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.
@TF I think it's a Chrome browser issue. Cannot comprehend any other reason as of now for a post to happen twice. Will try with a different browser next time.
Don't know. I also use Chrome.
@TF I thought the double posting was a error. I am trying from my phone now. If it still persists then something is not right.
@Rio I think the backlash and other reasons provide the government the ammunition to ban a book.
The media merely adds to the chaos by not representing a balanced view. We are no less guilty, we watch the very same debates on television and wait with baited breathe to catch the next stupid assertion such that we can tweet about it.
The publishing house though is in the business of publishing. They are not like the academia where a doctoral thesis is peer reviewed befor being accepted. Peer review too can fail to catch all loop holes.
The publishing house is no different from a present day news channel. Both are trying to make money and profits. The more the eyeballs, the more the fame or infamy and recall value and that could translate into profits.
Also now if Penguin were to publish a work that logically points out the errors in the earlier work, they need not invest as much in advertising as they have the attention of the readers.
On an aside, in your passion for the issue, you always seem to be double posting. Yesterday also I had to delete your duplicate post. Again today.
Direct sales revenues are not the only source of income for media and publishing houses. Due to under the table dealings, they might be purposely promoting vested interests as well. So it is not necessary that they will publish a rebuttal.
And I read, the court case was apparently about editing out inaccuracies. But instead of doing that these guys went for playing drama queen by getting the book pulped rather than edit out inaccuracies to garner the sympathy of the freedom of speech bridage.
TF 
To say what you want to say, without giving a thought what other people might think, at the same time respecting their feelings!
I think there are a multiple matter as play here than merely freedom of speech.
The people against the book have used the same law that was used against Satanic Verses and Da Vinci Code. We need to accept that at least they did not go crazy and start a dharna or attack Penguin offices.
Now for the pulping (not banning) of the book, this looks more like a business decision. The pulping might have gotten more sales of the book.
Having said that, banning or retraction is rarely helpful these days.
I have speed read upto 50 pages of the book and in that I found a couple of errors so as a literature and scholarly work, it is not robust enough to stand on its own. Also criticisim for the errors in the book have been around for sometime and these people are professors and teachers in their own right and lest people miscontrue; not Indians and in no manner linked to the case.
The issue as I see it is:
1. A self appointed monitor decided to use the same law that has been invoked earlier to protect his or her flavour or wolrd view of Hinduism
2. It is legal but not necessarily logical and rational
3. The author's work is not as definitive as claimed and errors in a non-ficiton supposed scholarly work does make one question the knowledge levels of the author
4. The book has a right to exist and printed and sold
5. A scholarly rebuttal has an equal right to come against the work. Though, will such a rebuttal be called scholarly or a right wing agenda, therein lies the other side of freedom of speech.
6. The problem is that we tend to label even factual rebuttal a right wing agenda without due diligence and that is also equally wrong as it strengthens the hands of very people whom we do not want to be the dominant voice of our culture.
very well said Sriram, the question is if people misconstrue words of an epic, and provide demeaning propaganda hitting on cultural beleifs, should they be allowed publication in the first place. if such thing flares up communal backlash who will take the responsibility of bloodshed.
now a professor at univ. of warwick, u.k. has termed shaheed bhagat singh and chandrashekhar azaad as terrorists and ignited another controversy.
someone's terrorist is another's freedom fighter...of course for british they'd be terrorists...they gave hell time to british rulers....for us indians they were freedom fighters
Many of our educated liberal people have generally become cynical about relegion especially due to spate of fake Babas and in line with relegion losing ground in the Western World. But patriotism is a different thing. Educated liberals are still too passionate about patriotism and won't brook a word against freedom fighters, especially the ones without association to any of the current political parties.
Yup...I agree with TF!
btw this petition was also by that same chap i think, who opposed the wendy something's book... http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-icse-calls-shahid-bhagat-singh-terrorist-court-says-change-it-1517536
even ncert school text books called him terrorist :o http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2007-12-21/india/27968086_1_bhagat-singh-historians-revolutionary-terrorism
ND, there's a proverb in Hindi: ek pagal doodhne niklo, hazaar milenge...I think this is the case here 
A Delhi court has directed Indian Certificate of Secondary Education (ICSE) to remove...
If the book is publsihed by Goyal Brothers, shouldn't the order be addressed to Goyal Brothers and not ICSE? 
fyi...icse included the book in their curriculam
Since when did ICSE start prescribing books? When I was in school, it used to prescribe only the syllabus and schools were free to follow any book they wanted to...
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.
@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.
@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. 
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.
@TF, May be they haven't put a Vespa or Sony LED as a prize. Have they? 
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.
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
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
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
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
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!
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
Sign in to reply to this thread
