Defining the Nation and Interpreting History

        Defining India and its history is something like the definition given by an Irishman when he was asked what the word “trousers” would be- singular or plural. Loud and clear came forth the answer, ‘It is singular at the top and plural at the bottom!’[1] The self-understanding of India and its history is undergoing today precisely this experience of singular and plural. But unfortunately, instead of arriving at a balance between unity and plurality, the developments at the political, cultural, religious, economic and ideological levels are tilting towards a singular view of India. Consequently, what is projected as the history of India is a history that presents itself, in fact, as a view from the top, unmindful of the plurality and diversity at the bottom.

Today, we, as a nation, are involved in a struggle for the past. This struggle in great part also defines our different conceptions about the nation. Even more, it portrays the conflicts of power among different segments of the people.

The communities comprising the nation may have different backgrounds and origins. But the point is that today they are a nation together, and none of them could be excluded. It is in their mutuality and interchange that they produce meaning and significance of the nation. When the attempt is made to define the nation and its history in majoritarian terms, it raises the critical question: Whose Nation? Whose History? Faced with the ideology of majoritarianism, marginal groups like the Dalits and tribals raise critical questions, so too other linguistic and ethnic groups.

What we have attempted then is to shift the attention to the everyday life of the people and to break out of the frame of reference in which the past is created to serve a political, social and cultural agenda of domination. The interaction and transactions of the past in which identities were not rigidly defined and the borders were open and flexible. Further, the interactions among communities were never solely reduced to religious identity; instead there were many layers of identities with which to relate and interact. Moreover, there were many regional and local narratives and histories. These have been an integral part of the life of the marginal people like the Dalits and the tribals. A reconstruction of the past taking into account all these aspects, is the necessary condition for the diverse groups to own the nation and its history. The reconstruction of history will go a long way to remove the alienation and exclusion being practiced today in the name of majoritarianism.

The everyday approach to the history of nation serves also to draw out the ethical implications of historiography. Besides respecting professional propriety in historical enquiry, which is an ethical demand, the reconstruction of the past should have as its interpretative key the building up of communities. The social and communitarian responsibility on the part of historians is an ethical obligation as well. Consequently, the manipulation and exploitation of history for communal conflicts is an unethical practice. Any imputation of guilt and accusation drawn from an ideological reading of the past and levelled against particular groups or communities is not ethically justifiable but politically dangerous.

Finally, we are at the moment of re-defining both the nation and its history. We cannot allow the nation and history to be hijacked by any one single group, community or religion. To create a nation of communities is a long-term project which requires new criteria and new terms of reference.   

---

[1] The anecdote is from A.K. Ramanujan Cf. Sunil Khilnani, The Idea of India, Penguin Books, Delhi, 1999, p.6

This Article Is A Part Of The Utopia Series. Utopia is not an unreal figment of imagination, or a chimera we chase in futility. It is the projection of another real order of things, a different set of values, and a new shape of the world and society. The suppressed identities, women, minorities, Dalits and tribals and all those who are marginalised in any way project their utopias. Utopia leaps out from the shoulder of may struggles to glimpse and experience the new and the different. Critique is indissociable from utopias.

Collected & Contributed By- 

Agriti Shrivastava,

Article Analyst, FSA

CNLU, Patna

Posted in: Blogging,Utopia Series,YOUR VOICE