A play with a view

Sir ? History repeats itself with Gurpreet Kaur Bhatti receiving death threats 15 years after Salman Rushdie got a fatwa slammed on him (?Critics fume at Behzti of art?, Dec 22). This raises a question ? do we yet realize the difference between ?criticism? and ?censorship?? In most modern societies, the public is allowed to judge a play, book or song, for itself. Which is why Eminem has been constantly criticized, but never banished. Taslima Nasreen is disowned by her community, but her books are still published. If the arts are considered ?creative?, why stop the creative flow? Gurdwaras are portrayed in Behzti just the way the playwright sees it. It is not necessary that we see them her way. But criticism can follow only if Behzti is allowed to be seen. Neither arts nor the community can gain anything by keeping either the play or the playwright away from public eyes.

Yours faithfully,
R. Agarwal, Calcutta

World disorder

Sir ? One cannot easily find the relevance of ?Lear?s anguished words? to Bhaskar Ghose?s critique of the ?free world? (?None does offend?, Dec 22). All his examples, ranging from Korea and Vietnam to present day Iraq, are the result of some states behaving ?badly?. But when does the moral code of a state fail? The obvious answer is when the state gets too big for its boots. The moral degeneration is already apparent in India, but Ghose says nothing of that.

As for the ?free world?, one should remember that it is ?free? because of individual empowerment in these societies. States here are mere tools to protect individuals? liberty and property. It is when states try to step out of this limited role that events like Iraq occur. Ghose hints that this ?moral code? should be restored. But nothing in history happens because of conscious planning. It is spontaneous actions of individuals that bring about changes ? be it a Gandhi, a Margaret Thatcher or a Ronald Reagan.

It is tiresome to hear discussions on morality that lead to no conclusion. One point has to be made however. In India, the state has to be prevented from controlling citizens? lives on the pretext of safeguarding public morality.

Yours faithfully,
Aruni Mukherjee, Earlsdon, UK

Sir ? Bhaskar Ghose predicts that ?tens of thousands of Iraqis have died and there?s no doubt thousands more will, only because the US wants to get at Iraqi oil?. But the theory of annexation is a 19th-century concept. Is it any more necessary to conquer a country to have control over raw materials? Japan imports iron ore from Australia to run its factories; it doesn?t think of conquering it. Second, would it not have been prudent for the United States of America to have attacked Mexico instead? This is closer home and would have minimized the attendant costs.

Yours faithfully,
Asoke C. Banerjee, Calcutta

Sir ? Bhaskar Ghose?s na?vety is appalling. He is quite sure that the rhetoric of ?good? and ?bad?, or of moral values in general is ?now? empty. He admits that it is being employed to justify state aggression. But was it any different earlier? Why does he think that the ?values? retained their pristine status in the world even during the Marshall plan? Moral values are relative and have always been used to the advantage of those in a position of power. In other words, it means that the hypocrisy with ?values?, whether old or new, has always been there.

Yours faithfully,
J. Sarkar, Calcutta

Death wish

Sir ? Police inaction in the Ganesh Palodhi murder case raises serious questions about the force?s integrity ?Ransom paid, child strangled? (Dec 22). Although every citizen is supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law, preferential treatment by the administration is a far too common phenomenon. There is a logic behind this, apparently. One of the elected members of the legislative assembly recently told me that the deterioration of law and order is plaguing every part of the country, so it is not possible to do everything for everyone. Be that as it may, we cannot forget that some of those in the administration or law enforcement departments also choose to be different. There was Bapi Sen, there is also Nityananda Roy, the constable who decided to bring to book the criminal who had given him a slip.

Yours faithfully,
Pijush Banerjee, Calcutta

Sir ? How could anyone be so cruel so as to abduct and murder a child? Even more shocking is the role of the police. They were informed and kept posted with the news of the abduction. And yet they failed to take any action. This further shows the irresponsibility and the callousness of the police force. Did the disinterest have anything to do with the fact that the father of the child is a commoner and did not have any strings to pull in the administration? A little more alacrity on the part of the police could perhaps have prevented the events from unfolding the way they did.

Yours faithfully,
Rimli Datta, Calcutta

Sir ? Ganesh Palodhi may have died of a drug overdose, but that does not absolve the police of the crime of negligence. Do the officers of the Bauria police station realize that they are equal offenders as the kidnappers?

Yours faithfully,
Anjan Chatterjee, Calcutta

Under cover

Sir ? As a BE college alumni of the 1972 batch, I am concerned at the successive unnatural deaths of students in the college hostels (?Third college suicide in a year?, Dec 14). The deaths have been attributed to examination pressure. Back in 1972, when there were few engineering colleges, the pressure was no less, but suicide was still difficult to imagine. Besides, it is impossible to imagine a student hanging himself from the window bar in that small room of the Wolfden college, cramped with a bed and a locker. Wouldn?t he be audible in the adjacent room? It is surprising that the college authorities are blaming the students and their examination-related stress instead of undertaking a thorough probe.

Yours faithfully,
Sanjoy Ghose, Calcutta