Open Forum
New
Delhi, 20 June 2012
Cartoon Debate
INTOLERANCE LAUGHABLE
By Dr S Saraswathi
(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)
Growing intolerance amongst our
political class is acquiring ridiculous dimensions. Sadly, it is slowly
emerging that this class is losing its sense of humour. We can easily confirm
this by the controversies erupting over cartoons, which go back decades! The
latest in the row is the leaders of both the AIADMK and DMK in Tamil Nadu
demanding the removal of a cartoon on the anti-Hindi agitation in the State in
1965, which they insist ridicules the Dravidian Movement.
The Human Resource Ministry is
regrettably under siege and obliging, with the first encounter it faced in last
session of Parliament. Recall that a rather frivolous issue consumed a good
deal of time of both the Houses which should have instead gone for debate on
important legislations. It related to a cartoon in the political science
textbook for class XI published by the NCERT. The cartoon, which was introduced
in the book three years back, suddenly
found a display of surviving anti-Dalit mentality derogatory to the
self-respect of Dalits, and disrespect to the architect of the Indian Constitution,
Dr BR Ambedkar, and hence highly objectionable.
The controversy provoked nationwide
debate through the mass media. The
demands from critics ranged from deletion of the objectionable cartoons,
careful scrutiny of all cartoons in textbooks, withdrawal of the books from distribution,
action against those responsible for production of the texts, and even
resignation of the concerned HRD Minister.
This despite the fact that the
cartoon itself was 60-years-old and resurrected from a popular Weekly reputed
for humour in presenting political happenings. It showed Ambedkar riding on a
snail (symbolizing the Constitution) cracking a whip, and Jawaharlal Nehru
whipping from behind to make the snail move faster.
The cartoon is included in the
chapter: Constitution: Why and How in
the book Indian Constitution at Work.
If one goes through the chapter the text is on the framing and working of the
various aspects of the Constitution and its over-all tone is one of
appreciation for the tremendous work involved in writing the Constitution. But,
this seems to have been lost in the ingenious interpretation of the cartoon by
Dalit leaders.
MPs were near unanimous in their
expression of objections to this cartoon in the school textbook – a rare scene
in Parliament - and the Minister was extraordinarily
prompted in responding to take action for the removal of such cartoons – an
indication of the omnipresence of vote- bank politics. This was followed
without delay by the resignation of the scholars responsible for the
preparation of the book, who obviously in their enthusiasm to make school books
readable and interesting, lost sight of the prevailing socio-political mood
waiting to politicize any issue.
Sadly, this sequence of events
remains the greatest achievement of the last session of the Parliament convened
to pass the Budget and number of pending legislations, including the setting up
of a Lok Pal and economic reforms. There is least realization that it was not
an issue which should have been debated in Parliament, but one that should be
decided by authors, publishers, and academic authorities/committees including
teachers. The matter has been removed from the academic domain and has become a
political issue that amounts to shifting it from educational institutions to Parliament.
Those defending the cartoon favour
innovation in textbooks and teaching methods, interesting presentation of
lessons, and humour in classrooms, and want to cultivate the ability of
students to look at issues from various angles. They also try to remind those
opposing it that this cartoon was never objected to by neither Ambedkar nor
Nehru nor from any reader in the past 60 years.
However, the Ambedkar cartoon and
the action taken on it seems to have given the political leadership a handle to
oppose outright anything objectionable towards them. And regrettably, the cartoon
episode, which started earlier in West Bengal
when action was taken against a University professor, has not stopped with the
Ambedkar cartoon.
Cartoon wars clearly divide in two
camps, those for and against. Those in favour insist on the right to freedom of
expression, a sense of humour and have faith in the ability of students to
decipher the meaning of the cartoons. Additionally, they point out that
students are exposed to cartoons and caricatures in any case through newspapers
and journals.
Those against, who discover Dalit
baiting in the cartoon on the Constitution, seem to be attributing a new
meaning to the drawing neither intended by the cartoonist nor conveyed in it. Nothing
in the cartoon signifies casteism even remotely. It refers only to the enormous
time taken for framing the Constitution and the anxiety to go faster.
In fact, the cartoon can also be
seen as anti-Nehru for forcing a quick job of writing the Constitution. For,
Nehru did not want a rigid and permanent Constitution, but spoke of flexibility
so that the Constitution can be amended later as required by future
generations. The cartoon may well be interpreted as depicting physical and
psychological pressure applied by Nehru on the drafting committee.
In any case, we have to be clear
about the place of cartoons in textbooks and cannot be quarreling about
meanings and interpretations of particular cartoons. The present controversies
have revealed for those who are not already aware that a cartoon may convey
more than one message and one has to be careful in using it as illustration of
the text matter. Cartoons are not photos to reveal the reality, but have a
punch or hidden meaning. They are bound to lead to misunderstanding if used in
the midst of a text.
Cartoons must be separated from the
text and used to improve the ability of students to discover their meaning. A
number of cartoons on one theme may be presented and students may be asked to
find out their meaning – the mood depicted, the devices used in the drawing
like symbols, personalities, etc., the issue or event referred, the action
depicted, the purpose and the message, the audience reaction, the view-point
supported and opposed, etc. Such an
exercise may help improve the capacity of students to analyse a matter in
various dimensions.
Thus, cartoons should form a
separate subject under the broad field of “drawing” intended to improve the
knowledge of students on current affairs, prevailing view-points on a topic, their intentions and flaws, and
ability to present an issue pictorially from various angles, and also to
cultivate a sense of humour about serious matters very necessary for a healthy social life.
In serious political science
textbooks, it is doubtful whether cartoons can help students learn the subject
matter. Evidently, in their enthusiasm to experiment with innovative methods,
the political scientists failed to gauge the absurd mood of present day
politicians and the extent of politicization that has taken place in the
society. ---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|