|
Husband of a Fanatic When
Amitava Kumar married a Pakistani Muslim, he began a process of
discovery that culminated in this "fiercely personal essay"
entitled Husband of a Fanatic. This work examines the complex
relationship between Hindus and Muslims on the one hand, and India and
Pakistan on the other. Predictably, it couldn’t have been an easy book
for the writer; nor is it easy for readers from this subcontinent who,
thanks to their long socio-cultural conditioning, are likely to have
affinities either with one camp or the other. Judgment on the book,
therefore, is likely to be coloured by personal ideologies and an
objective assessment would be a near impossibility. However, like all
literary endeavours, it deserves a fair trial before verdict is
pronounced. The marriage of an Indian NRI, who teaches in the USA, to
Mona, a Muslim of Pakistani origin, also settled in the American
continent, raises several complex issues because of the religious
factor. While the new bride is accepted by the groom’s parents
unconditionally, the groom is asked to adopt a Muslim name, thereby
"converting" to Islam. This begs a question that this
"fiercely personal essay" fails to answer – if it is love
that unites two individuals, why isn’t there an unconditional
acceptance of each other’s individuality and beliefs? Why does Amitava
Kumar have to become Safdar Ali to marry his true love? Instead of
facing this problem squarely, the writer – with the loyalty of a
devoted lover and the zeal of a new convert – skirts the issue, talks
about Hindu-Muslim relations, about community politics that sour all
chances of peace across the Radcliffe Line, and a lot of other related
issues. Often the account seems to ramble as though the writer were
explaining things to himself, seeking private solutions to the problems
confronting him. The prologue narrates the writer’s encounter with a
caricatured Mr Barotia, a foul-mouthed Hindu fundamentalist who embodies
the prejudices and misconceptions that the Hindus of India harbour
against Muslims. Sure, caricature, too is an admirable art, but Amitava
Kumar’s penchant for caricatures seems limited to Hindu
fundamentalists; he seems more tolerant of individuals with rigid
ideologies on the other side of the communal divide. While visiting
India he focuses on the discrimination meted out to the Indian Muslims,
their backwardness, their sufferings in Gujarat, and the demolition of
the Babri Masjid. Apparently, he does not think it necessary to
highlight the special concessions, the privileges and the protection the
minority community has received over the last half-century. In
Pakistan, although he is aware of the near-absence of Hindus in the
country, he does not analyse or explain it. Briefly, he mentions the
demolition of their temples and burning of Hindus but there are no
graphic accounts, no psychological probing into the hatred nurtured
against them by the Islamic nation. Whatever the reason, Kumar’s
account of the animosity between the two nations remains one-sided. At
the same time, there are several plus points: one does not doubt the
author’s sincerity in trying to grapple with complex religion-based
issues. Nor can one ignore the range of subjects covered and the
research undertaken. Kumar has surveyed diverse areas ranging from the
academic and elitist to the popular. He speaks of nuclear tests, of
popular cinema, of Partition literature, of writers like Rajinder Singh
Bedi and Urvashi Butalia, Lal Ded and V.S. Naipaul. He gives us the
history of Kashmir when he discusses the Kashmir problem. He focuses on
stereotypes, on the mutual suspicion and distrust, and on the crying
need for "brotherly love" between the two
communities. Sometimes his viewpoint seems naïve but there are
moments of insight, too, when he evokes memories of a shared life
between the two communities. All this is contained in the eight chapters
of Kumar’s book. His sources are cited in the bibliography. What the
reader misses is an index, which would have been very useful. Kumar’s
effort to explain and understand animosity between two warring
communities is in itself a laudable one. Although the account begins in
private experience, it attempts to reach far beyond the personal,
exploring realms that concern not just individual lives but
international relations. His point of view may be too personal, it also
may be the expiation of a private guilt, yet the effort, despite
shortcomings, is commendable. |