Protesting writers prevail

The Sahitya Akademi has salvaged part of its bruised image by belatedly supporting the writers’ right to freedom of expression. Divisions in its ranks, however, did not allow a condolence meeting for Prof MM Kalburgi. A prompt and spontaneous condemnation of the killings of writers and rationalists would have spared the Akademi much of the damning criticism it has received of late. The institution was shamed when, on the ungracious demand of its president, Vishwanath Tiwari, writer Nayantara Sahgal returned four times the money she had received. Instead of speaking up on behalf of the writers, who voiced their anguish individually over the brutal incidents of intolerance and suppression of dissent by returning awards or quitting their positions, the Akademi lost its voice and chose to behave like a governmental organisation.

The Akademi has asked the protesting writers to take back their awards. The surrender of awards by as many as 36 writers is a powerful political statement, which apart from focusing national attention on the threats to the culture of tolerance and liberalism, has provoked pro-establishment writers/spokespersons to question the protesters’ silence over the 1984 Sikh massacre. Displaying pettiness, Chetan Bhagat wondered if the dissenting writers would surrender their passports too. Finance Minister Jaitley dismissed the protest as a “manufactured paper rebellion.” In a befitting reply, poet Keki N Daruwalla has said: “We have nothing to throw at the establishment and the Akademi except our awards.” 

It is for writers to decide when, and if, they need to raise their voice. Democracy allows critics to challenge their “selective outrage.” However, those who have kept their awards need not be judged unfairly. Each is free to make a choice: whether to stay apolitical or support a party or an ideology; whether to hold a Sahitya Akademi position, or quit, or stay away from such institutions. If a Sahitya Akademi, a Lalit Kala Akademi or a Sangeet Natak Akademi fails to play the role expected of it, it is bound to invite criticism. These institutions would rise in public esteem if they assert their independence when required. The Sahitya Akademi, unfortunately, failed to fulfil its basic mandate. No society can progress if its creative voices feel choked.