FPJ INTERVIEW: 'Celebration Should Not Become Disturbance,' Says Pune Activist Vidyanand Bapat - VIDEO

Pune: Pune’s Ganeshotsav debate has acquired an unlikely new fault line: how much noise is too much noise? At the centre of it is 37-year-old activist Vidyanand Bapat, whose campaign against DJs, loudspeakers and amplified sound during public celebrations has moved from a civic demand to a city-wide debate.

Visit asg-reflektory.pl for more information.

In an interaction with The Free Press Journal, Bapat spoke about the DJ debate, tradition, the memes targeting him, his use of provocative language, the Chief Minister’s Marathi remark and what he wants to see after Ganeshotsav.

He also explained why his campaign is against excessive sound, not festivals, and why the September 3 assault has made him more determined to pursue the issue.

Pune VIDEOS: Massive Fire At Plastic Factory Near Moshi; Workers Rescued, Adjacent Unit Saved

Q: Why are you against DJs during Ganeshotsav? And why did you raise the issue now?

A: I am not against Ganeshotsav. I am against excessive noise and the assumption that a public celebration gives us the right to impose that noise on everyone around us. My concern is particularly with DJs, loudspeakers and amplified sound systems because their sound travels far beyond the people actually participating in the celebration.

I raised the issue because I felt that the problem had reached a stage where somebody had to speak clearly about it. In Pune, people living in some areas actually leave their homes during Ganeshotsav because of the noise. That should make us stop and think.

My question is very simple: why should a person who is not participating in a celebration be forced to experience it at a high volume? I am asking for responsible celebration, not cancellation of celebration.

Q: Is your opposition to DJs, or to loud public celebrations altogether?

A: My opposition is to excessive sound amplification in public spaces. I am not asking people to sit silently during festivals. I am asking them to understand that public celebration also involves public responsibility.

If somebody wants music at a high volume, let there be an enclosed, soundproof place where people who enjoy it can participate. The sound should remain within that space.

My argument, therefore, is not festival versus no festival; it is celebration versus disturbance.

A person participating in a procession has voluntarily chosen to be there. A resident living along that route has not voluntarily chosen to hear the music for hours. That distinction is important.

I want a model where both sides can enjoy their rights. People should be able to celebrate, and people who are not participating should be able to live peacefully.

Pune: Nigerian Woman Staying Illegally In Hinjawadi Deported To Nigeria After Pimpri-Chinchwad Police Action

Q. Where do you draw the line between celebration and public nuisance?

A: The line is crossed when your celebration starts affecting somebody else’s basic right to live peacefully. A public space does not belong exclusively to the people celebrating an event.

If the sound is confined to the premises where the event is taking place, that is one thing. But when amplified sound enters homes, disturbs sleep, affects elderly people, patients, children or people working from home, it becomes a civic issue. I also look at traffic obstruction and the duration of celebrations. The prescribed decibel limit should not become the target. We should ask ourselves why we want to come close to that limit in the first place. The law provides a maximum permissible level; it does not mean we have to produce that much noise.

Q. Why do you oppose dhol-tasha when it is a traditional part of Pune’s celebrations?

A: I respect dhol-tasha as a cultural tradition. My question is whether something automatically becomes beyond criticism simply because it is traditional.

Traditions evolve. Society changes, and our understanding of public health, individual rights and urban living also changes. Pune today is a densely populated city. What may have been manageable decades ago may have a very different impact in today’s environment.

I am not asking anyone to erase dhol-tasha from Pune’s culture. I am asking whether it has to be played at excessive levels in public spaces and whether there can be better places and timings for it.

If we genuinely value the tradition, we should be able to preserve its cultural character while reducing its harmful impact. Tradition deserves respect, but it should not become a licence for public inconvenience.

Pune Shocker: Youth Attacked With Koyta Over Love Marriage, 4 Arrested With Pistol Seized

Q. Do you believe traditions must change when they affect other citizens?

A: Yes. No tradition can be completely insulated from social change.

There are practices from the past that society has changed because we understood their consequences differently over time. Traditions have evolved with time. Practices such as sati and child marriage were once accepted as traditions, but society eventually recognised their harm and abolished them. The same principle applies to festivals. If a particular form of celebration causes avoidable disturbance to thousands of people, we should be willing to discuss whether it can be conducted differently. I am not saying that every tradition should be changed. I am saying that tradition should be able to withstand questions.

If someone tells me that my argument is wrong, I am willing to debate it. But saying, “This is tradition,” cannot be the end of the conversation.

Q. During Dahi Handi, Punekars saw police action against DJs violating rules. Do you see this as the ‘Bapat impact’?

A: I would not call it the “Bapat impact”. That makes the issue about me, and I don’t want that. If police are enforcing existing rules, that is their job. What I would like to see is consistency. Enforcement should not happen because I have raised an issue or because there is public pressure. It should happen because the law applies equally to everyone.

If my campaign has helped bring the issue into public discussion, I am happy about that. But I will consider it a success only when noise regulations are enforced routinely, irrespective of who raises the complaint.

The real impact should be citizens understanding their rights and authorities implementing the law. It should not be about one activist getting credit for police action. Maharashtra has already seen other districts take steps on DJs and amplification, which shows that regulation is possible.

Pune Police Targets 72 Juveniles Under 'Samvad Parivartan Yatra' for Rehabilitation

Q. More than 300 people protested against DJs on Sunday and marched towards the PMC. How do you see that, and why weren’t you there?

A: I see the protest as a positive development because it shows that the issue is no longer restricted to one person. Citizens themselves are now coming forward and saying that noise pollution needs to be addressed.

I could not attend because I was unwell. There was also a protest earlier when I was told that a protest had been cancelled, and I later learnt that it had taken place.

But I don’t think my physical presence is necessary at every protest. In fact, I would prefer the movement to become larger than me.

If 100 or 1,000 people come forward without depending on me, that is a much stronger development. I don’t want to become the face of a movement that should ultimately belong to citizens.

Q. After being assaulted on September 3, has the attack strengthened your resolve or changed your approach?

A: It has strengthened my resolve. An assault cannot decide whether an argument is right or wrong. If someone believes I am wrong, they should come and debate with me. Tell me where my argument is factually incorrect. Convince me. That is how a democracy functions.

What happened on September 3 was unfortunate, but I don’t want the discussion to become only about the assault. The larger issue remains noise pollution and how public celebrations affect other citizens.

Q. There are memes about you all over social media. Have you seen them? What do you make of them?

A: Yes, I have seen some of them, not all. I don’t have a problem with humour or criticism. People have the right to disagree with me and even make fun of me.

But there is a danger when the personality becomes bigger than the issue.

If people are discussing my hairstyle, my Marathi, my expressions or making memes about me, but nobody is discussing noise pollution, then the conversation has moved in the wrong direction.

People can make memes. People can criticise me. People can disagree with me. But after all of that, I want them to answer one question: why should one citizen be forced to tolerate excessive noise created by another citizen’s celebration? That is the debate I want.

Pune: Santosh Pandit Remanded To 14-Day MCR In Kothrud Case; Probe Underway

Q. You have said disagreements should be answered through debate, not violence. Do you think your strong language sometimes contributes to hostility against you?

A: I accept that I use strong language because I want people to pay attention. But strong language is not an invitation to violence.

If someone thinks I have used the wrong word, challenge the word. If someone thinks my argument is wrong, challenge the argument. I am also capable of reflecting on my own language. I don’t claim that every expression I use is perfect. But there is a huge difference between provocative speech and physically attacking someone.

Democracy requires space for uncomfortable arguments. We cannot say that only polite or convenient opinions are allowed.

Q. You have used the phrase ‘Lashkar-e-Utsav’. What exactly do you mean by it? Do such terms heat up the debate?

A: I use that phrase to describe a mindset in which celebration starts becoming an assertion of power, where the idea seems to be that the bigger the sound and the greater the disruption, the stronger the celebration.

I am not using it against a religion or against the festival itself. My criticism is directed at the behaviour surrounding public celebrations.

Q. The Chief Minister said he would need classes to learn Marathi like you. What is your response?

A: I took that positively. I don’t see it as something to fight about. Marathi is a beautiful language, and I enjoy using it. But language is ultimately a medium to communicate an idea. The purpose of using difficult or powerful words should not be to show off one’s vocabulary. If the CM felt my Marathi was good, I take that as a compliment.

I don’t want people to remember me simply because of my Marathi vocabulary. Language can attract attention, but the issue has to sustain the conversation.

Q. What is your next plan, especially now that more people are supporting your stand?

A: The next step is to institutionalise the issue rather than keep it dependent on me. There are people and organisations that are discussing the possibility of working together specifically on noise pollution. The objective would be to take the issue beyond one festival and pursue it through administrative, legislative and, where necessary, judicial channels. But I also want citizens to take ownership.

If people believe noise pollution affects them, they should not wait for me to speak. They should complain, question authorities and demand enforcement.

The campaign should eventually reach a stage where my name is not required for action.

Q. After Ganeshotsav, will you continue focusing on civic issues and maintain your stand on DJs?

A: Yes. The issue is bigger than Ganeshotsav. Noise pollution is not limited to one religion or one festival. It can arise during different religious celebrations, political programmes, processions and public events.

My stand has to remain consistent. I cannot say that excessive noise is wrong during one festival but acceptable during another.

At the same time, I don’t intend to become somebody who comments on every issue in every part of Maharashtra. I have my own professional responsibilities as well.

My focus will remain on issues where I believe citizens’ rights are being affected and where there is a genuine need for public discussion.

Ban DJs, Not Ganeshotsav: BJP Minister Madhuri Misal Seeks Uniform Crackdown On DJs Across Festivals In Pune

Q. You have taken up this issue in Pune. Will you become the person who takes up every civic issue everywhere?

A: No. I will not take a stand like Jesus Christ and try to save everyone.

Every city and every community has people who can stand up for issues that need to be addressed and brought into the spotlight. I cannot go to Nashik and start addressing the problems of Nashik. The people there have to stand up for their own rights. Similarly, people in Pune have to stand up for Pune’s issues. I am not claiming that I am the only person who can raise these questions. In fact, I want more people to do exactly that.

I am one citizen raising one issue. I am not a messiah for every problem.

Q. Finally, what is your end goal: silent festivals or a fundamental change in Pune’s festival culture?

A: I don’t want silent festivals. I want responsible festivals.

Pune should continue celebrating. Ganeshotsav should continue. Dhol-tasha, cultural programmes and public gatherings can continue. But we need to stop believing that a celebration becomes better when it becomes louder.

If someone wants amplified music, provide an enclosed, soundproof venue. If a procession is necessary, manage it properly. If there are sound limits, enforce them.

The fundamental change I want is in our mindset.

Read full story at source