I was just reading about a painter whose work was called blasphemous and whose house was attacked by a mob of 90 militants as a result. 
They also attacked an art gallery that was showing his paintings and destroyed 28 of his canvasses. Two other painters whose work was displayed with his at a different gallery were also attacked. He has been the subject of repeated police investigations in the past, and was just booked by the police yesterday for offending religious sentiment.
It might surprise you to know that this is not a story of Islamic intolerance. Instead, this is a story about Hindu religious sensibilities offended by the work of one of India’s most famous painters, Muqbool Fida Husain, a man whose paintings were recently auctioned by Christie’s for $2 million a canvas.
Hindu groups objected to Husain’s pictures of Saraswati, Durga and Draupadi naked in 1996, when militants rioted, and are currently objecting to a painting of “mother India” naked:
Acknowledged as one of the living legends of Indian art, Maqbool Fida Hussain created a public furore by painting Hindu goddesses in the nude in 1996…. Hussain later apologised and said he had not meant to hurt the sentiments of any religious group. He even expressed his willingness to go before a committee of three persons – an art critic, a lawyer and a representative of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad – that could scrutinise his entire collection. Hussain said he would immediately destroy anything that the committee found objectionable. That suggestion was brushed aside as members of members of hard-line Hindu organisations ransacked the painter’s house in Mumbai and also manhandled artists outside a gallery in Delhi that had Hussain’s works on display. [Link]… the Shiv Sena … endorsed the Bajrang Dal’s attack on Husain’s home… Bal Thackeray said: “If Husain can step into Hindustan, what is wrong if we enter his house?”… [Link]
IN the October 11, 1996 incident, a group of Bajrang Dal activists forced their way into the Herwitz Gallery in Ahmedabad’s Husain-Doshi gufa, the well-known art complex. Armed with tridents and wearing saffron scarves, they intimidated a lone guard and destroyed about 23 tapestry items and 28 paintings which were on display there. The work destroyed included Husain’s series on Hanuman, a depiction of the Last Supper and the famous Madhuri Dixit series. [Link]
<
p>
WARNING: Thumbnail versions of the offending images below the fold, click to see larger versions
<
p>
In addition, Husain was investigated several times by the police for his paintings, although charges were never brought against him:
A few days before Hindutva fundamentalists vandalised Husain’s paintings in Ahmedabad, the Mumbai Police had registered a case against Husain under Sections 153-A and 295-A of the IPC. (Section 295A is concerned with deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.)… [Link]
He is currently back in the news for stirring up controversy with his painting of a naked “Mother India”:
India’s most famous artist has apologised for a painting in which he represented the country as a nude goddess. Maqbool Fida Husain also promised to withdraw the controversial painting from a charity auction… India is often portrayed in popular culture and arts as a mother goddess. But the 90-year-old artist took that a controversial step further by painting the goddess without any clothes. In response, two hardline Hindu groups lodged formal police complaints. [Link]The Vishwa Hindu Parishad has demanded that Husain be placed under arrest for hurting sentiments of the majority community. Meanwhile, state Bharatiya Janata Party president Nitin Gadkari has also extended support to the demand for Husain’s arrest, saying that the renowned painter has hurt religious sentiments. [Link]
So why didn’t these protests grow large in 1996, like those we see today in Arab countries? Well, protests have to be organized and fomented by groups – spontaneous protests are rare and don’t last very long without support. In this case, the Bajrang Dal was probably restrained by the BJP because of Husain’s high profile:
By 1955 he was one of the leading artists in India and had been awarded the Padma Shri. He was a special invitee along with Pablo Picasso at the Sao Paulo Biennial in 1971… Husain was awarded the Padma Bhushan in 1973, the Padma Vibhushan in 1989 and was nominated to the Rajya Sabha in 1986. [Link]
He was also well supported by India’s intelligentsia, and it didn’t make sense for the BJP to let this go too far. Husain also apologized right away, and his investigation by the police probably assuaged many of those who had been offended at first. By contrast, it is in the interest of Islamicist leaders in the Middle East to continue to whip up protests, and Western newspapers are continuing to insist on their right to offend. The politics of the current Danish cartoon affair go a long way to explaining the difference in outcomes between the two cases.
UPDATE:
Here is a list of paintings that Hindu groups found objectionable, their descriptions, and some links. The entire passage below is taken from a group that objected, so these are their interpretations of the photos:
The Obscene Paintings
Painting 1: Naked Sita on the long tail of Hanuman
In this painting Goddess ‘Sita’ and ‘Hanuman’ have been depicted in the nude. Sita was never rescued by Hanuman. Further, Sita is the icon of chastity for millions of Hindus all over the world. Here, Husain depicts Hindu Holy figures in violation of Hindu Holy Scriptures.
Painting 2: Lord Hanuman with His genitals pointing towards a woman having sexual intercourse
The title of the painting is Hanuman V. It shows a three faced Hanuman, and a nude couple in sexual intercourse. The erect genital of Hanuman is shown bent in the direction of the female.
(Critique of the ‘Hanuman V’ painting by noted critic, Shyamal Bagchi:
“While the brave and valiant Hanuman tries to concentrate on his meditation, the naked figures of Rama and Sita can be seen in the foreground…” Read more here.)Painting 3: Hanuman opposite Sita sitting on the thigh of naked Ravana
This painting signed as ‘Hanuman 13’ by Husain shows naked ‘Sita’, sitting on the thigh of naked ‘Ravana’, while naked Hanuman is attacking him.
Painting 4: Naked Goddess Saraswati
Hindus regard Saraswati as the Goddess of knowledge, art and wisdom. She is worshipped as the one ‘wrapped in white, pure garment’. Showing Her naked is in violation of Hindu Scriptures.
Painting 5: Bull copulating with Parvati, with Shiva watching
Painting 6: Durga in sexual union with tiger
In this painting of Goddess ‘Durga’, she is not shown astride, but in sexual union with a tiger.
Painting 7: Naked Goddess Lakshmi on the head of an elephant
‘Lakshmi’ is also shown naked, perched on the head of an elephant.
Painting 8: Naked Krishna with His feet and hands cut off
Husain’s some other denigrating paintings of Deities (available for sale or exhibition on the Internet).
Related posts: Provocation, The Danish cartoon controversy, Husain’s record-setting art sale
GGK,
Well sorry if I sound like a apologist but it was not until start of freedom movement in late 19th century (or before )till Indians realized that they were in this together. Till then everyone was happy betraying others. Do you really think it was possible for few pesky goras with horribly tasteless food to conquer India.
Debauch,
It is a little meta thing. Indians have acquired this habit of shortening everything from yanks(possibly even from british).But if anything there is a surplus amount of communists in India. Care for some ?
Regards
no, its a common-enough term used in the indian polity. if anything, its more common than in the u.s. since the end of the cold war
I haven’t called anyone names but what happened to our freedom of speech? That oh-so-non-negotiable, untouchable, golden doctrine of the fantabulous free world that grants us the ability to insult others (as long as it doesn’t incite violence)..
I don’t think so.. Communism is probably more well known to Indians as a practice (Kerala, West Bengal) than the generalised pinko commie bogeyman known to Americans since the ’50s.
Bengali – see the bottom of this post for the answer to your question about freedom of speech.
this thread is full of name calling to the point its lost its point. by the way, Rang De Basanti is calling out for a thread. If nothing else, talk about how Soha Ali Khan’s chin is just way too cute
I dont deny that there werent reasons why events happened they did. It is more interesting to read why people tollerated mao tse tung in china, if not adored him, but we have the good advantage of hindsight and the freedom to see what alternatives could have been. And projecting further one shouldnt necesarily repeat mistakes of the past. I am stating my position that we dont need gandhi(or gandhians). If any thing we need a Ben Franklin. He did manage to unify groups as well as take the entire nations agenda further. Also I am sorry b/c i can not continue this discussion further as i have to pack for a trip I would have loved to discuss this further, but as it is i waste too much time on non productive things And i am a horrible writer and am not being very clear here either. So Till I return, Offenses and Abuses to all 😉
Deja Vu – III
Lala Jagat Narain of Pujab Kesari group of newspapers.
Selman Rushdie escaped harm even after having a fatwa declared against him, he is indeed lucky to have escaped the jaws of death. The founder of Punjab Kesari was not that lucky. On September 9th 1981 Lala Jagat Narain was killed by the goons of the devil incarnate, “Jarnail Singh Bhindran Wale” (who himself died a dogs death).
Khuswant Singh writesÂ…. link [ quote ] Did the Sikhs deserve to be taught a lesson? I pondered over the matter for many days and many hours and reluctantly admitted that Hindus had some justification for their anger against Sikhs. The starting point was the emergence of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale as a leader. He used vituperative language against the Hindus. He exhorted every Sikh to kill 32 Hindus to solve the Hindu-Sikh problem. Anyone who opposed him was put on his hit list and some eliminated. His hoodlums murdered Lala Jagat Narain, founder of the Hind Samachar group of papers. They killed hawkers who sold their papers. [end quote]
Khalistani murders were not very discriminatory when it came to killing innocent civilians.
[ quote ] The Sikhs, a modern-day offshoot of a Hindu reform movement founded in the Punjab four hundred years ago, are an amalgamation of different beliefs and practices lacking a strong theology of its own. As such, the Sikh faith has long struggled to differentiate itself and its followers from Hinduism: placing a strong emphasis on prominent religious symbols and means of personal identification involving the Golden Temple and sacred scriptures and individual accoutrements such as the wearing of the turban, long hair and beards, and carrying a dagger.38 Foremost among the Sikh’s aims is independence from India and the establishment of a revitalized Sikh nation, called Khalistan- literally, “Land of the Pure.” In this regard, the group has sought to cleanse the Punjab of “foreign influences” – an aim that led to the murder of 16 executives and technicians at a textile factory partly-owned by the American multi-national company, DuPont, in March 1992. An estimated 20,000 persons have been killed as result of Sikh violence during the past decade. In 1991 alone, a record 4,700 deaths occurred in the Punjab. Although the majority of the fatalities were members of the regions Hindu minority population, fellow Sikhs judged as traitors or apostates have also been targeted. [ end quote ]
Dhruv – Trivial nature of Hindu mythology? How dare you? What makes the richest mythology in the world trivial? It is only paintings like these, and also the work of other artists who STEAL — STEAL, PILLAGE, CHANGE FOR THEIR OWN COMMERCIAL REASONS — from cultures not their own that trivialise ANY culture. And religion IS culture, like it or not. And exactly why do Hindus “need” to become less this or more that? Who are you bowing down to in doing so?
Tom,
I think it is past, at present Punjab is peaceful and doing Bhangra. Bhinderwaale was one bun of sith ofcourse. But the back story is little more complicated. He was used by Secular Congress against Akali. Akali on their part could be said to appealing to religion,(Though I am not sure whether it was directed against Hindus). Also the rage of Sikh extremism was directed against Nirankaris.
But yes I think one of the reason for tension is the identity issue.
I don’t know but for some reason there are always identity issues where Hinduism is concerned. (May that is why it is called Metaphysical Boa Constrictor)
Regards
Did anyone notice the title of the book all of those paintings on the Sanatan Sanstha site were scanned from? “Anti-Hindus”
I’d be interested to know whether those are the actual titles of those paintings or whether the editors changed them.
Sorry, not title of the book (maybe not, anyway) – but definitely title of the chapter or section…
Observer asked earlier why I used images of the paintings here while in the cartoon post, the cartoon of Mohammed was partially censored. There are a few reasons:
The biggest reason was that here, unlike with the Mohammed cartoons, the people who were opposed to the images were inviting people to go look at them. In fact, I would not have found the paintings without the list that Sanatan.org had put together. I thought if I used their text, along with the images that they had sought out, this would be reasonable.
In Abhi’s post he didn’t want to discuss the images, he wanted to discuss the controversy that they had engendered. He could do this, in part, because the cartoons were already widely available while the paintings had not been seen. In this case, I thought it was impossible to discuss the issues without looking at the images themselves. Apparently, those offended did too [see point #1].
Abhi showed half the image, above the fold. I used very small versions of the images, below the fold. Both of us used some method of partial obscurement so that the casual reader wouldn’t be confronted, but still used some form of the image.
We have no problems with offensive images here. Earlier Manish was offended by the statue of Ganesh with the garland of penises around its neck, and he put that front and center. We reserve the right to use offensive images, and indeed deliberately offend our readers.