One of the things I absolutely admire about the US is their passionate love and respect for freedom of speech. It is protected no matter who the speaker. When M F Hussain wanted to come back to India here is what I wrote on this blog:Even as a Hindu, when I saw the picture of a so-called art piece where Jesus Christ was shown immersed in urine, I was offended. The guy who made that had only one thing in mind and that was offending all the religious conservatives in the US. Despite of that grossly offensive piece of puerility, the artist was not harmed in the US. He was just ignored. That is what we should have done to M F Hussain. He should have died an ignominious death in complete anonymity instead of getting feted by the entire left wing of India (of course that speaks volumes of them).
Having said all that, I would like to say that a puerile man with a diseased mind, M F Hussain should have been protected by strong Indian laws. He should have remained unthreatened. You see, Hinduism, which is the greatest religion in the world, can survive a worm like Hussain. He is gone and will get what he deserves in the afterlife but Hinduism will remain strong and the only guiding light to India. We should ignore annoyances like him and worry about what is truly important. India and what she stands for.
As a patriotic Indian, I respect the laws of the land and expect that all of us adhere to it like our lives depend on it. This is why; I may have sounded like someone who was taking sides with the liberals and the pseudo-seculars on this matter. Of course this is where the similarity between people like me and the liberals ends. I strongly believe that Salman Rushdie has every right to visit India and expect the Indian laws to protect him. On the other hand, the timid response of the liberals and pseudo-secular crowd is flabbergasting. The entire English language media has not made a peep against the Muslim clerics and other Muslim leaders on this matter. No sarcastic comments are coming from the leftist luminaries. You could not shut these people up when they were railing against the Hindus who were angry with M F Hussain.
Here is Digvijay Singh on the matter:
"Who has stopped him? He does not need a visa to come to India," he said, adding that "there is no law" to stop the author from visiting the country.
Wow, such innocence! Of course he dare not say the real reason with UP elections so close. This is nothing but blatant subversion of Indian laws and basic human rights in the name of minority appeasement and votes. But then accusing these people of hypocrisy will be very naïve on my part.
Our blogpost on the M F Hussain matter can be read at: http://thenethindu.blogspot.com/2011/06/m-f-hussain-india-and-freedom-of-speech.html
The world is wide. There is no need to censor anyones feelings as long as those feelings remain within four walls.what constitutes offence. a phisical slap, a verbal abuse, written abuse, pictoral abuse, odor abuse (like smoking in public). If we can find public smoking offensive, why should a pictoral abuse be not offensive. M.F.hussain's paintings are certainly offensive. As long as these paintings remain within four walls, I have no objection. But when it is widely published, it deeply disturbs my sense of sacred. Take the case of topless photos of princess kate willaims. the entire british media agreed not to publish these topless images. why?
ReplyDeletewhy the same logic is not applied to in dealing with MFHussain's vulgar paintings.