Are we increasingly becoming intolerant as a nation, as a society? Are we losing out our plurality of thoughts and of our social realities? Are we just a nation that cares for retaining or maintaining power? Are we stifling the basic idea of human's spirit of inquiry (about our past)? Are we all becoming a bunch of nincompoops or just over-sensitive bunch mob?
The panel has recommended removal or modification of 36 of the 176 cartoons in textbooks for classes 9-12. Interestingly, it has also sought removal of some of the cartoons of the Nehru-Gandhi family observing that such cartoons are too many in number. in the textbooks and has sought their removal. Another good thing about the report is a dissent by one of its members. Professor Pandian has objected to the conclusions of the report arguing that an unnecessary controversy has been created over harmless cartoons. He has argued that these cartoons need not be removed. But, his attempt to live true to Ambedkarism may not go down well with neo-activists aka anti-Ambedkarism protagonists.
The answer to all these questions is definitely Yes, if we go by what followed after NCERT cartoon controversy boiled over. We all know it started with a cartoon wherein JL Nehru was about to whip a snail (personifying our constitution-in-the-making) which was saddled by BR Ambedkar armed with a lash. Two theories were put forth. One, Nehru was depicted as flogging dalit messiah Ambedkar and that this was an insult to the entire dalit community. In politically aroused India, the term dalit does not need to be defined separately, though it has acquired an altogether different meaning over the years. This was said that the cartoonist Shankar meant an elite Nehru flogged a dalit Ambedkar! Everyone buried the fact that the two leaders respected each other immensely.
Theory number two. That Nehru was upset with the pace at which constitution was being prepared and was angry with the entire process, which was moving at a slow pace. So, Nehru, holding Drafting Committee chairman, Ambedkar responsible for the delay wanted to whip the entire committee so that it can speed up the most crucial process of the time.
It's true that Pt Nehru was upset and there has never been any doubt about it. He wanted to see the constitution making process to get over soon. So did Rajendra Prasad, the chairman of the constituent assembly. But, Nehru being the most influential leader of the age got more space in news media and public debate. So, his anguish also got more depiction among the cartoonists. Nehru was no casteist. And, Shankar, as they all say, was no naive cartoon journalist. He could not have shown Nehru supposedly whipping snail-rider Ambedkar, had any of the two leaders was a casteist. Moreover, the cartoon was published while the two leaders were very active in politics and interestingly, none of them objected to it. Further, Nehru wrote to Shankar suggesting that the cartoon could have been depicted the other way as well.
But, much water has flown under the political bridge in India and decades later neo-sensitive dalit activists and politicians find the same things unacceptable. This is a classic example of a wedge being built between Ambedkar and his followers. Ambedkar, purportedly at the receiving end in the cartoon, respected Shankar's fundamental right to expression. But, his followers forgot that Ambedkar vowed to protect right to freedom of expression with his life. And, I would like to make it clear that these neo-activists are not true followers of Ambedkar but political opportunists, who want to stake their claim on Ambekarism and thereby emerge as dalit leaders. What followed when the NCERT cartoon was discovered six years after it was re-published in 2006 was a result of this race to emerge as champion of Ambedakrism.
But, spare a thought. If Nehru 'whipped' Ambedkar for whatever reason, why should it be not taught to the students? If an eminent cartoon journalist felt that Nehru was responsible for expediting the already lengthy process of constitution making and Ambedkar was the centre of his ire, why should this generation be not taught about that? If Nehru had a casteist agenda in mind, why should it be not taught to young minds so that they have a proper understanding of the modern makers of India? And, if an eminent cartoonist, who was appreciated by the likes of Nehru and Ambedkar was a casteist or anti-dalit, why should the students be not told about that?
However, Union Human Resource Development Minister Kapil Sibal and his team think the other way. The latest proof of this mindset is the report submitted by the NCERT committee that examined cartoons in school textbooks after the aforesaid controversy. The committee, headed by Sukhadeo Thorat, chairperson of the Indian Council of Social Science Research, has recommended that the cartoons and caricatures bearing 'negative' references to politicians and bureaucrats should be removed from the text books. The only relief for me has been the remark by the six-member panel which was set up following the row over Dr B R Ambedkar's cartoon in the political science textbook that cartoons are good learning tools and that they should not be discarded away with completely.
The panel has recommended removal or modification of 36 of the 176 cartoons in textbooks for classes 9-12. Interestingly, it has also sought removal of some of the cartoons of the Nehru-Gandhi family observing that such cartoons are too many in number. in the textbooks and has sought their removal. Another good thing about the report is a dissent by one of its members. Professor Pandian has objected to the conclusions of the report arguing that an unnecessary controversy has been created over harmless cartoons. He has argued that these cartoons need not be removed. But, his attempt to live true to Ambedkarism may not go down well with neo-activists aka anti-Ambedkarism protagonists.
