By Collin Wanñiang
Whatever term we give to our present-day culture – modern or post-modern, there is a paradigm shift, a re-interpretation of values, a re-defining of our goals, and updating everything lest we become obsolete. We update our computers to protect them from virus attacks. But viruses are created! Sharing of files from one device to another is said to generate viruses as the files from one device may not be recognised in another. Apple Computers, iPads, iPods, iPhones are said to be immune to virus attacks. Why such a monopolised immunity? Because Apple gadgets are exclusively for Apple; others are incompatible with them. Thus viruses cannot find their ways as the Apple system is armoured with a technology to automatically reject whatever is detected as incompatible.
Is there a culture today in our planet which dares to boast of being pristine and is not affected or influenced by others? If there is one, such a culture will be considered obsolete, irrelevant, uncute, barbarous etc. Today we speak of a “global village”. In the real sense of the word, inhabitants of a village belong to the same culture, same language et al. If our globe is a village, then there should be one culture, one language, et al. But whose culture and whose language? Undoubtedly, that of the powerful nations; of the majority. The insignificant nations or tribes will have to “copy and paste” from the powerful ones in order to cope up and be considered up to date.
On visiting a Church in the USA, I enquired if there was an Assistant Pastor. I was told, “There is no Assistant here; we only have a Co-Pastor”. Americans are good at using what they call “polite, undiscriminating terms”. They refer to the native indigenous Indian tribes as, “First Nations”. Terms such as “handicapped”, “blind”, “mute”, “lame”, “deaf” are courteously replaced with “differently abled persons”. Words are usually the external expressions of what the inner self thinks and feels. “It’s only words, and words are all I have to take your heart away” says the Boyzone song. However, there are cases where people say: “Oh I don’t really mean it. It’s just a slip of the tongue”. So, are the newly coined sugar-coated words meant for honouring and respecting the others, just a slip of tongue? Words may reflect a “copy-paste” culture if they are uttered just because everybody is using them. It’s high time to educate oneself on the value of words for as the English Alphabet consists of 26 letters where the sum total of the alphabets in sequence is 100; so too its attitude that makes the words really words. From a positive attitude flow positive words and deeds.
The Germans call their country “Vaterland” (Fatherland) while many others would say, “Motherland”. On enquiring about this difference from German professors the answer I got was that Germans see their land as an inheritance from their forefathers or patriarchs – thus “Vaterland”, while the English language uses the term “Motherland” because the Queen is the Head in England. India defies both. It is not merely a “copy-paste” of England that we call our country “Mother India”. There are deep-rooted seeds in our own Indian tradition and culture personalising our land as a mother. In this country where women are still oppressed there is ironically a deep sense of intimate bond in motherhood to the extent that the Indian Independence Movement instilled in the minds of many Indians the notion of, “Bharat Mata”. Our National Song, “Vande Mataram” invites every Indian to pay respect to “Mother India” as a patriotic duty. It is unthinkable in the Khasi language to address the Hynñiewtrep Land or Meghalaya State in the masculine gender. Thus, the gender determiner for land is “Ka” and not “U” – “Ka Ri HynñiewTrep”, “Ka Jylla Meghalaya”, “Ka Ri baieit ki blei”(the Land whom the gods love), “Ka Ri i Pa i Mei” (the Land of our Father and Mother), “Ka Ri b’la kyrkhu U Blei” (the Land blessed by God).
It’s a global tendency today for the older generation to bemoan the plight of the younger generation. Did the past generation bemoan today’s older generation? George H.W.Bush once said, “You are our living link to the past. Tell your grandchildren the story of the struggles waged, at home and abroad. Of sacrifices made for freedom’s sake. And tell them your own story as well – because everybody has a story to tell.”
Traditionally, the ancient Indian system of education was the “Guru-Shishya” lineage, or Parampara. In this system a student or disciple (Shishya) has to be with the teacher (Guru) who was regarded as a mentor of the student’s character so that knowledge is transmitted from the Guru to the Shishya. In fact, this is not only in the traditional Indian culture and religions such as Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism but also in the Judeo-Christian tradition of the time of Jesus – “And he appointed twelve, that they might be with him, and that he might send them forth to spread the Good News.” (MK. 3:14). Though time has changed, the notion of being a teacher is still the same – a teacher is a Guru who draws the best out of a Shishya. Misinterpretation of a student as an empty pot to be filled with the knowledge of a teacher is a fallacy. The more appropriate notion would be that a student is a potential teacher in the making. The Gospels also says, “A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher. (Lk.6:40).
However, something went wrong in between what we have “copied and pasted.”Its what Gandhiji would say, “People have no idea what education truly is. We assess the value of education in the same manner as we assess the value of land or of shares in the stock-exchange market. We want to provide only such education as would enable the student to earn more. We hardly give any thought to the improvement of the character of the educated. The girls, we say, do not have to earn; so why should they be educated? As long as such ideas persist there is no hope of our ever knowing the true value of education.”
I believe that whatever education a child receives in school is only an aid to what was initiated and moulded in a home. Without a home, tireless external efforts and attempts to mould a child may prove futile. Alex Haley said: “In all of us there is a hunger, marrow deep, to know our heritage – to know who we are and where we came from. Without this enriching knowledge, there is a hollow yearning. No matter what our attainments in life, there is still a vacuum, an emptiness, and the most disquieting loneliness. In every conceivable manner, family is the link to our past; the bridge to our future.” Moreover, inborn traits come to play their role in a person’s upbringing: A laboratory observation of three infants born at the same time – a nurse caresses all the three, but the reactions of the three infants vary completely from one another. The first responds with a sign of joy, the second cries and the third seems not to bother at all.
A home is not a house while a house can be a home. Home does not merely mean a nuclear family comprising of father, mother and children. It is the larger relationship with the kith and kin. Commenting on the present-day American young people, Pearl S. Buck said: “The lack of emotional security of our American young people is due, I believe, to their isolation from the larger family unit. No two people – no mere father and mother – as I have often said, are enough to provide emotional security for a child. He needs to feel himself one in a world of kinfolk, persons of variety in age and temperament, and yet allied to himself by an indissoluble bond which he cannot break if he could, for nature has welded him into it before he was born.”
Minor cultures in our globe fear the threat of extinction but major cultures are bored with their own and strive to discover new cultures; minor cultures feel outdated and strive to copy-paste from the major cultures. Sadly, today the idea of culture is only in the mere display of dresses and dances. Some of the Khasi visionaries foresaw doomsday ahead if the matrilineal system continues. Others invite a return to “Ka Juk Kñi” (era of an uncle) to assert the “Ka jinglongkyrpang ka Jaitbynriew” (Uniqueness of the tribe). There are genuine reasons for both the parties to defend and propagate their views. So while the former sees nothing wrong in copy-pasting the good things from other cultures; the latter thinks that dilutes the uniqueness of “Ka Jaitbynriew” (tribe). The Khasi tribe now stands at a critical juncture when moving in either direction involves a process of change. The whole universe is constantly changing, as there is nothing permanent in our universe. Winston Churchill says, “there is nothing wrong with change, if it is in the right direction.” But fear accompanies that leap into the unknown. As Marilyn Ferguson says, “It’s not so much that we’re afraid of change or so in love with the old ways, but it’s that place in between that we fear… It’s like being between trapezes. There’s nothing to hold on to.” Charles Darwin observes, “It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.”