feeds from sacw.net
print versionValentine threatens caste order
Cladius II, the third century emperor of Rome, forbade marriages as young men were unwilling to leave their wives behind to join his army. Valentine, then an unknown monk, defied the rule and solemnized marriages of young couples. He did this in secret, but word got around.
He was sentenced to death, but he lost his life for a good cause. Love has never been easy, not even for cupids and match-makers.
In tradition when barbers fixed Indian marriages, keeping in mind the minefields of caste and clan, their job too was fraught with risks. Cutting hair and shaving jowls was easy enough, but match-making was a clear occupational hazard. If the union did not work out, for whatever reason, the barber could be beaten to death. Now that we are striving to create a caste-free society, it is time that the legend of Valentine replaces that of the barber.
Salman Rushdie stopped short when he said that a true metropolitan experience begins when one cannot choose one’s neighbours. But, in fact, a true metropolitan experience actually starts when a person cannot choose his son-in-law. This is why Valentine must edge out the barber, else the mind of India will remain locked in the past.
At the bottom of these attacks against Valentine’s Day is the drive to give back to the barber his traditional role. Valentine’s Day is the celebration of romance, which goes against the tenet of the barber model. Barbers were put to the job so that varna, or caste identities, remained firm against the primal onslaughts of romance. It stands to reason: if boy does not choose girl, but parents do, then caste marriages will remain unchallenged.
As long as romance is not allowed in the open, it will flourish in legends and drama as a vicarious festival of what cannot be done. From Romeo and Juliet to Heer-Ranjha or Soni-Mahiwal, these fantasies draw tears as romance is forced to yield to cultural taboos. Now that the West has freed romance from its bestial and natural connotations, it has acquired a cultural dignity of its own.
The marking of Valentine’s Day is probably because of Chaucer’s presentation of the mid-February wedding between Richard III and Anne of Bohemia in late 14th century. They were both 13-year-olds, and Chaucer wrote about their starry marriage as if it were born of young love in the woods. There may or may not have been diplomatic considerations that accompanied this royal wedding, but at any rate Chaucer elevated romance from its supposed base natural origins and gave it a high cultural status.
From then on no Romeo need die.
Marriage
In India, on the contrary, just to forestall nature getting a foothold on the young, child marriages were conducted by caste-conscious parents through their barber intermediaries.
This ensured varna purity against wild, natural urges of the young, usually provoked by women. Nothing would please casteists more than to put their wards in the stockade and return to the barber his complete job description. A senior colleague of mine once told me that when he timorously asked his father if he could please have just one look at the face of his wife-to-be, he was roundly slapped. His father said that he had seen the girl, his prospective fatherin-law had seen him, so where was the need for such a cheeky request.
Hindutva squads would see nothing wrong if elderly women went to bars with their grandchildren in tow. After all they have been much-married, and given their late-stage nature was not even bothering. I cannot imagine traditionalists getting hot under their collar if there was a lower age limit and marital qualifications for stepping into a Valentine pub. Once marriages take place according to tradition, nothing else really matters.
Indian scholars have repeatedly drawn attention to the fact that for most Hindus the observance of religion is really the observance of caste norms and taboos. It is also widely acknowledged that while boys will be boys, girls uphold family’s honour and caste purity. If only young men went to pubs, that would be alright — a little indulgence on the side is good for growing stallions. It is only when young girls join in that conches start sounding like alarm bells.
Identity
Many of the features that characterized the caste order even a generation back have now fallen by the wayside.
Caste and occupation can no longer be easily linked; neither can caste and dining restrictions; nor can caste hierarchies be calmly set to work without opposition; and, finally, your boss may be from a lower caste. If all this is true, can an interloping and transgressing son-in-law be far behind? This is the ultimate threat to the caste order, and that is why traditionalists fight to keep boy and girl apart in the name of religion, modesty and high culture.
But deep down it is all about caste; and how dare natural drives disturb ancient culture? The old-fashioned caste system that put every one in their place, high or low, has been replaced by caste politics and caste competition.
Urbanization has done this somewhat relentlessly. While no one caste hierarchy marking the pure from the impure remains unchallenged, what has withstood the ravages of time is caste identity. In fact, the stronger one’s sense of caste patriotism, the more committed one is to the politics of caste. If the traditional Brahmannical varna order is contested on the streets, it is because each caste sees itself superior to the other, and there is just no consensus on this matter. The primal purusa of Rig Veda, whose body was the template for the varna order, is now just a fallen Superman.
What matters today is not the hierarchical caste system but fractious caste identities. The only antidote to caste identity is romantic marriage, and that is where opposition to Valentine’s Day steps in. This is why traditionalist look at Valentine cards as if they pack a poisoned message. Take away caste marriages and the back of caste is irrevocably broken. The last bastion of Hindu India will have fallen to the pound of heartbeats.
Subversion
In strict Hindu terms, children born of inter-caste marriages are not hybrids, a bit of this and that, but actually outcastes. All our ancient law- givers, from Manu to Yagnavalkya, raged against out-of-caste marriages, threatening that couples would produce monsters and not children.
This is why in pure Hindu terms inter- caste unions should stop or else the Hindu order will collapse. So much depends upon the right marriage that traditionalist cannot take a chance and frolic on Valentine’s Day.
It is somewhat naïve to argue that only criminals are involved in attacks against Valentine’s Day and romantic liaisons in pubs. The charge may be led by goon squads, but millions of bystanders sympathise with them.
Romance in general, and Valentine’s Day in particular, offend prescriptive marriage norms. And without caste marriage, only ascetics can be Hindus.
Which true Hindu would like that? Valentine’s Day and romantic dalliance in pubs signal something much more than spending frivolous money and time. There is something very subversive in the way romance can undermine the basis of the Hindu caste order. But the best part is that the protagonists of Valentine’s Day are not fully aware of their larger mission.
History always works best when it toils behind the backs of men.
The author teaches Sociology at the Jawaharlal Nehru University
