatri on February 9, 2006 08:57 PM · Direct link

If this was a painting of Mohammamed and Jesus engaging in homosexual intercourse made by a hindu artist, the communists would be up in arms overit.

How about gandhi and jinnah engaging in the act?

74 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 08:59 PM · Direct link

well, you could also check the ahmaddiya websites on the web. they get shat on a lot more than shia for various reasons, and there are around a 1 million or so of them.

Good example. I do know some Ahmadis who were kicked out of Pakistan in the 80's and are now settled in the US. Actually thats an excellent example of state action against minorities in Pakistan.
As I understand, when Zia took over, he purged the military of Ahmadiyyas including those who were in high ranking positions.
Of course we all know about the Bangladeshi radicals burning down Ahmadiya mosques in Bangladesh.
Ahmadis might be the most beleaguered minority in South Asia today.

75 · Duur on February 9, 2006 08:59 PM · Direct link

Guru Gulab Khatri - I liked your comment on showing your protest. Reasonable and do-able.

76 · hammer_sickel on February 9, 2006 09:02 PM · Direct link

Dude, what does this have to do with communism/US/Israel/Hamas?

I just wanted to point out to the author about Frontline magazines' hypocratic stand on extremism. They were very critical of fundamentalist BJP when it came to power in India wheras Hamas who actually is militant, is glorified as vitorious. This adds up one more evidence against the communists as being anti-Hindu and anti-US as well.

77 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 09:02 PM · Direct link

Ahmadis might be the most beleaguered minority in South Asia today.

itz cuz they say they are muslim and they aren't (or are muslim, i don't know). one of my parents' closest friends from bangladesh are an ahmadi couple, they tell us all about it.

Anti Zealot, you're a christopher john. asshole.

78 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 09:08 PM · Direct link

no chris, i'm tired of having this monkey shit fight on SM.

79 · Kush Tandon on February 9, 2006 09:08 PM · Direct link

Razib,

I feel for Ahmadiyas.

Greatest scientific minds from South Asia - CV Raman, S. Bose, Ramajuan, S. Chandrashekar, and Abdus Salam.

An incredible mind with a humble heart - Abdus Salam was an Ahmadiya.

He also did lot for Third World science and scientists also.

80 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 09:10 PM · Direct link

kush, the irony is that he is often counted as a great muslim scientist, when in pakistan ahmadiya's aren't defined as muslim (they consider themselves muslim of course).

81 · Xfile on February 9, 2006 09:14 PM · Direct link

But they don't barbecue human beings by the mass grave tonne - unlike your Hindutvadi thug heroes.

Now who is relativising the primiticism, dude??

Let me paraphrase you in this context:

"Don't mention the communist thuggery and killings in West Bengal and Kerala, because it is worse in the Hindutva side."

82 · Xfile on February 9, 2006 09:29 PM · Direct link

A.Zealot,

You are either for relativising or against it (its like freedom of speech ;-) ). Dont be a bigot and relativise some things but not others. Take a chill pill.

83 · Dhruv on February 9, 2006 09:38 PM · Direct link

But they don't barbecue human beings by the mass grave tonne - unlike your Hindutvadi thug heroes.

Typical Indian communist propoganda:

- Stalin was a gentle, progressive human rights activist who worked for the betterment of his commarades, while the American capitalist pigs were busy starving their people and digging mass graves.
- Mao's cultural revolution in China brought a time of great prosperity, while Deng Xiaoping's capitalist reforms are destorying the country and reducing the standard of living.
- And Kim Jong Il has empowered North Korea to fight agianst western imperialism, while those capitalist South Korean sellouts rot in hunger, famine and poverty.

Western communists bend over backwards to reaffirm their ideology, but their Indian comrades take cognative dissonance to a whole new level.

Then they resort to childish name calling when someone points out the obvious.

How about gandhi and jinnah engaging in the act?

Or Bush and Bin Ladin. Or Hitler and Churchill. Henry the 8th and the Pope. I am all for the idea, it's too bad I can't draw...

84 · Guru Gulab Khatri on February 9, 2006 09:49 PM · Direct link

My favorite blogger is atanu dey.
Vinod Khosla fans, he has coauthored a paper with him.
Heres what he had to say on the matter

MF Hussain is free to paint whatever he wants to paint and however ugly his paintings are, it is protected. It is interesting that he would happily paint nude Hindu goddesses but will not paint Islamic icons. Interesting but understandable because if he did the latter, he would be sent to make his maker, as Monty Python would say. Bereft of life, he would rest in peace eternal. All statements to the effect that the artist known as MFH is still a going concern would from that point on become inoperative. He will become a dead artist.

85 · bengali on February 9, 2006 10:00 PM · Direct link

Ahmadis might be the most beleaguered minority in South Asia today.

Surely it's the Dalits... but Ahmadiyyas are close behind.

86 · anand sarwate on February 9, 2006 10:03 PM · Direct link

Anti-Zealot:

Face it - every desi religion has a gleam of thuggery in it.

Dhruv:

And non-desi religions like Islam and Christianity are bastions of peace and enlightenment. Right ?

Islam and Christianity are desi religions. Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs are also desis, right? Or what are you trying to say here?

87 · Gaurav on February 9, 2006 10:10 PM · Direct link

Dalit Minority, since when ???

About Ahmadiyas, few I met seemed like good guys. I don't know why the persecution.
May be Pakistani rulers were indulging in favourite trick of any politician, that is distraction.

Regarding Bajrang Dal, what they are doing is reprehensible, irony is that it will provide fodder to Hindu baiters like communists.

I find the pictures offensive, but vandalising is not a way to go about it. May be Hindus need another Mahatma Gandhi.

Regards

88 · Guru Gulab Khatri on February 9, 2006 10:19 PM · Direct link

May be Hindus need another Mahatma Gandhi.

Sure more temper tantrum throwing baldy saying hum khana nahin khayenge agar tum hamaare baat nahin manoge.

89 · Gaurav on February 9, 2006 10:28 PM · Direct link

GGK,

Well better than vandalising right?
I don't agree with his philosophy (I think Gandhian Socialism is BS just like Nehruvian Socialism).
I was talking about his method, ofcourse it can be said that he was indulging in emotional blackmailing.

Regards

90 · epoch on February 9, 2006 10:30 PM · Direct link

Islam and Christianity are desi religions. Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs are also desis, right? Or what are you trying to say here?

I thought he was alluding to the violent hindu thuggee cults, and suggesting that all religions originating in south asia had elements of that barbarism in them.

Desi Muslims, Christians, Jews, etc are desis, of course.

91 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 10:40 PM · Direct link

It sounds a little weird when Indians call someone a 'commie'. Its something only regularly used in arguments by a certain section of the American population.
I wonder if people have incorporated this in their lingo from exposure to American blogosphere/culture and is only an internet thing or whether people are commonly referred to as 'commies' in India as well.

92 · Nacheez on February 9, 2006 10:43 PM · Direct link

Perspective - esp for Christopher John a.k.a. anti-zealot.

Hindu thugs and deranged hooligans recently burnt down a library in Maharshtra containing priceless manuscripts because of a book showing 'disrespect' to 'Hindu Warrior' Shivaji.

Divya did point out that these were actually anti-Hindu thugs. Completely unknown before this incident and unheard of later. They burnt down the library not because of the denigration of a Hindu king but of a Maratha king and because to them the library represented Brahminical condescension of an anti-religious folk hero. This is the opposite of Hindu nationalism.
To say that this is hair-splitting is like saying that the Brits killed Jews in the genocide and then shrugging off the correction.
In short, you are an idiot. Also somewhat unhealthily obsessed with showing up Razib. Get some air.

93 · Guru Gulab Khatri on February 9, 2006 10:45 PM · Direct link

GGK,
Well better than vandalising right?

No if some one else has taken over your runs it how he wants to run it and refuses to leave, then my bapu would get strike the lathi in the intruders groin.

94 · Guru Gulab Khatri on February 9, 2006 10:49 PM · Direct link

It sounds a little weird when Indians call someone a 'commie'. Its something only regularly used in arguments by a certain section of the American population. I wonder if people have incorporated this in their lingo from exposure to American blogosphere/culture and is only an internet thing or whether people are commonly referred to as 'commies' in India as wel

Nonsense! again it shows that you have no knowledge of indian political scene, may be cause you ape americans you expect every one else to be at the same level as you

95 · Guru Gulab Khatri on February 9, 2006 10:51 PM · Direct link

sorry messed up applying tags in comment 110

GGK,

Well better than vandalising right?

No if some one else has taken over your house runs it how he wants to run it and refuses to leave, then my bapu would get strike the lathi in the intruders groin.

96 · Ennis on February 9, 2006 10:51 PM · Direct link

Boy, I went away for a few hours to go work out and already this place is sounding like a nursery school.

KNOCK IT OFF WITH THE NAME CALLING ALREADY! DON'T MAKE ME START TO DELETE COMMENTS, YOU ALL KNOW BETTER THAN THIS!

97 · razib_the_atheist on February 9, 2006 10:52 PM · Direct link

debauch, well, india has had democratically elected communist parties for a while though. so communism is alive there in a way it isn't in the USofA. but, it gets confusing, as 'commie' is an epithet with particular connotations here.

98 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 10:58 PM · Direct link

Nonsense! again it shows that you have no knowledge of indian political scene, may be cause you ape americans you expect every one else to be at the same level as you

Guru,

Calm down!

I did not pronounce a judgment one way or the other on Indians who use this term. I was wondering about the origin of this word and its usage in the Indian context. I also made a speculation about whether this expression was 'borrowed' from the US.

I have already stipulated as to my lack of knowledge and that is why I asked a question instead of making a declarative statement.
Now you need to calm down, before you completely lose your mind and commit random acts of violence on yourself and on people close to you.

99 · Derick on February 9, 2006 10:58 PM · Direct link

Ha! Ennis! Quiet in the class room...

100 · for_debauchery_in_ cartoons on February 9, 2006 11:02 PM · Direct link

but, it gets confusing, as 'commie' is an epithet with particular connotations here.

Exactly!
I get the feeling that Indians who use this term are duplicating the American popular culture connotation which might be out of place in India.

101 · Gaurav on February 9, 2006 11:16 PM · Direct link

GGK,

Well sorry if I sound like a apologist but it was not until start of freedom movement in late 19th century (or before )till Indians realized that they were in this together. Till then everyone was happy betraying others.
Do you really think it was possible for few pesky goras with horribly tasteless food to conquer India.

Debauch,

It is a little meta thing. Indians have acquired this habit of shortening everything from yanks(possibly even from british).But if anything there is a surplus amount of communists in India. Care for some ?

Regards

102 · Sahej on February 9, 2006 11:25 PM · Direct link

I get the feeling that Indians who use this term are duplicating the American popular culture connotation which might be out of place in India.

no, its a common-enough term used in the indian polity. if anything, its more common than in the u.s. since the end of the cold war

103 · bengali on February 9, 2006 11:26 PM · Direct link

KNOCK IT OFF WITH THE NAME CALLING ALREADY! DON'T MAKE ME START TO DELETE COMMENTS, YOU ALL KNOW BETTER THAN THIS!

I haven't called anyone names but what happened to our freedom of speech? That oh-so-non-negotiable, untouchable, golden doctrine of the fantabulous free world that grants us the ability to insult others (as long as it doesn't incite violence)..

I get the feeling that Indians who use this term are duplicating the American popular culture connotation which might be out of place in India.

I don't think so.. Communism is probably more well known to Indians as a practice (Kerala, West Bengal) than the generalised pinko commie bogeyman known to Americans since the '50s.

104 · Ennis on February 9, 2006 11:28 PM · Direct link

Bengali - see the bottom of this post for the answer to your question about freedom of speech.

105 · Sahej on February 9, 2006 11:30 PM · Direct link

this thread is full of name calling to the point its lost its point. by the way, Rang De Basanti is calling out for a thread. If nothing else, talk about how Soha Ali Khan's chin is just way too cute

106 · Guru Gulab Khatri on February 9, 2006 11:32 PM · Direct link

Well sorry if I sound like a apologist but it was not until start of freedom movement in late 19th century (or before )till Indians realized that they were in this together. Till then everyone was happy betraying others. Do you really think it was possible for few pesky goras with horribly tasteless food to conquer India.

I dont deny that there werent reasons why events happened they did. It is more interesting to read why people tollerated mao tse tung in china, if not adored him, but we have the good advantage of hindsight and the freedom to see what alternatives could have been. And projecting further one shouldnt necesarily repeat mistakes of the past. I am stating my position that we dont need gandhi(or gandhians). If any thing we need a Ben Franklin. He did manage to unify groups as well as take the entire nations agenda further. Also I am sorry b/c i can not continue this discussion further as i have to pack for a trip I would have loved to discuss this further, but as it is i waste too much time on non productive things And i am a horrible writer and am not being very clear here either. So Till I return, Offenses and Abuses to all ;-)

107 · Tom on February 9, 2006 11:34 PM · Direct link

Deja Vu - III

Lala Jagat Narain of Pujab Kesari group of newspapers.

Selman Rushdie escaped harm even after having a fatwa declared against him, he is indeed lucky to have escaped the jaws of death. The founder of Punjab Kesari was not that lucky.
On September 9th 1981 Lala Jagat Narain was killed by the goons of the devil incarnate, "Jarnail Singh Bhindran Wale" (who himself died a dogs death).

Khuswant Singh writes. link [ quote ]
Did the Sikhs deserve to be taught a lesson? I pondered over the matter for many days and many hours and reluctantly admitted that Hindus had some justification for their anger against Sikhs. The starting point was the emergence of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale as a leader. He used vituperative language against the Hindus. He exhorted every Sikh to kill 32 Hindus to solve the Hindu-Sikh problem. Anyone who opposed him was put on his hit list and some eliminated. His hoodlums murdered Lala Jagat Narain, founder of the Hind Samachar group of papers. They killed hawkers who sold their papers.
[end quote]

Khalistani murders were not very discriminatory when it came to killing innocent civilians.

[ quote ]
The Sikhs, a modern-day offshoot of a Hindu reform movement founded in the Punjab four hundred years ago, are an amalgamation of different beliefs and practices lacking a strong theology of its own. As such, the Sikh faith has long struggled to differentiate itself and its followers from Hinduism: placing a strong emphasis on prominent religious symbols and means of personal identification involving the Golden Temple and sacred scriptures and individual accoutrements such as the wearing of the turban, long hair and beards, and carrying a dagger.38 Foremost among the Sikh's aims is independence from India and the establishment of a revitalized Sikh nation, called Khalistan- literally, "Land of the Pure." In this regard, the group has sought to cleanse the Punjab of "foreign influences" - an aim that led to the murder of 16 executives and technicians at a textile factory partly-owned by the American multi-national company, DuPont, in March 1992. An estimated 20,000 persons have been killed as result of Sikh violence during the past decade. In 1991 alone, a record 4,700 deaths occurred in the Punjab. Although the majority of the fatalities were members of the regions Hindu minority population, fellow Sikhs judged as traitors or apostates have also been targeted.
[ end quote ]

108 · agnosticartist on February 9, 2006 11:42 PM · Direct link

Dhruv - Trivial nature of Hindu mythology? How dare you? What makes the richest mythology in the world trivial? It is only paintings like these, and also the work of other artists who STEAL -- STEAL, PILLAGE, CHANGE FOR THEIR OWN COMMERCIAL REASONS -- from cultures not their own that trivialise ANY culture. And religion IS culture, like it or not. And exactly why do Hindus "need" to become less this or more that? Who are you bowing down to in doing so?

109 · Gaurav on February 9, 2006 11:49 PM · Direct link

Tom,

I think it is past, at present Punjab is peaceful and doing Bhangra. Bhinderwaale was one bun of sith ofcourse.
But the back story is little more complicated.
He was used by Secular Congress against Akali.
Akali on their part could be said to appealing to religion,(Though I am not sure whether it was directed against Hindus).
Also the rage of Sikh extremism was directed against Nirankaris.

But yes I think one of the reason for tension is the identity issue.

I don't know but for some reason there are always identity issues where Hinduism is concerned.
(May that is why it is called Metaphysical Boa Constrictor)

Regards

110 · Madurai Vivekan on February 10, 2006 12:10 AM · Direct link

Did anyone notice the title of the book all of those paintings on the Sanatan Sanstha site were scanned from? "Anti-Hindus"

I'd be interested to know whether those are the actual titles of those paintings or whether the editors changed them.

111 · Madurai Vivekan on February 10, 2006 12:14 AM · Direct link

Sorry, not title of the book (maybe not, anyway) - but definitely title of the chapter or section...

112 · Ennis on February 10, 2006 12:18 AM · Direct link

Observer asked earlier why I used images of the paintings here while in the cartoon post, the cartoon of Mohammed was partially censored. There are a few reasons:

1. The biggest reason was that here, unlike with the Mohammed cartoons, the people who were opposed to the images were inviting people to go look at them. In fact, I would not have found the paintings without the list that Sanatan.org had put together. I thought if I used their text, along with the images that they had sought out, this would be reasonable.

2. In Abhi's post he didn't want to discuss the images, he wanted to discuss the controversy that they had engendered. He could do this, in part, because the cartoons were already widely available while the paintings had not been seen. In this case, I thought it was impossible to discuss the issues without looking at the images themselves. Apparently, those offended did too [see point #1].

3. Abhi showed half the image, above the fold. I used very small versions of the images, below the fold. Both of us used some method of partial obscurement so that the casual reader wouldn't be confronted, but still used some form of the image.

4. We have no problems with offensive images here. Earlier Manish was offended by the statue of Ganesh with the garland of penises around its neck, and he put that front and center. We reserve the right to use offensive images, and indeed deliberately offend our readers.

Comments closed.