Taslima Nasrin: Her fight for Freedom of expression!

In 1993, when Nasrin published 'Lajja' (Shame), which described the tortures inflicted on the minority Bengali population by Muslim fundamentalists, the Bangladesh Government exiled her following the declaration of a 'fatwa' that imposed a death sentence for her. The episode does revive our memories of the 1988 'fatwa' on Salman Rushdie after the publication of 'The Satanic Verses', in which the author was alleged to have made irreverent remarks about the Prophet. Such incidents, however, bring forth an important question: What are the limits for freedom of expression, and who should set the limits?

Somehow, i can't resist myself here from drawing a parallelism to Arundhuti Roy's Booker winning novel, 'The God of Small Things'. Roy had also raised another question for the society, though somewhat similar in essence: 'whom' to love, and 'how' much to love?! Drawing the two threads together, let me put up my question: Does our society have the right to decide for us what are the limits and boundaries of 'love' or of 'freedom of expression'?! To me, the question is similar to asking- who should take a higher preference- an individual's will or the conventions acceptable to society?

The answer isn't easy, precisely because of the fact that many a times in history we have observed that it is an individual who dared to stand up all alone against the whole society and serve as an eye opener to those who had been sheepishly following the established norms without even questioning their appropriateness. The subject of an individual's will and viewpoint being different from that of the society's has a parallelism even in nature. As Einstein observed during a discussion with Tagore, "One tries to understand in the higher plane how the order is. The order is there, where the big elements combine and guide existence, but in the minute elements this order is not perceptible". Tagore had replied, "Thus duality is in the depths of existence..". Perhaps, it is the rule of nature that conflicts will arise from differences of an individual's protest against the existing conditions, leading to a revolution, or an eye opening lesson, and then slowly an 'orderly scheme of things evolve' with passage of time. I am tempted to quote Darwin here, who proposed that human beings evolved through conflicts, and the society only grows through conflicts. Instead of going into the discussion about the scientific credibility of Darwin's hypothesis, I find it essential to state at this point that I personally do not agree with the way this theory was interpreted and used by Karl Marx or Friederich Engles in developing the communist theories of 'class struggle'.
Without digressing further in debating on a topic that probably has no off-hand solution, let us return to the story of Taslima Nasrin and her fight for equality of women and freedom of expression.

Ban on her books in Bangladesh doesn't surprise her anymore. But she was flustered a bit when the so-called 'liberal' state of West Bengal also imposed a similar ban on her third volume of her memoirs, Dwikhandita, on 27th November, 2003. Well, I guess the naked truth was perhaps too strong even for the 'men' of Bengal Intelligentsia. Yes, I agree on the fact that Nasrin's works contain shockingly explicit and crude descriptions that, in India, can only be expected from Shobha De or Khushwant Singh, but at the same time we must realise that it is upto the readers to decide for themselves whether her writing style is acceptable to them or not. Vivid elaboration of tabooed topics have marked the writing style of many famous authors, and such works have been widely welcomed by a big section of readers. Austrian feminist writer, Elfriede Jelinek, known for jolting readers with her frank descriptions of sexuality, pathos and conflict between men and women, went to win the Nobel Prize in 2004 inspite of severe controversy and resistance within the prize committee, specially from academy members like Knut Ahnlund.
Bengal Government may claim that it was a step taken to prevent riots, or stop any moral degradation of the society. But I feel like questioning: Is that so? Or was it that the inherent hypocrisy of an average Bengali, or more appropriately the group of 'pseudo-intellectuals' who like to bask in the glory of their past literary geniuses, philosophers and reformers, had to come to the forefront? Oh, I am sorry, I guess now I am crossing the 'limits' acceptable to my fellow West Bengal intellectuals.

Whatever may be the outcome of this struggle between the ones who believe in full freedom of expression and others who believe in freedom within limits acceptable by existing social standards, the truth that emerges here is that our society, however civilized we might claim it to be, has a long way to go before it can be mature enough to accept criticism, whether baseless or reasonable! The fact that Nasrin's work on sexual freedom for women created such a grave development in Bengal just goes to prove that.

Nasrin in her explanation said:

"...One of the main reasons for the controversy regarding Dwikhandio is sexual freedom. Since most people are immersed neck-deep in the traditions of a patriarchal society, they are irritated, angry and outraged at the open declaration of a woman's sexual autonomy. This freedom is not something that I simply talk about; rather, I have established it for myself, in and through my life. But this freedom is not license; men cannot touch me whenever they please. I decide..."

While Nasrin believes in fighting for the freedom of expression, many others feel that her works are just a blatant attack against religions and some of the well-established norms of our society to which maybe we should(?) get used to! The debate revolving her works will surely continue even in the years to come, even with authors of the future! I believe that writers of the next generation will also have the spirit of Taslima Nasrin while defending their stance.
However, I must say that though Nasrin has presented herself as a victimised woman, her own actions have remained questionable. Many critics feel that she solely aims to create new controversies in the name of women liberation by dragging famous names through the mud (as she did in her book, "Ka").

Taslima's 'Noorjahan', the epic poem which describes the savagery done to a female lover who was stoned to death by the society's 'moral-police', also speak volumes about the injustice meted out to the author in her own words.

"They have made Noorjahan stand in a hole in the courtyard
There she stands submerged to her waist, her head hanging
They're throwing stones at Noorjahan
Stones that are striking my body
I feel them on my head, forehead, chest, back
And I hear laughing, shouts of abuse

Noorjahan's fractured forehead pours out blood, mine also
Noorjahan's eyes have burst, mine also
Noorjahan's nose has been smashed, mine also
Noorjahan's torn breast and heart have been pierced, mine also

Are these stones not striking you?

They laugh aloud, stroking their beards
Their tupis [caps] shaking with jubilation
As they swing their walking sticks
They with quivering and cruel eyes speed to pierce her body, mine too
Are these arrows not piercing your body?"