MF Hussain

Some things just don't change- Like the LiC's defense of the indefensible. Take for instance today's breast beating over MF Hussain getting Qatar Nationality. 

Though MF Hussain has been a hugely controversial figure, the LiC refuses to even acknowledge it and pays glowing tributes to the crooked painter who despite his senility managed to portray Hindu deities in infuriatingly objectionable postures. The no-less crooked LiC portrays him as a paragon of secularism, modern thought and a hapless victim of Hindutva intolerance. Birds of the same feather flock together, don't they?

"I know no one more genuinely and deeply committed to the composite, multi-religious, and secular values of Indian civilisation than M. F. Husain. He breathes the spirit of modernity, progress, and tolerance"

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article113018.ece?homepage=true

The disgusting defense of the crooked painter- who faces a slew of criminal cases -is nothing but an immature and an emotional outburst sans substance or merit. Age has nothing to do with criminal conduct and being 95 or 25 does not matter before the criminal justice system which, as the LiC mentioned, is shamefully lax. That perhaps explains why the justice system did not initiate action against Hussain when he drew those disgusting images back in the 1970s. LiC must understand that a crime in 1970s will continue to be a crime in 2010 too.

The most shocking aspect of LiC's argument is the equation of Hussain's lewd work with that of Khajuraho sculptures and the murals and frescos of South Indian temples. This line of reasoning is as senseless as a 60 year old pedophile citing Prophet Mohamed and Aalia to have sex with a minor.  Godess Sita and Lord Hanuman shared a mother-son relationship. Godess Sita sitting in the nude on a sexually aroused Hanuman's hardened tail is a cruel and criminal distortion that is only an expression of contempt and not "artistic freedom" as the LiC wants us to believe. Hussain is reported to have said he draws in the nude those he wants to insult. He has portrayed Hitler in the nude while several people in his other works – including Muslim women, Gandhiji are clothed. The nudity is reserved only for Hitler, Hindu gods and Godesses and Bharat Mata perhaps.

It will be interesting to know how much the LiC would enjoy a painting of him having sex with his daughter in full view of his wife and son-in-law, if he has one. Being a patron of modern art and thought, he may even allow an exhibition at his office. I also wonder if Qatar will continue to honor him with its citizenship if Hussain, the "alleged"  beacon of Indian values, extends the honor reserved for Hindu deities to Sheikha Mozah bint Nasser al Missned, wife of the emirate's ruler, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, who has come in for some priase by the LiC.  Can Hussain hope to get away in Vatican city if he portrays the Christ in sexually objectionable poses? Forget Vatican, can he get away in Meghalaya that saw a furore over depiction of the Christ with a beer bottle?

 

I don't mean offence anyone mentioned above.  The comparison is meant only to expose the shocking insensitivity of the LiC's shameful defense. And a news paper that promptly and profusely apologized for accidentally depicting an image of the Prophet (that too on a Children's page) is defending someone who has painted sexually explicit images of religious deities revered by many under the guise of Freedom of expression. What happened to the paper in question's freedom of expression? Why did it apologize? MF Hussain is just another accused evading the clutches of law by running away from the country and refusing to be accountable for his actions. To give LiC a taste of his own medicine, the people of this country are more concerned about rocketing inflation, internal security and the agrarian crisis and not what happens to a sick mind that iundulges in blasphemy. By demonizing Hussain's detractors, the LiC is only cementing his place in the fool's paradise he has been living for quite a while