Congress's UN General Secratary writes:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><span style='color:red'>It's time to stop harassing M F Husain</span>
29 Jul 2007, 0052 hrs IST,Shashi Tharoor
The question of why Husain doesn't paint Muslim figures in the nude is a red herring. The Islamic tradition is a different one from either the Hindu or the Western; what causes offence in one is different from what causes offence in another. Islam, after all, prohibits any visual depiction of the Prophet, whereas visualising our gods and goddesses is central to the practice of Hinduism.
The emails and messages still haven't stopped coming in on the Husain paintings of unclad Hindu goddesses, but I think it's time to draw a line under that debate with one last foray. First, though, i'd like to deal with those who've questioned my own record: many have written to ask whether I have spoken out in favour of freedom of expression elsewhere (i have, for decades, and continue to do so); whether I have publicly defended Salman Rushdie over The Satanic Verses (i have, widely, and in writing as well as in person); and whether I have spoken in favour of the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed (I have not, because I consider them a needless provocation). The last line of questioning, I must say, irritated me; those who draw a parallel between Husain's art and a bunch of cartoons have not begun to understand the first thing about either.
But it's time to acknowledge that one category of objection cannot be lightly dismissed. I wrote a few weeks ago about those readers who, while fully respecting Husain as an artist, and without expressing any of the communal bigotry that I found particularly distasteful about this affair, nonetheless expressed anguish at seeing representations of goddesses in the nude. They wrote of their hurt that images they worshipped should have been so depicted; many asked why Husain has not depicted figures of other faiths, including his own, undressed. Several added that this was because Hindus are a pushover; other faiths are more robust in their self-defence, whereas Hindus like me are all too willing to accept being insulted.
There's a lot to be said about all this that one can't fit into a single Sunday column. But some points must be made. First: I don't feel insulted by the paintings because (unlike the Danish cartoons) no insult was intended. As i've explained before, Husain is no Johnny-come-lately; he is a major artist, a national treasure, one with a long record of being inspired by Hindu mythology as a major source of inspiration for his work. His paintings of goddesses are consistent with 50 years of his paintings of other iconic Hindu images, clad and unclad. I saw the paintings in that context; his critics saw them out of context (and judging by some emails I received, grossly exaggerated what the paintings depicted: a Hindutva website falsely alleges that Husain shows Durga in sexual relations with a tiger, something it would take a perfervid imagination to see in his picture!) Husain saw his paintings as being within a millennial Indian tradition in which nudity has been widely used in art, including on temple walls. So did i. But I accept that's not enough.
Husain as an artist has long used form to suggest ideas beyond form; images in his works are both less and more than realistic depictions of what they portray. His paintings are full of metaphors and allusions; the body, he has often said, is a representation of something formless, illusory (maya). As a Hindu, I did not see his goddesses as literal depictions of the images I worship. I believe in the Upanishadic view that the Divine is essentially unknowable, and that all worship consists of human beings stretching out their hands to that which they cannot touch. But since we humans, with our limited minds, need something more specific to aid our imaginations, we visualise God in forms that we find more easily recognisable. Hinduism, in accepting that need, also gives its adherents an infinite variety of choices about how to imagine God. That's why there are 333,000 names and depictions of the Divine in Hinduism; each Hindu may pick the ones he wishes to venerate, and the form in which he wishes to venerate them. There's nothing more 'authentic' about a Raja Ravi Varma image of Saraswati than that of a calendar artist; each is imagining the goddess according to his own sensibility. As a Hindu, I had no difficulty in according Husain the same right.
The question of why Husain doesn't paint Muslim figures in the nude is a red herring. The Islamic tradition is a different one from either the Hindu or the Western; what causes offence in one is different from what causes offence in another. Islam, after all, prohibits any visual depiction of the Prophet, whereas visualising our gods and goddesses is central to the practice of Hinduism.
But having said that, one has to accept that people of good faith may well have been offended â and if so, it's not enough to tell them they shouldn't be. Husain himself accepts that if you hurt people unintentionally, the right thing to do is to apologise. And he has done so, more than once. Since when have Hindus become so ungracious that we refuse to accept apologies?
On his current visit to the United States, Husain was asked by a radio interviewer how he felt about the controversy "as a Muslim". The 92-year-old Master bridled. "I'm an Indian and a painter, that's all," he said. As an Indian and a painter he has brought immense honour to our country and our civilisation. Is it right that, in the tenth decade of his illustrious life, he should live abroad, fearful of being hounded and harassed if he sets foot in his native land? I appeal to the very sense of decency that some readers claim Husain has violated. Let us put this matter beyond us, accept his apology, and withdraw the multiple cases that have been filed against him and which have destroyed his peace of mind. The persecution of Husain does not show Hindus acting in robust self-defence; it shows us as petty and small-minded. What does it say about us as a society if, instead of offering our greatest living artist an honoured place, we tell him he is not welcome in his own homeland? It is time to end this harassment â not just for Husain, but for our own sake as a civilisation.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion...how/2241328.cms
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There are so many things to be said about this. Later.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><span style='color:red'>It's time to stop harassing M F Husain</span>
29 Jul 2007, 0052 hrs IST,Shashi Tharoor
The question of why Husain doesn't paint Muslim figures in the nude is a red herring. The Islamic tradition is a different one from either the Hindu or the Western; what causes offence in one is different from what causes offence in another. Islam, after all, prohibits any visual depiction of the Prophet, whereas visualising our gods and goddesses is central to the practice of Hinduism.
The emails and messages still haven't stopped coming in on the Husain paintings of unclad Hindu goddesses, but I think it's time to draw a line under that debate with one last foray. First, though, i'd like to deal with those who've questioned my own record: many have written to ask whether I have spoken out in favour of freedom of expression elsewhere (i have, for decades, and continue to do so); whether I have publicly defended Salman Rushdie over The Satanic Verses (i have, widely, and in writing as well as in person); and whether I have spoken in favour of the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed (I have not, because I consider them a needless provocation). The last line of questioning, I must say, irritated me; those who draw a parallel between Husain's art and a bunch of cartoons have not begun to understand the first thing about either.
But it's time to acknowledge that one category of objection cannot be lightly dismissed. I wrote a few weeks ago about those readers who, while fully respecting Husain as an artist, and without expressing any of the communal bigotry that I found particularly distasteful about this affair, nonetheless expressed anguish at seeing representations of goddesses in the nude. They wrote of their hurt that images they worshipped should have been so depicted; many asked why Husain has not depicted figures of other faiths, including his own, undressed. Several added that this was because Hindus are a pushover; other faiths are more robust in their self-defence, whereas Hindus like me are all too willing to accept being insulted.
There's a lot to be said about all this that one can't fit into a single Sunday column. But some points must be made. First: I don't feel insulted by the paintings because (unlike the Danish cartoons) no insult was intended. As i've explained before, Husain is no Johnny-come-lately; he is a major artist, a national treasure, one with a long record of being inspired by Hindu mythology as a major source of inspiration for his work. His paintings of goddesses are consistent with 50 years of his paintings of other iconic Hindu images, clad and unclad. I saw the paintings in that context; his critics saw them out of context (and judging by some emails I received, grossly exaggerated what the paintings depicted: a Hindutva website falsely alleges that Husain shows Durga in sexual relations with a tiger, something it would take a perfervid imagination to see in his picture!) Husain saw his paintings as being within a millennial Indian tradition in which nudity has been widely used in art, including on temple walls. So did i. But I accept that's not enough.
Husain as an artist has long used form to suggest ideas beyond form; images in his works are both less and more than realistic depictions of what they portray. His paintings are full of metaphors and allusions; the body, he has often said, is a representation of something formless, illusory (maya). As a Hindu, I did not see his goddesses as literal depictions of the images I worship. I believe in the Upanishadic view that the Divine is essentially unknowable, and that all worship consists of human beings stretching out their hands to that which they cannot touch. But since we humans, with our limited minds, need something more specific to aid our imaginations, we visualise God in forms that we find more easily recognisable. Hinduism, in accepting that need, also gives its adherents an infinite variety of choices about how to imagine God. That's why there are 333,000 names and depictions of the Divine in Hinduism; each Hindu may pick the ones he wishes to venerate, and the form in which he wishes to venerate them. There's nothing more 'authentic' about a Raja Ravi Varma image of Saraswati than that of a calendar artist; each is imagining the goddess according to his own sensibility. As a Hindu, I had no difficulty in according Husain the same right.
The question of why Husain doesn't paint Muslim figures in the nude is a red herring. The Islamic tradition is a different one from either the Hindu or the Western; what causes offence in one is different from what causes offence in another. Islam, after all, prohibits any visual depiction of the Prophet, whereas visualising our gods and goddesses is central to the practice of Hinduism.
But having said that, one has to accept that people of good faith may well have been offended â and if so, it's not enough to tell them they shouldn't be. Husain himself accepts that if you hurt people unintentionally, the right thing to do is to apologise. And he has done so, more than once. Since when have Hindus become so ungracious that we refuse to accept apologies?
On his current visit to the United States, Husain was asked by a radio interviewer how he felt about the controversy "as a Muslim". The 92-year-old Master bridled. "I'm an Indian and a painter, that's all," he said. As an Indian and a painter he has brought immense honour to our country and our civilisation. Is it right that, in the tenth decade of his illustrious life, he should live abroad, fearful of being hounded and harassed if he sets foot in his native land? I appeal to the very sense of decency that some readers claim Husain has violated. Let us put this matter beyond us, accept his apology, and withdraw the multiple cases that have been filed against him and which have destroyed his peace of mind. The persecution of Husain does not show Hindus acting in robust self-defence; it shows us as petty and small-minded. What does it say about us as a society if, instead of offering our greatest living artist an honoured place, we tell him he is not welcome in his own homeland? It is time to end this harassment â not just for Husain, but for our own sake as a civilisation.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion...how/2241328.cms
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There are so many things to be said about this. Later.