Chanakya’s View
Anew name has been added to the illustrious list of those who have fought to strengthen democratic India post- 1947: Perumal Murugan. Until a few years ago, few outside Tamil Nadu would have heard of him, much less read him. This 50- yearold remarkably talented scholar and writer, the author of several novels, short stories and anthologies, was happy to be away from the glamour lights of Chennai, and taught Tamil at the government art college in Namakkal. But destiny was waiting to catapult him from a Tamil writer of eminence to a national icon standing for the pre- eminence of freedom of expression and speech in India.
In 2010, Murugan wrote a Tamil novel titled Madhorubagan, later translated into English as One Part Woman. It is a story about a childless couple desperate to have a child in order to escape social stigma. In the narrative, Murugan wrote about a traditional custom in which a woman could have consensual sex with a stranger on the 14th day of the temple car festival. This tradition, at one time, had the sanction of the community, and was one way to resolve the predicament of childlessness. The decision was that of the woman, often with the support of her husband. It was not considered immoral, and was part of customary law.
Murugan uses this custom as a powerful metaphor to highlight the anguish and humiliation of a childless couple. The curious thing is that for four years the novel did not provoke any protests from any section of society. But, suddenly, in December 2014, some elements expressed great outrage. Perhaps it is happenstance that in May of that very year, the BJP had come to power at the Centre. Did this embolden “fringe groups” of the Hindu right to a new form of aggression? Readers are free to draw their own conclusions, but the fact is that for four years prior to 2014, there were no voices of protest or intimidation.
It is curious also that when these protests escalated, the government of Tamil Nadu stepped in to bring about “peace” by “unofficially” proscribing the circulation of the novel. What was the locus standi of the state to intervene in the matter? And was it becoming of it to so meekly succumb to the aggression brought to bear upon Murugan by such threatening fringe groups? Is it the dharma of the state merely to somehow enforce “peace” without objectively assessing the merits of the case, or evaluating what the impact of this decision would have on the expressly guaranteed right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 of the Constitution?
Abandoned by the state, and devastated by the illiterate ferocity of the venom being directed at him, Murugan took a landmark decision. He wrote on his Facebook page: “Perumal Murugan the writer is dead. As he is no God he is not going to resurrect himself. He has also no faith