[To mark the International Day of Democracy]
Artist Manish Harijan painted a few arts depicting Hindu god and goddess in poses that were disliked by many people. Some, including the former army colonel and head of a Hindu group, decided to register a case against him and issue the death threats. The controversy ended after the artist and the exhibitor Sangeeta Thapa agreed to remove two of the paintings and signed a paper agreeing not to paint and exhibit such images in future. The artists were furious over the compromise made over the Freedom of Expression by Thapa, and the role played by the administration.
Those incidents brought a big discussion on Social Media. I generally said that artists should be able to exercise his freedom of artistic expression and people thinks it’s legally not acceptable they can seek judicial remedy. I also said that issuing death threat is against the law. People can dislike his painting but that shouldn’t translate into threatening him of consequences.
SuperKali: A painting by Manish Harijan depicting Hindu Goddess Kali imposed in Superwoman. Copyrighted painting used under fair use policy.
Many of the people expressed that they didn’t like it. Some of them wrote foul and threatening words to the artist.
This reminds me of an incident during a World Summit on Information Society in Tunis, Tunisia in 2005. During a session on freedom of expression on the Internet, a Tunisian journalist got into a long comment concluding that when the world is fighting for food and other basic necessities, the issue of freedom of expression on the Internet is a non-sense.
An African blogger on the panel had the best answer: “If we do not have freedom of expression, we cannot talk freely about food.”
I have no complaints against those who expressed dislike for Harijan’s art decently. For those who used foul or threatening words; I can only feel pity on them because they are using their same rights to demand curtailing of the same rights. If we believe in human rights, then we should defend it in its spirit not in our own interpretations. If we call ourselves citizens of a nation, we should abide by its law and act accordingly.
Freedom of expression comes with certain responsibility especially regarding the public order and social harmony. But if a group of people dislike the art and then started violence; who is the main responsible for disturbing the public order?
We live in democracy, where everyone is provided forum to express their views. We use our skills to express our views – some use words in writing, some use spoken words, and some use films and some use paintings. If we dislike them, let say that and avoid it – something disliked by many will eventually die. If Harijan’s art is disliked by all, no one will go to his exhibition, no one will buy it and no one will cover it in media – then eventually the value of such art will be zero.
Right and wrong has to be determined by the law; not by personal or communal or religious faiths. If we let our personal or communal or religious faiths determine rights and wrong for everyone we meet and see, then we are heading towards a chaotic society. Moral policing doesn’t take us anywhere but to destruction of human values – as exemplified by Taliban in Afghanistan.
Photographs by Boushra Almutawakel of Yemen. Copyright photos used under fair use policy.
Tolerance is another thing that we should have if we want to have a harmonious society. As I wrote on one of Facebook comments on the issue, I don’t like use of F-words (in our culture it’s unacceptable), so should I form a group of likeminded and start threatening people? Can that create a harmonious society?
When I look at the art, SuperKali, I feel it would have been better if he hadn’t painted this. That’s because it challenges my belief and that challenge could have two consequences, one I disapprove his message or I partly/fully approve his message – it could be the element of change in our beliefs. The classic example of is heliocentrism. Galileo Galilei stood on trial and after failing to convince the Rome in 1633 AD, was put into house arrest for rest of his life for writing in his book that earth rotates around the sun. That was contrary to Bible and against the faiths and beliefs of the people.
I am not saying Harijan’s art could have revolution of that magnitude but just want to push that sometime it may be worthwhile to let someone push the ideas that may seem to be outrageous. Let’s brainstorm over the message. But for the message, it’s foolishness to try to intimidate the messenger.
And, many compared it with the printing of Buddha’s images on shoes by an American company. Many of us felt offended. But the comparison doesn’t suit because that was a business (no message involved) and this is art (with very limited business). That was mass production and this is one off piece of art unlikely to been seen by millions.
So let’s live in an open society giving space to all beliefs and thoughts and acting on the way best of human kind – in modern terms accordance to the laws.
And, yes the final words to artists: you all are part of society; if your work is likely to offend the big part of it, think over again and again before publicly exhibiting it. Hurting lots of people is a biggest non-punishable crime one can commit.
By Rajesh KC. Copyright cartoon / Fair Use.
And even the Freedom of Expression in the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (one that is legally binding to Nepal as a signatory) states:
- Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
- Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.
- The exercise of the rights carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; (b) For the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals.
More reading on the issue
- By hook or by crook by noted cartoonist Rajesh KC in Republica’s The Week
- UNESCO concerned by death threats against Nepali artist Manish Harijan
- Blasphemy charges in a secular state by Anuraj Acharya in Nepali Times’ The Brief
- Art exhibition halted over death threat to artist in The Himalayan Times
- Artist in death threat trouble for ‘blasphemy’ by Ankit Adhikari in The Kathmandu Post
