This is a review on chapter of book TRIBE, CASTE AND FOLK CULTURE,(1998) by CHITRASEN PASAYAT, he discuss the culture of tribes of orissa, their struggles against the urbanisation, and the debates of issues related to tribes and the Urban's.
The first chapter of the book called "concepts of folk and folk culture: Reexamined in the Indian context", where chitrasen discuss about the definitional problems and the conceptual problems of term folk and tribes. I will give a summary of the chapter,
Folklore is refered as oral literature handed down to as from generation and generation through oral tradition, through art, dance, songs literature, folk tales, tradition and myths. the folk culture is carried out.Folk culture is everyday life include cos tomes. settlements, cookery, notions, symbols, medicine, play and arts. Chitrasen discuss on the origins of folk culture which is problematic, because the folk culture is taken through the oral tradition where their is no written records, and even it takes in different levels, even the folk dance and songs are seen in rural settings which makes difficult to distinguish between the tribal culture and rural culture. Difference between the elite culture and tribal culture. Elite culture in Indian context is about the Hindus who take higher stratum in the society,(caste based) and where as tribal who are at lower stratum of society. who differs in their culture from the upper caste groups. Even Marx as tried to define the folk or tribal, According to Marxian philosophy tribal are nothing but peasant group, where he majorly divides the society based on the class ideology. So in Indian context the tribals take position of peasant, the division is based on the ideology of caste(purity and impurity), but understanding the tribal group based on the hierarchical structure of society gives an misconception about the tribal group. and even it is complicated in Indian context because of the caste system, which is been misinterpreted by outsiders(western). Rural culture and tribal culture, some scholars have assumed both share some of the characters tics, but research have shown the difference between the both the cultures. Main difference we can see are the tribals are nature oriented people, they are highly depended on the nature, their settlement, social, economic and political system is created based on the nature. where as rural community is referred as the system which is similar to the tribal system but they are considered as cultivators, and rural community as certain social order which is regulated by macro system of caste and other social factors. In simple words we can say that tribal community is micro community and rural is macro community.chitrasen as also discussed on the sanskritisation and tribalisation, where both the terms refers to the following other culture, it is a adaptation of the culture of others to ourselves. Lastly he discusses on the how urbanisation is effecting the tribal community.
I would like to discuss some of the issues and the questions that I have about the concept of folk, tribes and cultures. The question that I have about the concept to what extent we can say that the folk culture is carried away through oral tradition? if we need to understand the tribal culture we need to understand them through their culture itself. the tribals are given the term, concept of folk are used to understand their culture, which are given by mainstream society, where the culture is been recorded in a written form or in any other medium. It would be mistake if we say that tribal culture is passed through generation to generation through oral tradition, their may be other mediums, and other components which play role of passing on culture to generations. my point of view is using the term folk is a mistake to identify the tribal and rural cultures. Another issue is about the Hindu and other group of caste in Indian society. Its said that Hindus are at the higher level and tribals are the bottom down group in the hierarchy of the caste system. my concern is who is the first is it the Hindus are the origin's of the Indian society are the tribal group? this would be the question which raise issues about the hierarchy, the originality's of the Indian society, in later discussions i would try to answer. Lastly talking on rural culture and tribal culture, apart from the living styles I would see both the communities as similar. till now I have discussed sociological perspective about the tribals and rural society. I have started to raise the question about the tribal minds by looking at the larger picture of the rural and tribal society. in simple words macro level to micro level.
The first chapter of the book called "concepts of folk and folk culture: Reexamined in the Indian context", where chitrasen discuss about the definitional problems and the conceptual problems of term folk and tribes. I will give a summary of the chapter,
Folklore is refered as oral literature handed down to as from generation and generation through oral tradition, through art, dance, songs literature, folk tales, tradition and myths. the folk culture is carried out.Folk culture is everyday life include cos tomes. settlements, cookery, notions, symbols, medicine, play and arts. Chitrasen discuss on the origins of folk culture which is problematic, because the folk culture is taken through the oral tradition where their is no written records, and even it takes in different levels, even the folk dance and songs are seen in rural settings which makes difficult to distinguish between the tribal culture and rural culture. Difference between the elite culture and tribal culture. Elite culture in Indian context is about the Hindus who take higher stratum in the society,(caste based) and where as tribal who are at lower stratum of society. who differs in their culture from the upper caste groups. Even Marx as tried to define the folk or tribal, According to Marxian philosophy tribal are nothing but peasant group, where he majorly divides the society based on the class ideology. So in Indian context the tribals take position of peasant, the division is based on the ideology of caste(purity and impurity), but understanding the tribal group based on the hierarchical structure of society gives an misconception about the tribal group. and even it is complicated in Indian context because of the caste system, which is been misinterpreted by outsiders(western). Rural culture and tribal culture, some scholars have assumed both share some of the characters tics, but research have shown the difference between the both the cultures. Main difference we can see are the tribals are nature oriented people, they are highly depended on the nature, their settlement, social, economic and political system is created based on the nature. where as rural community is referred as the system which is similar to the tribal system but they are considered as cultivators, and rural community as certain social order which is regulated by macro system of caste and other social factors. In simple words we can say that tribal community is micro community and rural is macro community.chitrasen as also discussed on the sanskritisation and tribalisation, where both the terms refers to the following other culture, it is a adaptation of the culture of others to ourselves. Lastly he discusses on the how urbanisation is effecting the tribal community.
I would like to discuss some of the issues and the questions that I have about the concept of folk, tribes and cultures. The question that I have about the concept to what extent we can say that the folk culture is carried away through oral tradition? if we need to understand the tribal culture we need to understand them through their culture itself. the tribals are given the term, concept of folk are used to understand their culture, which are given by mainstream society, where the culture is been recorded in a written form or in any other medium. It would be mistake if we say that tribal culture is passed through generation to generation through oral tradition, their may be other mediums, and other components which play role of passing on culture to generations. my point of view is using the term folk is a mistake to identify the tribal and rural cultures. Another issue is about the Hindu and other group of caste in Indian society. Its said that Hindus are at the higher level and tribals are the bottom down group in the hierarchy of the caste system. my concern is who is the first is it the Hindus are the origin's of the Indian society are the tribal group? this would be the question which raise issues about the hierarchy, the originality's of the Indian society, in later discussions i would try to answer. Lastly talking on rural culture and tribal culture, apart from the living styles I would see both the communities as similar. till now I have discussed sociological perspective about the tribals and rural society. I have started to raise the question about the tribal minds by looking at the larger picture of the rural and tribal society. in simple words macro level to micro level.
kiran kumar ctl
No comments:
Post a Comment