Editorial Viewpoint
An eerie silence
The community has kept a studied silence on the ban initiated by the militant Hindu outfit, the Shiv Sena on Rohinton Mistry’s novel Such a Long Journey. Parsis have remained quiet even after a report appeared in The Times of India of October 22, 2010 that Bombay University English professor Niloufer Bharucha has flown to Germany, apparently out of concern for her safety. According to the write-up, “She headed the curriculum sub-committee when the book was introduced in the syllabus.” And the current head of the English department Coomi Vevaina has also “proceeded on leave,” the report says because she allegedly feared an attack on her.
How many more Parsis have to be threatened or live in insecurity until the community wakes up and realizes we are being targeted, albeit indirectly? Every time a local politician needs mileage by attacking a soft target, we are at risk. The notion that we are some sacred cows who will not be touched by the fanaticism and hate mongering of demagogues and rabble rousers is a pipe dream. If turning on the Parsis could ensure a political victory for a sectarian party, they would do it without a moment’s hesitation. And the henchmen know they will not be touched by the authorities.
The cold-blooded slaughter of minority groups without any fear of redemption is borne out by the developments in our country’s recent, bleak history. Three thousand Sikhs were slaughtered following Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination by two Sikh bodyguards in 1984. No immediate action was taken either to stop the massacre or punish the guilty. The demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992 and those responsible for the killings that followed, including the death of two Parsis, saw nothing done for several days to stop the slayings or bring the guilty to book. (The third generation of the party that initiated the pogrom has asked for a ban on the book!)
Following the carnage in Godhra in 2002, the guilty continue to hold high office. Here only thanks to the perseverance of a few nongovernmental agencies and the intervention of the Supreme Court is there hope of a modicum of justice being done. A Parsi boy went missing in the mayhem and is presumably dead.
But the Sikhs and Muslims are far larger in numbers than the Parsis and more vociferous. They have large expatriate communities and the Muslims have their brethren all over the world. India’s largest trading partners are the Islamic countries in the Middle East who provide us the oil we crucially need to keep our economy growing. Who then is there to shed a tear for Parsis when we ourselves keep silent?
Even though all the affected characters in the ongoing drama are Parsis, not a single community institution has condemned the ban on Mistry’s novel. Parts of the book may be offensive to some. But so are articles in newspapers and magazines. Noted columnist Jyoti Punwani stated in her column in the Daily News and Analysis of October 22, 2010 under the heading “Pot calls the kettle black as another book bites the dust” that the language used in the Shiv Sena mouthpiece Samna is far more offensive (terms such as “eunuch,” “impotent,” “landya” — circumcised — are regularly used to denounce minorities and others). Has any call been heeded to ban the paper or prosecute its editors? Was any action taken against the Sena for the inflammatory articles that ignited the 1992-93 Bombay riots?
Aditya Thackeray following in his family’s despotic footsteps and asking for a withdrawal of Mistry’s book is bad enough. A craven vice chancellor readily succumbing is also understandable allowing for the pathetic state Bombay University is in these days. But a Congress chief minister, whose utterances on public issues change on a day-to-day basis depending on whose favor he is trying to win, supporting the boycott is quite another matter. Or is it just par for the course?
These are clear indications that if any attack were to take place on the community or its members, the authorities would dillydally over the issue if not facilitate the onslaught. It is only if bullies believe they are up against a formidable foe that they think twice before launching a broadside. Tormenters target the weak, the defenseless, the unarmed, women, children, the elderly, anyone who can’t fight back. The political parties must have been aware that when writer Murzban Shroff was persecuted for using the term ghati (a term for a Maharashtrian hailing from the Western Ghats) in his book Breathless in Bombay, the community did not speak in his defense. That sadly was left for the courts and civil society to do.
Zoroastrianism urges its followers to fight the good fight, to stand up for what is right and just, to battle the forces of evil. Our community leaders are ever ready to portray themselves as defenders of the faith. They are prepared to pounce on women, children and even a lone foreigner if the leadership assumed these hapless people wished to enter the Zoroastrian faith. Parsi fundamentalists are willing to hop into cars and drive for hours to correct a perceived wrong.
So why the silence now? At public fora, in their mouthpiece publications, on the floor of the Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meetings they boast of their prowess in keeping the Zoroastrian flame lit. They attack the Parsi media for reporting on community news but they keep quiet when communalists attack a Parsi author and community academicians. Why the cowardice now?
Several Parsis including Mistry who resides in Canada have voiced their opinion against the ban and even participated in public demonstrations against the illegal proscription. The tragedy is that none of our community institutions stood up to defend freedom of expression.
In a democracy the only defender of minorities is the constitution and the courts that uphold those inalienable rights. Parsis rush to court to fight each other but we do not turn to the courts to assist one another.
The Rohinton Mistry episode is not so much a black mark against the general Indian polity — we expect nothing better from our political leadership. But the sordid drama is certainly a blot against the followers of Zoroastrianism who idly stand by and permit wrongs to be perpetrated.
How many more Parsis have to be threatened or live in insecurity until the community wakes up and realizes we are being targeted, albeit indirectly? Every time a local politician needs mileage by attacking a soft target, we are at risk. The notion that we are some sacred cows who will not be touched by the fanaticism and hate mongering of demagogues and rabble rousers is a pipe dream. If turning on the Parsis could ensure a political victory for a sectarian party, they would do it without a moment’s hesitation. And the henchmen know they will not be touched by the authorities.
The cold-blooded slaughter of minority groups without any fear of redemption is borne out by the developments in our country’s recent, bleak history. Three thousand Sikhs were slaughtered following Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination by two Sikh bodyguards in 1984. No immediate action was taken either to stop the massacre or punish the guilty. The demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992 and those responsible for the killings that followed, including the death of two Parsis, saw nothing done for several days to stop the slayings or bring the guilty to book. (The third generation of the party that initiated the pogrom has asked for a ban on the book!)
Following the carnage in Godhra in 2002, the guilty continue to hold high office. Here only thanks to the perseverance of a few nongovernmental agencies and the intervention of the Supreme Court is there hope of a modicum of justice being done. A Parsi boy went missing in the mayhem and is presumably dead.
But the Sikhs and Muslims are far larger in numbers than the Parsis and more vociferous. They have large expatriate communities and the Muslims have their brethren all over the world. India’s largest trading partners are the Islamic countries in the Middle East who provide us the oil we crucially need to keep our economy growing. Who then is there to shed a tear for Parsis when we ourselves keep silent?
Even though all the affected characters in the ongoing drama are Parsis, not a single community institution has condemned the ban on Mistry’s novel. Parts of the book may be offensive to some. But so are articles in newspapers and magazines. Noted columnist Jyoti Punwani stated in her column in the Daily News and Analysis of October 22, 2010 under the heading “Pot calls the kettle black as another book bites the dust” that the language used in the Shiv Sena mouthpiece Samna is far more offensive (terms such as “eunuch,” “impotent,” “landya” — circumcised — are regularly used to denounce minorities and others). Has any call been heeded to ban the paper or prosecute its editors? Was any action taken against the Sena for the inflammatory articles that ignited the 1992-93 Bombay riots?
Aditya Thackeray following in his family’s despotic footsteps and asking for a withdrawal of Mistry’s book is bad enough. A craven vice chancellor readily succumbing is also understandable allowing for the pathetic state Bombay University is in these days. But a Congress chief minister, whose utterances on public issues change on a day-to-day basis depending on whose favor he is trying to win, supporting the boycott is quite another matter. Or is it just par for the course?
These are clear indications that if any attack were to take place on the community or its members, the authorities would dillydally over the issue if not facilitate the onslaught. It is only if bullies believe they are up against a formidable foe that they think twice before launching a broadside. Tormenters target the weak, the defenseless, the unarmed, women, children, the elderly, anyone who can’t fight back. The political parties must have been aware that when writer Murzban Shroff was persecuted for using the term ghati (a term for a Maharashtrian hailing from the Western Ghats) in his book Breathless in Bombay, the community did not speak in his defense. That sadly was left for the courts and civil society to do.
Zoroastrianism urges its followers to fight the good fight, to stand up for what is right and just, to battle the forces of evil. Our community leaders are ever ready to portray themselves as defenders of the faith. They are prepared to pounce on women, children and even a lone foreigner if the leadership assumed these hapless people wished to enter the Zoroastrian faith. Parsi fundamentalists are willing to hop into cars and drive for hours to correct a perceived wrong.
So why the silence now? At public fora, in their mouthpiece publications, on the floor of the Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meetings they boast of their prowess in keeping the Zoroastrian flame lit. They attack the Parsi media for reporting on community news but they keep quiet when communalists attack a Parsi author and community academicians. Why the cowardice now?
Several Parsis including Mistry who resides in Canada have voiced their opinion against the ban and even participated in public demonstrations against the illegal proscription. The tragedy is that none of our community institutions stood up to defend freedom of expression.
In a democracy the only defender of minorities is the constitution and the courts that uphold those inalienable rights. Parsis rush to court to fight each other but we do not turn to the courts to assist one another.
The Rohinton Mistry episode is not so much a black mark against the general Indian polity — we expect nothing better from our political leadership. But the sordid drama is certainly a blot against the followers of Zoroastrianism who idly stand by and permit wrongs to be perpetrated.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive