The Hindu has published a post 'The Big Stupid Indian Wedding'. And as we can guess from the word 'stupid', the article is about Hindu weddings.
This is written by Shilpa Krishnan, who describes herself as "someone for whom happiness is the pursuit of words — reading, writing and narrating tales, tall and short. She lives near the sea with a cat she adopted and a kitten that adopted her and spends the evenings at the beach with her ten best friends, all canine". You can read the full post here.
The article isn't an eye-opener in any sense of the word. Extremely stale in both style and substance. Just good enough to score brownie points from ideological comrades who don't realise their 'radical' views are well in the mainstream and a part of commonsensical morality. Calm down 'radicals', you are not marginalised. You rule the industry of knowledge production. All the barons of academia belong to your school of thought. Your thoughts are a part of school textbooks. You are shocking no one, except by the disproportionately patronising response you give to such mundane narrative, "This article is really amazing". She said something that you studied in class 8th NCERT? Really amazing.
Every Navratri, our FB walls are flooded with photos of Hindu Goddesses modified to make an ideological statement. Sometimes it's Lakshmi with the wounds of domestic violence, Sometimes it is Durga with a sanitary pad soaked with blood creating the design of a sacred symbol. Sometimes it is the post of a 'strong woman' exhorting us to go to Pandals even when menstruating. Be courageous. Rebel against the guards standing at the door of every Pandal checking women's panties. Other times it is plain moral shaming. Hindus worshipping a woman when they can't respect one? Shame on you. Now we have become quite used to this constant outrage. In fact, it has become rather boring now. What bothers us is the expectation to be shocked and horrified. Don't you know how extremely violent and horrible Indian weddings are? You don't? WOW. You must be one of those male chauvinist purdah loving, wife beating, child-bride marrying sexual predator.
As Hindu males, you must constantly feel guilty. You can't enjoy one festival without people telling you how unworthy you are of happiness, how that festival is sexist, racist, casteist, speciest, anti-minority and anti-humanity some way or the other. So either you ideologically convert to their side and atone by constantly crapping on your Hindu identity or chop off your penis and hide in some corner.
Coming back to the article, it is titled 'Diary of a Little Woman' and the narrator is a "young Nila who rolls her eyes at archaic rituals and practices". The choice of a young child as the narrator is an apt device to wash off the ideological agenda, excuse the extremely deficient grounds on which the article stands and evoke the generosity rooted in emotions which adults are required to show towards children. We expect children to be innocent, honest and free from the kind of prejudices adults have. Plus, the little girl is writing in her journal. So this piece is not an industrial production intended for circulation. It is the experience of a cute little girl told to her dairy. Could it be more genuine and trustworthy?
To her credit, Ms. Krishnan has inspired me to be a little relaxed with my writings, not be on the edge to carefully formulate and substantiate arguments, provide evidence, not be too concerned about representation of all major sides to the story. I should thank her. Though I am scared that I may not be able to pull it off with as much grace as her. This privilege is limited to genuine elites. I am afraid I will look like Kajol trying to copy the dress and makeup of college queen Rani Mukherjee in Kuch Kuch Hota Hai. Genuine elites are backed by the giants of knowledge industry. And me? just Godse. People with a bad track record like me have to be extra-cautious to be taken seriously. They are already on the margin and can be quickly kicked out and disposed off as a noisy fanatic or useless troll.
The usage of a child in this ideological rant is much less of a nuisance when compared to other uses of children in ideological struggles. Use of child soldiers by Maoists is one example. Children are used as human shield by Hamas terrorists to extract more media attention and strengthen their victim narrative. Extremist groups in Kashmir do the same thing with stonepelters. On more legal side of things, parents are raising their young children as a girl while they are a biological boy (or vice versa) to show their ideological commitment to gender fluidity and be on the 'right side of history'. Closer home, Hindu shaming is entrenched in the mainstream academics and school education targets young children for indoctrination.
Nonetheless, our young innocent Nila is witnessing the wedding of her beloved Apoo Akka who is marrying Karthik Anna. Vanaja Mami is the villain. (Told you, rather boring) She doesn't allow a simple wedding but pays for a 1000 guests to eat, and some of them whom the bride and groom have never even met! (What a bitch) She looks for a groom from the same caste on a matrimonial website. Apoo Akka couldn't rebel against the arrange marriage because Vanaja Mami is not easy to fight with. She doesn't allow Apoo Akka to have any say in the guest list, venue, her dress or make up. By the way she also doesn't like bowling and the kids had to hid from her the fact that Karthik Anna took them bowling. Maybe she also strangled a cat and murdered a puppy.
As disgusting as she is, she isn't the mastermind of these crimes, she is just an agent. The mastermind is, wait for it, Indian culture. doom doom doom. In case you didn't get, that's 'suspense revealed' music. (Ah! who am I kidding, I am Kajol aping Rani Mukherjee)
Our young Nila is quite a sociologist. She doesn't forget to mention it was an arranged marriage from the same caste along with horoscope matching. The groom is a 'software engineer', selected of course by Vanaja Mami. Bride and groom were not allowed to meet alone. Parents forced the children to accompany them. Apoo akka didn't get any say in the guest list, or her wedding dress, or her makeup, or the venue. What? Who are these brides who are not allowed to invite their friends, or choose their lehngas or choose their makeup? Is it really common? Except for financial reasons, which apply regardless of gender, since when Indian culture started stopping brides from selecting their make-up. Unless she wants to dress as a drag queen, I don't think anyone would have a problem. And in that case, brides all around the world will face some opposition. Living in a society always entails some social expectations, unless it is an atomistic society characterised by isolated, disconnected individuals dependent on market and state for everything rather than spontaneous human associations.
Before writing an account of Indian wedding, one can do minimal research of watching videos of Indian weddings on YouTube. There are a lot of these. In these videos you can see how Indian weddings have changed quite a lot in last ten years. Brides are dancing with their friends, bride and groom are hugging and kissing, bride is dancing on stage and everyone is cheering and clapping. These brides didn't get a say in the guest list, their attire, their make up? What then, Panditji selected the song and dance steps for the bride?
I glanced at the comment sections of these videos. Almost no one seems to be bothered. Almost everyone has just congratulated and given best wishes to the couple. No one even notices that the bride danced without a dupatta. Compare this with, say the comment section of an Intagram post of Muslim actress in Bollywood wearing a bikini. One sea away in the west women have to cover head to toe to be in a public place, require permission of male members to attend college, are stoned to death for adultery. One sea away in the east, female genital mutilation is pervasive, but in India, our women are forced to create imaginary accounts of victimhood. Red Lenhga is oppressive. Sindur is oppressive. Mangalsutra is oppressive. Jaymala is oppressive. Everything is oppressive, everything is a sinister design of patriarchy to subjugate them, every flirtation is sexual assault and every intercourse regretful in hindsight is rape.
Nila is outraged about Kanyadanam. Why in this day and age a father would 'give away' his daughter? Why should he wash groom's feet? Why does the groom throw a 'tantrum' of going for Kasi Yatra?
Before why Kanyadanam, let's address what Kanyadanam is. Before I give my view, I would like to point out that there are diverse interpretations of the ritual, none superior to others in practice. There are varying interpretations of what dana means here. Some point out that the Kanyadanam is symbolic of the blessings of gods Bhaga, Aryama, Savita and Purandhi, who bless the woman, a symbolism of Shakti, with different boons. This interpretation is inspired by the Shakta tradition in which goddess Mahishasuramardini was bestowed by different devas different gifts like weapons, clothes, jewellery and other items of sringara. Rami Sivan, a scholar of religion says that the meaning of the word 'Kanya' is pre-pubescent girl, therefore, in the light of the fact that marriages today happen between adults, Kanyadanam is redundant. It was only with a pre-pubescent girl that the father acted as the guardian during marriage. He further explains that Shastras give freedom to women to marry on their own after three years past puberty, without any role of their father or family, only that they wouldn't be entitled to the stree dhana if they do so.
Isn't it funny how a debate on theological roots of social evils, say homophobia in other religions is always filled with questions of translation, interpretation, orientalism etc. even when the text is quite straightforward and religion quite monolithic but living traditions like Kanyadanam and Kasi Yatra which are far more complicated are treated on the face value.
The straight translation of kanyadanam as 'giving away of daughter' doesn't do justice to the ritual. The particular ritual should be seen in the context of the whole marriage ceremony. The main marriage ceremony starts itself with 'Varmala'. Notice that there is no such thing as 'Vadhoomala'. There are swayamvars for women but no swayamvars for men, because it is the man who has to become worthy of the woman. It is seen as woman's prerogative to choose a man as her husband. Another interesting thing to note is that while going for Varmala, bride is accompanied only by her friends and sisters - people whom she trusts and who are loyal to her. Parents and elders are not allowed because they may create undue pressure on the bride. Bridal entourage for Varmala is also traditionally accompanied by young brahmachari scholars. These scholars act as the 'protectors of the truth'. These are separate from the priest that performs the ceremony. They act as guardians that no coercion or injustice happens. In Sanskrit literature, it is often such brahmchari scholars who act as dutas or messengers for the girls who loved someone but were being forced to marry someone else. The vivaah of Krishna and Rukmini happened this way. In Abhijnan Shakuntalam, such scholars go to the court of Dushyant with Shakuntala to argue her case, in their capacity as 'those committed to Brahman or the Truth'. The tradition of such guardians protecting justice was quite prevalent in ancient India. For example, if the king is unjustifiably taking away the lands of villagers or levying excessive tax, the villagers may go and plead to these scholars, who in being true to their commitment to the truth and Dharma, would confront the king and often go on fasting, using their moral force against the brute force of the King. Prof. Vinay Lal has mentioned how Gandhian politics was inspired by such practices of ancient India.
The concept of woman having the first right of choice in marriage is also quite meaningful. A vast array of research in evolution and psychology points towards the fact that women, not just for social reasons, but biological reasons are hypergamous. It is argued that it was the selective mating attitude of female homo sapiens that drove the fast evolution of human race, much ahead of their closest relatives in the animal kingdom. Like many of the living traditions of our culture, the ritual of Varmala reflects deep sensibilities of human beings and harmony of culture with nature.
As far as feet washing is considered, again, it has to be evaluated from the perspective of its meaning in within the framework of Indic thought. Like Santhara in Jainism is not the same as suicide in framework of Victorian morality, feet washing isn't considered a sign of subordination in Indic cultures. When his poor friend Sudama visits him, Krishna himself cleans and washes the feet of Sudama. Arjuna also, out of his love for his friend Krishna washes his feet when he arrives after a long journey. Feet washing by bride's father of the groom isn't akin to a slave washing his master's feet, it is a sign of humbleness a data shows to one whom he is giving dana. It is a symbol that despite being superior in wealth, despite being the giver, data has not become arrogant.
When we were kids, rituals like Kasi Yatra were thoroughly enjoyed. They involved a lot of teasing and comedy. The bride's father doesn't 'beg' the groom. This ritual is symbolic for the groom to not lose sight of Dharma and Moksha being too indulgent Kama sukha. This ritual mimics the very profound Suka-Janaka samvada of Mahabharata, where a young Sukadeva, wary of samsaric bandhanas and determined to take sanyasa is educated by King Janaka. As to why the bride's father asks the groom to enter Grihastha Ashrama and not his own father, this also derives from the same story of Sukadeva. Suka is repeatedly asked by his father Vyasa to enter Grihastha Ashrama as its experience is important for his growth even as a sanyasi. When Suka doesn't listen to him, Vyasa asks him to go to King Janaka. Janaka, Seeta's father, today also remains a popular icon as the bride's father in Indian culture. Sukadeva intrigued by his father's words that Janaka despite living the lifestyle of a Grihastha, and moreover a king, is still Videha, one who isn't limited by bodily desires, decides to talk to him. The groom going for Kasi Yatra is the young Sukadeva who distrusts his father's advice who may be acting under the influence of Moha for his son and grandchildren and may not be giving him the best advice. Bride's father is like the father of Seeta, King Janaka, Videha who educated a sanyasi on the virtues of Grihastha Ashrama and ultimately convinced him after a debate. Like Sukadeva, the groom realizes the virtues of Grihastha Ashrama and agrees to marriage.
A detailed account of all the rituals of a Hindu wedding would require whole another article. The point is that these practices aren't a product of scriptural commands. They are not frozen in time. They are 'living'. They have been the stream of both continuity and change. A simple English translation is not enough for casting judgment upon them.
The attack on the practice of Kanyadana is celebrated as the part of a larger agenda of uncovering and fighting cultural forms of discrimination but I am not sure that Kanyadana or Kasi Yatra is really a source of oppression of women. Rami Sivan has pointed out that kanyadana, based on technical reasons, is no more relevant today. On the other hand, I believe the same quality of 'living' tradition of Kanyadana makes it relevant today. The moment a bride sits in the lap of her father, she gets a chance to relive all those memories when as a little girl she used to play in her father's lap, when she used to climb over his shoulders, often ruining the work he was doing and he would still laugh at his adorable daughter. She would eat with him in his plate and create a mess and he would still laugh at his adorable daughter. She would make noises and jump around when he would be sleeping, trying to wake him up to play with her. It is a moment of realisation for both the daughter and father in how far they have come since her childhood. It is a moment of reflection on the ceaseless change that characterises our world. The little girl who wouldn't go anywhere without her father has grown up, ready to take responsibilities of marriage.
Some may argue that why father only, isn't the mother also important? Of course she is. The focus on father-daughter relationship is more important at this juncture because the father in a way, is reminding the daughter of the role-model of a man he has set in her life. He is reminding her to expect same amount of love, care, patience and protection from the man she is marrying. There are rituals for the groom and a mother-figure reflecting the same opposite-sex role modelling. There are other rituals where same-sex role modelling comes into picture, and others, where a friend or brother figure is important. It is important to note that in Nila's narrative also, it is her father that she showcases as the 'ideal man'.
In times where men increasingly find themselves unable to participate in the feminist movement except ideologically, vilified as sub-conscious agents of 'patriarchy' and products with manufacturing defect of 'toxic masculinity', a ritual like Kanyadana gives me an opportunity to thank men who have helped me become who I am, most important of them, my father. It only goes well with my self-image of a strong woman that I am not scared to acknowledge the role of men in helping me be so. Unfortunately, the dialectics between sexes is broken and any talk of men having helped women is dubbed as misogynistic.
The character of young Nila in the story doesn't seem young. Her childlike literary skills are not complemented by a childlike sense of wonder, openness to experience and amazement. She often uses very strong words unusual for her age. "It has been THE LONGEST WEEKEND of my life. Arrgh!" "..I absolutely hate them" "Such rubbish!" She "rolls her eyes". I have been to a couple of Indian weddings and as the eldest child of the eldest sibling in a joint family, I have had the opportunity to spend a lot of time with young children. In my experience, children don't express themselves in such profound, judgemental ways.
To pass as a child, she could've been a little less whiny. If we think about it, Nila actually represents the archetypal feminist self image, that they are like an innocent little girl caught in a web of exploitation. She can't comprehend what's happening to her but feels something is wrong. They are like a helpless child who can't understand a lot, much less do anything about it. It is a self-imposed disability on being active agents, being rational and adult about life. They expect to be treated with as much love, affection and pampering as cute little baby girls. Their assertions, like a child's, are honest and clean and should be taken as true on face-value. As a child, they don't have the capacity for objective debate. Every criticism and challenge to their narrative is rude and harsh. It is 'toxic' masculinity of the evasive monster of patriarchy that mommy and daddy can't see but they do. They want to live in their own make-believe world where the imaginary daddy calls them "Ms. Nila" respecting her as an equal. He tells them 'I know you quite well' and is the kind who couldn't even 'force them to eat a bowl of carrots'. This middle aged dad is still romantic with his wife, winking at her making a not-so-non-veg joke in response to his daughter's question, something about a long honeymoon and short wedding instead of vice versa.
The ideology of feminism has become a therapy session for women with daddy issues. Unfortunately, even the scholars in the field of women's studies have not worked hard to instil objectivity in their research. They have actively avoided connections with disciplines of psychology or biology that can restrict their power to forge narratives based on their subjective opinions and their works are more often no better than a long, poorly written rap song.
This is the first wedding Nila sees from up close and the journal that she writes is about a list of complaints. She complains that the wedding was too long. She complains that they had to stay in the hall for three days even though they lived in the same city. In my house when such functions come children refuse to go back to the same old routine of school-home-school. To the contrary, they want the function to go on forever because they can play with their siblings and friends without being constantly monitored by adults. Such 'independent' time for children most of whom live in nuclear families with people other than their parents is quite liberating, and needless to say very important for their personal growth. They get some experimental time to practice skills taught by their parents with other adults and thoroughly enjoy it. On the other hand, young Nila is irritated by 'too many people". She is 'exhausted'. She complains that 700 guests is 'just too much'. Why, because you were given the responsibility to welcome them or because you had to go make a formal small talk with everyone? Maybe Nila's mother stole her diary and wrote this piece.
Nila complains about the wedding clothes. She is irritated that akka changes into countless sarees. Silk sarees. And as a child, this is what she observes - price tags. Really? She doesn't mention how vibrant the colors were, how akka looked so different in saree. She doesn't talk about how she herself looked. Instead, she mentions the prices of the sarees. Few of them cost 5000 and one of them cost 20,000. She doesn't mention how the groom looked, just the fact that he wore a 'couple of gold chains and a super fancy kurta'. Next she complains about the make-up. The make-up lady made Apu Akka look like a 'scary pink doll'. Somehow hiring a bad make-up artist is Indian culture's fault. The list of complaints goes on. The guests were too much, the clothes were too much, the jewellery was too much. "Oh the stage! the smoke! the chaos! the never ending mantras!"
This is the journal of a young girl. Really?
Nila doesn't mention decorations, dancing, enjoying different meals and meeting her relatives. She spent the wedding being upset because "they complicate the simple act of forging a matrimonial bond between two consenting Indian adults". What complications of the marriage ceremony are bothering this child that she prefers a simple marriage? What is in the 'simple' marriage for a child? It is the elaborate social marriage where she gets to take off from schools, meet her siblings, her friends and play with them all day long. Why would a young child advise the couple to cut short the social part and skip straight to banging? Although this is the advice Nila's daddy gives. When she asks him 'what he thought of the wedding, he winks at Amma and says they could have spent the money on a "long long honeymoon instead".
Forging a matrimonial bond can never be an act as simple as sex. Marriage is different from a relationship. Relationship is a contract which two people enter to increase their own happiness. It is between the two of them. They can make it, break it as per their own wishes. Marriage is a social institution which is in a quid pro quo with society. Married couples are an asset of the society, a family is the basic unit of its functioning. Family is to society what a cell is to our body. All the necessary tasks of a society are family centric - wealth generation, child rearing, taking care of older generation etc. The society recognises a marriage and provides the couple with certain social benefits, in return, the marriage, by definition, has to be a social affair, as it is in most of the cultures. Those who are not ready for marriage, should remain in a relationship but diluting the concept of marriage is not in their prerogative.
Nila's list of complaints is never ending. The cost of wedding is too much. The groom is so fussy. Why didn't he wash Akka's feet ? When Nila gets married, she will make her husband "wash her feet every day". Living with in-laws ? Yuck. Although I don't know if Nila's father would like it a lot if she moves in with her husband to his house, since he has already told her that he "can't afford to feed 1000 people just because she decides to get married" and that he can't foot the bill for her wedding and she has to go for court marriage. Nila is right, "Appa rocks".
Now Nila is a little girl and we can't say too much to her but here is something for her father.
Sir, you don't rock. You are a deadbeat dad. You have raised this child to have such a high sense of entitlement that she seems unable to enjoy anything beyond herself. With your ideological brainwash, you have robbed this child of her childhood. "I can't make you eat a bowl of carrots" and this means you win. You're a strong independent woman, Ms. Nila. You have convinced her into a scheme of 'freedom' which lets you escape your responsibility. She is so happy that you would never give her away. How can you when you're already an absentee father? You should really focus on being her dad rather than being a submissive friend. If you aren't able to teach her that adult life requires compromises and adjustments, we don't always get what we want, we have to make short term compromises for long term happiness, we have to plan ahead and that world owes us nothing , you have failed as a father and she will pay for it. Today she can complain and complain and you can rejoice how 'strong' she is but the world doesn't work like that. She will have to prove her worth to people. Her endless whining and negativity can scare you into submission but the world will simply cut her off. You are winning the popularity contest right now but with time she will come to hate you. She will blame you for her failures and not giving her the necessary life skills at the right time. She will have trouble forming genuine relationships, cynical as she is to find oppression in every human connection. This can act as fodder for writing posts online about patriarchy and toxic masculinity, but few likes and social media martyrdom can take you only so far. She will be frustrated, hurt and lonely. If you don't give her some tough love, Appa, your Nila Kutti is going to have to live her life only with 'a cat she adopted, a kitten that adopted her and spend the evening with her ten best friends, all canine".
It's probably too late for Nila's father, but it isn't too late for us. Can feminism be salvaged? Not without correcting its past mistakes. What are these mistakes? What are the issues feminism missed and skipped? Can the dialectics between sexes be re-established? How? We will answer these in our coming posts.
Don't forget to subscribe!