|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | REPORT | |||
|
September 25, 1998
ELECTIONS '98
|
How Readers reacted to Ashwin Mahesh's recent columns
Date sent: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 00:00:35 +0000
Good article. The reservation system is one of the stupidest means to construct an egalitarian society. It is, however, the best way to maintain individual and group power bases. I will be a very proud Hindu when I see a woman pujarin in a temple. I will be a very proud Indian when I see the end of casteism and reservations. Reservations will not end casteism; on the other hand, the end of casteism will see the end of reservations. I will be a very proud Indian when I see criminals excluded from politics. But till then, all I can bleat about is how great our civilisation was -- 5,000 years.
Ravi
Date sent: Sun, 06 Sep 1998 17:19:21 -0500
Boring!
Date sent: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 15:40:34 -0700
Ashwin, Your column on religious and caste equality is brilliant. Our Hindu caste system has reduced our temples to an employment centre for the "priestly" caste. If they initiate and remove the "100 pc reservation" system they have enacted for themselves, it would remove the contempt that many people have for our temples. Visiting temples would then become more meaningful. Subbu
Date sent: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 07:35:30 -0700
As an NRI, technically I hold an American passport and citizenship. I am deeply involved in the development of India. It is wrong to say that we are greedy or turn a blind eye. We lack integrity and consciousness, and are unable to see over all the isms. Look at the arcane laws that are imposed on the honest. They make life unliveable in India for people who want to do something ethically. From the time I step of the plane in Sahar, Bombay, I have to have a wad of currency notes to wade my way through the immigration, customs, taxi lines, railway station etc. What kind of sympathy will I have for spending my hard-earned dollars in India? With my dollars, I can go to Europe and the Far East and never face these predicament. Of course, I do not forget the lack of clean toilets as you travel. There is not one edifice that India has built in the last 50 years that a person is proud to go and visit, it is always British or Mughal buildings. Nobody wants to address the corruption issue. We think the explosion of Pokhran is the ultimate. We can't even kill mosquitoes with it! We are a "Government of the Ignorant, for the Ignorant and by the Ignorant!" Believe me, that hurts a lot.
Date sent: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 15:57:20 PDT
As a positive step, encourage those with an Indian passport to invest using a specially floated bond. Create special NGO-type groups to be funded by non-resident Indians (using these bonds again) to work for population control and education in villages, with tax incentives. Many NRIs feel for India and would like to help. Investors are investors as far as legalities are concerned. Let legalities treat them as investors. If they are patriots, they would be so in their hearts, and they would not want any such certificate from a journalist or writer or politician! Dual citizenship has certain dangers that should be well deliberated. Sharan
Date sent: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 15:13:20 EDT
Mr Ashwin Mahesh forgets to mention the fact that many NRIs have already invested in India, sanctions or no sanctions. Yes, there are many greedy NRIs but there are many good ones, too. Given India's draconian laws and bureaucracy, tell me how many NRIs would like to invest? Should they not be concerned about profit at all? I think there is no relationship between investment driven by patriotism and love for one's country. An NRI need not invest to love his country of origin. Many NRI entrepreneurs have become successful in the US and the UK. Why have they become successful abroad but not in their own country? Shouldn't Mahesh think about this question first. The Indian government and the states talk a lot about introducing sops for entrepreneurs and improving infrastructure. Actions speak louder than words. Whenever an NRI tries to set up a business, he has to bribe people right from the peon to the minister. Now who's greedy? The NRI or the bureaucracy? When you compare India with China in terms of investment by non-residents, you must also compare their respective entrepreneurial environments. Blowing hot and cold about NRIs' unpatriotic behaviour and their apathy for India's economic condition is futile. Why are NRI investments sought only after the sanctions? Did India have to test a nuclear device before seeking NRI investment? Why wasn't the initiative taken by the BJP government right after coming to power? I think Mahesh's article is quite naive and driven by emotion, not pragmatism. How many Indians resident in India are patriotic? Given a chance, most of them would like to emigrate to the West. Even Mahesh would be quite glad to accept a posting in Washington DC or New York without giving much thought to patriotism.
Anil Bhat
Date sent: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 09:41:06 EDT
I totally disagree with Mahesh. While trying to expound high philosophy, this man completely ignores the ground realities by comparing Indians from Guyana and Indians from Pakistan. He is only trying to manipulate some innocents. Please let him know that not everyone falls for that crap. About dual citizenship. What the hell is wrong if India accords this status to persons who held Indian passport once and switched their nationality to some other country, as a first step? If these former citizens wanted to do mischief, they would have remained Indian nationals. You and I know that these people switched for economic reasons. Now grant this dual citizenship to persons of countries with whom India has a good extradition treaty. Whether you can believe it or not, as an NRI I can vouch that none of us want to see an India that is still squealing in ignorance and poverty while the rest of the world advances. One last request to all the Maheshs of this world. You have not been able to do anything for India except greedily grab from her poor resources. At least be kind enough to not stop others from whatever they can do to help. Use that brilliant but perverse mind you have, which you are now using to corrupt people with deceiving thoughts, for something beneficial to our great country. Jacob P
Date sent: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:13:05 EDT
Mahesh presents a very logical flow of thought in arguing that Husain either lacked average intelligence in determining his choice of work and thus offended the sensibilities of others, or simply was ignorant of the magnitude of his offence and did not expect such a public reaction. What of a third possibility, one that came to my mind prior to the two suggested in the column? It is very likely that Husain simply didn't give a damn, to put it bluntly. He must have been quite aware of the controversy and turmoil that his painting would cause, but could care less. He is not the first "artist" to adopt such a stance. To name a few prominent people and their works in recent times: Martin Scorcese's film The Temptation of Christ, and Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses. Smriti D Isaac
Date sent: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 01:36:35 -0500
Ashwin Mahesh admits his gross ignorance of art and then proclaims that it makes him eminently qualified to define art. He paraphrases his argument thus : " If we are judges and 80 pc of us think Husain's paintings of nude goddesses is not art, then it must not be." And what exactly is the cut-off for deciding whether something is art or not? Would Mahesh be satisfied with 30 pc or 40 pc? Would he include in his survey all sections of society or merely Hindus since this is a painting of a Hindu goddess? Would he admit possibilities like -- something being a work of art in Maharashtra and not quite art in Kerala? There is a third option for an artist that Mahesh overlooks. An artist might be aware that his work might cause offence to some people (Is there anything at all that doesn't cause offence to somebody?) but might simply not care. Now I know nothing about art, but I would hesitate to call anything 'dirt' just because there is a nude god/goddess/prophet in the painting. I noted that Mahesh makes no attempt to write about the painting. He's probably never seen it. The very fact that it offended people (80% to be exact) is enough for him to dub it unartistic. Don't they make intelligent columnists anymore? Considerably worried, Samir Dhume
Date sent: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:32:27 -0700
Dear Ashwin, I find your article totally in agreement with my own views on the subject. I think painting any god, of whatever religion, in nude shows inconsiderate and irresponsible behaviour on the part of the painter. But what right does the Shiv Sena government have to let goons attack Husain and destroy his painting?
Jagadish
Date sent: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 18:24:41 -0500
Ashwin Mahesh's arguments are perfectly logical in any civilised country -- but not in our dear 'Secularist India'. Mahesh asks: "Why the retrograde notions that produce nude Saraswatis (Draupadi, Sita and Hanuman) have to be upheld as virtues in any society?" I have this answer. Hindus accepted insults and humiliations and that has been their 'Tolerance and Pride' for over a thousand years. Every one knows our secularist Hindus won't let that change now. So why blame M F Husain? Husain also proved one very important thing with his art. He was able to disrobe Draupadi which the mighty Dushsasan failed to achieve. He challenged Krishna to come and help Husain's Draupadi from public humiliation and he won squarely. So our secularists have a grand plan to build a monument for Husain (for his grand victory over Krishna).
T R Rao
|
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
SPORTS |
MOVIES |
CHAT |
INFOTECH |
TRAVEL
SHOPPING HOME | BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | HOTEL RESERVATIONS PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL | FEEDBACK |
|