|
Page 1 of 2
Although some of his paintings are offensive, the artist himself says he never felt victimised in India and left the country voluntarily. So what's the row about?
India's high-profile secular-fundamentalist partisans are highly agitated that one of their ilk - nonagerian painter MF Husain - has cocked a snook at their frenzied campaign and accepted to become a subject of the Sheikh of Qatar. So much for Husain's alleged commitment to the cherished values of democracy, freedom of expression and born-again secularism! Qatar qualifies on none of these attributes while India does on all. Unable to digest, leave alone convincingly justify, the whimsical painter's decision, secularists are running about like headless chicken blaming the ubiquitous Sangh Parivar for Husain's decamping. I was amused to read a convoluted anti-Parivar tirade by Jyotirmaya Sharma in a Delhi tabloid blaming everybody except Husain himself for running away from his motherland. Sharma explains the Sangh Parivar's unexceptionable positions on Taslima Nasreen and My Name Is Khan as a deliberate attempt to confuse people by speaking in separate tongues. The logic of this assertion eludes me, but then I have never claimed to be a secular-fundamentalist!
To begin with, it is not comprehensible why an attempt is being made to generate a controversy over Husain's calculated decision to migrate to Qatar. It is his personal choice and the painter, being no spring chicken, knows well that acceptance of any other country's citizenship automatically results in the termination of his Indian nationality. Interestingly, the painter has repeated described himself in recent communications as an "artist of Indian origin" not, mind you, "Indian artist". He has further stated that he has been "honoured" by Qatar's decision. Two things are clear: Husain, in effect, asserts that he merely "originated" in India almost by way of accident of birth and is therefore free to adopt the nationality of any country. Second, he regards Qatar's gesture as an "honour" and is overwhelmed enough to gratefully accept it. In an interview to Mint, he categorically said "(This is) the media and those with their own interests who're putting words in my mouth. I don't feel victimised. I'm really happy with all I have."
So, what's the brouhaha all about? The man has voluntarily accepted a lavish exile ("The Sheikha here has been very nice to me," he told Mint). Earlier he told Times Now TV that he has never felt threatened in India and thus not left its shores out of fear. So much for the argument that Hindu vandals hounded him out of this country and the poor artist is languishing in the arid, inhospitable climes of Qatar a la Bahadur Shah Zafar imprisoned in Rangoon, penning ghazals like:
"Itna hai badnaseeb Zafar, dafn ke liye
Do gaz zameen na mili ku-e-yaar mein."
The most preposterous suggestions for wooing him back to India were advanced in a discussion on NDTV in which I too was a participant. While Husain's fellow-artist, the otherwise celebrated painter Anjolie Ela Menon pleaded than an exception be made and he be bestowed dual citizenship by the Government, Lalit Kala Akademi chief, Hindi writer Ashok Vajpeyi demanded that Bharat Ratna be conferred on him by way of mitigation for the crimes of a handful of vandals. I am naming all these personalities because it is important to underline that respected intellectuals, who undoubtedly have a fan following, often put forward the most illogical and provocative arguments in their blind rage against Hindu sentiment. While it is a fact that many Hindus disapprove of the vandalisation of Husain exhibitions, very few endorse his depiction of Durga, Saraswati and Bharat Mata in the nude or the sexually explicit portrayal of Sita. Apart from social exhibitionists I cannot think of anybody seriously endorsing such paintings because they offend our deep-seated beliefs and amount to wilful affront to the Hindu faith.
Last update : 07-03-2010 23:59
|
|
|
(0 vote)