Click to play videoInfosys chief mentor Narayana Murthy is in the middle of a controversy following his comments on the National Anthem.
It all started with President APJ Abdul Kalam's visit to the Infosys campus in Mysore on Sunday. As per protocol, the National Anthem was played out but it was an instrumental version. Later Murthy explained that it was done to save his foreign guests from an “embarrassing” position of being silent and while their Indian counterparts were singing it.
Now Murthy is not the only one being taken to task for dishonouring the national sentiment. There is also a raging controversy against cricketer Sachin Tendulkar, who was photographed cutting a cake made of the colours of the Indian flag.
While a considerable majority feels that the two public figures have insulted the sentiments of the people by their actions, there is also a segment that argues it’s too much fuss over nothing.
Are we oversensitive about the national anthem? On CNN-IBN show Face the Nation conducted by Sagarika Ghose, a panel comprising of eminent writer U R Ananthamurthy and columnist for The Pioneer Sandhya Jain discussed the issue.
A fall from grace?
Narayana Murthy has always been perceived as a capitalist with a difference, a homegrown international icon, a boy next door who made good but has his comment on the National Anthem disappointed India?
“I don’t think we should over do this. He chose a wrong word, he is such a votary of the English language and I am surprised that he used a word like embarrassment. He should have said that it is difficult for them to sing it, perhaps then there would have been no controversy,” Ananthamurthy said.
But then, can there be a greater patriot than Murthy and should he be judged on whether or not he sings the National Anthem?
While hinting that Murthy’s comment was rather uncalled for, Sandhya Jain said, “He knew that the President, as per protocol, has to be received with the National Anthem and it has to be played. Nobody was asking his foreign trainees or guests to sing the National Anthem as a compulsory activity on the campus.”
She went on to explain that if the National Anthem is sung anywhere in the world, one stands respectfully and visiting dignitaries are not expected to sing the anthem but they are only expected to pay their respects.
“All that the guests standing there had to do was to stand when the Anthem was being recited, which they do in their own country and we do when we go anywhere. So, there was no question of embarrassment or a compulsion to sing. I do not know why Narayana Murthy said that and he has given a very poor excuse for covering up his very major lapse,” Jain added.
Fallout of globalisation
Murthy’s decision to side with visiting dignitaries raises a vital question – is this in some way the face of globalisation?
Infosys is our flagship-globalised company and in order to globalise, one has to perhaps compromise a little on national identity and play down the nationalism.
“I am unhappy with Narayana Murthy because he speaks only for the English medium and he is a cosmopolite. He is a great achiever and we admire him, but we differ from him,” Ananthamurthy said.
He added that Murthy should be grateful to the Karnataka government and to India because he owed his success to the two entities. Ananthamurthy blamed Murthy of having no sympathy with the Nehruvian kind of socialism that created the infrastructure necessary for people like him to flourish. So, there is something wrong with the corporate culture.
Ananthamurthy went on to say, “I don’t think he really meant it but because he belongs to a corporate culture, the globalising world, he does not have enough respect for mass movement, the people of Karnataka and the languages of India.”
Meanwhile, taking a dig at Murthy, Jain said, “I think more than the wrong word, he has used the wrong concept. It is only in India that we find the corporate elite trying to subordinate nationalism, national icons and culture to please an imagined global audience. There was no need to disrespect the National Flag or the Anthem to have an international standing, which he thinks he is going to acquire by these means.”
Ananthamurthy, however, had a softer stance on the argument, “There is a category of people like Murthy, who are very successful, humane, compassionate but disconnected in some fundamental level with India.”
But then, isn’t it way too sensitive of us to judge them? After all, a mature nation state can surely deal with a situation like this. Jain begged to disagree, “A mature nation state does not disrespect the symbols of its nationhood. We should not be mocking the symbols for which we are supposed to stand and for which people lay down their lives.”
She added that Sachin Tendulkar should not have cut cake, which looked like a tri-coloured flag. In fact, it should have been ensured that at least the charkas were not there.
The true patriot
Who is then a greater patriot? Was it someone like Narayana Murthy or Sachin Tendulkar who prove their sentiments through actions or is it someone who displays the tricolour of Indian nationhood?
While Ananthamurthy claimed it was “neither of them, it is the people of India”, Jain said, “It is the person who dies for India. The country has had many achievers and they have all done India proud in various respects. India has given it certain privileges, love and respect to people like Murthy and Sachin and it has gone to their head and created the so-called disconnect.”
Final results of the question of the day poll: Are we oversensitive about the national anthem?
65 per cent – Yes
35 per cent – No
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.