the courage to persuade the pistol

25.05.2026

S: In ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’, courage is defined as the fight against racism. They say that courage is knowing that you are licked before you even begin to fight racism and still fight nonetheless.

A: You believe that you have this courage?

S: I fight racism with my words. I fight racism with my deeds. With my heart. With my love and my friendship. I have never denied anyone anything because of the colour of their skin or their religion or culture. I have never denied anyone love because of what is wrong.

A: What is your idea of courage? It is something that you write about a lot, this concept of courage and bravery.

S: Do you know what the courage of a Punjabi is? The guru said:

‘Chirion se main baaz turaun,

Tabe Gobind Singh naam kahaun’

It is when I make sparrows fight hawks that I am called Gobind Singh.

‘Gidderon se main sher banaun,

Tabe Gobind Singh naam kahaun’

It is when make I lions out of wolves that I am called Gobind Singh

‘Nichon se main ucch banaun,

Tabe Gobind Singh naam kahaun’

It is when I make the lowly rise that I am called Gobind Singh

‘Sawa lakh se ek laraun,

Tabe Gobind Singh naam kahaun’

It is when I make one fight a hundred thousand that I am called Gobind Singh

Courage is when you have no power and you still fight. Courage is when you are the one and you fight the hundred thousand. When you stand against all as The Tiger. It is a concept shared by both Atticus Finch in ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ and the Guru. Attitus is one of the powerful. He says it despite the fact that he has power in a white supremacist society as a white man. The Guru? He said it when he was one of the lowly. What the Guru said is the truth, it is the sincere conviction of the true warrior.

A: You believe that you are the lowly?

S: I am an Untouchable. I am The Oppressed, the Dalit. I am the working class. I am an ethnic minority man. We are they who they want to keep low. And yet, I fight. With everything. To the last breath. With my love. With my freedom. With my voice. With my body. I am the one that the Guru called to fight. Because they want us to be lowly but we will rise. It is us that are truly powerful. With all of their might, we are the ones that strike fear into their hearts. Because it is us that are the warriors. And them? They are the cowards. They are the hundred thousand that fight the one. Me. And it is them that lose.

The Turner Prize 2024 – ‘Punjabi’ Art is Shortlisted

24.04.2024

What’s on the Turner Prize shortlist this year in terms of ‘Punjabi’ art? Covered with a giant white doily, a red Ford Escort vehicle is presented to us. The ‘art’ is in front of a photograph of a family with the car.

Rosie Cooper, director of Wysing Arts Centre, who sits on the judging panel, said Kaur sees the vehicle as a “representation of her dad’s first car and his migrant desires” and it “blasted snippets of uplifting pop songs referencing freedom and liberation throughout the space”.

https://news.sky.com/story/artist-who-covered-sports-car-with-giant-doily-nominated-for-turner-prize-13122021

Suneel’s Comment

Obviously the artist shortlisted in this country – when they are Indian – would necessarily be female. This is what ‘diversity’ means to white people when it comes to the Subcontinent – the women. Their books, their art, their cinema. It is all celebrated. Because they are heroic ‘victims’ of Indian culture to the West. Us men are to be ignored and marginalised. Because we are the ‘oppressors’ of women in this culture.

And what about this piece which white taste has valued? The big white doily is the key. It covers over the car. The migrant desire – according to the rules of white society – is to be covered over in whiteness. The white doily – the whiteness – is self-consciously patterned and artistic – it is the touch of art in the piece. Otherwise, there would just be a car and a family snapshot. The white doily – the whiteness – is what creates this exhibition as a piece of art work. It is what demonstrates ‘taste’, ‘selection’, artistic ‘discrimination’ (the pun is intended).

And what about this ‘migrant desire’ which – despite the capture of the car in the whiteness that is like a constraining net – blasts songs of freedom and liberation (laughable)? It is ideology at work. The veil of ideology covering over the vision of the car, the white veil over things for the migrant experience. Blinding the eyes and vision. Interfering. Coming between self and object, mind and reality. Art is the white veil itself. What else is? They sing of freedom. When they are the exploited. They sing of liberty. When they are constrained and bound by the white net.

The car. The phallic symbol. Red to signify status and dominance. Gross materialism. Migrant desire is couched as greed. Desire for masculinity in this patriarchal white supremacist society. Desire for control – one drives a car.

Desire for freedom – the car represents freedom. A cliched symbol of freedom the car. But this one is caught up in the net. Even the music – they blast snippets of songs about freedom. Even musically, the freedom is partial, disrupted, interrupted, punctured by purposely oppressive silence.

Do you know what the net signifies in India? The net of maya – illusion. Gross materialism. Trickery. What comes between us and the understanding of reality. The doily is perhaps maya. This white culture and its control, its limitation of freedom for the migrant. The doily becomes kitcsch art – described by several art historians as the artwork of a capitalistic, unthinking and unfeeling, philistine and totalitarian society.

Yet, there is a paradox. If I remember correctly from the Metro newspaper article that I read today about the art piece, the doily also represents the Sikh and Indian workers that worked in textiles factories in huge numbers when they first migrated here to the United Kingdom (Metro 24.04.2024). So this net of whiteness is being created by the migrants themselves. Their deference. Their blind adulation. Their willingness to be exploited. Their inability to revolt against the systems of power.

So what are the migrant desires of the Father in this image? As seen through the eyes of a Punjabi woman? Desire to criticise the wants of the Father? Or an attempt to be sympathetic to his wants?

The artist writes:

‘In this show I am having a conversation with personal histories,’ explains Kaur, ‘exploring improvisation and political mysticism as tools to reimagine tradition and inherited myths.’ 

https://list.co.uk/news/43283/jasleen-kaur-alter-altar

But is this a re-imagination? Look at the piece again. It tries to base itself against reality as ideology – against the photograph, the representation of reality. The photograph has the Indian family in it. The base unit of Punjabi and Indian culture. The finished art exhibit has no family in it. It has a relationship merely to the Father in a patriarchal system of culture. A Father that wants to be covered in whiteness. Is this what is valued in this culture? Probably. The probability is on the side that adulates whiteness and patriarchy. The family is forgotten in favour of the Master. In favour of isolation and individualism. In favour of the desire for mastery and control and power.