The_Showstopper
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2011
- Messages
- 6,708
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
We should feel sad for History, the worst victim of 2016
In 2016, history in India was the victim of ‘nationalism’, the word that in present times is often confused with ‘patriotism’ and ‘Hinduism’.
It would be quite apt to say that 2016 has been the year of victimisation of history.
Poor History! It has been a tough year for the subject. In these times of blogging and social media, when everyone feels like an expert on historical methodologies, the real victim has been the subject itself. All through the year, this rather boring subject that school kids consider some kind of a torture designed by their teachers, has been struggling hard to free itself from the constant tussle between political motives of the ‘left’ and the ‘right’. It would be quite apt to say that 2016 has been the year of victimisation of history.
The problems started right in the beginning of the year when the suicide of a PhD scholar led to aggressive discussions on the caste system in India and its historical existence. This was soon followed by whether or not history allowed women to enter certain religious spaces. No sooner had those in authority reached some conclusion about how justified history was in stopping women from entering temples, that national pride threw the discipline in yet another scoop with aggressive questioning about whether or not the British did in fact take away the Kohinoor from India by force some 200 years back.
The legendary freedom fighter Bhagat Singh was in peaceful slumber, both in his deathbed and in history textbooks, when he was suddenly woken up by a rather feisty government berating a certain historian, also dead and gone, for having made the audacious claim of calling the late nationalist hero a ‘terrorist.’ All hell broke loose and a virulent fight broke out between Left wing historians and those representing the government upon whether or not the word ‘terrorist’ used in a history book of 1988 had the same connotation as that in 2016.
There were other issues as well including whether or not history had been witness to leather tanners in India or not, and whether the change in names of High Courts, streets and states can help in pushing away the ‘bad’ history from collective memory of not. The year was finally about to end that a new report came out questioning history on yet another issue. When the author of a research paper in the journal ‘Itihaas’ published by the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) claimed that the celebrated ‘dancing girl’ figurine of Mohenjodaro was actually the Hindu Goddess Parvati, he was actually questioning the historicity of Hinduism in India, pushing it back several centuries from when currently historians believe it to have originated.
It would be quite wrong to say that it is only the present year that has victimised history. The reigns of political power have for centuries determined what should and should not be considered as authentic in the past. In that sense, history has forever been the victim of political interest. However in 2016, history in India was a special kind of victim. It was the victim of ‘nationalism’, the word that in present times is often confused with ‘patriotism’ and ‘Hinduism’.
But then of course, in the time and age when a military operation upon a neighbouring country is considered an exercise promoting ‘nationalism’ and an economic move to wipe out black money is given a nationalist fervour, why should history- the favourite subject of political authorities- be spared? How could history be released from the clutches of nationalism/ patriotism/ Hinduism? 2016 had to end with a victmised history, pleading to the government to finally release it from its skewed perceptions of nationalism.
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/web-edits/poor-history-the-worst-victim-of-2016-4445704/
In 2016, history in India was the victim of ‘nationalism’, the word that in present times is often confused with ‘patriotism’ and ‘Hinduism’.
Poor History! It has been a tough year for the subject. In these times of blogging and social media, when everyone feels like an expert on historical methodologies, the real victim has been the subject itself. All through the year, this rather boring subject that school kids consider some kind of a torture designed by their teachers, has been struggling hard to free itself from the constant tussle between political motives of the ‘left’ and the ‘right’. It would be quite apt to say that 2016 has been the year of victimisation of history.
The problems started right in the beginning of the year when the suicide of a PhD scholar led to aggressive discussions on the caste system in India and its historical existence. This was soon followed by whether or not history allowed women to enter certain religious spaces. No sooner had those in authority reached some conclusion about how justified history was in stopping women from entering temples, that national pride threw the discipline in yet another scoop with aggressive questioning about whether or not the British did in fact take away the Kohinoor from India by force some 200 years back.
The legendary freedom fighter Bhagat Singh was in peaceful slumber, both in his deathbed and in history textbooks, when he was suddenly woken up by a rather feisty government berating a certain historian, also dead and gone, for having made the audacious claim of calling the late nationalist hero a ‘terrorist.’ All hell broke loose and a virulent fight broke out between Left wing historians and those representing the government upon whether or not the word ‘terrorist’ used in a history book of 1988 had the same connotation as that in 2016.
There were other issues as well including whether or not history had been witness to leather tanners in India or not, and whether the change in names of High Courts, streets and states can help in pushing away the ‘bad’ history from collective memory of not. The year was finally about to end that a new report came out questioning history on yet another issue. When the author of a research paper in the journal ‘Itihaas’ published by the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) claimed that the celebrated ‘dancing girl’ figurine of Mohenjodaro was actually the Hindu Goddess Parvati, he was actually questioning the historicity of Hinduism in India, pushing it back several centuries from when currently historians believe it to have originated.
It would be quite wrong to say that it is only the present year that has victimised history. The reigns of political power have for centuries determined what should and should not be considered as authentic in the past. In that sense, history has forever been the victim of political interest. However in 2016, history in India was a special kind of victim. It was the victim of ‘nationalism’, the word that in present times is often confused with ‘patriotism’ and ‘Hinduism’.
But then of course, in the time and age when a military operation upon a neighbouring country is considered an exercise promoting ‘nationalism’ and an economic move to wipe out black money is given a nationalist fervour, why should history- the favourite subject of political authorities- be spared? How could history be released from the clutches of nationalism/ patriotism/ Hinduism? 2016 had to end with a victmised history, pleading to the government to finally release it from its skewed perceptions of nationalism.
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/web-edits/poor-history-the-worst-victim-of-2016-4445704/
