Introduction:
Set in the backdrop of the Bodo
society, Janil Kr. Brahma and Katindra Swargiary’s short stories “Dumphao’s
Phitha” and “Hongla Pondit” respectively reflect the aspects of nationalistic
strife undertaken by the Bodo people to assert their ethnic identity. In both
the stories it is projected that Bodo people seek to stabilize their ethnic
identity in terms of the rhetoric of difference. This rhetoric of difference
explicitly points to conscious cultural practices—rituals, customs, names—which
are used not only to assert the Bodo identity but also its discernible
difference from other ethnic groups for both political and cultural cause. The
implicit questions that arouse from the stories are—is ethnic identity entirely
based on the rhetoric of difference? Is it not possible to retain the
difference without being hostile to other ethnic groups in particular and to
the idea of Assamese in general? The Bodo nationalism seeks to justify that it
is the rhetoric of difference that aids in structuring their ethnic identity.
With linguistic and cultural differences the Bodos strive to differentiate
themselves so as to preserve their identity. Indeed, for them it is a political
as well as cultural necessity. These aspects are sought to demonstrate in this
paper.
Janil Kr. Brahma and Katindra
Swargiary’s short stories “Dumphao’s Phitha” and “Hongla Pondit” respectively
reflect the Bodo consciousness of their origin, history and culture. In “Hongla
Pondit” through the attitude of Navajyoti or Irakdao it becomes evident that
the Bodos regard Assam as
their homeland and claim with the weight of historical affirmation as the
original inhabitants of Assam.
But the irony is that they do not call themselves Assamese. This becomes evident
from Navajyoti’s changing of name to Irakdao. On the other hand, the story
“Dumphao’s Phitha” shows the resurgent Bodo ethnicity in its political
dimension. Opposed to assimilate or homogenize themselves under the umbrella
term of ‘Assamese’ the Bodos endeavour to recognize their difference that will,
as desired, establish their ethnic identity. This paper is an attempt to
address these issues.
Ethnicity and the Rhetoric of Difference: A Reading of Janil Kumar Brahma’s “Dumphao’s Phitha” and Katindra Swargiary’s “Hongla Pandit.”
The central theme in Bodo cultural politics today is to
repudiate the process of unequal assimilation into Assamese subnational
formation and to seek differentiation from, and equality with, the ethnic
Assamese. (Baruah, 2001:183)
The relationship of an ethnic tribe to the state of Assam
has been a problematic one for the Bodos because of the surpassing importance
in the ideology of the values of freedom, equality and the autonomy of the
tribe. In these circumstances the questions, ‘Who are we?’ and ‘Where do we
belong?’ become inevitable. Set in the backdrop of the Bodo society, Janil Kr.
Brahma and Katindra Swargiary’s short stories “Dumphao’s Phitha” and “Hongla
Pandit” respectively deal with these questions and reflect the aspects of
nationalistic strife undertaken by the Bodo people to assert their ethnic
identity. My attempt in this paper is to project how in both the stories Bodo
people seek to stabilize their ethnic identity in terms of the rhetoric of
difference. This rhetoric of difference explicitly points to conscious cultural
practices— rituals, customs, names— which are used not only to assert the Bodo
identity but also its discernible differences from other ethnic groups for both
political and cultural causes. A sense of uncertainty regarding their future
identity and existence, confused by the prevalent nationalist discourses and
frightened by the prospect of being submerged in the Assamese hegemony the
Bodos in Assam
faced an ethnic crisis and as such they preferred a confrontationist path in
order to establish their ethnic identity. Indeed, for them it is a political as
well as cultural necessity.
“Dumphao’s Phitha” and “Hongla Pandit” reflect the Bodo
consciousness: their origin, history and culture. In Janil Kr. Brahma’s
“Dumphao’s Phitha” Somen Master,
Dumphao’s husband is projected as a common man whose job as a school teacher is
yet not permanent “my job is also not yet permanent. One cannot get a job when
one wants it!” (Brahma, p 22), but is devoted to work for the upliftment of his
community. This is evident in the following statement:
But what have I given to the
community? You have seen Dumphao, how nowadays everyone wants their community
to prosper. All communities are progressing. Only we Bodos are lagging behind.
Will our community survive if we sit back and say we are poor? You are a
literate woman. If all of us, you and I, do not do anything to uplift our
community a little, who will do it Dumphao? (Brahma, p 22)
Somen’s statement projects his growing ethnic consciousness
and a call to the Bodo community to work progressively for affirming their Bodo
identity. Their marginal position serves as the battle ground for reclaiming
their ethnic identity. Moreover, Somen’s urge to work for the upliftment of the
Bodo community in particular acts as a means of resistance to the grand
Assamese discourse. Opposed to assimilate or homogenize themselves under the
umbrella term of ‘Assamese’ the Bodos endeavour to recognize their difference
in order to establish their ethnic identity.
Inspired by her husband’s words, Dumphao makes up her mind to
assist her husband in every step of life. With this objective she sets out to
sell phithas (rice cake) in the Samthaibari market. If women from other
communities could thrive trading in items like betel nut and tea, why can’t the
Bodo women? I am also human, thought Dumphao. Thus, Dumphao set forth to do
just as she had thought. (Brahma, p 22)
This knowledge of the position of the ‘other’ is crucial in
determining one’s subjectivity. Opposed to the theory of assimilation the Bodos
regard the Assamese as their ‘other’. However, this opposition amongst the
Bodos has been the result of the oppression to which they have been subjected
to throughout history being the original natives of Assam. They have been the victims
of land alienation, poverty, severe unemployment, economic exploitation and
cultural and political oppression in Assam. Monirul Hussain in his essay
“Tribal Question in Assam”
states:
There are also
numerous cases of land alienation from tribals in which the state government
itself was involved. In a memorandum submitted to the president of India, the
Plains Tribals Council of Assam (PTCA) specified several cases in which state
government agencies were involved in depriving tribals of their land in the tribal belts to accommodate non-
tribals. (Hussain, 1992: 1049)
Being subjected to state oppression, deprivation and
discrimination the Bodos become homeless in their own homeland and as such seek
to regard Assamese as the ‘other.’
They, in turn, started articulating their identity to gain political
power and to overcome their socio-economic backwardness and oppression.
One of the most essential grounds by which the Bodos maintain
their rhetoric of difference from Assamese subnationalism is through language.
Sonam Babu, a youth leader in “Dumphao’s Phitha” raises a proposal to set up a
Martyr’s Tomb in Samthaibari Market commemorating the leaders who sacrificed
their lives in the Roman Script Movement. It is noteworthy that in 1974, a movement demanding the
introduction of the Roman script for the Bodo language was launched by the BSS
(Bodo Sahitya Sabha) with the active support of the ABSU (All Bodo Students’
Union). The Bodo leaders of that time felt that the Roman script was easier and
more susceptible to the peculiar phonetic sounds of the Bodo language. But the
government of Assam
opposed the demand and the Script Movement turned violent resulting in police
action against the agitators. Jadav Pegu states:
More than
fifteen Bodos had to lay down their lives during the course of their agitation.
In the end, there were no gainers: the Bodos discarded the Assamese script and
the Government accepted the compromise option of allowing the Devanagiri
instead of Roman script for the Bodo language…The Bodo language and literature
could not develop satisfactorily due to this long drawn out struggle to find
the right and widely accepted script. (Pegu, p 89)
Dumphao delivers a sum of rupees five thousand to Sonam Babu
for the noble cause of erecting a permanent Martyr’s Tomb made of marble in
honour of the leaders who sacrificed their lives for the “Bodo cause” (Brahma, p
24). Three months later when the work of the tomb has been completed a meeting
is organized with a view to inaugurating the tomb. Somen Master, who is also a
devout social activist, is invited to inaugurate the Martyr’s Tomb. Dumphao
accompanies her husband to the meeting. After felicitating the invited guests
with traditional Aronai, Sonam Babu delivers a speech in which he formally
introduces the guests to the masses gathered on the occasion. Apart from
complimenting Somen Master for his untiring zeal for the Bodo cause he also
commends Dumphao who establishes herself as a leading woman trader amongst the
Bodo women. Next Somen Master delivers a speech recalling the people who fought
for the cause of Bodo language and literature which not only moves the masses
to tears but also imbibes in their mind the consciousness to assert the
distinctiveness and equality of the Bodos vis-à-vis the ethnic Assamese.
Katindra Swargiary’s “Hongla Pandit” also centers on the issue
of Bodo-Assamese conflict. Being the first matriculate in the Samthaibari area
Hongla Pondit was proud of his career as an L.P. school teacher and preferred
to be called Pandit rather than ‘Master’ or ‘Teacher’. He felt that the terms
‘Master’ or ‘Teacher’ failed to encompass his wide range of knowledge and
wisdom. But Hongla Pandit is retired now. He never allowed his children to
mingle with the ordinary village folks because he feared that they might
assimilate into the local language and culture. He too distanced himself from
the people of his village. He regarded his native language as inferior and
forbade his children to speak in their native tongue at home.
“Hongla Pandit never encouraged speaking in Bodo in his
household from before. If somebody in the house violated this rule, s/he had to
face Hongla Pandit’s glare.” (Swargiary, p 56).
Instead, he resorted to the Assamese language because of the
power and prestige associated with it and even gave Assamese names to his
children—Ram, Arjun, Devjani and Navajyoti. He sent his children to be educated
in the town. Hongla Pondit’s preference to the Assamese language over the Bodo
signifies to the fact how the Bodos once upon a time sweated to learn the
Assamese language and adopt the culture of the Assamese-speaking class. For
many members of the Bodo community the ability to speak the Assamese language
was considered an achievement in itself. In this context it is, however,
noteworthy that Assamese can be regarded as an outside language which imposed
itself steadily on the Bodo communities through its superiority gained from its
written script and its Sanskrit base, and the rich Hindu culture and tradition
that it carried. Jadav Pegu in Reclaiming
Identity: A Discourse on Bodo History
asserts:
Indeed, the
original Assamese-speaking people can be seen as outsiders who brought ‘Aryan’
culture and developed a Sanskrit-based language in the region and imposed
themselves on the aboriginal groups. (Pegu, p 6)
He further claims:
It can, therefore, be deduced that a
superior language [‘Assamese’] fostered by ‘higher’ caste people and apparently
favoured by indigenous kings and chieftains under the influence of Brahmans
representing a higher civilization and religion, had, over the years, in the
period of medieval and modern history, hijacked the identity of a region that
was originally dominated by communities speaking dialects belonging to the
Tibeto-Chinese family and especially to its Tibeto-Burman subfamily [the
Bodos]. (Pegu, p 11-12)
Thus, it becomes evident that the caste-Hindus were able to
establish Assamese as the dominant language in Assam and exert its influence over
the other ethnic tribes. Therefore, many members of the ethnic tribes have
themselves adopted the Assamese language and culture to form a major chunk of
the Assamese-speaking milieu. Moreover, the history of the assimilation of the
Bodos and other ethnic tribes into the Assamese formation provides one of the
most dramatic examples of how Aryan civilization in India’s
northeastern periphery managed to recruit converts from the aboriginals of Assam
and thereby continue to maintain the differentiating policy of caste and tribe.
For those who remained outside the Hindu caste order was stigmatized as
‘Kacharis’, a term which among the caste-Hindu Assamese have a rather
pejorative connotation. Hongla Pandit’s recourse to the Assamese language in
lieu of his mother tongue Bodo is Katindra Swargiary’s projection of these
issues. But with education and enlightenment drawing upon them and due to many
socio-economic factors, the Bodos become conscious that their original identity
shall not be allowed to disappear. This becomes evident when Hongla Pondit’s
youngest son Navajyoti changes his name to Irakdao after he goes to pursue his
education at the university. Irakdao was the Bodo name of the last Kachari king
Govinda Chandra. He now speaks only Bodo and prefers not to speak Assamese.
“…Navajyoti or Irakdao speaks only in
Bodo, mixes with the ordinary people, goes out and eats with them. Not only
that, sometimes he would bring them to his house and would be found in deep
discussion with them.” (Swargiary, p 56).
The implication of speaking Bodo operates as a powerful marker
of differentiation by which Bodos differentiate themselves from the ethnic
Assamese. Through the attitude of Navajyoti or Irakdao it becomes evident that
the Bodos regard Assam as
their homeland and claim with the weight of historical affirmation as the
original inhabitants of Assam.
But the irony is that they do not call themselves Assamese.
In order to assert their difference from the Assamese
sub-nationalism, Irakdao finally joins the Bodo militant organization called
Bodo Liberation Organization. The Bodo Liberation Organisation ambushed an army
convoy and killed eight of them on the spot and seized their weapons. Violence
acts as a political strategy to reclaim their ethnic identity. The power
structure of the state fails to give an ear to the voices of the Bodo ethnic
community. According to Irakdao, the Bodos have been colonized and exploited in
their own homeland as the democratic mechanism of the state has been largely
biased in favour of the majority group in a polyethnic society. The democratic
mechanism of the state government that operates in the guise of colonialist
regime fails to conceptualize the voices of the Bodos thereby displacing them
from the centre to the periphery. Violence, for Irakdao becomes an inevitable
option that represents the deep sense of frustration permeating his social
psyche:
Violence has
become a strategic political tool particularly in the hands of the smaller
communities whose interests are not adequately looked after by the majoritarian
democratic institutions working in a polyethnic social space. (Das, p 44)
The ideology behind their indulging in such militarism is to
assert their rhetoric of difference from the Assamese sub-nationalism. And the
politics behind such rhetoric of difference is to gain autonomy. In this regard
it seeks to differentiate it from the Assam
movement as the Bodos realize that the policies of Assam movement do not figure out
the Bodo voice.
Indeed, to some
extent the movement for a Bodo homeland was an outgrowth of the Assam
movement. … Assam
movement contributed to the process of ethnicization of the Assamese. Bodo
student leaders accused ethnic Assamese leaders of anti-tribal prejudices and
portrayed the first AGP government as an “Assamese government,” meaning a
narrowly based ethnic Assamese government that cannot be trusted to speak for Assam
as a whole. (Baruah, 2001:175)
It is this sense of ethnic insecurity that facilitates the
ground for Bodo insurgency. As a counter to Bodo insurgency the State also exerts
legitimized violence to contain and incorporate Bodo insurgency within the
state apparatus. The state uses the military power to impose coercive laws in
the region. The army immediately starts ransacking the villages after the
killing of their officials near the Samthaibari area by the members of the Bodo
Liberation Organisation. One of the military personnel comes to Hongla Pandit’s
house for investigation and interrogates him in Hindi. But Hongla Pandit fails
to grapple the questions of the army personnel because he does not understand
Hindi. The army asks:
Where, where is
your son Navajyoti alias Irakdao alias Nerson? Where does he stay? Are you
aware that your son is the captain of the banned organization Bodo Liberation
Organisation? It was your son who led the army ambush a while ago. Where, where
are the guns? (Swargiary, p 57)
As the army has been interrogating Hongla Pandit four of them
enter his house and rape his daughter Delaisri. Entrapped in such a helpless
situation he swears at the army man in Hindi though he does not know Hindi,
“Kutta ka baccha, Army” (Swargiary, p 57). The army men ransacked his house and
assaulted him physically. So, it is evident that state sponsored violence has
intensified the sense of insecurity among the Bodos, and subsequently it
nurtures the breed of radical ethnic sentiment in the Bodo psyche. In this
regard Hiren Gohain observes:
The army’s
favourite method is to terrorize the countryside, the supposed base of
terrorists, with indiscriminate acts of repression including brutal beatings of
the elderly and the alleged rape of womenfolk. (Gohain, p 52)
It is the common people who become sufferers of this
insurgency and the resultant violence between the state and the Bodo
insurgents. This is evident from the predicament of Hongla Pandit and his
family. The story vividly portrays the Bodo indulgence in insurgency to attain
their ethnic identity. Navajyoti’s transformation to Irakdao justifies this
fact. So, it can be rightly said that “Dumphao’s Phitha” and “Hongla Pandit”
bring to the fore the urgency of the Bodos to assert their ethnicity through
the rhetoric of difference. It can be construed that in the context of Assam
ethnic identity and culture are based on the rhetoric of difference which, in
fact, points to the inner turmoil of the land.
References:
1.
Baruah, Sanjib. India
Against Itself: Assam and
the Politics of Nationality, New Delhi: Oxford University
Press, 2001.
2.
Brahma, Janil Kumar. “Dumphao’s Phitha” in Anjali
Daimari and Pranab Jyoti Narzary Ed. & trans. Sagan: A Collection of Bodo
Short Stories, Guwahati: DVS Publishers, 2011, pp.19-25.
3.
Das, Gurudas. “Small Societies in Large Democracy:
Problems of Conflict Resolution in India’s North-East” in Monirul Hussain Ed.
Coming Out of Violence: Essays on Ethnicity, Conflict Resolution and Peace
Process in North-East India, New Delhi: Regency Publications, 2005, pp. 39-47.
4.
Gohain, Hiren. “Human Security in North-East India” in
Akhil Ranjan Dutta Ed. Human Security in North-East India:
Issues and Policies, Guwahati: Anwesha, 2009, pp. 45-53.
5.
Hussain, Monirul. “Tribal Question in Assam” in
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 27, No. 20/21: Economic and Political
Weekly, May, 1992, pp. 1047-1050.
6.
Pegu, Jadav. Reclaiming Identity: A Discourse on Bodo
History, Kokrajhar: JWNGSAR, 2004.
7.
Swargiary, Katindra. “Hongla Pandit” in Anjali Daimari
and Pranab Jyoti Narzary Ed. & trans. Sagan: A Collection of Bodo Short
Stories, Guwahati: DVS Publishers, 2011, pp.53-58.
Author’s Bio: Miss. Mridula Kashyap is a research scholar in the Dept.
of English in Gauhati University,
Assam. She has
also completed her M.Phil on African Literature from Gauhati University.
She has been pursuing her research on Egyptian Literature. She has the
experience of working in different colleges of Assam. She has been regularly
contributing her writings to the Institute
of Distance and Open Learning, Gauhati University.
No comments:
Post a Comment