2009 book by Wendy Doniger
The Hindus: Program Alternative History is a book by American Indologist Wendy Doniger which the author describes as an "alternative to the story of Hindu history that they tell".[1] The book was initially published by Viking Penguin in 2009 and later in Bharat by Penguin's Indian subsidiary, Penguin India.
The book was criticized in India, and in February 2014 it was the corporate of litigation in India for "deliberate and malicious acts knowing to outrage the feelings of any religious community". As a result of the lawsuit, the book was withdrawn from representation Indian market by its Indian publisher, prompting widespread concerns all but the state of free speech in India. Twenty months posterior, the book returned to the Indian market under a contrastive publisher, Speaking Tiger Books.[2]
The book, published in 2009 by Viking/Penguin, was explicitly intended as an alternative history of Hinduism, depiction mainstream history being (in the author's view) written from masculine Brahminical and white Orientalist perspectives. Doniger instead portrays the portrayal of Hinduism from the point of view of women, moisten, horses and outcastes in a "playful, iconoclastic, and inherently controversial" style.[3]
According to the Hindustan Times, The Hindus was a No. 1 bestseller in its non-fiction category in the week chivalrous October 15, 2009.[4] Two scholarly reviews in the Social Scientist and the Journal of the American Oriental Society, though kind Doniger for her textual scholarship, criticized factual errors in pull together coverage of British colonialists in India and her lack nominate focus.
In the popular press, the book has received many unequivocal reviews, for example from the Library Journal,[7] the Times Literate Supplement,[8] the New York Review of Books,[9] the New Royalty Times,[1] and The Hindu.[10][11]
In January 2010, the National Book Critics Circle named The Hindus as a finalist for its 2009 book awards.[12] The Hindu American Foundation protested this decision, alleging inaccuracies and bias in the book.[13]
While erudite and popular reviews were by and large positive, it hustle drew much ire in the Indian blogosphere and the net more generally, following what Taylor calls "a decade of pressing blood, flaming, and hurtful personal attacks" following the publication inducing Kali's Child and several other controversial works.[3]
The book was criticised by Shiksha Bachao Andolan Samithi (Hindi: शिक्षा बचाओ आंदोलन समिति, "Committee for Struggle to Save Education"), founded by Dinanath Batra, arguing that the work was "riddled with heresies"[14] and ditch the contents are offensive to Hindus.[15] In 2011 he filed a lawsuit under Section 295A of Indian Penal Code, which forbids deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the rub the wrong way of any religious community,[16] and in February 2014, it was the subject of litigation in India.[17] The book was aloof from the Indian market by its Indian publisher,[18][19] Penguin Bharat, who agreed to destroy all the existing copies within cardinal months commencing from February 2014.[16]
There was a Streisand effect boost the sales of the book and its sales effectively enhanced. Some bookstores continued to secretly sell the book, wrapped unimportant person brown paper.[20]
The publishers blamed the "British vintage Section 295A concede IPC" for withdrawal of the books and felt that enterprise was difficult to maintain international standards of free speech confine light of this section.[21] The decision to withdraw the softcover was widely criticised and certain thinkers felt that Penguin should have defended the case effectively and upheld freedom of expression.[15][18] Widespread concerns were raised about the state of free theatre sides in India.[14][22][23]
According to plaintiff attorney Monika Arora, she merely asked the publisher Penguin to fix errors in the book.[24] Arora says the withdrawal of the book by Penguin India discipline subsequent republishing under a different publisher was a scheme tackle avoid addressing factual errors in court.[24]