The Evolving Nature of Culutre in Society
Every year in October the festival of Diwali is celebrated in India. In the days building up to the festival, people clean their houses and then decorate it with diyas, rangoli, and lights. According to Hindu mythology, the festival of Diwali is celebrated in order to symbolize the victory of good over evil. People first celebrated the festival when God Ram returned to Ayodhya from his exile after defeating Ravan and saving his wife Sita from him. However, in addition to the diyas and lights, people also burst firecrackers on Diwali. For the majority of people in India, bursting firecrackers is an integral part of celebrating Diwali.
In 2017, the central government in India imposed a ban on bursting firecrackers in India’s capital of New Delhi. This was done in order to regulate and reduce the ever-worsening air quality in New Delhi. The ban caused an outrage among the people in Delhi. People and politicians spoke against the ban and even burst crackers as a sign of protest. Many even considered the ban as an attack on Hindus and called it an anti-Hindu ban.
India accounts for almost one-fourth of all deaths caused due to respiratory diseases in the world. New Delhi, the country’s capital has one of the worst air quality index in the country. There is a constant blanket of smog over the capital which has now become a standard sight for people in New Delhi. Respiratory diseases are not the only problem caused by this smog. Since the air is filled with pollutants, particles float in the air and reduce visibility. In November 2017, the lack of visibility on the Yamuna Expressway near Delhi lead to a deadly 24 car accident.
The decision regarding the ban was simple; it was an attempt to regulate the pollution levels in the capital and to avoid an increase in pollution during the festival of Diwali. The Supreme Court took the decision taking into consideration the welfare of the people and it seemed like a logical and correct decision. One would wonder, why anyone would anyone protest against a decision aimed towards protecting their health and welfare. The reason is that Diwali is a religious festival. The protesters did not perceive the ban as a decision towards improving their welfare, rather a decision curbing their freedom to celebrate the festival.
In India, Diwali and firecrackers go hand in hand. During the festival, it is common for people to burst firecrackers. Bursting firecrackers during Diwali has become so common that people now assume that bursting firecrackers is essential for celebrating Diwali. This is where the problem begins because the truth is — Firecrackers have nothing to do with Diwali!
Then how did firecrackers became synonimus with Diwali?
There was a time, centuries ago when people did not burst firecrackers on Diwali. That was the culture then. Somewhere around 1940s people adopted the practice of bursting crackers on the occasion of Diwali. This was the start of a new cultural practice. Each generation after that was taught that firecrackers are an integral part of celebrating Diwali. It even reached a point that crackers started to be included in the identity of the festival itself, hence a made up cultural practice became an integral part of a religious community. Then in 2017, when the Supreme Court decided to ban the practice, people were enraged as they perceived it as an attack on their cultural practice of bursting crackers, which is not something that has a basis in their religious scriptures, but something that was taught to them by their parents in the same way it was taught to them by their parents.
However, at the same time Diwali was celebrated in London. The governing body of London organized a fair at Trafalgar Square which included Indian traditional dance performances, stalls selling Indian cuisine and a place for the visitors to dance and have a good time. As you would have noticed, firecrackers were not included in the celebrations and to no surprise, no one protested against it. The event was organized specifically for Indians in order to give them a chance to celebrate one of their prominent festivals and also for other residents of London to be a part of the celebrations. This begs the question — were the celebrations in London any less cultural than those in India? Why didn’t the Indians staying in London protest against fireworks not being included in the celebrations?
Those protesting the ban in India believed the ban was anti-cultural and thought that the ban was an attack on their religion. However, that was not the case. As culture is separate from religion.
What exactly is culture?
Going by the anthropological definition, culture can be defined as –
“The sum total of ways of living builtup by a group of human beings and transmitted from one generation to another.”
Taking that definition into consideration, culture is a subjective term, and also, if it is passed onto from one generation to the next, then it is likely that culture will change overtime.
The cracker ban symbolised the ongoing process of another cultural change happening currently in India. Old cultural norms are now being challenged by people and new progressive norms are being established. A good example of this is the changing attitudes of people about women. Earlier, women were not allowed to go to schools and were kept at home and trained to be housewives, as it was a cultural practice for women to be homemakers. However, parents now focus on their daughter’s education and allow them to create an identity of their own.
However, similar to the backlash over the cracker ban, a part of the population continues to hold on to old cultural practices and view progressive thoughts as a negative influence of western ideologies on Indian culture. However, what they don’t realize is that they live in a ‘westen’ world on a dialy basis.
If one observes Indian cities objectively then yes they are westernized. Let’s take Mumbai as an example. Mumbai provides all the facilities to its inhabitants as western cities such as New York or London. Mumbai has a well-established transportation system, Mumbai is known for its nightlife mainly due to the hundreds of pubs and clubs located in almost every area of the city, restaurants in Mumbai offer almost all types of cuisines known around the world and the most common housing style in the city is apartments.
However, the surprising thing is that all these aspects are taken in a positive light by those living in the city. There is no outrage against Italian restaurants in the city or people using the railways which was built by the British during their rule in India. No one views the sky scrapers being built as a negative western influence; rather they are seen as figures of development and progress. The creation of mega commercial office complexes around the city are not seen as a negative influence, rather they are viewed as a necessity for the progress of the economy.
The one thing that is scrutinized based on culture is clothing, especially women’s clothing. Even though western clothes have become the norm in Mumbai among men and women; if a women wears a crop top or a skirt then she is looked down upon as being ‘uncultural.’. The woman is viewed as an example of how western influence is ruining Indian culture. However, she will be judged by men who themselves wear shirts and pants.
And men like those are at the center of the cultural struggle in metropolitan cities such as Mumbai. Even though men like the one in the example, each day live a ‘westernized’ life, by travelling in trains and going to work in office complexes, they pick out certain elements from their everyday life and then term it ‘uncultural.’ In their eyes, girls wearing revealing clothes are ‘uncultural.’ What they don’t realize is that they are doing the same by wearing western clothes. However, because they are so used to wearing western clothes, they have normalized western clothing for themselves; however they have not done the same for clothes that women wear.
The cultural struggle is not between Indian and Western ideologies; rather it is an integral struggle relating to the cultural perceptionsthat people form for themselves. Indian culture is just a term that is used in the media which does not have a fixed meaning. It is subjective. Each person has their own perception of what Indian culture is. Their perception is formed by numerous factors such as — their upbringing, their education, their exposure to media etc.
In the battle of being cultural or not, there is no fixed winner or loser. However, when someone in Mumbai, themselves wears western clothes, eats in restaurants, works in office complexes and then judges others as being ‘uncultural,’ that is where the problem lies. Making people accept changing cultural norms is not easy. This is because once cultural practices become a norm in society people start associating it with how the nation is identified. However, this problem of differences in opinion related to cultural practices is not just limited to India.
Saudi Arabia is known to practice Wahhabism an ultra-conservative brand on Sunni Law. According to Wahhabism women need to wear veils and it also insists on segregation of sexes. Since the start, there was no practice of women in Saudi Arabia to drive cars. However, there was no official ban either. This changed in 1990 when women in Saudi Arabia demanded social reforms which included the right to drive vehicles. But, the protest did more harm than good. Their protest was seen as going against the laws of Wahhabism and hence an official ban on driving vehicles was imposed on women. In the doctrine of Wahhabism, there is nothing mentioned about the right for women to drive vehicles, however, in 1990, the ban was imposed on the basis of the doctrine.
The doctrine was used as a catalyst to create the ban; however, the real purpose of the ban was to protect the long-standing cultural tradition of male dominance in Saudi society. Women were never allowed to drive and if their protest was successful then it would have caused a cultural change, which the rulers at the time were not ready for. Hence, the ban protected the cultural norms which adhered to the standards of the rulers at the time.
However, in 2018 Saudi Arabia will experience a cultural shift. This is because in 2017, King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud signed a royal decree which will overturn the ban imposed in 1990 and will give women the right to drive vehicles.
In 2016, a year before the decree was signed an influential Saudi Prince, Alwaleed bin Talal, openly spoke against the ban. He said –
“Preventing a woman from driving a car is today an issue of rights similar to the one that forbade her from receiving an education or having an independent identity, they are all unjust acts by a traditional society, far more restrictive than what is lawfully allowed by the precepts of religion.”
Along with issue of rights, it was also an issue of cultural practices. Just like in India, where girls were denied their right to education because it was an accepted cultural norm that they were only meant to be housewives; in the same way in Saudi Arabia, it was an accepted cultural practice that women should not be allowed to drive.
From a social and economic perspective the decision to lift the ban is justified. Economists estimate that allowing women to will help a Saudi household save $1000 a month on average which they currently spend on hiring a driving. The removal of the ban is also expected to help increase the country’s GDP and the development of the private sector.
Maybe the biggest and the best example of challenging and changing cultural norms is the struggle for equal rights by African-Americans in the United States of America. In this example, I am not trying to summarize the story all the way from slavery to the modern day, as that is not the point. What I want you to focus is on their struggle to change the cultural norms in society.
Their story began in 1619 when the first African slaves were brought to the North American colony of Jamestown, Virginia. This signaled the start of the slave trade in America. During that time, America was a group of colonies controlled by the British. At that time the norm was the slaves would have to complete seven years of hard labor and at the end of that time period, they would earn their freedom. However, that norm did not last for long as in 1641 slavery was legalized.
Once slavery was legalized, African-Americans were treated as objects. According to the cultural norm at that time, they were an inferior species to the white European settlers in the American colonies. This assumption had no basis in religion or even science at that time. It was just an accepted belief among whites.
Slaves were treated inhumanely, forced to work on plantations without pay, whipped at the will of their masters, women were forced to be mistresses and even children were not spared from this violence. The plantation owners at that time did not view their slaves as human beings, even though they obviously were. This was because it was an accepted cultural norm that slaves were not to be treated as equals rather be treated as a commodity that could legally be sold in the market.
The main cause of the American Civil War was a difference in cultural opinion between two parts of the country. The North wanted slaves to be given rights and be treated as free human beings, while the South wanted to hold on to its age-old tradition of owning slaves and being a plantation owner. This war can be considered the most violent battle to take place in order to bring about a cultural change in a nation. Sadly even after the victory of the North and the abolition of slavery, the cultural environment did not change much.
In the years following the Civil War, labor contracts and sharecropping came into existence. And as a result, it brought back slavery in a different form. Even though in the eyes of the law, blacks were free, however the cultural environment in the South did not change a bit. However, the norms changed. Plantation owners could not whip their workers, nor could their force black women to be their mistress. Yes, the abolition of inhumane treatment of blacks can be considered a cultural victory; however, racism and the ideology of superiority among whites still existed.
After this America entered the era of ‘Separate but Equal.’ It just amazes me as to how easily the American legal system can be manipulated in order keep a culture of racism and inequality alive and thriving for centuries. The main aim of the ‘Separate but Equal’ doctrine was racial segregation. The doctrine basically flushed all the progress made after the Civil War and the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments made to the constitution down the toilet. This was because not only did the doctrine make racial segregation the cultural norm in America, it also celebrated the culture of racial superiority of whites in America and reduced blacks to the status of outcasts and made them endure racism in all walks of life on a daily basis.
What is commendable is the relentless struggle of African-Americans in the United States over the centuries. Since the start, they have been kept in a culture which is always against them. What is unique about this culture is that, unlike in the examples of India and Saudi Arabia, the racist culture in America keeps evolving. From slavery it evolved to sharecropping from there it evolved to separate but equals, then came the era of mortgage discrimination and now we live in the current present.
In this present, there are such strong cultural stereotypes against blacks that if you’re walking on the street alone and you see a black man walking behind you, you will be scared. You will think he’ll mug you or in the worst case, shoot you. This example is not an oversimplification or exaggeration. Such ideologies have been inculcated and celebrated in the racist culture in America and sadly, unlike the other examples I gave, this one does not have a positive ending, because this is a culture which throughout the years has managed to remain constant. And it is the best example of how cultural norms can affect a certain group in society.
According to the Constitution of the United States, all of its citizens irrespective of their race or gender have equal rights. However, the Constitution is just a piece of paper that people choose to follow. What actually defines a country is not its constitution, but its culture. And sadly, for Africa- Americans this culture has been against them for centuries. This culture of racism and discrimination has reached a point where blacks in America literally have to tell the rest of the nation that “Black Lives Matter.”
No laws or policies will help improve the condition of blacks in the United States until the country undergoes a cultural change as a whole.
In the examples above, I have explored how existing cultural practices in different nations in the world have been challenged and then changed. A perception that people have with culture is that it is something scared, something that should not be changed, something on which their identity and their nation’s identity is based on. However, this is not true. As it was explained in the definition, culture is the sum of practices passed on from one generation to the other. What this means is that, culture of any nation, city or individual is not concrete and it keeps changing. The reason it is important understand this property of culture is because this is a continuous process and all of us are a part of it on a daily basis. And in order to keep up with this ever evolving process, we need to evolve with it.
