Sachin Tendulkar‘s comment that Bombay belongs to India, and that he was a proud Maharashtrian but an Indian first, has predictably kicked off a storm with the hobbled Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray saying there was no need for the batsman who has 29,951 international runs against his name to take a “cheeky single” by making such remarks.
“By making these remarks, you have got run-out on the pitch of Marathi psyche. You were not even born when the ‘Marathi Manoos‘ got Mumbai and 105 Marathi people sacrificed their lives to get Mumbai,” Thackeray said in an editorial in his party’s mouthpiece, Saamna.
Who is right? And can this be applied across the country?
Also read: S.L. RAO on parochial passsions
As some politico said, Sachin has clean bowled Thakeray. Also, i think Sachin’s statement will do wonders for the Marathas who have been embarrassed to be associated with the like of Raj and Bal.
Sachin has truly scored with his comment.
There isn’t even a question of right or wrong here. What Balasaheb is trying to imply is outright absurd! The idea of Maharshtra isn’t independent of India, therefore even the-keeper-of-marathi-manoos-rights is an Indian first…then only his marathi-ness follows. He’s growing old…and hence losing it by the hour. And his nephew is already showing those signs.
If marathi’s have any sense, they’d relegate the Thackereys to a fringe group like KRV in Karnataka.
Linguistic Chauvinism is absurd! Most Indian languages didn’t exist about 30 generations ago, and in another 30, none of the current languages may be spoken. Marathi as it is spoken today has just about 800 year history, and old maharastriya (prakrita) langauge was perhaps about 1300-1500years old. A generation is considered to be 30 years, so each 20-40 generations languages change.
Enlish of Shekspere and elizebeth is hardly spoken today. That’s 700 years. Even 400 years back the languages were different than how it is spoken today. When languages evolve so fast, by intermingling with other languages, what purpose will be served by enforcing an linguistic purity? And how can it be pure, when there isn’t a ‘pure’ language int he world?
Cultures of places change slower, but languages change much much faster. Our mythology have grown over 5000 years, but the language in which those mythologies were written is no longer spoken!
So, what is in a language? It is just a means of communication. It can’t define a nation!
People like Thackereys (Bal/Raj/Udhav etc) should be consigned to mental asylum but then what of the 10-15% voters who vote for them??
Even at the peak of Gokak in Karnataka Kannada Chaluvali guys couldn’t command more than 1-2% of votes, in fact, most of the time its been less than 1%.
Why Marathi’s are becoming even more Chauvinistic than even Tamilian groups??
I think what irritated Bal Thakre is Sachins answer that Mumbai belongs to the entire country. This worsened the Thakres insecurities. Also, Bal Thakre wanted to cash on this before Raj Thakre would do something.
Part of the trouble is for celebrities uttering platitudes because they are celebrities. . Why couldnt this idiot say he was an Indian and a Maharashtrian without pitting Indian first- or why couldnt he just keep his mouth shut?
Pingback: Bal Thackeray Commits Blasphemy – Questions & Aattacks God . – POV
Sachin has the Ashoka chakra on his helmet, which used to be below the BCCI symbol, and now above it, which he usually kisses after every notable performance. Probably Thackeray has missed this!!
How stupid people can be.
Whatever Thackeray has mentioned regarding Marathi people giving away their lives for sake of Mumbai is very true.
Marathi people are the first citizens in Mumbai, very similar to the way French people are first citizens in Paris.
What I fail to understand is, what is the need to worry when anybody says “Mumbai belongs to Marathis”.
Sachin’s statement over he being an Indian first and then a Maharashtrian is utter non sense. Even when Maharashtra was existing, India wasn’t. Only because he is a Maharashtrian, he is an Indian and not the other way round.
All this is nonsense. Just because the microphone is held in front of the mouth, people speak such fancy things. He is not an exception. I don’t think he will tell the same answer if his mother or a close friend asks. These fancy things could be interpreted in different ways by different minds. The media also plays a role in reporting trivial things and watching the fun. This is yet another example of making a mountain out of a mole hill.
There are people who argue when they utter “I play for my nation….” they say why not utter because they are paid so heavily!! That is another view. These things stand out because generally people are dishonest when they make such remarks because we have only seen Netas utter them. It is here the genuine ones gets diluted. People will not believe if some genuine fellow shouts from the heart “I am proud of my country India and so on..” So in our country it is better to do many such things inside our four walls or keep mouths shut even if they are being honest! There are many people here who have lots of time looking for new issues to rake up, out of usually nothing.
Another thing: Sachin has been granted special permission to wear the little national flag on his helmet below the BCCI logo, which no other player can boast of.
Bal bowled one but Sachin hit the *Bal* for a four because that *Bal* was a poor one. He scored just one boundary yesterday, did he not?
ಇವತ್ತಿನ ದಿನ ಕನ್ನಡ-ಕನ್ನಡಿಗ-ಕರ್ನಾಟಕಗಳ ಏಳ್ಗೆಗಾಗಿ ದುಡಿಯುವುದು ದುರಭಿಮಾನ, ಇಲ್ಲವೇ ಜಾತಿವಾದ, ಇಲ್ಲವೇ ರಾಷ್ಟ್ರೀಯತ್ವಕ್ಕೆ ವಿರುದ್ಧ ಎಂದು ದುಡುಕುವುದು ಕೆಲವರಿಗೆ ವಾಡಿಕೆಯಾಗಿಹೋಗಿದೆ. ಆದರೆ ಈ ದುಡುಕಾಟದಲ್ಲಿ ಹುರುಳಿಲ್ಲ.
ಕರ್ನಾಟಕವೆಂಬ ಭಾಷಾವಾರು ರಾಜ್ಯ ಹುಟ್ಟಬೇಕು ಎಂದು ವಾದಿಸಿದ ಮೊದಲಿಗ, ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ಕುಲಪುರೋಹಿತರಾದ ಆಲೂರ ವೆಂಕಟರಾಯರ “ಕರ್ನಾಟಕತ್ವದ ವಿಕಾಸ” ಎಂಬ ಹೊತ್ತಗೆಯಿಂದ ಆಯ್ದ ವಾಕ್ಯಗಳು ಕೆಳಗಿವೆ. ಹಿಂದೆ ಕರ್ನಾಟಕವೆಂಬ ಪ್ರತ್ಯೇಕ ರಾಜ್ಯ ಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ಹೋರಾಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದ ಅಲೂರ ವೆಂಕಟರಾಯರನ್ನು ಕೂಡ ಜನರು (ಕನ್ನಡಿಗರು ಕೂಡ!) ಅಪಾರ್ಥ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡಿದ್ದುಂಟು, ಅವರನ್ನು “ದುರಭಿಮಾನಿ”, “ಜಾತಿವಾದಿ”, ಮತ್ತು “ರಾಷ್ಟ್ರೀಯತ್ವ ವಿರೋಧಿ” ಎಂದೆಲ್ಲ ಕರೆದಿದ್ದುಂಟು. ಹಿಂದೆಯೂ ಅವರು ಈ ಪೊಳ್ಳು ವಿರೋಧಗಳಿಗೆ ತಲೆ ಕೆಡಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳದೆ ತಮ್ಮ ಸಿದ್ಧಾಂತವನ್ನು ಸ್ಪಷ್ಟವಾಗಿ ಅರ್ಥ ಮಾಡಿಸಿದ್ದುಂಟು. ಕರ್ನಾಟಕವೆಂಬ ಪ್ರತ್ಯೇಕ ರಾಜ್ಯವನ್ನು ಕನ್ನಡಿಗರಿಗಾಗಿ ಅವರು ಕೊಡಿಸಿಯೇ ತೀರಿದ್ದು. ಆ ಮಹಾನುಭಾವನ ಅಂದಿನ ಮಾತುಗಳು ಇಂದಿಗೂ ಹೊಂದುತ್ತವೆ. ಇಂದೂ ಕೂಡ ಕನ್ನಡ-ಕನ್ನಡಿಗ-ಕರ್ನಾಟಕಗಳ ಏಳ್ಗೆಗಾಗಿ ದುಡಿಯುವವರಲ್ಲಿ ಇಲ್ಲಸಲ್ಲದ ದೋಷಗಳನ್ನು ಕಾಣುವವರಿಗೆ ಅವರದೇ ಉತ್ತರ:
ಪ್ರಾಂತೀಯತೆ ಎಂದರೆ ಪ್ರಾಂತದ ದುರಭಿಮಾನವಲ್ಲ. ಪ್ರಾಂತೀಯತೆಯೇ ಸರ್ವಸ್ವವಲ್ಲವೆಂಬುದು ಕರ್ನಾಟಕರಿಗೆ ಗೊತ್ತಿದೆ. ಅನ್ಯರು ಕಲಿಸುವದು ಬೇಡ.
ಕರ್ನಾಟಕರು ಇಂದಿನ ವರೆಗೆ ಎಂದೂ ಅಧಿಕೃತವಾಗಿ ರಾಷ್ಟ್ರೀಯತ್ವಕ್ಕೆ ವಿರುದ್ಧವಾಗಿ ಹೋಗಿಲ್ಲ, ಹೋಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ.
ಪ್ರಾಂತೀಯತೆಯನ್ನು ಜಾತೀಯತೆಗೆ ಹೋಲಿಸುವುದು ತಪ್ಪು. ಕರ್ನಾಟಕಕ್ಕೆ ಭಾರತದಂತೆ ಸ್ವಾಧೀನ ಕರ್ತೃತ್ವವು ಬೇಡ. ಭಾರತಾಧೀನ ಕರ್ತೃತ್ವ ಬೇಕಿದೆ. ಸರ್ವತಂತ್ರತ್ವವು ಬೇಡ. ದತ್ತ ಸ್ವಾತಂತ್ರ್ಯವು ಬೇಕು.
ನಾನು ಮೊದಲು ಭಾರತೀಯನು, ಆನಂತರ ಕರ್ನಾಟಕನು ಎಂಬುದು ಸರಿಯಲ್ಲ. ಇವುಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಮೊದಲು, ಹಿಂದಗಡೆಗಳಿಲ್ಲ. ಎರಡೂ ಭಾವನೆಗಳು ಪರಸ್ಪರ ವಿರುದ್ಧಗಳಲ್ಲ. ವೃಷ್ಟಿತ್ವವೂ ಸಮಷ್ಟಿತ್ವವೂ ಏಕಸಮಯಾವಛೇದದಿಂದ ಬೇಕು.
ಏಳಿ! ಎದ್ದೇಳಿ! ಕನ್ನಡಿಗನೇನೆಂಬುದನ್ನು ಅರ್ಥ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳಿ! ಪ್ರಪಂಚದಲ್ಲಿ ಕೋಟಿಗೊಂದು ಹೃದಯ ಕನ್ನಡಿಗನದಷ್ಟು ಶುದ್ಧವಾಗಿದ್ದೀತು! ಇಡೀ ಭಾರತಕ್ಕೆ ಕನ್ನಡಿಗನೇ ಆದರ್ಶ ಪುರುಷನು! ಇವನಲ್ಲಿ ಸಂಕುಚಿತ ಮನೋಭಾವವೆಲ್ಲಿಂದ ಬಂದೀತು? ಇವನಲ್ಲಿ ಹೇಡಿತನವೆಲ್ಲಿಂದ ಬಂದೀತು? ಇಲ್ಲಸಲ್ಲದ ಮಣ್ಣೆರಚಾಟವನ್ನು ಕೈಬಿಡಿ! ಬನ್ನಿ! ಒಗ್ಗೂಡಿ! ಒಂದಾಗಿ ಬಂಗಾರದ ಕನ್ನಡನಾಡ ಕಟ್ಟಲು ಮುಂದಾಗಿ!
First Indian then Maharashtrian is bull crap. They are not 2 separate and opposite views. Being a Maharashtrian makes Sachin an Indian and not the other way around.
Slowly this decease will come to bengaluru, then chennai and every other linguistically unique city of this country. All these cities will see a demographic invasion and then, people shouting from their top of the voices saying that they are indian first crap.
In the process,, the entire unity in diversity crap will see a silent death and we’ll see north indian imperiliasm every where in the country and i’ll tell you that is bad for the unity of this country.
Before calling someone an Idiot, have you considered what tendulkar did was Deliberate?
He was trying to make a point by pointedly saying Though he is a maharastrian, he is an Indian first. He could’ve stopped there but he went on to say – Mumbai is for all Indians. It wasn’t a slip of tougue.
Just because someone points their considered opinion they don’t become idiots.
There is nothing wrong in saying “Mumbai is for Maharastrian” The trouble comes up only when we add ‘only Maharastrian’ to that phrase, which is what Sena(s) have been doing.
They will not be able to do this even if Maharastra votes Shiva Sena or MNS to power with a majority (Which they won’t get as at best they have 12-15% support). Indian constitution is very clear, and any attempt at succession will lead to dismissal of state govt.
Hiranyaaksha: Maharastra existed when India didn’t?? Heh it is the other way around, India (as in Bharat) existed when Maharastra did not! Maharastra and Marathi history is just 1300 years old, Maha Bharata and Bharata Varsha is older by a few thousand years : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharata_%28emperor%29
Hiranyaksha: don’t know if you noticed the map int he URL I posted in previous post. You can find that here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/EpicIndia.jpg
The founder of this nation is King Bharata, and his nation was called “Bharatavarsha”. In fact, most brahmins who have recited any sankalpa may recall, the words “Bharata Khanda” or Continent of Bharat, being part of Jumbu Dwipa (which is part of 7 dwipas mentioned in our ancient texts).
India was indeed a name given by British, but that doesn’t mean India didn’t exist. This is a mis-perceptional of some people who say, British defined the Indian Nation!!
If you can try and see the BBC series called “The story of India”. Six parts and amazing, though not very exhaustive (Indian history can’t be covered in just 6 hours).
Kulla can barely speak ‘Inglish’! May be he was in the zonk ‘zone’.
For Other Posters: the problem is with Marathi as a language; it is a hodge podge of some bad Hindi, Persian, Portuguese, Kannada, Konkani, and some tribal dialect. Also the genus ‘Marathi Manoos’ is quite complex.
Bal is right. Yes, this applies to the entire country – India i.e.
Firstly, I doubt if Sachin, who, in the past 20 years, has been living more than 50% of the days in a year outside “his” country, knows enough about what India and Maharashtra actually mean to a normal individual – including himself, and Bal too. No harsh feelings there, but I guess that’s part of his occupation, thats all.
In this context, I am reminded of an intriguing question that Aaloora Venkatarayaru (leading man behind Karnataka ekikarana in the ’50s) had raised in his work – Karnataka Gatavaibhava – “if one were to pick up a fistful of sand from Hampi, would that sand belong to Karnataka, or India?” Is this puzzling to some of us? Even today?
Well I guess, this question bears most congruence with today’s situation. When a Maharashtra born citizen of India, is confused about his identity and says he is an Indian first, Marathi (or Maharashtrian) next, things definitely have gone wrong! Mind you, this applies even if you play cricket for India more than you play for Maharashtra, because this is about you as an individual, and what you inherited from birth – not about what you did with it in all your life.
India is the derived entity & identity that Maharashtrians, Karnatakans, Tamilians, Andhraites, Keralaites, Goans, Orissans, Biharis, Uttarpradeshis, Gujarathis, Assamees, Kashmiris etc. etc. share. In order to “relate oneself to” this “shared” identity, I wonder why one needs to order one’s identities in an artificial order, thereby manipulating something natural and true!
Sihva sena has so far destroyed mumbai. They only care for religious sentiment and language sentiment. They don’t care wheather mumbaikar have bread to eat daily or small place to sleep. I pray to god that mumbai should have one more tusnami so that all germs are washed out.
Speak in the language that is most convenient to you. Simple. Why are people emotionally attached to language, culture, I don’t get. Big deal if it’s washed away. Try reading haLegannada and you will see its totally different from what it is today. Same is true with Tamil or any other language. Culture evolves even faster.
What Sachin has said is right.But Mr.Harkol for your information in tamilnadu the people from all different states are living safely. Don’t write something personal. O.K
I think the point should be made that taking pride in one’s state, city, region or village does not imply that one is against the country. There is no need to create controversies related to this.
Does Mr Marata fanatic has a passport? If it is an Indian passport it is a shame and insult to the Marati’s, he should return it or he should be persuaded to return it!
I don’t think I wrote anything ‘personal’, but I apologize if I offended you in any way.
And I am scratching my head to figure where I mentioned anything about Tamilnadu, though I think Tamilnadu also has its share of chauvinists just as in karnataka. But, no where has Chauvinism has become as acute a problem as in Maharastra.
So, My grouse is with the voters (a group, not any person) who vote for linguistic or religious parties that have no bigger vision or agenda for the country/state, other than playing on narrow issue of pride/victimhood.
Please make your point more crisply.
While what you mention in your last comment might be true, I dont see how it matters in the discussion going on on this page.
So please show the relation between your comment and this article.
Consider this irony – Hampi was the capital of Vijayanagara Kings. The official language of Vijayanagara empire was Telugu & Kannada. The greatest King of Vijayanagar, Krishna Devaraya, wrote his famous books Amuktamalyada in Telugu, and scores of other books in Telugu and Sanskrit!
He himself was a person of Tulu descent (born to a commander from Tulunadu, the present day Mangalore/udupi). Krishnadevaraya spoke Telugu, Kannada, Tulu, Tamil and Sanskrit languages fluently. No record of him ever writing anything in Kannada, and his Ashta Diggajas were mostly Telugu speaking (Who can forget Tenali Ramakrishna??)
I also disagree that just because a person lives outside the country for a while, he is any less knowledgeable or competent to speak than persons living within. If your contention is right, then Gandhi, having lived in England and South africa for more than 20 years (away 100% from India) couldn’t have led India at all!!
Besides, we are not talking about understanding or competency here. We are questioning the tactics of Shivsena/MNS, where they appropriate a write of free speech for themselves, but take offense when others exercise theirs!! They go on issuing threats and warnings to those who have different opinion.
Kanakadasa sang “kula kula kulavendu Hodedadadiri”… If he was living today, perhaps he’d have sung “Bhashe Bhasheyendu hodedadadiri”!! ;-)
1. I think we are talking about regional parochialism and cultural conservatism here, Thackerey being the champion of it. So I don’t know why you think my coment was off the topic.
2. I am not writing the constitution of India here. It is just a comment, big deal if its tangential.
Firstly, I have to mention – you seem to possess this skill of kidnapping a discussion away into your jungles of darkness, eh!? Mentioning Hampi was only a placeholder there. You obviously didnt get the gist of my anecdote, what with the confusion that you dragged yourself into!
After all, Hampi still rests inside Karnataka, and it is the Vijayanagara Empire with which Hampi is always identified with, and not the Indian identity, right?!
Secondly, I submit that I had to mention Sachin’s self-imposed “exile” from India only to relate his lack of physical involvement in the proceedings in the country – nothing to do with his ability to comment, but the irony in the fact that all of a sudden this bolt of Indianness seems to have struck him now, and made him come out in public talking about it?
Anyone here remembers the days when Sachin had to import his ‘gifted’ ferrari into Indian and reach into the annals of politics to avoid paying heavy taxes to the country? What Indianness is he portraying by making such a loud and glaring mistake? Does he understand what Indianness means in the real sense then? Is sharing the Indian identity only about wearing blue and scoring on the field, and not being anything magnanimous or trend-setting outside of it? Does he not remember that his cricketing skills didnt grow up anywhere else in India, but in his own birthplace – Maharashtra? He could have been a totally different kid (Good or Bad) at 16 if he were born anywhere else. I quote myself – “Dear Sachin – you are what you are, because of your real identity, your Maharashtrian identity, and not that one, the Indian one.”
And talking about it fundamentally, what actually, anyone here can answer this, does he mean he’s India first and then a Maharashtrian? I fail to understand how anyone’s identity can have an order when all the identities mean the same?! Its like saying, excuse me, but I am a human being first, and I belong to this planet called Earth first, and then to Asia, then to India, and then to MH state, and then… how kiddish!? Who’s Sachin trying to impress (now)? What extra does his Indianness get him that his alleged Maharashtrian (or any other) identity wont get him? What’s so “first” about it?? Its like – If you tell me you’re Indian by identity, I’ll still seek more! So why not tell me the truth straight forward!?
In fact because of such people who seem to be having an identity crisis, any talk about one’s own language appears to draw battle lines, while they actually are not! So the hodedaata that you hint at is an unfortunate consequence of misunderstanding in this regard.
You see, Mr Harkol, everyone on this planet (and even the dumb ones who cant speak) is bestowed with a language, a beautiful one in that, and its his absolute right to flaunt it. And luckily in our country we have a construct called State built with regions which house people speaking a similar language. And now if that were to be one’s identity (at the time India was being constituted) the Indian identity is definitely a secondary, shared identity, but surely not the complete reflection of an individual’s identity. So my question remains – what is Sachin expecting out of this new order in his identity now?
excellent comment Harkol. We take pride in for unity in diversity. And when it comes to state, we want one language for the state. whats an irony. Does the diversiry means those speaking other language than the natives can not live in peace n harmony. Abu Azmi is a democratically elected legislature and the people who have chosen him does not care what language he speak o. what they want is development he can do for his constituency. If the people who have chosen him does not care about his ignorance about marathi, why should other care about.
Nijavada: Sorry I may have missed what you are trying to say.
From my “Jungles of darkness”, I can only see this: When we travel outside of India (Which is what you yourself admit Tendulkar does most of the time), the only identity he’d be carrying is that which is printed in his “indian” passport.
And I don’t think we need passports to travel within India, so I don’t have to establish my identity as a Maharastrian/Kannadiga etc. to live anywhere in India. If a day comes when that is needed, then we all cease to be Indians, and we will be flaunting our other identity ‘first’.
In gist, that’s what tendulkar said – Our true identity is that of Indians. We may have many sub-identities as you mention, but our standing identity in the world is that of India.
That said, here is a thought for everyone to chew. Maharastra is not only about Marathi. It also has Konkani as a major language. In fact, Mumbai belongs to Konkan Region. So, where does that leave Bal/Raj on claiming Mumbai as Marathi’s??
The problem that happened with Linguistic division of India is that it created a false Identity. We don’t call a Telugu Speaking Karnataka Citizen as Kannadiga, neither do we call Urdu Speaking Bangaloreans Kannadigas!! That identity is a linguistic identity, not geographic at all. The only geographic identity we have is “INDIAN”, for I may live in 3 places of India (like I do in Bangalore, Hyderabad and Managalore alternatively).
I am a Tulu Speaking person from Mangalore, does that make me a Kannadiga, because Someone chose to club Mangalore with Karnataka?? I can speak kannada well, so does that make me Kannadiga, if so, I can speak English and Hindi well. Does that make me British and UPite as well??
And let us revert your logic of saying anyone who is a Marathi is also an Indian, so why insist on an identity? What of a Singapore born Tamilian? Or A Simhalese Tamilian. Are they Indian too??
Where do you draw the line?
We are all Indian, other divisions are all administrative and are in our minds.
Replace “Maharastra” in your comment with “Brahmin” and see if it makes any difference. He is Brahmin, born in a Brahmin family, married to an Brahmin ( he did not marry to any Maharastrian..but to a Brahmin girl). where is the Maharastra identity in him?? why should he be identified with Maharastrian. If not Indian, he should be identified with Hindu-Brahmin.
I think more than Harkol, you seem to possess this skill of kidnapping a discussion away into your jungles of darkness.
bal thackery has the right to express pro- marathi views. sachin has made a political, unworthy statement which was unnecessary.
hindiwallahs are shooting from sachin’s shoulders.
northindian lobby is working overtime to destroy india’s diversity.
for me ,there cannot be a more talented, aggressive ,gifted player like vivian richards. i think he is the greatest batsmen to have played the game post-bradman era.
To put the question of INDIAN identity in perspective:
My friend a Hindi speaking person from Calcutta, chose to marry a Kannada speaking person, and they speak English at home as that is the common language for them. Their only child speaks English from early childhood, and learnt Kannada, Hindi only as part of curriculum. What is the identity of this child?? British?
Alternative example: R.K Narayanan is appropriated as Tamilian and Arvind Adiga as a Kannadiga. But, both of their literary achievements have been in English and they are likely to be most comfortable in that language.. Does that make them British?
Thyagaraja Composed almost all of his music in Telugu, sitting in Tanjaore (heart of Tamilnadu). What does it make him?
How do we define Arundati Roy?? Born to a Bengali Father, A Keralite Mother. Early education in Kerala, perhaps learnt malayalam because of that, but she’s most comfortable in English, but now lives in Delhi. She was claimed by Malayali’s as their own.. Or Is she a Delhwala? How so?? Why so?
Aishwarya Rai, Born in Mangalore, brought in in Mumbai, spoke Tulu with her parents, but speaks fluent Hindi and english. She is more comfortable with Hindi/English than tulu. What does that make her? Maharastrian? Kannadiga (She doesn’t know Kannada). Tuluva – There isn’t a state for Tulu people. So, what is she?? What identity should she claim as her own, other than that of “INDIAN”??
And Tendulkar – Speaks fluent English other than perhaps Marathi. I suspect he speaks wonderful hindi too. Why should he only be thought of as a Marathi?? Because he was born to Marati parents?
Nandan Nilekani: Born to a Konkani Family, in Karnataka. What is he?? If Kannadiga – Why? Because he can speak Kannada? He speaks fluent English too!
If language we speak indeed defines our identity – Then perhaps there are more than a Billion British people in the world!!
CONCLUSION: Language creates a false identity. It is just a tool to communicate. WE ALL HAVE ONLY PRIMARY IDENTITY – INDIAN. All other identities are transitory.
The very fact that you bring the geographical factor into identifying oneself carried an answer to the question in rhetoric embedded in your comment!
Dude! You’ve really thought so much about the combinations possible in our diverse setup, but if only had you given as much thought in the direction that we all deserve a “better” solution to our situation than accepting the current implementation as good enough, you’d have seen the point I was trying to make.
So drawing from points you raise, I see that you’re overwhelmed by the super diversity present around you. You’ve certainly given that part a good thought. If there’s something that needs your thinking, that is that diversity is REAL. And a good system does NOT fear from reality, neither does it attempt to find alternate truths!
But you do raise controversies in your own comment. While you deny the need for passports within India, you use some interesting terms like “Karnataka Citizen” and “Telugu guy”.
If you live in 3 towns, I dont think it is fair enough for you to base identity decisions for an entire 100 crore population on your grounds! Neither is it all inclusive. If you say you need the Indian identity to distinguish yourself from an American, or from a German or whoever, and for that you have passports, do you think it is fair doing to the “human identity” in discriminating people at the country level? Arent we all World citizens and human beings too? Why differentiate and draw country borders at all? Said otherwise – if country borders are alright, why do state borders within India look like battle lines to you?
You infact raised a good point – “Where do we draw the line?”
And then you you talk about the difference between a geographical and a lingustic identity.
If you looked closer you’d see that a geographical identity is what seems possessive and seeks to exhibit control over land, something that you dont want to do; whereas the lingusitic identity says that you inherit the identity of the people you commute with, and thereby exhibits transparency in its nature.
And BTW, you’re wrong in assuming the only identity you carry when traveling to another country is that “Indian” seal on your passport. Indian is just your nationality, and nationality is not EQUAL to identity. Upon meeting another Tulu guy in that country, you do speak with him in Tulu.. you dont speak Indian, do you?!
Somebody who is not Tendulkar might say, I am my family first, then my caste, then my language, then my religion, then my village/town/city, and only then my country.
If I cannot improve my own home first, what chance do I have in the world?
Probably is how it is for 90% Indians (yes I pulled that figure out of my hat, but it must be something close to that).
For the 10% like Tendulkar, it might be the other way around. If Tendulkar were a star in a game with a bigger international reach like soccer, he would probably have said – we are all human beings or some such thing.
Tendulkar is most probably saying something which suits his lifestyle the best. Someone else may not be the same boat as him – we need to use our own brain to decide rather than blindly agree with what our hero tells us.
I am assuming many of us commenting on this blog are the lucky 10% like Tendulkar who can afford to think at a higher abstraction and put country before caste/village/town/language/religion.
That said, the xyz Sene jackasses have proved their lack of ideas again. Their foolish physical attacks dont attain much and they dont even seem to know how to pick their battles.
You are both making very good conversation. A welcome change from the name calling we generally involve in here. So keep up the conversation, dont bother too much about the personal attacks.
While I am trying to enumerate the avenues of opportunities this tool called Language lays wide open to every single individual in this world you’re listing various “exceptions” in society and magnifying them beyond scale, safely ignoring a majority of the rest of society that is quite normal, and exception free. Not everyone is Thayagaraja or RK Narayan, or Arundhati Roy!
That apart, I think what you need to understand here is a Language serves as a major tool for development of an individual and a society on earth. It also happens to be, in process, the best way of identifying individuals as well.
Usually I dont pick on words from a debate, but this one gave me sufficient reason to pick – this is what you said “We are all Indian, other divisions are all administrative and are in our minds.”
I feel this is where lies the fault in your theory. In fact your theory itself can be extrapolated to say that we’re all human beings, and India is just in our minds. In fact even India as a country happens to be only administrative in nature. In fact that is what it is!
What does anyone in India need the Indianness for? Is it to differentiate oneself from the Chinese? Or from Pakistanis? In that case arent you saying you need an identity on the basis of widening the gap among human beings although there are things common between them? There are Punjabis & Kashmiris across the Indo-Pak border who maintain brotherhood because they speak the same language, BUT it is the nationality converted into identity that is hurting this brotherhood, everyday.
Your idea of an identity stands on grounds that divide human society, whereas the linguistic identity serves to unite them, most often organically.
AG: Nice point made about how 90% Indians may not be able to relate to an abstract concept of being an Indian. perhaps that’s the point Nijavaada was making too.
>”Upon meeting another Tulu guy in that country, you do speak with him in Tulu.. you dont speak Indian, do you?!”
I haven’t had an opportunity to speak to a non-Indian Tulu person, but I have a friend from Canada (currently in India) who claims to be a french man, because his parents were french, settled in Canada!! He has never been to france even once, and has no stake in well being of france. :-)
I have also spoken to a Non-Indian Kannadiga in Kannada! He can perhaps claim a sub-identity of being a Kannadiga Brahmin by virtue of Birth,, and speaks fluent Kannada, albeit with an accent.
And I can tell you that in no way this person can be called an Indian. He is a US national born and brought up in US, married to a US citizen. He told me he is a Kannadiga brahmin (by virtue of having Kannada parents and learning Kannada as his mother toungue). But, he wasn’t an Indian and doesn’t claim to be so, as he has no emotional/physical connection to India.
I use the term Citizen as with the meaning “an inhabitant of a particular town or city”. As with most words in English, Citizen has more meanings than just “a subject of a nation”.
There is a reason why a geographic identity typically scores over Linguistic one. Language is transitory, constantly changing and adaptable resource. Geography is something hard, rarely changing entity. Our Geography can make or destroy us. We can’t transcend the geography as easily as we can transcend Language.
Shall i say – the difference between Hardware and Software.
You speak of a ‘better solution’ than one that exists. There is a better solution – Bringing down the national barriers and making the whole world a single entity, with people being allowed to live anywhere they’d like to, and travel without restriction. In other words – The whole world as a single nation that would make current national identities irrelevant. Hope such a day will arrive.
World Citizen is not as abstract a concept as it appears. We all share a Genepool that is remarkably similar. Our differences are really narrow, it shouldn’t be large enough for people like Bal/Raj to divide us to the point of physical fights.
ಇತ್ತೀಚಿಗೆ ಸಚಿನ್ ತೆಂಡೂಲ್ಕರ್ ತಾನು ಮೊದಲು ಭಾರತೀಯ, ಆನಂತರ ಮರಾಟಿಗ ಅಂತ ಹೇಳಿದ್ದು, ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಶಿವಸೇನೆಯ ಬಾಳ ಠಾಕ್ರೆ ಅವರು ತೀಕ್ಷ್ಣವಾಗಿ ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯಿಸಿದ್ದನ್ನು ಮೊನ್ನೆ ಟಿ.ವಿ ಯಲ್ಲಿ ನೋಡುತ್ತಾ ಇದ್ದೆ. ನಾನು ಮುಂಬೈ ಯಲ್ಲಿ ೧೦ ವರ್ಷಗಳ ಬಿ.ಸಿ.ಸಿ.ಐ ಕಚೇರಿ ಹತ್ತಿರದಲ್ಲೇ ಇದ್ದವನು. ಹೀಗಾಗಿ ಅಲ್ಲಿ ನಡೆಯೋ ಲಾಬಿ ಬಗ್ಗೆ, ಅಲ್ಲಿ ನಡೆಯೋ ವಶೀಲಿ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ತಕ್ಕ ಮಟ್ಟಿಗೆ ತಿಳಿದವನು. ಸಚಿನ್ ಈ ರೀತಿ ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯಿಸಿದ್ದನ್ನು ನೋಡಿದಾಗ ಆಗ ನನ್ನ ಮನಸಿಗೆ ಕೆಲವು ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆಗಳು ಬಂದವು.
೧> 16ನೇ ವಯಸ್ಸಿಗೆ ತಂಡಕ್ಕೆ ಆಯ್ಕೆ ಆಗಿದ್ದರಲ್ಲಿ, 20 ವರ್ಷಗಳ ಕಾಲ ಒಮ್ಮೆಯೂ ಅವರನ್ನು ತಂಡದಿಂದ ಕೈ ಬಿಡದೇ ಇದ್ದಿದ್ದಕ್ಕೆ ಕಾರಣ ಸಚಿನ ಅವರ ಪ್ರತಿಭೆ ಮಾತ್ರ ಅಂದುಕೊಂಡರೆ ಅದು ನಮ್ಮ ದಡ್ಡತನ. ಕಳೆದ 20 ವರ್ಷಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಬಿ.ಸಿ.ಸಿ.ಐ ಗೆ / ಆಯ್ಕೆ ಸಮಿತಿಗೆ ಅಧ್ಯಕ್ಷರಾಗಿ ಬಂದವರು ಯಾರು ಅಂತ ಒಮ್ಮೆ ಯೋಚಿಸಿ, ಕಿರಣ್ ಮೊರೆ, ಗವಾಸ್ಕರ್, ವೆಂಗಸರ್ಕರ್, ರವಿ ಶಾಸ್ತ್ರಿ, ಶರದ್ ಪವಾರ್ ಹೀಗೆ ಸಾಲು ಸಾಲು ಮರಾಠಿಗರ ಹೆಸರುಗಳು ಕಾಣಿಸುತ್ತವೆ. 16ನೇ ವಯಸ್ಸಲ್ಲಿ ಆಡಲು, 20 ವರ್ಷಗಳ ಕಾಲ ಒಮ್ಮೆಯೂ ತಂಡದಿಂದ ಅಚೆ ಹೋಗದಂತೆ ( ಎಂತಹ form ನಲ್ಲಿ ಇಲ್ಲದ ಸಮಯದಲ್ಲೂ ಕೂಡಾ ! ) ನೋಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಸಚಿನ್ ನೆರವಿಗೆ ಬಂದಿದ್ದು ಇದೇ ಮರಾಠಿ ಲಾಬಿ, ಆಗ ನೆನಪಾಗದ “I am first Indian” ಅನ್ನುವ ಮಾತು, ಇವತ್ತು ನೆನಪಿಗೆ ಬರುತ್ತಾ ಇರುವುದು ಹೊಳೆ ದಾಟಿದ ಮೇಲೆ ಅಂಬಿಗನ ಹಂಗೇನು ಅನ್ನುವ ಮಾತು ನೆನಪಿಸುತ್ತೆ. ಮುಂಬೈ ಇವತ್ತು ವಲಸಿಗರಿಂದ ತುಂಬಿ ತುಳುಕುತ್ತಾ ಇದೆ. ಅಲ್ಲಿನ ಮೂಲ ಭೂತ ಸೌಕರ್ಯ ನಾಯಿ ಪಾಡಾಗುತ್ತಾ ಇದೆ. ಅಲ್ಲಿನ ಸ್ಥಳೀಯ ಮರಾಠಿಗರು ತಮ್ಮ ಹಕ್ಕುಗಳಿಗಾಗಿ, ತಮ್ಮ ಅಸ್ತಿತ್ವಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ಹೋರಾಡುತ್ತಿರಲು, ಸಚಿನ್ ಗೆ ಅದು ಯಾವುದು ಕಂಡ ಹಾಗಿಲ್ಲ.
೨> ಸಚಿನ್ ಮಾತಿಗೆ ” ವಲಸಿಗರ ಕಾರ್ಖಾನೆ” ರಾಜ್ಯಗಳಾದ ಬಿಹಾರ / ಯು.ಪಿ ಯ ನಾಯಕರು ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯಿಸಿದ ರೀತಿಯಿಂದ ನನಗಂತೂ ಏನು ಅಚ್ಚರಿಯಾಗಿಲ್ಲ. ತಮ್ಮ ರಾಜ್ಯವನ್ನು “ದರೋಡೆ, ಸುಲಿಗೆ, ಅರಾಜಕತೆಯ ” ತಾಣವನ್ನಾಗಿಸಿರುವ ಈ ರಾಜ್ಯದ ನಾಯಕರು ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾ ಇರುವ ಒಂದೇ ಒಂದು ಕೆಲಸ ಅಂದರೆ, ಟ್ರೈನ್ ಮೇಲೆ ಟ್ರೈನ್ ಬಿಟ್ಟು ತಮ್ಮ ರಾಜ್ಯದಿಂದ ವಲಸಿಗರನ್ನು ಮುಂಬೈ, ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನಂತಹ ಹುಲ್ಲುಗಾವಲಿಗೆ ಅಟ್ಟುತ್ತಿರುವುದು. ಇಂತಹ ದೇಶದ್ರೋಹಿಗಳಿಂದಲೇ ಇವತ್ತು ರಾಜ್ಯ-ರಾಜ್ಯಗಳ ಜನರ ನಡುವೆ ದ್ವೇಷದ ಕಿಡಿ ಎಳುತ್ತಿರುವುದು. ಸಚಿನ್ ಇದನ್ನು ಒಮ್ಮೆ ಪ್ರಶ್ನಿಸಿದ್ದರೆ, ಅವರು ನಿಜಕ್ಕೂ “Indian” ಅನ್ನಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು.
೩> ದೇಶದ ಎಷ್ಟೋ ಚಿಕ್ಕ ರಾಜ್ಯಗಳ ಪ್ರತಿಭಾವಂತ ಕ್ರಿಕೆಟ್ ಆಟಗಾರರಿಗೆ ರಾಷ್ಟ್ರೀಯ ತಂಡವೆನ್ನುವುದು ಗಗನ ಕುಸುಮವೇ ಆಗಿದೆ, ಆ ರಾಜ್ಯದ ಪ್ರತಿಭಾವಂತ ಆಟಗಾರರಿಗೆ ದೇಶದ ತಂಡ ಸೇರಲು ಲಾಬಿ ಮಾಡಲು, ವಶೀಲಿ ಮಾಡಲು ಆಗಲ್ಲ, ಅಂತಹ ಪ್ರತಿಭಾವಂತರು ಹತಾಶೆಯಿಂದ ನಿಟ್ಟುಸಿರು ಬಿಡುವ ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥೆ ಇರುವ ಇವತ್ತಿನ ಕ್ರಿಕೆಟ್ ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥೆ ಇಡೀ ದೇಶವನ್ನು ಪ್ರತಿನಿಧಿಸುತ್ತಾ ? ಅನ್ನುವುದು ನನ್ನ ಮನಸ್ಸಲ್ಲಿ ಹಲವು ಸಮಯದಿಂದ ಕೊರೆಯುತ್ತಿದೆ. ಅಂತಹ ರಾಜ್ಯಗಳ ಆಟಗಾರರಿಗೂ ಸಮಾನ ಅವಕಾಶ ಸಿಗಬೇಕು ಅಂತ ಸಚಿನ್ ಹೇಳಿದ್ದರೆ, ಅವರು ನನ್ನ ಕಣ್ಣಲ್ಲಿ ನಿಜವಾದ Indian ಆಗುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು.
೪> ನಮ್ಮ ದ್ರಾವಿಡ್, ಕುಂಬ್ಳೆ, ಗಂಗೂಲಿ ಇವರಿಗೂ ಸಚಿನ್ ನಷ್ಟೇ ಪ್ರತಿಭೆ ಇದ್ದರೂ, ಅವರಿಗೆ ಯಾವ ಯಾವ ರೀತಿಯ ಅವಮಾನಕಾರಿ treatment ಸಿಕ್ಕಿದೆ ಬಿ.ಸಿ.ಸಿ.ಐ ನಿಂದ ಅನ್ನುವುದು ಎಲ್ಲರಿಗೂ ಗೊತ್ತು. ಸಚಿನ್ ಗೆ ನೆರವಾಗಿದ್ದು ಮರಾಠಿ ಲಾಬಿ ಆನ್ನುವುದು ಅವರಿಗೆ ನೆನಪಿದ್ದರೂ, ಈ ರೀತಿಯ ಹೇಳಿಕೆ ಮೂಲಕ ಅವರು ತಮ್ಮ ಹಿತಾಸಕ್ತಿಯನ್ನು ಕಾಪಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಯತ್ನಿಸಿದರು ಅಂತಲೇ ನನಗನಿಸುವುದು. ತಾನೊಬ್ಬ ಕ್ರಿಕೆಟಿಗ, ಆಟವೊಂದರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಮಾತ್ರ ನಾನು ಮಾತಾನಾಡುವುದು ಅಂತ ಹೇಳಿಕೆ ಕೊಟ್ಟು ಸುಮ್ಮನಾಗಿದ್ದರೆ ಅವರು ನಿಜಕ್ಕೂ Indian ಅನ್ನಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು.
ಅಷ್ಟಕ್ಕೂ, ಆಡಿದ ಪಂದ್ಯ, ಜಾಹೀರಾತು ಎಲ್ಲದಕ್ಕೂ ಕೋಟಿ ಕೋಟಿ ಎಣಿಸುವ, ವಿದೇಶದಿಂದ ಫೆರಾರಿ ಕಾರು ತಂದರೆ, ಅದಕ್ಕೂ ತೆರಿಗೆ ವಿನಾಯಿತಿ ಬೇಡುವ ಕ್ರಿಕೆಟ್ ಆಟಗಾರರು ಈ ದೇಶದ ಪಾಲಿಗೆ ಹೀರೊ, ಆರಾಧ್ಯ ದೈವ ಆಗುವುದು ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶದ ಬೌದ್ಧಿಕ ದಾರಿದ್ರ್ಯ ತೋರಿಸುತ್ತೆ.
How come there is an state identity when the state itself does not have any single identity. When Mumbaikar dont identify themself with Vidharbha region, Andhra with telangana, coastal karnataka with south n north karnataka, East and west UP are two poles apart. Same with Gujrat ( Kutch n Sourashtra). State identity is a false identity which politicians use as per their convenience. Only identity which a person has within india is religion and caste. Religion n caste goes long back when even nation/state was not there. Outside india its religion and nation.
I quote you (again) – “There is a reason why a geographic identity typically scores over Linguistic one. Language is transitory, constantly changing and adaptable resource. Geography is something hard, rarely changing entity. Our Geography can make or destroy us. We can’t transcend the geography as easily as we can transcend Language.”
Another faltering in your theory dude!
Look within your comment (all through this page) and you’ll realise you’ve caught yourself in a controversy. While you were the one who said people could live anywhere in the world, and some could even live in 3 places all thru their lives. And now you’re saying Geography is something hard, and it rarely changes! In fact your American Kannadiga – what about him? He seems to be a Kannadiga regardless of the geography attached to him, right?
Agreeably a language is an evolving body, and anyone could “adapt” to it – I take adapt and learn in the same sense here. Not sure about your sense though. But, what remains shaashvata is the bond between you and your own language. Not talking about the exceptional people here again. Most of the people born in this world have only one mother tongue. So lets not talk about exceptions here. In fact your American friend is a perfect example of the lack of any meaning behind the Indian identity. That is why he/she naturally feels more Kannadiga, than Indian! In a way he has been able to transcend geography, but not language.
True religion/caste came before states/nations. But, Language came way way before religions/castes! Now what?!
You made this statement
“He told me he is a Kannadiga brahmin”
And then this
“There is a reason why a geographic identity typically scores over Linguistic one.”
Kinda contradicts you, doesn’t it ? Your friend thinks he is a kannadiga and not an Indian. So, which is more fundamental here ? Indian or Kannadiga identity ?
It is wrong to degrade the question of language to one of mere identity. It is a pity that Sachin has done it; it is a pity that most politicians do it. But it is a greater pity that this is often the topic of many heated discussions, such as this one – in which people seem to have a greater are more genuine concern for the future of India than cricketers or politicians generally have.
When we all graduate to appreciating the real utility of language, the noises made by empty vessels shall cease, for empty vessels they shall remain no more. That day shall be.
The utility of language is infinitely more important than the fact that it lends a certain identity to its speakers. Language is a tool for education, communication and cooperation between the speakers of that language. Marathi is the tool for education, communication and cooperation for all Marathis, Kannada for all Kannadigas. And remember that education, communication and cooperation are crucial for the economic success of a people. The general Indian intelligentsia, being products of Macaulay’s education system, cannot imagine any real education, communication and cooperation in Indian languages – but that is a huge mistake (funnily, Macaulay himself expected this intelligentsia to go forth and build Indian language education systems – which many among them seem to have blissfully forgotten).
So from a pure utilitarian point of view, Marathi beats both Maharashtrian-ness and Indian-ness hands down. These last two have no utility other than confining oneself geographically to either Maharashtra or India. The Marathi language, on the other hand, has the potential to free the Mind of a Marathi and let it fly like doth a bird in the high skies. The power of language is immense and irreplaceable by anything else. In India, we specialize in neglecting it, thereby remaining devoid of the powers our own languages hold – be it Marathi or Kannada or what have you.
In short, I urge debaters here to move away from the question which is so tempting to answer – the question of identity based on language, to the question of utility of language.
Think of Sachin Tendulkar and Bal Thackery as temptors distracting your mind which should be in a penance – a penance with the aim of bringing out the full glory of the utility of Indian languages.
switching between languages is easier than switching between religion. I can identify myself with multiple language, not true with the religion. If I am able to speak chinease, it does not mean that I am one of them, but when I adopt their religion, I can suerely identify myself with them. religion and culture are tightly linked which provide the identity. Take for example, Is there any geographical boundry for christians in TN n KA. A christian in TN would identify himself with another christian from KA than a person from other religion in the same state. The core point is “Language does not define an identity”. I am not tied to any language. I am tied to a religion and culture.
Nijavada: You mistook what I am saying to mean people can’t live in other geography. I didn’t say that – A person can live elsewhere and can even adapt another Identity/nationality with quite a bit of effort.
What I said was – The Geography changes far slower than languages, making it a far more realistic & sticky Identity. Indian Geography has hardly changed from the times of the Vedas.
Language is so transitory. The language Veda was written in doesn’t exist anymore. Linguists will tell you how Kannada has changed in the past century, I am sure Our film industry contributed in no small measure!! ;-)
Voluntary will isn’t sufficient to go live elsewhere in the world. Transcending geographical boundaries of national ID are not as easy as transcending language Barrier. All animals mark their territory and guard it to their last breath. Humans have done that from pre-historic times.
So, these geography based identities are far more real and harder to overcome.
To understand this more clearly – I have learnt British English sitting in India, but I won’t become British, Unless I was born in the territory of England or I migrate England, live there for substantial amount of time. An example of Geography giving me an Identity.
>American friend is a perfect example of the lack of any meaning behind the Indian identity
What are you saying? Because an American can speak Kannada, a concept called Indian Identity can’t exist? What is the co-relation?
This person hasn’t transcended geography as you say, he is tied to the one he is born in. He has transcended language, as he speaks English more fluently than Kannada (one his parents taught him), and also Spanish.
Though, His parents have adopted a different nationality than their birth, by virtue of living in that geography for long, they are still called “Indian-Americans” – Not “kannadiga americans”. Another example of “Indian first”.
Both Sachin and his mentor Sunil Gauskar were mediocre players most of the time, who were only inerested in piling up personal records in cricket, instead of contributing to the team. And we are here debating what this guy should or should not have said.
Compare these 2 players with our own karnataka players BS Chandrashekar, Vishy, Prasanna, Kumble, Srinath, Dravid etc and you will know the difference.
Vishy is Gavaskar’s brother in law. Dravid can hardly speak in kannada. Srinath parents are Telugu. Dont know what the personal deal is with Chandrashekar and Kumble.
Nothing great about ‘our’ cricketers as compared to ‘theirs’. They are no more or less cricketers than Sachin or Gavaskar.
If you are a pessimist – Ellara mane dose thoothu.
Well, I guess you’re just getting more and more confused now.
Now you seem to be thinking identity of a human being *must* be dependent upon something that doesnt change, or changes the slowest! Will you care ask yourself WHY that should be so? If change is so integral to humankind, no matter where he lives, there is no reason why such a static entity needs to be employed to identify a human being! Moving ahead into the modern world, where location of a person is literally meaningless now that the world is such a small place, I wonder what you’ll do identifying yourself with a piece of land! An individual’s obsession with a piece of land reaches climax when he wishes to identify himself with that piece of land itself, and infact, as I’ve said earlier too, that is when all the struggles over land or any other immobile property triggers in the human society.
Just because a system (so buggy) has spread its arms wide into the world so that people (like your friend) are termed Indian Americans, I dont think that is reason to believe that terms their REAL identities. Your friend has identified himself correctly by calling himself Kannadiga. I dont know if you’ve heard of the AKKA group of Kannadigas in the US, and many other Language groups present, and operating effectively in the US and other countries. Most members of such groups have transcended geography in your own sense!
> Somebody who is not Tendulkar might say, I am my family first, then my caste, then my language, then my religion, then my village/town/city, and only then my country.
Tendulkar is most probably saying something which suits his lifestyle the best. Someone else may not be the same boat as him – we need to use our own brain to decide rather than blindly agree with what our hero tells us.
Absolutely true. You hit the nail on the head !
The same question should have been asked to a normal Marathi/Kannadiga guy who has just not got a class IV railway job because special train load of people from Bihar are competing for the same jobs. Indian first or Marathi first ??
The problem is not Sachin’s thinking of India first, Maharashtrian next.
The problem in everybody in UP and Bihar thinking the same – Indian first and Maharashtrian next and thus the huge influx into Mumbai :-) !!
Trying to impose an identity based on language is just silly and futile. Natural selection always wins.. efficient languages will survive while the rest will fade away, just like computer languages :)
You may not like Sachin and Sunil Gavaskar. But to call them as mediocre is going too far. Some of the best players of cricket consider Sachin to be a great batsman. I don’t think he (or anyone in cricket for that matter) try to play to score personal records.
yes. All the players you mentioned are also great. I personally like Kumble among the lot.
“they are still called “Indian-Americans” – Not “kannadiga americans””..
Say, for example, srilankan tamilians. Are they tamilians or srilankans or both ? I think language binds you more than geography.
Nijavaada avare. I had participated in a AKKA meet a few years back, while I was in west coast of US.
But, Bidi saar. I don’t think I can make myself clear at all..
Perhaps, Do not have the linguistic skills needed. Those skills have been appropriated by the likes of Bala Thackerey and his admirers, who are hell bent on dividing this nation on as many silly-identities as possible.
My sense is that Majority of the people of this country supported Tendulkar on his statement. Majority perhaps thinks like me and take pride in their primary identity as Indians. Perhaps, from your perspective, they are all as confused as I am.
Sandesh: Due to Srilanka’s proximity and problem with Tamil population people do call them srilankan tamilians. This is largely because they as a class of people contest the identity of being Srilankans. But they are still known as Lankans.
Except for a minority of Indians, who support the separatist cause and Tamil Eelam, rest of Indians consider them Srilankans. Tamilian is only a secondary identity at best (As with Srilankan-Tamilian never Tamilian-SriLankan).
And besides we are not talking about ‘binding’ here. We only discussed Tendulkars comment on “primary” identity. An identity that comes ‘First’. I agree bonds can develop between people who can converse in same language.
Identity is what others classify us with. While, we can subdivide our identity to ridiculous levels if we choose (just as we have done by creating so many different caste identities in India), what matters are the primary ID.
One can make a case that there is even better bonding between people of same caste/tribe, but it’d be a sad day, if we accept our caste is our primary identity. Only a person blinded by caste system will do that, just as people blinded by linguistic diversity are forcing those identities on people.
you make some nice comments. However, the identity you claim depends on with whom you are interacting. if I meet a kannadiga abroad, I don’t say I am indian. I say that I’m a kannadiga too. Same with srilankan tamils. when a SL tamilian meets Indian tamilian their identity crosses geographical boundaries. similarly malaysian tamils and so on.
you are against linguistic identities. that is fine. however, you could go one step further and then claim identity based on continents. or if ever life is found outside earth, then you can say i am from earth.
I find it confusing to pin down an identity. however, majority of indians identify themselves with language rather than india. hence my feeling is language first–country next.
“Do not have the linguistic skills needed. Those skills have been appropriated by the likes of Bala Thackerey and his admirers, who are hell bent on dividing this nation on as many silly-identities as possible.”
i am no sympathizer of bal thackarey..but blaming him or his admirers for not able to put your point across is ridiculous.
“My sense is that Majority of the people of this country supported Tendulkar on his statement.”
my feeling is the opposite (see, both yours and my statements are just hypothesis :)).
“Sena workers attack TV channel office in Mumbai”
Shivsena goons attacked IBN TV channel office today. They were unhappy with its coverage of Bal Thackerey’s comments on Sachin Tendulkar.
Apparently, Freedom of Press is only for fanatics and their newspapers like Saamna, who can propound any narrow minded identities and divide our society. They can even attack physically when someone disagrees.
That is High culture and pride of one’s language, deserving of support by various people (even more educated/enlightened ones).
Sad state of affairs. As long as there are pathetic apologists and supporters for narrow vision of Shivsena, MN Sena, Sri Ram Sena and various other vanara senas, these parties will thrive.. Our national parties will close their eye for those pathetic 5% votes and will never act on these thugs.
I read someplace that an economic study done showed how it only takes about 10crores a year to control an entire city like Mumbai by a person like Raj Thackery. Apparently, 10crore is the amount needed per year to maintain a part time army of 500 people, who can hold an entire city to ransom. With no fear of law, and assured of support of so many sympathisers (quite a few on these discussions here), the ROI for these senas are phenomenal. Why would they stop??
>i am no sympathizer of bal thackarey..but blaming him or his admirers for not able to put your point across is ridiculous.
I think what Shivsena did with IBN attack yesterday makes it quite clear as to what I meant when I said “… have been appropriated by the likes of Bala Thackerey and his admirers”. These guys don’t cede the right of speech to anyone else at all… They burst into ‘spontaneous reaction’ after 2 days and a few people will be left nursing the bloody nose (if they are lucky to get away with only that).
What high culture!! How proud their linguistic fraternity should feel??
>my feeling is the opposite (see, both yours and my statements are just hypothesis :)).
I haven’t seen any public claim of support for what Thackerey said, except some fringe voices of shivsena and such mad outfits. All political parties and press commentators, newspaper editorials supported what Sachin said.
These reports and expression of support to what Sachin said is a fact, not a hypothesis made out by me. If you can site substantial public opposition (other than the goons of some fringe outfits and odd voices) to what Sachin said, then perhaps, what I said becomes a hypothesis.
On the other hand, the concept that people support Linguistic Identity beyond some pockets, is a hypothesis, which isn’t supported by facts. If it was a fact, then majority of people should be voting for SS, MNS, KRV kind of parties. Hasn’t happened. In no state a party has come to power purely on the basis of Linguistic Identity.
IAC, the people who normally promote the lingustic primacy are also people who denigrate the very thing they claim to glorify! By going and hitting people Shivsena, MNS or KRV can’t show their pride, in fact they shame their fellow langauge speakers by their lack of culture.
And I don’t understand why you feel I am against a Linguistic Identity. My only concern is of any identity becoming a basis for division of our main identity of being Indian (the only identity that unites us instead of dividing us). I believe that the idea of India is bigger than the sum total of its linguistic, religious, castist parts.
I empathize with the people that have been hurt and bruised by that attack on IBN office. If there could have been a better and more civilized way of negotiations, that should have been done. But sitting far away, not knowing what all went on there, I dont think we need to comment on the rights and wrongs out there. Besides, I personally dont want to believe the press (nowadays) a word of what they say. The fourth estate has just lost the credibility that it was bestowed in the past.
Indian American, SL Tamilian.. there’s a trend apparent in such adjectives that your mind is putting out. Next could well be Malnad Kannadiga, Madurai Tamilian, Nagpur Marathi, Kohima Naga etc. And I’d say that is going to be an improvement in terms of an understanding of identity. Saying so, what I intend to tell you is that however pin-pointed your identity could sound, I dont think it should be perceived in the negative sense to a society’s integrity & harmony.
The day we as a people truly appreciate the diversity amongst us, appreciate the inbuilt differences amongst us, understand that being different is natural and no reason to fight, we decide going ahead towards a better life is more important, identify things that will help us reach there, and realise these true identities will only help make life more colourful.
But when false identities, or should I say derived & concocted identities, especially of the magnanimous kind (nationality for instance) get imposed onto individuals, tiffs are bound to happen between people – sometimes within people of the same “true” identity!
Nikhil Angadi speaks the truth! This Kulla and his achievements have been hyped beyond reason.
thackeray is an asshole
I am an Indian citizen of the world. My country prepared me to feel at ease anywhere in the world, secure in my identity. I have no interest in this meaningless debate. After all, we are all headed to only place.
Good luck to all chauvinists and bhoomi putras. If Thackeray did a DNA geneaology study on his own family, he might just find that his ancestor was Gengiz Khan.