The Indians – Portrait of a People

Sudhir Kakar & Katharina Kakar

Penguin Books, Published in 2007

What makes this diverse congregation, this desperate assembly of people into calling themselves Indians?  Our erstwhile colonialists would take some credit for constructing this identity by their geographical unification of this huge landmass into a nation, perhaps for the first time in our history.  Beyond the political constructs of ‘state’, ‘nation’ and the concomitant arousal of passions of ‘nationalism’, are there stray sociological strings which tie and knot our people to form a unique pattern and design?  Could we march further  from  the much touted ‘mozaic of cultures’ to discover one overwhelming design which units us all?  The larger and bigger question perhaps is, are we to understand our relationship to the territory we inhabit and the institutions of state in the western linear sense of something borne out of assuming another identity for the sake of establishing this bonding (a Leviathan which has come into existence for this purpose) or are there unique features which deviates or departs from the western model?

These were some of the questions which arise in our minds even before opening this book.  Sudhir and Katharina Kakar provide some answers to these questions.  In the opinion of the authors, the building blocks of Indianness are:  an ideology of family and other crucial relationships that derives from the institution of the joint family; a view of social relations profoundly influenced by the institution of caste; an image of the human body and bodily process that is based on the medical system of Ayurveda; and a cultural imagination teeming with shared myths and legends, especially from the epics Ramayana and Mahabharata, that underscore a ‘romantic’ vision of human life and a relativist, context-dependent way of thinking.

Young and modern Indians would finds references to joint family and caste relationships as crucial components of Indianness quite disquieting, but these two institutions still remain crucial factors in defining the personal identity of a large mass of Indians.  The authors do concede the fact that Indian identity has not remained a constant, fixed and unchanging through the march of history.  As they put it, Indic civilization has been in constant ferment through its encounters with Islam and European civilizations, but had not only that inherent capacity to absorb and assimilate these influences but be proud of such inheritance!

What makes our ‘family’ an inherent part of our selves even in modern times?  In the view of the authors, the institution of family has continued to discharge its function as a ‘fall back’ tool for Indians in times of need.  Such a continuous reliance on family also adversely reflects our lack of faith in the effectiveness of modern institutions of state.  In the absence of effective institutions of state, achievements of individuals are still seen as achievements of the family rather than that of the Institutions or of those individuals.

Caste is another social institution unique to India and is of enormous influence.  The Kakars hold that the organising principle of caste system is the notion of ‘pollution’ and ‘impurity’ and they cite Alan Dndes’ postulate about association of these notions with faeces, instilled by the Hindu cultures toilet training.  The Kakars go on to deny this association, but it is important considering the fact that such ‘impure’ jobs are still being performed by the so called ‘untouchables’.

Between the two, caste and family, which one pulls a modern Indian towards it more?  The authors note that for an increasing tribe of professions, civil servants, managers and others, it is easier to repudiate their caste than shed their responsibilities to their families, given the moral stigma attached to family obligations.  There is riveting discussion about the innate preference of a son in Indian families, discrimination built against daughters, their careful ‘nurturing’, the role of mother in-law in monitoring the functions of a daughter in-law in the new family and especially in preventing any kind of attachment and tenderness to develop between the son and the new entrant.  But by far the most fascinating discussion is about the ‘love’ versus ‘arranged’ marriage and why love marriages are perceived to be so upsetting to the psyche of an Indian.

Even with the express inhibition, if not prohibition against love marriage, why does ‘love’ hold such a fascination to the Indian mind?  The elaborate answer given by the authors need to reproduced in full:  “Love and the lyrical impulse of its narration are indeed universal, one of the few constants left in a world that makes a fetish of cultural relativism.  Erotic passion, with love’s tender discoveries, sudden torments and consuming desires, is one of the last bastions of our common humanity.  In India, as in most other cultures through history, the love story has never been a reflection but a subverter of the accepted mores prescribing the relations between the sexes.  The pleasure we take in this subversion is one of the many enduring fascinations of the love story which is a vehicle for the vicarious satisfaction of our hidden desires and obscure longings.  The love story, whether in movies or fiction, is the dream of capturing love’s freshness and spontaneity free of all social restrictions and internal inhibitions and of becoming one with the beloved while overwhelming the forces that would dampen desire and the urge to merge.”  Perhaps, the Kakars provide the direction which the fast-changing Indian world must traverse, if it is to find fulfilment.

It is difficult to agree with the authors’ view that a belief in the curative potential of Ayurveda holds any fascination for the Indian mind, considering the poor state of research efforts being put into this system of medicine and the inability of its practioners to build an effective cadre of medical professionals.  More than health, a fuller discussion on our food habits would have been useful considering the fact that our culinary practices exhibit more commonality.

The  greatest cliché about this country is our supposed ‘spiritualism’.  In contrast to other people, we are supposed to lead more spiritual lives and place more reliance on the non-worldly quotient than the crude obsession with materialist possession.  The discussion on religion and spiritual lives of Indians brings out the fact that we are as much prone to materialist longings as others.  One breed of this unholy nexus between  the spiritual and material is the ‘flexible Hindu’ who combines the opportunity presented by material benefits to explore other ‘spiritual byways’.  Such characters are aplenty and they hog the headlines in the newspapers for all the wrong reasons.

No discussion of Indianness would be complete without delving into the question of religious differences, especially Hindu-Muslim relationship, which has bedevilled the country for so long with disastrous consequences.  Quite unlike others, the authors    seem optimistic when they chart the futuristic course as one of recognition and tolerance of the differences – indeed benign indifference - between these two communities rather than evolving into a ‘composite culture’.

Have the authors left anything which has a bearing on Indianness?  One feature  which would have enriched this discussion is the fusion of technological innovations in the daily lives of Indians.  The easy adoptability of technological innovations by Indians, especially by people belonging to the lowest strata of society, needs a probe.  How technological changes have affected family lives, caste relationships, sexuality and even spiritual lives also need a detailed study.