Though understanding violence in its concreteness is not easy, so is describing what “normal” ought to be (“ >In maya, the killer and the killed ,” Jan.14). In trying to make us understand the difference between symbolic and physical violence and how one cannot be superior to the other, thereby bringing the intellectual and the killer on an equal footing, an important distinction is forgotten. While an intellectual debate can cause emotional violence that is much deeper and long-lasting, when a killer kills, the victim is permanently silenced. The bodies strewn around become the dead end of all varied possibilities. Therefore, the act of killing is naturally condemned in a greater degree than the act of expressing one’s vision through symbolic violence.
Aswathy Chandragiri,
New Delhi
This is my counter-argument. The comics did not attack Islam or other religious beliefs. They were a satirical take on those practitioners who were arrogant and tried to enforce their rules on others. A criticism of extremists within a sect does not equate to criticism of the entire sect. The editors at Charlie Hebdo pursued true democratic freedom in spite of repeatedly being firebombed, hacked and so on. That they met with such a fate for standing up for their rights shows the intolerant nature of the attackers and their inadequacy to reason. The argument that the hurt that may have been caused due to words is immeasurable cannot be a justification for their crime.
Abhishek C. Desikan,
Chennai
Nowhere has the writer drawn solid conclusions from the mythological stories or concepts he has provided. Neither has he taken sides anywhere. But his views tend to justify physical violence. Is he suggesting that physical violence be accepted as a fitting reply to an intellectual’s words? I have only one thing to tell him. True, emotional violence hurts a lot and can’t be measured. But killing people is definitely not an answer to any kind of emotional violence.
Poovanna Kuttetira,
Madikeri
The article justifies physical violence in response to emotional violence. However, it fails to realise that physical violence is always a disproportionate response. Further, intolerance is a highly private trait associated with one’s personality. Different people act differently to a piece of writing that may offend them. Thus, it is possible that even a mere statement of truth may attract a violent response.
Third, violence cannot be justified in a civilised society, lest chaos and destruction prevail. Today the world is facing growing intolerance to the freedom of expression. We need to debate and discuss, not curb, what is unwelcome for us. As Ronald Reagan said: “One who loses the argument starts the fight first.”
Ashish Pareek,
New Delhi
The article looks at the issues of the limits of “free speech” in contemporary society, and the perceived favouritism shown towards intellectuals of all stripes. In the hands of a better writer, this could easily have been a thought-provoking essay on civility and mutual respect in public discourse. Unfortunately, Mr. Pattanaik’s righteous indignation gets the better of him. First, it is irrational to draw parallels between Mahatma Gandhi and the attention-seeking cartoonists. Comparing the two is akin to comparing apples and oranges. Second, his misguided attempt to evoke sympathy for the attackers by comparing them first to soldiers, and then to victims of domestic violence, is deeply insulting. The parallel between Godse and the Charlie Hebdo attackers is equally futile: Godse’s assassination of Gandhi was the act of an isolated individual, while the Charlie Hebdo attack was a coordinated group act of premeditated violence.
But finally, the most telling is the writer’s ugly use of the term “neo-Brahminism”, to condemn those whom he feels are in the wrong. It is a curious and self-referential paradox that in his zeal to defend the “soldiers” of terrorism, Mr. Pattanaik should himself stoop to using the name of a community that would never fight back using the weapons the Charlie Hebdo attackers had.
Ravi Philip Rajkumar,
Puducherry
