Watching Sex, Reading Sex

Plot or no plot, our bodies react to what we see. So, when film directors say that some sexually explicit scenes are not meant to titillate but are crucial to the plot, I wonder. People do not get intimate in the streets for a reason – it is about intimacy, and that is private.

Therefore, I do not understand why director David Fincher insisted that he will not permit any cuts in his film The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo recommended by the Indian censor board. The suggestion was to blur bare bottoms and bare breasts.

When access to varied forms of media is easy, one might question such prudery. This is precisely the point. Sexuality titillates and there is nothing that would make it so crucial to the story. People are watching YouTube videos of real people being battered and raped. It is all live streaming. Even if we find it squeamish, our brains are partitioned to ‘enjoy’ what is going on without endorsing it.

Is it cultural? To an extent. But even in the more open societies, one cannot assume that love-making is necessarily seen in context and not just for pleasure. Cinema is in a sense also a tactile medium, besides addressing the sensory stimuli of sight and sound. It transfers the smells to us, especially if we are watching it in an auditorium with others. Taste is about dry throats, salivating salvation.

One of the most disturbing rape scenes I have watched did not show anything. It was in a Hindi film, Ghar. It relied purely on one piercing sound and the aftermath was in the eyes. Yet, one could feel the terror.

For someone who talks about several sexually related subjects, I do get uncomfortable watching explicit scenes. It could be partly a sense of shame that is ingrained in us, and also fear about one’s hormonal responses. There are beautiful sequences that build up like foreplay, but I want them to stop just short. Again, a comment I always recollect is when a Hindi film director, known for his light comedies and subtle romances, Hrishikesh Mukherjee, was asked why he did not show bedroom scenes in his films, he said something to the effect that he left the room when his characters made love.

There has been a departure and we have some hardcore films. Unfortunately, however hard they try, they look self-conscious. I don’t see much ‘realistic’ difference in the deliciously simulated Bollywood kiss that showed two flowers meeting and today’s lip licking and finger sucking. Both are merely conveying something. And for those who go on and on about the Kama Sutra and how free we were, well it was written by Vatsyayana, a celibate, and he used his imagination.

Sexuality in contemporary cinema does not leave much to the imagination, although in other aspects there are several nuances it lets us explore.

Does one say the same about books? Can we not get turned on by a piece of writing? Of course.

I had read an account by a person I respect a lot. She spoke about her personal experience with date rape. If the idea was to display the gruesomeness, it did not work. The graphic details of being roughed up, being pushed, while she was in her senses and in fact continued talking to the man, and then the assault from the back just made it exciting in a macabre sort of way. I speak here as a woman who has and will raise my voice against such violence and abuse. But I cannot deny that reading the account did not nauseate me; it had the opposite effect. Perhaps too much empathy makes one feel it right in the bones as well as the flesh.

Why was it so? Because, she did not convey any hatred towards what was happening while it was happening. It was later that she realised that it was an intrusion. This is not to justify my response, which might for all you know have been similar had I watched animals on Discovery Channel. What I am saying is that sex in any form is titillating, whatever be the motive.

Some of my poetry has been described as ‘raw’. It comes from rawness, whatever other emotions go along with it. Obviously, the potency registers more sharply than the purging. But then, tears too are wet.

- - -


Update: I would like to add that ‘pure’ pornography is a niche market and cannot be viewed in the same manner. My views on it are different because it is stacked on a separate counter. An earlier article: Civilise society, add a dash of porn

Radia Tapes: Open Sesame?

We have seen how the 2G scam unfolded. Important people were packed off to jail. The really prominent names were not. No Tata, no Ambani. The role of the lobbyist thawed. Nira Radia became a ghostly figure making court appearances.

Now, the tapes that were at the centre of the controversy have been given a clean chit. I say tapes deliberately:

The Centre has argued before the Supreme Court that the Nira Radia tapes that were leaked to the media were tampered with. The tapes contained conversations between lobbyist Nira Radia and various industry leaders. The government has also stated that the tapes were not leaked by government agencies. The government said there were eight to ten agencies, including service providers, involved in the tapping of telephonic conversation of former corporate lobbyist Nira Radia.

Is this a victory for anyone? Was it not the government that was culpable, to begin with? So, how is the government version acceptable? What are government agencies doing? Why was the inquiry handled by the Ministry of Finance who appointed officers to investigate into the case?

The report says the starting and the end point of the conversation do not match with the original tapes, Justice Singhvi said referring to the report. He said the report also says that officers, who had conducted the probe, do not know who has leaked it."It is quite possible that someone else has done it," the bench said.

This is the SC making such vague statements. Of course, it is possible. We have seen the Shanti Bhushan case; Amar Singh is now a veteran in these false tape cases. Is it not crucial to ask who leaked the tapes and why?

Why should we accept the government statement when we doubt it on almost every other occasion? It is a seriously flawed argument, for the government got trapped in the scams. Why would it leak the tapes, anyway? To clear the main decks?

The other possibility is business rivalry and ego.

I had written the following a while ago:

We are witnessing this farce as the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), while not yet giving a clean chit to Ratan Tata and Anil Ambani, has been talking about their honesty and how candid they have been. Niira Radia has been called “evasive”.

Ratan Tata, when asked about his letter to the Tamil Nadu chief minister praising Raja’s work in the telecom ministry, with some gumption said, “We had a chemistry problem with (his predecessor Dayanidhi) Maran.” Yet, he claimed, “I didn’t manipulate the system for 2G licence allocation.” Did not Mr Tata file a petition regarding breach of privacy about the leaked tapes? The political machinery does not wish to completely alienate the corporate lobby, so it accused Radia of being anti-national and an agent of foreign intelligence agencies.

Both sides are getting trapped in quick sand and they need to prop each other up without being seen to ostensibly do so. Why did they not produce records of the Rs. 300 crore that Radia had accumulated? Of course, there is every possibility of impropriety, but for whom and for what?

If foreign agencies were involved, how did they pay her so that the authorities would know the amount? Have the finance and other departments tapped those calls from foreign agencies? What foreign agencies have interests in seeing to it that the Ambanis and Tatas get the prime deals? Which foreign agency would be interested in what portfolio Raja got? It might be important to examine how these players then can be indicted for such foreign connections as well as anti-national activities, including the governments, past and present, for accommodating them.

This is a morass. Now, we come to the media. There was a huge noise by those who were acting as whistle-blowers as well as the ones defamed. The strange aspect is that both groups have continued with their work and moved on. Vir Sanghvi had, in fact, sent the tapes to a couple of laboratories abroad that showed there was something amiss. Will the government use this as evidence? What about the magazines that carried transcripts – will the courts file a case against them?

How much of it is fake? If the “starting and end point” do not match, then what happens to the middle? Besides, who will be seen as culprits in these tampered tapes – will there be a hierarchy of favoured ones and those who can be put to pasture? The politicians, the businessmen and executives, the media persons – if some of their conversations have been tampered with, then does it follow that everything is? Does it, therefore, falsify the whole case and we discover there has been no scam at all?

And to think that a whole people’s movement started by riding on this wave. It is the people who will have to live with such half-truths.

Do read The Media as Middleman for a background and more

Gandhi: Man for all Seasons

Had there been no Mahatma Gandhi, we would not have to invent/imagine/simulate/recreate/upgrade one. That would have been a truly good thing for India. For there are a few Gandhi ideas that are the overloaded baggage we have been left to deal with. Instead of accepting the fallacy of these, we are forced to deify them out of force of habit or because we love holy cows.

Gandhi with Nehru and Sardar Patel

• Gandhiji learned well from the British about divide and rule. Without being a part of active politics, he played one against the other, knowing well that everyone, including he, had to deal with an ego. It was his ‘suggestions’ about the prime ministership that resulted in a game of musical chairs.

• Gandhiji started the strategy of what came to be called, and derogatorily at that, the policy of appeasement. His alignment with the Khilafat movement was as politically expedient as Jinnah’s new-found discovery of sherwani politics. But, at least, he had the good sense to form a country. Gandhi’s legacy continues to force groups to ‘cater’ to Muslims, and for Muslims to be used, and at times use, this policy. 

• Gandhiji’s ahimsa resulted in people being beaten up. Non-violence should essentially mean a state of peacefulness. Offering the other cheek does not wipe out the violent principle. Even today, there is more violence in the name of maintaining law and order or protecting the peace of the country. Such irony.

• Gandhiji’s experiments with toilet cleaning only made it clear that this was a low job and he was taking it up to dignify it. It was a generous gesture, the magnanimity of the high-born. The term Harijan – god’s children – was just such a pat pigeonhole. Everyone is considered god’s child for non Darwinists, and in India it is generally considered so. He was creating one more ‘special’ interest group. There was no suggestion that they could rise above toilet cleaning.

• Gandhiji’s swadeshi movement only managed to make a bonfire for his vanity. It was like bra-burning feminists. People did not adopt the charkha and khadi is today a designer garment. Also, while promoting all things indigenous, he was quite happy to be ministered to by his foreign acolytes. 

• Gandhiji brought religion into state politics. He spoke in terms of dharma, and invoked god. His public gatherings were prayer meetings held in an ashram. This was his idea of secular nationalism.

• Gandhiji pushed the rural ideal of India living in the villages. While this is true, the process of industrialisation was burdened with guilt. It led to Nehru’s destructive policies of socialism, which was neither here nor there. 

• Gandhiji’s abjuring of wealth and worldly desires were personal whims that he projected as part of an iconic lifestyle. This was brand creation. Had he been true to it, he would not need to announce it. His hosts were big business houses, and he put many people to test only to test his own mettle. This was not sacrifice, but selfishness. 

• Gandhiji is largely responsible for post-Independence kingmakers. He had no dynasty, but he had a pedestal from where he could wave the baton and orchestrate major events, often not giving a thought to the consequences. From L.K.Advani to Sonia Gandhi, these moments of ‘sacrifice’ have only drawn the nation into a leaderless state or a state with a leader as mask/puppet.

The fact that people as far removed from each other as Narendra Modi, Rahul Gandhi, Anna Hazare, Yaseen Malik think of him as an ideal should tell us that Gandhiji was a man for all seasons. It is not the Gandhian philosophy that they care about, but the sheer breadth of the marketing genius of the man who became Mahatma.

- - -

An earlier piece The Gandhian Orgy: Ideological Bunga-bunga

- - -

It's time for the Guinness Book. 485 "underprivileged" boys in Kolkata took out a peace march dressed as the Mahatma. It became a record. Their lack of food and education may never make it.

  - - -

There is an attempt by the RSS to distance itself from the assassin, Nathuram Godse, saying that he had severed ties in 1934.

This is what his brother Gopal said:

“All the (Godse) brothers were in the RSS. Nathuram, Dattatreya, myself and Govind. You can say we grew up in the RSS rather than in our home. It was like a family to us. Nathuram had become a baudhik karyavah (intellectual worker) in the RSS. He has said in his statement that he left the RSS. He said it because Golwalkar and the RSS were in a lot of trouble after the murder of Gandhi. But he did not leave the RSS.”

Poof goes the spoof

The past few days saw a couple of Jay-Joe humorous swipes that met with two distinct reactions: WTF and WTF. The potent acronym is, however, about duelling ideologies.

1. “WTF! How can anyone be so insensitive?”
2. “WTF! Can’t we just chill and grow up? It’s a joke.”

I think I know a few mean jokes; I am told I do possess a dry wit. I swear by a good satire, and not at it. And that’s the point. If we have to laugh at something, we put ourselves in a superior position. It may not be deliberated upon. Yet such jokes that make someone or something an object of derision automatically imbue us with the power of looking down on them. You might ask, don’t opinions and indignation do the same? In a sense, yes, they do. But one has the time to at least attempt an argument. It may be implausible to others, but that’s what pushing the envelope is about. Flat humour is more like licking a postage stamp and showing tongue. Beyond the juvenile aspect is a not-so-innocent narrative.

In the age of connectivity, we can see some snide personal comments being leavened by the clever use of emoticons and a heavy dose of exclamation marks. This seems to often suggest that the comment made is all in good fun. It often is, though not always.

When Jay Leno put up a picture of the Golden Temple on a show with Mitt Romney and suggested it could be his summer home, there were the two reactions I mentioned. I am afraid I did not find it funny. It is perhaps the most visible religious symbol of worship for the Sikhs in India. My argument is that a place where people pray is not something to be messed with. There are other glittering glorious monuments. Would Leno have sold the idea of the Vatican to Romney, or is it not summery enough? Besides that, my squabble is about reference to the context: Had Romney talked about conversion, for example, then a subtle mention would seem legitimate. A good parody is not something you pull out of a hat. Heck, when the brilliant Chaplin pulled something out of a hat it ended up as rather profound humour. There will be jeers over the term profound prefixed to humour. It reveals the paucity of the humour discourse that is so slapstick even our minds need to fall on banana peels to get tickled.

So, is Joe Biden, who is supposed to be full of gaffes, imitating an Indian accent offensive? We again get the “WTF! It’s just a joke” reaction. In this case, as I have said so often, we get into the veracity dispute. What is an Indian accent? If you live in India you would realise that there is variety, as there is in the United States, in UK, and I am sticking to the English language. The slightly worrying aspect is that his target was the call centres. We know just how bad the employment situation is in America; this sort of draws attention to the outsourcing.

I read a report that talked about how the people in Delaware are cool about it. They would be. They have to keep their little stores open, and quite a few do indeed use their ethnic background as a calling card. It is amusing to see how they market this, in their mode of dress, deportment and speech while they are abroad. When they return on visits home it is as Americans or Britons – foreign accents laying on the slang, ill-fitting western clothes, and the mandatory shrug of shoulders.

This is great material to lampoon, and the ‘Mind your language’ series did a pretty nifty job of it. However, Peter Sellers enacting an Indian was a bit off simply because he remained on the periphery of stereotypes. Stereotypes are often comical.

There cannot be straitjacket rules for humour. That would defeat the purpose. A lot of stand-up comedy by the diaspora in the West is a defence mechanism; it is a nervous laugh. It is the desperation to be seen as ‘nice’, as ‘belonging’ that results in most of the jokes that cater to the mainstream. Leno was informed that Sikhs are the butt of jokes, so why the issue over the Golden Temple reference. Indeed, Sikhs are the subject of many jokes, but it is about them and their foibles. I’d say even the priesthood makes for a great subject across the board. These are people who need to be outed with jokes, if not in a more serious manner.

If Joe Biden finds Hinduism weird and someone else finds Islam weird in another manner and somewhere else Catholicism is seen as weird, then we are talking about a whole lot of weird atheists who are obsessed with how the ‘opponents’ behave. There really is nothing to take jibes at atheism. There has to be something when we hit out.

Where does one draw the line about that something? It really depends on where we are. It is culture specific. I do not believe religion should be out of bounds, but certainly leave gods and places of worship alone. There are jokes about Jews, many of them, but one leaves Judaism alone. I read that Liam Neeson “may become a Muslim”. I was amused by the announcement of a possibility. You do not declare that you may fall in love, or you may change your gender. But if Leno may interview him on the subject, I’d think it would be quite apt if he asked the Irish Catholic if he would give up his Guinness and settle for a pint of camel milk. Personally, I would have no problem if even zam-zam were mentioned, but it is holy water from Mecca and it has history and flows with the devotion of millions. The reason I would not mind is that I know there is a whole ancillary industry that markets this holy water by adulterating it, so its holiness is quite diluted. But not many think of these pragmatic details, and faith is not about pragmatism, even less about scepticism.

The problem with the broad professional liberal attitude is that freethinkers recoil when the joke’s on them or their favoured icons. This openness allows for a faith to be caricatured, but dare we not make a farce of the person who does so. Now, this is funny. It might have been a joke, too, except that I prefer mine sharp.

This quote by Anon exposes the wooziness best: “Liberals are very broadminded: they are always willing to give careful consideration to both sides of the same side”

For someone who does not believe in political correctness, I’d like to ask a question: Would these people look kindly on humour about obesity, anorexia, women, homosexuality, men, the body, physical and mental deformity? No. If the reason is sensitivity – though I can assure you that privately these are subjects of humour in these same liberal bastions – then the belief of people is also not a joke. We can, and must for clarity, split hairs and nitpick and fight over every aspect of what is right and wrong with all of these. It is called debate and discussion.

A one-liner, a rolling on the floor laughter is a kneejerk reaction. A spasm does not a satire make.

(c) Farzana Versey

From Ayodhya to the jungles

Is anyone surprised that the BJP would rake up the mandir issue again for the assembly polls in Uttar Pradesh? The party is living in a time warp. However, this happens to be a good time for such ‘regression’.

"Construction of a grand temple is associated with the faith of crores of people of the country. Ram is the symbol of prestige, pride and dignity of the country. Unfortunately due to pseudo-secularism and vote bank politics it is being opposed. BJP is committed to remove all hurdles in the path of construction of Ram temple," the manifesto said.

With all due respect to the faithful, many of them too will agree that outside of the puja room and temples Lord Ram is not associated with how the country is viewed. Was his name uttered to fight the Mughals or the British? Before the Ramjanmabhoomi movement gained ground, did the country lack in pride, prestige and dignity? When tourists go to religious monuments, are they doing so because those represent national pride? Have visits to the Ayodhya site increased since the demolition of the Babri Masjid because suddenly Indians have discovered their dignity is dependent on it? How many people have given up their worldly desires to simulate banwaas (exile) and internalise the pain of what a coloniser built over Ram’s birthplace?

Is this the pride of a country that secures and barricades a place after destroying something by making incendiary speeches using cheap language and orchestrating riots? Does this not amount to barbarism?

On questions regarding the temple at Ayodhya, UP state unit President Surya Pratap Shahi said that the party was of the opinion that Hinduism was the life substance of the country, but due to vote bank politics it was being attacked by parties, including Congress, SP, BSP and the Left.

If this is not trying to cater to a vote bank, then what is? The BJP is offering a cow to every poor family. I am not sure whether those who do not have space or any interest in the dairy industry will benefit. There is a subtle use of the cow as metaphor, as well. Its association with religion cannot be ignored.

Besides, on what basis has the party arrived at the conclusion that Hinduism is the life substance of the country? If it means in areas of culture, then certainly it is manifest in most parts. It is about tradition, mores and even a value system. We are not talking about yoga, babas, and public display of affection for symbols. These exist and have a place. But it has nothing to do with the country as a nation state.

Although one is quite certain the party has no chance in UP, this pushing of an agenda has come at a time when certain Muslim groups in the state started a little fire fanned by the Congress. At this point, let us be clear that the Deoband is an independent organisation and not a political party. Let it attempt to contest elections and we will see it fall flat on its face. It has no political or largescale credibility among Muslims. I keep giving the example of the Shahi Imam who lost his deposit. The BJP’s conniving method is to sell a Gujarat-Bihar dream state while retaining its ‘heritage’. It won’t work in UP, and now. But this is the party’s best chance to capitalise on the Deoband’s stupidity without even naming it. This is preparation for the national elections.

Does the person in the street care about a nice big temple (it has to be nice and big, which just shows that this is economics and not just religious)? Not really, but when the option is a Congress that is behaving like a novice, despite being a veteran in the corruption stakes, then people would look elsewhere. And if that elsewhere is offering a nice, big temple and embedding it in national pride, while giving students laptops and promising Modi’s malls and Nitish’s bridges, then this sounds utopian. Like escapist cinema, people will buy tickets. Inside the dark auditorium, they are brainwashed into believing all that they see. When they come out and are blinded by the light of reality, it is too late. And the political parties do not care about that. It is to get them to the box office.

- - -

In another escapist move, the chief of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) K Vijay Kumar has given his 70,000 troops another dark auditorium moment to deal with the Naxalites:

"Your adversary is far too inferior than you – in training, in equipment, in physical strength, in tactics, in weaponry, in number, in food he takes. He cannot give you a face to fight. He believes in hiding, hitting and running. This is his strength. Let us also modify our tactics – be like hunters, hide in his area and hit him hard. Learn to be a junglee.”

If this is supposed to be a morale booster, then there is nothing new. Guerilla tactics are employed by security forces; they use camouflage. The reason they have to sometimes be ‘open’ is to give those not involved in such activities a sense of security. When the political machinery is inept, then the forces reflect it. The police have complained about inadequate supplies and support.

Besides, it might be prudent not to use terms like ‘junglee’. There are many who live in forests and lead such isolated lives hide and hunt for that is their only means of sustenance. Will they, who are not involved in fighting the forces, also be ‘neutralised’?

Where are the golden birds?

The garbage has not been taken. The black bag lies huddled. No municipal truck will come to collect it. It is a holiday. A day when she is written into the Constitution. Until the other day I did not know her name, did not even know who she was. Silently, early mornings, she’d pick up the bag and leave. I realised that her whole family has been doing the same work for years. I know the father. He is a filmi sort who always blesses everyone in the language/greeting of their community. I knew the mother. She met with an accident and decided to stay home. Where was home?

I had gone there once. Not because I am nice. I was a predator, doing a story. I reached there, jumping over puddles. She shooed off the onlookers, but they continued to stand there, edging away slightly, their bodies twisting and turning in anticipation. She felt grateful. She, who had seen leftover rice that I threw away with curry floating in it, the blood-stained sanitary napkins, my useless pens and lots of sheets of shred paper that hid secrets, was protecting me from the crowd. We talked as my eyes scoured the room. A bedsheet I had given her covered a large bundle; it looked like a coffin. She was wearing one of my salwaar kameezes. For a few seconds, I felt displaced. This could have been my life. This could be me. Suddenly, my nails with silver varnish looked like neon lights in a dhaaba.

Someone brought a bottle of Fanta and opened it right there to assure me so that it had not been touched by them. A man hobbled in. He had some mithai in his hand. It was prasad he said. I could not believe that he was not sure whether he should drop it in my hand or let me pick it up. Which of the two acts would his status permit? He would not even look up. My fingers reached out and took a piece from his curled open palm. He looked up and folded his hands. He thought I had done him a favour. I was eating what he had to offer, and yet I was making him feel tall.

As I left, a trail of kids followed me. Bimla would not forget this day, she told me. Years later, I did not even know what her daughter looked like. A daughter who has inherited the job, the leftovers, those black bags stuffed with another day of my life that went to waste.

As on every year, today too I could hear music. It came from a place I do not know. My not knowing about it is what I mourn for. It is not personal ignorance. It is about all those who live other lives. “Jahaan daal-daal par sone ki chidiya karti hai basera”…the golden birds. Where are they?

They love playing the poor. The Chikni Chamelis. The tough guys who break matkis. Agneepath! Agneepath! Actor Hrithik Roshan goes to his old school Bombay Scottish to promote the movie. What are we coming to? I hate the promos. There is too much colour, it hurts the eyes. But see, this kind of film in a fancy little school would never have made the grade earlier. But now it is acceptable. Everything is a commodity. They will say they are exposing the children to reality. They have done it by exposing him to a little man who pretends to be a clone of Mahatma Gandhi. A sanitiser ad took over a whole page of a broadsheet. One of the points made is that children should carry it with them to school. These children will never touch mud. Agneepath! Agneepath!

Author James Shapiro, an authority on the Bard’s works made an astonishing comment on his visit to India: “I’d say that first and foremost, half the street children around the world now read Shakespeare. It is not just in India, the US or the UK but around the world.”

Where do people get these ill-informed ideas from? There are hardly any statistics about these kids, so how would one know their reading habits? Besides, much as I love Shakespeare and literature, how does this transform their situation? Do they have a choice – to be or not to be street children? When they cling to the edge of your kurta as you leave after ‘doing time’ with them, are they thinking of sitting back with A Midsummer Night’s Dream?

The newspaper had this on the front page yesterday.

It is such an insult. The Republic cannot lose just like that. Has the Republic lost when those street children cannot even read their own names? Has the Republic lost when a man cannot offer me prasad because he belongs to a low caste? Has the Republic lost when people play music at high volume because the words will cut through them and their lives, and slice their hopes? “Sone ki chidiya.” Where? In saheb’s house. In a gilded cage, beaks nibbling aperitifs. On some days, when their servers gather together – an assembly of more than five not allowed, they are told ominously – they too are called the mob. The Republic is supposed to protect them. The Republic has made them lose.

Most of the gallantry awards this year were given to those who fought insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir and the Naxalite areas. Those people did their jobs. But remember, we are killing our own and being killed by our own.

It is late now. My windows are still shut. The music has become a whimper. I did what I heard without thinking. My eyes were filled with tears “Zaraa aankh mein bhar lo paani” because the garbage bag now looks dead. I mourn for the waste. In a few hours, the day will be over, so why am I writing now? Because I want the water to flow tomorrow and the day after and after…

“Ae watan, ae watan, tujhko meri qasam…”

- - -

These two pictures were taken on different trips in India.

Also an earlier piece: The Republic of India Divided

The Satanic Bourses

I have not seen so many levels of bigotry, liberalism, and the medium path before. Tags are being flung around. Everyone is looking for moderate Muslim voices as they would pins in the haystack, when these voices are the darned haystack. But you don’t like the idea of something so obvious.

Here’s your Stop Press moment. Salman Rushdie was to come live in a video conference after not being permitted entry and the whole Jaipur Literature Festival (JLF) turning into a battleground of ideologies, many newly-acquired. The news is that this chat has been called off, too. It is time to mourn for the freedom of expression once again. More martyrs. More ‘rabid Muslims’. More snide comments about ‘hurt sentiments’. More disgust about how people are feeding off this episode, even if some are raising legitimate questions, who have been following the writer’s work and the literary trail for years. No word about how Rushdie has himself milked the fatwa cow at every single opportunity. He needs this identity more than anyone else. He needs some little thread to connect him to his Muslimness so that when he writes again about one of the angels from jannat, he can by default be seen as an ‘insider’.

Not a single person or any of the ‘freedom’ groups has had the sense to file an FIR against the miscreants. Why? On what grounds, then, do you expect the police to take care of you? The cops have been on duty. To call the government cowardly makes no sense. How brave are the organisers? Are they being held to ransom by some Muslims? In what manner? What exactly is the threat? There has not been a single word on that. We heard about the Raza Academy and SIMI earlier, and Mumbai dons as well. Any case filed against them? What is the liberalism you speak about if you cannot act upon it?

There is a yo-yo even in the attitude towards the government. Sometimes, it is accused of advising against Rushdie’s visit, then there is denial, then back again. It is the government’s job and the police’s job to protect those who are there, not those who are absent. Has a single incident occurred that any of the delegates or visitors can complain about?

A report says:

Despite Rajasthan government supporting the organisers of the festival, the link was called off amidst much drama at Diggi Palace in Jaipur. The owner of the Diggy Palace Ram Pratap Singh said that he decided to not allow the video link fearing violence. Singh said that several people had entered the venue and threatened to take the law in their own hands if the video link was allowed. 

"I have taken a decision on not to allow the video conference to go ahead on the advise of Rajasthan police. There are a large number people who are inside the property and a large number who are marching towards the property. This is necessary to avoid violence and harm to the property and my family," he said.

Don’t they have video cameras to shoot this march of the brigade? Are the police advising on their walkie-talkies while these people are stomping in droves to the venue? Why is there no clarity, and why is no one bothered to ask? Because, creating fear is a lucrative industry in such a situation. It gives everyone, including the cow that apparently is around to add an exotic touch at the venue, an opportunity to feel the pain of artistic muzzling.

Barkha Dutt was supposed to conduct the interview. She tweeted, “Wish me luck”. This is the woman who has gone to Kargil, covered wars in other parts of the world, interviewed separatists and people who are dangerous. Did she need luck for those coverages?

The problem is that the issue has had a snowballing effect and a good deal of it was allowed to get out of hand. Why the need for such a video chat when he was being asked to talk about ‘Midnight’s Children’? What’s the occasion? Just a rebellious act? Had he not been able to make it for personal or health reasons, would there have been such a need to link up? We know the answer.

So, should we applaud this freedom of speech? Will those in Jaipur and those following the festival circus care to oppose the move by the Gujarat police that detained six activists from the NGO Anhad when they attempted to enter Godhra for a programme ‘In Search Of Justice’ as a counterpoint to Narendra Modi’s Sadbhavana fast?

Whose sentiments were they hurting, these six people from an organisation? Do they have freedom of expression on an issue that is more palpable and real and certainly has greater consequences on people’s lives?


Now, the Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust (Sahmat), incidentally Anhad was formed by its founding members, has extended an invitation to Rushdie. Member Ram Rehman said:

"We have watched with dismay the unnecessary controversy which erupted over the presence of Salman Rushdie at the Jaipur Literary Festival. We strongly disapprove the threats - real or concocted - issued against Rushdie’s participation. Sahmat is issuing an open invitation to Salman Rushdie to come to Delhi to deliver a lecture or participate in a discussion on literature at any time of his choosing. We will host him under any circumstances along with an exhibition of the works of the late M.F. Husain, driven into forced exile by a similar retreat by the state in its cowardly unwillingness to stand up against communal politics.”

Do these people know what exile is? We must also remember that Safdar Hashmi belonged to the CPI (M). He was killed by goons of the Congress while performing the street play “Halla Bol”. We are getting into another political arena here. There is no doubt divisive politics, but it would be interesting to see how they would have viewed these two outside of the present strictures. The comparison of Husain and Rushdie is disingenuous.

For one, Husain’s paintings are not banned, and he chose available iconography. There is nothing that is not seen in ancient art. However, I have said this earlier, he lost the case when he took up the citizenship of Qatar. He was painting for patronage. He chose to be shackled. He kept in touch with his socialite hangers-on that used him to the last. He was an establishment man.

Rushdie too is very much establishment, and his ‘sin’ is not just of writing what he did but using that as the benchmark for a limited idea of freedom. A ban cannot change his basic outlook. He does not speak for the rights of the dispossessed. He makes his diaspora status sound like banishment, which is where even the Leftists join him. How do those who are now crying for Rushdie view this? Would they speak up for Maoists and separatists too?

A petition for lifting the ban on ‘Satanic Verses’ is being circulated. It has been endorsed by Hanif Kureshi, Charu Nivedita, Arvind Krishna Mehrotra and "ordinary college students", as a report quoted one of the drafters say. Had a petition been circulated among ‘ordinary’ people for a religious/community cause, they would be deemed brainwashed idiots.

Anyhow, what it states is revealing:

The petition argues that the ban places India “alongside Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, Malaysia, Liberia and Papua New Guinea” which are some other countries where the ban stands.

India often figures among the most backward countries where crime, corruption, gender disparity, standard of living are concerned. Do we want an Egypt-style revolution? Will we even have the ‘courage’ to overthrow a political leader in this manner? Such random comparisons are ridiculous. Why did the NDA government not lift the ban?

You already know that India was the first country to ban the book, even before the fatwa by Ayatollah Khomeini. Ever since then the liberals have taken charge of telling us how the mullahs will threaten us, and they are only too happy to oblige.

This is not to suggest that the maulvis are blameless. But just look at how the events unfolded. The Deoband protests. In the beginning that was it. They have protested many times. Let us say they are exercising their right to express their views. Everyone agrees it was political. However, it was beyond political politics. It was literary politics and opportunism as well.

It brings us to the Fab Four. How many know about their politics, their views on The Satanic Verses? They say they acted on their own. What freedom were they upholding? What about those who joined in the chorus? Can a writer who takes extreme poetic licence about reality speak of freedom? Can someone who has a Rajya Sabha seat from a rightwing party that bashes up journalists fight for Rushdie’s rights? Can someone who writes hagiographical accounts talk about freedom? Can those who are silent when smaller artists are banned talk about freedom? Can we talk about the freedom of banned organisations? Or of politicians who are forced to resign because of some ‘incident’ where they hurt someone?

Yes, they can. But only if they first look in the mirror.

- - -

And since I know I will be seen as anti-Rushdie, and I do not have the time or inclination for ifs and buts now, here you are.

Today, I am a Muslim for your pleasure. So listen up. If it has been convenient for you to label me, then it is convenient for me to use that label. Remember the times I have been shamed into the pigeonhole of belonging to the ummah? The times I was told that India tolerated me, that I should go to Pakistan, that I should try driving in Saudi Arabia? Where was your liberalism then when you could not see me? Where was the liberalism of the liberal editor who said I looked “too Muslim” in my photograph? Where was the liberalism of the newspaper that could not palate criticism of a sadhu? Where was the liberalism of the radical rag that told me not to write a spoof on Muslims? Yes. This too.

Where are the voices that don’t go around looking for mountain causes only so that they can hear the echoes?

(c) Farzana Versey

PS: Blog comments are moderated. I am curbing your freedom, but you know you compelled me to.

L.K.Advani's Pakistani Elections

At the Faisal Mosque, Pakistan

BJP leader L.K.Advani could not but help mention Pakistan. We are talking about a man who thinks he can be prime minister, who knows that his party is competing for seats in the assembly elections, and yet he feels the need to mention the P word.

Is this electoral strategy? Here, I do not mean the Indian Muslim vote, but the Pakistani Muslim vote of confidence. Our neighbour is going through a major political crisis, and the uncertainty is more palpable than it has ever been. Mr. Advani probably believes that by sneaking in some feel-good bon mots, he will send out signals across the border. This is a pre-emptive strike to prepare the ground for a return to power. He wants to do a Vajpayee.

His ambitions for the top post are conveyed in an ostensibly subtle manner:

If you would recall, the BJP had gone into the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, projecting me as the party’s face. Interestingly, that was when my party’s unhappiness with me was at its peak, following my description of Jinnah as secular. That was on my trip to Pakistan, which, till date I maintain was a high point in my life.

The question asked in the Times of India interview was whether he was willing to be the NDA’s prime ministerial nominee. So, what’s the deal here? He is into big-style masochism peppered with confidence. He is telling us that the BJP could never do without him, which is the reason he was the face, but when he called Jinnah secular his party members were miffed. This is cunning. Vajpayee was known as the mukhota (mask). Here we have Mr. Mask himself.

That visit to Pakistan became the high point in his life. That handing out a certificate to someone who is considered as the person behind the Partition was a smart move; regurgitating it now is shrewd. By default, he wants us to assume that he is secular. Can we forget that anyone who opposed the BJP was dismissed as “pseudo secular”? Today, he is recalling that definitive moment when although he was the most prominent leader, he still had to bear the burden of unhappiness by his colleagues. He had to watch their sadness, and yet stand his ground, irrespective of the fate the party would suffer.

Jinnah had long been dead. But both India and Pakistan considered it a landmark. We have a history of crumbs passing of as dough.

This is the Advani scheme. It’s like a student saying I was busy helping out the neighbour so I could not study. If he passes the exams, it will be seen as an achievement; if he fails, everyone will know it was for the larger good.

Where are the Indians in his plan of action? Where is the secularism he reminds Pakistan about? When asked about cultural nationalism, he said:

Nationalism in India is essentially Hindu. But interpreting nationalism in religious and not cultural terms would be wrong. That you can be an atheist Hindu proves the validity of my argument. On intolerance, I blame politicians for creating this atmosphere. There’s no doubt that intolerance is highest among all religions. I tell my party people that Ramakrishna Paramhansa had become a Muslim for three days, but there was no hue and cry about it then.

This is so much balderdash. I have problems with terms like ‘cultural’ prefixed to any community. This sort of diversionary tactic does not work. On what basis is Indian nationalism Hindu? Our dance forms, our music, our art, our literature, even our dressing and certain values are part of the symbiotic process that includes what the ‘outsiders’ gave us. An atheist Hindu is as much possible as an atheist Muslim. What does he mean by “you can be”? Do people seek permission from the scriptures and say, sorry god/lord/bhagwan, but I’ve got to excuse myself?

Jinnah was probably an atheist Muslim, for if you call him secular it means he believed that all faiths have a place under the sun and the…er…moon. The general perception, and going by how monotheistic faiths are formulated, this would not be permitted. But, it is. There are Muslim nations that have temples, churches, gurdwaras. Using Swami Paramhansa’s example here is specious. Is this the Hindu atheism he talks about? What would three days of a simulated religion give anyone?

We have a slew of celebrities who convert to Islam to facilitate remarriages. Are they atheists or opportunists or just looking for a convenient ruse to commit what is ‘wrong’ in their faith by using another without thinking of the dimensions of such licence, however obsolete it may be in contemporary times? Come to think of it, such licence is anyway used and the Hindu atheist can do so using several examples from mythology.

It is precious that Mr. Advani blames politicians for intolerance. What has his role been? Who was the one watching from the dais and egging on the kar sevaks?

But you know what?

Even though a Sindhi, from Karachi, I became the deputy prime minister. Indian ethos is essentially assimilative, while Pakistan is exclusionist.

And, Benazir was from Sindh, Nawaz Sharif from Punjab and Musharraf from Delhi. What’s the point? And why can we not discuss our elections, our ethos, and our political and social situation without mentioning Pakistan?

It is no time to remember the Partition, unless this is the ony way you can discuss the Indian bosom’s cleavage.

Hotel Room

familiar scent of strangers

leftover fingerprints

on mirrors

reflecting lost caresses

in deep wrinkles

on mattresses

burdened with guilt

tables laden with fruit

like still-life painting

soft pillows heavy

with dried tears

crumbs hidden in carpet knots

toes scrounge for bits

of buttered toast

towels remind of other bodies

wrapping wetness

from the open window

a bird flies

with clipped wings

~FV

Poverty as Photo-Op: India's Zoo Story

India's Zoo Story
Poverty as Photo-Op
by Farzana Versey
Counterpunch, Jan 20-22

Oprah Winfrey walking the seedy bylanes of Mumbai on a work assignment in India, Jeremy Clarkson dropping his pants for a reality show, and tourists paying to watch naked Jarawa tribals dance are part of the same deal: Branding Blahdcasting Corporation.

Should outsiders be permitted to portray us in a manner that might seem demeaning? Is there only one reality in a nation as multicultural and internally divisive as India? Is it a matter of reality or of ethics, and are they mutually exclusive?

The latest news is that the BBC will not apologise for the Top Gear show that the Indian High Commission complained was “replete with cheap jibes, tasteless humour and lacked cultural sensitivity”. The channel says that while the programme showed the warts, it could not be considered insulting.

Rather uncharacteristically an Indian politician, naturally deemed liberal, wondered what the noise was about: we do shit, pee and spit in the open. So why get upset about this? The political system in India thrives on obsequiousness. The visit of the head of state from a western country is treated with the reverence we reserve for gods. The streets are washed, buildings where the foreign leader will pass by are painted, potted plants line the streets, garish hoardings are removed. We do not want them to see the dirty picture. Why is the Establishment’s protocol of greater importance than how television channels air our offal?

There is the dirt; you can see it. Films have been made with the backdrop by Indian filmmakers. “Gritty reality” is how they are described. Sometimes, they are romanticised with a mournful background score and large vacant eyes. This is art as manufactured reality. A painting of snotty kids is an expression; the canvas is the statement: where it is placed, how much it fetches at the auction, and what the artist’s sensibilities are.

Jeremy Clarkson’s “light-hearted road trip” is no satire. It does not turn the tables to show us the under-side. He is poking where it hurts. He is not hitting out at stereotypes like an intellectual Samaritan; his agenda is to play those up and cage them. If the intention was to feel the place, a “spontaneous interaction” that would capture “beautiful scenery, busy city scenes, local charm and colour”, and bring the “local car culture” alive, then one might have indulged the delightful picaresque. However, Clarkson had a toilet fixed to the boot of his Jaguar. He said: “This is perfect for India because everyone who comes here gets the trots.”

There is truth in such a remark. Unfortunately, scatological necessities are a great leveller and a global phenomenon. If I may say so, this is not unlike some scheduled castes that until recently carried night soil, excreta, on their heads. Is Clarkson replaying it as tragedy or as farce, or is he just on his own trip of exposing?

Are Indians in denial? We have luxury cars, bespoke apartments, farmhouse getaways, scented toilet paper. The drains in the highrises are choked with used sanitary napkins; handbags at parties are stuffed with silver cutlery from the host’s table. This calls for a satire. This calls for light-hearted revelation.

The closest he got to this was when “he stripped off his trousers in public before two Indian dignitaries to show them how to use a trouser press, while joking that he used it to make naan bread”. The ‘dignitaries’ are not identified. See, this is what passes for reality. People wearing slightly dressy clothes seem important.

His train journeys were most certainly not about Indians, but about the British. He put up banners. One read “British IT is good for your company” and when the carriages split apart it read: "Shit For Your Company". This is precious. Indians are always praising the British rule for giving us the railways. Obviously, Clarkson forgot that.

One learns that his show is pretty much about being upfront and offensive. He is paid big money to crack racist jokes. What does it reveal about such a social ethos? The fact that the channel does not think showing warts is an insult might work if the next Top Gear episode is a road trip to Balmoral. It’s closer home and he would not have to fit a toilet to his Jaguar boot.

* * *

Is exploitation by the establishment any less devious? Some foreign tourists were taken to the Andaman and Nicobar islands where the Jarawa tribes live in isolation. The naked women were asked to dance and were offered food and knick-knacks in return. A video that was aired by television channels revealed that a police officer was complicit in this ‘adventure’.

Modi reads from The Satanic Verses

...and the Anna-fication of a literature festival

Narendra Modi realised that all his efforts for the Sadbhavna mission fast were not going as great as expected. He had planned it meticulously, but he chose the wrong venue. Godhra. Wrong timing: a month before 10th anniversary of the train burning. No mention of the riots. He wants Muslims to forget that. He wants to mend fences. Nice guy.

This was about peace and harmony. 1600 cops and 5 specially-trained Chetak commandos and unarmed jawans guarding the place. Peace? Peace is based on trust, and he says that there have been no riots. So, what is he afraid of? I get it. He is afraid of Salman Rushdie. What if that bloke who is not permitted to visit the Jaipur Literature Festival decides to land in Gujarat? After all, Narendra bhai has been promoting it as the wonderful Disneyland where you may scream in terror as long as you can afford the rides. Modi likes Rushdie. He does not know why, but maybe it’s the old if A=B and B=C, then A=C.

Yet, for all his liking, he did not want to spoil the Jumma party. He waited and waited for some real Muslims to pay their respects. Finally, he just gave up. Peace can go take a long walk. He asked his men to get a copy of The Satanic Verses. He was going to protest against these Muslims. Those Deoband guys who did not treat his progressive Gujarati fellow nicely when he was made Vice Chancellor and that SIMI is really awful going after poor Salman. No one cares for freedom of expression.

“But, saab,” said his favourite police officer who was transferred for giving signals for an encounter killing, but had now undergone cosmetic surgery and was back at duty, “We took down posters, we threw out artists…”

“Bhai, jo, that is different. We are the establishment. Establishment has right to protect minorities.”

“Er…we are the majority.”

“That’s okay. I am not counting. We must feel like the minority.”

“So, what to do now, sir?”

“Bring me that book. I have many copies in that underground place where I keep all those files about 2002.”

“The book is banned in India.”

“We are not India. I mean, Gujarat has 5 crore people, so we are India within India.”

“This could cause communal enmity, saab.”

Modi guffaws. “This is the land of communal enmity. If you add tadka to cooking oil it will splutter but you get good food. Go, get me a copy. Cover it with green cloth.”

The man leaves hurriedly. A few mullahs come and shake hands with Modi. He says, “You are late.”

“We went to buy you a special edition of the Quran to promote this wonderful multicultural system you started.”

“Time is over for peace.”

“You are insulting Islam by not accepting a copy. Last time you did not accept skull cap.”

“You people’s sentiments get hurt all the time. But you cannot reach on time. I had arranged for your bath here.”

“Kya?”

“For your namaaz, I made arrangements for you.”

“Wazoo…it is called wazoo.”

“Don’t try and convert me.”

“We are only informing you.”

“Why you did not inform me about Godhra train?”

There is silence.

“Okay,” Modi continued. “If you want harmony, go and sit quietly.”

His officer brings him a copy of the Rushdie book.

The mullahs smile when they see the green cover. “Subhan Allah! You are our supreme leader. We knew you had a surprise for us. We will pass a fatwa against anyone who does not vote for you.”

Modi whispers in his officer’s ear, “How did they know I am trying to conduct a counter election campaign to get some mileage because everyone is talking about UP?”

“The Deoband must have informed them.”

“This is same group that does not want Rushdie, na? Now see how papers will be full of Gujarat.”

He opens the book and starts reading. The group says, “Wah, wah” in unison.

Modi is confused. “You know what I am reading?”

“Ji haan. You have a sense of humour. You are reading Gulliver’s Travels.”

“What is that?”

“In the madrassa some boys have copies, they told us about how he lands in place where tiny people are and they tie him up.”

“So, why are you smiling? Now where is your Islam? It does not get insulted if book is covered in green?”

“The grass is also green and we walk on it, Khomeini saab.”

“I am not Khomeini,” Modi says disgustedly.

“Uff, mistake. Please continue reading, we are your prajaa, the little people.”

The CM shifts uncomfortably. The thought that he would be tied up by these little people worries him.

“How did these illiterates start reading books?” he asks his assistant.

“Because of Rushdie.”

“Does it mean if I read this book, I will become Muslim?”

“Saab, anything is possible. But don’t say this loudly. They will call it Islamophobia.”

“Take this away.” He returns the copy of The Satanic Verses. “Bring me some other book. These Muslims like stories. Even for peace mission, they want stories. It is always about god.”

The officer gets an idea. “I will get The God of Small Things.”

Modi shakes his head. “What things? These minorities will start thinking their god is the best again.”

“This is not about god.” The officer mentions the writer’s name.

“Arre, the same one who went jogging with comrades in Cuba?”

“Not jogging, only walking. Not Cuba, in India with Maoists.”

“Then send copy to Chidambaram.”

“What do get for you now?”

“Aladdin and the Magic Lamp. Muslims like fairytales. They think by rubbing a lamp, a genie will appear. They forget this is idol worship.”

“I cannot get it, sir.”

“Why? Is it banned?”

“No, your copy has disappeared.”

“How?”

“Sanjiv Bhat took it as evidence that you were plotting against minorities.”

“What happens to my freedom of expression?” This time he asks aloud.

The audience looks wide-eyed.

“Say something.”

“We thought you are reading from the book.”

“No. I want to know. Why can I not express myself however I want?”

The crowd starts to leave. He calls out to them.

A small voice says, “How can ashes answer what freedom the fire must have?”

- - -

Reports say that today, the opening day of the Jaipur Literature Festival, some writers read out excerpts from The Satanic Verses, since Salman Rushdie is not allowed. This personality cult is seen as protest.

Was Rushdie going to read out from the book? A bunch of huddled up elites in their cocoon thinks this is freedom of expression. Would they have permitted Modi to read, had he written a book? Who are they catering to? A small group, and that includes the media, that knows precious little about such expression, that muzzles dissenting voices, that sells its space without ethics for ad revenue, that pushes political agendas, that also pushes religious ideas; this applies to publications in regional languages as well. It is, however, the English-language media that plays god. We have discussed this already in Salman's Atheist Shrine.

These interests sponsor the JLF and grabbing eyeballs is part of the strategy of making it commercially viable. If they have some enthusiastic pseudo martyrs, they will benefit. Incidentally, Taslima Nasreen and Arundhati Roy, both ‘victims’, have not been vocal about this. Taslima had a fight with Rushdie about Twitter followers and his misogyny. Roy has got to guard her Muslim constituency. Everyone is on their own trip.

This reminds me of Team Anna and the singing-dancing brigade exercising their freedom. Rushdie had attended the previous festivals, so cut it out. If it is so important, then I would like to know why the writers have not sent a petition to the government asking it in clear terms to arrest those who issued threats. Do that. Exercise your freedom, instead of sticking out your tongue.

The festival is already overcrowded. If this were a movie, it would have been all about buttered popcorn.

(c) Farzana Versey
- - -

Similar posts:

Why Modi refused spandex tights

Modi’s fast ‘unto’ death: Gujarat’s shame

A Lost Day

I have spent the last 24 hours thinking it was Friday. What is strange about it? What does one do on Fridays that one does not on Thursdays? I don't know. But I feel as though Time has cheated me. It took away one day. It has given me a day that will by default repeat itself. FridayFriday. Like a stuck record. Like velcro. Like a mirror upon a mirror.

I could not even feel the skin of Thursday and am faced with Friday's flesh.

Don't Vie For Priyanka

Priyanka Gandhi is a cheerleader. She may be seen as more assertive, but her role in the Congress Party campaign is just that. She said she would do what brother Rahul tells her. It is completely off to believe that this could mean she might play an important part in active politics. Today, there are several dynasties in India that are asserting themselves forcefully– the Yadavs, the Abdullas, the Scindias, the Pilots, the Pawars, the Dikshits, the Thackerays, the Marans, the Karunanidhis. It does not have to be blood inheritance, though.

Mayawati has inherited the Kanshi Ram mantle and taken over the Ambedkar one. In that sense, her’s is the more solid ground because it uses the heritage of ideology, irrespective of how she has faked the system to her advantage. Jayalilitha’s is similar, for she had the MGR legacy, but from there she was on her own and she is more willing to share space; Mayawati is aggressive. And she is quick to use any card, not only the one up her sleeve, but also from the deck.

The Gandhi children have not been able to sustain, or capitalise on, the heritage link. Is there anything about their conduct that is reminiscent of Nehru, Indira Gandhi or even Rajiv Gandhi? In a way, this would be seen as striking out on their own without any baggage, and it is not a pretty baggage. Nehruvian socialism is obsolete; Indira Gandhi’s tenure had some horrifying episodes; Rajiv Gandhi’s major claim to fame was as reluctant politician. His attempts at ‘modernisation’ were primarily cosmetic, and much credit (and discredit) goes to some high profile people he imported from overseas. Although Sanjay Gandhi was known as the guy with the goons, Rajiv did have his own little group that did the dirty work.

Rahul has to both live up to a name and also stay away from the smears on it. So, what does he do? India is not Amethi, and poverty is not about a farmer’s widow. Do we need to know his agenda on every issue? This is the pressure that only he faces, for it is like being taken off the cradle and asked to complete a marathon. It is not possible. Therefore, the relay race comes in handy. Sonia Gandhi passes the baton to Manmohan Singh who passes it to Rahul who passes it back to our PM and then it goes back to Ms. Gandhi, which is how the chain is sustained. (For more, my piece Dr. Do Little: Rahul Gandhi As Placebo)

Where does Priyanka figure in this? Whether it is her choice or it has been decided at the family dinner it is difficult to say, but she will be a moral support, a benign figure. Unlike many commentators, I do not see the elections in Uttar Pradesh as a test case. In fact, it will confirm that dynasty dynamics have changed and any kind can work for a ‘mai-baap’-oriented junta. The Gandhi family can only claim it as a memory for now. Using Priyanka is just adding gilt to an empty golden throne.

Is she inconsequential? Unlike her grandmother who was dubbed “goongi gudiya" (dumb doll) when she was merely her father’s daughter, and then we saw how her 'talk' turned into a nasty rebuttal, Priyanka is lucid. Her cheerleader act is not of a mute bystander, but a vocal one. She smiles, she shakes hands, she empathises. People feel happy, the locals who gather to watch such shows. She is a bit of Mother India – a complete woman, with husband, children, tending to her home and taking an ostensibly independent stand, even if that means it is not to be a part of politics.

She can at best be seen as the Sonia Gandhi of politics at a later stage.

- - -


Other election titbits.

In Kanpur, it is not clothes and food that are offered as bait. It is bar girls:

Some election candidates here have found a novel way to entice voters. They are organizing sleaze shows where Mumbai bar girls dance to Bollywood tunes in skimpy outfits. Candidates book us for dance shows to lure voters and keep the morale of party workers high, said Chandni (name changed), a bar dancer from Mumbai, who was part of one such show organized by candidate of a political party in Kalyanpur area of the city.

A bit ironical, for a few days ago the Election Commission decided that it would send an all-women team of general observers to Goa. The reason?

EC officials said that in the past, there were complaints against male officers sent on election duty to Goa, these included drinking during office hours and partying in clubs while supposedly being on duty. There were also allegations that in some cases, candidates were bearing the cost of entertainment of officials. In a few cases, the allegations were made by poll candidates. 

EC sources also said that officers had been given so much work that they would not be left with much leisure time. Moreover, women officers are more conscientious, an EC official said. This is the first time that EC is sending an all-women team as observers to any state. However, the poll body has retained male officers in the list of expenditure observers.

Candidates use women; the EC uses women. While the motives of the former are obvious, the EC is putting pressure on these women observers. This is a pre-emptive strategy, it has admitted. Instead of making women into incorruptible devis, it would have been better if the EC sent a mix bag of observers and took action against those who go against rules. This zenana vigilantism only reveals that enjoyment is a male prerogative and women are to be saints.

Ramdev and Digvijay: Leaky Pens

Inked face and assaulter

We are a culture that thrives on condemning. We condemn those who are silent and we also condemn those who make a noise. Such condemnation takes away from any other questions. So, it was not surprising that the Congress, the BJP, the RJD, everybody condemned a man who threw ink on Baba Ramdev. Soon after, some ‘uncondemned’ the act. The theatre of the absurd does not quite go with a Greek tragedy, but Indian democracy can manage such contradictions. We will get there. First, a snapshot:

A man who gate-crashed at Baba Ramdev’s press meet on black money splattered ink on the yoga guru when he refused to answer a question on the 2008 Batla House encounter. 

Kamran Siddiqui, was beaten up by the yoga guru’s supporters immediately after the incident at the Constitution Club where Baba Ramdev was speaking to reporters regarding his plans to campaign against black money in the upcoming Assembly Elections. Siddiqui, who runs a non-governmental organisation called Real Cause was placed under arrest following a medical examination. A case under sections 153 (promoting enmity among communities) and 355 (criminal assault) of Indian Penal Code has been registered against him, a senior police official said. A first information report has been registered against him at the Parliament Street police station. If convicted, he may be jailed for up to two years.

When Baba said that the Batla House encounter was not fake, Kamran threw ink on him. Siddiqui is a petitioner in the Batla House encounter case.

A few points:

• If Baba Ramdev is discussing politics, stop calling him a yoga guru in the context of his speeches.
• A bit strange that nobody had heard about Kamran Siddiqui even though he is a petitioner in the case. Is it difficult to find that out?
• Even more strange is that he asked this question to Baba Ramdev, and the latter chose to answer it. On what basis? 
• Why has he been arrested for promoting enmity among communities? This sort of pigeonholing makes it into a communal issue. Batla House is not the whole of India.

Arrest anyone who indulges in this sort of behaviour, but is it so unusual? Don’t our MPs throw slippers at each other inside Parliament? What about heads of educational and medical institutions whose faces are blackened?

What about scheduled caste/female victims who are paraded with their faces smeared because of some ‘honour’? Why do we not condemn those acts with equal ferocity?

Typically, Baba Ramdev has become a martyr:

Media reports quoted Baba Ramdev as saying that he was not deterred by such attacks and would continue his campaign against corruption with full force. I spoke about bringing back black money to the country and giving it to the nation. I spoke about eradicating corruption. I spoke about turning a loot-tantra to a real loktantra (democracy). And in return, as a prize, this is what I have got. I don’t mind receiving black ink. By throwing ink on someone, one cannot malign someone’s character, he said.

You talk about a vague show-me-the-money, and everything else gets washed off. The report said that Baba Ramdev said that it was not an encounter and that led to the ink throwing.

This is not an attempt to blacken the face of Swami Ramdev. This is an attempt to blacken democracy, Hazare said in a statement.

Has Anna Hazare never seen such blackened faces before? Much as I do not relish the idea of such juvenile shoe-ink throwing, let us remind Mr. Hazare that his movement is a protest that has attempted to speak on behalf of the population without its consent. He should not be talking about democracy. If democracy is about protest, then black or blue ink should not be of concern. Hazare and his team should be finding out what it is that angers certain people. He has been holding the flag for such propagandised anger for a while now.

We have entered absurd territory, and the wilting cherry on a leftover cake is this:

Congress leader Digvijay Singh said the incident was a well-orchestrated conspiracy by RSS and the NGO activist who did it was anti-Congress and had links with BJP.

There have been occasions when such orchestrated attempts were made, by every political party. I do not understand how it can be deemed anti-Congress when the Congress government had said the encounter was not fake. (Unless, Ramdev has joined forces with the Congress Party!) Or, is this a strategy similar to the one he is accusing the RSS of – outsourcing, with the frontman speaking one version while the high command maintains its larger role?

The Batla House case was already politicised. The encounter had several loose ends that I mentioned in Shooting Terrorists and Other Stories: It was over within 30 minutes. 25 shots were fired by the cops; eight by the terrorists. Were these dreaded men so naïve as to open the door to a ‘salesman’, sub-inspector Dharmendra. What was he trying to sell? Did they buy anything? Did they not notice him looking at them carefully? Did all the “suspicious characters” stand at the door to welcome him?

Now Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav has spoken out clearly:

"Congress is not serious on the issues pertaining to Muslims and treats them only as a vote bank. That is why when assembly polls are underway, the issue of Batla House encounter has been raised by party leader Digvijay Singh, who termed it as fake. Why has this issue been raised by him now? Congress should either sack him or take action against PM and Home minister, who feel that the encounter was not fake...This is just a political gimmick to befool Muslims, who are being treated as a vote bank.”

Do the political parties realise that for the majority of Muslims, all this produces a huge yawn? You think someone in Bhiwandi (a communally sensitive area in Mumbai) cares or even knows what Batla House is? Or are the ordinary Muslims suddenly expected to possess knowledge about all that happens with, to and by their community?

It disturbs me that one episode of ink-throwing has brought another case to the fore. And it is back to the chain reaction of condemn this and condemn that. Don’t. Each player is an actor here. If Siddiqui was sponsored by the RSS, and Digvijay Singh has been sponsored by his own party, with the satellite players Anna and the rest forming the chorus, then the crowded stage is bound to fall.

Nothing new. We invariably get the dark pits we deserve. If only we saved that ink and wrote our own fate.

(c) Farzana Versey

- - -

Image: Mumbai Mirror

History Through Her Lens

Homai Vyarawalla was always described as the “first lady photographer”, and the thought of someone tiptoeing with a little camera, gently clicking flowers and princesses came to mind. But, when we place her in those historical times, then being a lady was about being many things. And she was.

There is a lot written about her, her photographs of leaders. It is like tracing a period without the need for any other crutch.

These two pictures of Jawaharlal Nehru exemplify this.

1. There is deadpan humour in this one, going where you are not supposed to go. Was there a political message?

2. Here, the image is reminiscent of Michaelangelo. Nehru is releasing the pigeon, but the sky is overcast. One does not know whether Nehru is letting go or wanting to hold on to it, or perhaps reach the sky. It comes across as a pensive, yet optimistic portrait. I’d say it captures the persona of the man and the politician.

And of course among the many others; this is how an Independence Day dance used to be like:

My fascination is with the way she treated her subjects. There is warmth and yet no obsequiousness. She seemed to be part of what was happening, but as a spectator. The black and white images, unfailingly adding a mystique, gave away quite a bit. It seems like a contradiction. It is not. The enigma was in the telling.

- - -

Check out more images curated by NGMA

Wayward thoughts: Blue Tooth, Water Song

I cannot swim. I cannot even drown. There is wood in me from the tree of life. It keeps me afloat. I ingest the tears of the ocean. I can listen to it even as my ears get blocked. Shut out the sounds. There must not be so much moaning. Water flows, they say. I still do not know where. It crashes against the shore.

I cannot hear it. My ears, too, are filled with tears.

- - -

Since I cannot swim, a pool-friendly bluetooth device would be pretty useless. But, I was quite enticed by the idea. All ideas entice me, especially if they are not workable.

It's called the Splash 100 and comes from Behringer, a German pro-audio company, which is surprising considering it will retail for a mere $99 when it comes out later this year. It will have a 230-foot range and deliver 3.5 hours of sound from its rechargeable battery.

Imagine one is in the pool and instead of hearing our splashes, we are tuned into some music; we are blocking out the pleasure of the moment. For a 230-foot range, we forget what is right there.

I suppose this is what it is about. To connect with an ocean beyond the one we flow in, for ultimately we crash against the shore where the noises give our words meaning, or we crash into the water-bed. The signal is never weak there. I can hear the algae sing.

Sunday ka Funda

"mez se jab meri tasweer hataai hogi

har taraf mujhko tadapta hua paaya hoga"

(My pictures taken off the shelf

Would have spread my pain everywhere)

War is not pretty. It is not desirable. It's Army Day in India today. 'Haqeeqat' remains one of the best films on the subject. It tackles the inner pain and not just outer bruises.

Sometimes, we have to forget because we are helpless...in any 'war'

Hoke majboor mujhe usney bhulaya hoga

Film: Haqeeqat

Music: Madan Mohan

Lyrics: Kaifi Azmi

Singers: Mohamad Rafi, Talat Mahmood, Bhupinder, Manna De

Director: Chetan Anand

How to be an expert on Pakistan

Unlike armchair critics, I have become a couch potato expert on Pakistan. During my chocolate break (Allah be praised) when the Islamic moon shone, I saw that our neighbour's hopes rest on Mick Jagger without the lips. Imran khan has begun to resemble the Rolling Stones iconic singer.

CNN-IBN got together a panel that was at pains to discuss what is happening on the ground. Given that our cricket team is a bit under the weather, I was afraid the discussion would change course.

But that was impossible. Hamid Mir was there. And when Hamid Mir is anywhere you only think of Pakistan the way you see flies at the halwai's.

He said something very important, though: Asif Ali Zardari will stand with a gun. You want the context? Does it matter that Zardari is not known to willingly give up anything? So, Hamid Mir is using Zardari's gun to tell us that this is not 1999, when Pervez Musharraf came to power, and therfore army rule is out.

The media does not want it. Yes, he said it. And we call ourselves a democracy. If Hamid Mir speaks on behalf of the media, the judiciary, the government, that too from the ground, then there is no chance in hell that the army can come to power.

Imran Khan said the country was ruled by crooks, and made it clear that he will have nothing to do with Musharraf. There were reports that there might be an alliance, but Khan saab blamed it on his diplomatic colleague.

Here it is: Army Chief Ashfaq Kayani meets Zardari. Kayani meets PM Yousuf Raza Gilani. Zardari criticises Gilani. Kayani maintains stoic distance. Calm.

Imran Khan is waiting and watching. Best to keep himself away for now when Hamid Mir says army cannot behave like 1999; Musharraf is 1999. Imran said he comes with baggage. He believes people want something new. Like a great chartbuster.

My 'expert' opinion. If you get an Indian politician, a Pakistani politician, the mandatory gora covering the subcontinent, and a political commentator, all haveli waalas, to debate the state of the country then you will know as much about the ground as Neil Armstrong from the moon.

Pakistan does not need a coup. The army rules when it wants. 1999 or not. It elects governments that are potted cacti. And the new trend is jalsas where they show there are lots of people in the street. There will be elections because it is elementary, dear Watson. The army will have its boots on.

And Mick Jagger will remain a rolling stone.