[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

NEWS : There should be no outraging of faith by obscenity and slander

Title : `There  should  be  no  outraging  of  faith  by 
        obscenity  and slander'
Author : Dionne Bunsha
Publication : The Times of India
Date : October 11, 1996

The  Shiv  Sena-Bharatiya  Janata  Party's  objection  to 
painter  M.F. Husain's nude depiction of Hindu  goddesses 
has  sparked a debate on artistic freedom.  The Times  of 
India spoke to literary critic, author and former head of 
the English department of Mumbai university Vrinda Nabar, 
about her views on the issue. What is your opinion on the 
controversy  about M.F. Husain's nude depiction of  Hindu 
gods and goddesses?  The whole exercise has catapulted  a 
non-issue into an issue.  I am basically an agnostic  and 
find  it  difficult to perceive how  the  faithful  would 
respond to such depictions. I do not support fundamental-
ism, in religion or other aspects of life.

There is nothing profoundly iconoclastic or revolutionary 
which  strikes  a blow for freedom In what  ,  Husain  is 
doing.   On  the other hand, it is an issue  which  could 
hurt  the  sentiments of a large social group.   So,  the 
question I would ask is: to what end has he painted these 
portrayals?

Many  people  opposing the paintings  argue  that  Husain 
could have chosen other subjects.  Shouldn't an artist be 
free  to choose his subject?  

Yes,  but as long as it is not offensive  or  aggressive. 
Even  with the most rational discourse, you  can  offend. 
Those  are artistic risks that one takes.  This does  not 
apply to the present issue.

Artists should be aware that any freedom operates  within 
certain  constraints.  They have to be sensitive  to  the 
larger social group in which they live.  The artist  also 
has  to  consider the irrational  components  of  social' 
consciousness.

Can  artistic  expression  be  absolute?   

If there are limitations, where do you draw the line?

No  freedom can be absolute.  There has to be a  constant 
interaction  between an individual's freedom to  express, 
act,  outrage  and his role as a social being.   Even  an 
artist functions as a social being.  The limits cannot be 
absolute.  But the artist has to be sensitive to society, 
and  have  an artistic  conscience.   Conscience,  unfor-
tunately, is a sort of bad word In the artistic  communi-
ty.

What  do  you feel about the  interference  of  political 
groups In art and culture?

I  oppose any political interference in culture.   Checks 
and balances should come from the community.  The  artis-
tic  community  has a responsibility  in  these  matters. 
Unless  It displays an artistic conscience, it gives  the 
other kind of interference a degree of sanction,  whether 
it likes it or not.

Besides, how does not draw the distinction between artis-
tic  stridency and fundamentalist outrage?   Fundamental-

ists  may say that since you have the freedom of  expres-
sion,  we have the right to respond.  Where do  you  draw 
the line then?  It could lead to a very explosive  situa-
tion, an eye-for-an-eye situation, as is evident.

Should an artist consider the socioeconomic and political 
atmosphere  while working?  Or can he work unhindered  by 
the shackles of society?

The  concept of freedom Is moulded by  the  socioeconomic 
environment In which one lives.  For example,  Mayakovsky 
wrote poetry for the Russian revolution.  Neruda's poetry 
was essentially a poetry of protest but within the condi-
tions  he lived in.  A lot or poetry was  written  during 
the  emergency.  A reasoned responsible critique is  dif-
ferent from self-limited and self-limiting indulgence.

I refer to a statement written by Salman Rushdie to Rajiv 
Gandhi when he banned his book The Satanic Verses.  "From 
where  I  sit, Mr Prime Minister, it is very  clear.."  I 
think  that  this is the crucial phrase.  Where  you  sit 
makes all the difference because your perspective is very 
different.

Mr Rushdie sitting in the West doesn't have to live  with 
the  kind of contradictions and irrationalities  that  we 
have  to  live  with everyday.  The issue  blew  up  into 
something  no one expected.  Several people died in  pro-
tests  and shootings - people who would never  have  read 
the book or bothered about it.

Or take the frenzy that the Ganapati drinking milk incid-
ent aroused.  This is the kind of environment we live in.  
Western liberalism Is very different from our reality.

Has  there been a tradition of depicting Hindu  gods  and 
goddesses In the nude in Indian culture?

Wall carvings, sculptures and temple art were a  celebra-
tion  in their time and place.  It was  unknown  artists' 
celebrating  a community's worship of the life  force  as 
issuing  from  their  gods and goddesses.   This  is  not 
peculiar to our culture alone, but is. found in virtually 
all cultures.

I want to make two points here. First, when we have moved 
away  in  virtually every respect from the  values  which 
those  temples  represent, It would be dishonest  to  use 
them to bolster an argument about Husain's painting which 
is  a product whose existence is conditioned  by  today's 
norms  of a market-driven economy.  You can't  just  pick 
and choose an argument whenever it suits you.

Secondly,  Husain is painting for money.  The  painting's 
bottom  line  is commercial value, which is not  true  of 
Khajuraho  or Ajanta.  I feel that to compare them  is  a 
short-sighted and blinkered defence.

Is  the  Issue being exploited by political  forces?   Is 
popular opinion being created by them?

Unfortunately,  the issue has been exploited both by  the 
political and by the artistic community.

The  backlash has to be looked at in  context.   Threats, 
real  or  imagined,  against the core  of  a  community's 

religious  beliefs can trigger off a form  of  regression 
which  is so primitive' that the seeking of  identifiable 
targets  becomes almost automatic.  It is almost  as  au-
tomatic  as the complete and unquestioning faith  in  the 
visions of leaders who promise deliverance.

The question of state intervention is complex.  One  does 
not  support  police action against an artist.   But  the 
problem is that in a global situation where state control 
in  the  most basic concerns of human life is  taken  for 
granted,  we  have to ensure that state  intervention  is 
kept at a minimum in certain other kinds of freedom.

Is the artist free to interpret religious subjects?

Yes,  as  long as he does not interpret this  freedom  as 
licence  to be offensive.  I have not seen Husain's  con-
troversial  paintings.   But I believe that  Draupadi  is 
painted  nude.  Draupadi's vastraharan (disrobing)  is  a 
terrible blot on the national consciousness.

To  ignore  this implies a  degree  of  irresponsibility.  
While  there  can be rational opposition  to  any  faith, 
the@should  be no outraging of it by obscenity and  slan-
der.

Are  we  moving  towards a more  fascist  and  intolerant 
state?

This is too enormous a comparison to make.  Besides, many 
social  issues  like corruption, casteism, decay  of  the 
polity, an uncertain economy, the breakdown of  virtually 
all social institutions have not been addressed by either 
Husain or the artistic community.

Freedom  in  the Indian context means  more  things  than 
appear  to be dreamed of In the artist's philosophy.  One 
wants reasoned, responsible freedom, so that all individ-
uals can live with dignity.  The community as a whole  is 
responsible.  This includes artists.
Advertise with us!
This site is part of Dharma Universe LLC websites.
Copyrighted 2009-2015, Dharma Universe.