March 2010 
Year 16    No.149
Saffronwatch


A person of Indian origin called Husain     

MF Husain, who has celebrated all that was Indian for these last seven decades, is no longer an Indian citizen.
The implication of this reality is only just sinking in

BY PRATIBHA UMASHANKAR

As I write this, today’s edition of The Times of India (March 9, 2010) has reported that MF Husain has officially surrendered his Indian passport to the Indian mission in Doha following weeks of media debates and discussions that erupted in the wake of the artist announcing that he had decided to accept the citizenship of Qatar.

“Maqbool Fida Husain (born September 17, 1915, Pandharpur, Maharashtra, India), popularly known as MF Husain, is a Qatari artist of Indian origin…” reads the Wikipedia entry. It has updated Husain’s biography with surprising alacrity. But it will take a while for even his critics to allude to him as a “Qatari artist”.

Maybe we should have seen it coming when he did not return home even after the Supreme Court of India on September 8, 2008 quashed court cases that had hounded him since1996, initiated against him by those protesting his portrayal of Hindu goddesses in the nude. (At one point he had been battling nearly 3,000 such cases.) The cases may have been defenestrated but not the hate campaigns his controversial paintings triggered. A blog has even demanded that a red corner alert be issued to get Husain, who is now beyond the reach of Indian law.

In 1998 Husain’s house was attacked and art works vandalised by Hindu groups like the Bajrang Dal with the tacit support of the Shiv Sena.

Husain had to issue an apology after the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti and Vishwa Hindu Parishad protested against a painting of a nude woman whose outline resembled the map of India. The painting had to be withdrawn from an auction in February 2006. Apparently, it depicted Bharat Mata, or Mother India. Husain has denied ever appending these labels to this work though he agrees that the image personifies India.

Protests against Husain led to the closure of an exhibition in London, also in February 2006. The mounting threats and court cases finally forced him to flee to Dubai the same year and set up a home and studio there. Picketing outside art auctions and shows where his works are sold or exhibited has now become a routine feature.

In 2007 he was selected to receive the Raja Ravi Varma Award from the government of Kerala. But on September 12, the Kerala high court stayed the Left Democratic Front government’s move to confer the award on him after a complaint was registered against him in Pandharpur, on the basis of which a non-bailable arrest warrant was issued against him by a lower court. The court directed the Kerala government to present Husain in court when he arrived to receive the award. The basis of the complaint was that Husain had hurt the sentiments of Hindus through his painting of Bharat Mata. The Kerala high court’s stay order was also dictated by a public interest litigation petition filed by a member of the former royal family of Kochi, contending that the state government had flouted norms in selecting Husain for the award.

On March 15, 2008, 18 artists flew to Dubai from India to honour Husain at a felicitation ceremony at the Jumeirah Beach Hotel. The list of artists included Amitava Das, Ram Kumar and Surendra Pal Joshi. Sponsored by the Bhoruka Charitable Trust, the event featured seminars on art. If Husain couldn’t come to India, India could go to Husain – that was the underlying idea behind the endeavour. Husain was ecstatic, as one of the things he misses in Dubai (and in Qatar) is interacting with fellow Indian artists.

A surprise had been planned for Husain: a joint “live” painting by all 18 artists – apparently for the first time in the world – that would be presented to him. The event had to be cancelled following veiled threats. The artists quietly flew back. Not only was Husain not honoured but a unique work of art was prevented from being created. History in the making was thwarted. No one spoke of the far-reaching implications of the event that did not/could not take place.

The Indian government has been regularly making token efforts to get Husain back home. This gathered momentum last year. But Husain was not impressed. “What are they talking about?” he asked in a telephonic interview from Dubai, excerpts of which were carried in a report on October 30, 2009 (‘Husain says govt cover not enough’). “The India Art Summit held in August this year did not feature a single work by me. The reason given was that they could not afford to take the ‘risk’. How will they protect me if they cannot protect my work? How can I trust them?”

That the Art Summit was supported by the union ministry of culture is a sad commentary on the Indian government’s lack of will to protect Husain from harassment by a section of society albeit a small one.

In January this year the BJP-ruled Himachal Pradesh government decided to drop Husain from its school textbooks, replacing him with Nicholas Roerich and Sobha Singh, on the flimsy grounds that Husain did not belong to the state.

The arm of communalism is obviously long and strong – longer and stronger than that of the law.

An email forward condemning Husain’s “perversion and hypocrisy”, which surfaces whenever he is in the news, has been doing the rounds once again. I quote the text of the mail. It has been edited only for punctuation: “Read upto the root, then you know the route (sic) cause of the nudity of Husain (sic),” it begins. “Really sad when art loses its innocence. Very sad, but it is reality…”

It goes on to say: “If a person dresses like a Sikh Guru, thousands of Sikhs gather and destroy their establishments, threaten to kill him, announce a bounty on his head. Sikhs are not criticised for being communal and intolerant.

“If a Danish journalist depicts the Prophet of the Muslims, Muslims all over the world rise in anger. There is violence. A booty on the head of the journalist. Muslims are not criticised for being communal and intolerant.

“If MF Husain draws paintings depicting Hindu Gods and Goddesses in sexual positions (which relations are not borne out by ancient texts at all) and Hindus merely protest, they are called communal, intolerant, and taught lessons in secularism by one and all.

“The problem apparently is not with Sikhs and Muslims, it is with Hindus, because we are not violent, we accept what ever (sic) is dished out to us. We do not have the guts to say that this is wrong. We seek acceptance from outsiders rather than from our conscience. We worship the same Gods and Goddesses but don’t stand up for them when the time comes.

“That is why Husain is wrong. Be a judge yourself of Husain’s paintings below.”

A set of paintings by Husain are then juxtaposed to chilling effect with rather simplistic captions (in italics): Goddess Durga in a sexual union with Tiger and The Prophet’s daughter Fatima fully clothed; Goddess Lakshmi naked on Shree Ganesh’s head and MF Husain’s Mother fully clothed; Naked Saraswati as against Mother Teresa fully clothed; Naked Shri Parvati compared to Husain’s Daughter well clothed; Naked Draupadi as against A Well clothed Muslim Lady and so on.

It is caustic enough to erode the support of even the staunchest liberal/secular-minded Hindu and makes it easy to sympathise with both camps – those who argue for artistic freedom and those who claim their religious sentiments have been hurt.

Husain elicits this kind of ambivalent reaction because he tries to bring together his love and fascination for the Indian/Hindu culture and mythology and free artistic expression. His being a Muslim but with an easy familiarity with Hindu deities and epics – easy enough to be able to interpret them creatively – complicates the issue. Though Husain’s Muslim identity may never have interfered with his identity as an artist, it is a Muslim artist pushing and challenging the boundaries of creativity and religious decorum that incites fundamentalist sentiments.

Two letters to the editor (The Times of India, March 2, 2010), both apparently by Hindus, sum up the two ends of the ‘a Muslim Husain depicting Hindu deities obscenely’ debate: The one titled ‘Govt lets religious fanatics thrive here’ says, “The manner in which renowned artist MF Husain was forced to flee India speaks volumes of Indian government’s hollowness in protecting the freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution… Instead of establishing the rule of law, the government appears to have allowed religious fanatics to have the last laugh.”

In the one titled ‘Husain is lucky with just court cases’, the writer concludes, “Husain would not have been spared like this in other countries, especially in Islamic nations, for a similar act.”

Though most liberal-minded educated urban Hindus will not admit it in public, they nurse a niggling feeling that their religious tolerance is perceived as weakness and that if fanaticism is the measure by which religious fervour and affiliation is gauged, Hindus often fall short. Because they are not angry enough when their religion is slighted, they are seen to have a cavalier attitude towards their religion. (Spoofs on Hindu epics and gods in the print and electronic media are laughed off by most Hindus.) This is one of the reasons why Hindu intolerance and fanaticism is on the rise – public demonstrations to prove that Hindus are not spineless and can feel as strongly about their religion as Muslims do. The incendiary mail cited earlier astutely exploits this sentiment.

Another email that is making the rounds emphasises this, apart from the ambivalent attitude Husain’s paintings generate which I spoke of earlier:

“Mr Husain has perhaps misinterpreted his limitations on his liberty to paint pictures of Hindu Gods and Goddesses. We cannot blame him for this. Everywhere we look around in India there are objects de art (sic) in stone/wood carvings, in metal icons, in mural paintings, etc, depicting our Gods and Goddesses in all kinds of poses, some even erotic, dressed, semi-dressed and undressed. Khajuraho is world famous
for this kind of depictions. Indians and foreigners flock there in large numbers to feast on these sights, without any revulsion. Patronage of eroticism seems to have thrived in India from time immemorial… It is said, ‘Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder’. So is obscenity… No creator or producer has been hounded out of India for putting to public view revolting scenes as we see today. Why Husain? Why?”

The reason is that there has obviously been an insidious process at work to bleed Husain slowly so that he is rendered too weak to assert his creativity and artistic freedom, to demoralise his spirit and gradually wish him away from public space and psyche. But in one fell swoop the artist has exercised his freedom and turned his back on a country that rejected him and a government that either clucked in sympathy or shrugged in helplessness.

“I’m a free bird. I can stay anywhere I want… There are no boundaries for me. Art speaks a universal language,” he said on March 5. But his tone was devoid of any triumphalism. He admitted being deeply hurt. “Now they are asking me to come back (but) when I was in exile, there was no one to speak for me” (‘Now Qatar is my place’, The Times of India, March 4, 2010).

Technically, no one could have stopped Husain from returning to India, especially after the apex court on September 8, 2008 dismissed a plea to prosecute him for his allegedly obscene paintings of Hindu deities. It must be remembered that it was a self-imposed exile. What prompted it was probably also self-inflicted. If only he had painted Hindu deities more demurely! But art has its reasons.

Commenting on the legal and artistic implications of the landmark judgement, Husain had said (‘Husain Wants to Return to India with Humility’, Khaleej Times, September 10, 2009), “The Supreme Court has proved that there is no such thing as obscenity when it comes to a work of art. No one can file an obscenity case against me now. A precedent has been set, which will be referred to not only in India but also the world over. There was no ban on me to return to India but now I feel truly liberated.

“My mind and soul have always been there. When you are intensely in love with something, the barriers of time and space disappear. But when I do return physically, I don’t want to go back triumphant but with a deep sense of humility.”

But Husain did not come “home”. More than the court cases against him, he feared physical harm. He feared the violence his return would have triggered.

In an interview for an article titled ‘Still in Circulation’ in the April 17, 2009 issue of Wknd., a magazine of the Khaleej Times, Husain said that the Indian government had invited entries for a symbol for the Indian rupee on the lines of the pound, the dollar and the euro. “A government agency contacted me and asked me to participate. And, of course, I wanted to,” he said. “It’s not another gimmick to be in the public eye. I’m often accused of being gimmicky. It’s because I love participation – to be an active part of a vibrant society. If someone invents a new kind of matchstick, I’d want to paint a matchstick label for it. That’s because I’m passionate about life and like to respond to what’s happening around me.”

He added with a tinge of sadness in his voice, “But even if they like my design, I don’t think it’ll be selected. If it’s selected, it’ll trigger protests.” He quickly shrugged and smiled, “At my age everything ceases to matter… everything except art.” In the same interview, he said, “Work energises me. It is my prayer, my meditation.”

This is proved by the volume of work he has undertaken. He is at present working on three major projects: the history of Hindi cinema initiated by Sheikh Nahyan Bin Mubarak Al Nahyan, minister of higher education and scientific research, for a proposed museum in Abu Dhabi; the history of Indian civilisation for a UK-based Indian businessman in London and the history of Arab civilisation – a set of 99 paintings – for Sheikha Mozah Bint Nasser Al Missned, the consort of the emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa Al Thani. “I will finish all of them by 2012,” he says matter-of-factly. Even at 95, Husain rarely indulges in nostalgia. His gaze is set on the future.

It was probably this that prompted him to accept the citizenship of Qatar when it was offered – an assurance of a safe haven to live and work in.

He did not ask for it. According to his close relative and confidant, it was a fait accompli. He applied for a three-year visa to be able to complete his project. The Qatar royal family reportedly offered him a royal passport instead so that Husain did not have to keep renewing his Qatari visa.

Since then, the media noise has drowned the real subtext. Husain too has been responsible for raising the decibel level by giving mixed signals – he has cited the creature comforts that Qatar offers, apart from it being a tax haven where he enjoys complete artistic freedom. He has called Qatar his “new place” but has added, “I’m saying this with a deep pain in my heart”. He has asked, “Is there any surety that I would be protected in India?” But he calls India his motherland, to which he can return any time he wants to and doesn’t have to beg to be called back and he denies any threat to his life.

It is not always easy to separate sincerity from sound bites, especially given the fact that Husain is media-savvy. But beneath the veneer of an upbeat-looking Husain is a heartbroken man. These last few years he has had to walk the thin line between asserting his artistic freedom and upholding what he believes to be right on the one hand and having to constantly prove his patriotism and “Indianness” on the other. It has been a balancing act, trying not to be cowed down by fringe elements baying for his blood and at the same time expressing regret for having hurt Hindu sentiments. It is worth noting that he has not expressed regret that he painted Hindu goddesses as he did, merely that they offended some people. (He reiterated this on TV channels recently.) But he was clearly tired of having to constantly prove his credentials. And when the offer of the Qatari citizenship came, he accepted it. But it can’t have been an easy decision to make. If one listened hard, it was not a defiant artist but an anguished man forced to make an impossible choice that made all those contradictory statements.

The tragic irony is that he has chosen a theocratic and despotic state against a democratic, free and secular India. The reason is easy to grasp but bitter to digest: Husain is now free to portray Hindu goddesses the way he has been doing in the past, if indeed he chooses to, as long as he continues to portray Muslim figures/Islamic subjects as he has always chosen to – with dignity. Does it reek of double standards in art? It certainly does if Husain had deliberately set out to denigrate Indian deities and Bharat Mata. But he was merely placing them in their cultural ethos and religious milieu. He was following a tradition.

That Husain as an Indian artist created images from the Hindu tradition and culture he had assimilated over the years is undisputable. But is the fact that Husain is a Muslim only incidental to the issue? Did Husain choose Qatar – an Islamic country – over a Hindu-dominated India? We may never be able to answer these two questions satisfactorily. And they will come back to haunt us and Husain for a long time to come.

Husain in his ripe old age may have taught the Indian state a lesson by resolutely turning his back on the lip service it offered him. But it is a Pyrrhic victory in a war of attrition. The state and his detractors finally did get him. He looks defeated even as he sounds upbeat.

This dichotomy is something that one often sensed even in his earlier statements. He once told me, “I truly miss my country. I have travelled a lot and kept going out of my country. But I never realised what it was like not to be able to return to my country till the time I was not able to return to it. It was then that I felt the pangs of separation… the pangs of missing my motherland. I not only miss my motherland but simple things – meeting people, walking on the streets… Nothing, not even paradise, can take the place of home… It’s a mysterious tie but a very strong tie that a man has to his soil. I would one day like to return to my motherland, no matter how long it takes. Even if it takes 10 years, I would like to return.” But sadly, if indeed it takes 10 years, Husain will then be 105.

More recently (on May 23, 2009), he seemed to shrug off the ‘exile’ tag when he said, “I’m a traveller. I’ve always been travelling and feel at home everywhere in the world. It makes no difference to me where I am. The prophet fled from Mecca to Medina – Hijrah. ‘Seeru fil ard’, he said – ‘Go, travel into the world’. And that is what I’m doing. I’m so busy finishing my three major projects and many others that I have no time to think of missing India.”

Maybe it was bravado. Maybe he was hiding his angst behind his incorrigible optimism and indefatigable energy. Maybe what he said was heartfelt. Or maybe, like all contradictions, both statements were true. Who can say that one cancels the other one out?

In an interview (‘Still in Circulation’, Wknd.), he confessed, “Once the only thing that would make me sad was betrayal of trust. Now not even that.” And added, “The only thing I fear is violence. Sadly, there’s a lot of it around.”

It is probably a deep sense of betrayal – that his country let him down – and fear of the violence that his return could set off that influenced his decision.

That India’s most celebrated contemporary artist may never return to his country and might die with his wish unfulfilled is too terrible to contemplate. But that he is no longer India’s most celebrated artist is even more so, for it is more telling a critique on us than it is on Husain, the artist.

The Indian government has described Husain as “the pride of India” and expressed the desire that Husain should consider coming back and feel safe in India. But that he should be allowed to return just because he is old is an inane albeit a valid argument. Husain wouldn’t want it. Maybe the time to make amends has passed. But if it has not, we will lose precious time if we continue to drag our feet till Husain becomes too old to care or remember, or until it is too late. Husain may not show it but he does feel his age.

I had said of Husain in an article I wrote when he turned 94 (‘It’s Been a Long Penance’, Khaleej Times, September 22, 2009): “Regret is a hollow sentiment that survives by virtue of hindsight. And Indians are known for valorising genius on hindsight.” I reiterate it now.

(Pratibha Umashankar is the contributing editor, Climate Control Middle East, and also a scribe at large.)

 


[ Subscribe | Contact Us | Archives | Khoj | Aman ]
[ Letter to editor  ]

Copyrights © 2002, Sabrang Communications & Publishing Pvt. Ltd.