Writers can’t just write anything
Shiv Sena complains to Bombay University about Rohinton Mistry’s novel Such a Long Journey, which is on a university reading list. Bombay University says “oh I do beg your pardon” and cuts Mistry’s novel from the list. Shiv Sena hugs itself in glee at this easy victory.
Mistry is not so chuffed. Mistry says a few words.
“The Shiv Sena has followed its depressingly familiar script of threats and intimidation that Mumbai has endured since the organisation’s founding in 1966,” the author said. “More bobbing, weaving, and slippery behaviour is no doubt in the offing. But one thing remains: a political party demanded an immediate change in syllabus, and Mumbai University [made] the book disappear the very next day.”
But Shiv Sena explained.
Mohan Rawale, a Shiv Sena official, said the book was full of “very bad, very insulting words”, especially about Bal Thackeray, 83, the group’s founder and leader.
“It is our culture that anything with insulting language should be deleted. Writers can’t just write anything. They can’t write wrong things,” said Rawale, who admitted not having read the book.
Well there you are. The book has insulting words in it. It is Shiv Sena’s culture that all insulting words should be deleted…unless they’re directed at Shiv Sena’s enemies, one imagines. There is of course no need to find the insulting words by reading them first; revelation and hunches are perfectly valid ways to detect the presense of insulting words.
In a pig’s eye.
So basically the same as the accommodationist type stance. You can’t write nasty things like criticism because it’s wrong, even though I don’t actually read anything you say. Yep, the same.
It does sometimes happen that a university makes a mistake, then corrects that mistake when it is brought to their attention.
I’m not saying that is what happened here, and your own analysis might well be correct. It’s just that I don’t like to jump to conclusions based on a single incident.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Skeptic South Africa, Ophelia Benson. Ophelia Benson said: Writers can’t just write anything http://dlvr.it/7JXpY […]
The Shiv Sena are a gang of thugs who have intimidated the people of India for too long. They hy their hair bave actively promoted everything from ethnic cleansing to attacking women and couples in pubs as part of their anti-Valentine’s day campaigns. This not not about culture or bad language. This is about a fundamentalist Hindu organization with an oppressive agenda.
Sorry about the typos. The second sentence should read: “They have actively promoted everything from ethnic cleansing to attacking women and couples in pubs as part of their anti-Valentine’s day campaigns.”
As much as I despise the Sena and their bullying tactics, I don’t quite see why we should make a fuss about a book being removed from university curriculum. You can still buy the book at any bookstore in Mumbai and read it at your own pleasure. And as far as I can tell, students are still free to read the book outside their classroom. It is entirely another matter that Bombay University has now decided to let unrepentant thugs pronounce judgements on literary merits. That is indeed lamentable. But I would withhold my indignation and outrage until the Shiv Sena publicly declares that no Indian citizen has the right to read Rohinton Mistry because he supposedly loathes Marathi culture.
The Shiv Sena has learned that violence and thuggery pays all too well. The university probably didnt want the SS’s gangsters rampaging on its premises and physically attacking its staff and students- which is behaviour that the SS is perfectly capable of. The tragedy is that Bombay’s police and political institutions would have offered the university lttle protection in the face of such an attack. So the cowardice of the university is not that reprehensible given the context- they were facing a pretty realistic threat and had little in the way of support/defence. There have been institutions in the west which have self censored themselves (against a perceived islamist rage) when they have had much lesser actual danger to contend with.
Also the Indian people who are now so anguished about freedom of speech being eroded are not always vocal about many other infringements of said right. The Satanic Verses will never be on any university’s reading list or curriculum in India.
In case it is not clear, I support anyone or any initiative to challenge the shiv sena. However it is also my observation that certain indian commentators or activists who speak out against the hindu fundies are selective in their outrage.
I don’t think anyone here is talking about Bombay University removing a book from its syllabus outside of the context of the Sena intimidating the university to remove the book. THAT is an outrageous attack on the freedoms of an academic institution by a religious and political group intent on whitewashing history.
My comment above was directed at Saikat, comment #6.
Ajita, what is more outrageous? The Sena dictating university curriculum, or the vice chancellor obliging them?
Both.
They’re different issues, and I am not comparing them.
Nilanjana Roy has written, fairly recently, about the need to unban the Satanic Verses :
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:dGZSSSRuZmkJ:www.business-standard.com/india/news/should-we-lift%253Ci%253Esatanic-verses%253Ci%253E-ban/369407/+nilanjana+roy+on+satanic+verses&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=sg
It is a good article – quotes the eminently sensible Salil Tripathi – and notes the consequences the Rushdie ban unleashed. However Ms Roy or the other writer she quotes as supporting the unbanning of SV seem to be awaiting some heroic indian citizen who would start the ball rolling in actually challenging the ban in the courts. A tad passive?
Ajita, outrage is what we express at someone who fails to live up to the standards set upon them by virtue of their position. By that criterion, the Sainiks are entirely living up to their reputation. But it is decidedly more outrageous when individuals entrusted with the responsibility of upholding academic freedom succumb instead to intimidation and threats.
This is what Soli Sorabjee had to say about MF Hussein’s ordeal at the hands of the same sainiks for his painting of a Hindu goddess
http://www.indianexpress.com/storyOld.php?storyId=88598
What is more outrageous? Chauvinistic thugs demanding their religious feelings be respected? Or a former Attorney General actually proclaiming that “injuring” the religious feelings of a community is actually punishable by law? Think about it. I don’t have to just cause bodily harm to someone to land myself in prison, but simply “injure” the religious feeling of a community.
Mirax, the disconcerting truth is that many educated and middle-class Indians sincerely believe that freedom of speech is fine and dandy as long as you don’t offend people’s “feelings”. The irony is entirely lost on them. So don’t expect Rushdie’s notorious book available in Indian bookstores anytime soon.
I understood that well, Saikat. Even Ms Roy’s article contained a couple of wisps of that mindset.
The other thing is that the Thakerays appear to command huge influence in Bombay. Even its glitterati superstars appear to genuflect to that influence. Amitav Bachan actually lauched some album by this aditya thakeray idiot who got the Mistry book pulled and seems to have artistic pretensions himself. Rajni kanth recently called bal thakeray some kind of god. These are two immensely powerful men who dont need to suck up to the SS, no? What gives?
Soli Sorabjee is wrong, I am sorry to say. Erm, I have actually been to that man’s house in Delhi. I once knew his wife, who is a notable bahai and who has Singapore connections. Her mother Shirin Fozdar was instrumental in pushing for the creation of the Women’s Charter, a landmark legislation enshrining women’s rights in Singapore. Lovely people but strongly religious.
@S
I disagree with your notion of outrage. My values dictate what I find outrageous, and I dont believe in reserving outrage for unexpected acts of disgusting behavior. As I have been trying to say from the beginning, your charge is a false dilemma. There is no reason why one cannot be outraged at both this particular thugish demand by the sena as well as towards the spineless university officials who caved in. I have plenty of reasons to direct some of my outrage at the fundamentalist Hindus who are the ideological base of the Sena.
Saikat, I do not agree with your definition of ‘outrage’. I think something is outrageous when I am outraged by it, period. I continue to be outraged by the depraved acts of religious fundamentalists, even if we have as a society come to expect these fundamentalists to behave in such a fashion. I refuse to be desensitized by the horror of religious extremism, even if society as a whole might already be.
I must insist, again, that the argument you’re having with me is a false dilemma. There is absolutely no reason why one cannot be outraged at both this particular act of intimidation and thugishness by the Sena as well as at the spineless university officials. There is no reason to quantify the two in relation to each other and downplay the outrage in one or the other.
Then don’t. But avoiding over-generalization doesn’t mean that you have to ignore how bad this particular incident is.
India has a long and shameful history of censorship. Few, if any, can claim the pedestal of intellectual or moral superiority in this regard. Both the left and the right, and a myriad of other political, religious and linguistic fundamentalist groups in that country, shelter their cherished idols and heroes from criticism and lampooning, often with help from a willing and spineless government and judiciary. From Rama to Christ to Muhammad, from Gandhi to Tagore to Periyar, and even movies stars like Amitabh Bachan and MGR, every leader dead or alive, is above scrutiny. Only at the risk of your life, limbs, and property, could you write against them.
Life and liberty are cheap, but vote is priceless in that so-called secular, socialist, democratic, republic.
If you are more interested in the sordid phenomenon of censorship in India, you may want to read:
“Published and be banned” – http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100718/jsp/7days/story_12697165.jsp
“Banned books in India: call for help” – http://kitabkhana.blogspot.com/2004/06/banned-books-in-india-call-for-help.html [scroll down for a long, unverified, list]
Ajita, I’m not asking you to accept my notion of outrage. For me, it is always a matter of degree as well as a prerequisite for action. We are all (I’m speaking of Indians including myself) outraged by religious fundamentalism. We have been outraged by countless acts of violence inspired by an array of factors – religion, caste, regional identity, language identity, ethnicity, economic disparity. It is staggering to even contemplate the supposed reasons why time and again, people have resorted to naked violence and the wanton destruction of public property. Yes, we have always been outraged. We should be.
But what exactly has that achieved? Fringe groups all over the country have now convinced themselves that intimidation works. Period. All I was trying to say was that it is not worth anything if we simply keep directing outrage at these goons. They don’t care. Never have, never will. Our outrage alone cannot deter them. Certainly not when it is backed up by an apathetic populace and equally pusillanimous politicians and lawmakers who are willing to condemn perpetrators only for their means and seldom for their nature of grievance (Sorabjee, for example, publicly lauded Indian newspapers for not publishing the Danish cartoons).
Look at what happened to Professor T J Joseph in Kerala. First, radicals hacked off his hands for supposedly insulting their prophet, then the college administration terminated his employment, and finally the Church that runs the college came out and fully supported his dismissal. Not a single arrest, not a single conviction, not a word condemning the depraved violence. The official stance was that Joseph brought it upon himself and that he vitiated ‘the communal atmosphere.’ And these self-proclaimed secularists and social activists, who always pick convenient fights and especially when the opponent wears saffron, were nowhere to be seen.
Our outrage will be better served if it is directed at the very people who should maintain civic and democratic ideals in our society. Our outrage should be backed by a coordinated thrust to shake them off their stupor and coerce them into action. Let the citizens of Mumbai bear their collective outrage upon university officials to uphold academic integrity and freedom. Let them foster an environment where citizens are able to utterly disregard anything the Sena thinks or says.
Actually, yes you are.
Much of what the freethought movement has fought for is motivated by outrage against religious oppression. It is apathy that has never achieved anything.
Straw man. Of course outrage alone cannot deter those we are outraged against. Nobody is arguing that it can.
Again I must insist that you are simply creating a false dilemma. I do not disparage that which you are outraged about. Please stop asking me to not be outraged about what I bloody well am outraged about.