Follow palashbiswaskl on Twitter

Saturday, November 24, 2012

Fwd: [media_monitor5] Fw: Girish Karnad's Outburst against Naipaul is due to his Injured Ego

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ashok T. Jaisinghani <>
Date: Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: [media_monitor5] Fw: Girish Karnad's Outburst against Naipaul is due to his Injured Ego

Can Rabindranath Tagore be called Mediocre because his song Jana Gana Mana is so Simple & Easy to Sing?
    Girish Karnad's comments on Rabindranath Tagore cannot be ignored because the fellow is well known as an actor, film director and writer who has won a number of awards in India. He is now desperately trying to get more important awards like the Landmark Lifetime Achievement Award and the Nobel Prize. Does any Joker like Girish Karnad deserve such awards?  
    Girish Karnad is like a Court Jester who demands that the Crown of the King be placed on his head. In a hilarious film, placing the King's Crown on the Joker's head can be good comedy, which can make the audiences roll in laughter.
    Pseudo-intellectuals like Girish Karnad are absolutely wrong in thinking that Rabindranath Tagore was a mediocre writer. Rabindranath Tagore was a great social reformer who wanted to reach out to the common people of India. So he very wisely chose to write his stories, plays and poems in a simple language, which could be understood easily by the common people. The great man did not choose to impress ONLY the big writers and other highly learned persons with his writings. The bigwigs of the literary world must appreciate the good intentions of a great writer like Rabindranath Tagore who purposely chose to write in a simple style.
    If we consider the reason why the National Anthem Jana Gana Mana is so popular, we shall find that it is such a simple song that it can be sung by thousands of people together at the same time. Most of the people of India have sung it a number of times in their lives. Jana Gana Mana is also set to a simple melody, which can be easily followed by the common people.
    Should we call Rabindranath Tagore a mediocre poet just because Jana Gana Mana is such a simple song that it can be easily memorized and sung in a simple melody by crores of people? The simplicity of Jana Gana Mana actually serves to greatly increase the value of the National Anthem as a song, and to vastly enhance the greatness of Rabindranath Tagore as a poet.
Jana Gana Mana can be Sung in many Melodious Tunes
    Jana Gana Mana can easily be sung in different melodious tunes by versatile singers. It is already being sung in different tunes by many well- known singers on Doordarshan's TV channels. The tune of Jana Gana Mana can be made unbelievably melodious by some great singers.
    I am not able to describe in words how vastly sweet the National Anthem can become when sung in more melodious tunes. I have myself tried singing the National Anthem in different melodious tunes. Of course, it would be difficult for the common people to sing Jana Gana Mana in such melodious tunes, especially when hundreds or thousands of people have to sing it together.
    Jana Gana Mana sung in a highly melodious tune can sound like an individual singer's personal prayer.
    Other people cannot easily believe that I have recently acquired the ability to sing in the range of about 10 octaves, which probably no one else in the world can do. So it is easy for me to try singing some great songs like Jana Gana Mana in many different tunes.
    Most people think that I must be joking when I tell them that I can clearly sing the tunes ranging from lower than bass, bass, baritone, tenor, soprano (falsetto) and even the tunes higher than soprano, in which my voice becomes thinner than that of a child. Even though I am 70 years old, I do not wish to display my abilities as a singer in a hurry before any big audiences. I believe that I must practice singing for more time before I make a decision to sing in front of a big audience.
    Ashok  T. Jaisinghani.  
       Editor & Publisher:
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 19 Nov 2012 7:10 AM
Subject: Re: [media_monitor5] Fw: Girish Karnad's Outburst against Naipaul is due to his Injured Ego

Dear Friends:
I am surprised and felt unhappy about the remarks made by Mr. Girish Karnad against Mr. V.S. Naipaul.  Mr. Naipaul, of Indian descent was born in Trinidad and is four years younger to me in age and I am very proud of him. Unquestionably he is recognized as one of the best writers in English and very rightfully he deserved to be honored with the Nobel Prize for literature. I read some of his books and writings with delight.
But I do not know who this Mr. Girish Karnad is. He even called gurudev Tagore as a mediocre writer!! By this writings he only proved how ignorant an idiot he is. It must be beyond his education and intelligence to understand even one sentence of what Gurudev Tagore wrote.
Yes, the Muslims invaded India, destroyed the Hindu temples, killed the Hindus in the millions and molested their women. Even after getting their Muslim Pakistan and Bangladesh, they are still killing the Hindus and molesting the Hindu women today. Born in East Bengal 84 years ago, I had the opportunity of  knowing about Gurudev Tagore and the history of Bengal and India. Mr. Naipaul could not change the facts of history just to please an idiot like Mr. Karnad. Let us ignore him as he does not deserve our attention.
Dr. Anil K. Sarkar. MD
 Nov 18th, 2012

----- Original Message -----
From: MediaWatch
To: mm
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 2:41 PM
Subject: [media_monitor5] Fw: Girish Karnad's Outburst against Naipaul is due to his Injured Ego


--- On Sun, 11/18/12, Ashok T. Jaisinghani <> wrote:

From: Ashok T. Jaisinghani <>
Subject: Girish Karnad's Outburst against Naipaul is due to his Injured Ego
To: "Arya Youth Group" <>, "Basudev Mahapatra - HOTnHIT News" <>, "Bhagwat Goel" <>, "Bhailal Patel" <>, "DAVE MAKKAR" <>, "Krishnaraj Rao" <>, "Media Watch" <>, "Mukund Apte" <>, "Tapan Ghosh - President of Hindu Samhati" <>, "Sudhir-Architect" <>
Date: Sunday, November 18, 2012, 3:53 PM

Girish Karnad's Outburst against Naipaul is due to his Injured Ego
    There was nothing new or startling that Girish Karnad said about V S Naipaul after the Landmark Lifetime Achievement Award, which was given to Naipaul at the Literature Live! the literary festival held recently in Mumbai. The controversial views of Naipaul about the Muslims have become widely known ever since he won the Nobel Prize in Literature some years back.
    In his article, "Have the courage to face our past and present, squarely," Anil Dharkar has written:
    Naipaul was given the Landmark Lifetime Achievement Award at the festival. This aroused Karnad's ire: the award should not have been given, he said, because Naipaul was anti-Muslim. In his non-fiction books, Naipaul's stance, according to Karnad, is to depict Indian Muslims as "raiders and marauders" and so, in effect, Naipaul has "criminalised a whole section of the Indian population as rapists and murderers." "I have Muslim friends and I feel strongly about this," Karnad added.
    What was the reason for Girish Karnad to get so much mad and furious over the Landmark Lifetime Achievement Award that was given to Naipaul? Girish Karnad's outburst against Naipaul must be due to his deflated ego after the Landmark Lifetime Achievement Award was denied to him, but was given instead to Naipaul. It is simply a case of extreme jealously, which has been shown by Girish Karnad who believes that only persons like him must be honored with such important awards.
    Due to his big achievements in films in different categories, Girish Karnad believes that he is a much greater writer than Naipaul. His outburst against Naipaul has nothing to do with the latter being anti-Muslim, for which Naipaul has been severely criticized by many other persons before. Girish Karnad's ego balloon has been burst with the denial of the Landmark Lifetime Achievement Award to him. His highly injured ego must have caused his outburst against Naipaul, which has now very badly damaged Girish Karnad's reputation. 
Megalomaniacs of the Film World
    Girish Karnad is a megalomaniac who strongly believes that he is much more qualified than Naipaul for receiving the Landmark Lifetime Achievement Award, and even for being honored with other greater awards like the Nobel Prize in Literature. By describing Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore as a mediocre writer, Girish Karnad has unnecessarily also dragged the name of another Nobel Prize winner into the controversy.
    It may be all right if Girish Karnad believed that Naipaul was anti-Muslim, but why did he try to belittle Rabindranath Tagore, the writer of India's National Anthem, Jana Gana Mana? It is obvious that Girish Karnad believes that he deserves the Nobel Prize in Literature more than Rabindranath Tagore and V S Naipaul. 
    The famous actors and other personalities of the film world and TV serials have larger than life images. Due to their great fame and success in the world of make-believe, many film and TV celebrities like Girish Karnad have hugely bloated egos. So such celebrities insist that they have a license to utter any nonsense against other successful personalities who are from the non-film world. Such megalomaniacs who live in a false world of films and TV serials think that they have answers to all the questions and solutions for all the problems of the real world.
    Film and TV personalities are absolutely wrong in believing that they can solve all the problems and control all the crimes like the heroes and heroines are shown doing in many films and serials. 
    There are people who can swear that there are many scenes shown in films and TV serials, which are actually encouraging jealousy, hatred, obscenity, violence against children and other weak persons, eve-teasing, sexual assaults on women, and many other types of crimes. Crimes get glorified by the films and TV serials that show the heroes and heroines committing different types of crimes, which can lead to more jealousy, hatred, obscenity, violence and crimes in real life. 
    It is common knowledge that many film personalities have links with the underworld dons and corrupt politicians, many of whom are known to control the production, finance and distribution of films. So it should not be surprising that fellows like Girish Karnad are deliberately creating unnecessary controversies, which can only increase the problems of India.
    Ashok  T. Jaisinghani.  
       Editor & Publisher:

----- Original Message -----
From: N Hirani
Sent: 15 Nov 2012 2:04 AM
Subject: Fwd: Have the courage to face our past and present, squarely- Anil Dharker

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Madhukar Ambekar <>
Date: Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:56 AM
Subject: Have the courage to face our past and present, squarely- Anil Dharker
To: Madhukar Ambekar <>

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Dr. Madhukar Ambekar" <>
Subject: Re: [FHRS_USA] Have the courage to face our past and present, squarely - Anil Dharker
Date: 14 November 2012 07:59:16 GMT

What Anil Dharker is saying is partially right. Today's Indian Muslims both types, Moderates and Orthodox, have different attitudes towards the Nation state they live in. There are very few Muslim who openly condemn the blind followers of Islam in India. Moderate ones are not very vocal to condemn the Terrorists and Jihadi's for fear of reprisals against them. 
Just to Quote some of the glaring example which has attracted the media attention in the past was that of Mushirul Haq Vice-Chancellor of J & K Univeristy was kidnapped from the University premises along with his secretary and brutally murdered for his views on Secularism. You can read by clicking on Mushirul Haq. Some other atrocities of Muslims and Hindu's can be read as well. Moderate Muslim has no voice all over the world.
The views of Mohhamed Karim Chagla about Veer Sarakar are evident as an Education Minister of India as "Former Union Minister of Education late Mr. Mohammed Karim Chagla described Savarkar as a great devotee of India, and a successful son of mother India. Freedom fighters like him created an atmosphere of awakening in the minds of Indian people for leaders like Mahatma Gandhi to continue the struggle for independence. If by any chance this great man is not given a prominent place in the history of India then it will be an imponderable disservice to our future generation."

Please be honest towards the National tragedies that took place under the tyrannical rulers of Muslim Invaders. I do agree that there are very good Nationalist Muslims who live under fear of being targeted by the "Fanatic" muslims. There are very few like Dr. A.P.J. Kalam.

Dr. Ambekar.
On 13 Nov 2012, at 03:44, sri venkat <> wrote:

Have the courage to face our past and present, squarely
Anil Dharker         
11 November 2012, 07:18 AM IST

Was V S Naipaul right or was Girish Karnad right? The sound and fury
generated by the controversy at Literature Live!, Mumbai's literary
festival, has obscured one important aspect of our national life:
we are afraid of our own history.  Let's recap for a moment how the
controversy began.
Naipaul was given the Landmark Lifetime Achievement Award
at the festival. This aroused Karnad's ire: the award should not
have been given, he said, because Naipaul was anti-Muslim. In his
non-fiction books, Naipaul's stance, according to Karnad, is to depict
Indian Muslims as "raiders and marauders" and so, in effect, Naipaul
has "criminalised a whole section of the Indian population as rapists
and murderers."
"I have Muslim friends and I feel strongly about this,"
Karnad added.

I have Muslim friends too, and i feel strongly as well, not about our
shared history but about the state of the community in our country
today. That feeling has been strong enough for me to be a trustee of
Citizens for Justice and Peace, an NGO which (among other things) has
taken up multiple cases on behalf of the Muslim victims of the 2002
Gujarat massacre. As a direct result, many people including Maya
Kodnani, a former minister in the Modi government and Babu Bajrangi,
the Bajrang Dal leader, have been sentenced to long prison terms. My
strong feelings, therefore , are not just emotional but take the
practical shape of righting today's wrongs.

But should that blind me to our history? Right from the 12th to the
15th century, Afghan and Central Asian invaders like Mohammad Ghori
and Mahmud Ghaznavi came as marauders and plunderers: they came to
loot (places like the Somnath temple were immensely rich and obvious
targets ), and even to destroy local religions like Hinduism and
The sacking and burning in 1193 by the Turk, Bhaktiyar Khilji
of the Nalanda library, one of the greatest places of learning,
and whose collection of books was so extensive that it took three
months to be gutted, is a case in point. Hampi, which is now a Unesco
Heritage site, was burned down by the Bahamanis , an act of vandalism
which took days. Later, the Mughals led by Babar may have come, not as
raiders but as settlers, but they did proselytize. Emperor Aurangzeb's
depredations were extensive and go far beyond the Shivnath temple:
when you think that Ahilyabai Holkar rebuilt as many as 350 temples in
and near Varanasi, you realize how far-reaching the damage was.

This is a rather jumbled, and hurried look at our history, but it
makes the point that in spite of the enlightened rule of emperors like
Akbar (notably), Jehangir and Shahjahan, a great deal of the nation's
heritage was wilfully destroyed by Afghan, Turk, Central Asian and
Mughal invaders and rulers. You can overstate the case, as Naipaul
does, by seeing in the Taj Mahal only the 'blood and sweat of slave
labour' (you can say that of the pyramids too), but that's only
overstating the case, not making one up. By stating it, you do not
become anti-Muslim.

That's the important point. Girish Karnad, like a lot of secularists
who want to see present-day India live in a harmonious blend of
communities, bends over backwards to gloss over the negative aspects
of Islam in our history, because of the harm this reiteration can
cause to present-day Muslims. (In his attack on Naipaul, for example,
Karnad said off-handedly, "Oh, I do admit some temples and monuments
may have been destroyed by the Mughals…&rdquo.

I  belong to that group of secularists too, and i would not be
writing this article if it weren't for the recent controversy. But we
need to remind ourselves about something that should be obvious:
Yes, it's true there was a Ram temple where the Babri Masjid stands;
yes, it's true that the temple was demolished and a mosque built on
the site-… But it's also true that over the many years after this
happened, not too many people were bothered either about the now-
decrepit mosque, nor the once existing temple until L K Advani
and the BJP made it an issue to revive its electoral chances. The
Babri Masjid demolition and the subsequent riots did not happen
because people like Naipaul wrote their versions of history.

Sadly, the laudable wish to ensure that today's Muslims are not
victimized any more than they are, also prevents secularists from
lashing out at the pronouncements and actions of the ultra-orthodox
in the community, for example the recent edict banning women from
entering the sanctum of Mumbai's Haji Ali dargah. Our silence only
helps those in the minority community who stop it from moving into
modernity. It's something we need to face squarely, as squarely as
we need to face our history.


Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:


    No comments:

    Post a Comment

    Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


    Website counter


    Blog Archive