Dr Jerrold Atlas posted the link to Dr. Wendy Doniger's Op-Ed on the Psychohistory-historical motivations forum with his comment:
[Worthy of interest, even if just for the rising tide of Hindu nationalism that is
about to burst forth in a new leader once condemned by the US. This is the
India few wanted to see -- a deeply nationalist, revisionist, highly puritanical
defenders of a group-illusion that never was. It is undemocratic in leaning
and very willing to condemn those who oppose them as "enemies". It
condemns their vision of a purified society in a deep group-think and rejects
what had been the Hinduism of yore. Thus, the Nehru-orginated Congress
Party has lost control over the hearts and minds of the majority in India.
We should try to remember that India is a mix of old and new with enormous
corruption and shoddy workmanship as well. It is a country where education
is prized but business shrewdness is more preferred, along with cronyism.
Thus, some succeed while others feel the sting of rejection and or losing to
become rather outcasts in their own world. Add in the demographic bulge
making population swell enormously (like China), increase urban tensions,
harbor desires for emotional outbursts as a way of relieving overcrowdedness-
caused stress, seek relief in Bollywood-style extravaganzas and allow an
increase in fundamentalist groups demanding faith-based purity or
erversions with religious context.
That neighboring Pakistan is nuclear and sees all purpose as attacking larger
India while Pakistan fundamentalism has led to civil wars between opposing
religious fanatics, fanatical modernists seeking success through industrial
opportunities misusing their fellow Pakistanis, westernized generals and their
armies focused on maintaining balance in society and protecting the nuclear
arsenal and the borders, ISI agencies playing all sides against each other
and willingly confronting what they deem to be Pakistan's enemies while
rewarding or dealing with enemies of neighbors (and keeping Afghanistan
weak, disorganized and confused).
This region is a powder-keg of trouble dangerously trying to not let anyone
light a match. All the while, they have to watch the East where larger
neighbor China is going through growth spasms and currency. manipulation,
generating endless billionaires annually and then seeing them collapse into
corruption (dragging down many of the party's potential leaders with them).
Their enemy neighbor is blustering for power and making demands on
neighbors that now frightens many.
In this context, the censoring of this standard text on Hindu past and culture
past is very clearly understandable, albeit disgusting. It is an academic
author's dream, to be banned and become a best seller. J ATLAS]
This was my response:
‘Banned in Bangalore’ is a misleading title for Dr. Doniger’s
NYT Op-Ed. She chose it to sync with the mid 19th – mid 20th
century selling caption in the U.S., ‘Banned in Boston’.
I am from Bangalore. The book was not banned there. It was
not banned anywhere in India. It was just withdrawn by its
publisher–distributor, Penguin Books, with the offer to ‘pulp’ the remaining
stock in an out of court settlement with the petitioner. The Indian blasphemy
law is quite illiberal and sweeping, and Penguin obviously wanted to avoid an
acrimonious litigation. I condemn both the blasphemy law and the pusillanimity
of Penguin Books.
I have read the book. I found it has nothing much to commend
and nothing much to condemn.
The problem with every discourse is the mismatch of
perceptions. This problem is extremely acute in the case of Hinduism. In the
first place, the word ‘Hinduism’ itself is a misnomer. It does not signify any
comprehensive system of belief or practice, let alone a unified one. As Dr.
Atlas has correctly pointed out, some “deeply nationalist, revisionist, highly
puritanical defenders of a group-illusion that never was” are trying to give it
a monolithic form, but in vain. It was partly because of this problem that the main
Hindu political outfits are using the word ‘Hindutva’ (the state of being a
Hindu) instead, which the Indian Supreme Court has glibly defined in one of its
judgment as a “way of life”. Actually, it is not one way of life but many.
About the Hindus, Doniger gave her perception. If others had
disagreement with it, they could have given their versions. But fundamentalism
does not work that way, whether it is of the defenders of a certain point of
view, or its detractors.
This April, India is going to the polls. Political
atmosphere here is hyper charged. Doniger’s book became an issue also because
of that. As an aside, I agree with Dr. Atlas that the dream of an academic
author to become a best seller through controversy has come true in the case of
Dr. Wendy Doniger. So far so good!
Suzarin 
No comments:
Post a Comment