Girish Karnad seems to be an opportunistic
provocateur who longs for the occasion to arrive and to prove his self-styled
secularism. He puts the hosts, the
guests and the organisers in a precarious position by creating controversy
during the festive-function over one or the other issue. Only recently Girish had come to lime light
for wrong reasons by criticising the Nobel Laureate VS Naipaul – calling him
‘tone deaf’ – for not recognising the Muslim contribution to Karnataka (Indian)
Music; what matters if they have destroyed ‘Vijayanagara Empire’?
Defeated people don’t write their history. They are incapable of interpreting the
historical events to find out correct answers.
They can equate Chhatrapati Shivaji to Tipu Sultan, Gandhi to Jinnah and
Modi to Lalu without any sense of historical proportion, cultural background
and contemporary politics. Girish karnad
must remember that secularism does not mean to forget history and its
proportionate impact on the society.
Instead of suggesting to change the name of BIAP, it would have been
better had he proposed any new scheme like a bullet train to be constructed and
run between Mysuru and Bangaluru in the memory of Tipu Sultan.`
The controversy does not seem to cease. The CM of Karnataka Siddaramaiah did not
appreciate Girish Karnad’s suggestion for the change of name of Bangaluru
International airport from Kempegowda to Tipu Sultan. He was shocked but did not utter a word
regarding it to avoid face to face confrontation. But Karnad was bent upon creating
mischief. His comments generated
communal disharmony and law and order problem wherein three lives had been
sacrificed. A public speaker must
restrain himself from speaking on controversial topics. Girish Karnad is cold blooded
provocateur. He should not have been
invited for the simple reason that he always mars the celebration and brings
disrepute to the organisers. He speaks
out of context without any purpose or necessity. How birthday celebration of Tipu Sultan is
related to the Airport?
There were three fundamental mistakes done by
Girish Karnad. First, he did not balance
properly the dark and bright side of Tipu Sultan. History narrated that Tipu Sultan was a
tyrant who committed atrocities and forced conversions in Kodagu and Dakshina
kannad districts. But Girish Karnad did
not want this point to be raised because it was history and did affect Kerala
but not Karnataka of which Tipu was a ‘good’ king. Even The British had done such atrocities. Why we mixed up past and present
together? Karnad seemed to be totally
weak in his argument in defending Tipu Sultan.
He had to read both sides of the coin in making comments. Second, Girish Karnad wrongfully compared
Tipu Sultan to Chhatrapati Shivaji the great icon not only of Maharashtra but
of whole India and went to the extent of bringing him to the level of Gandhi
and a great freedom fighter. The
non-violent freedom movement of Gandhi as we understood was totally different
from what Tipu raged wars against Britishers to save his kingdom. Neither Tipu
Sultan nor his successors ever tried to organise a movement to drive the
British out of India. Those were the days of defending and extending one’s own territory
and Tipu did the same to save his kingdom.
Tipu was equally against Marathas as he was against Britishers. We should not compare historical figures for
contemporary political gains. Third,
Girish Karnad hurt the sentiments of Vokkaliga community and majority of the
people living in the state of Karnataka and disrupting the social harmony. By his unsolicited suggestion and comments Madekeri
had become the hot bed of agitation.
Creating bad blood and apologizing cannot go together. Girish
Karnad should be brought to book as per our law of the land. Freedom of speech does not mean disrupting
peace and harmony. Karnad is a habitual
offender of creating controversy and bringing social disharmony and thus
generating lawlessness.
Girish
Karnad created historical fallacy. His
ignorance of history makes him insensitive to historical consciousness of India
as a Nation State. During Tipu’s time, India
was a colonial regime with different kingdoms fighting for their own empires to
consolidate. Two different stocks of
people, both foreign to the land of India, who captured the country, were
fighting with each other. Both were
invaders, except the Marathas, the Deccan Dravidians and the Hindus who were
native to this land and owe their origin to pre-historic age. There was historical flaw in celebrating Tipu
Sultan’s birthday, when we discard Aurangjeb’s or for that reason Akbar’s
birthday. Why we rejoice over the birthday celebration of Tipu Sultan? They all belong to the stock of ruthless
invaders. The concept of Nation State
developed during Gandhi’s freedom movement.
But again they played a trick: they divided India. Invaders don’t form a nation. They destroy it. And we can’t erase so easily our historical
consciousness that reminds us of invasions, colonialism and the partition.
