Banning the book "The Satanic Verses" authored by Sir Salman Rushdie in India for hurting religious sentiments is quite often seen as protection of minority right and respect to concerned religion. However, it is not the only reason for banning of a book. One purpose of restricting publication of such books is assumed to have developed for suppression of critical thinking by virtue of "Culturalization". Objective of the article is to understand effects of "Culturalization" on social interactions and its recordings known as history.
"Culturalization" is referred to development of an ideology subject to influence of specialized training and/or controlled access to information. During British Raj (Colonial India), "Culturalization" of Indian ideological thought begun. Under British Raj this "Culturalization" was particularly “English” or "British". Ideological thought process was also influenced by eminent European scholars such as Carl Marx, Aldous Huxley and many more. In this new "Culturalization", original Indian thought was sacrificed. In absence of electronic media like Internet, print media (books, newspapers etc.) was only channel of information exchange and cultivation of new ideas. Therefore, banning a book had a great influence in the past.
First example is a book written by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, also known as Veer Savarkar. Veer Savarkar participated in Indian freedom movement. He wrote a book on 1857 mutiny in the British Army, first war of independence as referred by him. The title of the book is "The Indian War of Independence of 1857", originally written in an Indian regional language Marathi in 1908.
In the English version of the book, very first paragraph of publisher's note says
"Most historians, British as well as Indian, have described and dismissed the rising of 1857 as a ‘Sepoy Mutiny’ or at best ‘The Indian Mutiny’. Indian revolution is on the other hand, and national minded leaders thinkers have regarded it as a planned and organized political and military rising aimed at destroying the British power in India."
This note suggest that British historians would prefer to record and propagate information as it suits British interests in colonial India. This was to avoid political unrest that may evolve by propagation of free information, challenging the British Raj. Furthermore, "Culturalization" of Indian historians also propagated the British view of "The Indian Mutiny". Publishing this book was also a challenge. In order to avoid publication of the book, British intelligence agency stole couple of chapters of manuscript written in Marathi language. After learning from the stolen chapters, inference was drawn that entire book could spread some critical information against colonial interests. The book was banned much before its official publication.
The banning of books is not only British Raj or colonial feature. Books are banned worldwide. One interesting banned book was found on internet as reference, while reading another banned literature in India. The banned book quoted in abandoned literature was originally written in Dutch. The title of the book was "De ondergang van Nederland" authored by Mohammad Rasoel. The book was published in 1992. It was later translated in English as "The Downfall of Netherlands - Land of Native Fools" by Faust. The book was banned in Netherlands by judge, in a court trial, terming it as a "racist pamphlet". Later, the print copy of books were taken off the shelves and destroyed. It is assumed that no paper copy of the book survives. Luckily it was found on internet. Blogger sincerely thanks to dennisw for keeping this book accessible.
The book was based on life of author, born in Pakistan. In large part of the book, author described how he "escaped" to Netherlands in search of a better life. The book presented his violent personal experience in his home country and variety of incidences in different nations. Author also praised extremely liberal Dutch society and put some light on different kinds of discrimination. Further, this book was his valuable contribution in understanding social and cultural differences. The translator of the book writes in his forwarding note
"Whosoever reads the references to the evolution of mankind, to the argument about various forms of discrimination, and to the naivety of the Dutch, as well as the detailed explanations regarding the mentality of the Muslims, illustrated with quotes from the Koran, "Though if they oppose you, then kill them," shall not only reconsider their own position in society opposed to the Muslims, but also look differently at the reflection in the mirror, this time with the eyes of the author, who possibly, because he basically writes against himself, could be seen as truly objective. As a side note, the author kept his true identity and location confidential, afraid to make the same mistake as author Salman Rushdie."
As little known musician, author of the banned book wrote quite in detail about very personal life experience and social behavior that is quite intrusive to survey. This conclusion is derived from his observations of women behavior in Dutch society and Moroccan society. In his observations author notes
"In my own street, in a comparable situation to the last one, a Moroccan woman who recently gave birth to a child all alone at home was surrounded by Dutch women from the neighborhood who were all sorry for her. 'What a horrible experience that must have been', they said, placing themselves in her situation, without realizing how normal something like that in third world nations is."
Furthermore, on socialization, author notes
"It happens that a Dutch girl wants to kiss but doesn't want you to touch her body, goes with you but doesn't want to pull off her clothes. ... A girl in Morocco kisses to have sex, or not at all, and if she's stupid enough to pose in her underwear, she might as well become a prostitute because her family would never believe her and cut all ties."
The cultural difference noted by author is significant. In Islamic and South Asian culture, family as a unit and attachment among its members differ to that of modern Europe or North America. Traditional family in former culture is a group of 3 generations - Grand parent, Parent and Children. Whereas, modern definition of family is a group of 2 generations - Parent and Children. Grand parents are not part of this modern family of parents. Furthermore, cultural difference of attachment to family play prominent role in individual behavior in public life.
Dutch society, as author points out, is very sensitive to discrimination of any kind. His objective, according to this blogger, was to keep natives informed on different aspects of "discrimination". Following passage of author clearly points out that any sort of social behavior can be attributed to certain kind of discrimination. Therefore, sensitivity to "discrimination" is exaggeration unless performed more often in normal routine.
"And though skin color doesn't matter, whites cover their bodies with sunscreen to get brown, and blacks put some other good on their skin to become white, ... All the nonsense, babble, and drama... And then to realize that nobody thought about there being more sides to the word 'discrimination.'
Two cases of denial of information were presented to demonstrate "Culturalization" of thought, in Indian society during British Raj and Dutch society, by banning certain books arguing offensive or dangerous content. Such books sometimes provide very critical information, difficult to derive from public surveys.
Ban on the book authored by Veer Savarkar was lifted after India gained Independence. However, the book is yet to find its space in academic society. On the other hand, the book authored by Mohammed Rasoel is currently banned.
"Culturalization" achieved by banning such thought provoking books lowers tolerance and promotes extremism. Recent demonstrations against a lately canceled visit of Sir Salman Rushdie at Jaipur Literature Festival clearly show increase in intolerance. A level of intolerance reached that live video interview was not allowed.
"Culturalization" is referred to development of an ideology subject to influence of specialized training and/or controlled access to information. During British Raj (Colonial India), "Culturalization" of Indian ideological thought begun. Under British Raj this "Culturalization" was particularly “English” or "British". Ideological thought process was also influenced by eminent European scholars such as Carl Marx, Aldous Huxley and many more. In this new "Culturalization", original Indian thought was sacrificed. In absence of electronic media like Internet, print media (books, newspapers etc.) was only channel of information exchange and cultivation of new ideas. Therefore, banning a book had a great influence in the past.
First example is a book written by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, also known as Veer Savarkar. Veer Savarkar participated in Indian freedom movement. He wrote a book on 1857 mutiny in the British Army, first war of independence as referred by him. The title of the book is "The Indian War of Independence of 1857", originally written in an Indian regional language Marathi in 1908.
In the English version of the book, very first paragraph of publisher's note says
"Most historians, British as well as Indian, have described and dismissed the rising of 1857 as a ‘Sepoy Mutiny’ or at best ‘The Indian Mutiny’. Indian revolution is on the other hand, and national minded leaders thinkers have regarded it as a planned and organized political and military rising aimed at destroying the British power in India."
This note suggest that British historians would prefer to record and propagate information as it suits British interests in colonial India. This was to avoid political unrest that may evolve by propagation of free information, challenging the British Raj. Furthermore, "Culturalization" of Indian historians also propagated the British view of "The Indian Mutiny". Publishing this book was also a challenge. In order to avoid publication of the book, British intelligence agency stole couple of chapters of manuscript written in Marathi language. After learning from the stolen chapters, inference was drawn that entire book could spread some critical information against colonial interests. The book was banned much before its official publication.
The banning of books is not only British Raj or colonial feature. Books are banned worldwide. One interesting banned book was found on internet as reference, while reading another banned literature in India. The banned book quoted in abandoned literature was originally written in Dutch. The title of the book was "De ondergang van Nederland" authored by Mohammad Rasoel. The book was published in 1992. It was later translated in English as "The Downfall of Netherlands - Land of Native Fools" by Faust. The book was banned in Netherlands by judge, in a court trial, terming it as a "racist pamphlet". Later, the print copy of books were taken off the shelves and destroyed. It is assumed that no paper copy of the book survives. Luckily it was found on internet. Blogger sincerely thanks to dennisw for keeping this book accessible.
The book was based on life of author, born in Pakistan. In large part of the book, author described how he "escaped" to Netherlands in search of a better life. The book presented his violent personal experience in his home country and variety of incidences in different nations. Author also praised extremely liberal Dutch society and put some light on different kinds of discrimination. Further, this book was his valuable contribution in understanding social and cultural differences. The translator of the book writes in his forwarding note
"Whosoever reads the references to the evolution of mankind, to the argument about various forms of discrimination, and to the naivety of the Dutch, as well as the detailed explanations regarding the mentality of the Muslims, illustrated with quotes from the Koran, "Though if they oppose you, then kill them," shall not only reconsider their own position in society opposed to the Muslims, but also look differently at the reflection in the mirror, this time with the eyes of the author, who possibly, because he basically writes against himself, could be seen as truly objective. As a side note, the author kept his true identity and location confidential, afraid to make the same mistake as author Salman Rushdie."
As little known musician, author of the banned book wrote quite in detail about very personal life experience and social behavior that is quite intrusive to survey. This conclusion is derived from his observations of women behavior in Dutch society and Moroccan society. In his observations author notes
"In my own street, in a comparable situation to the last one, a Moroccan woman who recently gave birth to a child all alone at home was surrounded by Dutch women from the neighborhood who were all sorry for her. 'What a horrible experience that must have been', they said, placing themselves in her situation, without realizing how normal something like that in third world nations is."
Furthermore, on socialization, author notes
"It happens that a Dutch girl wants to kiss but doesn't want you to touch her body, goes with you but doesn't want to pull off her clothes. ... A girl in Morocco kisses to have sex, or not at all, and if she's stupid enough to pose in her underwear, she might as well become a prostitute because her family would never believe her and cut all ties."
The cultural difference noted by author is significant. In Islamic and South Asian culture, family as a unit and attachment among its members differ to that of modern Europe or North America. Traditional family in former culture is a group of 3 generations - Grand parent, Parent and Children. Whereas, modern definition of family is a group of 2 generations - Parent and Children. Grand parents are not part of this modern family of parents. Furthermore, cultural difference of attachment to family play prominent role in individual behavior in public life.
Dutch society, as author points out, is very sensitive to discrimination of any kind. His objective, according to this blogger, was to keep natives informed on different aspects of "discrimination". Following passage of author clearly points out that any sort of social behavior can be attributed to certain kind of discrimination. Therefore, sensitivity to "discrimination" is exaggeration unless performed more often in normal routine.
"And though skin color doesn't matter, whites cover their bodies with sunscreen to get brown, and blacks put some other good on their skin to become white, ... All the nonsense, babble, and drama... And then to realize that nobody thought about there being more sides to the word 'discrimination.'
- Direct discrimination: A ship got stuck at the pole. A helicopter comes to the rescue with warm meals for the whites and bread for the blacks.
- Indirect discrimination: Whoever calls American people nice, calls at least one people not nice.
- Subjective discrimination: An old Dutch woman is afraid of foreigners, and avoids them.
- Objective discrimination: A Dutch moviemaker wants native Dutch actors for his Dutch movie - he doesn't want Moroccans.
- Counter discrimination: A Turk who only rents rooms to Dutchmen.
- Reversed discrimination: A Dutchman who isn't allowed in a bar for dark skinned people.
- Inversed discrimination: Foreigners who are treated better and get more opportunities than the native Dutch."
Two cases of denial of information were presented to demonstrate "Culturalization" of thought, in Indian society during British Raj and Dutch society, by banning certain books arguing offensive or dangerous content. Such books sometimes provide very critical information, difficult to derive from public surveys.
Ban on the book authored by Veer Savarkar was lifted after India gained Independence. However, the book is yet to find its space in academic society. On the other hand, the book authored by Mohammed Rasoel is currently banned.
"Culturalization" achieved by banning such thought provoking books lowers tolerance and promotes extremism. Recent demonstrations against a lately canceled visit of Sir Salman Rushdie at Jaipur Literature Festival clearly show increase in intolerance. A level of intolerance reached that live video interview was not allowed.
