We need a death to value life. We need a suicide to demand
equal rights and justice. Today, the others’ death is an occasion for the
living to show outrage. Somewhere I read, amidst the growing angst against the
authorities of the Hyderabad Central University and one of the central ministers
all over the country, seeking justice for the Dalit research student, Rohith
Vemula who committed suicide as a protest against discrimination, some artist
presenting a work of art about ‘death and the effects of it that leaves on the
living’. I could not help thinking about the famous title of Damien Hirst, ‘the
Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living’. The more we
think about it the more we get into the zone of absurdity. Death, as we all
know puts an end to one’s life, leaving the rest to cope with it; and sooner
than later one comes to know that none is indispensible. Rohith Vemula will be
forgotten sooner than later though the cause for which he sacrificed his life perhaps
would continue unabated.
With due respect to the deceased, I feel like telling the
world that it was not needed. He could have lived on, fought against the
discriminations that he and his ilk face on a daily basis. The moment he took
the decision to commit suicide, I am sure he had forgotten his idol,
Dr.B.R.Ambedkar. The architect of our Indian Constitution could have committed
suicide several times for it was he and the millions of his Dalit brothers and
sisters who had suffered at the hands of the caste system in India much
severely than what Rohith had faced. Each Dalit leader in this country could
have chosen the path of self-annihilation instead of fighting it out violently
and non-violently alike. The history of the Indian Dalit movements could have
been different had it been so. Rohith failed to understand the larger picture.
But yes, he must have been led to such a dead end where he found it difficult
to turn back and fight. He chose to hang himself.
(when Rohith was thrown out of hostel)
Who in this world has not contemplated once the act of
suicide? Everyone living on this earth today, for right or wrong reasons, has
thought about it; either as a solution or as an escape. People say that
committing suicide is an act of cowardice. But it could be an act of bravery
also. So many Buddhist monks in Tibet and elsewhere choose to burn themselves
against the political authoritarianism of the other countries or even to show
protest against the mid path of their own socio-political and religious
leaders. Their society has accepted this way of protest, though painstakingly
over a period of time. But it was not the same case in India. However, thanks
to existential literature and the overt romanticism around the existential
creative creature many have chosen the path of suicide and almost all of them
have gained the status of eternally young bards. Suicide then was a choice but
not a protest. With the thickening of the politically oppressed climate around us
has facilitated suicide as one of the options to show protest; Perumal Murugan
killed the writer in him when his ‘Madorubhagan’ was banned and his life was
under threat as a writer. He made the writer in him to commit suicide.
I ask myself again and again whether this Rohith’s act is
justified or not. I am nobody to pass a judgment over his decision. I cannot
feel what he had felt as an oppressed Dalit student. But if he was a leader
with the guts to stand up against the oppressors, he could never have thought
about committing suicide. He was obviously not a guerrilla warrior like the
Tamil Tigers who used to carry cyanide tablets around their necks. Rohith
failed many and perhaps made many others bold to speak up. He forgot the fact
that protests these days have become a vocation for many. Anybody who has faint
acquaintance with the deceased one would come out as a living martyr and claim
the space that the dead one left without shedding much tears or sweat. This is
a vulgar scenario created by the social media. Everybody tries to step into the
shoes of the dead without once asking whether the death of this young boy did
create a new avenue to fight? Like the films change every week end, the causes
for social protests also change these days. Depending on the trending in twitter
and in the news channels, deaths of the oppressed also have become the changing
locations of protests.
(Rohith's mother)
I am not against Rohith or the people who support his cause.
Nor do I support the University authorities or the minster who is allegedly the
culprit. But I am definitely not with the people who go all over the city
thumping their chests in the name of Rohith Vemula. Is his death going to cause
a series of deaths? Or is it going to create a social stir that would last till
a solution is found to the problem for which he had submitted his life? Or is
it going to be the fad of the week and would be pushed into oblivion? Rohith’s
death is a loss for his parents and immediate family members. It is a loss for
his friends. It is a loss for the cause that he was fighting for. But his death
is not going to change the game for the players are not going to stick to the
same game for long. They will find new games to protest; they will find new
petitions to sign. Like a political party that cannot strive only on
anti-corruption plank, protests cannot survive on only one issue. So it is
obvious that as days would pass by, Rohith will be forgotten. But we should not
let that happen. However the question remains, are these protestors going to
remember him for long? Or are they going dip their angst in coffee, drinks,
facebook and other distractions with a revolutionary edge?
No comments:
Post a Comment