Friday, May 05, 2006

MF Husain and nude paintings


Now, the Home Ministry of India has ‘alerted police to take appropriate action’ against MF Husain for his controversial Paintings. Earlier, the Bombay High Court asked him ‘to file an affidavit in response to criminal action against him’ for his nude paintings of Hindu gods and goddesses.

What is with Artists and nude paintings? Why do most artists (including me) paint nudes?

For most artists nudity doesn’t necessarily represent obscenity unlike most common people. Artists tend to depict nature, people or the things that they see in various forms- like shedding it to bare, raw or simple forms, or seeing it in the most bizarre forms, or as abstract and unrealistic as possible. And the freedom for artistic expression is essential for such artists to thrive. Sometimes art can be offensive to some people, like some paintings, or certain books, or certain music albums, in which case they are NOT open to everyone but only to those who are ready to experience it. I put a picture of MF Husain Painting on the top to show case how an artist depicts his experiences. The picture above is that of MF Husain’s Durga (the goddess) and if it were to be nude, you can imagine how offensive it could be :)

Depicting a man or a woman in nude is one of the biggest challenges for an artist. And many artists do paint nudes one time or the other. Sometimes they may cover the private parts with a fig leaf or a small piece of flying cloth, but nevertheless, they are trying to capture human in nudity.

Is nudity a perversion of an artist?

Yes and No. Perversion comes from making every one, a king, a farmer, an angel, a laborer, a goddess, all equal by reducing them to their barest and truest form with no ornament, no garment or a man-made status symbol.

Artists in India have sculpted and painted all our gods and goddesses in nude, and sometimes exaggerated certain features by depicting prominent hips and breasts on a woman. This exaggeration is somewhat similar to a caricature, to highlight certain aspects, in this case sexual symbols. Almost all Indian temples of ancient times have nude figurines all over the place. It looks like our ancestors were either perverse or extremely liberal in their thought process. Whatever may have been that reason, we seem to have lost that reason and have become very conservative and orthodox in the recent past- Is it because of Muslim and British Rule? Or is it because the figurines and pictures of gods and goddesses were now entering common household instead of being restricted to temples? Whatever may be the reason for such a change in our outlook towards our goddesses, we have definitely turned intolerant. While we may tend to think that it is against our tradition and religion to depict a goddess nude, one look at ancient temples would reveal that it is exactly the opposite.

When does the ‘artistic freedom’ stop and ‘respecting other people’s sensitivities’ kick in?

While an artist should have his creative freedom, he is not free to do anything he/she wants. What if he wants to cut the body parts of a human to adorn his canvas? That involves hurting or mutilating another human and crosses the boundaries of artistic freedom and starts being trampling on other people’s rights (and bodies). Can I play offensive music loud in a street? I would then be causing inconvenience to others, and I do not have freedom to do that. Can I play the same offensive music in my headphones? Of course Yes, and if someone stops me from listening then they are trampling on my rights.

Can I put a nude poster on a huge billboard? If the society allows it, I can (like in Europe) and if the society feels offended (like in India), we should take it out. Can an artist paint nude figurine of anyone including a goddess? Of course he can! But can he showcase it in a public place? Of course not- if it offends certain sections of people. But can he put it in his place? Of course yes, and can he invite his friends and patrons to come in and look at it? Of course yes. There is no one forcing anyone to see it without one’s consent.

So, why should it bother anyone if MF Husain paints nude paintings of Mother India and Durga and showcase it in an art gallery which is restricted to only those who want to look at it? This is where the intolerant, orthodox and conservative Indian masses kick in. The common man, who has no idea of what culture or heritage he once had, gets to say what an artist can do. And they go about protesting and taking it to court. And the court agrees to uphold such intolerant concerns.

When does 'getting offended' translate into 'being intolerant'?

We are not able to publish books on how Hindus meted cruel treatment to Sikhs after Indira Gandhi’s assassination, we are unable to uphold woman’s rights when she is divorced and forsaken by a Muslim Husband, and now we are unable to uphold artistic freedom that was always a part of this country’s history. The intolerance has reached gigantic proportions affecting the very fabric of our democracy and the values it promised to uphold.

People get offended by almost everything in the name of ‘Indian culture’. While our ancestors enjoyed and practiced Kama Sutra and depicted it in sculptures where gods and goddess perform various sexual positions in abandon and freedom, our generation looks at everything sexual as obscene. While most of the new songs on MTV and VH1 are quite vulgar, that seems to be OK, but nudity is a strict no-no. While young girls in India wear t-shirts with messages that are downright obscene, any show of skin is a strict no-no. It’s very confusing sometimes. Can’t actually say what offends us and what doesn’t. And offended people feel they have a right to come to my home and change the way I live at my home, if possible resorting to ransacking and pillaging my home.

Or is MF Husain targeted because he is a Muslim depicting a Hindu goddess in nude? Its like saying, ‘we can have these nude figures in our temples, because they are Hindu temples, but how come, you being a Muslim dare to paint our goddesses nude’? I see a great deal of 'progressive thinking' taking place within Hindus who are now emulating their brother nations like Iran by announcing Rs. 51 Crore prize money to anyone who beheads MF Husain. "If Afghans, Iranians and Arabians are intolerant, you haven't seen much, just give us some more time and you will see what we can come up with!"

Or is it because Muslims get their fun and frolic while relieving the frustration protesting the Cartoons of Prophet while Hindus don’t get any fun? Hindus need those occasional kicks too.

34 comments:

  1. A Very good post and sound arguments. I agree absolutely creative expression be it bar dancing or painting nudes cannot be banned just because certain people find it offensive. There is something called freedom of choice if you don't like it don't go see it.
    The line about our ancestors being extremely liberal or perverted was killer.
    The problem with our country is while too much importance is given to community rights little premium is put on individual rights. We are still stuck in the majority knows best mindset. Also people need to understand that nudity is not obscenity. these are subjective ways of looking at things and should be left at that. Compulsive generalisation is stupid and arbitary. Finally we agree somewhere :-)thanks for all your comments on my blog have responded

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous you are a bloody blood baiting communalist

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree that it is a good post. However, we should understand that society evolves. What is acceptable in earlier generations need not be acceptable in todays times and it may be different tomorrow.

    By using the example of nude sculptures in our temples the so-called liberals are doing a great injustice. It may have been agreerable then, so what?? Maybe during those times, walking around naked would not have been such a bad thing and against the law. however, now it is.

    We know that in todays world hardly anything can be kept private especially when it involves someone high profile like MF Hussain. If he wants to keep the nude paintings private. By all means he can do that and keep it in his folder. But by putting it in art gallery and inviting his friends and journalists he has made it public and hence very offensive.

    Though I agree that what MF hussain did was morally reprehensible, I definitely do not condone or encourage attacks on him/ his gallery/paintings etc. We can express our displeasure in a much more mature fashion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree that it is a good post. However, we should understand that society evolves. What is acceptable in earlier generations need not be acceptable in todays times and it may be different tomorrow.

    By using the example of nude sculptures in our temples the so-called liberals are doing a great injustice. It may have been agreerable then, so what?? Maybe during those times, walking around naked would not have been such a bad thing and against the law. however, now it is.

    We know that in todays world hardly anything can be kept private especially when it involves someone high profile like MF Hussain. If he wants to keep the nude paintings private. By all means he can do that and keep it in his folder. But by putting it in art gallery and inviting his friends and journalists he has made it public and hence very offensive.

    Though I agree that what MF hussain did was morally reprehensible, I definitely do not condone or encourage attacks on him/ his gallery/paintings etc. We can express our displeasure in a much more mature fashion.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I disagree with anyone offerring 51 crores ( or even 51paise ) for any extra judicial killing. But I cant get myself to agree with MF hussain's idea of artistic freedom.
    Compare this: MF hussain makes a film with quranic verses included ( no obscenity) , and simply withdraws the film when islamists protest. But MF Hussain depicts nudity and bestiality with the whole nations revered figures and when people protest he claims artistic freedom
    Can someone question Hussain the reason for his preferences or is it just called taking advantage of tolerance

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kali is always nude, she is the goddess that reflects femenine energy, she is the ultimate source of energy, painting her nude is nothing wrong but a true reflection of the goddess. She remain pure and chaste as ever, it's people's dirty mind that sees nudity as dirty.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dear Sujai,

    I personally feel that religion should never be confused with anything. Also I understand your point of not questioning the nudity in our society but in Hussain's paintings. But I would like to ask here, in case you have seen is paintings other than the controversial ones as well. For example he's painted Fatimah, prophet Mohammed's dughter fully covered, his own daughter & mother fully covered, Mother Teresa Fully clothed, a well clothed Muslim lady, His painting of a well clad Muslim King & a naked Hindu Brahmin is well available on internet.Also he's shown Hitler naked in one of his paintings. On top of it all he's said in his interview once that he hates Hitler. Now in't it a well derived conclusion that he paints those people nude whom he hates or wants to portray his hatred.

    This is so sad a scene when, just because of people like him there is a vast rift created on account of religious bias. Doesn't really suit an artist of his stature.

    And by the way, if he hates Hindus that much that he can't keep his brush off to paint them nude all the time, why can't he better come out with tis openly. No point doing something, meaning something & at the end justifying something....

    Hope you too & all those who read this get my point.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Pooja:
    I understand what you are saying. But I still believe and feel that we need not interpret the intentions of the artist.

    Looking at Kajuraho temples, should we interpret the true intentions of the people who sculpted those erotic images. Were they thinking of goddesses of other tribes, or other's wives, someone's sister, etc? Should we be bothered if they were quite conservative in their true lives, where they put their wives behind veils while they sculpted erotic images? Should we look for such contradictions from the minds of the artist?

    You write:
    Now in't it a well derived conclusion that he paints those people nude whom he hates or wants to portray his hatred.

    I don't think I can conclude the same from the examples you have given me. I don't think his painting nudes and his hatred for them are correlated.

    You write:
    And by the way, if he hates Hindus that much that he can't keep his brush off to paint them nude all the time, why can't he better come out with tis openly.

    I don't think he hates Hindus that much- and I don't think it is reflected from the fact that he paints them nude. I don't see a correlation between his painting nudes and his hatred.

    I am not sure if you reason that from one example of Hitler's paintings. He even painted Mother India nude. Do you reason then that he hates India too?

    Sujai

    ReplyDelete
  9. I feel this is a very good argument, i will give it to you. Indian Culture always had Kings going to Veysyas and all other prostitutes for sex. it is not only Kings but everyone who needed sex went to prostitutes.

    Now India is a Democratic Country.

    Let us see it in a democratic way. What does democracy mean? You can do what ever you want to do with out disturbing the other person. I dont know where the person is disturbing you if he is painting some one nude in his home. Did he call you and made you sit naked in front of him forcefully or did he ever ask you to see his paintings, why the hell you are bothered. if you can really stop and want to stop something bad, go to the roads, find the children who are working or find those people who are spitting on roads and find people teasing girls and so on, stop the anti social elements not artist who has done no mistake but putting his taughts in to a picture. There are many unwanted things in the country than nude images on screen and other things which are just a mere personal life issues. It is time to become open on these issues. i dont mind getting the pleasure of sex from some other if i dont get it from my wife. come on man, i have a single life and it is a very enjoyable thing in the life. same goes with women, it is their right to get a good sex life. Become open, There are much bigger problems to India than these silly things. You talk about culture, which you yourself dont know exactly where it came from. Can you show any photo copies or proofs that people cannot have extra martial affairs or should not be painted nude and kind of things in our epics or vedas. USE you brains than stupid beliefs, it will bring pleasure to your life and others life.

    ReplyDelete
  10. There are lots of arguments that are given in favour and against.. a long read :). I am a liberal minded Mumbaiite who believes in practical and harmonious living.

    Reading the comments made, I kind of agree with Anonymous's basic point of being sensitive to the society's thought structure.

    There is a concept that is used [or rather abused] but is never really talked about. It is that there is a difference between the "unwriten rules of social conduct" for a comman man and a public figure. At least the expectations are like that currently .I would not venture to judge wether it is right or wrong, just that it is the way things are. What a comman man says, does not carry as much improtance and exposure as when a public figure says it. Classic example - Glamourous Film Stars doing Soft drink adds [a product that has no connection with their professional skills].

    Having said this, I would point out the moral responsibility any public figure has when making public statements of any kind through any media. Any incompletely thought-through statement, can have dangerous repurcussions [as an added bonus we have the media to compound the problems].

    From this stand point, I would say that Mr. MF Husain can paint what he pleases, but when he plans to make public the paintings [an art gallery is a very public place in case anybody has any doubts about that. It is as public as a Cinema Theater] he better think of the effects or at least employ somebody to do that thinking for him. He did nothing of the kind and has ended up hurting the sentiments of a section of the Indian people. It is not acceptable. He better apologise for making the painting public and take it out of the stands.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sujai, you said:
    The common man, who has no idea of what culture or heritage he once had, gets to say what an artist can do. And they go about protesting and taking it to court.

    This sentence caught my eye. And what do you think made the common man forget the culture and heritage? Perhaps a century of British rule that drilled into us the inferiority of our culture? And, how do we go about changing that? By educating people about the positives of yoga and Ayurveda. :D

    I think this is an excellent example of people exercising their right and their freedom of expression too by criticizing the paintings, and petitioning the court. As for artistic freedom, I'm all for it, but Hussain did display those paintings in a gallery which is open to public . Also some others have already raised some valid points. I guess it's a complex issue with shades of gray, more so in the context of Indian society.

    -Amit

    ReplyDelete
  12. but Hussain did display those paintings in a gallery which is open to public

    What if the gallery puts a note outside that it has certain viewing that might be distasteful to certian people?

    What about an adult movie? What about Playboy magazine? How about a fashion show? They are all open for public (but restricted).

    You may want to go in there or not.

    Its not an ad or a bill board or a TV show on prime time. Its not a street show. There is a difference.

    You are arguing for the sake of arguing.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Umm .. I did say that it is a complex issue. And, I cannot argue with your statement about adult movies. People who think they will get offended, should stay out.

    I hope you maintain the same yardstick when discussing banning of Satanic Verses and Lajja in India, protests regarding Fire & Water, the killing of the Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh, and the whole situation with the Danish cartoons - "How dare you show our prophet as a violent person? To prove that you are wrong and we are not violent, we will engage in violence!!" Now that was ironic, wasn't it? I hope you champion the cause of freedom of expression with equal fervor in all those cases too, and criticize violence - no matter which religion.

    Cheers,
    -Amit

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hi,
    I nice article and well put thoughts. But there is certain degree of confusions too. For eg., when saying that since we had Khajuraho and Kaam Sutra in our past, we should be liberal towards nudity, amounts to samething as since women had absolutely no rights in certain sections of society in the past, so even now we should be liberal towards the communities who want to practice them. Policies like reservation or even treating all tribes/sections at par cannot hold if everything is taken as is from the past. We have to select what we want to take and what not. And this selection is a slow process. We have come to terms with a lot of changes, have become much liberal (ofcourse, barring the stupid Fundamentalists ).
    Also, as touched in the article too, individual and society are two differnt concepts. Individuals make the society. When some individuals with similar mindset and values (and thinking etc) come together. they form a society. When some individual differ from those, they either modify the values etc of the society or just part and start a new society. This is easily visible in the form of multiple cultres in the country itself. And every culture evolves, for better or for worse. Now claiming that this particular culture is bad or intolerant is okay, but you cannot change the whole society or culture in a single day. It will be slow, it will take time, as there are lot of individual who have to soak in the change. For you, they are intolerant who do not tolerate your views, for them you are intolerant who does not respect to their views..... simple evolution will show where the culture finally moves .....:)
    and surely, you put to words what I have been thinking for sometime, though not exactly in those terms but with certain other issues, and sort of figured out the above :) ....
    -Rohit (my blog got deleted ... so dont have one right now ...)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dear all,

    After going thru internet pic's of Hindu dieties of Hussain and some pro comments..I just have this simple question... some one said where in Hindu holy books you find Nudity is banned or offensive..? accepted. So does that mean Hussain's faith/holy book says nudity is offensive? I would like to read it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Sujai,

    you yourself are saying again and again that you don't know his intentions or her intentions.... so if you don't know anything then don't say anything. just say what you know... and by the way if MF Hussain has the real artistic guts, he should draw any of the muslim profet in their raw form and then he'll not be able to paint anything else... @#$%ER

    ReplyDelete
  17. M.F. Husain. He is a kindly man, and a prodigiously productive artist. There is no warrant at all for disrupting all his exhibitions. I am on the point of sensibilities. His depictions of Hindu goddesses have been in the news: he has painted them in less than skimpy attire. I particularly remember one in which Sita is riding Hanuman’s stiffened tail — of course, she is scarcely clad, but that is the least of it: you need no imagination at all to see what she is rubbing up against that stiffened tail. Well, in the case of an artist, that is just inspiration, say the secularists. OK. The question that arises then is: How come in the seventy-five years Husain has been painting, he has not once felt inspired, not once, to paint the face of the Prophet? It doesn’t have to be in the style in which he has painted the Hindu goddesses. Why not the most beautiful, the most radiant and luminous face that he can imagine? How come he has never felt inspired to paint women revered in Islam, or in his own family, in the same style as the one that propelled his inspiration in regard to Hindu goddesses?

    ‘In painting the goddesses, he was just honouring them,’ a secular intellectual remarked at a discussion the other day. ‘It was his way of honouring them.’ Fine. It is indeed the case that one of the best ways we can honour someone is to put the one skill we have at the service of the person or deity. But how come that Husain never but never thought of honouring the Prophet by using the same priceless skill, that one ‘talent which is death to hide’?

    ‘Has Mr Shourie ever visited Khajuraho?,’ a member of the audience asked, the implication being that, as Hindu sculptors had depicted personages naked, what was wrong with Husain depicting the goddesses in the same style. Fine again. But surely, it is no one’s case that the ‘Khajuraho style’ must be confined to Hindu icons. Why has the artist, so skilled in deploying the Khajuraho motifs, never used them for icons of Islam? The reason why an artist desists from depicting the Prophet’s face is none of these convoluted disquisitions on style.

    The reason is simplicity itself: he knows he will be thrashed, and his hands smashed.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Nowadays in India a new community is arising, that thinks that their religion is all about stupid rules, and the muslims are the one who suffer from it. You said: since M. F. Hussain is a muslim that is why, he is been intolerent to the hindu society. For your kindest information, even if it would have been a hindu the situation would have been the same. It's a customary of Indian muslims to do something and then to escape by calling themselves minority. You were talking about the nude sculptures in temples, actually they do not represent the god or goddess and another thing is that the society at that time might not be looking at the religion in the same way.
    You were talking about MTV and others, the people who oppose this also oppose them, it's just that, that can't be stopped so easily. He has actually shown a prophet full cladded, but a hindu goddess nude. Then why not a nude painting of his own family members. This is completely humiliating our religion. Why dont you paint a nude painting of any islamic icon. Honestly speaking you are a true communalist.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Nowadays in India a new community is arising, that thinks that their religion is all about stupid rules, and the muslims are the one who suffer from it. You said: since M. F. Hussain is a muslim that is why, he is been intolerent to the hindu society. For your kindest information, even if it would have been a hindu the situation would have been the same. It's a customary of Indian muslims to do something and then to escape by calling themselves minority. You were talking about the nude sculptures in temples, actually they do not represent the god or goddess and another thing is that the society at that time might not be looking at the religion in the same way.
    You were talking about MTV and others, the people who oppose this also oppose them, it's just that, that can't be stopped so easily. Honestly speaking you are a true communalist.
    He has actually shown a prophet full cladded, but a hindu goddess nude. Then why not a nude painting of his own family members.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Have you, Mr. Sujai heard of the new protest in Kanpur against a website from france, where they have shown Md. Paigambar as a cartoon and those people want the site to be blocked. Just because of newspaper showing some of such pictures earlier there had been all india protest over this matter.
    Come on guys these people can not even see their priest as cartoon and you people can bare them to be nude, uncovered. Shame on you. Just for being secular or so called hippocrate modern you people can go to any limits.
    And Mr. Sujai that too was an artistic freedom, accept it or not??????????????hmmmmmmmm.....

    ReplyDelete
  21. Nisha:
    Yes, I find such protests ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Dear ALL,

    Simple thing for whom those are suppoting MF Hussain nude paintings.....

    Think if he has painted your Mother nudely.
    Can you give the same comments......
    If so its ok.
    But I can't.........

    ReplyDelete
  23. Some of the answers to the questions above are at:
    MF Husain Nudes and Mothers

    ReplyDelete
  24. If artistic freedom is to be granted and we are talking about Privately opened public offences- I am cocnerned. Just because there is freedom to express one's feelings and ideas - can you say, I will advertise that I am having an exhibition on "Drug's benefits", or "Why Education is not required", or "Terrorists are Right"?? If I claim that this is my opnion and who ever likes can view my exhibition - do you think any society will tolerate? Even if one can enter on own volition, a taboo is a taboo when hurting other's sentiments.

    ReplyDelete
  25. When it is open for Public and as per Sujai's claim that one enters on their own volition - has there been any warnings / Notices that "there are nude paintings of Hindu Gods and one may enter if they still wish?". No -there has been no such messages - so a compeltely innocent art lover can go inside in the expectation of viewing art and get offended to see these manifestations of cruel art. So, when it is open for public - you need to limit your freedom of expression.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous:

    can you say, I will advertise that I am having an exhibition on "Drug's benefits", or "Why Education is not required", or "Terrorists are Right"??

    Why not?

    You can have a forum to discuss why Terrorist's demands are right, and why education corrupts young minds and why drugs have certain good side effects.

    If I claim that this is my opnion and who ever likes can view my exhibition - do you think any society will tolerate?

    A mature society should tolerate.

    Some of us want to make this society mature, while others want us to go back in time to periods of Inquisition - where you are given a different justice because you belong to different religion.

    Even if one can enter on own volition, a taboo is a taboo when hurting other's sentiments.

    What is a taboo?

    Should our untouchable be moved to outskirts of our cities and villages? It was a taboo once to even touch them?

    Sentiments are hurt way too easily. Sober up, mature up - that's the only way you can make sure your sentiments are not hurt at every action.

    Best - stop learning. That's best way to preserve your innocence and stop your sentiments from hurting.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Sujai

    I reread your article again and I realized that what you are arguing for is not so much artistic freedom but that of right to privacy. That is evident from the statement that if the same paintings were put on a Billboard in India where the soceity would take offence at it, then it should not be done so. If it was artistic freedom that you were advocating, then you wouldn't be arguing along those lines. You have argued for holding an art exhibition within private confines where only invited individuals were permitted

    ~ Vinod

    ReplyDelete
  28. ***So, why should it bother anyone if MF Husain paints nude paintings of Mother India and Durga and showcase it in an art gallery which is restricted to only those who want to look at it?***

    Sujai. let me also ask u a question. Mr X is a movie director. who has recently directed a blue film on gods and godesses. some people are strongly opposing it.
    Why should it bother anyone if Mr. X makes a blue film on gods and releases it in selected theatres which is restricted to only those who want to 'look at it'?

    Please answer.

    -Chairman, Anti-Pseudo liberal/secular organisation.

    ReplyDelete
  29. i really wonder how this person( m.f hussien) managed to stay in india after drawing the pictures of lakshmi devi in such vulgar manner. People like this should be killed and i feel pity on those pseudo secular shameleess people, and the worst part is most of these are hindus supporting this painter. Iam sure if the painter was a hindu and if he would have drawn something which hurts the sentiments of muslims and christians all these media and these shameless secular people will label him as a communal virus and say he is a hindu hardliner. Being a hindu nation i feel being a hindu hardliner should be something that any hindu should be proud off...

    ReplyDelete
  30. Madhu:
    Sujai, let me get one thing straight. What is maturity? Being in-sensitive? If that is the case, no offense, I find you immature because you are sensitive about artistic freedom. Since there is no fixed ruler to measure maturity, what you find as immature may not be universally accepted as immature and vice-versa. For example, people might find Hussein immature because he sees everyone naked like an adolescent boy. In my opinion, sensitivity makes us human and it should not confused with maturity.

    I agree with you that everyone has the right to opinion/express themselves. But, this should include people who oppose Hussein's paintings. Anyone resorting to violence as a solution for anything is a fool. But if someone is offended by something, they should have the right express it. I am expressing the same points with regards to freedom of expression as you are, except I am looking at both sides of the coin. In other words, no body is right or wrong, its just difference of opinions.

    My last comment: In your post you claim that sexual freedom has been our heritage and we should embrace it. In another comment, you say, "Should our untouchable be moved to outskirts of our cities and villages? It was a taboo once to even touch them?". If you follow your heritage motto, why not embrace it too? The bottom line is nothing is universal and timeless. The one constant thing is change. We are constantly evolving and so are the rules of society. If people do not want to embrace change, change will embrace them. But I think they should have the choice.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Please compare both these links and try to find out the diffrence :


    http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00xcallig/modern/mfhusain/mfhusain.html


    http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00routesdata/1400_1499/bhakti/hansuperman/hansuperman.html

    Any type of controversy is always advantageous for business purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  32. What I feel everybody in this entire should be given the right to the freedom of expression but everyone should remember another word attached with freedom is resposibility and a very famous person like Hussain Sahib has shown lack of responsibility by showing nude pictures of Hindu God and Goddess in public. If his artistic crave inspire him to paint such pictures then he should kept it secret not shown to anybody. If Hindu organisations got angered, I would like to blame Mr Hussain. Though I am not a racist, i belong to a secular family and have many muslim freinds but in my view Hussain SAHIB has done the wrong thing. All celebrities/big names should behave and have the feeling of moral responsibility and effects of their deeds or words within the society. I just want to cite an example how muslims through out the world have reacted very badly against the Swidish/Finnish writer for his article. Some of the muslim clerics even declared fatwa against him so whats wrong if any Hindu organisation went against Hussain Sahib and his paintings.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Hi,
    Please read this interview by Husain saheb himself.
    Probably, it will clear some misunderstandings and confusions created here in the discussion.

    http://www.tehelka.com/story_main37.asp?filename=Ne020208in_hindu_culture.asp

    ReplyDelete
  34. MF Hussain now lives in Qatar and has accepted Qatari citizenship.Would he paint the Sheikh's wives in a see-through burqua? I am sure he wont have the BALLS to do this.
    He is a frigging artist. Treat him as one. Not a demiGod.

    ReplyDelete

Dear Commenters:
Please identify yourself. At least use a pseudonym. Otherwise there will be too many *Anonymous*; making it confusing.

Do NOT write personal information or whereabouts about the author or other commenters. You are free to write about yourself. Please do not use abusive language. Do not indulge in personal attacks and insults.

Write comments which are relevant and make sense so that the debate remains healthy.