A long essay on Ramayana writtten by a linguist, late AK Ramanujan, nearly two decades ago when he was working at a leading US university, titled: "Three Hundred Ramayanas":Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation", has suddenly become a subject of heated debate in the media. According to press reports, this clearly controversial Essay was included in the syllabus of the Delhi University's BA 2nd year history course, in 2006. Presumably, the Essay came under adverse notice of a section of students and teachers. Recently, the Delhi University Academic Council, in a majority decision of 141 members against 9, removed the Essay from the syllabus.
This democratic decision by the most important body of the DU has triggered a vociferous protest by "Marxist" and "Left-liberal" teachers and student unions. Some of them even came out in a protest demonstration in the DU's north campus, calling the Academic Council's decision as "wanton philistinism" and an assault on "academic freedom". One lady history teacher of Jawaharlal Nehru University(JNU), prof. Mridula Mukherjee went to the outrageous extent of condemning it as "goondagardi"(goondaism). "Hindutva" groups who had favoured the removal, were accused of bigotry and "taking one view of history".
Strong views of the critics of the Essay that some versions of the "retellings" of the epic in Ramanujan's collection were incredibly perverse, even obscene, in their projection of the iconic figures like Ram, Lakshman, Hanuman and Indra, and deeply hurt the religious feelings of the vast numbers of the majority community, were totally dismissed. Their argument that there were no demands for banning the book and that it was only excluded from the syllabus of the history course of undergraduate students still in their teens, also had no relevance to these "Marxists". Strangely, even some leading intellectuals belonging to the Capital's think tanks, wittingly ignored this limited restriction.
Here are a few examples of some of these offensive "tellings": Ravana and Lakshman seduced Sita; Sita was unfaithful to Rama; Hanuman was ladies' man; Indra, king of devas, was debased; his testicles fell down because of ...a curse and animal testicles were implanted; Indra's body was covered with vaginas of thousands of women! When such evil and malicious "tellings" are part of the Ramanujan's essay , is it improper for the DU Academic Council to remove it from the syllabus of college freshers?
Will these history teachers show similar enthusiasm to recommend Salman Rushdie's novel "Satanic Verses" for the English syllabus at the DU, or the JNU as it makes derogatory references to Prophet Mohammed's wives? Did they come out on the streets to shout against the ban on the book? And what about the Bangladeshi writer Tasleema Nasreen's book that was banned? Why hurting the sentiments of the Hindu majority community seems easy meat to these psuedo-secular thinkers and teachers?
.
This democratic decision by the most important body of the DU has triggered a vociferous protest by "Marxist" and "Left-liberal" teachers and student unions. Some of them even came out in a protest demonstration in the DU's north campus, calling the Academic Council's decision as "wanton philistinism" and an assault on "academic freedom". One lady history teacher of Jawaharlal Nehru University(JNU), prof. Mridula Mukherjee went to the outrageous extent of condemning it as "goondagardi"(goondaism). "Hindutva" groups who had favoured the removal, were accused of bigotry and "taking one view of history".
Strong views of the critics of the Essay that some versions of the "retellings" of the epic in Ramanujan's collection were incredibly perverse, even obscene, in their projection of the iconic figures like Ram, Lakshman, Hanuman and Indra, and deeply hurt the religious feelings of the vast numbers of the majority community, were totally dismissed. Their argument that there were no demands for banning the book and that it was only excluded from the syllabus of the history course of undergraduate students still in their teens, also had no relevance to these "Marxists". Strangely, even some leading intellectuals belonging to the Capital's think tanks, wittingly ignored this limited restriction.
Here are a few examples of some of these offensive "tellings": Ravana and Lakshman seduced Sita; Sita was unfaithful to Rama; Hanuman was ladies' man; Indra, king of devas, was debased; his testicles fell down because of ...a curse and animal testicles were implanted; Indra's body was covered with vaginas of thousands of women! When such evil and malicious "tellings" are part of the Ramanujan's essay , is it improper for the DU Academic Council to remove it from the syllabus of college freshers?
Will these history teachers show similar enthusiasm to recommend Salman Rushdie's novel "Satanic Verses" for the English syllabus at the DU, or the JNU as it makes derogatory references to Prophet Mohammed's wives? Did they come out on the streets to shout against the ban on the book? And what about the Bangladeshi writer Tasleema Nasreen's book that was banned? Why hurting the sentiments of the Hindu majority community seems easy meat to these psuedo-secular thinkers and teachers?
.
No comments:
Post a Comment