[Reader-list] Ways of Life and Transgressions

[Rahul Asthana]

Dear Yousuf,
Your argument is  what I call reductionist (from dictionary.com=2.the practice of simplifying a complex idea, issue, condition, or the like, esp. to the point of minimizing, obscuring, or distorting it.).
When you talk about "millions of issues in our society which people used to take with orthodox attitude",you are basically creating a straw man.Many orthodox practices have to be given up;we have no difference on that.
When two deontologies collide,we have to present a teleological argument in favor of one or the other.In other words,when two value frameworks reach conflicting position on an issue,we have two ways we can approach the conflict.The one who favors one value framework should present a comparison of the two frameworks in terms of social cost-benefit,or,The one who favors one value framework tries to educate the other one to their system just because its "better".Do you see the difference between the two?
Now, in an engagement of two groups on perceived social cost-benefit,there will be conflicts.Its hard to imagine how two groups will have same perception of social cost-benefit.But at least we would be trying to resolve issues within a teleological framework which is a lot better than "my way is better than your way and you have to be educated to my way".

Regards
Rahul






gate social cost-benefit,and not on the basis of what one group thinks is right.

--- On Mon, 9/1/08, 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: Monday, September 1, 2008, 9:12 AM
> Dear Rahul
> I understand your logic, but I think your alternative no.3
> is too idealized and utopian to achieve, although I would
> love if it works. Also, it may apply only to some
> situations, not all. For instance, if a group of people
> thinks that women are inferior and should remain inside
> homes, or that we should ruin the environment by cutting
> trees, wasting water and fuel, would you allow them to
> believe and act on this? You may call it my condescending
> attitude, but why is it that we have managed to bring an
> awareness and "reform" today about so many
> millions of issues in our society which people used to take
> with orthodox attitude. I am talking about gender equality,
> environment, education, health issues (although it is still
> not enough). Nobody is born with politically correct genes -
> we all acquire things as we grow. So what's the big deal
> for instance about having arts appreciation as part of the
> school curriculum or TV programmes. Should we allow our
>  mainstream media to remain condescending then? Why is
> television changing the attitude of people - why is our
> society becoming more consumerist and aggressive and
> prejudiced? 
> Look my condescending solution doesn't involve simply
> education - I am talking about dialogue and awareness, and
> not talking down somebody's throat which the TV does
> today.
> 
> Yousuf
> 
> --- On Sun, 8/31/08, 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: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta"
> <shuddha at sarai.net>, ysaeed7 at yahoo.com
> > Cc: "Sarai list"
> <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > Date: Sunday, August 31, 2008, 11:54 PM
> > Yousuf, 
> > 
> > I think i failed in getting my point across.No amount
> of
> > "education" would make Hussein's art
> > appreciated by some,and those who are offended by
> > Hussein's art are no less "educated"
> than you
> > or me.
> > Unless you get rid of your condescension about
> educating
> > people about what they should or shouldn't get
> offended
> > by,any discussion about solution to conflicts like
> this is a
> > non-starter.
> > 
> > I am going to make one last try though.
> > 
> > Say there are two groups A and B,with different value
> > systems.A is offended by an act X and B is
> not,apparently
> > due to their different value systems. B encourages X
> and
> > this increases tensions in a society where A and B
> live
> > together.Lets see what are the possible solutions.
> > 
> > 1.Both A and B tell each other to go take a hike and
> they
> > would do according to how they feel fit. 
> > 2.Both A and B are sure that their value systems are
> > superior and they try to convert each other to their
> own
> > view points through dialog etc.
> > 3.Both A and B recognize that there are irreconcilable
> > differences in their world views.They also recognize
> that
> > they would respect the differences and try to honor
> them to
> > the extent possible while also trying to achieve their
> own
> > goals through whatever means possible.
> > 
> > If liberal fanatics like you will keep on engaging in
> > #2,(which in my opinion is even worse than #1 because
> #1
> > does not involve condescension) that you are doing
> right
> > now,you will always enable religious fanatics from the
> other
> > side who will try to convert you to their view
> point.Why is
> > their stand less valid than yours? 
> > If you engage in #3 ,you will enable moderates from
> the
> > other side who will listen to you if you listen to
> them.
> > The big leap of understanding that you need to make is
> that
> > there can be two internally consistent value systems
> which
> > will lead to opposing positions on many issues,and
> both
> > these value systems are equally valid.
> > 
> > Regards
> > Rahul
> > 
> > --- On Sun, 8/31/08, 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: Sunday, August 31, 2008, 9:40 AM
> > > When I mention education, I primarily include
> media in
> > it.
> > > But the media is careless and works only on the
> > diktats of
> > > industry and politicians. So the prime
> responsibility
> > (of
> > > making sure that their art is appreciated) falls
> on
> > the arts
> > > fraternity itself. At least until we find a
> better
> > solution.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- 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: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta"
> > > <shuddha at sarai.net>, ysaeed7 at yahoo.com
> > > > Cc: "Sarai list"
> > > <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > > > Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008, 9:58 PM
> > > > "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/>