Ideological tampering: Bid to erase women’s, Dalit perspectives

The Oversight Committee of Delhi University has removed from the syllabus Mahasweta Devi’s short story Draupadi

The changes made in the English undergraduate literature syllabus of Delhi University (DU) are yet another attempt to take politics to the classroom, to shape academic narratives in partisan ways and to ensure that students see, hear and read only what the authorities want them to. This is done by both exclusion and inclusion--exclusion of what the authorities do not want students to study, and inclusion of what authorities think they should. The Oversight Committee of the university has removed from the syllabus Mahasweta Devi’s short story Draupadi and the works of two Tamil Dalit writers, Bama and Sukirtharani, which were replaced with the writings of an “upper caste’’ writer, Ramabai. The department has also been told to replace Chandrabati Ramayana with Tulsidas. The changes speak a language now known to pervade academia.

The DU Registrar has said that the changes were made so that the literary content does not hurt the sentiments of any individual. He said that the language used in Mahasweta Devi’ story, which is about the gangrape of a tribal woman in custody, was not acceptable, and it would make students hate the military. Bama is a novelist and Sukirtharani a poet, and both of them have made important contributions to Dalit and women’s writing. Chandrabati’s Ramayana is a retelling of the epic from Sita’s point of view by a 16th century woman poet in what’s presently Bangladesh. The Oversight Committee’s aversion to these writers is self-explanatory because their positions do not belong to the ideology that it might want to promote in the university. A pushback against power by a tribal woman, assertions of identity by Dalits and women, and other versions of the Ramayana than the one the authorities favour, are anathema for such a mindset. Women’s narratives and perspectives perhaps appear especially dangerous to the Committee.

The decisions were taken without consulting the Academic Council, whose members have protested against the “arbitrary changes” and termed the Committee’s action “maximum vandalism”. The English department was consulted apparently, and the Committee chairman said in effect that one does not need a PhD to take such a decision. But the implications should be evident. Literature exposes students to the complex human condition, opens up their minds and makes them aware of the various versions and realms of reality. It holds a mirror to society, echoing many voices and presenting many narratives. To deny the diversity of such stories to students and to give them only an authorised version of ‘reality’ is wrong, as it limits their thinking, imagination and experience. A censored and sanitised syllabus without suffering Dalits, questioning Sitas, and custodial rapes will only show them an unreal world. Instead, students should be encouraged to question, not to accept, to imbibe everything and to exclude nothing.