All about the Right Stroke

4th March 2013 

Depictions might not adhere to any limits. This is what comes across the cartoons made by Aseem Trivedi, who shot to overnight ‘fame’ due to the Sedition Act slapped on him by the Bombay High Court.

His cartoons were eccentric in many ways that drew adverse reactions by the judiciary. Among few of his cartoons, the Indian Parliament was drawn as a toilet seat; Ajmal Kasab was seen to be relieving himself on the constitution of India; the lions of Ashok pillar were replaced by fierce wolves and perhaps the worst of all, India personified as a woman was to be attacked by personified forms of corruption. Corruption can be portrayed in various ways. Trivedi chose a way that was aimed to shock as well as to provoke. And many of his cartoons were used for India Against Corruption campaign. Corruption took a centre stage in many of his cartoons as the bad man. The cardinal phrase - Satyameva Jayathementioned in the bottom of the emblem was rephrased as Brashtaachaar Jayathe! (Long live the corruption!). A critic who seeks to reprimand can use subtle, direct or indirect methods to reach to the target. But, provocative criticisms are unlikely to have long-term impact and instead they create instantaneous ripples, likely to disappear like a bubble.

These cartoons drew immense public attention. Such expressions of creativity often get characterized as boundless vents of energy whenever such issues come up. The same followed when Aseem Trivedi was charged of Sedition Act and of dishonouring the national emblem. The arrest undoubtedly brought in a lot of strong protests from media fraternity forcing the government to release Trivedi, following which he was released after 5 days of remand.

 

Aseem Trivedi, a young 25 year-old lad, is from Kanpur and started cartooning for campaigns in support of the India Against Corruption movement. Enthusiastic to drive people of the country to battle against corruption, Trivedi used sketching as a means to vent out his rage on burning issues of the country. Audacious and unrelenting, Aseem Trivedi certainly did not budge when the arrest came his way and refused to apply for bail insisting the withdrawal of sedition charges against him. The rage and furore that spread after his arrest knew no boundaries as every media establishment voiced their protests bagged by the support of team Anna members.

This, on the face, seems like the subject-matter of freedom of speech envisaged in the Indian Constitution in article 19 (1) that has been doing frequent rounds in India. There are also some similar instances to recall. The memory of the arrested college professor, Ambikesh Mahapatra in Kolkota, for sharing a cartoon on Mamata Banerjee has still not faded. Despite Ms. Banerjee denying the charges, neither the arrest nor the marred reputation of the professor can be recoiled. Another accused in the list of recent sedition charges was the civil rights activist Binayak Sen who was made to face lifetime imprisonment by Chattisgarh High court for apparently supporting Maoists against the state government in 2010 and was later granted bail by Supreme Court.
This topic has raised few questions across borders with all hue and cries on the discrepancies regarding freedom of expression. The very essence of cartoons that envisage satire or hyperbole seek to voice the opinion of the artist. A French magazine that scoffed at Islam has invited widespread protests and hostility in the eastern countries. The cartoon showed Prophet Mohammed as a scary bearded man who imposed certain restrictions on the entire community with a quote that said “100 lashes, if you’re not dying of laughter.”
Now the question is where to draw a line on expressing such opinions through creativity. What needs to be reflected is whether freedom of speech justifies itself even if it is allowed to ridicule others’ sentiments?

Trivedi defends his stand as a will to express and portray the way he perceives. It cannot be denied that this affects the symbols in turn the identity of the nation. This does not negate the fact that sedition charges were justified. Nor does it equate his disrespect to national symbols with inhumane acts that draw sedition charges. However, an image or a piece of art accessible in public domain has to be restrained in a way it does not distort national symbols.
Does this mean that there have not been cartoons that are critical in our country? There are eminent cartoonists whose sketches are par excellence. India is proud of great cartoonists such as R. K. Laxman who rightfully bend their sketches and still make an impact. Unlike their expressions of art, Aseem’s art seems extremely bold and discordant and also strikes a hard blow and disrespect to the nation and its insignia as a whole.

Corruption can be conveyed through a pen or a play or a sketch or an ode to the nation. But the nation should be respected in all its integrity while being critical. After all, criticism is for improving something or someone rather than their blatant dismissal.