Skip to main content

Can History be Civilised?


English philosopher, C E M Joad, defined civilisation as thinking new thoughts, making new things, and obeying the rules for the smooth functioning of the society.  Yet we don’t find such people in our history books.  Our history books are filled with people who killed others, conquered their lands, and imposed themselves on other people. 

How many Indians have heard of Satyendranath Bose though there is a subatomic particle (Boson) named after him?  How many Indians are ready to recognise the name Ali Akbar Khan though he is known to the world as the Indian Johann Sebastian Bach?  Why does the genius of a Shakespeare get eclipsed by a Queen Elizabeth in history books though Shakespeare’s contribution to civilisation far outweighs that of the Queen? 

These are some of the many thoughts that crossed my mind as I read the very long article by A. G. Noorani, ‘India’s Sawdust Caesar,’ in the latest issue of Frontline.  “A year and a half after he became Prime Minister of India on May 26, 2014, the people of India have begun to discover that Narendra Damodardas Modi is a flawed character who has proved himself unfit to sit on the chair on which Jawaharlal Nehru once sat.”  That’s how the article begins. 

Nehru made significant contributions to civilisation.  Even if we ignore his contributions as a statesman, his writings will be enough to ensure a prominent place for Nehru in the history of India if history stops giving undue importance to killers and conquerors.  How will history remember Mr Modi?

Noorani quotes a cable sent by Michael S. Owen, the U.S. Consul General in Mumbai, in 2006 to his bosses in America: “In public appearances, Modi can be charming and likeable. By all accounts, however, he is an insular, distrustful person who rules with a small group of advisers. This inner circle acts as a buffer between the Chief Minister and his Cabinet and party. He reigns more by fear and intimidation than by inclusiveness and consensus, and is rude, condescending and often derogatory to even high-level party officials. He hoards power and often leaves his Ministers in the cold when making decisions that affect their portfolios.”

Source: Frontline
How will history books celebrate Modi?  It will depend on who writes the history, of course. 

Noorani cites instances that prove the little-mindedness of the Prime Minister.  For example, gifting a copy of the Gita to the Japanese Emperor, Modi said, “I do not know what will happen in India after this. There may be a TV debate on this. Our secular friends will create toofan [storm] that [sic] what does Modi think of himself. He has taken a Gita with him. That means he has made this one also communal.”  Modi was ridiculing his own country in another country. 

Another example: On September 23 in Dublin, Modi praised Indo-Irish students for reciting Sanskrit mantras, but in a manner that he can never shed: “It is a matter of happiness that they can do it in Ireland, but had this been done in India, it would have raised questions on secularism.” 

Which Prime Minister of a country, especially if he claims to be in love with the country and its culture as Modi does, will belittle his own country in a foreign country like this?

Yet how will this man go down in history books?  How much of his personality and its dark truths be buried, how much of the other side exaggerated? 

Why is history like this?

These are just some of the thoughts that crossed my mind.  I suppose there are no answers except that that is how history is.  If you want Bose and his boson, you should study science.  If you want Ustad Ali Akbar Khan, you should have music in your veins.  And if you want Shakespeare, be literate enough.   

But if history is what interests you, you will get marauders and conquerors.  History cannot be civilised, it seems.


PS.  Mr Modi is taken as an example here merely because it is an article about him that triggered these thoughts in me.  There are many, too many, leaders in the world today who can trigger the very same thoughts.  That’s precisely the question: why are leaders like this?
Labels:

Comments

  1. UnknownDecember 10, 2015 at 9:14 PM

    Something on my mind as well, had written a post this week on how history books present history with an example of Mughal history! The realm of the textbook is place of drama and war with every changing government, how modi gets written depends on as you say, who writes that portion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalDecember 10, 2015 at 9:37 PM

      Suppose we change our approach to history and present scientists, philosophers, and so on to students in such a way that they learn to question, investigate and discover. Instead of mugging up boring facts about who killed whom!

      Delete
  2. Sneh AsnaniDecember 11, 2015 at 3:40 PM

    Well written and thought provoking..

    ReplyDelete
  3. Elsapaul84December 11, 2015 at 4:07 PM

    I am genuinely thankful to the holder of this web page who has shared this fantastic paragraph at here.

    custom essay writing service

    ReplyDelete
  4. sunaina sharmaDecember 11, 2015 at 5:36 PM

    Interesting article. History has been a complex subject that gives rise to debates because what one writes comes from his/her own 'situatedness' as well as 'affiliations. I think Gadamer had talked about 'understanding' it 'differently', and bringing one's own understanding to the historical text. I think history itself is a series of 'texts' that have been subjectively (masked objective) written.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalDecember 11, 2015 at 7:03 PM

      History can never be objective, in short :)

      The article I have cited above illustrates it eloquently. America had refused to grant visiting visa to Mr Modi in the aftermath of the 2002 riots. However, later it revoked the decision because the same Consul General mentioned in the article suggested it. And the reason? Modi's meteoric popularity! The Consul General was sure Mr Modi would rise to national politics and in all probability become the PM. Then, if America changed the decision after that, it would be accused of opportunism. Hence he advised the diplomatic action of revoking the decision earlier. A few years from now, most people will forget these details and historians will make a new history: that even America realised its error with respect to Modi and the riots. That's how history works. It is manufactured. Heroes do not make history, history makes heroes, as a historian said.

      Delete
  5. Datta GhoshDecember 11, 2015 at 10:01 PM

    Incidentally I knew all three, interestingly enough, I was always intrigued by history, but that did not yield any info. History as it goes is penned on corpses and other things that are not "civilized" why? because history was always written by the victors, who won a war and massacred. It is a great flaw in us to understate the good and magnify shady incidents as history

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalDecember 12, 2015 at 8:25 AM

      History inevitably belongs to the victor. See how the Indian history is being rewritten or attempted to be by the present BJP regime. A lot of RSS people have been appointed to relevant positions so that the process will be subtle but effective.

      Delete
  6. Titas BiswasDecember 11, 2015 at 11:42 PM

    Leaders in the current world are hardly those who have been given that place by society,leaders are generally those narrow-minded people who are in that place today because 20,000 different methods were calculated before inculcating them in the "necessary" propaganda to earn the required profit.All of fundamentalism,hypocrisy,communal-ism are just the components of the entire process.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalDecember 12, 2015 at 8:26 AM

      That's interesting, Titas. 20,000 calculated strategies!

      Delete
  7. Manju PanchalJanuary 22, 2016 at 7:47 AM

    Well written article. Enjoyed reading it. Very thought provoking.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ivan the unusual friend

When you are down and out, you will find that people are of two types. One is the kind that will walk away from you because now you are no good. They will pretend that you don’t exist. They don’t see you even if you happen to land right in front of them. The other is the sort that will have much fun at your expense. They will crack jokes about you even to you or preach at you or pray over you. This latter people are usually pretty happy that you are broke. You make them feel more comfortable with themselves even to the point of self-righteousness. Ivan was an exception. When I slipped on the path of life and started a free fall that would last many years before I hit the bottom without a thud but with enormous anguish, Ivan stood by me for some reason of his own. He didn’t display any affection which probably he didn’t have. He didn’t display any dislike either. There was no question of preaching or praying. No jokes either. Ivan was my colleague for a brief period at St Joseph’s
14 comments
Read more

Joe the tenacious friend

AI-generated illustration You outgrow certain friendships because life changes you in ways that nobody, including you, had expected. Joe is one such friend of mine who was very dear to me once. That friendship cannot be sustained anymore because I am no more the person whom Joe knew and loved to amble along with. And Joe seems incapable of understanding the fact that people can change substantially. Joe and I were supposed to meet one of these days after a gap of more than two decades. I scuttled the meeting rather heartlessly. Just because Joe’s last messages carried words that smacked of intimacy. My life has gone through so much devastating fire that the delicate warmth of intimacy has become repulsive. Joe was a good friend of mine while we were in Shillong. He was a post-graduate student and a part-time schoolteacher when I met him first. I was a fulltime schoolteacher teaching math and science to ninth and tenth graders. My dream was to postgraduate in English literature an
11 comments
Read more

Kailasnath the Paradox

AI-generated illustration It wasn’t easy to discern whether he was a friend or merely an amused onlooker. He was my colleague at the college, though from another department. When my life had entered a slippery slope because of certain unresolved psychological problems, he didn’t choose to shun me as most others did. However, when he did condescend to join me in the college canteen sipping tea and smoking a cigarette, I wasn’t ever sure whether he was befriending me or mocking me. Kailasnath was a bundle of paradoxes. He appeared to be an alpha male, so self-assured and lord of all that he surveyed. Yet if you cared to observe deeply, you would find too many chinks in his armour. Beneath all those domineering words and gestures lay ample signs of frailty. The tall, elegantly slim and precisely erect stature would draw anyone’s attention quickly. Kailasnath was always attractively dressed though never unduly stylish. Everything about him exuded an air of chic confidence. But the wa
9 comments
Read more

Machiavelli the Reverend

Let us go today , you and I, through certain miasmic streets. Nothing will be quite clear along our way because this journey is through some delusions and illusions. You will meet people wearing holy robes and talking about morality and virtues. Some of them will claim to be god’s men and some will make taller claims. Some of them are just amorphous. Invisible. But omnipotent. You can feel their power around you. On you. Oppressing you. Stifling you. Reverend Machiavelli is one such oppressive power. You will meet Franz Kafka somewhere along the way. Joseph K’s ghost will pass by. Remember Joseph K who was arrested one fine morning for a crime that nobody knew anything about? Neither Joseph nor the men who arrest him know why Joseph K is arrested. The power that keeps Joseph K under arrest is invisible. He cannot get answers to his valid questions from the visible agents of that power. He cannot explain himself to that power. Finally, he is taken to a quarry outside the town wher
11 comments
Read more

Levin the good shepherd

AI-generated image The lost sheep and its redeemer form a pet motif in Christianity. Jesus portrayed himself as a good shepherd many times. He said that the good shepherd will leave his 99 sheep in order to bring the lost sheep back to the fold. When he finds the lost sheep, the shepherd is happier about that one sheep than about the 99, Jesus claimed. He was speaking metaphorically. The lost sheep is the sinner in Jesus’ parable. Sin is a departure from the ‘right’ way. Angels raise a toast in heaven whenever a sinner returns to the ‘right’ path [Luke 15:10]. A lot of Catholic priests I know carry some sort of a Redeemer complex in their souls. They love the sinner so much that they cannot rest until they make the angels of God run for their cups of joy. I have also been fortunate to have one such priest-friend whom I shall call Levin in this post. He has befriended me right from the year 1976 when I was a blundering adolescent and he was just one year older than me. He possesse
8 comments
Read more