Talk:Mir Taqi Mir

Proposed merge with Meer Taqi Meer

A cursory google search suggests that both the names are equally popular. However, I propose retention of this article as it is of an older vintage and has more edit history. I would wait for a week for comments before effecting the merge. Thanks, --Gurubrahma 11:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Please go ahead and do that.. in fact I was myself going to propose that. A "redirect" also would not be amiss.

--202.138.102.142 12:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)Amit 181

WP:INDIA Banner/Delhi Addition

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Delhi workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Delhi or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 02:40, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

HOMOSEXUALITY

I have removed or heavily edited references to Mir's supposed bisexual/homosexual tendencies which is not a Noted Feature of his verse as menioned. I have done so firstly because the verses quoted are a norm in eastern poetry in which the hair in males and females is thought to be extremely attractive and takes on sensual denotations in verse. The theme, as such is a common one.

Secondly because the translations given of the verses from the Urdu original (in which I am fluent) are extremely loose and in fact, mistranslated.

Thirdly because no historical evidence in support of such a claim exists in the authentic/official biographies of the poet. Such a tendency would have been considered very abnormal, not to mention criminal and would not have escaped notice amongst his circles.

SEMTEX85 (talk) 05:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you are right, so there is no problem. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi^talk! 05:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

We have to contend with sources such as Urdu texts and contexts: the selected essays of C.M. Naim where Naim claims (p25) that many verses of Mir's contain mentions of boys, that he has a fondness for this theme, and that this abundance of pederastic references in his diwan is shared only by one other of five major contemporaries (Abru).

Same-sex love in India: readings from literature and history By Ruth Vanita, Saleem Kidwai, p 119, also asserts that Mir's poetry "represents homoeroticism" and that he, along with others, "developed a discourse of erotic commentary on young males." Vanita and Kidway also point to the efforts of most scholars to ignore, gloss over, and heterosexualize Mir's opus (N.57 p.119) Haiduc (talk) 16:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

"Such a tendency would have been considered very abnormal, not to mention criminal and would not have escaped notice amongst his circles." That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard, of course it migtht have escaped notice and there is no reason why people can't keep something like that secret. You are just upset because you don't like the idea of one of your favourite poets being gay. Same thing happened on the Isac Newton page, he was most likely gay as well, but since a bunch of homophobes think it is irrelevant it is not mentioned on the page. Just sad really. 85.230.137.182 (talk) 21:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't bother me as to what Mir's sexual preferences were. Just that the suggestion is uncorroborated by facts. He married more than once and fathered children, his verses in praise of the charms of women run into their thousands if not hundreds of thousands in comparison with the handful which are about tricky boys and make no mention of their sexual allure whatsoever. That's the only problem I have with the premise.

SEMTEX85 (talk) 01:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

@SEMTED85 the words śāhidbāzī and śāhidbāz have been used multiple times in his poetry, even referring to himself. I'm not sure how this suggestion is not supported by facts? RonnieSingh (talk) 18:30, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mir Taqi Mir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090409135932/http://mama.indstate.edu/users/shakil/meer.html to http://mama.indstate.edu/users/shakil/meer.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:16, 2 January 2018 (UTC)