05-15-2006, 10:43 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-15-2006, 10:44 PM by Bharatvarsh.)
All Indian's are intolerant except secular Sanghvi.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Everybody loves a good ban
COUNTERPOINT | Vir Sanghvi
May 13, 2006
The last conversation I ever had with Pramod Mahajan concerned a column I had
written on this page about The Da Vinci Code. The point of my piece was that
Hindus tended to be less tolerant than Christians. Consider what would have
happened if somebody had written a Da Vinci Code-type of novel about Hindu gods,
I asked. Would we have allowed such a book to be published?
On the other hand, I wrote, Christians had shown themselves to be astonishingly
tolerant. The central thesis of The Da Vinci Code is that modern Christianity is
a hoax and that Jesus did not die on the cross but married Mary Magdalene and
went on to have children.
Despite these apparently blasphemous claims, The Da Vinci Code is the
best-selling novel in the history of the world and it has broken all records in
nearly every Christian country. When, I asked, would Hindus learn that a mere
novel poses no threat to a religion and stop demanding bans on everything?
Pramod Mahajan phoned to say that he disagreed. It wasn't that Hindus were
intolerant. It was just that Indians liked protesting. After all, the campaign
against The Satanic Verses did not begin in the Islamic world but was launched
by Indians. And as for all my arguments about how Hindus would react to similar
claims about our gods, was I aware that blasphemous books suggesting an illicit
relationship between Ravana and Sita (and casting doubts on the paternity of Luv
and Kush) had been published in Marathi?
I said that this was news to me. And, in any case, if this was so, then why
hadn't he, as leader of the Maharashtra BJP, protested?
That was just the point, he said. The books were written by Dalits at the height
of the Dalit Panther movement in Maharashtra. "Dekho Vir," he explained. "At
that stage the Dalits were protesting more. How could we, as Brahmins, have
complained? It would have been seen as an anti-Dalit activity. In our country,
Dalit agitation will always be more powerful than Hindu communalism. He who
protests the loudest always gets his way."
I was reminded of my conversation with Pramod when I read about the protests
against the impending release of The Da Vinci Code movie from Indian Christian
organisations. While these organisations had been largely content to let the
book become a massive bestseller in India, they had suddenly been galvanised
into action by the news that the movie was about to hit our screens.
Pramod had said that the propensity to protest and the desire to censor had
nothing to do with Hinduism, or Islam for that matter. It had to do with
Indians. We are a nation of protestors. Give us an issue and we will demand a
ban. Some religious or caste groups were better at protesting (Muslims and
Dalits, for instance), so they usually got their own way. But given a chance,
everybody would protest.
And sure enough, India's Christians have not let Pramod down. Even though the
film The Da Vinci Code is made by Christians in a Christian country and will be
watched by millions of other Christians all over the Christian world, India's
Christians say that they are so offended that it should be banned in our
country. Never mind that the rest of the world will see it.
Say this for Pramod: his slightly cynical but entirely pragmatic perspective has
been vindicated. India's Christians are Indians first and Christians second.
In other words: give them an issue and they will protest, protest, protest.
And what about the nature of the protests? All of us were outraged when Yakub
Qureshi, a UP minister, offered a reward of Rs 51 crore for the head of the
Danish cartoonist who drew the cartoons lampooning the Prophet. But Nicholas
Almeida, a former corporator in Bombay and a self-described Christian activist,
has attracted little outrage for doing much the same sort of thing. Almeida has
offered a reward of Rs 11 lakh to anyone who brings Dan Brown (the author of The
Da Vinci Code) before him "dead or alive".
And what will Mr Almeida do if Dan Brown is actually produced before him in the
flesh? "That is between me and him," the saintly Nicholas told the Bombay
edition of the HT. "I know what I have to do. I have no fear. Even Jesus gave
his life for the people."
Clearly, Almeida would prefer to give Dan Brown's life for the people, rather
than his own. But just in case members of his local parish fail to produce the
author before him, the saintly Nicholas has a Plan B ready: he will burn Dan
Brown's effigy in front of St Antony's Church, Vakola.
As he says humbly, "God may forgive Dan Brown. But Almeida will not."
In case you think that Almeida is a nutcase and that I am unfairly caricaturing
the Christian community by quoting him, I should point out that he is not alone.
A week ago, the Catholic Social Forum (CSF) called people of all faiths to fast
unto death at Azad Maidan in central Bombay until the government banned such
anti-Christian films as The Da Vinci Code. For good measure, they also asked for
a ban on Tickle My Funny Bone, a film I have never heard of but which presumably
also poses a grave threat to the holy Church.
The CSF is nothing if not far-sighted. Recognising that others like me will not
know why Tickle My Funny Bone is so offensive, they also planned to show
objectionable clips from the film at the Canossa Convent in Bombay's Mahim area.
Well may you ask: if the damn thing is so offensive, then why in God's name are
you going to show clips from it to people who would otherwise never have heard
of it?
Another organisation, the Bombay Catholic Sabha (BCS), has already met the Chief
Minister of Maharashtra to demand a ban on the film. Surely, it is not in the
nature of Christians - a well-educated and reasonable community - to demand such
bans? Not at all, BCS president Dolphy D'Souza told the HT, "Freedom of
expression is being used in a whimsical way."
Moreover, adds the good Dolphy, The Da Vinci Code film is part of a concerted
campaign against Indian Christians: "There is a pattern emerging. The Bishop of
Vasai, Thomas Dabre, was attacked in February. There were ridiculous molestation
charges against Father Gonsalves in Nallasopara recently. Now, Christ is being
depicted wrongly."
Huh?
All right, I concede that none of this sounds entirely sane. And it would be
tempting to dismiss it as the work of a lunatic fringe. But it isn't.
The CSF has already met with some success over Tickle My Funny Bone. Along with
the All-India Christian Council, it approached the Censor Board in Delhi and
secured guarantees that all visual Christian symbols - a church, a rosary, the
cross, clergy and even a woman dressed as a nun - will be deleted from the film.
Now, says Joseph Dias, general secretary of the CSF, it will continue these
protests till The Da Vinci Code is subjected to similar butchery - if not banned
altogether. A Christian member of the Delhi Minorities Commission, Arnold James,
has already written to Sharmila Tagore, chief of the Censor Board, demanding a
ban on The Da Vinci Code: "This movie is sheer blasphemy and has deeply offended
millions of Christians." (How? They haven't even seen it. They've only read the
book. And nobody's asking for a ban on that. But it's no use looking for logic
in these protests.)
My guess is that the Censor Board will hold firm on a big film like The Da Vinci
Code even if it is willing to hack the relatively unknown Tickle My Funny Bone.
But don't be too sure.
Remember, India is probably the only democratic country in the world where the
film Jesus Christ Superstar - a musical that was credited with starting a
Christian revival in the West - was banned by the censors because Catholic
organisations took the bizarre line that it was anti-Christian.
What does all this prove? I don't think we should draw any general conclusions
about the liberalism of the Christian community from these protests. After all,
some liberals such as Bishop Agnelo Gracias have said that though they regard
the central thesis of The Da Vinci Code as absurd, they are against banning
movies on principle.
But equally, I think, these protests should also tell us something about
religious sensitivities in India. Most of us regard Indian Muslims as extremely
illiberal. And we are shocked by the regular demands to censor anything that
Hindu fringe organisations find offensive.
The truth, of course, is exactly as Pramod Mahajan described it: it is not
Muslims or Hindus who are illiberal when it comes to religion. It is Indians.
Even Indian Christians will demand bans on films that Christians elsewhere in
the world regard as entirely acceptable.
And the tragedy is that because we give in to anybody who protests loudly
enough, we risk becoming an illiberal state, held to ransom by any nutcase who
claims that we have insulted his religion.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1697689,0035.htm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Everybody loves a good ban
COUNTERPOINT | Vir Sanghvi
May 13, 2006
The last conversation I ever had with Pramod Mahajan concerned a column I had
written on this page about The Da Vinci Code. The point of my piece was that
Hindus tended to be less tolerant than Christians. Consider what would have
happened if somebody had written a Da Vinci Code-type of novel about Hindu gods,
I asked. Would we have allowed such a book to be published?
On the other hand, I wrote, Christians had shown themselves to be astonishingly
tolerant. The central thesis of The Da Vinci Code is that modern Christianity is
a hoax and that Jesus did not die on the cross but married Mary Magdalene and
went on to have children.
Despite these apparently blasphemous claims, The Da Vinci Code is the
best-selling novel in the history of the world and it has broken all records in
nearly every Christian country. When, I asked, would Hindus learn that a mere
novel poses no threat to a religion and stop demanding bans on everything?
Pramod Mahajan phoned to say that he disagreed. It wasn't that Hindus were
intolerant. It was just that Indians liked protesting. After all, the campaign
against The Satanic Verses did not begin in the Islamic world but was launched
by Indians. And as for all my arguments about how Hindus would react to similar
claims about our gods, was I aware that blasphemous books suggesting an illicit
relationship between Ravana and Sita (and casting doubts on the paternity of Luv
and Kush) had been published in Marathi?
I said that this was news to me. And, in any case, if this was so, then why
hadn't he, as leader of the Maharashtra BJP, protested?
That was just the point, he said. The books were written by Dalits at the height
of the Dalit Panther movement in Maharashtra. "Dekho Vir," he explained. "At
that stage the Dalits were protesting more. How could we, as Brahmins, have
complained? It would have been seen as an anti-Dalit activity. In our country,
Dalit agitation will always be more powerful than Hindu communalism. He who
protests the loudest always gets his way."
I was reminded of my conversation with Pramod when I read about the protests
against the impending release of The Da Vinci Code movie from Indian Christian
organisations. While these organisations had been largely content to let the
book become a massive bestseller in India, they had suddenly been galvanised
into action by the news that the movie was about to hit our screens.
Pramod had said that the propensity to protest and the desire to censor had
nothing to do with Hinduism, or Islam for that matter. It had to do with
Indians. We are a nation of protestors. Give us an issue and we will demand a
ban. Some religious or caste groups were better at protesting (Muslims and
Dalits, for instance), so they usually got their own way. But given a chance,
everybody would protest.
And sure enough, India's Christians have not let Pramod down. Even though the
film The Da Vinci Code is made by Christians in a Christian country and will be
watched by millions of other Christians all over the Christian world, India's
Christians say that they are so offended that it should be banned in our
country. Never mind that the rest of the world will see it.
Say this for Pramod: his slightly cynical but entirely pragmatic perspective has
been vindicated. India's Christians are Indians first and Christians second.
In other words: give them an issue and they will protest, protest, protest.
And what about the nature of the protests? All of us were outraged when Yakub
Qureshi, a UP minister, offered a reward of Rs 51 crore for the head of the
Danish cartoonist who drew the cartoons lampooning the Prophet. But Nicholas
Almeida, a former corporator in Bombay and a self-described Christian activist,
has attracted little outrage for doing much the same sort of thing. Almeida has
offered a reward of Rs 11 lakh to anyone who brings Dan Brown (the author of The
Da Vinci Code) before him "dead or alive".
And what will Mr Almeida do if Dan Brown is actually produced before him in the
flesh? "That is between me and him," the saintly Nicholas told the Bombay
edition of the HT. "I know what I have to do. I have no fear. Even Jesus gave
his life for the people."
Clearly, Almeida would prefer to give Dan Brown's life for the people, rather
than his own. But just in case members of his local parish fail to produce the
author before him, the saintly Nicholas has a Plan B ready: he will burn Dan
Brown's effigy in front of St Antony's Church, Vakola.
As he says humbly, "God may forgive Dan Brown. But Almeida will not."
In case you think that Almeida is a nutcase and that I am unfairly caricaturing
the Christian community by quoting him, I should point out that he is not alone.
A week ago, the Catholic Social Forum (CSF) called people of all faiths to fast
unto death at Azad Maidan in central Bombay until the government banned such
anti-Christian films as The Da Vinci Code. For good measure, they also asked for
a ban on Tickle My Funny Bone, a film I have never heard of but which presumably
also poses a grave threat to the holy Church.
The CSF is nothing if not far-sighted. Recognising that others like me will not
know why Tickle My Funny Bone is so offensive, they also planned to show
objectionable clips from the film at the Canossa Convent in Bombay's Mahim area.
Well may you ask: if the damn thing is so offensive, then why in God's name are
you going to show clips from it to people who would otherwise never have heard
of it?
Another organisation, the Bombay Catholic Sabha (BCS), has already met the Chief
Minister of Maharashtra to demand a ban on the film. Surely, it is not in the
nature of Christians - a well-educated and reasonable community - to demand such
bans? Not at all, BCS president Dolphy D'Souza told the HT, "Freedom of
expression is being used in a whimsical way."
Moreover, adds the good Dolphy, The Da Vinci Code film is part of a concerted
campaign against Indian Christians: "There is a pattern emerging. The Bishop of
Vasai, Thomas Dabre, was attacked in February. There were ridiculous molestation
charges against Father Gonsalves in Nallasopara recently. Now, Christ is being
depicted wrongly."
Huh?
All right, I concede that none of this sounds entirely sane. And it would be
tempting to dismiss it as the work of a lunatic fringe. But it isn't.
The CSF has already met with some success over Tickle My Funny Bone. Along with
the All-India Christian Council, it approached the Censor Board in Delhi and
secured guarantees that all visual Christian symbols - a church, a rosary, the
cross, clergy and even a woman dressed as a nun - will be deleted from the film.
Now, says Joseph Dias, general secretary of the CSF, it will continue these
protests till The Da Vinci Code is subjected to similar butchery - if not banned
altogether. A Christian member of the Delhi Minorities Commission, Arnold James,
has already written to Sharmila Tagore, chief of the Censor Board, demanding a
ban on The Da Vinci Code: "This movie is sheer blasphemy and has deeply offended
millions of Christians." (How? They haven't even seen it. They've only read the
book. And nobody's asking for a ban on that. But it's no use looking for logic
in these protests.)
My guess is that the Censor Board will hold firm on a big film like The Da Vinci
Code even if it is willing to hack the relatively unknown Tickle My Funny Bone.
But don't be too sure.
Remember, India is probably the only democratic country in the world where the
film Jesus Christ Superstar - a musical that was credited with starting a
Christian revival in the West - was banned by the censors because Catholic
organisations took the bizarre line that it was anti-Christian.
What does all this prove? I don't think we should draw any general conclusions
about the liberalism of the Christian community from these protests. After all,
some liberals such as Bishop Agnelo Gracias have said that though they regard
the central thesis of The Da Vinci Code as absurd, they are against banning
movies on principle.
But equally, I think, these protests should also tell us something about
religious sensitivities in India. Most of us regard Indian Muslims as extremely
illiberal. And we are shocked by the regular demands to censor anything that
Hindu fringe organisations find offensive.
The truth, of course, is exactly as Pramod Mahajan described it: it is not
Muslims or Hindus who are illiberal when it comes to religion. It is Indians.
Even Indian Christians will demand bans on films that Christians elsewhere in
the world regard as entirely acceptable.
And the tragedy is that because we give in to anybody who protests loudly
enough, we risk becoming an illiberal state, held to ransom by any nutcase who
claims that we have insulted his religion.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1697689,0035.htm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->