Lyrics of a Conflict Song: Creating of the Stereotypes
- Part 1 -
Ninglun Hanghal *
A scene from documentary film 'Manipur Song'
"Manipur , a state equated in popular representation as conflict torn area has seen the manifestation in armed insurgency and HIV – AIDS. While conflict has adversely affected the social fabric, its representation has reduced the conflict into simplistic hills – valley animosity and is steeped in stereotypes".
Today the state of Manipur is notoriously equated with conflict. Problems that the state of merely 2.2 millions population is faced with, is far greater than what one would normally expect. Two major areas in which conflicts get manifested are armed insurgency and HIV–AIDS. There are other related areas of conflict like ethnic tension, religious animosity, hills-valley divide, rural-urban divide, etc. All these have in fact wracked the social fabric of the place and its people.
But more worrisome trend amidst these forms of conflict is the way these conflicts have been represented by people who are crafted with the art of representation, be it writing of novels, scholarly books, print and electronic media, films and photographs. Several stereotypes of the state, and also many other states of the region, have been projected in the recent past. The documentary film titled Manipur Song by a well-known film maker, Pankaj Butalia, is one such representation that depicts the region and the people in a bad taste. The film was telecast on August 15, 2010 coinciding with India's independence day by NDTV Profit, a Delhi based national television which focus on business and market. Certainly sensationalization beomes themantra of such production houses and film makers, for that will bring greater market avenues.
Butalia's film picturizes armed conflict, drug abuse and prostitution in a most blatant and sterotyped form that is completely devoid of any effort to capture the nuanced human conditions shaped by a violent culture of conflict. There is no denying the fact that Manipur today is one of the most violent states in the world. With a data of 369 insurgency related fatalities in 2009, the South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP) in its assessment year 2010, stated that Manipur is the most violent state in India followed by Assam with 344 fatalities. But role of a film maker is little more than merely presenting the facts. There is much to be read about the intentions and politics behind making of such films.
Next comes the HIV–AIDS "epidemic," a term used by UNAIDS. Manipur has a record of being the highest percentage of adult HIV prevalence state in India according to the 1998–2006 estimate of National Aids Control Organization (NACO), where Manipur shows 1.67 per cent, while the country's overall estimate is 0.36 per cent. The HIV–AIDS data and statistics are self explanatory in itself. Subsequently, Manipur was the first state in India to have a State AIDS Policy; the Manipur government adopted the State AIDS Policy on 3rd October, 1996. Later the Manipur State AIDS Control Society (MACS) was formed and registered in March, 1998. According to the society's recorded data from 1986 till August, 2010, there are a total of 4589 AIDS cases, where 3316 are males and 1273 are females, with record of 645 deaths due to AIDS. It says Manipur contributes nearly 8 per cent of India's total HIV positive cases.
With such a back ground that is alarming, many from within and outside the state have studied this land and its people with a sense of "excitement." But few try to understand the pain and sufferings that the common people in the region have survived decades of suppression and violence. While a study on aspects of conflict is likely to open the "pandora's box," that is still a welcome step compared to those narratives that remain in the peripheral level and merely sensationalizes. Pankaj Butalia's Manipur Song is one such case in point.
The year 1947 has become more or less a land mark in the history of Manipur and Northeast India at large. The end of the colonial rule becomes a point of contention for the people of the region on evolving new political processes. It brought tremendous changes in terms of socio political life of the people. Manipur have had the experience of resistance movements – of armed non state groups and pressure groups with several claims starting from sovereignty, self determination, autonomous administration, to recognition for schedule tribe status (ST), etc. As stated above, besides the conflicts of state versus non state, numerous inter and intra communal strifes have also been witnessed.
In the face of all these, there is also a perception by a large section of the people in Manipur (also of the Northeast) that they do not (think to) belong to India. Though such a perception is often seen as state of emotion, this certainly forms a strong case for opposition against the "forced annexation" into India. Indeed Manipur and communities of the Northeast India actually comprise of independent and distinctive cultural identities. Oral histories, folk tales passed on from one generation to another narrate stories of past glory, self sufficiency, abundance of natural resources, self governance, distinctive culture and tradition. This distinctiveness of a different entity called "Manipur" or the "Northeast India at large," fairly different from the mainland India.
Subsequently as much as Northeasterners do not feel a sense of belongingness, the geophysique further alienate the region creating a psychological distance. This differences also generate indifferences by the "mainlanders," while people inhabiting this region feels "foreign" to the mainland India. These factors of "difference and indifference" manifest in various forms, kinds and magnitude. While on one hand, people of the Northeast feels discriminated and alienated for being different, manifest in the form of violent resistance and demands for self determination, on the other hand, mainlanders' indifference towards the region manifest in the form of misperception, judgmental opinion, attitude and treatment particularly towards the women folk of this region.
Manipur Song began with an introductory note on the political history of Manipur. The introduction narrates that the appropriation (merger) of Manipur into the Indian Union after the British left India in 1947 leading to insurgency movement in Manipur, which was quite understandably anti-Indian. The introduction rightly notes Manipur's sovereignty and its existence as an independent kingdom. Simultaneously it goes into picturing the Laiharaobadance and a traditional Meitei marriage procession, showcasing Manipur's socio culture and tradition that is different from mainland India's.
This is followed by a generalised introduction stating that the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), 1958, was introduced in the region because of the insurgency movement in Manipur, further mentioning that over 20 such insurgent groups operate in the state. The introduction also underlines the conflict between these insurgent groups, underdevelopment, drugs, HIV–AIDS, stating that there are many irreconcilable problems. The introduction while underlining Manipur's different socio cultural and practices, noting its rich culture, gives a generalised and negated version over the issue and problems facing the state. It remains to be understood what irreconcilable problems the film maker tries to tell about and why was it irreconcilable. This negative outlook sends a de-motivating message for those who live their life with hope and for those who believe that reconciliation is one possiblesolution for conflict.
The narration says that the film maker travels from Delhi, the national capital, in 2004, being provoked by certain incidents. This was followed by video footage of the nude protest, police firings, angry youth out in the streets with slogans. The narration does not give any background information as to what it is all about, why those incidents took place. It was left to the viewers to try to grapple with the footage. As a viewer, a Manipuri residing in Delhi, I assume that what provoked the film maker would be the heighten protest in aftermath of the alledged rape and killing of Th. Manorama Devi in July 2004, more so the infamous "nude protest" as the narration gives much emphasis over it stating that it had caught national media attention. As for those who does not know much about Manipur, or mainland Indians at large, it would appear just a groups of angry young people, police firing protesters who defy the law or heartening nude protest of elderly women. The pictures do not leave otherwise the desired impact, definitely not to the mainland Indians. Or one wonders if the film maker intentionally wants opacity to remain.
The documentary was segregated into episodic parts; viz. Violence: the backyard of nationalism, The diaspora as periphery, Living on the edge, and On the notion of collateral. The first and foremost episode began with nationalism and separatist story. First beginning with the United National Liberation Front, a Meitei group, describe as a political movement and are fighting to regain self determination from the India state, its Chairman Sana Yaima giving an interview to the camera. On continuation the film narrated that the other millitant groups who were categorically tribal groups "dislike" the Meitei group – viz. the Nagas, Kukis and the Zomis.
As per the description in the film, these Meitei groups are exclusively supposed to be the people who inhabiting the then sovereign Manipur kingdom and subsequently the territorial boundary of todays' Manipur state. The background narrative also states that these militant insurgent groups are fighting among themselves in a structured hierarchal order of Meitei militants fighting the "Indian State" for self determination, were in turn "fought" by the next larger group, the Nagas, who in turn is targetted by the Kukis, who are then targetted to by the Zomis. A chain of resistance by the smaller group upon the immediate bigger group is what is being shown. The chain goes to include the Paites, other sub group of the Zomi. This is rather simplistic and an over generalised statement.
The film maker's perceived notion that the smaller groups or the other communities inhabiting the "Meitei land" have no political standing are highly bias at several levels of the articulation. It shows lack of proper understanding of the complexity of identity claims and armed resistance movement associated with the same. All the armed militants or insurgents groups mentioned by Butalia have their own political ideologies and should be clubbed under a larger basket of the "non state." In spite of the fact that inter – intra community rivalry may emerge in course of their political struggles, which is not so strange considering the multiplicity of ethnic groups and their aspirations, yet these should not be the "background introduction" of the "non state" movements which is primarily a political struggle, at least theoretically and ideologically.
This episode also tells about how youths are lured into the life of militants or militancy. This is a typical narrative of the statist discourse. There is nothing new in this representation, thus showing a case of old wine in new bottle. This episode also shows the "romantic" daily lives of the young militants. But the real life is quite different from the reel life, another form of stereotype representation. To this extent it shows some parallel with Bollywood films. While living underground in jungles with a gun is never a peaceful life, only a Bollywood film throws some excitement into the audience. Not only the militants suffer hardship, even their family members do face hardship in everyday life.
Another level of suffering is the sense of fear and tormant faced by the former (surrendered in fewcases) militants, their wives, and widows of the militants killed. They face discrimination at different levels. The fake encounter killing of Sanjit , a surrendered militant, at Imphal's B.T. Road in July 2009 tell us that a militant is always a militant, an identity of no return. Emergence of organizations like Extrajudicial Execution Victims Association Manipur (EEVAM), Manipuri Women Gun Survivor Network, etc. say a lot about the life faced by the people associate with the movement. There is nothing extraordinarily exciting about their so called "romantic life." This is yet again an attempt (perhaps deliberate) to reduce the entire politics of armed struggle into triviality of romance. Similar is the case where representation of child soldiers is made as victims. This in a way is to deny them as political actors.[i]
An interview of a "meira paibi" activist, Ima[ii] Taruni, was shown synchronised with several footages of violent incidents and protests, well crafted to delegitimise the movements. Ima Taruni speaks about one such incident before the camera where hundreds of women came out for a protest rally. This is followed by pictures of the incident she was supposedly speaking about. There was no background narration. The Ima said "at Thangmeiband THAU ground, we took out a protest rally… the police fired at us... many were killed…. Many injured... we ran helter skelter… many people jump into the river…. There were chaos and commotion… chappal (slippers) and clothes were scattered everywhere...." In the subtitle transcribed in English were these lines "… women left their clothes. They lost control of what they were wearing." Connect this narrative with Kangla nude protest. The film maker seems to be deliberately planting this idea to the viewers that Manipuri women have very little sense of dressing, as if dresses are easily thrown out or pulled out in an incident. So, protesting without clothes is an extension of their "casualness" about their dress.
The film has done violence on sexuality of women by this projection of a stereotype image about Manipuri women. Themeira paibis (torch bearers) women's groups, widely acclaimed for their courage and roles in socio-political lives, were not even asked to give their opinion or views, but only recollections of an event like a protest or a violent incident. The film maker does all the interpretation. This is yet again a violence to the political sensibility of these women activists, giving the impression as if they are incapable of thinking and organising praxis.
To be continued....
From Eastern Quarterly, a jounal published by Manipur Research Forum ( Delhi) vol 7, issue I&II spring and monsoon 2011
http://www.manipurresearchforum.org
Notes & References
[i] This is from Meha Dixit's writing "Dirty looking stones," Hard News, September 2010.
[ii] The term "Ima" meaning "mother" is usually used to address the women activists with a sense of respect.
[iii] Sonagachi, the largest legal red light district in Kolkata shot to fame after a documentary Born into Brothels: Calcutta's Red Light Kids won the Academy Award in 2004. Source: UNODC website, accessed during September 2010.
[iv] See Jackindia, "HIV–AIDS Industry," 2002.
[v] As stated in The Sangai Express, March 19, 2010.
[vi] The questions were raised by Civic Chandran at a performance of the play Meira Paibi based on the life of Sharmila in Delhi in May 2010. For details see, The North East Sun, June 16–30, 2010.
* Ninglun Hanghal wrote this for Eastern Quarterly, a jounal published by Manipur Research Forum
The writer reports for 'The Statesman' and 'The Sangai Express' newspaper She can be contacted at her blog or email at hanghal(dot)ninglun(at)gmail(dot)com
This article was posted on August 03, 2012.
* Comments posted by users in this discussion thread and other parts of this site are opinions of the individuals posting them (whose user ID is displayed alongside) and not the views of e-pao.net. We strongly recommend that users exercise responsibility, sensitivity and caution over language while writing your opinions which will be seen and read by other users. Please read a complete Guideline on using comments on this website.