I was reading news in the TOI about how M F Husain is no longer an Indian the other day and saw the four hundred odd comments left by regular Indians who needed to express their opinion. Surprisingly for me, the overwhelming sentiment seems to be an outrage against the painter for depicting Hindu goddesses in the nude, and most are happy to be rid of him. The TOI blogger Ramesh Khazanchi has written a scathing article on how the Freedom of Expression is not unqualified and how Husain will learn in his new home how precious it is – of course, forgetting in the process that it was India which drove him away.
I myself have to ask the question: “So what if he painted nude goddesses?” I mean what exactly are people protesting? Suppose Husain had painted the nude goddesses and kept them in his room – never displaying them to anyone. Would they have objected then? If so, then what they’re saying is that a person has no right to even think about naked goddesses since a painting is a mere expression of one’s thought.
Husain's Paintings are not being forced on anyone, so what's the big do?
But of course, Husain displayed his paintings, and again I have to ask: “So what?” It’s not as if they were forced on people, not as if they were projected onto buildings, not as if they were advertised on TV. In fact, everyone who saw the paintings chose to see them. The question crosses my mind, what kind of insane person goes to view pictures that he or she knows will offend them? And worse, what kind of person chooses to view pictures and then complains about it?
So perhaps people are objecting to the fact that others saw the pictures since one presumes they never saw the paintings themselves (they being so offensive and all). If so, they’re essentially claiming that adults don’t have the strength of mind to know what’s good for them and that someone has to ensure they’re kept in check…Not so different from people like our beloved Pramod Muthalik who feel the need to “protect” India’s culture and force their version of it down people’s throats, saying they don’t know what’s good for them.
In my opinion, people are too quick to put limits on free speech using phrases such as “Freedom of expression is not absolute” or “Freedom of speech doesn’t mean you can say what you want.” Well, I’m afraid it does! A mature society realizes that words themselves don’t harm anyone and more importantly, one can choose what one wants to see and hear. So if you read or hear something which offends you, you have no one to blame but yourself.
What’s your opinion? (You can choose two answers)
I agree with you…Best of all, most of the people protesting haven’t even seen the paintings!
Read this post sometime back and loved it, right now I am n a hurry – will come back and comment.
Good post, clearly stated. The bar for limiting expression should be very high, imho. Feelings should not come into it. Yelling fire in a crowded room is unsafe and should not be allowed. Other than that kind of thing, I say, if you don't like it, don't look at it!
Fortunately we have good courts that are tough of issues like this. It seems as if the general public however is becoming more and more intolerant. And not just in India too. Everywhere from the UK to Australia, to the US.
But I have faith that things will become better over time – the eternal optimist! Well, apart from believing we'll do something on climate change that is :D
Good post, clearly stated. The bar for limiting expression should be very high, imho. Feelings should not come into it. Yelling fire in a crowded room is unsafe and should not be allowed. Other than that kind of thing, I say, if you don't like it, don't look at it!
Fortunately we have good courts that are tough of issues like this. It seems as if the general public however is becoming more and more intolerant. And not just in India too. Everywhere from the UK to Australia, to the US.
But I have faith that things will become better over time – the eternal optimist! Well, apart from believing we'll do something on climate change that is :D
[...] laws.”The topic may have been done to death in the Indian blogosphere – what with the furor over M F Husain’s paintings and all. But this new logic needs to be addressed, where an entire country claims that they have [...]
i do not agree , can i ask MF HUSSIAN ,will he draw nude painting of prophet , will he ? i think not , bythe way ,those painting were displayed in public because they were on sale . so my point here is that why do these artist think that they work in isolation ,cant MF HUSSIAN ,do a little reasoning and not draw those paintings ,he could have been spared from harrasment. Offending one religion is not good and should be avoided . I feel that in India ,it is alright to abuse kill the memebers of majority community but of the majority community retaliates then it is the fault of that majority community only , no one sees why the retaliation took place in the first place
Are you saying you actually admire violent persons who want to harm people who draw things of mohammed? You want to make others sink to their level of barbarism? There’s nothing to admire. Husain didn’t pain nude pictures of mohamed for the same reason that one doesn’t go and talk to a rabid dog. There’s nothing noble about the dog, and rabid dogs should be killed – not respected.
In a free country, why should I care about how others feel about my work? If people want to buy my paintings, let them. If they don’t like my paintings, let them not buy them.
If you want to take revenge on M S Hussain, then reply in the same way he offended you. Write an article, draw more paintings (!), sing a dirty song about him or whatever, BUT – don’t threaten him with violence.
Only animals use violence and those who threaten him with it are little more than animals…
[...] Muslims just ignoring the pictures?I really want to know why. We saw the same sort of response over M F Husain’s paintings. Many people asked then, why no one drew offensive pictures of Mohammed. Well, now they have. And [...]
Bhagwad,
This article is completely insane.. do you have even basic common sense?
Does painting such obscene pictures on other religious gods, a freedom of expression?
i had much respect for you (even if our views differed a lot), and after reading this, i could not believe, you are so insensitive and insane..
Does painting such obscene pictures on other religious gods, a freedom of expression?
Yes. Why should it not?
i said earlier.. you are insane..
its a common sense, that one should not offend others.. its common sense, that one should use swear words at others.. its common sense, one should not ridicule others.. its common sense, that one should not abuse others..
As such its common sense, that one should not paint the gods of other religions, in obscene, obscure way.
Let that pervert draw anything, in any posture.. but why should he name, this is sita.. this hanuman etc.. and when he could have chosen ordinary figures, why he draws pictures of gods for his pervert expression..
Freedom of expression, doesnt mean, freedom of offending others..
You called Bhagwad insane. According to my creed, this is a swear word, abuse and ridicule all put together. And I am offended. You could have chosen anyone – why did you choose this blog?
Now leave the blogosphere forever. Fair?
A person can be called a jerk for swearing at others. But he/she can’t be punished for it.
Freedom of expression, doesnt mean, freedom of offending others..
Yes it does. Or more accurately, no one has the right to not be offended
/** If you want to take revenge on M S Hussain, then reply in the same way he offended you. Write an article, draw more paintings (!), sing a dirty song about him or whatever, BUT – don’t threaten him with violence.
**/
who are you to prescribe what kind of retaliation one should make?
As per your own statement, if some one kicks me, i can kick him back.. if some breaks my nose, i can retaliate and break his nose.. if some one bites my ear, i should retaliate him in the same manner..
Arent you not advocating laws of saudi arabia.. in pakistan, when a person raped a girl, the village court ordered the brother of the affected girl, to rape the sister of the accused.. Perfect tit for tat, as advocated by you..
May good sense prevail in you..
Physical violence is out of limits. Otherwise you can do what you want. Because only physical and financial violence is real harm which you can’t ignore.
There’s a saying:
Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
If that’s the case, then why there is law which punishes when people abuses other.. why is the PCR act existing..
There is also another saying.. the physical harm will heal quickly.. but the harm caused by words will never heal quickly..
To punish someone for harm which is not physical, the following must be met:
1. The victim must not be a weak person who find everything harmful like women wearing a dupatta
2. The harm must be real – and assessed by a psychologist. Just their claim of harm isn’t enough
/** To punish someone for harm which is not physical, the following must be met:
1. The victim must not be a weak person who find everything harmful like women wearing a dupatta
2. The harm must be real – and assessed by a psychologist. Just their claim of harm isn’t enough
**/
Who are you to set these terms?
There is one thing called “Common sense” which you do not accept.. the common sense says, that the harm has to be judged based on situation and the extent of offence.. NOT by any blind rules..
I’m afraid the harm has to be judged by blind rules.
Haven’t you heard? “Justice is blind.” That is why the statutes of justice always have a cloth over their eyes. The law is blind. And that is a good thing.
Do you know what is the meaning for “Dharma”.. i dont want subverted form of justice that is practiced in the west..
Our Justice system is actually very fair. Everyone is equal before the law. The law doesn’t give special privileges to anyone.
*loves the goddess(es) (he painted in nude).
I think I have partly commented on the issue earlier. I dislike Hussain’s duplicity on the issue. To me it is clear that he lies when he says that he drew the paintings in nude because he loves them. The proof of that is his not drawing in nude figures of his own religion, which he perhaps loves more.
Had he clarified that he drew these paintings simply to provoke and gain notoriety, then I would not have been angered, would have perhaps respected him, too. But perhaps, I get more irritated when the media also employs a partisan attitude and hails him as a great painter, not in the least because his paintings sell for a high price. Moreover, they also invoke freedom of expression to support what he does. Of course, he has the freedom of expression, but as I can see the media is not that forthcoming in supporting rights of people to burn the Quran in the US.
And as I had mentioned earlier, it was also reported that Hussain hadn’t paid his taxes, and perhaps didn’t have much inclination to, so leaving India was a good option for him.
But yes, he had the right to do what he did (but unfortunately, not under the Indian law, though, depending on how the much discussed IPC section 295-A would be interpreted).
A good analysis Ketan. Though we're justified in discussing Husain's motives, I think we must take the debate beyond him and discuss it as a matter of principle – abstracting the issue from the person.
People have every right to get angry. I'm not debating that. Neither am I debating that they have a right to protest. Everyone has that right too. What they don't have is the right to threaten him with violence. That's a form of protest I'm not about to countenance.
"Stick and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me!"
Actually, I took the question you posed as the title of this post quite literally! :)
Had your question been “does MF have right to draw those paintings?” or “how does one justifiably protests/displays anger against his paintings”, my answer would’ve been different.
On a somewhat related note, please read my comment on http://advocatusatheist.blogspot.com/2010/08/fear… There I’ve pointed out how interpreting a question subtly differently leads to opposite answers. The blog post by Tristan is very long, and the context of my comment could be made out without reading it. And of course, he’s an interesting blog. :)
Thanks Ketan – will definitely put that on my read list…
[...] strange soil. All because people were unable to ignore things which irritated them. But we’ve discussed this many times before. I’ve already explained why you can’t take someone to court for “offending” [...]
All this hullabaloo from a country that gave us Khajuraho