Penguin India to destroy all copies of "The Hindus" due to religious pressure

[din155]

Originally Posted by shalym

So are you saying that the following quote from the author is a lie?
http://www.mhpbooks.com/penguin-pull...hurt-feelings/

Shari

Just out of curiousity, do you know this law?

[shalym]

Originally Posted by din155

Just out of curiousity, do you know this law?

No, I don't. That's why I asked if the quote was a lie.

Shari

[jayajha]

Originally Posted by shalym

So are you saying that the following quote from the author is a lie?
http://www.mhpbooks.com/penguin-pull...hurt-feelings/

Shari

No. There is indeed a law against "deliberately and maliciously" outraging the religious feelings (and for good reasons, which aren't really related to scholarly writing, but a history of communal troubles). It is the section 295A of IPC. But whether or not something is "deliberately and maliciously" outraging can probably only be decided by the court. In this case Penguin decided to settle it outside the court (after a prolonged battle admittedly). So, whether they would have been charged with that or not remains unknown.

Now, they either sensed that the case was not going in their favor, or something else happened behind the doors. We'd never know because their official statement was very vague.

So, there we are! Not knowing who to blame. Although they are conveniently blaming the law

[din155]

Originally Posted by shalym

No, I don't. That's why I asked if the quote was a lie.

Shari

Aah, for a moment I thought you were challenging the previous poster by quoting the author. From what I have read about this law, it doesn’t specify hurting followers of a specific religion. This looks more like Penguin being under pressure from a political/religious group. This was not decided in the court but a decision taken by Penguin India. Surely, you can’t blame the law without being proved in court. So, I am not sure if the author is lying or just angry. I wish Penguin had carried on publishing the books on principles instead of destroying them but they definitely are getting my money for the book. Atleast, the book has got more publicity than it would have got otherwise and my cynical mind thinks that was the intention of Penguin from the beginning.

[jayajha]

Originally Posted by din155

Aah, for a moment I thought you were challenging the previous poster by quoting the author. From what I have read about this law, it doesn’t specify hurting followers of a specific religion. This looks more like Penguin being under pressure from a political/religious group. This was not decided in the court but a decision taken by Penguin India. Surely, you can’t blame the law without being proved in court. So, I am not sure if the author is lying or just angry. I wish Penguin had carried on publishing the books on principles instead of destroying them but they definitely are getting my money for the book. Atleast, the book has got more publicity than it would have got otherwise and my cynical mind thinks that was the intention of Penguin from the beginning.

Yeah. The law isn't about a particular religion. And my lawyer friends tell me that proving "deliberate and malicious" attempt is particularly difficult.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by jayajha

Now, they either sensed that the case was not going in their favor, or something else happened behind the doors. We'd never know because their official statement was very vague.

I think it is very likely that Penguin simply counted the beans and decided that continuing to fight this was not worth the expense, even if they were eventually vindicated in court. It's like a war of attrition where even if you can win eventually, the amount of sheer numbers of men and materiel you need to pour in make it not worthwhile.

The controversy has undoubtedly sold quite a lot of copies of the book outside of India to those who might otherwise never have heard of it. Is it "deliberately and maliciously outraging the religious feelings" of Hindus? If Hindus didn't want to read it, it probably wouldn't sell well in India. It presents an alternative view, but just because some people don't like it doesn't mean that there was any malice or attempt to cause outrage. I understand the intent of these laws, they want to avoid goading conflict between religions. But these laws can have the effect of allowing one faction of a religion enforce orthodoxy upon others. Fortunately, with today's technology, banning a book doesn't stop it, it only promotes the book.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by The Old Man

Reminds me of the pressure by the academic community put upon Macmillan to stop the publication of Velikovsky’s Worlds in Collision in 1950. It was a bestseller and they sold the rights to Doubleday. Velikovsky dared to challenge the dogmas of “science.”

Ah, Immanuel Velikovsky. The precursor to Erich Von Daniken. Velikovsky! Whose scientific credentials are second only to the researchers at Answers in Genesis. Velikovsky! Without whose writings we would never have known that 17,000 years ago Jupiter pooped out the planet we know today as Venus.

Sheesh.

[din155]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Ah, Immanuel Velikovsky. The precursor to Erich Von Daniken. Velikovsky! Whose scientific credentials are second only to the researchers at Answers in Genesis. Velikovsky! Without whose writings we would never have known that 17,000 years ago Jupiter pooped out the planet we know today as Venus.

Sheesh.

I don’t about it but this was really hilarious

[arjaybe]

Originally Posted by The Old Man

Reminds me of the pressure by the academic community put upon Macmillan to stop the publication of Velikovsky’s Worlds in Collision in 1950. It was a bestseller and they sold the rights to Doubleday. Velikovsky dared to challenge the dogmas of “science.”

He was also full of it. The man apparently didn't even know the difference between hydrocarbons and carbohydrates. Still, being egregiously wrong and misleading your readers isn't sufficient reason to ban it.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Ah, Immanuel Velikovsky. The precursor to Erich Von Daniken. Velikovsky! Whose scientific credentials are second only to the researchers at Answers in Genesis. Velikovsky! Without whose writings we would never have known that 17,000 years ago Jupiter pooped out the planet we know today as Venus.

Sheesh.

Velikovsky's book was nonsense, but attempting to prevent its publication gave it a "legitimacy" that it didn't deserve. He didn't "challenge" science, he just put out nonsense.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Ah, Immanuel Velikovsky. The precursor to Erich Von Daniken. Velikovsky! Whose scientific credentials are second only to the researchers at Answers in Genesis. Velikovsky! Without whose writings we would never have known that 17,000 years ago Jupiter pooped out the planet we know today as Venus.

Sheesh.

Hey; don't mock legitimate science. Next you'll be telling us that the Earth isn't supported on the backs of elephants standing on a giant tortoise.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Hey; don't mock legitimate science. Next you'll be telling us that the Earth isn't supported on the backs of elephants standing on a giant tortoise.

Roundworld is NOT supported on elephants!! (This is a matter of considerable disappointment, and here you are, making fun of it.)

The Discworld is, as are a few others (based on the events of The Light Fantastic, that seems clear) but it is known that Roundworld is octiron-deficient...

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by arjaybe

He was also full of it. The man apparently didn't even know the difference between hydrocarbons and carbohydrates. Still, being egregiously wrong and misleading your readers isn't sufficient reason to ban it.

Macmillan is a science and education publisher. In that light, I can understand why the academic community would put pressure on them not to publish Velikovsky’s Worlds in Collision. While I would oppose such censorship across the board, I can understand why academics would be opposed to such a prestigious publishing house with longstanding ties to academia from publishing this charlatan's work. There are plenty of other publishing outlets for crackpot views.

[arjaybe]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Macmillan is a science and education publisher. In that light, I can understand why the academic community would put pressure on them not to publish Velikovsky’s Worlds in Collision. While I would oppose such censorship across the board, I can understand why academics would be opposed to such a prestigious publishing house with longstanding ties to academia from publishing this charlatan's work. There are plenty of other publishing outlets for crackpot views.

In that light, I can see why they'd protest.

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

I think it is very likely that Penguin simply counted the beans and decided that continuing to fight this was not worth the expense, even if they were eventually vindicated in court. It's like a war of attrition where even if you can win eventually, the amount of sheer numbers of men and materiel you need to pour in make it not worthwhile.

The controversy has undoubtedly sold quite a lot of copies of the book outside of India to those who might otherwise never have heard of it. Is it "deliberately and maliciously outraging the religious feelings" of Hindus? If Hindus didn't want to read it, it probably wouldn't sell well in India. It presents an alternative view, but just because some people don't like it doesn't mean that there was any malice or attempt to cause outrage. I understand the intent of these laws, they want to avoid goading conflict between religions. But these laws can have the effect of allowing one faction of a religion enforce orthodoxy upon others. Fortunately, with today's technology, banning a book doesn't stop it, it only promotes the book.

That's the problem with any such law that would allow criminal or even civil penalties for maligning someones religious beliefs. Self censorship because of legal duress is as much censorship as book burning.

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Ah, Immanuel Velikovsky. The precursor to Erich Von Daniken. Velikovsky! Whose scientific credentials are second only to the researchers at Answers in Genesis. Velikovsky! Without whose writings we would never have known that 17,000 years ago Jupiter pooped out the planet we know today as Venus.

Sheesh.

I'm always learning something new from this site. I had never hear of Velikovsky and am now informed. I do recall seeing the film version of Chariot of the Gods in high school. Not thankfully in a science class, but believe it or not in a creative writing class