[In a New York Times book review, the
author Pankaj Mishra called the book “a salutary antidote to the fanatics who
perceive — correctly — the fluid existential identities and commodious
metaphysic of practiced Indian religions as a threat to their project of a
culturally homogenous and militant nation-state.”]
By Raksha Kumar
In a copy of the out-of-court settlement dated Feb. 4, which has
been widely circulating online, Penguin
Books India said it would complete the withdrawal of “The Hindus: An
Alternative History,” by Wendy Doniger, a University of Chicago religion
professor, within six months.
The lawsuit had been filed by Dina Nath Batra, the head of Shiksha
Bacho Andolan, a Hindu educational organization in New Delhi, in 2011. Prior to
the lawsuit, he filed a notice to Ms. Doniger and
Penguin Group USA, then the parent of Penguin Books India, in 2010, saying that
Ms. Doniger’s book “has hurt the religious feelings of millions of Hindus” and
therefore breached section 295A of the Indian Penal Code.
The book, which was released in the United States and India in
2009, offended Hindus because of its “tendency to over-eroticize” the religion,
said Ashok Malik, a journalist who reviewed “The Hindus” when it first came
out. “I thought it was overdone.”
However, he did not support Penguin Books India’s decision to
withdraw the book. “Why did Penguin go for an out-of-court settlement? They
could have waited for a judgment,” he said. “This is part of a larger trend
where publishers keep away from controversial topics.”
In a New York Times book review, the
author Pankaj Mishra called the book “a salutary antidote to the fanatics who
perceive — correctly — the fluid existential identities and commodious
metaphysic of practiced Indian religions as a threat to their project of a
culturally homogenous and militant nation-state.”
Mr. Batra said in an interview Tuesday that Shiksha Bachao Andolan
would continue to battle books that hurt religious sentiment, and Madan Mohan
Sharma, a member of Bharatiya Shiksha, a sister organization, said the group
felt vindicated by Penguin Books India’s decision.
In an email to India Ink, Ms. Doniger said that she was “angry and
disappointed, and deeply concerned for freedom of speech in India.” Penguin
India did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
The book is not banned in India, and it is still available as an
e-book on Amazon. “If a smaller publisher wants to get the rights transferred
and publish it, they could,” said Nilanjana S. Roy, an author who is also a New
York Times op-ed contributor. “But most publishers would not want this. Going
to the courts is not what a publisher wants to do.”
Ms. Doniger’s scholarly work has drawn opposition from Hindu
groups in India and overseas. During a lecture in London in 2003, Ms. Doniger
was almost hit by an egg thrown by a Hindu nationalist who was angry at the
“sexual thrust” of her interpretation of the “sacred” “Ramayana,” Mr.
Mishra wrote in his book review.
In 2010, an online petition started
by the Sarasvati Research Trust, an educational institution based in New Delhi,
demanded that Penguin Group USA withdraw the book from India.
Ms. Roy said Penguin Books India’s settlement sets a bad example.
“There will be more people who would put pressure on the publishers, and they
would not have the resources or the time to stand up for each of their books,”
she said.
Last month, Bloomsbury India withdrew “The Descent of Air India,”
by Jitender Bhargava, a former Air India executive director, who wrote about
the national airline’s recent turbulent history. Local media reports said a
lawsuit was filed by a former minister who was blamed in the book for causing
the airline’s downfall. The publisher also issued a public apology to the
minister.
Vikram Sampath, an author and the organizer of the Bangalore
Literary Festival said, “The answer to a book you don’t agree with is another
one –not a ban or withdrawal. If this trend continues, we will be left with
chick lit books only, unfortunately.”
Raksha Kumar is a freelance journalist. Follow her on Twitter@Raksha_Kumar.
@ The New York Times
I was thrilled and
moved by the great number of messages of support that I received, not merely
from friends and colleagues but from people in India that I have never met, who
had read and loved The Hindus, and
by news and media people, all of whom expressed their outrage and sadness and
their wish to help me in any way they could. I was, of course, angry and
disappointed to see this happen, and I am deeply troubled by what it foretells for
free speech in India in the present, and steadily worsening, political climate.
And as a publisher’s daughter, I particularly wince at the knowledge that the existing
books (unless they are bought out quickly by people intrigued by all the
brouhaha) will be pulped. But I do not blame Penguin Books, India. Other publishers
have just quietly withdrawn other books without making the effort that Penguin
made to save this book. Penguin, India, took this book on knowing that it would
stir anger in the Hindutva ranks, and they defended it in the courts for four years,
both as a civil and as a criminal suit.
[‘That YOU NOTICEE has hurt the religious feelings of millions of Hindus by declaring that Ramayana is a fiction. “Placing the Ramayan in its historical contexts demonstrates that it is a work of fiction, created by human authors, who lived at various times..........” (P.662) This breaches section 295A of the India Penal Code (IPC).] ‘
They were finally
defeated by the true villain of this piece—the Indian law that makes it a
criminal rather than civil offense to publish a book that offends any Hindu, a
law that jeopardizes the physical safety of any publisher, no matter how
ludicrous the accusation brought against a book. An example at random, from the
lawsuit in question:
‘That YOU NOTICEE has
hurt the religious feelings of millions of Hindus by declaring that Ramayana is
a fiction. “Placing the Ramayan in its historical contexts demonstrates that it
is a work of fiction, created by human authors, who lived at various times..........”
(P.662) This breaches section 295A of the India Penal Code (IPC). ‘
Finally, I am glad
that, in the age of the Internet, it is no longer possible to suppress a book.
The Hindus is available on Kindle; and if legal means of publication fail, the
Internet has other ways of keeping books in circulation. People in India will always
be able to read books of all sorts, including some that may offend some Hindus.
@ Please check Scroll
@ Please check Scroll
