People's Democracy
(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)
No. 41
October 13, 2013
|
Vol. XXXVII
No. 41 October 13, 2013 |
SEMINAR
ON 25TH SAHMAT ANNIVERSARY Secularism
in Arts Comes out in Full Glare Amol
Saghar ON the occasion of its 25th anniversary,
the
Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust (SAHMAT) organised a three
day seminar on ‘Secularism
and the Arts’ from September 26 to 28, 2013.
This seminar, held in
the Sahitya Akademi auditorium, took place at a time
when communal forces are
going an extra mile to polarise the Indian masses on the
basis of religion and
vitiate the communal harmony of the country. This
explained the relevance of
the seminar. The seminar saw a plethora of insightful
and interesting papers
being presented, throwing light on different strands of
the theme. The speakers
tried to analyse the close interrelationship of arts and
secularism, and its relevance
in today’s context. In his short welcome address, Sohail Hashmi
presented an outline of SAHMAT’s history and threw light
on its work since it
came into existence. In the light of the communal
disturbances the country has
witnessed in recent times, the most recent being the
Muzzafar Nagar riots, he explained
the relevance of organisations like SAHMAT in
maintaining harmony in the
present times. WHAT
SECULARISM REALLY
MEANS After the welcome address, the first
session of the day saw two doyens of history, viz Irfan
Habib and Romila Thapar,
discussing the concept of secularism from two different
perspectives. In his
insightful and thought provoking presentation, Professor
Irfan Habib tried to
analyse the various meanings that are associated with
the word secularism. He
brilliantly brought forth the fact that religion and
secularism have nothing to
do with each other and that what secularism really meant
was outright rejection
of intervention of religion into the sphere of morality.
He also said a state
is secular as far as it is not guided by any religion.
To him the French revolutionary
state was a secular state in true sense of the word. He further argued that even though the word
secularism was added in Indian constitution in 1976, it
is sad to see that in today’s
scenario this word has got corrupted in the everyday
parlance. Today it means
respect for and tolerance towards all religions. But yet
there is no legal
foundation for the view that a secular republic must
respect the religions. He
argued that even a non-tolerant state can be secular.
The Supreme Court too, it
was argued, played a role in corrupting the concept of
secularism. Going back
in history we see that religious tolerance has always
been an important part of
Indian history— be it the reign of the Ashoka, where
perhaps for the first time
the concept of religious tolerance was mentioned
explicitly in Rock Edict 12;
or the national movement where this idea was invoked
repeatedly. For Habib, ‘neutrality
towards religions’ should better be used instead of the
phrase ‘respect for
religions.’ Habib also underlined that in In this context he spoke about the Hindu
code bill which, according to him, was a landmark
development as it showed that
in two years period the ages old dharmasastras
were overthrown by the parliament, which marked a
complete transformation of
the civil code. However, he expressed displeasure that
such landmark changes were
not seen in other religions. He further argued that PROVISIONS
OF SECULARISM
WEAKENED As for secularism in the realm of
education,
it is sad that the concerned provisions have got
weakened. Our constitution clearly
says no religious education would be imparted in any
educational institution,
but in reality we see this notion repeatedly violated.
An example is of the
NCERT school textbooks controversy under the tenure of
the BJP led government. Surprisingly,
even though newspaper reports of the day rubbished the
BJP move, the apex court
did not oppose it; instead, it supported by citing the
saints who, according to
the court, were the source of all religious and morality
based education. As for madrasa
education, we see state subsidies directed towards
several madrasas operating through the length and
breadth of the country.
This, it was argued, is a clear violation of article 28
of our constitution. Habib
expressed surprise that the Sachar committee recommended
this move, instead of
opposing it; nor did any political party oppose it.
Explaining the politics
behind madrasa
education, he argued
that there are hardly any girl students in madrasas.
Further, it is wrong to believe that Muslim children do
not want to go to
public (government) schools; it is just that there are
no public schools in most
of the “Muslim areas,” and thus a majority of these
children do not have easy
access to public school education. Also, as Hindu
children do not go to these madrasas, there
is hardly any
interaction between Muslim and Hindu boys, which is
disastrous. The speaker also put forward some ideas
that
could help to change this situation. One solution is
that public schools should
be set up in Muslim areas. The movements promoting
legislation favouring secularism,
such as the one associated with giving leverage to the
secular content in
school textbooks, must be encouraged by all means.
Wherever the Left is
dominant, it should oppose attempts made by divisive
forces to construe the
meaning of secularism in a wrong way. The notion of
secularism must apply to
all institutions and groups irrespective of their being
majority or minority
ones. ON
RIGHT WING MOBILISATION After Professor Irfan Habib’s presentation,
that of Teesta Setalvad was equally enriching, and in
many ways an eye-opener. Discussing
the issue of secularism from a legal perspective, she
went back a little bit
into history and argued that there was a compromise
insofar as abolition of the
caste system was concerned. Instead of completely
eradicating the system for
once and all, the custodians of the country at that time
preferred to chicken
out of the issue and were instead satisfied only with
the abolition of untouchability.
Setalvad further argued that a close
relationship
exists between communalism and the growth of right wing
groups. As far back as 1951,
we see B R Ambedkar resigning from the first ministry of
independent Setalvad’s paper also delved into the issue
of hate speech that has always played a vital role in
vitiating the environment
and promoting communal hatred. Every communal
disturbance is invariably
preceded by a string of hate speeches and rumours before
it reaches the stage
of actual violence. In this regard one can recall the
distribution of trishuls
during the NDA government in
1999. Lately, a similar phenomenon was seen in Muzzafar
Nagar; here mahapanchayats
were allowed to be organised
where hate speeches against a particular community were
openly delivered and
where people gathered with illegal weapons. Before concluding, she drew attention to
two important issues. First, it would be disastrous if
we are selective in our
narratives of the national movement. We must refrain
from the practice of
including certain aspects and completely ignoring other,
equally important
aspects of the national movement. Secondly, there is a
tendency among many of
us to loosely use terms such as pseudo-secularism (a
term which BJP has been
using); we have to refrain from it. Nor should we compartmentalise the idea of
secularism and democracy, or emphasise only one ---
electoral --- aspect of it.
Secularism, equality and non-discrimination are three
concepts which need to be
looked together. The
speaker also
pointed out that the Sachar committee, which was formed
in 2005, completely
ignored the issue of security of the Muslims. It is
noteworthy that the term
minority was completely removed from article 16 of the
constitution, which
again was a compromise. RELIGION
CAN’T HAVE PRIMACY
IN EVERYDAY LIFE The last paper of the morning session was
that of Professor Romila Thapar who delved into the
issue of secularisation of
Indian society. Secularism has got restricted,
unfortunately, to a mere slogan.
She also said our concept of secularism has been derived
from Professor Thapar argued that secular does
not deny religion, but at the same time it does not give
it any sort of primacy
in everyday life. She stressed that state should stop
patronising the institutions
which have religious affiliations. To her, religion
promotes the idea of
dominant and subordinate people or groups. One may also
note that it is the
caste distinctions that have almost always decided the
functioning of religious
groups and there are also instances when people have
formed their own religion,
as in the example of Lingayats. Before concluding, Professor Thapar argued
that today, whether we like it or not, social networking
sites like Facebook
have come to occupy an important position in society.
Divisive forces are making
use of these sites to promote their agenda and we also
have to use the same
media to fight them effectively. The Muzzafar Nagar
riots have shown the
dangerous role played by such sites. Presenting a
somewhat frightening picture,
she also argued that we should be prepared for more
communal disturbances in
near future, especially in Muslim majority areas. The session concluded with some useful and
insightful remarks made by Professor Prabhat Patnaik who
chaired the first session.
He emphasised that secular must also be seen as the
reducing role of religion
even in the personal sphere. BHAKTI
TRADITION AND
SECULARISM The evening session saw four more, equally
rejuvenating papers being presented. In this session
chaired by M K Raina,
Malini Bhattacharya, Madhu Trivedi, Vidya Shah and Madan
Gopal Singh shared their
ideas of the close association of secularism with arts.
Bhattacharya in her
presentation discussed the notion of secularism from the
perspective of
literature and folklore. She referred to Rabindranth
Tagore’s Gora
and tried to analyse the way the
issue of secularism was dealt with in this work. She further talked about the emergence of
various sects in While Madhu Trivedi’s paper discussed the
concept of secularism purely from a historical point of
view, Vidya Shah in her
presentation began by recalling her childhood years and
how she was not allowed
to participate in the recitation of ritualistic chants
like those from Yajurveda
only because she was a girl;
she naturally felt marginalised. However, the presence
of feminist in several
of these recitations is very important. Shah’s presentation was accompanied by
recitation of various sorts including those from Bulle
Shah, Andal and Kabir.
In conclusion she raised a pertinent point by asking as
to what happened to a
woman bhakta
in the bhakti
movement. For her feminism is in
fact deeply rooted in the concept of secularism. Madan Gopal Singh recited several verses
which were written as far back as the 16th century and
through these
recitations he explained how a close relationship always
existed between
secularism and arts. He argued that the aspect of
secularism has always been
present throughout history, though it has been
visualised differently at
different points of time. The accompanying recitations
by Shah and Singh were
like an icing on the cake and made the session a
memorable experience. SECULARISM
IN
VISUAL ARTS The morning session on the second day saw
well known painter Gulammohammed Sheikh, Pushpmala N and
Ram Rahman making
power-point presentations to discuss the intricate
association of arts and
secularism. In his presentation Sheikh explained how
secularism got reflected
in literary traditions throughout the course of Indian
history. With the help
of various slides and pictures, he drove home the point
that secularism has
always been an integral part in the making as well as
visual execution of
literary traditions. Various arts including sculpture have
played a pivotal role in assimilating the lower caste
groups into the cultural
belief systems of upper caste groups. Arts thus allowed
a broadening of the
belief system and at the same time also allowed upward
mobility in our society.
Pushpamala N, in her interesting
presentation, tried to analyse the theme of secularism
from the perspective of
artistic representation. She tries to see how secularism
is played about in the
popular artistic representations such as those of Raja
Ravi Verma and others. Ram Rahman’s paper was a lesson in the
history
of SAHMAT. With the help of several visuals he tried to
make everyone present
aware of the work done by the organisation since the
time of its inception. He
threw light on the positive role played by SAHMAT in
bringing about people from
different walks of life in an attempt to raise voice
against the divisive
politics carried out by certain vested interests. In the
years prior to and
immediately after the Babri Masjid demolition, the
SAHMAT ran important
campaigns to keep communal hatred at bay and bring back
the confidence of the
minorities, which was severely affected by the
demolition of the mosque. The speaker
also visually highlighted how, while running its
campaigns, SAHMAT itself came
under attack more than once. The session chaired by In the evening session, Subhash Kapoor,
director of two critically acclaimed movies, viz Phas Gaye Re Obama and Jolly
LLB, and renowned art critic Sadanand Menon were
the speakers. The session
was moderated by Sashi Kumar. The two speakers discussed
the manner in which
secularism has been dealt with in Indian cinema. While
Kapoor chose to discuss
it mainly from the perspective of the mainstream
Bollywood cinema, Menon tried
to trace the trajectory of secularism in Indian cinema
from a general
perspective and also the way it was reflected in the
cinema of the south. Kapoor argued that a sort of irony exists
as far as secularism and its depiction in most of the
movies is concerned. He
raised several points such as the manner in which
certain sections of society, e.g.
Muslims, are depicted in the movies. Today the title of
the movies is shown
only in Hindi and English and not in Urdu. Also,
producers hesitate to invest
in movies which try to take the issue of communalism
head on. He provided
several interesting examples to highlight these issues
which worried him. Menon traced the growth of communalism from
the time it emerged in the post-1857 period up to the
present time. He also
discussed at length some movies like Roja
and DEVELOPMENTS
IN
HINDI & URDU The concluding day was devoted to the
issues
of language and literature, and their close proximity
with the theme of
secularism. While the morning session was dedicated to
the Urdu literary
traditions and how one can see secularism embedded in a
majority of the works
written in this language, the evening session analysed
this concept in the context
of Hindi literary tradition. Ramesh Dixit, Naresh
Nadeem, Khurshid Akram and
Salil Misra carried out the morning proceedings, with
Ali Javed in chair. The
session saw the participants reciting poetries and
couplets from Meer, Sauda, Ghalib,
Nazeer Akbarabadi, Akbar Allahabadi and Faiz, among
others, from time to time
to enrich their respective presentations. In his passionate talk, Ramesh Dixit made
it clear that, as compared to Hindi poetry, compositions
in Urdu were more strongly
opposed to imperialism, colonialism, communalism and
feudalism. Urdu poetry is poetry
of resistance by its very nature. Naresh Nadeem underlined the relationship
of Urdu poetry with the Sufi tradition and insisted that
secularism of the Urdu
literary creations must be seen in the context of its
source in tasawwuf
(Sufism). He made a poignant point when he said that
there was a clear-cut
difference between the ways Hindi and Urdu poets took
note of the country’s independence.
While the former were celebrating the independence in
various forms, the latter
was weeping due to the fact that the country had been
partitioned. Not just
communist but also non-communist writers and poets felt
a deep sense of sadness.
Nadeem also attempted to trace how the Hindi literary
tradition got a tinge of
communalism as an enmity against Urdu developed here. Khurshid Akram tried to show how secularism
was reflected in the short stories written in Urdu
language throughout the
period. Salil Misra’s tried to locate the aspect of
secularism in the works of Nazeer Akbarabadi and Akbar
Allahabadi. In the second session chaired by Chanchal
Chauhan, Manmohan and Jawarimal Parekh tried to study
how secularism got
reflected in various works written in the long history
of Hindi literary
tradition. It was argued in this session that, instead
of making it an issue of
one-upmanship, we should rather realise that secular
elements are present in
both the literary traditions but that we fail to see
this point since there is little
interaction between the two traditions as a result of a
division made by the
British way back in the 19th century. It is unfortunate that the development of
Hindi in the modern period bypassed the secular route
and went through the path
of communalism. There is, however, an element of
secularism in a number of
Hindi works and it is for us to take note of it and
promote this aspect of our literary
tradition. The extremely enriching and memorable
three-day
seminar came to a conclusion with Sohail Hashmi
delivering the vote of thanks. He
also informed those present about the coming programmes
of SAHMAT to celebrate
its twenty five years in existence.
