Opting to 'play it safe' over 'disruption'

The Indian state - both deep and shallow - has always wanted to play it safe. Of late, in keeping with the zeitgeist, it celebrates 'disruption', although evident more in politics than in longer-lasting matters like economic reforms. But the default position of 'playing it safe' still rules the roost. 'National security' and 'law and order' are the favourite two cards taken out to nix lawful anti-establishment sentiments.

This week, we saw the proverbial knee jerk in two high-profile cases. Photos that were to be part of an exhibition at Bikaner House in New Delhi were taken down by the venue management (that happens to be headed by Rajasthan's chief secretary). The removed photos - of the recent anti-CEC protests in New Delhi - were found to be 'inconsistent with [management] policy'. The removal had ostensibly nothing to do with the fact that the photographer is Raihan Vadra, Priyanka and Robert Vadra's son. Meanwhile, Delhi Police denied permission to singer-actor Diljit Dosanjh for an Oct 30 concert, due to 'security threat-related inputs' and 'law-and-order' concerns. The Indian-American pop star had earlier condemned the police crackdown on CJP-led protests, and was labelled 'antinational' by pro-government trolls after airing support for 2020-21 farmer protests.

With censorship and self-censorship an optimal strategy to conduct business, being 'disruptive' - a prime function of the arts and, indeed, business - seems to hold diminishing value in India. To ply one's trade without having to look over one's shoulder, it may be better to seek out platforms and venues without such in-built caveats. Without over-cautious riders and conditions, these may be easier to find outside 'establishment-aligned' venues, including outside India.