Legend Indian Muslim artist doesnt trust India

[Al-zakir]

And Islam is all about cross borer terrorism, killing innocent people huh?
Shame on you. Atleast EjazR's proved that he's an Indian and a true Muslim.

What is the diffent between my post and ejazR? He is saying the same with diffrent twist. In either case, This guy hussain is not a good muslim since he paint some hindu goddess.

Now, your attcking comment toward me, make you an ignorant terrorist.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

Hussain left India in a huff because, IIRC, he was threatened by right wing elements, and NOT the state.

I do not know if these threats were serious, or made by publicity seeking idiots.

He should have the right to paint anything he wants; the sign of a mature society is the ability to accept criticism, and even abuse, without resorting to violence. It was a pity he left, but the government did not ask him to.

As for Hussain himself, those supporting the man from a Muslim perspective don't know his 'style' or his 'lifestyle'.

They would send the devout screaming.

 

[Balance]

Actually you do have the right to that freedom of expression. Just because it isn't acceptable in your society, it doesn't mean it is right. Sanity is not based on numbers.

This is the problem when you put religion on a pedastal. Freedom of expression shall not be limited just because some pious people are offended. If people are offended, they can disagree and protest, not start threatening people with death. This is the difference between an open and civilized country, and one that is insecure and restricts people for pleasing religion.

Why should M.F. Hussain apologize? Because some people disagree with him? Next you will say that religion shall not be criticized even if it is the problem (as it is in so many cases).

That was one of the most insensitive posts I ever went through on this forum.
As Mr M F Hussain picked a Hindu Goddess as a 'subject' of his painting, there's no harm in assuming that he must be knowing what he is painting and what can be the effects.
If he was not clear about his information, he could have easily asked any of his many Hindu fans. They would had been more than happy to tell Mr Hussain that "Saraswati" or "Sharada" is a Goddess of knowledge and wisdom.
I can't imagine what sort of humans can name such acts as "freedom of expression". Don't you see, such comments bring disgrace to your own community?

@ All the freedom of expression lovers here-
Freedom of expression only applies where someone's valid interest is at stake and no innocent gets hurt by your expression.

 

[Balance]

You assumed I held a different position on the Muhammad cartoons. I hold the same position for any religion, whether it is Islam, Christianity, Judaism

No, that doesn't make you look better. Cartoon is a different thing. No one in India objected ever to that. Almost all the newspapers are flooding with God Ganesha's cartoons during "Ganesh Festival". There are number of animated films for children showing humorous fantasized acts of Gods to teach children values.
But painting a Goddess in nude? Freedom of expression stretched too far.

 

[Balance]

Well I guess he doesn't agree with the limits on freedom of expression like others do, and he has every right to believe that. He has the right to paint a hindu goddess any way he wants, he is free to do that. The problem is with bigots who feel that it is everyones duty to respect them.



Sure it would have been the same whether he had portray some other religion like this, but he has the freedom to do so. If it offends people, then they shall stay offended instead of becoming violent. In a civilized society people can agree to disagree without becoming violent

Good to know that you are not condoning the activities of the violent groups

Some people warned me about conditions on this forum. I guess they were right.

JUST ONE QUESTION TO ALL THE "FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION LAWYERS" HERE -

WHY THE HELL ISLAM DOES NOT ALLOW NUDITY IN ANY FORM? PORNOGRAPHY IS A WAY GOOD TASTE OF EXPRESSION THAN PAINTING ANY RELIGION'S DEITIES NUDE.

I'll be interested in the response of Jana to the above question, too.

 

[Balance]

Well apparently he wasn't safe so he had to leave. You think it was a mistake for him to do that, but he might not feel that way. So what to do? Force him to apologize or kill him? Tell me something, why does he HAVE to respect the tender sentiments of people?

This reminds me of some Bollywood movies that were made on Sikhs. I believe there was a controversy with SIK and some other movie, Dil Bole Hadippa, I believe. Again the sentiments of Sikhs were hurt. It seems like you have to do everything with a view of not hurting 'religious sentiments' So much for freedom of expression.

Well, he has to respect others' sentiments because others respect his.

Now just look at the picture in different light.
What the people has done wrong with Mr Hussain?
Did they cut his hand? - No.
Did they burn his house? - No.
Did they beat him? - No.
Did they hurt anyone from his family? - No.

They just expressed their feelings. So, what's the fuss all about? Shouldn't he just 'agree to disagree', or at max, stay offended?

Amaze me with your clear logic and modern thoughts.

Talking about the later part, it never goes unquestioned. If the matter reaches court, the release of the film is stopped, or the director is ordered to remove the disputed part.

 

[SecularHumanist]

do you feel the same way about the dutch guy who drew cartoon of the prophet ???????????? guess there were loads of people busy with offering a reward for his beheading?????

do you think that there should be no limit to freedom of expression....so that would mean that you have no problems for all the anti -pakistani stuff to be posted on this forum??????? then please
recomend the moderators to stop moderating>>>>>

I have already answered that earlier in the thread, look for it. Sure freedom of expression shall be allowed. There are many Taliban sympathizers on this forum that post anti-Pakistan stuff. Have u not read that?

 

[SecularHumanist]

That was one of the most insensitive posts I ever went through on this forum.
As Mr M F Hussain picked a Hindu Goddess as a 'subject' of his painting, there's no harm in assuming that he must be knowing what he is painting and what can be the effects.
If he was not clear about his information, he could have easily asked any of his many Hindu fans. They would had been more than happy to tell Mr Hussain that "Saraswati" or "Sharada" is a Goddess of knowledge and wisdom.
I can't imagine what sort of humans can name such acts as "freedom of expression". Don't you see, such comments bring disgrace to your own community?

@ All the freedom of expression lovers here-
Freedom of expression only applies where someone's valid interest is at stake and no innocent gets hurt by your expression.

Because you are looking at the issue from the lenses of your religious righteousness. Actually no I don't see what is wrong with that. The way you have understood freedom of expression, it seems the freedom of expression exists as long as it is second to religion. I never cared for religious irrationalities and I bet neither does M.F Hussain

 

[SecularHumanist]

Well, he has to respect others' sentiments because others respect his.

Now just look at the picture in different light.
What the people has done wrong with Mr Hussain?
Did they cut his hand? - No.
Did they burn his house? - No.
Did they beat him? - No.
Did they hurt anyone from his family? - No.

They just expressed their feelings. So, what's the fuss all about? Shouldn't he just 'agree to disagree', or at max, stay offended?

Amaze me with your clear logic and modern thoughts.

Talking about the later part, it never goes unquestioned. If the matter reaches court, the release of the film is stopped, or the director is ordered to remove the disputed part.

No, they ONLY threatened to kill him if he stepped on Indian soil. In fact, they probably would have if he didn't leave the country, hardly called 'expressing their feelings.'

With views like yours, we can say that freedom of expression does not exist because it can impinge upon religious sentiments. In addition, the religious pressure means that creativity is also limited in a supposed secular country.

 

[kumar_V1.0]

Protect me? They can’t even protect my art: M F Husain


Anubha Sawhney Joshi & Himanshi Dhawan, TNN 30 October 2009, 01:27am IST
|

MUMBAI/DELHI: The government might be finally moving to make things easier for India's renowned painter M F Husain to return to his homeland after four years of exile, but the 94-year-old artist is hardly impressed. Nor is he taking seriously the home ministry's efforts to club three pending cases against him so as to ensure their speedy disposal.

``What are they talking about?'' asked Husain in a telephonic conversation with TOI from Dubai. ``The India Art Summit held in August this year did not feature a single work by me. The reason given was that they could not afford to take the `risk'. How will they protect me if they cannot protect my work? How can I trust them?'' (Read full interview in TOI-Crest this Saturday.)

The artist feels that it's not just a question of legal cases against him. That did not force him to leave India. What caused his exile were the threats of physical harm to him by saffron groups. He wondered what would happen to him if he actually returned. ``They can, of course, promise me a bullet-proof car and the works. But, then, did Indira Gandhi or Rajiv Gandhi have any less security?''


On its part, the home ministry plans to approach the Supreme Court and request it club the three cases pending in Delhi, Gujarat and Maharashtra ^ and move for their early disposal. Said Husain's lawyer Akhil Sibal: ``Any positive step by the government is welcome. But we would also like to see a clear message that the government would do everything within the law to prevent his harassment.''

Husain said his case was not unique: ``From Galileo to Pablo Neruda, creativity has been exiled many times. I am not the first one.'' Still, the artist said he was deeply hurt by the way ``a few'' have treated him. ``It's a tremendous hurt. I'm Indian. Why should I beg these people to call me back to my country?''


M F Husain

Protect me? They can?t even protect my art: M F Husain - India - The Times of India

Atleast we dont have and need blashphem laws, Govt is trying to make it easier for him.

What he has dome for some time is highly objectionable to people of hindu faith. He is no doubt one of worlds best artists but he should restrain dealing with other religious deities.

Jana remember some dannish cartoon..

 

[MilesTogo]

Just curious - Do we have a similar thread, defending Abdus Salam?

 

[Balance]

No, they ONLY threatened to kill him if he stepped on Indian soil. In fact, they probably would have if he didn't leave the country, hardly called 'expressing their feelings.'

With views like yours, we can say that freedom of expression does not exist because it can impinge upon religious sentiments. In addition, the religious pressure means that creativity is also limited in a supposed secular country.

Hold on.
Now who's deciding what the freedom of expression is?
If I can't decide what the freedom of expression is, how can you? Binding it in your own limits may make it look like it is boundless to you, not to others.
There has to be a balance in everything. Stretch it too far, and a moment will come when it breaks. This equilibrium is the main reason behind the stability of India. Mahatma Gandhi treated unnecessarily hurting the sentiments of other person as violence. Thank God I live in India.

PS: I'm still waiting for your response on "nudity prohibited in Islam" issue. (post #95)

 

[RiazHaq]

This week is the 25th anniversary of the Sikh carnage in India in 1984.

Indira's Sikh assassins met swift justice, but the murderers of 3,870 innocent Sikhs still roam free a quarter of a century later. In addition to the Sikh pogrom, the year 1984 also saw a deadly gas leak in a factory owned by Union Carbide in Bhopal that killed over 2,000 people and left permanent injuries for many more for life.

In reaction to the Sikh killings in Delhi and other places, Indira's successor and son Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi declared at a massive rally in the capital that "once a mighty tree falls, it is only natural that the earth around it shakes".

One of the worst massacres took place in two narrow alleys in India's capital New Delhi's poor Trilokpuri colony where some 350 Sikhs, including women and children, were casually butchered over 72 hours, according to media reports.

The charred and hacked remains of the hundreds of dead in Trilokpuri's Block 32 on the smoky and dank evening of 2 November 1984 were stark testimony to the unimpeded and seemingly endless massacre, according to the BBC.

The history repeated itself in Gujarat in 2002, only the pretext and the victims were different this time.

Haq's Musings: Sikhs Remember Victims of 1984 Massacre

Haq's Musings: The 21st Century Challenges of Resurgent India

 

[vsdoc]

^^^ Troll alert. You are ranting in the wrong thread.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Balance]

This week is the 25th anniversary of the Sikh carnage in India in 1984.

Indira's Sikh assassins met swift justice, but the murderers of 3,870 innocent Sikhs still roam free a quarter of a century later. In addition to the Sikh pogrom, the year 1984 also saw a deadly gas leak in a factory owned by Union Carbide in Bhopal that killed over 2,000 people and left permanent injuries for many more for life.

In reaction to the Sikh killings in Delhi and other places, Indira's successor and son Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi declared at a massive rally in the capital that "once a mighty tree falls, it is only natural that the earth around it shakes".

One of the worst massacres took place in two narrow alleys in India's capital New Delhi's poor Trilokpuri colony where some 350 Sikhs, including women and children, were casually butchered over 72 hours, according to media reports.

The charred and hacked remains of the hundreds of dead in Trilokpuri's Block 32 on the smoky and dank evening of 2 November 1984 were stark testimony to the unimpeded and seemingly endless massacre, according to the BBC.

The history repeated itself in Gujarat in 2002, only the pretext and the victims were different this time.

Haq's Musings: Sikhs Remember Victims of 1984 Massacre

Haq's Musings: The 21st Century Challenges of Resurgent India

What the hell this has to do with M F Hussain?
By the way, nice try to dig out past.
Mahatma Gandhi was killed by a Brahmin person. After that, a massacre of Brahmins followed. This was even worse because of two reasons-
1. Brahmins were never known for their fighting abilities (obviously it has exceptions, but I'm talking about the community as a whole)
2. Brahmins are already very less in number (some 3-4%), making it useless even if they got united against the mob.
Now, I'm a Brahmin and I don't go crying around yelling "our killers are still roaming free".
These things are unfortunate and done mostly by mindless mob. But artists are supposedly elite members of society and more sensitivity is expected from them.