Scholars in India demand Harvard U Press drop its well-respected editor

[Recursion]

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/03/01/scholars-india-demand-harvard-u-press-drop-its-well-respected-editor

The Murty Classical Library of India has been praised as an ambitious scholarly effort to make the classics of India available in the highest-quality English translations -- and to promote more study of those classics around the world. In the series, works are presented in their original languages (which include Bangla, Hindi, Panjabi, Persian, Sanskrit, Tamil and Urdu) with English translations on opposite pages. Hundreds of titles may eventually be published. An article in The Hindu in October said that "few intellectual and literary ventures have more transformative potential" for scholarship and understanding of India.

In what some fear is an escalation of demands from Hindu nationalists to control study of their country's history and culture, more than 11,000 scholars and others in India have in only a few days signed a petition demanding the ouster of the lead editor of the series, Sheldon Pollock, who is the Arvind Raghunathan Professor of South Asian Studies at Columbia University and generally considered a leading expert on the classic works of Indian civilizations.

Academics in the West are concerned not only about the petition but the reasons it gives. Pollock is criticized because he disagrees with some views of Hindu nationalists, because he is leading the project (which involves an international team of scholars) from the United States and because he recently signed a statement of scholars that defended students and faculty members at Jawaharlal Nehru University who are protesting the arrest of the president of the student union on sedition charges.

Effectively, say Western academics, their counterparts in India who are affiliated with the governing Bharatiya Janata Party are sending a message to the United States and elsewhere that professors who criticize the nationalist moves by the government will find themselves facing hostility or other obstacles to working on India. The petition is attracting widespread attention -- much of it positive -- in the Indian press.

The JNU arrest and protests are huge over here; not sure if they're getting any press in the US?

Also, here's a good "what's this really about?" write-up:

http://thewire.in/2016/03/02/what-the-petition-against-the-sanskritist-sheldon-pollock-is-really-about-23357/

After misleadingly quoting from his lecture, the petition goes on to give a second reason why he does not qualify for his editorial position. The professor, it points out, has been a signatory to statements that have “condemned various policies and actions of the Government of India” including “two recent statements released by US academicians condemning the actions of the JNU authorities and the Government of India against separatist groups who are calling for the independence of Kashmir, and for India’s breakup.”

According to the petitioners, Pollock’s decision to sign these statements demonstrates “disrespect for the unity and integrity of India”.

So here we have the real issue behind the petition. We return to the question that has been occupying us all with particular urgency not only since the JNU controversy began last month but, in some sense, ever since the BJP came to power: does loyalty to India require loyalty to one particular idea of India over other ideas? Who has the power to decide the legitimacy of ideas and loyalties? And does loyalty to India mean no dissent, no debate, no disagreement?

The petitioners’ attempt to question Pollock’s credentials, when in fact one could call him (to use the simplistic language of the petitioners) one of India’s main ‘advocates’, speaks to an extreme and dangerous narrow-mindedness, because it shows a fundamental inability to participate in the process of intellectual questioning and reflection. The fact that individuals and institutions that pursue true knowledge are targeted – as also in the case of the JNU controversy – reveals the insecurity that necessarily accompanies the narrative that is weak and incomplete but that pretends to be strong and whole and attempts to dominate.

The question of what "India" and "Indian-ness" are has been a daunting one for a long time, but they are particularly vexing today.

Also, for completeness, here is the petition itself:

https://www.change.org/p/mr-n-r-narayana-murthy-and-mr-rohan-narayan-murty-removal-of-prof-sheldon-pollock-as-mentor-and-chief-editor-of-murty-classical-library