|
|
A Tribune Special
Narrow proclamations of identity |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Clamour for new states
On Record
Profile
|
A Tribune Special
For the first time, democracy no longer seems to enjoy an unchallenged position. With the phenomenal rise of China and its muscle-flexing in world affairs and the emergence of Russia as ultra-nationalist and world’s first energy superpower, there has been a consolidation of dictatorships among authoritarian rulers not only in Central Asia and Southeast Asia but also in Africa and Latin America. China’s impressive growth has made it an attractive proposition for many autocratic regimes. More significantly, China’s growing assistance to poor, non-democratic countries has cast a shadow over democracies’ poor track record in offering assistance to neo-democracies. George Bush’s promotion of democracy became synonymous with regime change. Even established democracies have seen democratic space shrinking. There is decline in mass parties, mass mobilising organisations, unions, student bodies and so on. The loss of faith in politics and voters’ growing apathy are the challenges that established democracies are wrestling with. India may have received kudos for keeping the flame of democracy alight in the dark surrounding of its neighbourhood prompting Bernard Levine of The Times, London to say, “if democracy in India falls, the end of democracy itself will be in sight.” However, the way politics has been reduced to a game of numbers and the kind of vote banks we have built, one would assume there are no citizens left. There are only backward communities, Dalits, minorities, Marathi manoos and the like. We have also reduced democracy to a never-ending-belittling scrap between political parties to the detriment of governments and governance. We vote our leaders to power expecting instant gratification. This has compelled them to give endless empty promises of El Dorado and meaningless sound bites to prove they are busy on our behalf. We have made our leaders act like nimble showmen. They play acrobat, Rambo, entrepreneur, messiah, often all at the same time. But far from being uplifted they are weighed down by such multiple roles. Big and small leaders are busy dipping their fingers into sticky political mud, be it Telangana, caste quota or Marathi asmita. Wearing several hats comes easily to our leaders. They keep promising the undeliverable and keep denying the undeniable. Politics in India was once a stern moral drama. Today it has become a ribald vaudeville, full of scandal and pantomime. It is no more a national project. It is a family business. Mulayam Singh Yadav, Laloo Prasad Yadav, M. Karunanidhi, H.D. Deve Gowda, Om Prakash Chautala, Prakash Singh Badal and Balasaheb Thackeray have converted their parties as family enterprise. We have a growing number of MPs, MLAs and sarpanches who have inherited their political mantle from their families. At a different level, ideology has taken a backseat. Today, there are as many socialist parties as there are socialists. All are blessed with egos of cosmic proportions and hence they cannot remain under one umbrella. Most regional parties have shared power with both the Congress and the BJP. They win elections with one plank and remain in power with another. What Maharashtra is witnessing is competitive parochialism between the two Thackeray scions. But has the Congress fared any better? The Bhindrawale syndrome was played out in Maharashtra, though to a lesser extent. Raj Thackeray counted on the blessings of the Congress when he began to create a constituency of his own by cutting into the support base of the Shiv Sena. Only the other day, Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan came out with a weird formula calling all taxi drivers to speak Marathi. He had to eat a humble pie as someone in Delhi decided to show him his place. Had Rahul Gandhi not undertaken a train journey in Mumbai, Shah Rukh Khan’s My Name is Khan may still be hostage to Thackeray’s whims. Bravo, Indian democracy! One day the Centre thunders that the Maharashtra government will take “firm action” against the “divisive agenda” of the Shiv Sena. Within hours, that “firm action” is taken in the form of Union Minister Sharad Pawar going to the Sena supremo’s lair to seek his blessings for organising IPL in Mumbai without any trouble. Rahul Gandhi snubbed the Shiv Sena by his visit to Mumbai but Pawar lifted its spirit. Thackeray’s son Uddhav, under pressure to prove his mischief potential, drove down from Pune to be in the photo frame. The smile on his face and the victory sign say it all. There are, of course, bright spots as well. “True democracy”, said Gandhiji, “can’t be worked by twenty men sitting at the Centre. It has to be worked from below by the people of every village.” India has begun to take baby steps towards inclusive growth through inclusive governance. Inclusion and empowerment of historically disadvantaged groups are the grand narratives of grassroots governance. In spite of leakages, corruption and mismanagement, the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) and other rural development programmes launched by the Manmohan Singh government have begun to change the face of rural India, added substantiality to purchasing power of rural masses and stimulated rural markets. In the past few years, the government has spent huge sums of money on the social sector. There has been a four-fold increase in expenditure on poverty alleviation and rural development from Rs 76 billion in 1993-94 to Rs 340 billion in 2003-04. The 2009-10 provision is about Rs 1,250 billion. India-Bharat divide may be widening, but Bharat is not drifting. The new panchayati raj may have many loopholes, but it has made the rural masses stakeholders in the polity. It has certainly enlarged the national cake. One good thing that happened to economic reform is that it coincided with the process of democratic decentralisation. The inclusion of the historically excluded groups like women, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the political process has begun to change the grammar of Indian politics. The silent revolution is taking place in the country. The new generation of panchayati raj is constitutionally mandated and it seeks to bring about a paradigm shift in grassroots governance. Here again, our leaders are paying lip-service. We have created the structure of decentralised governance, but not devolved funds, functions and functionaries. The panchayati raj institutions are like a structure which has pillars and walls but no roof. All said, the panchayati raj and a plethora of rural development schemes are potentially revolutionary. They must become transformative. Some of the weaknesses of our system are institutional. Representative democracy is minimalist. But deliberative democracy or plebiscitary democracy too has its pitfalls. Governance should not be seen as political engineering. Trust and social capital will make governance more accountable. The interface between the citizen and the elected representative is with the citizen as a supplicant, rather than as an applicant. This must change. Only better citizenry will stem the
rot. The writer is Associate Director, Institute of Social Sciences, New Delhi |
|
Narrow proclamations of identity
The claim to “identity” in narrow terms of caste, religion, state and race seems extremely suspect. This writer wonders what the whole noise is about. Can even one person proclaim, he/she is only this or that, and validate it with a convincing argument? If so, then the person has to be an idiot or a fanatic. Racial intermixing, mass migrations, cultural amalgamations, inter-religious influences, have happened ever since man started from that common identity of being a Homo Sapien. Then where is the question of absolute purity of even one pedantic social institution, that we subscribe to so fervently? If one views from a historical perspective, the very nature of religion or caste, or race or nation state has been different in different times. Society is constantly in a state of flux, such that even moral or ethical values are relative. Then, which ‘identity’ does one so faithfully adhere to, when that identity is always changing? The change in an individual’s identity occurs at a plethora of levels. And the factors that influence that change might be so vast and varied. They range from personal, social, cultural, economical, and political; a whole gamut in fact, which makes that particular ethos of the times in which the individual lives. Our fast developing economy, yet the plight of the poor, the rise of an Afro American President in the United States of America, yet the economic insecurity of his times, the fall of Communist Russia and yet the mammoth rise of Red China, the famines in Ethiopia, the homeless on the roads in Delhi winters, the rise of educated politicians at the Centre, the enormous power that the media wields in our lives today, the corruption at every level in our government offices, the music we listen to, the movies we watch, Google, cell phones — all and many more, are factors which form our identities. To just brand oneself as a Marathi manoos, or a Punjab da puttar or Telugu Bidda is a deliberate delimiting, diminishing and falsification of one’s vast identity. All of us, individually and collectively as a society, are so much more than our states or religions or castes or our genes. In philosophical terms too, the concept of “I” continuously changes and grows in context of the “other”. The “I” is not a fixed entity. Your thought process at one point and place in your life might be totally different from it, at another point. In the process, he is also crushing your infinite “identity” and turning you into a brainwashed one-dimensional zombie. The question is, why on earth would we allow that fatal event to happen to us? Which is the Hindu identity that is being proclaimed from rooftops by the Ram Sene and the Shiv Sena? Does Hinduism itself have a very regimented and uniform identity all through this nation of ours? No. The Hindus in Punjab have more in common with the people of what is now Pakistan than they have with Hindus in South India. There is no difference in the attire of Muslim, Hindu or Sikh women in north India. And they all look extremely different from a sari clad, bindi wearing South Indian woman. While Hindus are largely vegetarian on Shiva Raatri, there is necessarily the sacrifice of a goat in the celebration of the same festival in Kashmir. While Brahmins are traditionally vegetarian in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, the ones in Goa cannot do without fish. If celebrating Valentine and cozying up as a couple is such a crime in modern India, what about the whole tradition of the Kam Sutra and the ancient Hindu temples exhibiting sexual postures? Similarly, what is the absurd concept of a “Jihad” in modern times? The misplaced faith in fighting for one’s religion just brings death, terror and destruction for ordinary people. And it also brands the whole religion and its people such that even the secular ones are always defensive because however innocent they might be, they are looked at with suspicion. Why make your own people go through such trauma by giving them a false and narrow idea of identity? Many Hindus have undying faith in Muslim Mazaars in this country. Many Catholics go to Zambavli Temple. Many people from all religious faiths visit the church of St Francis with awe and veneration. The cities of India have their unique architectural character because of the forts built by the Mughals and the majestic buildings built by the British. So much of our Indian music is influenced by the Sufi gayaki and ghazals of the undivided Punjab. We incorporate the western culture in so many ways in our life, because watching it in the media, influences us. Our common identity comprises too many factors. Then why brand ourselves with a label which cannot even define an iota of one’s self? This is a country of ancient wisdom, tolerance and acceptance. We are a smart people and the whole world recognises that. So please do not sell us some nonsense of caste-based, regional, religious or racial identities. We do not buy it. We do not wish to live in these small, cocoon-like definitions of our “identity”. All we want is a safe life, with some measure of economic stability and a clean progressive government. Both the government and the opposition need to have an ideology based on real issues which can give a better life to the country’s citizens. We cannot be a nation of under-nourished, illiterate, below poverty line, unhappy people who are content to live in narrow concepts of regional identities. As an individual, this writer comes from quite a mixed stock. My great aunt was a Malaysian. We are ancestrally from what is now, Pakistan, and came to India during the Partition. My maternal grandmother was a Sikh. All the rest in between were Hindus. My father comes from a Sikh family. My sister-in-law is an Irish Roman Catholic. My favourite aunt is from Andhra Pradesh. Another is from Rajasthan, My friends have been from all parts of this country and I have learnt so much from them. From Peshawar to Ludhiana to Delhi to Madhya Pradesh to Maharashtra to Goa, the generations of my family have migrated often. My identity might be a result of all of that. But it is also much more than that and I humbly accept that I cannot define it. When I myself cannot define my own identity, how can I let some vague person sitting in Bombay, define it for me? I guess I am somewhere uncertain, floundering, discovering, growing, marveling, sighing — just a human being, beyond
definitions. |
Clamour for new states
THE Indian political class is not tired of telling the country that India will be a global power in 21st century but problems of governance, administration, economic efficiency, Naxalite violence and other concerns about internal security, growing demands for smaller states and issues of political economy create doubts on these claims. The sudden demand for Telangana statehood after the tragic death of former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy caught the ruling UPA napping. It did not anticipate the event. Its response is a sad reflection on the political establishment. In a damage control exercise, Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram has been able to stabilise the volatile situation through a series of meetings with the affected parties initially and then by setting up a five-member high powered committee headed by Justice B.N. Srikrishna, a former Supreme Court Judge to look into the entire gamut of issues. But the big question is should a government respond to matters of public concern when agitations are launched and damage to public life and property is done. Working under the motto that “only a crying child can ensure milk supply from the mother”, successive governments at the Centre have been approaching problems of crucial significance in the last few years. The government should have dealt with issues and problems in a structured manner with a long-term vision. While the NDA can be held guilty of creating Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Uttarakhand without a serious analysis of the pros and cons of new states, the Congress in 2004 had promised such a commission but when it assumed power, it was conveniently given a burial. The Congress’ flip-flop approach was once again evident when Mr Chidambaram announced the creation of Telangana at midnight on December 9, 2009. His hasty announcement violated the political norm and was against the principle of collective responsibility. As Parliament was in session, such a policy announcement should have been made there. After the announcement, the Congress and the UPA tried to wriggle out of the political mess by convening of a meeting of leaders of all Andhra political parties. As expected, nothing came out of the meeting but it definitely cooled down the frayed tempers and helped restore normalcy in the turbulent Andhra Pradesh. The January 5 all-party meeting from Andhra Pradesh failed to evolve a consensus on the issue and there is considerable pressure from Telangana leaders on the UPA government. There was a serious dilemma before the ruling UPA. If the demand of Telangana was conceded, it will open a Pandora’s box of demands for creation of more states. What was stated in 1956 in the first States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) holds true today. The criterion of language, an important determining basis for creation of 21 States and Union Territories, has outlived its utility as well as its relevance in the context of the nation’s ambitions and rising aspirations of the people. The five-decade-old demand for a separate state of Telangana, which has been coming up at regular intervals, is a firm proof of rejection of language as the basis for identity of a state. The First SRC, headed by Justice Fazal Ali, had realised that the criterion of language in itself was not enough and had pointed out to the Telangana people’s apprehensions. The latter feared that they would be unequally placed in relation to their major partner, which will derive all the advantages immediately while Telangana itself may be converted into a colony by coastal Andhra, the Commission had observed in its report. Overlooking these and other objections, the Nehru government went ahead with the formation of Andhra Pradesh. However, Telangana was guaranteed certain safeguards through the Gentlemen’s Agreement to address its concerns and ensure proper development of the region. Despite having a common language, Andhra and Telangana had strong cultural and socio-economic differences. The educationally backward people of Telangana had apprehensions that they may by swamped rather get dominated and exploited by the more advanced people of the coastal areas. Subsequently, after a long agitation for separate state on the basis of Punjabi language, Punjab was divided into two units — Punjabi-speaking Punjab and Hindi-speaking Haryana. Similarly, the bilingual state of Bombay was divided into Marathi-speaking Maharashtra and Gujarati-speaking Gujarat. Afterwards, the demand for creation of states started arising with arguments of lack of development and that smaller states would ensure rapid development. Cultural rather tribal identity has also been one of the other factors which have pushed the cause of a separate state. Political parties demand separate states for creating a political base for themselves and later coming to power in the newly created states. In some cases, the demand begins with the overvaulting ambition of a particular political leader who finds it difficult to find keys to doors of power. Often, those making demands for a separate state don’t do their homework; they also don’t give serious thought to issues of governance and economic viability. At the moment, in addition to the demand for Telangana, statehood pleas have come for Vidarbha and Marathwada in Maharashtra, Bodoland in Assam, Mahakosala in Orissa, Ladakh and Jammu in Jammu and Kashmir, Mithilanchal in Bihar, Vindhya Pradesh in Madhya Pradesh, Harit Pradesh, Purvanchal, Terai Pradesh and Bundelkhand in Uttar Pradesh and Gorkhaland in West Bengal. There may be many more waiting in the wings. Consequently, the time for setting up of a Second SRC has come for optimising the country’s strengths and minimising its weaknesses and frailties. The country’s reorganisation should aim at creating units which are governable, administratively and economically efficient and are able to counter challenges of regionalism, extremism, fundamentalism and terrorism. It is surprising that the two national parties – the Congress and the BJP – have promised to set up such a commission when they were in the Opposition but the moment they captured power, they
backtracked. The writer is Senior Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi |
|
On Record
A known face among the Indian theatre fraternity, Aziz Quraishi’s association with the stage is more than 40 years old. He has been the general secretary of Indian People’s Theatre Association (IPTA) Delhi since 1981. He has directed, scripted and acted in many plays. In an exclusive interview to The Tribune in New Delhi, he speaks nostalgically of his association with IPTA Delhi and of the changes in theatre. Excerpts: A: IPTA began in 1942. The Delhi initiative started in 1977. An apolitical, patriotic and cultural group, IPTA has been raising its voice against the exploitation of economically and socially weaker sections of society for five decades through theatre, dance, musicals, choir group evenings, street performances and other cultural activities. IPTA plays have always been controversial and path-breaking in nature. The aim is to spread awareness and inspire people with help from likeminded organisations. The scripts we pick up are carefully chosen after judging their societal relevance. Every year we come up with at least one production and handle at least 20 to 25 shows. Q: How was IPTA then and now? A: All shows till date have been open houses and no government aid. Of the 100 plays with over 3,000 shows that IPTA Delhi has done hitherto, not a single ticket has been charged. Those who have performed for IPTA include Bhisham Sahni, Rais Mirza, Vishnu Prabhakar, Kaifi Azmi, Naseeruddin Shah, Om Puri, Pawan Malhota and Panjab Kapur. Most of them have joined films, but even the current actors working with us are quite promising and hardworking. Channels have improved for students who want to pursue theatre as their passion. Colleges like the National School of Drama and many others in Mumbai have come of age. Q: Has technology changed the dynamics of the theatre world? A: Yes. With technology, a scriptwriter’s imagination has multiplied manifold. What was unimaginable earlier is now presentable on the stage. Every theatre group now has an audio-visual support unit. Subtitling in plays is possible now. Various kinds of sets, production props, music and lighting techniques have come of age. Upcoming artists are benefiting the most as most are tech-savy. Q: Does the theatre industry face funds crunch? A: Theatre cannot earn anyone money. Problems have changed, but they very much exist. Theatre takes time to get popular. Unlike films, theatre does not even get adequate sponsors. Advertisements have stopped as Income-tax applies on them so the sponsors back out. An auditorium costs Rs 30,000 for a day today as against Rs 5000 earlier. Unlike established groups, struggling units have a tough time. Even if they manage to raise the money, the lack of popularity kills their confidence and if it fails to attract attention, they are almost finished. Q: What is the most challenging aspect of theatre? A: There is no scope for excuses and retakes. The phase “the show must go on” belongs to theatre. A show is generally never cancelled. Q: How do events like the Bharat Rang Mahatsov contribute to theatre? A: The event, now in its twelfth edition, has brought together 50 plays from across 13 countries of Asia this year. Different styles of theatre — comedy, tragedy, silent theatre — have come to one platform. Plays written by Vijay Tendulkar, Habib Tanvir, Naseeruddin Shah and Western writers like Anton Chekov and Shakespeare have been adapted and brought to life. Every play gives us something to learn and encourages new talent. Ideas, concepts and imagination grow when one comes out of his/her
cocoon. |
|
Profile He possesses a rich and sonorous voice and his vocalising is in perfect diction and clarity. Eighty-year-old Jasraj is a vibrant classical singer of India. His compositions are heard with enthusiasm by music lovers all over the world. Pandit Jasraj started to learn music at a very young age. His life history is very interesting indeed. At the tender age of three, he started exercising his vocal chords under the guidance of his father, Pandit Motiram. Unfortunately, his father expired when Jasraj was very young. Later, he received training from his elder brother, Pandit Maniram. Highly inspired by Begum Akhtar, he decided that he would become a singer in life. Moved by the soulful strains of the ghazal Dewana banana hai to diwana bana de sung by Begum, he began his musical journey which continues unabated. Through rigorous training to Jasraj, Pandit Maniram ensured that the family’s proud legacy was carried forward by his brother. Today the fact that it is preserved through ensuing trails is in itself a testimony to the sheer grit and determination that has gone into its preservation. And Jasraj, who has kept it alive to enthral and exalt our spirits today, is its voice, making sure that the future generations will imbibe its qualities and take it to greater heights. The standards Jasraj has set put a heavy responsibility on his disciples. What will make it possible for them to make the Mewati tradition thrive in the times to come is his own exemplary genius, his loving way of imparting knowledge and, more important, his blessings. As Jasraj once told V.P. Naik, the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra: “Sir, I can only claim that I could make four young girls and boys self-reliant. I assure you they will not be liability to the state”. Today that number has grown fourfold and Jasraj’s growing strength of disciples extends across Indian shores. A lot is heard about Mewati Gharana but the common man has little idea of what it stands for. For their benefit, the fountainhead of the Mewati Gharana, Ustad Ghagge Nazir Khan, belonged to the princely state of Jodhpur in the Mewar region. For this geographical reason the musical tradition that evolved under his influence is today called Mewati Gharana. This very tradition was passed on to Pandi Nathulal and Pandit Chammanlal (who died young). Pandit Nathuram passed it on to Pandit Motiram, his nephew, in the secrecy of dark jungles after the sun had set in. This unusual training lasted for seven years. Pandit Motiram, in turn, passed it on to his brother, Pandit Jyotiram, who later became a disciple of Ustad Rajjab Ali Khan and to his sons — Pandit Maniram and Pandit Pratap Narayan. Ironically, after a brief initiation into vocal music by his father, Jasraj opted for the tabla. This was merely a decision taken to create an additional means of livelihood to lighten the burden of family responsibilities that were thrust on him by the sudden demise of his father. To supply additional means of livelihood, Maniram took Jasraj as an accompanying table player. But at the age of 14, unhappy with the treatment meted to an accompanying artist, Jasraj vowed not to cut his hair until he had learned to sing. At that time, like saragi players, tabla players were looked down. In the course of time, Jasraj not only became an accomplished singer but won the Padma Vibhushan, the nation’s second highest civilian award. It is often said that great artists fail to pass on their art form to the next generation but Jasraj has a large student following and thus ensured longevity for his style of signing. In memory of his late father, he organises a music festival every year, called Pandit Motiram-Pandit Maniram Sangeet Samaroh in Hyderabad. This festival will complete 38th year this year. In 1962, Jasraj married Madhura, daughter of the legendary film director, V. Shantaram. The couple has a son, Sarang Dev, and a daughter, Durga Jasraj, TV
anchor. |
|
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
T
Akademi Ratna