- We condemn the flogging of Dalit men in Gujarat, says Rajnath Singh
- India cannot suppress voice of Kashmiris, should hold plebiscite: Nawaz Sharif
- Hockey legend Mohammed Shahid passes away
- Ambiguity on Navjot Singh Sidhu's status in BJP as no official word on resignation from party
- 7th Pay Commission: Govt to examine pay parity between IAS, non-IAS officers
Rushdie spoke in Delhi without event, proving the fearful second-guessers wrong
Salman Rushdie came to a conclave in Delhi, he spoke his piece, he left. Listening to his words did not cause the audience to spontaneously combust. He delivered his familiar use-it-or-lose-it speech on freedom, denounced votebank politics and religious bigotry, insulted a few politicians, estimated how many Muslims really cared about his presence. The lack of drama and special effects around his talk only showed up how empty all the fuss in Jaipur was.
The Jaipur literary festival controversy had a strange, rehearsed and stop-start quality to it — some Muslim groups were reportedly livid at the idea of Rushdie being invited, and threatened violence. The state government seemed weak-willed, the organisers shared their anxieties with Rushdie, and he finally stayed away. However, the Rushdie issue swallowed up the festival. Others championed his cause, some of them defiantly reading from The Satanic Verses — until the repercussions loomed too big to take on. As it appeared that Rushdie would not even be allowed to speak via videoconference, the surrender seemed abject — India, it seemed, was shamefully incapable of engaging with any writing that struck sparks. Political parties that thought they were competing for the Muslim vote made sure to register their intolerance of Rushdie — to the extent that the state could not even guarantee his security. Salman Rushdie, in their account, was the ultimate red rag to the believers, his presence was an invitation to trouble.
His Delhi visit dissolved all of those ideas, and revealed how entirely manufactured these controversies are, and how they misunderstand what Indian citizens care about. We need to see more of Rushdie in India, to bring him back to human proportions — an individual who can be heard and argued with, not he-who-must-not-be-named. Those who disagree have the right to stay away, without denying others the pleasure of engaging with Salman Rushdie.
- UN faces a crisis, but its new secretary general is unlikely to upset tradition
- South China Sea verdict has changed the ground rules for future engagement with China
- Empowering women through JAM
- Resolution of citizen grievances is an indicator of the performance of government departments
- Telescope: Grace and the lack of it
- The endeavour for a common civil law must be to end discrimination, and not stamp majority might