[Reader-list] Ways of Life and Transgressions

[inder salim]

Picasso said, if it is possible to explian, it is futile to paint.

even if i we gnore picasso, who is an old hat in modern art now, let
alone hussain sahib who is immensely supported by investors, and 'post
colonialism' as theoritical justificaioin to do whatever he or we
sometimes  are doing which can pass as derivate at the best.

what is education or what is not , what is offensive or what is not,
is difficult to explain, if one chases the text, and its meaning
profoundly...

what we forget also is the fact that what we see are phtographs of the
the original

.and is photogaphy representing real, if so then we have truly
disappeared from the face of this earth. and it does not matter if
there is hussain or not,

there is book by Jean Baudilard ' conspiracy of art'
which speaks  the contemporary art practices , and that makes us feel
that the whole world is in fact a piece of modern art work , and we
are not there, simple not part of it.

the question of relevance of hussain in our social structures is open
to this sort of criticism,

 but not once it lands as amunition in the hands of fanatics.

love
is






On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Rahul Asthana <rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> OK, I think we are almost on the same page now.If by educating you mean explaining;then I agree.Hussein might explain why his painting was not meant to offend,alternatively he may realize how and to what degree its offensive, and he may decide its not worth it.It should work both ways.
> I have no stake in whatever is decided,but as Kshmendra has mentioned,the emphasis should be on understanding and respecting the other,not educating them.
>
> --- On Tue, 9/2/08, 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: Tuesday, September 2, 2008, 11:03 AM
> > Dear Rahul
> > Why are you so scared of the word "education",
> > and why are you seeing it in such limited terms. If you look
> > at my last mail, I agreed that your solution #3 is good and
> > I'd be happy if it works. But I emphasized about
> > dialogue as part of the education. Don't you think
> > dialogue and communication between the two conflicting
> > parties would be an integral part of even your solution?
> >
> > What would you have to say about a counselor/psychiatrist
> > who tries to resolve conflicts say between two spouses.
> > His/her main role is to (a) know each side's story, and
> > then (b) inform each spouse about the other's problem
> > which was actually missing between them due to long gaps of
> > non-communication. Most conflicts in the family or society
> > occur because of the distance we create between two parties
> > - we fear each other, imagine all sorts of strange notions
> > about each other and strengthen the hatred about each other.
> > If only we talked, we could have realized that much of our
> > fears were baseless.
> >
> > Hence I am simply talking about creating bridges between
> > two parties through communication. Why can't we for
> > instance have a meeting/workshop between Hussain and the
> > religious fanatics where they tell each other's story
> > and try to explain why each party needs to be sensitive to
> > others' feelings. I know this will not entirely remove
> > either party's deep prejudices, and may lead to further
> > flaring up, but some moderation may also happen. But I would
> > again emphasize that those thoughts and ideas of both sides
> > which are required for the dialogue should at least be
> > available for everyone to see and understand. For instance,
> > we only get to see a lot of hate-propaganda from the
> > religious fanatics against the artist, but never see any
> > effort from Hussain or the art fraternity to explain what
> > this art is all about, and why he makes what he makes. The
> > artist thinks that he/she doesn't need to explain
> > anything.
> >
> > I am sorry, but I don't follow terms like reductionism,
> > teleology, deontology, so maybe I am sounding a bit rigid to
> > you.
> >
> > Yousuf
> >
> > --- On Tue, 9/2/08, 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: Tuesday, September 2, 2008, 2:01 AM
> > > 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
> > > > > > > > > > >> becauseof
> > 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:
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > <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:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > <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:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > <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: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>


--

http://indersalim.livejournal.com