Hello readers👋 

our sir (dilip barad) is very much concerned about his students, that they should come out with youthful thinking by stressing their complicated psyche, so that the minute particles of asteroid would gather and burst, where lively thinking lives and try to generate a new oasis🤩😍👸this task is very much concerned with these emotions..


Some hypothetic synthesised facts, based on obituaries of Girish Karnad controversial life:

As we know Girsih Karnad was a greatest controversial critic of India.  As he had criticised "V.S. Naipaul for being an anti-muslim", appreciated tipu sultan as one of the five hundred kings's "great king of Mysore" though he was  intolerant of religion, condemned RSS, BJP in 2014 when Narendra Modi, today's our prime minister was chief minister of India, also reprimand for the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 and against the ongoing controversial attempts for "Idgah Maidan" in Hubli.

By applying {The formalist approach[The trap metaphor]}. we suppose to see that what "Girish Karnad" knew, we must be not knowing. Implying his known factor, he is able to see what is actually the case and so he had precarious reaction towards such controversial things, which seems to us as treason to nation but actually isn't the case.

For Example: As he is against religious fundamentalism, and as Girish Karnad wants freedom of speech for his country, we can literally see that only he wants to transform his India into an ideal state. Where there isn't any system of "right wing". who are deeply embedded in religion and also are intolerant of religion, force others to be like them and If one goes against them or even tries to think about it, can be shot dead. As they allegedly shot dead "Gauri Lankesh" an editor of weekly magazine, belonging to bangalore, karnataka.

If we presume here that it is the duty of the writer to shape his nation or people and if he/she cannot, atleast he/she should try once in a life, he should have satisfaction of atleast he did something in his life, It depends  if it works or not. As here we're to see "Girish Karnad", when one knows what is real and what is illusive, how one can follow the obscure path?Though at that time "The India" was a conservative nation still it is and so perhaps he wasn't willing to be the part of corrupted, violent, religious majoritarian nation. where at the name of religion, people are threatened, forced to follow what they are following, compelled to do such things and If one goes against such man made religious laws, one has to pay the cost by abandoning his life, while that particular person becoming an exampler for them to threaten others, that If they would go against them, they would meet the same fate as that person met his death.

Perhaps here all "Girish Karnad" attempts, seems at surface level wrong, but actually it was towards a new India, enlighting India, religion free india or "The India" where every person has freedom of speech and they have their equal share to disseminate their ideas or information, which is said to be the key to a democratic country. While it is, that though our India today, a democratic country but the fundamental rights given to the Indian isn't yet utilized and so the India is now called to be "the developing India", because the important information is always curtailed by the authoritative dignities of India(FREEDOM OF PRESS-SHASHI THAROOR).

At another side, we see that he was the facilitator of muslims, as he had also condemned V.S. Naipaul for being "an antipathic of muslims" and he don't have any right to be, as he belongs to "Uzbekistan". It can be also seen that "V.S. Naipaul" seems to belong to the right wing of Hinduism and as he was a writer, Girish Karnad wanted him to be the follower of (left wing) so that he can see the world by his own perception and as a dutiful writer suggest or bring the required and improvised changes in India. While the others, who allegedly claim him to be the "treason of the nation", weren't knowing his hidden intentions(applicable theory of "seeming" and "being").The other ongoing process of just awakening the sleeping(babri masjid issue, Idgah in hubli). Where it literally seems that he was only endeavoring to dead the roots of riots. He wants to place every citizen of India at equal scale. Where all are equal, all have equal rights, all will follow the same path, noone is supreme or inferior and perhaps wanted to make "religion free India".

 "Charity begins at home".

 and as he was belonging to hinduism, he wanted first, improvement from his side, so he was scathingly criticizing hindu activists and opposing them.

"Don't judge the book by its cover".

conclusively, we may learn here that what we see isn't the true, truth has many faces and hues and it transforms in many combinations,  where a person can only identify his own truth, with the help of his perception. So we should avoid judging people by their actions as here we had the controversial figure of "Girish Karnad".

Quick References:
  • https://dilipbarad.blogspot.com/2019/07/girish-karnad-artist-citizen-and.html?
  • https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girish_Karnad
  • The trap metaphor (seeing and konwing, seeming and being)-A handbook of critical approaches to literature.