Many years ago, at an Indonesian evening, I met a young man called Krishna Mohammed. An Indian said to him, “You can be Krishna or Mohammed, not both.” His answer was beautiful: “Krishna is my culture, Mohammed is my religion.” He explained that many Indonesians were practicing Muslims, but cultural Hindus. Just as Indian Muslims chose Arabic and Persian names unconnected with Islam, Indonesians chose Sanskrit names, as well as drama, dance, puppet shows and the Ramayana, all of Hindu origin and unconnected with their religion, but connected with their culture.
With the approaching elections, politicians have been spouting wisdom about culture, language and identity. Culture is a state of material development: iron age culture and so on. Today we are in the age of information technology. Jallikattu, for example, originated in the Neolithic age, when men rounded up bulls, which came with a herd of cows. Cattle provided milk, meat and skin, and bullocks pulled the plough and the cart. We use tractors, cars and aircraft today.
Culture is the state of human development, manners and customs of a given people at a given time in their history. Accomplishments in fine arts, literature and religion are an indication of high culture. The floats and dances on Republic Day reflect culture. Behaviour is also culture. When Donald Trump left the White House without welcoming Joe Biden, he was uncultured. When Biden waited for Trump’s departure before leaving for his inauguration, he was cultured.
Identity is an indication of who you are. At the basic level, the passport or ID card affirms one’s identity. At a mundane level, gender, family, caste, community, appearance and characteristics define identity. At a sublime level, behaviour, preferences, ability, accomplishments and faith define identity. Identity can evolve or change over time. So where does language come into the reckoning? Language is the means used by a particular country or community of structured words conveyed by speech, writing or gesture. Without a common language, communication would be impossible.
But language is not a symbol of identity. MGR was born in Sri Lanka in a Malayalam-speaking family from Palakkad, Kerala. But he became chief minister of Tamil Nadu. Actor Rajinikanth was born in a Marathi-speaking family in Bengaluru, Karnataka. But he is a Tamil icon. Both gentlemen claim to be ‘pure Tamils’ and are accepted. When politicians claim an identity based on language, they are denying other and changing identities. Karnataka consists of speakers of Kannada, Kodagu, Tulu, Konkani, Marathi, Byari and tribal dialects.
Yet a resident of Karnataka is called Kannadiga, whatever his language. The term Dravida (of Sanskrit origin) should encompass all South Indian linguistic groups, but does not, having been appropriated by Tamil political parties. As a result, many schools in Andhra Pradesh teach children that Telugu is derived from Sanskrit. Politicians spout unsubstantiated definitions of culture, identity and language. Culture is a people’s decision, a people’s choice. Identity is mutable and variable. Language has erroneously become the yardstick for identity and culture.
People from multilingual families or families with transferable jobs cannot be identified by a single language. I belong to a family that has members from several countries and Indian states. Each child has a different ‘mother tongue’, which becomes irrelevant as we all communicate in English, our common language that is no longer foreign. Chauvinism has no place in a new India and in a global society. Children must learn the local, national and many other languages in order to communicate, not because it is their ‘mother tongue’.
The emerging trend of neo-liberal driven cultural appropriation poses serious public concern. Indian politicians are malleable, with the lure of power justifying everything. But the support of liberals is worrying, for they should be a bulwark against extremism. With the approaching elections, caste, culture, language and identity, all generally transactional, are hardened. Be it West Bengal, where Mamata Banerjee rallies against the national appropriation of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, or Tamil Nadu, where Rahul Gandhi claims to have a “blood relationship” with the state (whatever that means), politicians will say and do anything to goad people into rejecting the ‘other’, so that they may come to power. These divisions fed to a gullible people cause social havoc.
Immutable caste-based identities are India’s tragedy. People are exhorted to vote for their caste leaders. When I was growing up in Bombay in the 1950s and 60s, my classmates and I never knew each other’s caste or creed. Unfortunately, today’s schools are required by state governments to document the ‘mother tongue’, religion and caste of every student. Our schools never asked for this information till, a few years ago, a letter from the Director of School Education said such information must be collected.
I will never forget two Scheduled Caste couples who were furious because, as they said, they had chosen our school for their children since nobody knew each other’s caste. Educated parents don’t want to give such information, but governments insist on this. Parents who want caste-based concessions can provide the necessary papers. Why should the rest be forced to do so? We are vitiating society by insisting on defined identities. If we want a modern, developed India, we must discard outdated pinpointing and subsume ourselves in a pan-Indian identity. The rest is a matter of choice.
Nanditha Krishna
Historian, environmentalist and writer based in Chennai
(The author also runs many schools and a college) (nankrishna18@gmail.com)