By P Niroop,
The recent unsavory episode of turning out a Khasi women dressed in her traditional attire of ‘Jainsem’ from an elite club of India’s capital, speaks volumes of the lack of ‘political civility’ and ‘cultural sensitivity’ on the part of the Management of those involved, especially, in the hospitality sector, to the aspect of promoting a ‘Composite Culture’ for National Unity, which the Constitution of India embodies, as every Citizen’s Fundamental Duty under Art. 51A (f) of Part IV-A “to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture”.
India is the envy of the world for its rich diversity, starting with its geographical features and percolating down to its culture, which gets reflected in it’s peoples’ dress, food, language etc., and dress of course is a definitive aspect of any ‘distinct culture’. One can easily identity a Khasi woman, just by her Jainsem, which hangs over her shoulders. In fact, people in Shillong recall Ms Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister coming to Meghalaya to inaugurate their new State in 1972, dressed in their traditional ‘Jainsem’ and uttered the following words, which are etched in public memory and which goes to show her ‘political sensitivity’ as embodied in her ‘integral vision of India’. (From P.R. Kyndiah’s book ‘No Hill State, No Rest’).
“India is a tapestry where many colours exist side by side to make a beautiful pattern. It is not a melting pot where the ingredients are compelled to lose their identity”
She again stated, in very clear terms about ‘Indianness’ that, “Our great pride is that Indian culture is a composite one, born of many strands, and that, in the process of assimilating or influencing, it has been India’s special genius to allow each component to retain its distinctive flavour and character”.
And she further goes on describe as to ‘who is an Indian’ by stating “There is no pure unalloyed Indian. He can be a Dravidian, an Aryan, an Australoid or a Mongoloid. His hair may be fair or dark, straight or wavy, the skin very fair or wheat-coloured, beige, brown or ebony. For, India has always accepted races, tribes, ways of thought and life, without demanding from them conformity which would negate individuality, yet stamping on them the unmistakable mark of Indianness”.
That was, a unique ‘gesture of culture’ on her part. But, we as a nation seem to be moving away from the ideal and goal of evolving the concept of a ‘multicultural citizenship’ in the constitutional context of ‘composite culture’.
To put it more comprehensively, in the words of the National Poet and Nobel-laureate, Rabindranath Tagore, in his famous “Gitanjali”, which encapsulates the Indian ideal of ‘unity in diversity’.
“…………….a land uncrippled/ Whole, uncramped by any confining wall/ A place where reason’s flow is not soaked up/By barren desert-sands of bigotry/ Where niggling rules and dogmas do not sap/ Its vigour, but joy in work and thought has mastery/ With pitiless blows/ Father, from your hand/ Bring India to that heaven; Wake this land.” (This is an English, poetic rendering of the original Bengali by William Radice).
The unfortunate event that took place at the Delhi Golf Club, is only a symptom, of an underlying malady of ‘insensitivity to national unity’ though, on the surface, it may seem to be a stray incident, which happened to an unfortunate individual. That is not the case, and in fact, it is a question of collective rights of minorities – be they religious, cultural or indigenous. In the present case, it is question of the rights of the indigenous people of Meghalaya, a State which is predominantly tribal, having its own unique cultural traits as reflected in their dress, food, language and ways of being.
In the recent past, one has witnessed loud protests especially from the North-Eastern States, against the Central Government’s ban on sale of cattle for slaughter, as a move to impose on the eating habits on the people, in the meat eating regions, or for that matter, the imposition of Bengali as a compulsory language in the schools, in the predominantly Gorkhali/Nepali speaking areas in the State of West Bengal, leading to a large-scale agitation, in and around the Darjeeling Hills.
The larger question before the civil society and the nation, is how to harmonize the existing concept of ‘composite culture’ as it was understood at the time of the making of the Indian Constitution, to mean a common culture, which may be singular, unified and homogenous, an idea that is at the root of the concept of a ‘nation-state’, with the contemporary concept of a ‘multicultural citizenship’.
There is a need to distinguish that a ‘shared culture’ need not be unified and homogenous always, as it could also be composite, internally diversified and yet multi-culturally constituted, so as to be in tune with the pluralist character of Indian society, and also in step with the contemporary philosophy of ‘multi-culturalism’ across the World, in modern times of globalization, rapid technological advancement and extensive international migration.
In fact, the whole world seems to be moving toward multi-culturalism and India is a good example of a ‘multi-cultural society’ striving toward a Composite Culture, which is a collective creation of major Indian communities be they Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Sikh or indigenous elements.
The starting point for inculcating this concept of ‘multicultural citizenship’ within the broader constitutional theme of ‘composite culture’ is to initiate a ‘inter-cultural dialogue’ between the various regions of India, in order to celebrate its rich cultural diversity through a ‘dialogue among cultures’. The other practical aspect, that can be taken up for immediate implementation, is for the Government of India, to come up with a model ‘code of conduct’, to be displayed and implemented by all national institutions, be they public or private, for inculcating tolerance and imbibing the principle of ‘multi-cultural citizenship’ failing which, we are doomed to slide into a ‘de-civilized society’, which India can ill-afford with its rich civilizational resources and a repertoire of cultures.
Before I end, let me quote a couple of memorable lines from Minoo Masani’s book “Our India”, which after foreseeing a great future for it, as early as 1940/1953, ends on the following note:
“We are proud of our country and we want it to be just a little proud of us”.
To add to this, it is the salutary warning that before we embark enthusiastically on to the slogan “Make in India” there is a dire need to “Make India” in the first place. India is a great culture and civilization but nevertheless a ‘nation in the making’ in the modern sense of the term.
(The writers is Advocate, Supreme Court of India & former Additional Advocate-General, Meghalaya)