|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | DEAR REDIFF | |||
|
ASSEMBLY POLL '98
|
|
|
'Saffron purists are pushing the limits of tolerance, the limits of civility, successfully'
E-mail from readers the world over
Date sent: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 10:33:54 -0700 I think Manjula Padmanabhan is a little confused. I feel that referring to the Khajuraho carvings as triple-X rated art and saying it is therefore justified to depict lesbianism on the big screen, is specious reasoning. Khajuraho can be viewed either as an art form (where no god's are blasphemised mind you) or purely educational ... where one would have to go to Khajuraho to see this unique and explicit nature of sex art from the Kamasutra. If indeed Fire was educational and not attracting school kids and underage college goers, it must be permitted to be shown. However, in India, rules are not enforced at theatres. If on the other hand, portraying lesbianism is known to negatively imbue young minds, the movie should be banned altogether and we must concentrate on solving other burning problems. Eashwer
Date sent: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 17:10:37 +0400 I am in complete agreement with most of the article but am surprised that the Shiv Sainiks have taken umbrage at the depiction of lesbianism, instead of raising objections at the religious sanction sought to have been granted in the film by bringing about an analogy with Sita's trial by fire in the Ramayana and Radha. Is it really fair to do this? Would it not hurt religious sentiment and sensibilities? Also, on freedom of expression and other such rights, while I hold no brief for the Shiv Sainiks or the VHP's, where were Dilip Kumar and other such worthies when Satanic Verses was banned? Manoj Mohanka
Date sent: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 14:37:26 -0600 Your lack of knowledge takes the cake. Thackeray is actually spelled as Thakre. The word comes from a tribe called Thakar. Please do some research (or just ask around) before posting your worthless article. The Shiv Sena chief spells his name as Bal Thackeray.
Date sent: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 19:06:09 +0530 Read your article with a bemused smile. It's all very correct that you have highlighted. However, what are your views on the 'SECULAR' Congress protesting (without much protest from all other lovers of art and artists) the Godse play? You are a staunch supporter of democracy. So do you think one can have democracy by halves? Should we ban the Godse play and allow Fire to be screened? Kindly do reply to this letter, lest it should raise doubts about your secular and 'arty' credentials. Vicky
Date sent: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 14:18:59 EST Excellent article. As usual, Manjula has shown her power of logical analysis. I agree with her 100 per cent. S Subramanyan
Date sent: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 10:48:38 +0100 It's heartening to see a lot of quality scribes bursting out of the wood work to express angst against the thoughtless, knee-jerk behaviour of the saffron clan. Unfortunately, there is a precious little of this debate reflected in the Marathi and Hindi press in Bombay, where it could really make a difference. The effectiveness of this medium has well proven itself in the past and could be used with reasonable advantage. Suppressing a good, well made movie takes them nowhere. Or does it? It provides fodder to waning political aspirations, and the tabloids in their ownership. Tabloids which have exhibited wanton disregard for reason in the past. And tabloids which I believe are read purely because there is very little otherwise to read... Rajiv
Date sent: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:28:39 -0600 You seem to be in great loss and grief because Shiv Sainiks vandalised a movie theater screening Fire. Why do you want to bring up the killings during Bombay riots in your article? Don't talk about Hindus killing Muslims during the Bombay riots if you don't know the complete facts. The riots started only after Muslims killed a bunch of Hindus by a bomb. It is liberal minded Hindus like you who have been encouraging them for centuries that has really destroyed our nation. How much do you know about our freedom struggle? Why did the Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and others not ask for a separate land when independence was imminent? Why did the Muslims alone demand their own land and split our nation into three pieces? Who prevented them from being Hindustanis? Why did the Muslims hate other Indian religions so much and destroy our temples and places of worship? Do you know how much Mahatma Gandhi tried to win their love and affection? Have you ever been to the Golden Temple in Amritsar? Go to the museum inside the temple complex and find out for yourself. Do you think the Muslims in our country are any better now? They bring their religion to work, they bring their religion to school, they bring their religion to sports and they brought their religion in our freedom struggle. How can they support the Pakistan team when we have a cricket match against them in our own land? Have you seen this happen in any other country? Why was Vande Mataram which was our national song during freedom struggle not accepted by the Muslims? Do you think they are going to accept it now? For your information, the partition of Bengal by the British Empire was prevented when Hindus and Muslims joined hands together and sang Vande Mataram. Look at Kashmir today. How many Muslims in India want to talk about it? Over 35,000 Kashmiri Pandits have been driven out of their land. Over a thousand of them butchered. I can give you hundreds of examples of Muslim atrocities in our nation. So, don't take one example of the Hindus getting an upper hand and try to project Hindus as evil. Bharat
Date sent: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 23:23:24 -0600 Does Ms Padmanabhan have the mandate to declare on behalf of all Indian women that lesbianism is our culture! The argument most mediocre writers like Ms Padmanabhan advance in favour of their theory is that it (It=sex, lesbianism) has been depicted in Khajuraho and the Kamasutra. By the same token we should be rooting for caste system also. I have no objections to anyone practicing homosexuality and lesbianism -- it is a matter of personal choice. But please do not denigrate Hinduism by telling the world that our culture is only about sex and homosexuality. I only wish 'elite writers' in India had brains to match their proficiency over the English language. But god is known to be cruel to everybody.
Date sent: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 18:45:35 -0500 Absolutely rubbish. Jai Hind.
Date sent: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:36:55 -0800 With all due respect, Manjula Padmanabhan, I think you represent a class of people in India who consider themselves scholars but are in fact pseudo-scholars and pseudo-moderns. FYI, the paintings or the x-rated carvings outside our temples don't represent that Indians are (or were) sexually extremely active people. By saying that you are trying to denigrate Indian culture and the great message those paintings or carvings try to convey. It doesn't mean that Indians like to do all such things in bed. In fact, Indian culture is to hate such things. Why ask somebody else, ask yourself this question. I am sure, your answer will be "NO." Otherwise what is the difference between an animal and a "normal" human being. The x-rated carvings outside the temple in fact try to convey you a great message. It suggests you to put away all such ugly (?) thoughts outside the temple and then only come inside. That is why those carvings are outside the temple and not inside. If you have not quenched your sexual appetite, you don't deserve a right to enter a holy place. You are saying that "Elsewhere around the planet, India is known as the home of triple-X-rated temple carvings" Are you out of your own mind? Westerners try to find meaning, which suits them the most. Take example of Rajneesh, why he was so popular? Indians did study sex, Vastayan did write Kamasutra. After all sex is a natural thing. And once again FYI, "Humans have no natural instinct of their sex, like other animals." Hope you understand the meaning of that sentence. So Kamasutra is needed. Sexual education is needed. Indians have Kamasutra, doesn't mean that Indians act in X-rated movie. We have those X-rated carvings on the temple, doesn't mean Indians do (or did) all such things. It is not the necessary and sufficient condition. Scenes in Fire merely try to narrow the huge gap between the great Indian civilisation which has risen above animal-instinctive sex desire and the western civilisation (in fact, it cannot be called as civilisation), which is based only on the physical desires. And the culture police are therefore needed.
Atul
Date sent: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:00:02 -0000
From: "Sunil M Kanekal" <KANEKAL@prodigy.net> Are you conversant with anything other than the movie Fire? Have you any clue of Indian history? Very doubtful. Sunil Kanekal
Date sent: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 12:09:59 -0800 Extremely wellwritten article. She hit the nail on the head. The saffronites are becoming increasingly fascist. They are pushing the limits of tolerance, the limits of civility, successfully. If we don't stop these thugs now, these goondas having smelt blood will go to any extent. When you have a despot openly claiming that no power on earth will stop him from stopping the Pakistan cricketers from playing in India and all that the Centre can do is watch, you know that things are already in a morass. Aravind
Date sent: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 12:45:29 -0700 I am writing this to those who want to protect out culture! I went to a very famous book shop in the US to buy some history books which talk about different cultures for my son. I found a book History of the World or something. I went straight to a page which talks about Indian culture and started reading aloud for my son. After a brief discussion about the Hindukush valley and etc etc., it talks about Ramayana Mahabharata etc etc. Then it says, 'FROM THIS WE UNDERSTAND THAT A HINDU WOMEN COULD HAVE SEVERAL HUSBANDS.' My son looked at my face for explanation! What do you say? Which story are they talking about? They are talking about PANJALI! She had 5 husbands, Pandavas. So the conclusion is Hindu women could have more than one husband! Is it true? Is it our culture? Are Hindu protectors going to change the whole story? Or ban the book! If they are ready to ban it, I may have to go and get some accurate information about the book! I am ready to do that! I don't know! Rama
Date sent: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 12:59:19 -0000 This is the first of Ms Padmanabhan's articles that I have read on Rediff and I am very pleased to note that there are people who are standing up against this morality police. Sometime back, I had written to Rediff saying exactly the same thing about the source of this puritanical streak in India -- it is a Victorian curse which must be fought. Look how the Brits turned out with this kind of Victorian morality! In any case, the right to free expression is a fundamental right, and if it needs to be curbed at all, then it should be done in instances where someone is inciting violence. But catch a politician doing that -- wouldn't certain politicos behind bars? Yes, people were offended when the controversy over Husain's Saraswati erupted, but does that mean that the artist should be stopped by violence, or indeed, stopped in any way? And people are offended by the film for their own reasons (homophobia is obviously something that our morality brigade has imported happily into Indian culture), but that does not give them any right to indulge in goondaism. I would go further and say that we should stop censoring art on pseudo-moral grounds. In any case, the rubbish that is churned out by the film industry is far more culpable of spreading "wrong" values. After all, isn't it common to see women being brutalised (in and out of the home), treated as sex objects and/or bimbos and generally shown in a poor light in our mainstream cinema. Is it all right with the thought police that our Indian tradition of respect and honour to women is being so crudely lampooned by our movies? Why don't these Mahila Aghadi workers spend time educating and empowering women, so that they are not brutalised by society? I appreciate the idea that each one of us has to stand up against this attack on our right to freedom of expression. However, it is difficult to implement the idea the author has suggested, especially for those living abroad. Why doesn't Rediff take a stand, and send copies of all the mail it has received on this subject to the appropriate office (is it the Censor Board?), and also to the minister (Navalkar, I think) who incited this violence. These guys should realise that they have been elected to govern, not to police our minds. Ruchira Raghav
Date sent: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 13:55:02 -0500 Manjula Padmanabhan has written a classic article on how to attack others without knowing them. It might be used as an example of how to attack what we don't know simply by observing the actions of some and then applying their ideas to the entire group, something, I believe, the English language describes as prejudice. What is saffron intolerance? Saffron is a colour of renunciation and using catchy titles like this one may enhance the salability or the noticeability of this article but it certainly doesn't enhance the readers' understanding of what is factually true. I don't claim to know it but I am capable of discerning that what you have written is not the truth either. Who are the saffron police at Jhandewalan in New Delhi? Do they have a name? Who should I address the postcard to? Saffron police? What if one of the Thullas catch hold of me and charge me with holding their mail? While the people who demonstrated in front of Dilip Kumar's house and those that are calling for the banning of Fire are obviously oblivious of Hindu thought and philosophy, Ms Padmanabhan has shown no contrary abilities either. Just attacks on the "other side." Ashish Chandra
Date sent: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:46:07 -0500 If the author feels it right to write whatever she thinks, for a living or to influence people -- the same theory holds good for the culture police she refers. The culture police have the right as a political party or as an ideology to speak what they think is right. Is there any thing new happening under the so called culture police than what happened under the secular (divide and get votes, reserve and get votes, curb the rights of majority to get minority votes) governments? The basics of thinking what is good for a society is always ignored and always motivated for writing negative opinions against culture police. If culture police like to force their views on people, Fire could have never been screened. There is no point in bashing the culture police (as a political force) for their opinion on lesbianism, rather discuss what is being propagated in the name creative or art pictures. After living outside for years, I wish the majority of citizens in India will have the same rights as citizens in other countries. I was educated in a Christian institution for 10 years where singing Christian songs and going to church was mandatory. Is it secular for imposing religion on children? Why don't secular authors come to our rescue in the past and present. If some thing happens locally, why do you write that the majority community targeted minorities. If the same minorities create problems, why is it not reported as a minority attack on the majority. Do we have different rights for different groups in a secular democracy? I wish all citizens of India have equal rights and opportunities, regardless of their political or religious views and not penalised for being a majority. These are my personal views and are not to offend anyone but to question the author about her views.
|
||
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
SPORTS |
MOVIES |
CHAT |
INFOTECH |
TRAVEL
SHOPPING HOME | BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | HOTEL RESERVATIONS PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL | FEEDBACK |
||