MDA Must Ban Agni Kootthu, Elangovan and Thenmoli
Agni Kootthu did it again..... They have come up with a theatre play production "Smegma" that is racially insensitive. MDA has banned it. This play is written and directed by Elangovan and its production manager is Thenmoli. This is not the first time Agni Kootthu and its crew led by Elangovan and Thenmoli have produced racially insensitive plays. A few years ago the infamous Talaq play was the brainchild of these people. It was also banned. Thenmoli disregarded the ban and was arrested for disorderly behaviour when police intervened to stop her from staging the play against the ruling.
I myself am an artist and i can only say this. Being an artist does not gives one the liberty to be insensitive to others. The sensitivities of others prevail before the liberty of one to express. Furthermore I as an artist can only express what i know about something. But my facts need not be truth and reality. Until the meaning of that something arrives at me or until I arrive at the meaning of that something, can i understand the truth and reality of it.
Sadly Agni Kootthu, Elangovan and Thenmoli are nothing more than a sect of Hindu fundamentalists and/or secular radicals who have arrived at no understanding of anything that they vehemently like to claim they know well. Their intolerance is deplorable. Had this country human rights regulations, there will be ample grounds to bring them before justice for racism. They have no regard for tolerance, sensitivities or even the law. In this multiracial Singapore, in order to preserve racial harmony, I urge the government to ban Agni Kootthu, Elangovan and Thenmoli and National Arts Council must suspend all future and present funding to this group and these individuals.
posted by ney_reed @ 4:09 AM
6 comments
6 Comments:
So what kind of artist are you? Musician?
Just to let you know that your Music link on this page has an error.
i am a magnum photographer...
thanks for pointing out the inaccurate url.. its now fixed
No idea what a magnum photographer is. The only magnum I've heard of shoot bullets.
Isn't the taking of photographs of people/animals haram? What is your opinion on that?
JP
No idea what a magnum photographer is. The only magnum I've heard of shoot bullets.
magnum has a host of meanings. go check it up online or in a good dictionary.
in photography you have many genres such as infra-red, macro, nature etc. one of it is magnum photography that was kinda made popular by the agency magnum photos. Michael Ignatieff writes about the best outcomes of magnum photography as , "magnum photography documents the distance between strangers, between the scream being uttered and going unheard, between the hand reaching out for help and failing to receive any. Thanks to magnum images, the moral distance between zones of safety and zones of danger has been rendered visible in the past 50 years. We cannot pretend we do not know what is going on in Rwanda, Kosovo, Bosnia"
Isn't the taking of photographs of people/animals haram? What is your opinion on that?
I am not a scholar, so you should never have asked for my opinion on this. But i will tell you the opinion of scholars. Islam is explicit in its prohibition of iconification. No icon can be represented. The intention of this is to permit the intellect within oneself to fully/broadly comprehend the truth and reality and not just facts of something since a physical representation will naturally distract the mind off the true depiction and essence of something.
now in some instances, the truth and reality can only be respresented or can be enhanced through an iconic representation. here scholars have allowed photography. magnum photography in simple terms can be said to be documented photography i.e. photography that documents events, people, realities etc. today the truth and realities of many events and circumstances are shrouded by media in their agendas and magnum photography has aided to bridge that moral gap.
another type of photography that is also permissible is nature photography should one do it with the intention of promoting the beauty of God, Al-Jamal (The Most Beautiful), by promoting the beauty of his beautiful creations.
in short in those few instances where a-iconification compromises its actual objectives of truth and reality (haqqiqah) and where iconifciation is needed in order to preserve those objectives, photography is indeed permissible. however in most instances relating to animals and people,
a-iconification is sufficient to preserve haqqiqah and there is no need for photography of humans or animals.
Post a Comment
<< Home