Competing Fundamentalisms: Behzti, Freedom of Speech, Sacrilege and Silencing

Abstract

When Gurpreet Kaur Bhatti’s play Behzti (Dishonour) opened at the studio space at the Birmingham Repertory Theatre on 9 December 2004, it was accompanied by protests outside the theatre. These were organised by local Sikhs, who argued that the way in which the production placed acts of sexual abuse and murder within a Gurdwara — a Sikh temple — was nothing short of sacrilege. These protests grew in size during the run, and eventually became violent, culminating in rioting and an attack on the theatre on Saturday 18 December. Five policemen were injured, three people were arrested, and some 800 theatre-goers had to be evacuated, including a large number of children who were attending the theatre’s main Christmas show. The riot resulted in thousands of pounds’ worth of damage; glass windows and doors were smashed, and backstage equipment was destroyed when some of the demonstrators managed to get in. On Monday 20 December, following a meeting with the police and community leaders, the Rep’s management took the decision to cancel the rest of the play’s run on the grounds of health and safety. Plans for rehearsed readings of the play elsewhere were called off, apparently after the number of death threats to Bhatti, the playwright, increased. This extraordinary example of successful censorship precipitated a heated debate in the media over the competing rights of the artist and those who were offended in the Sikh community. Below, I examine some of the tensions, assumptions and contradictions inherent in the various positions adopted in this debate, placing these against an account of the development of the play in rehearsal.