The Rushdie Effect :: Enumerating Art is such a misnomer

30th Jan 2012:

Every day for the last one week, all I have seen in the main page of the news paper was the tantrums of Salman Rushdie and the get backs of the Rajasthan Government when a month back. When I read about there being a Literature Festival, I was hoping more of a traditional, knowledge enriching debates and sessions to take place at a full scale. As the inception drew closer more and more controversies started rising up, about a book whose import was banned but downloading and owning is not. How mordacious is that? As the Literature Festival started the issue only engulfed the whole prominence resulting in mediocre outcomes and not many worthwhile writers were recognised appropriately. All the debates only saw the rain shadows of the paper last week. Sad as this may be, many started discussing about the sovereignty and the integrity of the country in justifying the ban ‘The Satanic Verses’ as it all comes to an end, as is always there, more often than not, theories about the whole literary society emerge and classifying art into broadly two categories, both of which not even remotely giving importance to the ‘purpose of passion’ of the writers, at the end of the article from what Justice Katju said, one who would after reading the article would come to a conclusion that the writers have to be categorised into either of the genres and that as ‘romanticism’ is not all the useful for a sociological insight all one has to do is publish, read, cherish and innovate on the books with ‘social’ purpose if there is a scope of narrowing down what the country needs basing on the social and infrastructural conditions prevailing in and around. 

One book that will never stop me from respecting Salman Rushdie

Does it mean that in Ancient India because people were living in flourishing wealth of societies they had the insight and the option of taking up ‘romanticism’ and because now the society faces many problems like poverty, population and pollution we don’t encourage it and of course seriously criticise anything that is fictional as too simplistic and non – serious? In such a poor country art for social purpose alone can be acceptable? We are here forgetting some facts that fiction like ‘Harry Potter’ and ‘Lord of the Rings’ succeeded in getting back the internet generation to books and helped in re-inculcating the awesomeness of long-forgotten book reading again. I am one person who tends to read Indian authors, even when the rating is not that good, many authors these days, fiction and semi-fiction, have made it to the stands and impressed the international market. No offence meant to the non- fiction writers, there are great books that are instilling and inspiring in today’s world, and this will not be complete without mentioning ‘Everybody loves a good drought’, ‘Non Stop India’, that hit the stands recently and many other books. So it is that an art cannot and should not be narrowed down to theories where there is an either- or relationship, it would be better appreciated if we can see it as, the penchant of a passionate person shared by many. Awareness is what matters and, just because the art supports a social cause and is a change agent, doesn’t make it accepted or appreciated; acknowledging the élan of impressionism, existentialism and realism is also a form of appreciating and recognition to art. Just because there is art for social sake, art for art’s sake can’t be made the foot note. It will show that we are capable of accepting that art’s purpose is subtler, this will help broaden the perspective with which this generation can appreciate art. Expression and Appreciation should come and go ‘As you like it’, as Art has no bounds.