Skip to main content

Mohenjodaro’s Dancing Girl


The Dancing Girl of Mohenjodaro looks only about 15 years old. But there she stands, apparently in front of many people including elders, “looking perfectly confident of herself and the world,” in the words of British archaeologist Mortimer Wheeler. John Marshall, the archaeologist who announced the discovery of the statuette in 1926, was struck by the “half-impudent posture” of the young girl. He just couldn’t believe that the statuette belonged to the period of 2300-1750 BCE. Was she really dancing? No one is sure. “She was good at what she did and she knew it,” says archaeologist Gregory Possehl.

Today, some 4000 years after that Dancing Girl was carved in bronze by an artist living in Mohenjodaro, the status of women in society deserves a probe. I would like to look at it just from two angles.

One is the Sabarimala issue that rocked Kerala three years ago. According to tradition, women in the menstruating age-group are not allowed to visit the Sabarimala temple since the presiding deity there is a confirmed bachelor. Well, let us not divert from the current issue by apparently blasphemous questions like whether gods are worse than men when it comes to feminine temptations.

The Hindu right wing in Kerala, including thousands of women, came out on to streets in loud protests against the judicial decision to let women enter the bachelor god’s temple. A few women did enter too. Nothing apparently happened to the god’s chastity because the women entered his chaste premises. But the right wing was appalled by the potential threat posed by women to their god. In the end, the verdict to liberate god Ayyappan from a silly tradition was revoked. Women continue to be banned from Sabarimala. And the women themselves asked for it!

Mohenjodaro’s dancing girl must have snickered.

The second example I would like to present is a more recent one. The hijab issue that raged in Karnataka. The same people (belonging to the same religion, I mean) who wanted to keep women out of a temple now wanted women of another religion to unveil their heads. Muslim women should not use the hijab in certain places like college campuses. Who decides? The same people whose concern for their god’s chastity kept women out of a temple altogether!

Obviously, it’s not about the hijab. It’s about political hegemony. One group is trying to show the other who the Master really is in this country.

Now let’s look at this hijab issue from the other side. Why would Muslim women insist on wearing that headgear in a place like India where the weather conditions don’t require such a dress at all. Forget the weather, why would the women want to restrict their freedom by putting blinkers on like horses?

In both cases mentioned here, I think the women defeated themselves out of certain rather witless political motives. Mohenjodaro’s dancing girl was far more advanced in her thinking.

PS. I'm participating in #BlogchatterA2Z 

Previous Post: Loneliness can kill

Tomorrow: Nationalism is a drug

 

Comments

  1. theres a scene in a movie called my name is khan where a womans hijab is forcibly removed, from then she stops wearing but that is in USA and after WTC tragedy (the premise in movie). However in India it feels like these are all sudden baseless uproars and yes women and the whole community fell in to the trap neatly and issue got blown out of proportions. I also wrote a post about general situation in India - mine may not be strong and outright frank like urs ...but tried something. May be I will post in last leg of challenge . Yes MOHENJODARO times were better

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I watched that movie when it was released and liked it too though I don't remember that scene you mention. My personal view is that religions should constantly update themselves. Christianity calls that concept aggiornamento. Islam has much to change in itself. Unfortunately Hinduism today is following Islam in this and a few other regards. As a writer said, we become like our enemies.

      Delete
    2. Yes Islam does need some upgrade. Even if i agree that there are some who r oppressed ..this is a huge topic to be not discussed in comments..your last statement is quite confusing ...anyway glad to know your thoughts :)

      Delete
    3. Yes, it tales more space and time. Actually all religious reforms should come from within the religion itself. That is, only a Hindu can reform Hinduism and a Muslim can reform Islam. People like me can only suggest, rather futilely, from outside.

      Delete
  2. Such a well-observed piece. It's true that women often become the flagbearers of patriarchy for political ideas coming out of some men.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably the mindset is a habit and hence women find it impossible to question their men. There are a few who do question the wrongs but they are too few.

      Delete
  3. Hari OM
    Well, apart from the obvious judgement that male archaeologists have placed their own p.o.v. on what they see in this statue, with no basis whatsoever for understanding what any junior lady of the time may have had to endure... I know Muslim ladies who by choice wear the hijab (which does not have 'blinkers' - the full face covering is the niqab) because this is what they wish to do with reflection on their own spiritual path. I also know some who choose not to cover their head. Fortunately they are both in societies (UK and OZ) where the choice is theirs entirely. Problems only arise where others, as you mention here, try to make decisions on somebody elses behalf, for whatever agenda. Women are now and have ever been pawns to power. No matter how 'advanced' we believe ourselves to have become, society still keeps this divide and, as you say, all too often women themselves create the issue! YAM xx
    M=Messiah

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I took the Dancing Girl as a symbol and the views of the archaeologists mentioned here as the interpretations of that symbol. Symbols are not to be taken literally. They are metaphors. We don't know what the sculptor of that statuette meant. We give the meanings...

      I teach quite many Muslim students and there are more girls than boys among them. Many of these girls would be happier without the hijab that is forced on them by their system. That's the impression I have gathered. There are many who keep it just because it has become a kind of identity mark. Self-inflicted stigma?

      Delete
  4. I loved how you analysed the Hijab controversy from both the angles. I completely agree, women in the past had better life and probably understood liberation in its true sense. The situation today is worsening every single day!

    Chinmayee Gayatree Sahu.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unless the women themselves come forward against the oppressions and restrictions imposed on them, there is no hope for a meaningful change. Nothing can be done when the majority of any community choose slavery upon themselves.

      Delete
  5. More than women pitted against women I see it as the clash of the values. India thakfully being a country where everyone can exercise their own choice, has dozens of the mindsets. These mindsets encompass a huge specturm. The far right and the far left being the two ends of it. However there are many like me who believe in live and let live, find these clashes very disturbing. Nothing except destruction comes of violence, isnt it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Violence is the savage way of solving problems. Nothing good comes of it in the end.

      I didn't say it's an instance of women pitted against women. It's women capitulating to the systems made by men.

      Delete
  6. I read your post, and the comments that followed. I do get your viewpoint in taking Mohenjodaro's dancing girl as a metaphor.
    I read one of my children's books ages ago, and in it for the Gupta period it was mentioned that women had started facing restrictions. So women being crushed under patriarchy has a long history in India (and in fact rest of the world too).
    The only way the country can get out of this quagmire is to restrict religion ( and I mean all religions) to home. Religion should not invade public spaces, at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I endorse your view on religion totally. Religion should be a personal affair, practised at home in one's private spaces. But now we have a Prime Minister who openly performs pujas and other rituals in temples and denigrates other faiths.

      Delete
  7. Extremism in any form is unhealthy and people suffer. End of story.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Adventures of Toto as a comic strip

  'The Adventures of Toto' is an amusing story by Ruskin Bond. It is prescribed as a lesson in CBSE's English course for class 9. Maggie asked her students to do a project on some of the lessons and Femi George's work is what I would like to present here. Femi converted the story into a beautiful comic strip. Her work will speak for itself and let me present it below.  Femi George Student of Carmel Public School, Vazhakulam, Kerala Similar post: The Little Girl

Don Bosco

Don Bosco (16 Aug 1815 - 31 Jan 1888) In Catholic parlance, which flows through my veins in spite of myself, today is the Feast of Don Bosco. My life was both made and unmade by Don Bosco institutions. Any great person can make or break people because of his followers. Religious institutions are the best examples. I’m presenting below an extract from my forthcoming book titled Autumn Shadows to celebrate the Feast of Don Bosco in my own way which is obviously very different from how it is celebrated in his institutions today. Do I feel nostalgic about the Feast? Not at all. I feel relieved. That’s why this celebration. The extract follows. Don Bosco, as Saint John Bosco was popularly known, had a remarkably good system for the education of youth.   He called it ‘preventive system’.   The educators should be ever vigilant so that wrong actions are prevented before they can be committed.   Reason, religion and loving kindness are the three pillars of that syste...

Coffee can be bitter

The dawns of my childhood were redolent of filtered black coffee. We were woken up before the birds started singing in the lush green village landscape outside home. The sun would split the darkness of the eastern sky with its splinter of white radiance much after we children had our filtered coffee with a small lump of jaggery. Take a bite of the jaggery and then a sip of the coffee. Coffee was a ritual in our home back then. Perhaps our parents believed it would jolt our neurons awake and help us absorb our lessons before we set out on the 4-kilometre walk to school after all the morning rituals at home. After high school, when I left home for further studies at a distant place, the ritual of the morning coffee stopped. It resumed a whole decade later when I completed my graduation and took up a teaching job in Shillong. But I had lost my taste for filtered coffee by then; tea took its place. Plain tea without milk – what is known as red tea in most parts of India. Coffee ret...

Relatives and Antidepressants

One of the scenes that remain indelibly etched in my memory is from a novel of Malayalam writer O V Vijayan. Father and little son are on a walk. Father tells son, “Walk carefully, son, otherwise you may fall down.” Son: “What will happen if I fall?” Father: "Relatives will laugh.” I seldom feel comfortable with my relatives. In fact, I don’t feel comfortable in any society, but relatives make it more uneasy. The reason, as I’ve understood, is that your relatives are the last people to see any goodness in you. On the other hand, they are the first ones to discover all your faults. Whenever certain relatives visit, my knees buckle and the blood pressure shoots up. I behave quite awkwardly. They often describe my behaviour as arising from my ego, which used to be a oversized in yesteryear. I had a few such visitors the other day. The problem was particularly compounded by their informing me that they would be arriving by about 3.30 pm and actually reaching at about 7.30 pm. ...

The Real Enemies of India

People in general are inclined to pass the blame on to others whatever the fault.  For example, we Indians love to blame the British for their alleged ‘divide-and-rule’ policy.  Did the British really divide India into Hindus and Muslims or did the Indians do it themselves?  Was there any unified entity called India in the first place before the British unified it? Having raised those questions, I’m going to commit a further sacrilege of quoting a British journalist-cum-historian.  In his magnum opus, India: a History , John Keay says that the “stock accusations of a wider Machiavellian intent to ‘divide and rule’ and to ‘stir up Hindu-Muslim animosity’” levelled against the British Raj made little sense when the freedom struggle was going on in India because there really was no unified India until the British unified it politically.  Communal divisions existed in India despite the political unification.  In fact, they existed even before the Briti...