SEARCH

Opinion » Lead

Updated: July 7, 2012 03:53 IST

A messy corner of India’s modernity

Krishna Kumar
Comment (38)   ·   print   ·   T  T  
The Hindu

We need to understand the dilemma of the school principal who denied admission to two child brides

A school principal in Melur in Madurai district, Tamil Nadu, is reported to have denied admission to two girls whose parents had married them off after they completed Class X (The Hindu, June 23). Prima facie, it seems the principal is wrongly applying her authority. Also, in the broader social context, it seems strange and unacceptable that the benefits of education should be denied to a girl just because she is now a married woman. There are other ways to look at this story. When I read it, I wished Leela Dube, the sociologist who died last month, were alive and I could phone her to find out what she thought about it. Her view of such matters derived its perspective from a deeper commitment — to social reality, rather than to activism or political correctness. Before I speculate on how she might have responded to the Melur principal’s decision, let me recall my pedagogic experience with one of her writings.

Do girls have a childhood?

Gender is now a common topic in courses on education and teaching. Everyone knows that discrimination on the basis of gender is a major problem in schools. Equally clearly, everyone has figured out how to talk about this problem. Political correctness on this topic has seeped in, all the way to the district and block-level institutions of teacher training. Resource persons are now readily available in all parts of the country who can wax eloquent about gender parity and how it can be sustained in the classroom. Officers at all levels have equipped themselves with power point presentations that will show how fast the gender gap is shrinking in enrolment, retention and outcomes. The same ease and excitement pervade the media when the CBSE and other boards declare their Class X and XII results. “Girls outshine boys” says the banner headline year after year. An ethos pointing to a nice social revolution envelopes us. In a happy environment of this kind, how do you ask students to notice the social world stretched right across their daily vision but tightly wrapped up under the pleasant discourse of change shared by the state and the social activist? Faced with this problem, I ask my students to read Leela Dube’s paper tersely titled, “On the construction of gender: socialisation of Hindu girls in patrilineal India.” Once they read it, they stop being glib, which is no small matter in this age of readiness to recommend.

In this paper, first published in 1988, Leela Dube portrays the cultural imprinting that turns girls into socially acceptable women. The portrait is laboriously drawn, with data and insights acquired from diverse sources and regions. The style is marked by a concern for accuracy and detail, and the reader is nowhere treated as either a concerned citizen or a social reformer. Throughout its 40 pages, Leela Dube sticks to her role as a scholar whose primary job is to examine human behaviour and the institutions that shape it. In this case, the institutions are family and kinship. Their joint venture ensures that a little girl starts to learn, from infancy onwards, that it is her destiny to leave her natal home for an uncertain future in a family to which she will belong after marriage. This destiny is cast in the rock of cultural practices, ranging from religious rituals to everyday language of lullabies, songs, idioms and metaphors. For the single-minded pursuit of matrimony, the girl’s appearance, body movements, habits and dispositions are to be honed into the approved model of beauty, self-restraint and self-abnegation. Space and time are supposed to shrink into increasingly narrow corridors of activity, and the natural desire for freedom a girl might have felt as a baby must be dissolved into a regime of responsibility and self-denial.

The essay leaves you wondering whether girls have a childhood at all, or whether they move straight from infancy into adulthood. Secondly, it sets up an explicit conflict between the aims of girls’ socialisation at home and their education at school. Tradition and customs require girls to learn during childhood that they must submit to male authority in all aspects of their life. The core of this learning lies in giving up any claim to intellectual autonomy and individual uniqueness. With the full force that religious and caste beliefs, and their representations in mythology, might be expected to carry for the young mind, girls are made to internalise the all-encompassing social value of their bodies for reproduction. Restrictions on physical movement and posture, and on the use of time and space begin much before puberty, but after menarche these restrictions acquire comprehensive rigour. If we add to these the chronic anxiety about the inescapability of leaving one’s parents’ home, we can somewhat appreciate how incompatible are the norms of girlhood in India with the basic principles of education. These principles revolve around the child’s agency and freedom. Progressive pedagogy is supposed to enhance the child’s confidence and courage to develop her identity as an individual. Both in terms of its emotional content and the reasoning on which it is based, the agenda of cultural imprinting of girls’ minds contradicts the objectives of child-centred education.

Peripheral to society

Leela Dube does not hesitate to articulate this conflict. “Can we really think of reforming the education system to bring about a more ‘enlightened’ relationship between the sexes as long as the larger structures which provide the context for the education system continue to reproduce gender-based relationships of domination and subordination?” Let us make an attempt to use this perspective to make sense of the news from the government school at Melur. Both girls who are being denied admission to Class XI have studied at this school till Class X. The school and its principal were apparently not taken into account by the parents who arranged their marriage, nor by the larger community which participated in the ceremony. In matters of this kind, we tend to ignore how peripheral the school is to society. It is a place where people send their children to enable them to seek certified qualifications. The school neither forms a point of reference for making decisions, nor does its curriculum carry relevance to everyday living. Its principal and teachers are perceived as petty functionaries of the government.

In her denial of admission to the two girls who have now become married women, the principal is conveying her inconsequential anger. If we blame her for misusing her authority and compel her to admit these girls — as the Tamil Nadu government will surely do quite soon — we miss the opportunity to listen to a voice we have institutionally muzzled. This is the voice of teachers who are supposed to carry on their lean shoulders the full burden of the rhetoric of national development and social transformation. The enormity of challenges teachers face in their daily professional routine is trivialised by us when we expect them to act like pedagogues and social reformers rolled in one. This latter role constitutes a grand illusion as they can expect to receive no cooperation from the larger society when they try to go against established norms. Curricular policies reduce their intellectual struggle to a ritual, to be observed for the sake of examination success and certification. Indeed, their training as teachers lacks professional rigour and length precisely because both the state and society treat them — whatever the rhetoric may be — as minor cogs in the system’s wheel. The Melur principal has made the mistake of conveying this a bit too explicitly. She is right in indicating that she is not equipped to run a school for married women. If the government is concerned about the education of child brides, it should develop a curriculum for them and start institutions where it can be taught.

True, such a step will form an oxymoron. The state cannot acknowledge a child bride as an adult citizen with constitutionally endowed rights. She is an ambiguous entity, a progeny of contradiction between the state and society. She inhabits a messy, forgotten corner of India’s modernity. We tend to look at her, when we must, with emotion and studied surprise. What distinguished Leela Dube as a social scientist was that she had the courage to stare unemotionally at such dim-lit corners of Indian modernity. About child labour too, she wrote in a similar vein, arguing that it is embedded in the deeper structures of society, not all of which have a purely economic character. When we ignore these structures and act like impatient activists, we inadvertently place ourselves at the disposal of strategists whose interests are narrow and short-term. As a major scholar of our times, Leela Dube teaches us how to register the present moment in the long story of women’s subordination.

(The writer is Professor of Education at Delhi University and a former Director of NCERT.)

More In: Lead | Opinion

Prof. Krishna Kumar's profound and sensitive critique of the Melur episode in Madurai district in which two girls were denied admission to Plus One after their parents had married them off after they had completed Class 10 was most touching.He points out how political correctness and gender activism have failed to see the real issue behind gender parity or the lack of it.His point about the peripheral nature of school to society and his description that the school neither forms a point of reference for members of society to take decision on a girl student nor its curriculum carry relevance to social reality is very apt in the context of the two married girls.His conclusion that schools are not the place and teachers are not the tools to carry out social reformation cannot be disputed.

from:  Chidambaram Kudiarasu
Posted on: Jul 2, 2012 at 20:59 IST

This is revolutionary article which has clinically bared the cruel world
of Indian girl in modern socio-cultural India and incite us to read
Leela Dube's work in this field.

from:  Mukesh Kaushik
Posted on: Jul 2, 2012 at 20:41 IST

Even though this article well explains an interesting and very appropriate sociological analysis, it does not focus properly on the solution of the problem. The right to education should not be denied to anybody. The principal should have admitted the girls and reported the illegal marriages to the authorities. Only education and sharing a classroom with children who fortunately did not have to go through such an early marriage can change those family and kinship ties Leela Dube talks about. A school for married girls? Ridiculous. It would simply strengthen the evil of child marriage attaching to it an institution recongnised by the state! Activist should not forget the social environment and the problems of people in their everyday life, but this does not mean justifying evils of society! Education is a right and child marriage a crime. There are principals who are obliged to assure this right and policemen obliged to punish this crime.

from:  Maria
Posted on: Jul 2, 2012 at 16:15 IST

This is what our society.we are in advanced and improved technology days.Only India shows discrimination on the gender.Other countries show discrimination but not like India.They are giving importance to the development of their countries,but India taking care about small small issues,but not on the burning issues like corruption ,eve teasing and suicides and accidents .
What is the mistake of those girls?,is it marrying , then they are married but they want to study and fulfil their achievements that's why they enter into school.If one boy was already married then that boy doesn't have a right to join in a school?that was not wrong in the present society because no one can recognise him as married.
We are in 21th century,People should not discriminate the others based on the colour ,cast,beauty and gender.Awake India and give importance to the talents and good things.First our political system should be changed.,then our country will grow more than other countries.

from:  Hema
Posted on: Jul 2, 2012 at 14:54 IST

@Vivek patil and @Shushant you are accusing the girls as if they had a say in the
decision to get married. All child marriages happen because of some idiots and
ignorant parents. First their parents did damage to those girls, then that principal
who refused to provide education and now you guys are doing by supporting
principal. Your argument that it will give wrong message to other students only make
me laugh. Since when class 10 students have starting marrying on their own. But if
we let the girls study, I think it will spread a right message to them "see what some
idiots have done to one of your friend, its a wrong practice and you should stand
against it".

from:  shwet shashank
Posted on: Jul 2, 2012 at 13:43 IST

This is what our society.we are in advanced and improved technology days.Only India shows discrimination on the gender.Other countries show discrimination but not like India.They are giving importance to the development of their countries,but India taking care about small small issues,but not on the burning issues like corruption ,eve teasing and suicides and accidents .
What is the mistake of those girls?,is it marrying , then they are married but they want to study and fulfil their achievements that's why they enter into school.If one boy was already married then that boy doesn't have a right to join in a school?that was not wrong in the present society because no one can recognise him as married.
We are in 21th century,People should not discriminate the others based on the colour ,cast,beauty and gender.Awake India and give importance to the talents and good things.First our political system should be changed.,then our country will grow more than other countries.

from:  Hema
Posted on: Jul 2, 2012 at 13:32 IST

The article is great and raises a good concern of our society.
The crux of the problem can be covered in below questions and answers:
Q. Should the married girls be entertained in same normal schools or should there
be separate schools?
Ans: There should not be any restriction on girl to study in regular schools just
because she is married. If the teacher thinks that it may bring wrong impression to
the other students, the counter comment can be we go to schools to learn our
society, how we should be and run our society. The incident here is pretty much part
of society and everyone must be aware of this. At the same time, others should learn
that it is something wrong to have child marriage and it must be eradicated with
society.

The decision taken by the principal is absolutely wrong.

from:  kulbhushan verma
Posted on: Jul 2, 2012 at 10:06 IST

The writer has presented the case very beautifully but he has not given
a solution for those two girls. I don't think opening a different
school for married children is a very good idea because then they will
be marked for the rest of their life and won't be able stand among the
normal children of their age. It's like they are being discriminated
from children of their own age group just because they got married at
small age. Also, opening new schools will take lot of infrastructure
and we don't have enough schools even for normal children.
I think the principal should have taken those two girls but before that
should have called the parents of all the students and in front of all
the parents and students scolded the parents of those two girls. From
this public display two messages would come out. First would be that
there is no fault of the girls in the marriage, every fault is of their
parents and second the school does not support child marriage.

from:  Praharsh
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 22:52 IST

The better way to come out of this situation would be to find a solution as whatever is done by the girls' parents is totally illegal and the girls' are victim of our traditional and conservative society. I think the solution can be to punish the parents under the law and to admit the girls to the school because denying them opportunity to learn because of their parents' misdeed would be unjust. Hope parents take a lesson and girls get education. Opening new schools for married nonadult will only encourage more minor girls marriage therefore not a better solution

from:  swati surve
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 22:20 IST

No problem. There is a new avenue. One can open Schools and colleges for married people.

from:  Mani Iyer
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 16:17 IST

Why hasn't anyone considered the option of letting the students attend the same school without any bias whatsoever? I am sure, the girls' permissions weren't sought before their hands were given away in marriage. This article beautifully explains Ms. Leela Dube's (thanks to the author for introducing the social scientist) words on how acting like an "activist" isn't the wisest of ways. The principal, instead of incriminating the students further, should be gracious enough to give them requisite education to stand on their own feet and more importantly, not grow into their parents.

from:  Nisha
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 14:15 IST

As writer has stated one should have a long term vision rather than a
short term success or victory the decision taken by the principal is
very correct. Someone has to take the harsh but vital decisions. if
those girls were allowed to attend the college then a wrong message
would have been spread among their classmates about child marriage.
Beside this girl's parents and in-laws should be punished for child
marriage.

A separate school or part time course can be arranged for those girls.

from:  Aditya Bhalchandra
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 11:45 IST

i am thinking in the same line as Vivek Patil is thinking.
the principal has done the right by not allowing these girls admission
to her School.
first of all, getting married at such a small age is not Legal.
second, if parents forcibly get them married, then their parents need
to provide a better reason to get admission in any school. this
article does mention anything about the situation in which both girl
get married.
this article seems to be biased on one aspect on only girls education
without looking into its acuteness and faulty compares it with other statistical data.
if viewed from Social activist eyes, this kind of child marriages
which are morally and legally illegal should be highlighted and action
must be taken to reform such illegality.

from:  Sushant
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 11:11 IST

So what if these girls are married??Come on people,they want to study and they have a right to do so.The principal's degree and right to teach should be taken off,if she feels she has a right to prevent them from studying.

from:  James
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 06:48 IST

I wish the Tamil Nadu government shows the courage to prosecute all the adults
involved in the marriage to the fullest possible extent as allow by the law. Child
marriages will only stop when the penalties for the same are made severe and should
mandatorily include long jail terms. The principal is probably wrong to over-react
and penalize the girls for actions that they did not wish upon them. But, I am happy
that she did it and brought this case to the limelight because without her we would
have never had this discussion in a public forum. The limelight should be not he
parents of the girls not on the principal.

from:  Girish
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 06:06 IST

I am like everyone clearly baffled by the dilemma of the role of
educational institutions play in the life of the people in real life.as
being mentioned by the author,is it just restricted to the job of
producing validated certificates only?
but who gets married willingly at this age to downplay the authority of
school?its still a harsh decision

from:  nilesh kumar
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 03:21 IST

This excellent article bringsout the mindset of our society towards
girls education.Teachers are role models for children and when they
give loose comments about certain things are only done by boys and
girls can't do it,these comments brings confusion and lack of
confidence in the minds of young girls who want to have their own
independence and identity.Education is fundamental right of every
child.Families should avoid comments like the young girl when she
becomes matured has to leave her natal home and make the house of the
guy she is married to as her own.This bring fear of unknown into the
minds of girls.The case in question about the principal of the school
went by social norms to avoid other parents wrath of having their
children studying with married girls.The girls are not to be blamed.It
is their parents who consider girls as family burden and get them
somehow married to shy away from responsibilities.A change in society
is possible when girls are respected as individuals.

from:  Manoj Pillai
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 02:24 IST

Without going into the ethics issues that who was the villain few things
must be learnt from the incident. state must make arrangements for young
women education and the parents must be held accountable for child
marriages without punishing the girls, who may personally not realize
teh ill effects of young-age marriage.

from:  Ashutosh
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 01:53 IST

Education and marriage are two different perspective of social life. its general opinion that marriage is an obstruction in pursuit of education as a carrier. The same cannot be said in present social context. Moreover this very act of the girls coming to school even after marriage shows the present social stigma regarding marriage as a hindrance to education proves the fact that the decision to send them back was a lack of pragmatic decision taking ability on the part of the principal concerned .

from:  akarsh roy
Posted on: Jul 1, 2012 at 00:31 IST

Married girls AND boys cannot be allowed to study in regular schools -
it is not about gender discrimination; it is about them and their
parents having broken the law. If they want to study, let them get
divorced, otherwise their education would be in trouble anyway. It is
the narrow-minded parents of these girls that need to be condemned, not
the school principal.

from:  Gayathri
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 21:50 IST

A separate school for married girls must be opened by govt with the vote and tax of tax payers money or donation from people . Those married girls should not give up studying and work towards atleast getting access to computer somewhere and study online cause the future studies will be online.

from:  Frederick Dsouza
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 19:48 IST

Eexplicit and subtle factors that contribute to changes in a complex society can not
be adequately explained by analyzing a random event in one of the the hundreds and
thousands of schools in India. Until recently, enrolling girls in schools itself was a major challenge (it still remains a challenge in some pockets). Today, enrolment of girls is not a serious issue at least as per the official figures from most States. This />change is the result of a 'reforming' forces both within education and other
subsystems, particularly the economy and the media. Having achieved overall gender
parity, the next target is gender equality. I am optimistic, with the current trend in
the popular demand for human rights, explicit gender discrimination in schools will
disappear soon. Finally, communities' perceptions of school and teachers depends
on teachers' willingness to participate in communities and their ability to strengthen
the reforming forces that are aimed at broader social change.

from:  Sathya
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 17:08 IST

An incredible piece of writing. As informative as it is, however, i felt the writer has not provided a viable solution. If a girl child is married at such young age she has already been treated harshly by her family. Now to deny her the right to education would be double jeopardy. In this case, the girls can enroll in a college as they have already cleared class X but girls who are still younger can not be denied enrollment in school just because their "societal goal" has already been achieved.
Separately, i greatly appreciate writer's effort in bringing to light a less known side of a teacher's life. Someone who's expected to teach and be a roll model also needs to help in elections, census and other things. That's a pity.

from:  kunal Angrish
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 15:27 IST

theory aptly put in the context.this phenomenon also shows the widening gap between policy makers and the lower level government functionaries who come into direct interaction with the social reality.reaction of the social activist further strengthen the logic that we as a society still try to find remedy in superficial manner and in ad hoc manner,instead of going into detail of our social values and priority.enlightining perspective from the poit of view of the principal clearly shows that education is still treated in our society from the instrumenantalist point of view not an end in itself.value based education is the need of our society not just utilitarian type of education.

from:  rahul kumar
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 15:14 IST

The article is correct.
The society itself never takes the responsibility of all the wrong practices it sees and expects too much from the school.
The parents, the education system and even students have little respect and support for the teachers, then they expect teachers to do a miraculous transformation of the child and society.

from:  Abhinav
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 15:02 IST

Is this article about the "dilemma of the school principal who denied admission to two child brides"?
I think not. It is rather about the "deep structures", often missed by activists, of the messy Indian reality where issues like child labour and child marriage are legion.
Though written and articulated well, the author is informing us the imaginary take, on the issue, of Leela Dube and not his own!

from:  S Sharma
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 14:18 IST

this is what an irony of our country we have been living in 21st century and talking about egalitarian society. a society where is no discrimination on the basis of caste, creed, gender, and color etc. however, In reality we have still gender discrimination across the nation. whereby a girl student denied admission in school because she got married at the early age. how long this gender discrimination to be................

from:  chandraveer singh bhati
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 13:28 IST

I learned something form this article. Thanks for introducing Leela Dube to readers like me.

from:  Ayyappa
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 11:29 IST

Isn’t it illegal to make marriage before completing 18 years of age?
How can those girls give possible explanation for this, if they are
themselves are unknown of the fact that they are guilty at the first
place for getting married in immature age. In that sense the
principal’s decision is right. If we want to stop child marriages,
somewhere a tough decision has to be made by someone. Otherwise it will
just go on! Author missed one point that says, principal denied the
admission to the married girls because it will give wrong message to
other students (it may encourage child marriages to be seen as anything
normal). In this sense, the decision taken by principal seems
absolutely fine. Because, otherwise people won’t see child marriages as
anything wrong! When the question of education of these married girls
comes, government should realize the need of special schools for bride
students which will be able to fulfill their requirements too. I wonder
why distant education is not an option

from:  vivek patil
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 10:41 IST

Compare the action of the principal with the judgement of the HC judges who said that a girl who has attained puberty, even if she is just 15yrs of age can be married off under the Muslim law. If the principal was conveying her angst in this manner, maybe it was wrong ... but did she have any other avenue. In fact, did the girls who were married off have any choice in the matter of marriage or education after marriage? Who wants to listen to a girl's viewpoint or think only for her benefit? Certainly not the 'modern' society of judgemental men!

from:  Rati Hegde
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 09:41 IST

But, Professor Kumar, what characterized her scholarship was that she explored
affectively the everyday of (our, shared) modernity, holding up a mirror to that which
was apparently dimly light. Shadows might shine.

from:  Saurabh Dube
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 09:24 IST

Excellent Article typical of The Hindu.Thought provoking and a correct
,practical approach is clearly shown. I wish that the subordination is
understood in a real and genuine manner and something practically is
implemented. The teacher's predicament is clearly illustrated as below by the
writer.How well said.
(1) "The enormity of challenges teachers face in their daily professional routine is trivialised by us when we expect them to act like pedagogues and social reformers rolled in one." (2) "This latter role constitutes a grand illusion as they can expect to receive no cooperation from the larger society when they try to go against established norms."
We as a society should utilize our exposure to education in a befitting manner to make the law makers and the Judiciary esp. to understand this and then counsel the Law Keepers- The Police. Something has to be done to the poor rural female child. As ateacher I know it well and I make this appeal.

from:  sankar aiyer
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 08:51 IST

When I was in the HR section of a Govt.Bank,way back in 1977,I was
presented with a claim for Maternity bill of a woman employee,whose
change of name following her wedding was yet to be decided.I passed
on the paper for sanction on the conviction that the expenses,
strictly relating to child birth,should not be held up on the
applicant's marital status.

from:  K P Natarajan
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 07:41 IST

What the principal did was definitely wrong. She denied the opportunity of education to those girls who married not because they wanted to but because they had to due to the kind of society you paint in the article exist.

from:  Anoop
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 07:27 IST

Agreed that society sets the norms on who a good woman is. It also tells her that
subordination is the crown jewel of womanhood. But how is all this related to the
punishment meted out to the girls by the school principal.
Lets get it right... The principal had no business denying admission to the girsl - from a legal , social or moral perspective. Also , while the practice of child marriage is revolting, no parent is obligated to consult the teachers and schools. This opinion of the author is quite bewildering.
We dont have separate colleges for married and unmarried, do we? The same applies to schools too. Further, by denying admission, the socieyty has punished the girls who already have been punished with the burden of marriage , by their parents.

from:  Swarna
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 06:05 IST

Totally agree with the author. In the olden days, every member in the
society was expected to fill in some pre-determined role and was
conditioned since birth to be a good fit. The modern education
contradicts the bottomline here, especially in case of the women.
Education aims that every individual realizes his/her true potential
and fits in a social role where he/she can contribute maximum to the
society based on his/her calling. Individual progress/interest was
never a goal of the original society, only the collective interest. I
personally know many females who were sent to professional COLLEGE so
that they can EARN a living some day if there is ever a need. No, they
were not sent for professional EDUCATION so that they can be
INDEPENDENT some day. Professional learning for certification and not
intellectual thinking.

from:  Roopa
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 05:21 IST

Beautifully written analysis and arguments. I thought marrying off an underage girl is a crime and wonder what the law did about this case. Admission to school should be immaterial for obtaining education. So one wonders if there is a political motivation undercurrent to the whole issue...

from:  Krishnan
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 04:17 IST

Congratulations for your excellent column. Large scale investment into
education is essential if India is to meet some of it major social
challenges and to begin with control its demographic growth. It will
need to equip itself with leaders concerned with this imperative of
paramount importance and capable of convincing their countrymen of its
necessity and inevitability. We, in France, have just elected a
President who is determined to place the issue of education at the
heart of his policy. We need more such leaders the world over who
understand the value of giving forthcoming generations the best
possible future. But fighting the forces of ignorance is tough battle.

from:  Gilles GEORGET
Posted on: Jun 30, 2012 at 03:12 IST
Show all comments
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor


O
P
E
N

close

Recent Article in Lead

Why is the fact of two state leaders, sitting casually on the verandah of Gandhiji’s home in Sabarmati Ashram, with their back to the home, worthy of such detailed analysis? The answer lies in the importance that symbols have for any society.

The larger picture, at Hriday Kunj

Gandhiji wanted Hriday Kunj ashram to be a training ground for politics, where the observances of the ashram would serve as the bedrock of a moral polity. The photograph, of Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping, reverses this fundamental relationship »