[Reader-list] Ways of Life and Transgressions

[Rahul Asthana]

"They have not been educated to appreciate the nuances of the medium or the message."
Yousuf, I am sorry but that's condescending.By the same token a religious person can say that the artist has not been taught the nuances of religious sensibilities.My point is that if two groups having different values have to coexist in a society,they have to be tolerant towards each other.
I do not advocate any limit to the freedom of expression,but there should not be complete callousness towards the feelings of groups.Painters like Hussein and other heretics would always keep producing works that would offend,and perhaps thats necessary too;but if some of the people in the media,and I do not mean the media which actually represents these groups, can understand and voice their feelings,then emotions would probably not flare up to that extent.
That is the middle way.


--- On Sat, 8/30/08, Yousuf <ysaeed7 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Yousuf <ysaeed7 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and Transgressions
> To: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net>, rahul_capri at yahoo.com
> Cc: "Sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
> Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008, 9:31 PM
> Dear Rahul
> I had difficulty following your first sentence (and a few
> others), but yes, to put it in simple language, people have
> been offended by Hussain's paintings, and they are not
> always at fault. They have not been educated to appreciate
> the nuances of the medium or the message. And the art
> fraternity doesn't have the urge to go to the people and
> explain what they do and why they do. The politician of
> course is too happy to cash in on the ignorance of the
> public. 
> 
> Incidentally, countless provocative/blasphemous art or
> statements have been made in the past but not all of them
> led to a public outcry. Almost all known cases where a piece
> of art/literature has led to violence, are those where
> somebody (or some political party) used them to spread the
> flames. In most cases, the protesters haven't seen or
> read what they have been protesting against. 
> 
> So, should the artists make such provocative works only for
> themselves or their closest friends, and never allow them to
> go public. Or should they (and their institutions) create an
> atmosphere of awareness where the public can appreciate
> their art and not tear it apart? I don't find a third
> alternative.
> 
> Yousuf
> 
> --- On Sat, 8/30/08, Rahul Asthana
> <rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: Rahul Asthana <rahul_capri at yahoo.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and
> Transgressions
> > To: ysaeed7 at yahoo.com, "Shuddhabrata
> Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net>
> > Cc: "Sarai list"
> <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008, 8:42 PM
> > Dear Yousuf,
> > 
> > I think the classic liberal stand of reductionist
> > extrapolation,in which one develops certain set of
> canonical
> > principles and expects them to govern all discourse on
> a
> > certain topic, is not necessarily philosophically
> incorrect
> > from their point of view,but insufficient and improper
> if we
> > want to live in a tolerant liberal society.I will try
> to
> > elaborate:
> > The point is not that Hussein as a Muslim can paint
> Hindu
> > deities,nude or otherwise or whether his intention was
> to
> > insult,or not.The point is also not that the his
> paintings
> > can be artistic and break new grounds of expression
> > etc.Neither is it the point that he should have the
> freedom
> > of expression to paint whatever he wants.The point is
> also
> > not that the people who attacked him were wrong.
> > 
> > The point that I have been trying to make is that all
> the
> > above things are true;but still a painting that he has
> made
> > can be offensive to many people.Now,the classic
> reductionist
> > line here is that,offense is subjective.Obviously,we
> > can't be bothered about every person who takes
> offense
> > at any random stuff, can we?To that I would say, using
> our
> > own personal judgment,depending upon our interactions
> with
> > people, we can make out most of the times  if
> something is
> > truly offensive to a large group of people or not.If
> we
> > can't,we should talk to people.IMHO,I don't
> think I
> > should take the easy way out of hiding behind the
> principles
> > of freedom of expression and visual metaphors etc.We
> should
> > always support freedom of expression,but if we can
> surmise
> > that a particular act of art was done,when it was
> probably
> > apparent that it would hurt the sensibilities of a
> large
> > group of people,we should call it for "bad
> taste".
> > 
> > 
> > If we have respect for and engage in dialog with the
> > moderates of groups we may not have to deal with the
> > extremists.
> > 
> > Dear Shuddha,
> > 
> > I think you mentioned earlier how religious people
> offend
> > the sensitivities of atheists.Could you please
> elaborate?
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Rahul
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Sat, 8/30/08, Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> > <shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> <shuddha at sarai.net>
> > > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and
> > Transgressions
> > > To: ysaeed7 at yahoo.com
> > > Cc: "Sarai list"
> > <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > > Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008, 2:44 AM
> > > Dear Yousuf, dear all,
> > > 
> > > thank you very much, Yousuf for your mail. I
> really
> > > appreciate your  
> > > point of drawing attention to the available
> > vocabularies of
> > > visual  
> > > representation and the way in which they
> determine or
> > > influence the  
> > > universe of visual repsesentatiation, if only to
> > underline
> > > the fact  
> > > that no visual artist is ever divorced from the
> > context tat
> > > they are  
> > > born into.  I have nowhere written about why
> Husain
> > does
> > > not choose  
> > > to represent themes from the Islamic canon, and I
> > totally
> > > agree with  
> > > you that he does not do so because they are not
> > available
> > > to him in  
> > > his cultural miieu,
> > > 
> > > As for apparently  transgressive cases like
> Husain or
> > Dillu
> > > Ram  
> > > Kausari, I cannnot see why they should not b
> > celebrated.
> > > Hindus  
> > > should honour Husain and Muslims should honour
> Dillu
> > Ram.
> > > In this way  
> > > they would ensure that acts of 'road
> crossing'
> > need
> > > not necessarily  
> > > end in lethal accidents,
> > > 
> >> warm regards, and hoping for many more road
> crossings,
> > > 
> > > Shuddha
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 29-Aug-08, at 8:25 PM, Yousuf Saeed wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Dear Shuddha, others
> > > > I really appreciate your highlighting of the
> fact
> > that
> > > Hussain's  
> > > > intention may not be of insulting the Hindus
> by
> > > drawing the deities  
> > > > in the nude or otherwise. I am not a
> defender of
> > > Hussain, but would  
> > > > like to put across a few points. Many people
> (on
> > this
> > > list and  
> > > > elsewhere) have pointed out that Hussain
> never
> > drew
> > > any Muslim  
> > > > character (such as the Prophet) in this
> manner,
> > and
> > > therefore his  
> > > > intention must be to insult the Hindus. They
> also
> > say
> > > that such an  
> > > > act by any artist in a Muslim country (like
> Saudi
> > > Arabia) would  
> > > > result in death penalty, and so on. But
> maybe
> > Hussain
> > > did not draw  
> > > > an Islamic character in an
> "immodest"
> > > posture simply because such  
> > > > an image or icon doesn’t exist in the
> > Islam's
> > > visual cultural  
> > > > tradition. If he does it, then that would be
> > > deliberately  
> > > > provocative (although I am not saying it
> > shouldn't
> > > be done). But he  
> > > > could draw a Hindu deity in the nude because
> such
> > a
> > > tradition  
> > > > exists in our Indian visual culture. I doubt
> if
> > he
> > > avoids
> > > >  the depiction of Muslim themes because he
> is
> > scared
> > > of the  
> > > > Islamists. Maybe he simply can't relate
> to it
> > as
> > > an Indian.
> > > >
> > > > If I as an artist cannot express my certain
> > feelings
> > > in the  
> > > > language that has been taught to be me by my
> > parents,
> > > and I  
> > > > suddenly discover a new language that allows
> me
> > to
> > > express that  
> > > > peculiar feeling in a much better way than
> what
> > my
> > > mother tongue  
> > > > did, I would be happy to use the new
> language.
> > There
> > > are thousands  
> > > > of poets and artists who found a new way of
> > expression
> > > in a  
> > > > language which every one in their midst had
> found
> > > "inferior" – I am  
> > > > talking for example of the tradition of
> Persian
> > poets
> > > of South Asia  
> > > > who also wrote verses in Hindi or Hinduvi.
> While
> > poets
> > > such as  
> > > > Masud Sa'd Salman, Amir Khusrau,
> Abdurrahim
> > > Khane-khana, Ghalib, or  
> > > > Iqbal became famous for their exquisite
> verse in
> > > Persian, their  
> > > > heart pours out better in their Hinduvi,
> Urdu or
> > Braj
> > > poetry where  
> > > > they can come down to the earth from the
> lofty
> > royal
> > > palaces. We  
> > > > often say, "Unki Hindi shayeri mein
> mitti ki
> > > khushbu aati hai" (one  
> > > > can smell the earth in their vernacular
> poetry).
> > And I
> > > >  think Hussain is no different from them. He
> > cannot
> > > draw an Islamic  
> > > > character in the nude because it's
> probably
> > not in
> > > his palette, or  
> > > > doesn't touch his heart. (And we cannot
> force
> > him
> > > to do it to  
> > > > become more politically correct).
> > > >
> > > > You may say that a lot of semi-pornographic
> > scenes
> > > have been drawn  
> > > > in Mughal or Persian miniatures, and he
> could
> > have
> > > followed that.  
> > > > But that's not the point. Hindu deities
> are
> > > flexible enough for us  
> > > > to turn them around the way we wish, to
> express a
> > > certain feeling  
> > > > that cannot be expressed any other way. So
> why
> > not
> > > appreciate and  
> > > > celebrate that fact. (I know such a
> statement
> > from me
> > > might raise  
> > > > some eyebrows). I maybe a Muslim but I
> appreciate
> > the
> > > fact that you  
> > > > can literally play with many Hindu deities.
> Just
> > the
> > > other day I  
> > > > heard Pandit Jasraj sing a khayal in which
> the
> > lyrics
> > > repeatedly  
> > > > referred to Krishna as a chor (thief). Does
> that
> > > insult a Hindu? Or  
> > > > would it insult a Hindu if this khayal was
> sung
> > by
> > > Ustad Amir Khan?  
> > > > (Incidentally, a large number of traditional
> > Hindu
> > > devotional  
> > > > lyrics sung in classical music have reached
> us
> > via
> > > Muslim gharana  
> > > > musicians, and much of devotional Hindu
> visual
> > > mythology has come  
> > > > to us via patwa artists of Bengal who are
> > > >  all Muslim. Can M.F.Hussain be detached
> from
> > that
> > > continuity?)  
> > > > Much of the popular calendar and poster art
> of
> > 20th
> > > century showing  
> > > > Hindu deities was drawn by an artist called
> Hasan
> > Raza
> > > Raja of  
> > > > Meerut. And the manner in which most Hindu
> > deities are
> > > visualized  
> > > > today comes from the pioneering work of Raja
> Ravi
> > > Varma who was  
> > > > clearly inspired by western style of art
> where
> > human
> > > models were  
> > > > used to visualize the gods and goddesses.
> So,
> > does all
> > > this insult  
> > > > the Hindus? And what is the
> "original"
> > Hindu
> > > way of imagining the  
> > > > deities any way?
> > > >
> > > > I liked your quoting from Kausari who is
> among
> > many
> > > Hindu poets who  
> > > > have written/announced their emotive
> affiliation
> > with
> > > Prophet  
> > > > Mohammad in the same way as say with
> Krishna. I
> > doubt
> > > if such  
> > > > actions in the past may have met with much
> > resistance
> > > (as you have  
> > > > mentioned) – such examples were a norm.
> There
> > are
> > > many Hindu poets  
> > > > who have written marsiyas full of pathos for
> Imam
> > > Hussain's  
> > > > martyrdom, and many Muslim poets who
> composed
> > adorable
> > > songs for  
> > > > Krishna. I don't think it was too hard
> to
> > cross
> > > the road in those  
> > > > days. So, why are we busy throwing stones
> onto
> > each
> > > other from the  
> > > > two sides of a road? I could imagine that at
> > least an
> > > online forum  
> > > > like Sarai could act like a subway or a
> walk-over
> > > bridge to cross  
> > > > the busy highway. But currently it seems
> more
> > like a
> > > road-block.  
> > > > And we are all paying the toll.
> > > >
> > > > Yousuf
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- On Fri, 8/29/08, Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> > > <shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> From: Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> > > <shuddha at sarai.net>
> > > >> Subject: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and
> > > Transgressions
> > > >> To: "Sarai list"
> > > <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > > >> Date: Friday, August 29, 2008, 1:31 PM
> > > >> Dear All,
> > > >>
> > > >> I have been intrigued by the exchange on
> the
> > list
> > > of late
> > > >> that has
> > > >> preferred to jettison the term
> > 'religion'
> > > and
> > > >> prefer in its stead the
> > > >> euphimistic phrase - 'ways of
> life'.
> > I am
> > > referring
> > > >> to the exchange
> > > >> between Chanchal Malviya and Jeebesh
> Bagchi,
> > > arising out of
> > > >> the
> > > >> heated correspondence on the disruption
> of a
> > small
> > > >> exhibition devoted
> > > >> to M.F.Husain.
> > > >>
> > > >> i am quite convinced that the term
> > > 'religion'
> > > >> which derives from the
> > > >> latin root of the word religio (bond)
> and
> > religare
> > > (the
> > > >> verb form of
> > > >> 'to bind') remains for me a
> useful
> > word to
> > > name the
> > > >> act of committing
> > > >> oneself in any form. In this sense,
> atheists
> > and
> > > agnostics
> > > >> are just
> > > >> as religious (in their commitment to
> doubt)
> > as are
> > > those
> > > >> blessed with
> > > >> faith. I would describe my religious
> > commitment as
> > > >> agnosticism - a
> > > >> commitment to doubt everything,
> (including
> > the
> > > value of
> > > >> doubt) and a
> > > >> certainty that we cannot speak certainly
> of
> > > anything at
> > > >> all, because
> > > >> there are always counterfactuals, and
> > hitherto
> > > unimagined,
> > > >> or unknown
> > > >> possibilities, that goad us on to yet
> newer
> > > possibilities,
> > > >> or to
> > > >> return to some very old ones. This is
> just to
> > say
> > > that it
> > > >> would be a
> > > >> mistake to assume, as is often done with
> some
> > > arrogance on
> > > >> the part
> > > >> of the more pronouncedly
> 'faithful',
> > that
> > > atheists
> > > >> and agnostics have
> > > >> no 'spiritual' quests. They do,
> and
> > they
> > > dont, just
> > > >> as those who are
> > > >> ostentatiously 'religious' do,
> and
> > dont,
> > > or do only
> > > >> in as much as it
> > > >> allows them to burn a few churches as
> they go
> > > questing. If
> > > >> Hindu
> > > >> fundamentalists have chosen to renounce
> the
> > ties
> > > that bind
> > > >> (religio)
> > > >> them to life, who would I be to object,
> > because, I
> > > am not a
> > > >> Hindu.
> > > >> But I have no quarrel with the term
> 'ways
> > of
> > > life'.
> > > >> The more words we
> > > >> have, the better.
> > > >>
> > > >> This discussion arose out of a rage felt
> by
> > some
> > > that a
> > > >> group of
> > > >> zealots had broken and disrupted an
> > exhibition
> > > that
> > > >> featured some
> > > >> images of and by Husain, and the counter
> rage
> > felt
> > > by
> > > >> others that the
> > > >> zealots had no right to be criticised
> because
> > they
> > > were
> > > >> acting to
> > > >> protect the honour of the Hindu deities
> that
> > they
> > > felt
> > > >> Husain had
> > > >> insulted.
> > > >>
> > > >> The second case is as follows - what
> right
> > has
> > > Husain, a
> > > >> Muslim to
> > > >> insult Hindu deities by portraying them
> in a
> > > manner that is
> > > >> offensive
> > > >> to the sentiments of many Hindus.
> > (Husain's
> > > >> motivations, or the
> > > >> aesthetic merit of his images are not
> the
> > issue
> > > here, what
> > > >> is at
> > > >> issue is the insult seen to have
> occurred
> > when a
> > > non-Hindu
> > > >> 'touches'
> > > >> a sacred Hindu icon with his
> > 'insulting'
> > > >> imagination. Those so
> > > >> enraged, also throw the following
> challenge,
> > has
> > > the
> > > >> opposite ever
> > > >> occurred?
> > > >>
> > > >> I am not here to make a case for Husain.
> (As
> > I
> > > have said
> > > >> before I do
> > > >> not have a very high opinion of his work
> as
> > an
> > > artist). I
> > > >> am here to
> > > >> make a case for what is considered to be
> > > transgression. No
> > > >> one can be
> > > >> sure when they have transgressed.
> Because
> > > transgression can
> > > >> be seen
> > > >> to occur even when the motives of the
> person
> > > concerned are
> > > >> far from
> > > >> transgression. Husain can say in his
> defence,
> > and
> > > indeed
> > > >> has on
> > > >> occasion said that his paintings are an
> index
> > of
> > > his
> > > >> appreciation of
> > > >> Indic culture and its diversity of
> > expressions, of
> > > his
> > > >> closeness
> > > >> (since early childhood) to forms of
> iconic
> > imagery
> > > in
> > > >> popular Hinduism.
> > > >>
> > > >> Here his intent is clearly not to
> insult, on
> > the
> > > contrary,
> > > >> it is to
> > > >> declare his appreciation for the beauty
> of
> > the
> > > iconography
> > > >> of popular
> > > >> Hinduism, a charge for which he would be
> > equally
> > > hated by
> > > >> both Hindu
> > > >> as well as Muslim fundamentalists.
> > > >>
> > > >> It has not been noticed that no Muslim
> > > fundamentalist or
> > > >> even Muslim
> > > >> religious figure has come out in defence
> of
> > > Husain. They
> > > >> are in fact
> > > >> in tacit agreement with their Hindu
> peers. A
> > > Muslim making
> > > >> images,
> > > >> and that too of Hindu goddesses, because
> he
> > is
> > > drawn to
> > > >> them, can
> > > >> only be seen as blasphemy in their eyes.
> On
> > this,
> > > like on
> > > >> so many
> > > >> other issues, Hindu and Muslim
> > fundamentalists are
> > > in total
> > > >> agreement.
> > > >>
> > > >> Let me come now to an interesting
> > counterfactual
> > > argument.
> > > >> I refer to
> > > >> the life an work of a little known late
> > nineteenth
> > > century
> > > >> and early
> > > >> twentieth century Urdu poet of Delhi
> called
> > Dillu
> > > Ram
> > > >> Kausari. Now as
> > > >> his name suggests, Dillu Ram was a
> Hindu. The
> > > trouble is,
> > > >> throughout
> > > >> his life he composed deliriously
> passionate
> > > elegies
> > > >> (na'at)  to the
> > > >> Prophet Muhammad.
> > > >>
> > > >> One of his quatrains went as follows
> > > >>
> > > >> Kuch ‘ishq e Muhammad mein nahin shart
> e
> > > Musulman!
> > > >> Hai Kausari Hindu bhii talabgaar e
> Muhammad!
> > > >> Allah re! kyaa raunaq e bazaar e
> Muhammad
> > > >> Ke Ma’bood e Jahan bhi hai kharidaar e
> > Muhammad!
> > > >>
> > > >> Being a Muslim is not a condition for
> loving
> > > Muhammad!
> > > >> Kausari, the Hindu, is also a seeker of
> > Muhammad!
> > > >> By Allah! How delightful is the bazaar
> of
> > Muhammad
> > > >> For the Lord of the Worlds is also a
> buyer of
> > > Muhammad!
> > > >>
> > > >> This kind of sentiment shocked both
> Hindus
> > and
> > > Muslims.
> > > >> Hindus,
> > > >> because how could a Hindu sing what
> amounted
> > to
> > > love songs
> > > >> to a
> > > >> Muslim prophet, and Muslims, for the
> same
> > reason.
> > > Both felt
> > > >> slighted
> > > >> and insulted by the transgressive way in
> > which the
> > > >> imagination of the
> > > >> poet had 'touched' the body of
> what
> > was
> > > sacred for
> > > >> one, and not, for
> > > >> the other.
> > > >>
> > > >> Another poem, which proved to be even
> more
> > > controversial,
> > > >> went like
> > > >> this -
> > > >>
> > > >> Rahmatulilalamin kay Hashar mein
> maana’
> > khulay
> > > >> Khalq saari Shaafa e Roz e Jaza kay
> saath hai
> > > >> Laykay Dillu Raam ko jannat mein jab
> Hazrat
> > gaye
> > > >> Ma’loom huwa kay Hindu bhi Mahboob e
> Khuda
> > kay
> > > saath hai!
> > > >>
> > > >> The meaning of “Mercy unto the
> Worlds”
> > became
> > > apparent
> > > >> on Judgement Day:
> > > >> The whole creation is with the
> Intercessor of
> > The
> > > Day of
> > > >> Acquittal
> > > >> When the Prophet took Dillu Ram with him
> into
> > > Paradise
> > > >> It was known that this Hindu too is with
> the
> > > Beloved of
> > > >> God!
> > > >>
> > > >> This poem, especially scandalized Muslim
> > > orthodoxy, because
> > > >> it dared
> > > >> to suggest that the prophet himself
> would
> > > intercede on
> > > >> behalf of an
> > > >> unbeliever on the day of judgement.
> > > >>
> > > >> It is interesting to note that Dillu Ram
> > never
> > > became a
> > > >> Muslim, at
> > > >> least not in his lifetime. An article in
> the
> > > interesting
> > > >> web portal
> > > >> Chowk 
> http://www.chowk.com/articles/12692 by
> > one
> > > Asif
> > > >> Naqshbandi says
> > > >>
> > > >> "It is also said that Dillu Ram,
> > delirious
> > > with his
> > > >> love, would
> > > >> sometimes stand in the middle of the
> bazaar
> > in
> > > Delhi, put
> > > >> chains
> > > >> around his neck and feet and shout at
> the top
> > of
> > > his voice
> > > >> to all
> > > >> passers-by, “Muhammad! Muhammad!
> Muhammad!
> > Yes!
> > > Muhammad
> > > >> is the
> > > >> Beloved of God! Muhammad is the first
> and
> > only
> > > Beloved of
> > > >> God! If God
> > > >> loves you, He loves you because of His
> > Beloved!”
> > > Some
> > > >> people even
> > > >> stoned him and he would often come home
> > covered in
> > > blood
> > > >> but he was
> > > >> totally lost in his love of the Prophet
> > (peace and
> > > >> blessings be upon
> > > >> him!)"
> > > >>
> > > >> There is an apocryphal story of how on
> his
> > > deathbed Dillu
> > > >> Ram Kausari
> > > >> had a vision of the Prophet himself, who
> came
> > to
> > > him, and
> > > >> that he
> > > >> read the Kalima with him. But as this
> vision
> > is
> > > reported to
> > > >> have
> > > >> appeared only to him, as he lay dying,
> and as
> > he
> > > is no
> > > >> longer with us
> > > >> to either confirm or deny this deathbed
> > > conversion, we can
> > > >> only
> > > >> surmise that it was a generous, but
> somewhat
> > > disingenuous
> > > >> method of
> > > >> having Dillu Ram's somewhat
> unorthodox
> > Muslim
> > > >> apologists claim him
> > > >> for themselves.
> > > >>
> > > >> As far as we are concerned, Dillu Ram
> > Kausari,
> > > caused grave
> > > >> offence,
> > > >> by his love for the Prophet, both to
> Hindu as
> > well
> > > as to
> > > >> Muslim
> > > >> zealots, as long as he lived.
> > > >>
> > > >> If, the things we call religions are
> > 'ways of
> > > life'
> > > >> then we can
> > > >> always determine for ourselves whether
> we
> > want to
> > > walk on a
> > > >> one way
> > > >> street that runs into a dead end, or to
> cross
> > many
> > > paths,
> > > >> walking
> > > >> down one way, for one purpose, down
> another
> > way
> > > for
> > > >> another, and
> > > >> sometimes just standing in between
> paths,
> > figuring
> > > out our
> > > >> journey,
> > > >> as we go about our lives.
> > > >>
> > > >> I find cases like Husain and Dillu Ram
> > Kausari
> > > interesting
> > > >> not
> > > >> because of what they paint of what they
> say,
> > but
> > > because
> > > >> they seem to
> > > >> cause such prolonged traffic jams on the
> > 'ways
> > > of
> > > >> life'. And all they
> > > >> were doing was crossing the road.
> > > >>
> > > >> thanks and regards,
> > > >>
> > > >> Shuddha
> > > >>
> > > >> -----
> > > >> Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> > > >>
> > > >>
> _________________________________________
> > > >> reader-list: an open discussion list on
> media
> > and
> > > the city.
> > > >> Critiques & Collaborations
> > > >> To subscribe: send an email to
> > > >> reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe
> > in
> > > the subject
> > > >> header.
> > > >> To unsubscribe:
> > > >>
> > >
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > > >> List archive:
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________
> > > > reader-list: an open discussion list on
> media and
> > the
> > > city.
> > > > Critiques & Collaborations
> > > > To subscribe: send an email to
> > > reader-list-request at sarai.net with  
> > > > subscribe in the subject header.
> > > > To unsubscribe:
> > >
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > > > List archive:
> > >
> >
> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> > > 
> > > Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> > > The Sarai Programme at CSDS
> > > Raqs Media Collective
> > > shuddha at sarai.net
> > > www.sarai.net
> > > www.raqsmediacollective.net
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _________________________________________
> > > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and
> the
> > city.
> > > Critiques & Collaborations
> > > To subscribe: send an email to
> > > reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in
> the
> > subject
> > > header.
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > >
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list 
> > > List archive:
> > >
> >
> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>