[Reader-list] Jamia Millia should be prosecuted
Nazneen Anand Shamsi
nazoshmasi at googlemail.com
Tue Sep 30 02:56:37 IST 2008
Dear Iram,
I see no logic in repeating arguments ad nauseum. I merely wanted in all my
earnestness, some regulations/guidelines so as to avoid an instance like
Radhikarajen. I still do. I feel sad about the whole affair. I appreciate
your concern to engage. I have already stated in my last mail, one of the
things that I would rather not have on the reader list. I await your
response.
Regarding Encounter/Blast, since you were a self confessed admirer of
'gestural' values, I had imagined a longer response on how does one recreate
imageries received from popular culture. I understand that you have
understood! No elucidation is expected, though sometimes dictionaries can be
useful, in 'gesturing' towards, new ways to think about same words. Just a
thought!
On VC's position, I take your point. I never thought that you are were out
to convince anyone. At the same time, I feel that for every precedent there
is an instance when there was no precedence, like before Namboodripad, there
was no precedence of a communist being democratically elected as a CM or
before Vajpayee there was no precedence of a BJP MP sitting on PM's chair
and so on. May be what Jamia, VC did was perhaps unprecedented.
With all due respect
and warm regards
Nazo
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 6:35 PM, <iram at sarai.net> wrote:
> Dear Nazo
>
> I think everyone on this list would have understood by now that you dont
> want individual responses from list members. Meanwhile there are other
> conversational threads on the list regarding 'protocols'. I would love to
> read your suggestions.
>
> Coming to the Encounter - Blast - you have very effectively stated your
> position (at least I have understood) and I need no further elucidation on
> that - certainly not dictionary meanings.
>
> Regarding the legal aid decision by the Jamia VC, there are various
> opinions floating around on various forums. Ultimately it was a matter of
> choice for the VC - and as far as inviduals like me or you are concerned,
> we can agree with him or disagree - AS i said before, I have no desire to
> convince you or any body that my way was the 'only' way. I have stated my
> position, as have you. (I await examples of precedents where a UNiversity
> has supported students accused of 'terrorist' activities - just as a matter
> of curiousity).
>
> Best
> Iram
>
>
> On 8:24 am 09/29/08 "Nazneen Anand Shamsi" <nazoshmasi at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Iram,
> >
> > Thank you for your reply. I deeply appreciate your thoughts. I had a
> > rewarding time reading them. Now that it seems we are exchanging our
> > thoughts on two threads simultaneously, please allow me, first to reply
> > to your response regarding public/private conversations between list
> > members, followed by Jamia 'Blasts'.
> >
> > 1. On public/private conversations-
> >
> > Does it not always takes us a while to understand things?
> >
> > I am fine with your Johnny Come Lately understanding on this issue.
> > You may recall that in a mail I posted on the reader-list on the 23rd
> > of Sept 2008, I wrote in a clear, concise and precise language, about
> > my intention to interact only publicly with all list members. (Kindly
> > allow me to quote- I intend to have only ON LIST conversations with all
> > or any members of this list. I do not wish to hold any private
> > conversations with list members.) Having stated this, as clearly as, a
> > not so literate person like yours truly could, I had hoped that my
> > message was unambiguous. Clearly, that was not the case. I beg your
> > pardon for that error.
> >
> > For your sake, I repeat again- I do not want or desire 'different
> > rules of engagement'. I just want a public dialogue. Am I asking
> > for too much for anyone to handle? Is it too complex a form of
> > communication or engagement?
> >
> > In all my humility Iram, I accept your apologies. I offer mine in
> > the same spirit. I hope you shall forgive me if I had caused you any
> > distress. Thank you for sharing with me your theoretical formulations
> > with respect to reader list. Now that you have spoken we can rest
> > assured that reader-list is indeed a -public space-. But I beg to
> > differ, for as I understand 'public-spaces' are
> > non-discriminatory spaces open to all without any reservation to caste,
> > class, ethnicity or gender. Reader list, in this regard discriminates
> > its participants on the basis of language. Reader-list, therefore, may
> > be loosely termed as a 'closed' public space as it could be
> > termed a privileged space in its broadest sense. The reader list
> > closes its public-ness especially if viewed from the perspective of a
> > non-English speaking person of course, who is perhaps desirous of
> > sharing this space. Having said that, I, as always, stand corrected
> > and will look forward for your refined thoughts on the nuances of
> > definitions regarding 'public-spaces' and its relationship to
> > reader-list.
> >
> > I do not have any hesitation in sharing with you my list of
> > regulations but like a responsible list member I want to make sure that
> > a sufficient threshold is achieved first in terms of a consensus that,
> > yes we need regulations, before we could address the question-what kind
> > of regulations-. In this respect, you may have noticed that on a recent
> > thread with subject header-On Sarai Postings- which was initiated by
> > Radhakrishnan, there are only five posts. I would like to invite you
> > and others on the list to join this debate, of course, if you have time
> > and inclination, and let us think together on this very crucial issue.
> > I would be extremely happy to hear your kind views, if you have any, on
> > regulation, conduct, content and modalities of engagement on the reader
> > list.
> >
> > Before I respond to Jamia 'Blasts' debate, let me say that we
> > could do away with the practice of copy/paste jobs on the list. A link
> > would suffice. I think all of us here are net savvy enough to follow a
> > link. As I reader I am most interested in understanding how people
> > think and what they think and how they articulate their thoughts. If
> > they want to share some literature with me I welcome that gesture but I
> > would rather that a link be given.
> >
> > 2. On Jamia BLASTS!
> >
> > -it would be great if you do not refer to the 'case' as
> > 'jamia blasts'! There were no blasts in Jamia.- There was an
> > encounter in Batla House-
> >
> > I don't blame you Iram for your painful insistence to adhere to
> > categories given to us by the mass media. We are all bowling alone here
> > aren't we, to allude to that classic by Putnam. Numbing down.
> > Dumbing down. The loop is hypnotizing us. In an Orwellian sense, the
> > Squealers are on the job again. Giving us language. Making meaning. And
> > we consume. Like a psychedelic drug. And dance trance like. Blast.
> > Encounter.Blast. Encounter. Blast. Encounter. Legs apart. Hands in the
> > air. Head floating. Eyes turned upward. Sweat breaking all over. News
> > just coming in There is a blast at CP. Blast at GK. Blast at CP. Blast
> > at GK. News just coming in There is an Encounter at Jamia. Encounter at
> > Jamia. Encounter at Jamia. And the dance begins. Blast. Encounter.
> > Blast. Encounter. Blast. Encounter. Lets go LIVE. Lets hear from our
> > correspondent. Legs apart. Hands in the air. Head floating. Eyes turned
> > upward. Sweat breaking all over. Till we are reduced to just a
> > creature. And Orwell says 'The creatures outside looked from pig to
> > man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was
> > impossible to say which was which.'
> >
> > But we are not creatures, are we? We seem to know which is which
> > don't we?. The loop has not hypnotized us. Has it?
> >
> > Blast and Encounter.
> >
> > Let's look at these words closely.
> >
> > Encounter. A dictionary informs us encounter is a verb-
> >
> > (used with object) to come upon or meet with, esp. unexpectedly: to
> > encounter a new situation. to meet with or contend against
> > (difficulties, opposition, etc.)to meet (a person, military force,
> > etc.) in conflict: –verb (used without object)to meet, esp.
> > unexpectedly or in conflict: –noun a meeting with a person or thing,
> > esp. a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting: Psychology. a meeting of
> > two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of
> > married couples (marriage encounter), conducted to promote direct
> > emotional confrontations among the participants, esp. as a form of
> > therapy (encounter therapy). (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q
> > =encounter)
> >
> > For me what happened that day at CP, GK and Karol bagh was nothing
> > less than an encounter. People encountered their death. They met with
> > their death 'unexpectedly'. That meeting was 'casual, and
> > brief'. May be we have become so tired of translating and
> > interpretating that we have given up our faculty to questions these
> > words. We do not know now that it was a blast or an encounter. We just
> > want to blend in. Speak the lingo. Yet I refuse to accept their word. I
> > will not imagine what they want me to. I refuse to not to not question
> > their semantics.
> >
> > Blast. The same dictionary says Blast may be a noun, a verb or an
> > adjective-
> >
> > a loud, sudden sound or noise,
> > the sudden death of buds, flowers, or young fruit.
> > to show to be false, unreliable, etc.; discredit to hit or
> > propel with great force
> > to shoot
> > (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=blast)
> >
> > Let us for the sake of argument re-phrase, what happend at Jamia that
> > day. There was a blast. A loud sudden noise. Followed by sudden death
> > of young men. Bullets flew with great force. Two students and a police
> > person was killed. Though now many people think that what happend was
> > unrealible.
> >
> > What happend at Jamia that day was clearly a blast!
> >
> > A blast in the truest sense of the word. But who is bothered about
> > truth here. Perhaps in this mesmerising psyshedelic dance of live TV
> > truth is the first casulty. We will never know whether it was a blast
> > or an encounter. Although we would like to remember it as an encounter,
> > because 'Times of India' says so. Aaj Tak says so. We will
> > insist on maintaning those categories. Separate and distinct. Clear. We
> > will confirm. We will not question. And if someone does we shall
> > correct her. May be she is on psychedelic drugs. She insists on a
> > dictionary. How crazy. A mere creature who does not know which is
> > which. And look at her. Legs apart. Hands in the air. Head floating.
> > Eyes turned upward. Sweat breaking all over. Dancing trance like.
> > Blast. Encounter. Blast. Encounter.
> >
> > 3. On possible options after the Jamia blasts!
> >
> > Iram, frankly speaking, for me the issue is not about
> > 'options', per se, rather it is the act. I applaud Prof.
> > Hasan's act in the event of non-occurance of other acts or may be,
> > perhaps OPTIONS for providing immediate relief in some form to
> > students. When one feels about something. One acts. One does not
> > necessarily explore options. May be Prof. Hasan felt strongly about
> > giving legal aid to students. And he acted.
> >
> > -Parallels to caste based aid were drawn because you gave Salman
> > Khurshid's exmaple and impled that Jamia University should
> > provide legal aid becuase the students are from middle class
> > backgrounds-
> >
> > Let me state again what I implied- I find Prof. Hasan's
> > spontaneous act of offer to give legal aid to students who were clearly
> > in need courageous. I would like to consider this act unique. I am in
> > no way none whatsoever in favor of comparing or correlating this act to
> > other 'ROUTINIZED/INSTITUTINALIZED' acts of disbersal of funds.
> > Period.
> >
> > 4. On possible precedents to VC's act/option to provide legal
> > aid.
> >
> > Even if there weren't any precedents, one has to make a beginning
> > some where. I would regard any form of decision making process that
> > relies on occurance of prior events as the sole criteria for present
> > optons prohibitionary. It takes courage to go against the grain, even
> > when one knows that one could be wrong.
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Nazo
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 7:10 PM, wrote:
> > Dear Nazo
> >
> > I have understood your terms. There would be no personal emails from
> > me - at least. Of course it took me time to realize that you dont
> > want any interaction with a list member except on a public forum. My
> > deepest apologies! I hope my individual/ personal email didnt cause
> > too much distress.
> >
> > The reader list is a 'public space'. Hence my request to my
> > co- members to send mails with 'content' and to think before
> > clicking the send button. My email was not 'precribing' codes
> > for email excahnge between individuals - I think people have to
> > arrive at their individual codes themselves- such as the two of us
> > have. No emails! Anyway, a private email exchange between two people
> > doesnt concern others. There are different rules of engagement on a
> > public forum with about 1400 members. You seem to be pushing for
> > 'regulations' on the list. Why dont you suggest some? The
> > reader list is as much your space as mine or the list admins. I am
> > sure if list members see value in them, the list admin will respond.
> > No hard feelings Nazo (I am tempted to make a smiley!) but I look
> > forward to your suggestions for 'regulations'.
> >
> > Now regarding the unfortunate series of events under discussion, I
> > have a request - it would be great if you do not refer to the
> > 'case' as 'jamia blasts'! There were no blasts in
> > Jamia. There were blasts in CP, GK and Karol Bagh. There was an
> > encounter in Batla House and a couple of students from Jamia
> > University have been arrested.
> >
> > Nazo, are you trying to suggest that the best possible way that
> > Mushirul Hasan, Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia, had, to help
> > the accused of various blasts in the city, was to provide 'legal
> > aid' on "behalf" of the University? The autonomous body
> > that emerges from the University system - to provide legal aid to
> > students accused of 'crimes against the state' was one
> > suggestion - I find it difficult to believe that the VC had no
> > options. Parallels to caste based aid were drawn because you gave
> > Salman Khurshid's exmaple and impled that Jamia University should
> > provide legal aid becuase the students are from middle class
> > backgrounds. I am still as unconvinced by that logic as I was before.
> > I know that needy/ meritorious students are provided scholarships. I
> > didnt realise we could extend that to court cases involving
> > 'terrorist activities'. Anyway, as far as I know Manjunath
> > Shanmugam Trust fought the case for the the former IIM- Lucknow
> > student. IIM lucknow did not fight the case directly. But these are
> > facts gleaned from newspapers, so I could be wrong. However, I am not
> > looking for a precedent where a University was directly involved in
> > providing legal aid to students accused of 'terrorist'
> > activities but nonetheless I would be curious to know if this has
> > ever happened before, in other parts of the world if not in India.
> >
> >
> > I am sure that the decision to provide legal aid falls within the
> > purview of the VC office. I wonder if it was the correct decision.
> >
> > With All Respect
> > Iram
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1:35 am 09/28/08 "Nazneen Anand Shamsi" wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Iram,
> > >
> > > What a pleasant surprise! I was not expecting yourresponse until
> > > later, since you mentioned something aboutunavailability of email
> > > access. Anyways!
> > >
> > > I would rather skipyour passage about list admin and
> > > &#39;prescriptions&#39;, I just wanted tomake a point
> > > which was this- that just as you want other members ofthis list to
> > > &#39;desist from clicking send&#39;, because you want them
> > > torespect some un-written modalities of engagement, so would I, in
> > > mypersonal capacity want others to at least acknowledge some
> > > writtenmodalities of engagement. It seems, all of us here- the
> > > writers, theresponders and the readers fail sometimes to
> > > appreciate this. We wouldalways want to engage with others on our
> > > own terms don&#39;t we. Please bepatient before sending those
> > &#39;desist&#39; mails if you in your personalcapacity cannot
> > > resist from engaging others on their terms. Justbecause a
> > > particular address is available on an internet search engine!
> > > Precisely the kind of attitude demonstrated by some of our
> > > co-membersjust because there are no argument-filters on reader
> > > list. Please showsome respect first and then expect.
> > >
> > > Otherwise chart out clear, no-nonsense rules of engagement. I am
> > > all for a regulatory code of conduct for Sarai Reader-list.
> > >
> > > I just want to make a point. No bad feelings. Consider it white
> > > noise and lets move on.
> > >
> > > Unless you wish to take this exchange forward...
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ---
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -
> > > Regarding your response-
> > >
> > > Let me rephrase your position- you &#39;suggest&#39;
> > > concerned partiesinvolved with the unfortunate Jamia blasts to
> > > &#39;consider&#39; an option tomake autonomous committees
> > > on lines of All India Defense Councilconstituted for a fair trail
> > > for SAR.
> > > To quote you
> > > -I feel that an autonomous body (perhaps with University support -
> > > Jamia, JNU and DU) should be set up - that provides legal aid and
> > > counseling to students. The Universities can provide financial
> > > support to such a body, the students can contribute and raise
> > > independent funding. This is a tentative proposition which has had
> > > precedent in various forms of Committees for Defense for people
> > > accused of &#39;crimes&#39; against the
> > > &#39;State&#39;-
> > > Hypothetically if the three universities of Delhi need to
> > > cometogether to form an autonomous set up, then, I would think that
> > > theycould do so only by, exploring options available to them under
> > > the UGC.No university can spend its money other wise. Even if UGC
> > > grants themsuch a permission then it would result in creation of a
> > > formal institution. Because every single paisa has to be accounted
> > > for. Properprocedure needs to be put in place, issues related
> > > tohierarchy, settling disputes etc needs to be dealt with. This
> > > institution, I would imagine, would be asautonomous as CBI ! This
> > > is common sense insofar as any dispensationof monies with respect
> > > to a state institution is concerned. Even thoughyou may not have
> > > wanted this, but unfortunately the wordings of yourargument
> > > suggest otherwise.
> > > Regarding Salman Khurshid. Let&#39;s enumerate what does he
> > > signify.First he is a politician, second he is muslim, third he is
> > > a practicingsupreme court lawyer, fourth he is rich, and fifth he
> > > exercises a farmore social influence as compared to a son of man
> > > from azamgarhwould. Financial status is just one of the many
> > > aspects of his life. That is why perhaps, I was in total agreement
> > > to dispense aidvis-a-vis social position in this instance. I still
> > > do.
> > > With respect to my opinion regarding the use of same logic
> > > todispense aid based on social position and not on caste, I would
> > > suggestthat we talk about it. Because I find the use of categories
> > > to classifycaste problematic. I think there needs to be more
> > > debate before wecould even begin to explore this issue. However, I
> > > will not persuadeanyone to universalize one&#39;s thinking,
> > > insomuch as one is blind to themerits of a case which is as
> > > particular as Jamia blasts. I believe the caste issue,
> > > particularly in India, isa separate issue and cannot be in any way
> > > compared to Jamia blasts. Hencean overarching common argument does
> > > not hold.
> > > Regarding Chandramohan&#39;s argument. You will recall that in
> > > my firstresponse to your mail on this thread, I had specifically
> > > mentioned thenames of Satyendra Dubey and Manjunath. Both were
> > > ex-students oftheir institutions, both were involved in activities
> > > that lay outside thepurview of their institutions and both of them
> > > were killed. Yet thedirectors of their former institutions took an
> > > initiative to help set upformal bodies to advocate justice for
> > > them. Just as Prof.Hasan hasdecided to do so.
> > >
> > > I have no objections, none whatsoever, if bodies like AIDC are
> > > setup to defend and insist on a fair trail for Jamia blasts
> > > accused.However, in the non-event of setting up of such a body, I
> > > welcome theinitiative taken up by Prof.Hasan and wish that accused
> > > will be given afair trial. I send you and everyone else on this
> > > list good wishes for festivities next week.
> > >
> > > Best
> > >
> > > Nazo
>
>
More information about the reader-list
mailing list