Sometimes, Mahesh Sharma can make a lot of sense. The Minister of State for Culture and Tourism is not cut in the Subramanian Swamy mould. He is mostly cogent and is indeed occasionally misquoted to make him seem more ridiculous than in reality. At least, that was until the last couple of weeks.
Sharma has recently gone on an interview offensive in the last few days, in a bid to establish just what his aims are as culture minister. In interview after interview, Sharma has repeatedly stirred the pot, making claims that only serve to reaffirm ideas that the Bharatiya Janata Party, which came to power on a development platform, is seeking to remake India in its own upper-caste Hindutva image.
Here, a sampling of Sharma's quotes:
Seven things that define Indian culture (which are really five things)
Sharma told the Telegraph what he thinks defines Indian culture, in possibly the most confused blueprint laid down by a union minister (and that's in a cabinet that includes Giriraj Singh). The list of seven features three sepia-toned ideas of what life in India is like if you like platitudes, two prescriptions from Sharma about what life in India should be like, and two more that he declined to list out right now.
*Three generations cooking in the same kitchen and eating on the same table;
*The relationship between parents and children and the respect they have for each other;
*The emotions Indians have for each other and the relationships they respect;
*My (Indian) values and books should be read before you read novels;
*Before youth go to gain wisdom from Thailand, Dubai and Singapore, they must gain wisdom from our own museums and heritage.
The sacrifices of a few
Sharma believes in appeasement, but only if those being appeased are Jains. In an interview to India Today Television, he defended the four-day meat ban in Maharashtra saying it wasn't too much to ask for. He even said that it should go on to include the nine days of Navratri, because the "sacrifices of a few" could help maintain the religious sentiments of a section of society. He didn't say whether all sections of society have an equal right to have their religious sentiments maintained or not.
The (polluted) foreign hand
Sharma sees no problem in talking about "cleansing" society.
G for Ganesh not G for Gadha (or for Goalposts, shifted)
Speaking to the Indian Express, Sharma explained what he meant by cultural pollution. Apparently it comes down to a difference between an elephant god and a donkey. "Suppose, we teach in Hindi and say ‘G for Ganesh’, then we become ‘non-seculars’ and are blamed for saffronisation. But if we say ‘G for gadha’, then we are secular. This is not fair," he said. Moreover, he insisted that there was nothing wrong with saffronisation because the people of India had voted the Bharatiya Janata Party into power – never mind Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikaas. (All together, towards development).
Petty policy
Sharma has clearly admitted that the current decision to question the appointment of Nehru Memorial Museum and Library director, who was hastily given a lifetime extension in the last few days of the previous government, was clearly done as a reaction to criticism of his decision to revamp the museum.
"We knew about Rangarajan's appointment for more than a year," Sharma said. "But had Congress not said anything about our government saffronising NMML, we would not have reacted. We are not unethical, Congress is."
We welcome your comments at
letters@scroll.in.
Sharma has recently gone on an interview offensive in the last few days, in a bid to establish just what his aims are as culture minister. In interview after interview, Sharma has repeatedly stirred the pot, making claims that only serve to reaffirm ideas that the Bharatiya Janata Party, which came to power on a development platform, is seeking to remake India in its own upper-caste Hindutva image.
Here, a sampling of Sharma's quotes:
Seven things that define Indian culture (which are really five things)
Sharma told the Telegraph what he thinks defines Indian culture, in possibly the most confused blueprint laid down by a union minister (and that's in a cabinet that includes Giriraj Singh). The list of seven features three sepia-toned ideas of what life in India is like if you like platitudes, two prescriptions from Sharma about what life in India should be like, and two more that he declined to list out right now.
*Three generations cooking in the same kitchen and eating on the same table;
*The relationship between parents and children and the respect they have for each other;
*The emotions Indians have for each other and the relationships they respect;
*My (Indian) values and books should be read before you read novels;
*Before youth go to gain wisdom from Thailand, Dubai and Singapore, they must gain wisdom from our own museums and heritage.
The sacrifices of a few
Sharma believes in appeasement, but only if those being appeased are Jains. In an interview to India Today Television, he defended the four-day meat ban in Maharashtra saying it wasn't too much to ask for. He even said that it should go on to include the nine days of Navratri, because the "sacrifices of a few" could help maintain the religious sentiments of a section of society. He didn't say whether all sections of society have an equal right to have their religious sentiments maintained or not.
The (polluted) foreign hand
Sharma sees no problem in talking about "cleansing" society.
“We will cleanse every area of public discourse that has been westernised and where Indian culture and civilization need to be restored – be it the history we read or our cultural heritage or our institutes that have been polluted over years.”
G for Ganesh not G for Gadha (or for Goalposts, shifted)
Speaking to the Indian Express, Sharma explained what he meant by cultural pollution. Apparently it comes down to a difference between an elephant god and a donkey. "Suppose, we teach in Hindi and say ‘G for Ganesh’, then we become ‘non-seculars’ and are blamed for saffronisation. But if we say ‘G for gadha’, then we are secular. This is not fair," he said. Moreover, he insisted that there was nothing wrong with saffronisation because the people of India had voted the Bharatiya Janata Party into power – never mind Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikaas. (All together, towards development).
Petty policy
Sharma has clearly admitted that the current decision to question the appointment of Nehru Memorial Museum and Library director, who was hastily given a lifetime extension in the last few days of the previous government, was clearly done as a reaction to criticism of his decision to revamp the museum.
"We knew about Rangarajan's appointment for more than a year," Sharma said. "But had Congress not said anything about our government saffronising NMML, we would not have reacted. We are not unethical, Congress is."
