Earlier this month (May ’06), the Indian High Commissioner to UK, H.E. Kamalesh Sharma inaugurated an exhibition of paintings by MF Husain in London and remarked that the painter was the greatest modern Indian artist [1].
Although I do not personally understand Husain’s art, I can imagine that he has some admirers. But to call this artist – who has over the years (for more than 2 decades) systematically attempted to denigrate a multitude of Hindu deities, symbols and images � as the "greatest modern Indian artist" is a little over the top.
This is the same painter against whom a notice has been issued by the High Court in Mumbai, against whom a case is pending in Indore and whose paintings are the subject of a Law Ministry advisory which is so detailed that state governments can (if they so wish) treat it as a complaint and take action against Husain [2].
But then why blame the High Commissioner when our entire intelligentsia considers Husain’s work as high-quality art and something to be proud of?
When I raised the issue of Husain’s apparent contempt for the feelings and sensitivities of Hindus in the practise of his "art" [3] with some "liberal" friends, the comments I got were similar and usually along the lines of:
"Hindus have become very intolerant in the recent past�"
"Nude gods and goddesses have been routinely depicted in Indian art and architecture e.g. Khajuraho" and
Hindu reaction is partly because of the controversy surrounding the Danish cartoons
We have to defend an artists’ freedom to depict the world (and express it) the way he/she sees it
Let us analyze these points one-by-one.
The first argument, viz. "Hindus have become very intolerant in the recent past�" is in the best traditions of the pseudo-liberal intelligentsia that dominate our national media. To these commentators, no insult is provocation enough and since the essence of Hinduism is "tolerance", we should forgive (and forget) such insults � because hasn’t Hinduism survived many such onslaughts in the past?
Oddly, none of these commentators talk about the rising "intolerance" around us (witness the Danish cartoon controversy) and none of them have any alternative suggestions for how else to deal with such gratuitous acts of contempt. For them, the solution is simple � tolerate and forget.
The second line of defense appears slightly more sophisticated but is equally specious. Hindu Gods and Goddesses have not routinely been painted in the nude in the past. The Khajuraho sculptures that these sophists refer to are not those of Gods and Goddesses but of courtiers, courtesans, royals and ordinary mortals.
The third point is really not a counter-point at all but is a weak attempt at explaining away the reaction to Husain’s art as an "aberration" on the part of the "tolerant" Hindu who has been led astray because of the rising tide of intolerance around him/her.
Note the subtle connection between points 1 and 3 � both make a virtue of "tolerance" and both elevate it to the "essence" of Hinduism. Whether Hindus have become "more" intolerant than before or not is open to debate but one must bear in mind that we do not live in a vacuum and what we see around us, does affect us.
Of course, Shri Husain is not unaware of these developments and earlier this year, he apologised for painting "Bharatmata" in the nude and also promised the painting from a charity auction (but stopped short of saying that he will destroy it) [4]
As regards the fourth point regarding "artistic freedom", I would simply reproduce an excerpt from "Encirclement From Within" by N S Rajaram in Mar ’03 [5]
"Here is another example. When some Hindu groups objected to M.F. Husain for painting Hindu goddesses in the nude, the secular intellectuals including the media defended his ‘artistic freedom’ do as he wished. But in 2002, a newspaper office in Bangalore was vandalized by a Muslim mob for publishing a perfectly innocent cartoon of Prophet Muhammad in its children’s section. And the newspaper apologized to the attackers. Imagine the victim apologizing to the assailants! Other papers in Bangalore�and at other places�have also apologized on similar occasions. So ‘artistic freedom’ means freedom to offend Hindu sensibilities only!"
The most amazing thing is that Husain has been doing the "I am sorry, I was wrong" act for more than ten years � while continuing to add to his repertoire of nude images and paintings.
In Jan’97 (yes, that is more than 9 years ago), Husain was interrogated by the police in connection with the controversy over his nude painting of Goddess Saraswati. Earlier in ’96, the Mumbai city branch of CID had actually registered cases against Shri Husain under Section 295 A and 153 A of the Indian Penal Code. The charge was that Shri Husain had outraged religious feelings and hurt public sensitivities.
And what did Husain do? He issued a written statement denying any "intention" to hurt religious feelings (of course) and apologised if he had hurt anyone’s sentiments � "Oops, I am sorry, I was wrong". Fast forward to Feb 2006 � and the BBC online story, "Indian painter sorry for nude art" – D�j� vu, anyone?
Now, as "tolerant" and "forgiving" Hindus, we will of course forget this apology too and move on � until the next affront hits us in the face � and there will another round of apologies, protests and withdrawals. Until then, please read a brilliant and biting piece on Shri Husain by RBL Nigam, " MF Husain: The Hindu Hater [6]" (May 13 ’06)�and to really make a difference, join the protest online at http://www.sanatan.org/hussaincampaign/
