urbestfriend Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Ever heard of Law/Constitution of India ?? I being a Hindu dont get offended by his nude paintings and I am sure I am not in the minority. Even if he has hurt religious sentiments and offended some people( I can't believe why anyone would get hurt by a painting whatever it is) , it is for the court to decide and punish him. Its shame that one of the greatest artist of India had to live in exile away from his birth country due to the handwork of some fascist elements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSK Fan Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 That doesn't mean you start justifying him for those paintings in the name of Art . Really? Instead of being so touchy, I suggest we should take a leaf out of the West. Have you seen what the shows like South Park, Family Guy, etc depict about chrisitanity? Yet they are some of the most popular shows and rightly so, We Indians take ourselves too seriously in life and this is a big hindrance towards being truly democratic and free country One dude depicitng nude religious images or a cartoon making fun will not make my religion small or degraded. True Art and craft have always transcended narrow minded public opinion and thats always have been their worth. From Lenardo Da Vinci to Michaelangelo, all of them have shocked and drawn hate in their time. An artist always stands alone, its his lot to be ridiculed and mocked for being ahead of his time. People feel threatened or feel insulted without understanding an iota of art. Thats why indian artists and writers will always be limited in their talent and expression and will end up making literary or artisitic 'masterpieces' which are low on artistry and high on emotional drama, in short what the public likes to see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuge Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Really? Instead of being so touchy, I suggest we should take a leaf out of the West. Have you seen what the shows like South Park, Family Guy, etc depict about chrisitanity? Yet they are some of the most popular shows and rightly so, We Indians take ourselves too seriously in life and this is a big hindrance towards being truly democratic and free country One dude depicitng nude religious images or a cartoon making fun will not make my religion small or degraded. I'm not being touchy or hurt :|heck, I don't even belong to any religion on earth(except for mother earth) :).Those few paintings of his only incited violence and created hatred cannot be deemed good . Keep in mind India isn't a fully matured Democratic country .Will take sometime before being called as one . I don't support people who threatened him for life or those who vandalized his works Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Sorry to say, but some very retarded (not Stuge) views on this thread :(( Some people should not cross limits and he is the one who did by depicting nude goddesses in his paintings .Just like Danish cartoonist ' date='who crossed his limits too.[/quote'] I'm not too sure if MF Hussain or the Danish cartoonist crossed any limits. Depends on who decides limits, what are the limits etc. The people who vandalized property because they were 'offended'* did cross the limits. What MF Hussain and the cartoonist did can be termed as insensitive and immoral at worst. However, the reactions ( to both) were criminal. * People have the right to protest if offended. They don't have the right to behave like retards and vandalize public property and destroy an artists work/ exhibitions etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSK Fan Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I'm not being touchy or hurt :|heck, I don't even belong to any religion on earth(except for mother earth) :).Those few paintings of his only incited violence and created hatred cannot be deemed good . Keep in mind India isn't a fully matured Democratic country .Will take sometime before being called as one . I don't support people who threatened him for life or those who vandalized his works An artist cannot be restricted by social norms and public's reaction. True art will always be for the sake of art. Anything else is being a pimp and not an artist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 You should be the last person who should interfere in this. Don't need to put ur nose in everything related to Muslims around the world, mind your own lot first ============== As for MF, freedom of expresson is multi-god country can be tough Their celebs lose their right to live by even speaking for minorities' basic rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Painters are so overrated. I dont see anything special in his paintings compared to many other unknown paintings. Its all about who becomes fashionable. People who rave about these things are fake intellectuals. Exactly!!!! Gourmet food is so overrated. I don't see anything special that a Copper Chimney has to offer compared to Ramakrishna Eating House outside Dadar station and many other such unknown restaurants. Its all about who becomes fashionable. People who rave about gourmet meals are just pseudos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganeshran Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 He painted the paintings in the 70s, wonder how suddenly people woke up in the late 90s and started protesting. Whether its a bunch of idiots protesting at some insignificant cartoons, or vandals destroying art in their misguided delusional effort to become the saviours of their religion. Both should be equally condemned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelig Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Everyone except Zelig is overrated :agree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 He painted the paintings in the 70s' date=' wonder how suddenly people woke up in the late 90s and started protesting.[/quote'] I think that in the mid 90s those series of paintings were published in a magazine, and that started the controversy. I saw on NDTV that MF Hussain has painted the entire story of the Ramayan in stills. He is the only person to do so. ( Or maybe I didn't catch that part properly). He grew up in a religious city- Pandharpur. I find it difficult to believe that he wanted to denigrate Hinduism. Maybe he was insensitive or plain callous or even very stupid. But that he intended malice, I really doubt. My dad was gifted a book collection of his paintings in A4 size prints, sometime in the early 90s before all this controversy began. Personally, I was never interested by all this stuff. But I'll have a look and maybe post a few pics too. PS: Hardline Muslim groups have been against him apparently for his movie Menaxi. Saw that in the news too. Must be a record of sorts to have both hard-line Muslims and Hindu groups baying for your blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelig Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Everyone except Zelig is overrated :agree: Why was this post moved here :hmmmm2: This should have stayed in CC :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gunner Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Why was this post moved here :hmmmm2: This should have stayed in CC :mad: Don't make me give you an infraction. It will hurt me more than it hurts you. :winky: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelig Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 :(( Freedom of speech :protest: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuge Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Freedom of speech :protest: Nope ! Freedom of speech of ICF section 5 says you can't hurt Gunner in any form :P:hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prakat Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I am for Freedom of Expression as long as it doesnt incite violence against anyone. That applies to Hussain, Taslima Nasreen, the Danish Cartoonist and Salman Rushdie among others. He painted the paintings in the 70s, wonder how suddenly people woke up in the late 90s and started protesting. Whether its a bunch of idiots protesting at some insignificant cartoons, or vandals destroying art in their misguided delusional effort to become the saviours of their religion. Both should be equally condemned Trouble making up your mind? Maybe Voltaire can help: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganeshran Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Trouble making up your mind? Maybe Voltaire can help: "I disapprove of what you say' date=' but I will defend to the death your right to say it."[/quote'] No trouble making up my mind. :winky: I am all for peaceful protest - it is an inherent right that democracy gives us. However, what happened against the Danish cartoons and MF hussain's paintings werent peaceful protests. They openly incited violence, though the cartoon protest was far more widespread and destructive. Hussain wasnt allowed to exhibit his pictures anywhere, the galleries were vandalized, numerous cases piled against him to prevent him from coming back to India. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rahulrulezz Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Yes his paintings were bit on the insenstive side but wth, India is a democratic country and has freedom of speech.. and don't know why we Hindus get so touchy whereas places like Khujraho has these kinda pictures at every pillar... Hinduism teaches us to live with peace and do our karmas... why the eff should we care if some painter draws random stuff on his/her canvas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texy Posted June 10, 2011 Author Share Posted June 10, 2011 I'm sure Digvijay Singh will cry like a baby and UPA govt will felicitate his work. Taslima Nasrin can be kicked, abused, chair thrown at in Hyderabad, India but Hindus are not allowed to protest any form of objectionable depiction And if M F Hussain can justify the paintings in the name of artistic freedom then why the double standard? why depict Hindu Gods and Goddesses? Why not depict Jesus & Muhammad naked? I mean just because we don't riot, scream, burn, kil(wiki Theo Van Gogh) in the name of God..we're suppose to bear this kinda bullsh!t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaurav92 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Representing India as a woman being raped, is nothing but a terrible denigration. For an Indian, 'Bharat Mata' is a Goddess and not some figurative concept and showcasing her in the manner he did was highly outrageous and a completely unacceptable form of denigration. It would be appropriate to ask him if he would have dared to make a similar painting had there been an attack on the UK, the UAE or Qatar and named it the 'Rape of UK, UAE or Qatar' ? I guess not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javier Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Representing India as a woman being raped' date=' is nothing but a terrible denigration.[b'] For an Indian, 'Bharat Mata' is a Goddess and not some figurative concept and showcasing her in the manner he did was highly outrageous and a completely unacceptable form of denigration. It would be appropriate to ask him if he would have dared to make a similar painting had there been an attack on the UK, the UAE or Qatar and named it the 'Rape of UK, UAE or Qatar' ? I guess not. Sorry but that doesnt include Mullahs which is why there organizations issue fatwas against even the Vande Mataram . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts