'Inadequate security to artists is strangulation of free Bharat'
Nandita Sengupta , TNN, Feb 26, 2010, 03।13am ISTNEW DELHI: It's a palette of anger, anguish and cynicism. Senior artists and other eminent personalities reacted to Qatar's conferring citizenship on master painter M F Husain with deep regret at how the government has failed to provide protection to an artist hounded by fundamentalists. Ironically, "the only Indian painter in history who has extensively painted both Ramayana and Mahabharata," adds Lalit Kala Akademi chairman Ashok Vajpeyi.
Padma Vibhushan M F Husain was first vilified in 1996 in a Hindi journal over his depiction of Indian deities made in the 1970s. On the charge that they hurt 'Hindu sentiments', his exhibitions were targeted, his work vandalized alongside freely expressed death threats and threats of "cutting off his arms or blinding him," says Vajpeyi. With successive governments quiet on the issue, Husain has lived in exile in Dubai and London for almost 13 years. Aged 95 now, he reportedly faces almost 900 cases. On Wednesday, a newspaper reported that Husain "has been conferred Qatar nationality". The report also pointed out "Mr Husain did not apply" for the nationality.
Fellow artists said that protests are integral to democracy but when they become violent and ugly, the government must protect its citizens, which successive Indian governments have either failed to or chosen not to. "Courts are for justice. Our judicial system cannot allow itself to be used to victimize," says artist-activist Ram Rahman, of Sahmat, a civil society group that has tried "for years" to bring Husain back. "You can't use violence or threat of violence and call it protest. It's travesty of justice, absolute tragedy for democracy," he says.
Absence of any political statement that Husain should be provided security showedgovernment endorsement of the violence. "With their silence, India's political wing and executive have endorsed the views of the fascist Right. Husain openly identified with the Congress, Nehru, Indira, Rajiv Gandhi," says Vivan Sundaram, but "he's been completely abandoned". Deeply saddened by the turn of events, filmmaker Shyam Benegal adds, "Why are we not capable of giving protection to Husain? It seems politics of intimidation has won."
Too true, and that's the single point emerging time and again. "On the one hand, government can't stop Bal Thackeray; on the other, it cannot provide security to writers and artists. It is a strangulation of free Bharat," says writer Rajendra Yadav, adding, "The government seems to be weak and open to making compromises."
Vajpeyi adds that there were "helpful signs" that home minister Chidambaram had moved to bring Husain back, but even that seemed to have been jettisoned. "He can't even come back to India to die," says friend Rahman. The helplessness of the artist community is obvious.
"We are nobody. Why ask us? Ask the home minister, ask the PMO. When they can give security to ministers, why can't they give security to one of India's greatest?" counter questions artist Jatin Das. "I met him last year. He wants to come back. But nobody's willing to give him security," he added. It's been a disappointing, at times shocking, struggle for Sahmat. A letter dated 2006 to president Kalam, asking the State to honour him with a Bharat Ratna was not even acknowledged.
(With inputs from Avijit Ghosh)
Padma Vibhushan M F Husain was first vilified in 1996 in a Hindi journal over his depiction of Indian deities made in the 1970s. On the charge that they hurt 'Hindu sentiments', his exhibitions were targeted, his work vandalized alongside freely expressed death threats and threats of "cutting off his arms or blinding him," says Vajpeyi. With successive governments quiet on the issue, Husain has lived in exile in Dubai and London for almost 13 years. Aged 95 now, he reportedly faces almost 900 cases. On Wednesday, a newspaper reported that Husain "has been conferred Qatar nationality". The report also pointed out "Mr Husain did not apply" for the nationality.
Fellow artists said that protests are integral to democracy but when they become violent and ugly, the government must protect its citizens, which successive Indian governments have either failed to or chosen not to. "Courts are for justice. Our judicial system cannot allow itself to be used to victimize," says artist-activist Ram Rahman, of Sahmat, a civil society group that has tried "for years" to bring Husain back. "You can't use violence or threat of violence and call it protest. It's travesty of justice, absolute tragedy for democracy," he says.
Absence of any political statement that Husain should be provided security showedgovernment endorsement of the violence. "With their silence, India's political wing and executive have endorsed the views of the fascist Right. Husain openly identified with the Congress, Nehru, Indira, Rajiv Gandhi," says Vivan Sundaram, but "he's been completely abandoned". Deeply saddened by the turn of events, filmmaker Shyam Benegal adds, "Why are we not capable of giving protection to Husain? It seems politics of intimidation has won."
Too true, and that's the single point emerging time and again. "On the one hand, government can't stop Bal Thackeray; on the other, it cannot provide security to writers and artists. It is a strangulation of free Bharat," says writer Rajendra Yadav, adding, "The government seems to be weak and open to making compromises."
Vajpeyi adds that there were "helpful signs" that home minister Chidambaram had moved to bring Husain back, but even that seemed to have been jettisoned. "He can't even come back to India to die," says friend Rahman. The helplessness of the artist community is obvious.
"We are nobody. Why ask us? Ask the home minister, ask the PMO. When they can give security to ministers, why can't they give security to one of India's greatest?" counter questions artist Jatin Das. "I met him last year. He wants to come back. But nobody's willing to give him security," he added. It's been a disappointing, at times shocking, struggle for Sahmat. A letter dated 2006 to president Kalam, asking the State to honour him with a Bharat Ratna was not even acknowledged.
(With inputs from Avijit Ghosh)
No comments:
Post a Comment