Freedom of speech & Democracy
Since yesterday one question is bugging me: what exactly is freedom of speech. Yesterday Penguin India recalled Wendy Doniger’s The Hindus, bowing down to a religious fanatic after 4 years of defending the book. Of course, freedom of speech doesn’t mean insulting anyone you like but does it mean not voicing your doubts about things that are taken as facts? If we can’t be ourself and take rational approach as we would like to, what’s the point of having a working brain?
Another question: what kind of democratic country India is if the thought-provoking ideas are banned from being expressed? And if we are suppressed from thinking out of the box, how are we going to grow as a society at large?
I’m posting this topic here because I’d really to know writers/authors/bloggers reaction to this development.
PS: I hope this topic is not considered flammable. This is more like a general discussion, meant to inspire bloggers to take a fresh look at the current situation of the publishing world.
Freedom of speech is alright but there is thin line between how much freedom one can have and dont know who decides that 
Exactly. And on what basis you can force anyone to recall a book? Secondly, isn't bowing down to fanatics as good as succumbing to bullying tactics? 
people do bow down to bullies, else they keep harrasing
I haven't read that book, but it certainly feels bad to see a piece of literature being banned like this :\
Absolutely 
I am putting up a counter argument, just to bring in a fresh perspective. Mind you, this is not my POV.
When you hit a beehive, you would expect to get attacked by bees. You have the "freedom" to hit a beehive, but the responsibility and consequences come along with it. You may not like it, and there would be a lot of people would agree with you. But that wouldn't change the fact that you will still be attacked. You have a choice: Hit the beehive and brace the consequences and not complain about it, because its a typical result of a typical action- or not hit the beehive. You can disagree with me if you want to, even make fun of me. But that wouldn't change the fact. Don't like the freedom of choice? I can't do anything about it!
Now, this is me adding wood to the fire:1,000 years down the line, human kind will take this news as offensive:http://kotaku.com/the-penguin-who-fell-in-love-with-a-grown-man-1521980337?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Facebook&utm_source=Kotaku_Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow
cross species breeding. strict no no.
Of course each person is ready for the consequences of their own action; the problem arises when the government, which is constituted and brought into existence to protect its citizens' basic rights, starts supporting bullies and fanatics. That's my issue!
Thank you for bringing this up here, FP. It has been bugging me seriously too. I haven't read the book myself, but I have friends who have and they find the backing down by Penguin saddening. My own POV for whatever it is worth - this is just plain wrong. If we wish to be called a secular democracy then an author should be free to say whatever they feel, it is their opinion. If a segment of the public is offended by it, they needn't buy/read that book. No-one needs to decide what is or isn't offensive to the general public. In any case, Hinduism has survived for thousands of years, it doesn't need anyone's protection. It is terribly disheartening the intolerance that is growing in our society, this issue is only one such example.
Exactly Nilanjana. And to be honest, this incidence shook the foundation of my belief in Hindutva for good. If we think long and hard, doesn't it mean that we are no better than terrorists?
@FP Whoa...dont you think you are jumping into conclusions too soon?
NSV, how am I jumping to conclusions?
Belief in Hindutva cant be shaken by just these sorts of trivial incidents. We will continue to have these incidents in the future too but that doesnt in anyway undermine the spirit of Hindutva. It is just an action of few individuals.
*Running Away*
Pankti, this is what is called extremism, and this gives rise to terrorism. Remember, religion is never bad, it's the followers who make it appear like that.
Presenting a link here http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/12/wendy-doniger-book-hinduism-penguin-hindus which is self explanatory. We are complicit definitely if we remain silent on the issue. The thing is this just raises the profile of the author and the book, people who want to read it will. And I also wonder how many copies Penuin India really have unsold? Obviously the loss from pulping is less than the cost of going through the legal battle. But the principle should have been defended. How can a book written with whatever shade of opinion change or offend people's beliefs? In a country where large parts of the population are illiterate still? And in any case, is ny religion so fragile?
Regarding moderating. (in response to Saket's viwpoint) I agree that it is absolutely Penguin's right to settle the issue as they like. It is just very sad that they had to take this particular decision.
NSV and CK, you guys are right about my reaction but it's the case of hating all the saints as majority of them are imposters, pretending to be something that they aren't! In today's scenario, out of 10 religious people you meet, 8 would be fanatics. You will have shaken religious beliefs then, won't you? Mind you, this doesn't mean you will stop believing in God; it's just that you will give up attending any religious events.
Me too But this incidence makes me averse to religious people too!
In any case, Hinduism has survived for thousands of years, it doesn't need anyone's protection.
yea..its true....but half of them got converted in the process making pakistan/bangladesh etc ...thats a fact too
@ND, others, I'd like to request that we should try not to point out towards any religion.
ck...its a historical fact...not pointing at any religion
1. Offensive is a word that can have different meaning to different people. Hence, In my opinion, to ban or not to ban a book shoul be entrusted with the judiciory. The definion of offensive should best be decided by the law of the land which represents the collective wisdom of the society / country. The govt should refrain from taking such decisions unless it is confident of defending its action in court basis the law of land.
2. It is within the publisher's rigt to bow out or stand firm. They can not be denied or questioned about this right of theirs
3. Presence of moderators and moderating is a must for Indiforums. Similarly, we can not do away with presence of moderators anywhere else, including society.
1. In India, judiciary is highly influenced by politics and politics, in turn, thrive on religion.
2. In economic sense, publishers have all the right to do whatever works for them. They are for-profit groups and they have to produce profits for the investors. But morally, is it correct? Shouldn't they support the right of expression of their authors? Don't they have a moral obligation toward the society to continue the rational revolution?
3. Moderators are good and they are required. But aren't moderators supposed to be of open mind and wise? Is giving a free reign to bullies and fanatics good for the society in the long run?
This is not a judgement given by the court . It was an out of court settlement after 4 years of fighting for it.
Yes...but according to the law, the book was in violation of not only civil law but also criminal law 
You can only give so much freedom to individuals > With greater freedom comes greater responsibility. And not all humans are quite capable of handling the truth.
jai ho babaji
Thank You shishy
sab maya ( illusion ) hai babaji...thats the ony truth
Mere office me ek Maya hai dusri mili nahi abhi
woh choriye...princess ji nei jo tippani di hai about imposters sadhus n babajis, uske baarey mei kya vichar hap aapke? kripa hume bhi bataye...aapko thes toh nahi lagi na itne generalized comment sun ke? aap princess ji jo kaise manayenge ki aache baba ji bhi hote hai, jaise aap?
Thank You just one thot for every one there is always light at the end of the tunnel and that light is always bright
babaji amar rahe
aap bade diplomatic ho babaji
Vatsa sasnsar me jeena hai to sansari banana padta hai Anyways I think Penguin did the right thing in banning the book. From the authorities point of view we are a melting pot of ethnicities and dont want another you know what again
Tunnel! Yyess, that's what I am going to call that thingy which came alongwith Sunsilk shampoo, beacasue it has light at the end. Was wonder what to call this thingy since last two days. Thanks Vijay, I mean babaji to enlightening me into naming that thing!
In India, a koan, "Ram bharose ramleela mandali", is utmost suited one. we are khichadi.
Religion, taketh blood in the hands of fanatics. No respite in sight. Blind following is a boon for leaders. they like and nurture them, because they are the vote winners. they pacify their whims and rule the throne. my pov is rules to abide for citizens should be strict to the extent they shudder from humiliating any religion whatsoever, by writeups or vocal outbursts. The rule offenders sought after and sent to gallows, be it any tom, macho or harry, they must be shown we mean business.
Writers should know their fanatic writing, though may be laced with full truth, can be a breeding ground for terrorists and many terrorists germinate form such seeds. If they suffered some injustice, go to bloody courts and settle the things.
but as I said, we are neck deep in shit of religious fanaticisms.
Agree there with you Sir Rio
I think Sorc gave an excellent analogy
"When you hit a beehive, you would expect to get attacked by bees. You have the "freedom" to hit a beehive, but the responsibility and consequences come along with it. You may not like it, and there would be a lot of people would agree with you. But that wouldn't change the fact that you will still be attacked. You have a choice: Hit the beehive and brace the consequences and not complain about it, because its a typical result of a typical action- or not hit the beehive."
That is the problem. The people whose job is to protect you from the bees have limited capacity. Already they have enough trouble to handle. They would not like you throwing a stone at bees nest and then expect them to drop everything else and come running to protect you from the bees. So better to make a law stopping you from throwing stones at bee hives.
You have the "freedom" to hit a beehive, but the responsibility and consequences come along with it.
yes....and bees also have freedom to bite you back...thats the moral of the story...people are actually bees
When expressing your opinions, are you attacking someone? You have a right to express opinions and the fanatics have the right to condemn/slander the book but not do anything else. Hitting a beehive is an attack and so bees attack you. 
Pankti - This is like saying I will go and provoke the neighbour's dog but if the the dog bites, it is the neighbour's fault. I have the freedom of expression to provoke the dog and neighbour has no right to tell me not to provoke.
The dog also should have only provoked me back and it should not have bitten me. It is neighbour's responsibility to prevent dog from biting whatever I do.
TF, your reply has put me into splits
To understand what you are saying here, I've a question. Who's the dog in this case and who's the neighbor? Maybe that will bring better clarity to me.
new lesson....people are not just bees they are dogs too
Well Pankti. I though it was self evident. The people with tendency to get provoked and react violently to the same are the dog. The government and law enforcement agencies who are responsible to generally keep violent behavior from their citizens in check are the neighbour. There is a limit to how much they can control violent behavior - so in some cases it is easier to avoid situtaions that causes than give free reign to everyone to provoke and let violence erupt all over the place and face the humongous task of controlling it everywhere with the limited resources they have.
Well, and I thought crazy dogs are supposed to be kept on leash! 
Pankti - It is not only crazy dogs that bite. Any dog will bite if you provoke it enough. Only solution then would be to put all dogs in the world under leach if you have to ensure no one gets bitten however they provoke the animals.
Well, if humans are going to behave like dogs then I don't have anything else to say!
I guess I am in the minority. With due respect to all shades of opinions here, to me a particular NGO/Politico-religious/Cultural organisation deciding what free thinking adult Indian citizens should read or not read smacks unpleasantly of a nanny state. I was unlikely to read the book before, and remain that way even now - a 700 page treatise on theology doesn't interest me, whatever religion it might present. But what does interest me is the author's right to write it and sell it to her publisher/readership without being heckled by fanatics. It is not as though it was getting into the school curriculum or something. This kind of moral/cultural policing is what goes on in nations in the middle east and it is sad indeed to see India tarred with that same brush. Not at all fitting for a society which wants to project progressiveness, secularism and free expression.
pen is mightier than sword....sometimes things we write might hurt more, so decision was taken as precaution when someone protested. there are other ways to earn money than by pricking other's beliefs,....fyi i've not read the book nor have any interest.
From what I read about this book, the book is not just presenting a different opinion - it is indulging in plain defamation of Swami Vivekananda and Ramakrishna - calling them paedophiles and sexual perverts (do not know if she had basis - at least her fellow Indologist Konrad Elst feels she had no basis for most of her analysis). How different is this from Kumar Vishwas' comment on nurses? I did not see anyone coming out in support for his freedom of speech.
Actually true intellectuals don't give a damn what one says or writes about their religion or anything. They know very well a crow is free to litter anywhere and the deity is high enough to be stained by such misdemenors.
Nilanjana, I agree with you totally
Now I have a question: If somebody analyzes all the writings of this author and applies some psychoanalytical frameworks to the writings and logically concludes based on this analysis that she has been sexually abused by her parents and siblings in her childhood, is that a personal attack or freedom of expression? Will she have right to file a defamation case in this case or not?
TF, when you start expressing your opinions about an individual you know nothing about, it's slander. But when you express your opinions about any institution or cult or any theory, it's not personal or directed against anyone in particular. This is case of comparision between an individual and a society!
when its against some theory/cult ..lets not forget millions follow those cults too, so gotta be more careful
Pankti - Ramakrishna and Vivekandanda were individuals who she has never met. Yet based on her interprestations of second hand accounts, how can she call them paedophiles? Isn't that rank character assasssination?
TF, I haven't read the book but if what you say is correct, then I concede it's a right action. BTW, have you read it? I'm quite curious to know about it in detail now 
I am also relying on articles in the net only. Who will read a 700 page academic book even to undertand a controversy. If she has said nothing of that sort - unsubstantiated personal attacks against Mahatma Gandhi, Vivekanda, Ramaksrishna etc. - then i also feel it should not have been banned. I don't think believing Ramayana was fiction or pyscho analytic interpretation of relegious rituals are suffienct grounds for ban as long as author has done it scientifically and not with a malicous intent to hurt a group of people.
Well, I wouldn't believe everything that's said by others as everybody has different POV and perception. The same thing happened with The Good Road movie.
Well - I guess courts that ban the book or publishers who decide beforehand that they will lose and decide to back out without fighting the case know best. Anyways it is Penguin's decision. I am more concerned that Penguin is not taking my books for publication than their deciding not to sell some random firangan's boring book.
"I am more concerned that Penguin is not taking my books for publication than their deciding not to sell some random firangan's boring book."
after court made its judgment we shudnt question it anymore!!
ND, I don't prescribe to that theory
You cant go against law after court declares then matter is closed! They look through every legal angle and donot go just by emotions/feelings/opinions.
It's time to throw away archaic laws and adapt according to the changing times.
order order..no more arguements...judgement has been made...everyone disperse!
Pankti - Yes. Let us throw out all the archic laws and get all anarchic laws. Hail Herr Kejriwal!
@Nandini - That is my line. I am the Indipolice here.
TF
ND, are you going to through identity crisis?
Taqhliya Taqhliya....court dismissed
Now I think that we all are making wild guesses.
None of us has read the book, and still we have so much to say about the book, or the one demanding it's withdrawal.
Just to get an idea of what we are discussing about, I decided to check out some details about the book.
Here are some links that I checked out:
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/feb/13/penguin-withdrawal-hindus-arundhati-roy-neil-gaiman
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-26148875
http://world.time.com/2014/02/12/sex-lies-and-hinduism-why-a-hindu-activist-targeted-wendy-donigers-book/
Based on what I read in the above articles about this issue:
=> A few points that Dinanath Batra-the activist asking for banning the book (through his Shiksha Bachao Andolan Samiti) puts forth, are okay in my perception of the issue, if, what he says about the book or specific excerpts is true. You can't write things, like what he said, are written in the book, and then not expect protest against what you write.
=> What the author Wendy Doniger said (source):
Doniger wrote that bloggers had accused her of attacking Hinduism and sexualising Hindus, flooded Amazon with their "lurid opinions of the book" and sent her obscene and threatening emails.
While I see bloggers in her support and overall the freedom of speech.
=> A bigger issue is what our law, the Indian penal Code that was enacted by the British almost about 150 years back, that is largely untouched; says and provides for laws that are now outdated. An outdated law also gives a weapon for fanatics and extremist groups to do whatever they like.
Like today, on the valentines day, there will be numerous incidents of violence and protests by these so called "saviours" of hinduism and Indian Culture. Who gives them the right to do so?
ck....u didnt read the book too....have you i had also googled up those news links to find what the controversy was about
CK, I didn't get you.
You can check out this one as well, Cyber.
http://koenraadelst.blogspot.in/2014/02/banning-wendy-donigers-hindus.html
The issue is why would I pay much attention to anything that offends me..and
why would I decide on someone's else behalf that "they" (other hindus in this case) will be offended...
If some author calls shiva-linga, a linga (surprise?)..some might hate him for the way (s)he put it, others might call him objective...its all about POV.
Or think about this, a study recently found that there is no negative effect of porn on human beings... try explaining it to dinanath batra (or to your parents..hehe)
So, if you don't like anything, don't read or recommend..but let the author say what she wants to say..
Taslima Nasreena (and many music artists too) said that worst you can do to an artist is ban his/her work -- take away their right to be heard!!
Let's not be juvenile... this country does not deserve to be ran by people with mindset of 10 year olds...
Totally agree with you!
One red heart from me on that view
Penguin caved in to save costs. Others are disappointed in Penguin because they thought the publisher will stand by the author. Conclusion: Penguin is a business. It is not any author's best friend. It did what it felt was in its best interest, the rest be damned.
Every sane person understands that freedom of speech is an important component of democracy. What the author wrote or not wrote is her lookout. We are at liberty to read or not read it. The rest is just fluff and time pass for the literati. Peace.
Absolutely
My point is, 1) IS THE WRITTEN WORK A SCIENTIFIC THEORY, OR A STORY BOOK, OR AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY, OR AN INDEPTH ANALYSIS OF OTHER CULTURES. WHAT CREDENCE DOES IT HAVE.
Is it because I have written and I am an author, I get my rights to say my way and this authorship rights give me all the previleges to bla bla bla shit everywhere.
Very good point- Rio. Fiction should definitely be given more benefit of doubt as it does not claim authenticity and we should respect artistic freedom. Similarly autobiography is fine because person only claims it to be their opinion and everyone is free to have right or wrong opinion.
But if person claims it is scientific, then it should have sound basis on facts, especially ideas that hurt sentiments of people and defame individuals. One should not shoot loose personal opinions of this nature in a scientific work. I do not know if this author has done that in this book. If she has, then definitely deserves to be banned. If she has not, possibly it should not have been banned. (let us not get into the technicality of ban v/s withdrawal again) Maybe someone who has read can tell which of these is the case.
@TF, May be they haven't put a Vespa or Sony LED as a prize. Have they?
Hate speeches with communal overtones should be banned in the same way as porn is banned on TV. In the cases of public speeches and television you cannot control or restrict the audience. You don't know whether kids (or people of certain maturity) will be listening or watching. In this case, FoS of propogator may negatively affect the FoS of kids and others.
But in the case of books, especially like this one, you make a very conscious decision to buy a book (your FoS) to read what the author has to say (her FoS). So everyone's FoS gets respected.
@FP: Can't stop thinking about this issue. Here are few more takes..
- If Manu was the first born among humans according to Hinduism, and Adam and Eve according to Christianity, did the Charles Darwin committed blasphemy when he wrote his seminal work “The Origin of Species”. Should his work be banned?
- I strongly advise anyone who thinks like a “Victorian” about Hindu culture to visit Khajuraho temples or Orissa ones (which inspires the cover page of the book by Wendy). We were not coy about depicting people doing it with a horse (what was the word for them?).
- Lot of things she mentioned are factual inaccuracies. Ok. It’s a bad book. Maybe penguin is just trying to save its backside. They published a badly edited book. But that’s it.
- Sometimes an author commits the mistake of applying modern definitions to judge the olden times. It is like calling Akbar a dude or Ashoka metrosexual. Can’t apply modern definitions or labels to people of that era. Same thing goes with modern definitions of racism, communalism, adultery and pedophilia. According to Ramayan, Sita got married at a very young age (6?) to a 13 year old Ram and we all know Ravana was also one of the suitor and was present in her swayamvar. So was Ravana a paedophile? What about the man Phoolan Devi got married to at the age of 11, and Ramakrishna marrying a five year old girl when he himself was 23?
- You don’t have to know someone personally to write about them or have to be of certain sect, caste, religion to write about the customs or religions of others. That would mean nobody today can write anything about Hitler, Vivekananda or Dinosaurs.
- And finally, we are talking about Gods here, they are same for Wendy and Dinanath, no matter what their respective religions are. Gods are not restricted by religions, customs and “cultures”, men do. So, everyone has equal “propriety” over Gods. You can chose to write for them, or criticize them or do whatever. It is a personal equation.
Good points, dude.
Just one additional point in support of bans in general - If a person cleverly mixes up personal biases and opinions with scientific analysis, thus misleading reader to believe in something that is not true just by putting it alongside other stuff that sounds true and logical, then that is fraud and makes grounds for a ban. I am not aware if that is the case here. But I see the possibility.
Kapil, I totally agree with you on all the points
About the first point, I'm thinking about this since years. How come each religion has their own people as first humans I guess these questions of mine are never going to be answered. 
@Rio: Dost, what you or other 100 people may find derogatory, there might be 100 others who don't. Seeing something as derogatory is just a POV. It is a opinion and not a fact.
court has given its judgement, "the book was in violation of not only civil law but also criminal law"... court's judgement is supreme...case closed!
I see you are very learned and consistent in your belief. you or others holding same viewpoint may feel the same. it takes a lot of courage to call a spade a spade. I remember, charlie chaplin, on death bed, when priest was dictating him his last sermon, when called upon to shun the devil, he said, "leave the devil part, who knows he will be greeting me there and I donot want to annoy him.
Very nice cause it is to defend some great author, and give a leeway and benefit of doubt, of he or she meant very highly of our culture.
I just heard her interview, on her book, "on hinduism". She is a jew, impressed by stories of Purana. Indian Philosophy doesn't interest her. She looks for basically stories and pariticularly related to women and animals. As far as I could understand her nature, she is impressed by those stories. She is learned, no doubt, but indian purana's and mythology is very rich in inner meaning and writing on Hinduism without insightful insights can be like diffusing a bomb.
God knows, clipping wrong wire or right wire, who knows.
Sign in to reply to this thread
