Editorial Viewpoint
The Federation and the Press
The relationship between the Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India and Parsiana has always been a cordial one.
In January 1974 when the Federation was meeting in Delhi, our correspondent Sanobar Marker sought and received the consent of the Delhi Parsi Anjuman (DPA) president Shiavax Nargolwala to attend the meet. But Nadirshaw Mulla, the then president of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) objected to the presence of the Press on the grounds that delegates may not talk freely if what they said may be reported (a concept not borne out by the Ahmedabad meeting in December 2004).
It was only two years later that Surat Parsi Panchayat president Maneck Gheyara invited the Press to the Federation meeting in Surat in 1976 to which the then BPP chairman B. K. Boman-Behram concurred.
It was at that Surat meeting when the felicitations were being given to the delegates that Dr Ratan Marshall also called out the name of the Parsiana representative and presented him with a bouquet. It was the first such acknowledgement of our existence and till this day we cherish the memory of that first glow of recognition.
Over the 29 years that Parsiana has reported on the Federation meetings the delegates have unstintingly heaped praise on the magazine and its reportage of community affairs.
The youth counterpart of the Federation, FOZYA (Federation of Zoroastrian Youth Associations) went around garnering subscriptions and even advertisements from their anjuman members for Parsiana.
Delegates from all over the country, no matter what their religious leanings, always felt free to talk to us knowing their confidence would not be betrayed.
So the happenings at the Federation meet in Ahmedabad came as a new experience (see "World body stymied," page 28). Of course one anticipated that there would be some hostility from the Khojeste Mistree-Yazdi Desai cabal but that it would be spontaneous and not orchestrated.
Having succeeded in their objective to stall the Indian Federation from joining the world body (the Mistree camp wanted a vote on the issue which they were denied, much to their annoyance and anger) and having succeeded in disrupting the all-India body's deliberations for 30 minutes or so by their verbal barrage and physical threats (their show of lung and muscle power having prevented two experts from fully presenting their views on the joint issues of survival and demography), their next objective was to attack Parsiana's credibility.
"Not the gospel"
The first salvo came in response to some allegations pertaining to the formation of a world body. Madras Parsi Anjuman president Nariman Mogrelia responded that the meetings were covered in Parsiana and one could refer to them. Mistree retorted, "Parsiana is not the gospel." Fair enough. You cannot fully report two days of deliberations in 7,000 words. So some delegate or observer can genuinely or with malice complain about some omission or the other.
The second query came from a Poona youth, Mabrin Nanavatti who till date has never sought clarification from Parsiana at any Federation meeting or elsewhere either by letters or phone calls. He wanted to know from where Parsiana obtained its data on births, marriages and deaths.
Our initial reaction was to ignore the query. (The source of information is printed at the beginning of the Milestones column. But that would mean having to read the magazine which would require a certain measure of effort and intelligence.)
But the Federation chairman Minoo Shroff asked Parsiana to respond [Shroff undoubtedly assumed that Parsiana would want to acquit itself and therefore would require the consent of the chair to speak. Earlier a Poona Parsee Panchayat (PPP) trustee Adil Sarondewala had objected to Mistree being questioned on his definition of a Parsi by DPA trustee Ava Khullar under the mistaken notion she was from the Press - she had been
In January 1974 when the Federation was meeting in Delhi, our correspondent Sanobar Marker sought and received the consent of the Delhi Parsi Anjuman (DPA) president Shiavax Nargolwala to attend the meet. But Nadirshaw Mulla, the then president of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) objected to the presence of the Press on the grounds that delegates may not talk freely if what they said may be reported (a concept not borne out by the Ahmedabad meeting in December 2004).
It was only two years later that Surat Parsi Panchayat president Maneck Gheyara invited the Press to the Federation meeting in Surat in 1976 to which the then BPP chairman B. K. Boman-Behram concurred.
It was at that Surat meeting when the felicitations were being given to the delegates that Dr Ratan Marshall also called out the name of the Parsiana representative and presented him with a bouquet. It was the first such acknowledgement of our existence and till this day we cherish the memory of that first glow of recognition.
Over the 29 years that Parsiana has reported on the Federation meetings the delegates have unstintingly heaped praise on the magazine and its reportage of community affairs.
The youth counterpart of the Federation, FOZYA (Federation of Zoroastrian Youth Associations) went around garnering subscriptions and even advertisements from their anjuman members for Parsiana.
Delegates from all over the country, no matter what their religious leanings, always felt free to talk to us knowing their confidence would not be betrayed.
So the happenings at the Federation meet in Ahmedabad came as a new experience (see "World body stymied," page 28). Of course one anticipated that there would be some hostility from the Khojeste Mistree-Yazdi Desai cabal but that it would be spontaneous and not orchestrated.
Having succeeded in their objective to stall the Indian Federation from joining the world body (the Mistree camp wanted a vote on the issue which they were denied, much to their annoyance and anger) and having succeeded in disrupting the all-India body's deliberations for 30 minutes or so by their verbal barrage and physical threats (their show of lung and muscle power having prevented two experts from fully presenting their views on the joint issues of survival and demography), their next objective was to attack Parsiana's credibility.
"Not the gospel"
The first salvo came in response to some allegations pertaining to the formation of a world body. Madras Parsi Anjuman president Nariman Mogrelia responded that the meetings were covered in Parsiana and one could refer to them. Mistree retorted, "Parsiana is not the gospel." Fair enough. You cannot fully report two days of deliberations in 7,000 words. So some delegate or observer can genuinely or with malice complain about some omission or the other.
The second query came from a Poona youth, Mabrin Nanavatti who till date has never sought clarification from Parsiana at any Federation meeting or elsewhere either by letters or phone calls. He wanted to know from where Parsiana obtained its data on births, marriages and deaths.
Our initial reaction was to ignore the query. (The source of information is printed at the beginning of the Milestones column. But that would mean having to read the magazine which would require a certain measure of effort and intelligence.)
But the Federation chairman Minoo Shroff asked Parsiana to respond [Shroff undoubtedly assumed that Parsiana would want to acquit itself and therefore would require the consent of the chair to speak. Earlier a Poona Parsee Panchayat (PPP) trustee Adil Sarondewala had objected to Mistree being questioned on his definition of a Parsi by DPA trustee Ava Khullar under the mistaken notion she was from the Press - she had been
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive