Author: Varsha Bhosle
Publication: Rediff
on Net
Date: June 23, 2000
In a time and a galaxy
far, far away, I used to be a darn good food-and-travel writer. I'd painfully
slog away with a pen for a fortnight, even do all the illustrations myself,
after which, the sub-editor in charge of the colour supplement would merrily
reduce my jewel of a composition by a third or a half (depending on how
comfortable his train ride had been) and regularly bring me to tears. Princess
that I am, I'd go over his head to the sainted editor and moan and groan
and make threats. The sainted one would appease me (meaning, hear me out
with a glazed look), have a word with the sub, and in the next installment,
my piece would be horribly slashed again...
Finally - when a piece
on London's restaurants was presented as one on Wimbledon ("Service with
a Smile," if you please, replete with a photograph of Martina) - I decided
to take matters in my hands. I ventured into the sub's smoke-filled den
and asked, what exactly did he have against me and my qalaam? He said,
and I'll never forget his baffled expression: "Whaat is this garlic and
coriander and cumin? Whyyy are you wasting yourself in all this nonsense?
Write something useful! Write something that makes people think! You have
it in you! I don't understand how long you'll go on and on about onions!!"
The dart struck home.
Within a month, I had assayed into social issues, and within two, politics.
But today, I have the same baffled look on my face as I ask this erstwhile
sub-ed of mine: Prem, whaat is this leg-break and snick and gully? Whyyy
are you wasting yourself in all this nonsense?! Write something useful!
Write something that makes people think! You have it in you - look what
a fabulous piece you whipped up on Azharuddin's doing an OJ. Bloodthirsty
fundie that I am, even I didn't think of the points you raised - including
the one that the government should stand Azhar in the dock for fanning
communal fires - and you still shy away from politics? Heavens, man, we
at least need food every day; what percentage of our lives is dedicated
to cricket?? What a blasted waste...
Of course, I'm digging
my own career-grave. Because Prem's article has made any further commentary
on Azhar's dastardliness totally superfluous. Not that I'd have taken Azhar
to task, mind you. For I think he's a victim: Azhar did precisely what
I expected him to do since that is what he's been conditioned to do - by
the likes of my dear friend Saisuresh. Sai's is the mind-set I want to
tackle; he's gone to town (with a record number of 12 asterisks, I may
add) to prove that "non-Hindus in general, and Muslims in particular, are
discriminated against in India" and that it's twice as hard for a Muslim
to succeed here...
More is the irony since
it was Sai himself who had once told Sajid Bhombal that "please do not
see Azhar as a Muslim, but see him as an Indian." Yes, we Indians are like
this only: we say one thing, and think quite another...
Naturally, I take issue
with Sai regarding all of his assertions, but the one that leads the roost
is that "heartwarmingly, among those astounded by this [Azhar's] statement
are Muslims themselves." Hunh? Why is your heart warmed, Ponytail...? Let
me ask you this: Is it easier for you to believe that all Indian Muslims
would support Azhar's discrimination claim...? Hey, just by the virtue
of being Muslim, how can they not be in tune with that baddy Azhar, right?
Well... well... well... if I say that I was taken aback by Javed Akhtar's
"He was showered with admiration and applause by millions, irrespective
of caste or religion. What more respect could he have got from society?
Now he is accusing that very society of ill-treatment. Who's going to buy
it? I am not," it is understandable. For I'm anyway said to wear coloured
glasses and thus see people as chunks of saffron and green. But you?! You're
the one whom Sajid endorses as "perhaps the best suited to speak frankly
on these matters"; you're the one who held that there was something wrong
with Sajid's line of thought that part of his sympathy for Azhar was due
to the fact that Azhar, like Sajid, is a Muslim. Ponytail, why didn't you
just think, a lot of cricket-loving Indians are astounded by Azhar's plea...?
Not too long ago, Nadeem
Saifi, accused of having conspired to kill Gulshan Kumar and currently
on the lam in London, too, alleged communal bias while contesting his extradition
case. When questioned about the frequent raising of such religious-discrimination
bogies by the accused, sociologist Imtiaz Ahmed of the JNU said, "When
the secular credentials of the State are in doubt, more and more people
will use this plea as defence." I think the good professor, betraying his
own prejudices, meant that the advent of a so-called Hindutvawadi government
has caused minorities to go more on the defensive; meaning, the fault lies
with the BJP. How Hindutvawadi and nationalistic that party is, I eschew
for the moment.
But even so, there is
some truth in Prof Ahmed's words: People have used and will use the discrimination
plea as a defence because India has *never* espoused secularism. To be
politically and socially secular, an individual and a government need to
disregard everything concerned with religion or religious belief -- including
reservations on caste/religion lines and parallel-running civil and criminal
codes. Every demand for these divisive measures is a plea which revolts
against the ideals of true secularism - and every so-called secularist
of India has always supported it. If making discrimination pleas is an
understandable backlash to Hindutva, don't forget that Hindutva itself
is a backlash to this pseudo-secularism.
It's not just "the Indian
establishment - an establishment that is dominated by Hindus like me" which
is to blame for the Muslim community's problems, Sai. I see a slip in Sajid's
essay, too. And I don't mean his sympathising with a fellow-Muslim, either
- biases of this sort are perfectly natural and no sin as long as they
don't interfere with a person and his sense of justice. What disturbs me
is Sajid's "Having been disappointed by the Bukhari type of leadership,
of a pessimistic type, Muslims really looked at Azhar's success as a prime
example of what India could do for them." This, I find atrocious! What
India can do for Muslims?? Why?! Ask what Muslims can do for India! Is
it not their motherland, too? And why should India do anything for Muslims
- or Christians or Parsis or Hindus...? Aren't you the guys who keep clamouring
for a secular India - one where all religions are equal? I don't go around
thinking that India didn't do this or that for me! Why should you?
Sajid also writes, "Azhar
showed to Indian minorities that if you have capabilities, you can rise
to any post in this country... Azhar showed how easy it is - provided you
have what it takes to be successful... You inspired us to believe in ourselves...
You showed us the way to look beyond our Muslim identity..." Apart from
summarily trashing Sai's claim that "for a Muslim it is doubly hard to
succeed in India; these are facts that are well known and incontrovertible,"
he correctly pinpoints the importance of individual ability. Sajid, I ask
you, do you attribute Azhar's failures to a third party like Islam...?
No, na? Then WHY do you attribute his success to another entity like India??
India has done zero towards Azhar's success - he did it all by himself.
Ponytail, is it really
true that "non-Hindus in general, and Muslims in particular, are discriminated
against, whether it comes to education and employment"? You shy from quoting
figures to buttress your argument; instead, all you say is that "these
are facts that are well known and incontrovertible." Excuse me, but "incontrovertible"...?
As in "indisputable" and "undeniable"? Says who?! Despite being a mere
12% of the population, Muslims have shone through in all walks of life:
Azhar was the captain of the cricket team; MF Husain is India's premier
artist; IM Kadri, our leading architect; Zakir Husain, our former President,
and his namesake, our foremost tabla-player; stars from Dilip Kumar and
Madhubala to Shah Rukh Khan and Shabana, have ruled the film industry.
BUT, these are just "trophy Muslims"... Then what about the totally Muslim-dominated
trades and crafts like furniture and woodworks, tailoring and embroidery,
and the leather industry - with Muslim artisans working under affluent
Muslim entrepreneurs? Or are you saying that to disprove your silly assertion,
one must name only those employed/affluent Muslims who can't possibly be
know and named?? A cute Catch-22 you've thrown with that "trophy" shot.
Unfortunately, it doesn't wash.
I've sworn to curtail
the length of this column so I'm not gonna pick detailed nits. However,
there is this little thing: "I know of housing societies that won't allow
a Muslim within a mile of them, so what are we talking about?" Ponytail,
have you heard of, say, Talkamaki Wadi or Poornanand Housing Society? No
non-Saraswat lives there. So should I make that a ground for alleging a
deep-seated and deliberate discrimination policy against all Koknastha
Brahmins...? Whaaaat, man, Sai...
