The myth of a glass house
The onslaught of the so called ‘moral police’ seems like a new phenomenon. It’s never been so widespread. We had dress codes imposed in colleges; dance bars were shutdown; night clubs were invaded by policemen; and not to forget, the Khushboo controversy. All in just a year’s time!
“Our culture is in danger — it’s the western influence!” conservatives would say. Well, may be — but the western influence has been there since ages, in movies, music and fashion (R.D. Burman songs and cabarets by Helen). So probably there is another angle to it:
Families nowadays are nuclear, which has decreased the number of social constraints on the individual. With economic liberalization, youngsters now have more options in terms of jobs, and therefore enjoy greater financial independence. Moreover, unmarried youngsters, who live away from their families, tend to experiment a lot (live-in relationships are common these days). A cumulative effect of these factors is causing radical changes in the social structure. And this change is what makes conservative radicals nervous. They want to preserve culture. What bullshit!
Einstein had said “the only constant in life is change”. This philosophy is embodied in Nature itself. Going by the theory of evolution (my apologies to people of the book(s)), selection and reproduction are accompanied by crossover and mutation. While selection helps in getting the best out of existing alternatives, mutation(change) helps in exploring better alternatives – thus improving the overall race. This concept has been successfully applied in optimization applications in the form of Genetic Algorithms.
In short, resisting change would lead to stagnation or may be deterioration.
In the same light, cultural change is advantageous, and nowadays inevitable. So instead of adopting a negative attitude, these neo-conservative-radicals should highlight the positive aspects of traditions (analogous to selection in genetic terminology) to help make a better society. I wish Shiv Sena and DPI would understand this. *sigh*
(Still not bored of this garbage? Read on.)
However, as the conservative radicals tighten their grip over metros, Kolkata has somehow managed to maintain its liberal outlook. An Indian Express report elucidates:
In India’s suffocating metroscape, the once conservative capital of West Bengal is a breather. Behind its new towering malls and globalised facade, Buddhadev’s Kolkata is not as ruthless about public norms. This is the city where, in 2003, an organisation called LOVE (Lovers’ Organisation for Voluntary Exhibition) demanded hassle-free spaces for lovers. Rupak Manush, a member, says, ‘‘LOVE wants to build a love movement. We want a sex education love park in Kolkata, which will be free of bullying by the police.’’ The organisation even went to the extent of organising a ‘‘kiss protest’’ at a Kolkata Municipal Corporation park. Compare that to the uproar that Tamil Nadu’s former screen goddess Khushboo caused by airing her personal views on pre-marital sex last week. A political outfit called Tamil Protection Movement forced her to apologise in front of TV cameras.
Kissing and hugging are common during the annual Gay Pride March in Kolkata, the only city where such a march has been organised over the last three years. The weekend deadline for nightclubs is 2 am and 4 am with special permits. Intrusive policemen are still rare. Sumit Bhattacharya, a former member of the jazz band Orient Express, recently went back to a new, hip Kolkata. “Outside Someplace Else, the bar where we used to play, I saw drag queens waiting to enter,” he says. Item girls from Mumbai and occasionally even dancers from Dubai are regular weekend fixtures. Sometimes, press photographers are allowed to photograph dance sequences early in the evening, leaving the late night for the crowd.
Who knows – Kolkata’s days might be numbered as well.
Is our culture a glass house? Is it that fragile? History is testimony to the resilience of our culture; countless cultural invasions have taken place – our society has absorbed all of them. Our culture is not rigid, nor is it fragile. It would continue to absorb and evolve towards betterment. Though this process continues to be hindered by irrational resistance.
November 27, 2005 at 2:10 am
On one hand we have this
and on the other - we have so much skin-show in Bollywood movies and the stupid Remix videos.
Why aren’t we able to find a middle path?
November 28, 2005 at 6:40 am
its up to the individual, I someone does not want to party then they shouldn’t be forced to, if somoene wants to party their head off then they should not be banned. see a problem arises with smoking, there is somethingcalled secondhand smoke, there should be a special booth for smokers so that they can inhale their poison over and over again, but then again I am going off topic.
the thing is if someone wants to keep a culture fine, but then why force it on others? and why should a new pop culture be forced on an individual who wants to remain traditional?
ah if people want to show their skin then let them? who cares?
who has time nowadys to even stop to notice what their neighbour is wearing or not wearing for that matter?
one has to think long and hard when thinking about culture and decide do I want to hold on to this or progress?
its up to the individual.
does anyone of you actually read bollywood news or hollywood news?
so question, if an indian girl shows her skin , it is taboo but it an american girl like lets say jessica simpson in her video ‘these boots are made for walking’ shows her skin its alright?
the point is we have double standards in society today and there are still those gender rules. case and point: in the movie doom, it was a big deal for esha deol to show off her skin but did anyone notice that that guy dunno his name the villan appeared without a shirt for more than 50% of the movie? once again off topic.
okay this is too much to think on, back to some other form of wasting time
November 28, 2005 at 11:32 pm
Culture is a reflection of a collective consciousness and is forever evolving. Any kind of denial or denigration of it implies ignorance or naivete.
November 29, 2005 at 12:40 am
‘ collective consciousness’ = the brainwashed individuals of society????
November 29, 2005 at 1:43 am
@Id
Culture is a reflection of a collective consciousness and is forever evolving. Any kind of denial or denigration of it implies ignorance or naivete.
How very true. The problem comes when certain minority groups, having political clout, create impediments to this natural process of evolution. However, I am optimistic; given it’s a natural process, impediments won’t sustain for long.
November 29, 2005 at 9:03 pm
[…] Is our ‘great Indian culture’ a glass house that would be shattered at a slightest hint of Western ‘attack’? BD takes a look at the culture wars and moral policing that seems to be the mantra in today’s India. […]
December 1, 2005 at 4:17 am
Nice post. I agree completely regarding the attitude of Shiv Sena about holding hands and DPI regarding the Khusboo thing. We should strongly condemn such attitude, but never ban their right to protest. Otherwise we will be equally intolerant as them.
Fluidity of culture is a tricky issue. Usually by evolution we imply evovling to standards we deem fit. Where we clearly see the direction in which culture ought to be heading and have our own time frames reagarding the changes we want implemented. Also we look at evolution in a linear manner. But the variables are not that simple. Social darwinism is unpredictable business. It may not be linear but many a times cyclic. Initially there was a lot of resistance for love marriages. One would have thought linearly that our culture would evolve to a point where love marriages would be the norm. There was resistance and the Bollywood producers went home smiling with their Ek Duje Ke Liye style takes on the issue. But many years since, love marriages (unfortunately) never became the norm. Instead there evolved arranged love marriages whatever that means. I know of many cases where the person had a lot of love affairs and yet chose arranged marriage. So the pulls on evolution can be from various different directions rather than just forward and backward. I think its hard to expect conservative elements to bow so soon. Its not that they are not evolving they are just evolving at a lesser pace than people like us.
Yes I know that the issue here is them trying to impose their views on others. But ask them the same question and they will accuse us of doing the same. Besides another point to consider is how to stop this menace? It is no use arguing that they should not protest. So long as there is political capital to be made out of the issue these guys will do it. Besides just the fact that they do it for political gains means that there is a significant proportion of the population that supports their moves and vote for them for their stances. And in a democracy they have every right to protest. We cannot take away their right. So long as they protest without disrupting any laws, you can me can only rant on blogs. If anybody has any creative ideas as to how to get around this situation without taking away anybody’s right to protest lets bring them forth here.
December 1, 2005 at 5:27 am
@Chetan
I appreciate your comment. Given the constraint of time, I’ve managed to muster a few responses to your views.
We should strongly condemn such attitude, but never ban their right to protest. Otherwise we will be equally intolerant as them.
Definitely. Everybody should have the right to protest, provided they are not intrusive and within the limits of the constitution. Most of the moral policing incidents that I linked to, were enforced by authorities themselves. My argument is: society should be allowed to self regulate, within the limits of the constitution. Government should have no role in moral policing.
So the pulls on evolution can be from various different directions rather than just forward and backward. I think its hard to expect conservative elements to bow so soon. Its not that they are not evolving they are just evolving at a lesser pace than people like us.
The pace doesn’t matter I guess. It’s just that minority groups with political clout shouldn’t create impediments by taking law on to their own hands.
Yes I know that the issue here is them trying to impose their views on others. But ask them the same question and they will accuse us of doing the same.
Well the way they impose their views: Vandalizing, throwing rotten tomatoes and chappals (Khushboo episode). I’m sure they never received the same treatment.
Besides just the fact that they do it for political gains means that there is a significant proportion of the population that supports their moves and vote for them for their stances.
I’m yet to ascertain whether they get votes for these activities. We political parties get their votes from their votebanks
And in a democracy they have every right to protest.
again within limits of constitution.
We cannot take away their right.
It’s not we, but they who are taking away our rights.
So long as they protest without disrupting any laws, you can me can only rant on blogs.
There is no need to rant if they don’t disrupt any laws. People would lead their lives without harassment, and accept or reject change according to their own will.
If anybody has any creative ideas as to how to get around this situation without taking away anybody’s right to protest lets bring them forth here.
A good idea would be separation of government from the matters of moral policing, and strict imposition of law and order in order to curtail the activities of these radical groups.
December 1, 2005 at 9:40 am
Thanks for the time and the well considered response. As I said I am completely in your camp. So even if you had shredded each of my argument to bits I would still have been smiling as it would have served my purpsose.
The vote bank issue is much more complex than what you make out to be and so is the problem of why they behave the way they do. In India castes and class are literally equivalent. Howmuchever we might find it despicable to talk about caste in the present time it still is a reality that the upper castes belong to the upper class and the lower castes are generally confined to the lower class. Now look at the socio-economic class background of the protestors. Most of them are poor or the lower middle class youth. You wont ever find someone from upper classes indulging in something like that inspite of many of them harbouring antiquated views. There may be many in the upper classes who may sympathise with the protestors but wont ever dirty their hands by taking an active part in the protest.
There is a sociological reason for the way members of each class express themselves. Part of it has to do with the job environment. A blue collar worker is immersed in physical labour throughout and finds an outlet for his energies through physical activities, in contrast with a white collar worker whose energies are spent in intellectual pursuits. So while protesting a white collar worker will always you intellectual arguments while a lower class will settle in with fisticuffs. This conditioning plays a major role in class responses to problems. If you manage to bring people out of poverty they wont behave that way. This manner of protest, which borders of the violent many a times, is not specific to India. The lower classes protest that way in every country. Look at the riots in France or for example; the 1992 LA riots in America. Both of them involve downtrodden caste (race in their case) who belong to the lower classes. So the manner of their protest should be looked differently than their reasons for it. The manner of protest cannot be solved until you bring all the people out of poverty.
Now consider that the parties who are involved in the Khushboo case. Pattali Makkal Katchi PMK (a caste based party of the Vaniyars an OBC caste) and the Dalit Panthers of India (another caste based party representing the lowest in the caste ladder the Dalits) Upper classes never feel threatened by changing social norms. That is because their sense of security doesn’t stem from them. For the upper classes their power, money and status are the security factors not culture. So an upper class person will protest in his own way if taxes are increased or housing rates go up or there is recession etc. All these security factors are absent in case of the lower classes. They do not have tangibles like house/cars etc. to feel secure. So they prefer to find security in the intangibles like culture, religion, historical figures etc. And they feel extremely insecure about any change in them. It is like taking away the only constant in their lives since all else (money, power and status is fickle as far as they are concerned) It’s naive to expect them to subscribe to civilized norms of upper classes when all they have learnt is by interacting the hard way on the streets.
Look at the Hindutva movement. There is a stark difference between the cadres of VHP (mostly OBC and from the lower middle classes) who are the foot soldiers involved in most disruptive morality protests and the cadres of RSS (mostly Brahmins and upper castes and white collared intellectuals) VHP has a brash inarticulate cadre who can create nuisance. They are the implementers, while policy formulation occurs at the RSS level. It is the intellectuals (if you can call them that) of the RSS who frame the policy about stance to be taken on moral issues. However they themselves never dirty their hands. The RSS swayamsevaks who are all white collared rarely if ever participate in a violent protest. But VHP and Bajrang Dal leaders do. This is of course much more complex than the way I have expressed it here. So my contention is that vocal support for such issues always will translate into vote irrespective of or rather precisely because of vote bank politics.
But for the constraints of space and time I can’t dwell into sociology any deeper. Suffice to say libertarian solutions such as abdication of government from moral policing wont solve the innate and complex problems of social behaviour and class dynamics. In fact without any enforcement, the insecurity of the lower classes may translate into even more violent forms.
Before I sign off let me apologise to anybody who might have been offended by the caste references here. I was merely pointing out the facts for the sake of analysis and also there was generalisation which one has to resort to in analysing issues from sociological perspectives. This was uncomfortable for me as well. So please bear with me on that. Thanks for allowing me to discuss bd. I hope to visit your blog often and give you a chance to shred my arguments. You may respond at your own convenience. No hurry.
December 1, 2005 at 8:00 pm
@Chetan
Interesting perspectives Chetan! and quite lucidly expressed. I don’t think it’d be fair to give a quick response to your comment. I’ll wait for others to dwell on this issue till the weekend, then I’ll add my views.
And regarding “Shredding arguments”
, Actually I thought it’s better to show the specific context; It’s easier for me to respond that way 
. Although I am aware that “whole is greater than the sum” 
Sorry about the “shredding” though 
December 2, 2005 at 4:37 am
there is black , and then white and according to this many shades of grey .oh bother
December 2, 2005 at 5:45 am
culture is not stagnant, it is ever evolving.
and when ever we have failed to keep pace with the times, or tried pushing relevant issues under the carpet, it has backfired taking calamitous forms.
World AIDS day was just here, high time we wake up to the reality.
Btw,if all the enerygy, the self appointed moral police puts into policing, they ‘de put into educating people and figting social plagues, we wld be living in a different India.