Pervert? biased? anti religious? anti social?

MF Husain is is no more. Was the fabulously gifted and superbly creative painter victimised by the people of his own country

It was February 2010, when Chief Editor of Hindu Mr. N.Ram received a letter from the world renowned Indian painter MF Husain (P.S Late MF Husain) conveying that he, at the age of 95, being a painter of Indian origin is offered citizenship by Qatar. Black inked doodling on a piece of a paper became a small reflective of the secular country we live in.

The letter pinched many of us, but the one who could reflect this message was N.Ram, and it was published in ‘Newyork Times; criticizing the eviction of MF Husain

The article was bounced around the world and boiled down to nothing but creating a stronger mass of people with pseudo intellect and a complete negligence to art

Here, I would want to jot down a few points to those who hated MF Husain for any reason. Rather I would like to show them a mirror.


It would be unfair if I completely shield MF Husain from the anger all of you have towards him. Some of the arguments cannot be argued back because they are true, but I would like to suggest some points that one can look through, to check the other angle to the issue. Also there are questions to be raised

First of all, let us not behave immature and drag the countries into this circle of issue. Qatar had offered the citizenship to MF Husain was totally their side of ball game. Let us first see why such great artist had to be evicted from his own country. Any artist cannot be arrested or banned from the country for his art or just because he expressed his own thoughts; which others thought was wrong! Weren’t we ashamed of putting a legal clutches on 95 years old man and threaten him for his life? ‘MF Husain is no longer an Indian ’ the line was a point of concern. It was a sad day for India to lose such a great personality.

One shall agree that all the people who publicized their resentment for those ‘pervert’ paintings are defiantly respectful to the ethos and customs of India. They got hell angry when Husain painted Sita or Durga totally nude. Were they really intolerant to any feminine offence? Then why do we not protest against the abuses associated with woman? If Husain’s freedom of expression is named as sexuality then what kind of fantasies do the abusers hold when they use those words? Where does their respect flies for a woman when it comes to utter such pervert words which I cannot even mention here? If we talk day long about worshiping Devis and respecting their womanhood, first please stop the domestic violence and other tortures on women. Let us first remove this hypocrisy. On one hand we enjoy fair skin shows in a secret room on television and on other hand we talk about being spiritual; sexuality for us is something to hide and spirituality is to project on top. Another example, we worship the great granths of our religion but we do not respect our own ancient literature ‘Kamasutra’; in fact we see it as pornography. Can we ever remove these double standards ?

I shall not take the freedom here to criticize any one personally but I can put in a sentence that when it comes to deities we pay them respect but women in our own houses are not seen as respectfully as a Devi seen in a temple. No feelings get hurt of people when prostitution and rapes are taken for granted? Is that not an insult to womanhood?

Anyways, can anyone define the concept of nudity? I am being subjective and so is the issue. What is offensive or obscene is subjective and individual view.

What are our references to imagine our deities? With full respect to Raja Ravi Verma and his work, the question could be asked that just because the great painter Ravi Verma painted them in a Nav vaari maharashtriyan saree, with lotuses and veena they are acceptable and Husain’s paintings are absolutely not? It was Ravi Verma’s imagination of the Saraswati and Laxmi and so was Husain’s.

Lest take the example of our own epic Ramayana. When Sita was rescued from Lanka and returned to Ayodhya, what was Ram’s reaction? For him Sita did not come back pure; indeed he suspected her and almost imagined her on Ravan’s bed. May be Ram imagined the same picture of Sita which Husain tried to put on a canvas. This is purely an arbitrary thought but, it could be Husain’s intention to show Sita through Ram’s eyes. There can be thousand interpretations and who are we to decide the correct one?

Art is a result of one’s imagination; one cannot have a control over thoughts. When Husain exhibited those paintings, people who protested him and made his exile from this country actually chose to go and see the exhibition. No one was forced or dragged to see them nor were they telecast on a national TV. Now who can swear what was going on in the minds of people while watching those paintings? Very well said that nudity is in the eyes of the spectator.... what if he had kept all the paintings in his bedroom and never exhibited them?

The point has it that Husain had never painted any of Muslim deity nude but just to defend that argument, If Husain compulsory had to paint Muhammad nude to be accepted back in his own country then that’s a very childish argument we are putting across.

Not chewing the same old question again asking if he was a true Indian or Not..The only question that arises here is that, why did we oppose Husain so much? Just because he painted Indian Goddesses nude or because he is a Muslim and he did?

Thank you

Dhwani Dalal