Ray you are absolutely correct. In addition a knowledge of the languages and actually living amongst the people is essential.Originally Posted by Ray
Even then (as in parts of Africa) even speaking the local language but living in a separate community limits ones intimate knowledge of what the local people are thinking (which is quite often diverse anyway) and why (this is often the important aspect).
For once I agree completely with JMA... will wonders never cease. Speaking multiple languages and living among the people gives a perspective that living in an expat enclave or other restricted area never can, even for decades. In addition a knowledge of the history, national and local, is important... not just "the history" as recorded by distant scholars, but the multiple historical narratives perceived by various subsets of the populace.
Not that all of that would mean that "one had ingrained oneself in the psyche and mindset of all sections of the people in that land!", but it would be a start. How many people can honestly claim to have ingrained themselves in the psyche and mindset of all the people even in their own land?
It's also true citizens of a country who have spent all or most of their lives in one part of their own country often have a terribly limited understanding of people in other parts of that country. How well does an urban sophisticate in Manhattan understand an Oklahoma wheat farmer? Could an academic in Mumbai or Delhi claim a full understanding of the vast diversity of populaces and narratives that makes up India? In my neighborhood we get Filipino visitors from manila who are more clueless than any of the foreigners, who haven't the slightest grasp of local language of custom and carry some of the most absurd stereotypes about indigenous people.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”
H.L. Mencken
Valid point.
Having had the experience of foreigners living and working in India, some on long tenures, some short and some making India practically their home, it is my observation that there are three types of such people.
1. Those whose circles were limited to their own people, local intellectuals, local professionals.
2. Those who had come to India for professional studies and research.
3. Those who made India their home.
The first group may have known one of the Indian languages and while they thought they understood India, in actuality understood only the 'intellectual'/ professional India. In actuality, they did not understand the 'real' India.
The second group who came for professional studies or research, understood India in their field of specialisation. They were better versed in understanding India because during their research or professional studies, they also had to interact with people, not specifically in their field alone. This is more so the one who had to undertake field study in the rural area.
The third group who made India their home or even second home and who had no hesitation to 'muck in' with the locals of all strata of society and lived in their neighbourhood and not in exclusive upmarket localities, understood India best amongst foreigners.
The missionaries, journalists/ writers who have made India their second home and their like would fall in this category.
However, they still would not be totally conversant with the psyche and mindset of an Indian. Even an Indian would not understand the psyche of other Indians from different parts of India, since it varies immensely. Therefore, even such foreigners would not be totally 'in the know' of the psyche and mindset.
It is also important that the locals should like you so that they share their views without hesitation.
Why I say this is because the last Counsel General in Kolkata, Beth A. Payne , dressed like an Indian and ingratiated herself with the locals and was the toast of the town, even with the Communists who were ruling Kolkata and who were not too well disposed to the US. She went out of her way to identify with the locals, rather than stand on a high horse that normally the western diplomats are prone to do.
Like it or not, while I cannot say that when she left, she became an expert on India, but this much I can say is that the anti US feeling that is natural for Communists went down exponentially and even the population at large (a large majority of Communist sympathisers) had become mellowed!
Just my observation.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks