Had controversial author Salman Rushdie managed to address the crowds at the Jaipur Literature Festival through a video link on Tuesday, it could have — just about — salvaged some of the reputation of the whole show. Though there were a number of literary stars in attendance and booklovers got a chance to hear many robust discussions, the ghost of the absent Rushdie hovered over the festival right from the beginning.

The cancellation of his visit, the feeble reasons offered by the government, the drumbeating by anti-Rushdie mobs and the organisers’ weak response left the prestigious festival tainted. A talk by him on the big screen might have restored some of the sheen; but inevitably, that whole venture collapsed in the face of troublemakers.
The mobs, in fact, have won each and every round in this episode. Right from the beginning, after the Darul Uloom vice-chancellor demanded that Rushdie not be allowed to visit Jaipur, an implicit threat of violence against the celebrated writer and the fete itself was in the air. A pusillanimous Rajasthan government claimed there could be an attack on him, without offering a shred of evidence. On Tuesday, a group of people representing Muslim outfits gathered at the spot and demanded that the video address be scrapped or things could get out of hand. Regrettably, it was cancelled.
But if this was shameful, the government’s conduct was a lot worse. Instead of firmly warning troublemakers and assuring Rushdie and the festival full protection, the Rajasthan government continuously leaned on the organisers to keep the author away from Jaipur. While his book is banned, why should he be stopped from coming, especially since he has come to India several times in recent years? No cogent explanation was offered. Equally shocking was the government’s condition that it would allow the video-conferencing only if he did not touch on anything controversial? What’s next — stopping his tweets?
The organisers too haven’t exactly covered themselves with glory. True, they wanted to save the festival, but there could have been ways of registering protest. Literary festivals aren’t just about schmoozing or celebrity spotting; they ought to be about the exchange of ideas, even if some of these are unpalatable. Instead of standing up for freedom of thought and speech, the JLF organisers appeared busy trying to ensure that other writers did not do anything untoward.
The Rushdie affair is one more example of the victory of intolerance in India, further shrinking an already withering liberal space in this country. And governments are always ready to pander to troublemakers, particularly, it seems, when there are elections in the air. From banning books and films, we have now moved on to banning people. That is the sad fallout of this entire sorry episode.