A Marathi 'olakh' identity

What does it mean to be a Maharashtrian? It's quite a conundrum

Much has been said and debated regarding the Marathi identity. But I have a question, what is a Marathi identity?

Is it not a language identity - that is anyone who speaks the Marathi language. Language only identifies the linguistic background of a person, it doesn't state anything more than that. The dialect to some extent identifies the cultural, social and political background or area one is in.

So often I wonder what is this 'Marathi' identity that some politicians are thrusting down people's throats. When this campaign was first launched by Bal Thackeray in the 70s against the South Indian lobby, it shouldn't have come as a surprise. Down South, especially in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, the fight for a strong linguistic identity was already formidable, as the protests were to obstruct Hindisation of the whole country when 14 languages were stated by the constitution as India's official languages - which include English, Marathi, Bengali, Assamese, Tamil, etc.

But, who am I? How do I identify myself? I was born and grew up in an absolutely Maharashtrian area of Girgaum. However, the environment in my house was a mix. My mother is from Billimora in Gujarat and my father's family from the Konkan. My mother says her mother tongue is Gujarati, which I know pretty well. She has NEVER written Marathi as her native language, because she never studied that language like she did Gujarati, since all her studies were in Billimora and MS University Vadodra. She then went to do a Bachelor's in classical music, which she believes is above all language barriers. My father a photographer studied in chaste Marathi school, Rammohan Roy, and speaks impeccable English too. He too believes his art breaks all boundaries - linguistic, social and political.

My parents were clear that they would send us to one of the best school in this city, Queen Mary School, which please let me clarify was never a convent. It was a Protestant school and I was a student when the last British principal left us in 70s.

For me, Marathi was the third language! First English, then Hindi and last Marathi. Also I was never interested in studies at that time in my life and more so because I hated my school. Here the whole focus was to think and function in English. At home, we spoke Marathi since my father had made it compulsory. Then I rebelled. I have never liked or allowed any sort of force to be used on me. So when we were all made to do riyaz (which I dreaded every day of my life) I would write the raag or song notes in English.

The fact is I can speak at least four Indian languages and understand them. However, when I took up journalism, I first went to a leading national daily. It was when I joined the Social Advocacy Group that I was required to communicate in Marathi. It was not tough, but people did make it difficult. Obviously my accent and diction were not as good as the natives. They would make it more difficult, as they would pull me up for my mistakes, make a public joke out of it.
Thankfully it wasn't my loss. No person learns or develops a need to learn something if they are ridiculed. Also Marathi wasn't my first language.

Meanwhile, I joined a leading television news company that produced Hindi news on Doordarshan Metro. It was fun. My boss asked if Hindi was a foreign language to me and I told him my Hindi was Bambaiya. He was one of the first few people who encouraged me to speak in the local dialect and way. That in fact helped me.

I re-learned Marathi long after I began speaking and communicating in Hindi. All our scripts were in Devnagri and one needed to know some really fine dehati adjectives. I in fact wrote a short story in Marathi later. However television can teach us all one important thing, people in India 'view' television, they simply see the pictures. Print is read.

I never really identified with this whole jingoism surrounding any language. I believe the politicians propagating this whole ideology must've met Vatal Nagraj, the Kannadiga leader who has always sought publicity by burning a car tyre and claiming everything in Karnataka should be in Kannada.

I am sure the readers must know that the constitution of India has listed 14 languages that are official and it includes English, Hindi, Marathi, Bengali, Assamese, etc. It is the freedom of the individual to speak any language. The states have their own laws, which says that name boards can be in both the languages, though the native language should be given prominence.

This has nothing to do with Marathi identity or being a Marathi manoos. Yes, knowing a language only helps the individual for a selfish reason and that is to make one's life simpler. It helps you through hardship and in an emergency. Otherwise speaking a particular language doesn't set you apart from another. How can it? This is exactly what the Birtish did. By propagating English and making it compulsory. So we had the babu Indians who wanted to work in civil services and learned to speak in English.

The Brahmins took it upon themselves to retain their way of speaking Marathi. So when someone speaks of a Marathi identity
I am confused. What is a Marathi identity? That of a Mahar, Matang, Chamar, Mali or still Shimpi (tailor), Sonar (jeweller), Baman (Brahmin), and again, from which region? Vidarbh, Konkan, Puneri. So when we speak of a Marathi identity the politicians themselves seem confused. Is it a CKP (Community of Thackerays) or Dalit or Kayastha?

I am sure our readers will say what is the connection? When we interact what is the connection of knowing one's past - socio-economic, political, or regional. It should not influence any sort of dealing and interaction if someone knows a language, can speak it, understand it, or not. But sadly it does.

So when some leader talks of Marathi identity I find it odd. Who are they representing? Which region or dialect are they representing? Which community are they representing? Now most Maharashtrians keep to themselves. They feel it best to mind one's own business and be blind and deaf to the happenings within the social community. It will come round to haunt them.

It is not a joke. They will weigh the pros and cons before saying or committing to any action or decision. If it is a political or social, even more so. The majority of Maharashtrains are 'silent' spectators. Spectators, because they will enjoy the developments around them, while not getting into it head-on.

They do not realise that they are to be blamed for their own condition today. Most Maharashtrians were forced to give up their houses, sell them and run off to Titwala, Dombivli etc. They will blame the politicians, the society, but I lay the blame on the community.

The whole Marathiness has never existed. Each fights the other, pulls the other down. If one Maharashtrian takes a risk to do something odd and may be stupid in the eyes of the community but is pursuing one's dream, the individual is publicly ridiculed and never forgiven. How can they ever rise? That is why they play safe and never harbour a risk-taking mindset.
Did I hear someone say that's how the master blaster was when he led the Indian cricket team?

Well, today most Maharashtrians have stayed away from this Marathi campaign. Not coming out forthright and saying yes the Marathi-manoos is the right way, or like me, say it is utter nonsense. Instead, many inspire their children to study hard and run away to America. They then return and criticise the India they left behind, which has moved ahead in leaps, but which I feel is regressing into fiefdom. The debate will continue and so will the fight. However, this whole thing is political and it just suits the Congress-Nationalist Congress Party who will get more votes, as the Maharashtrians will stay away from both parties: Shiv Sena and Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, as they will say, "We agree to what they say but do not support their violence!" Now nothing can be more diplomatic than that.
k_neeta@dnaindia.net