MR G A R D N E R M U R ­P H Y came to India in

1950 as an U N E S C O consultant to organise research teams to explore the reasons for social tensions. In the Minds of Men* is a non-techni­cal report of his impressions regard­ing many constructive forces work­ing for national unity. While searching for the sources of ten­sions he had to discuss the prob­lems of the family and the caste system in India. We shall confine ourselves to his observations on these two topics only.

Murphy begins the analysis of the Indian situation by observing the forces of solidarity and security, and then discusses the sources of cleavage in Indian life. He dis­cusses caste and the economic and religious aspects of Indian life in the past at the village level and makes the concluding observation that in spite of the caste hierarchy and the consequent social distance. the economic inequalities and reli-gious differences " over long periods and throughout large regions caste and religion have been relatively free of the phenomena to which we would apply the word ' tension.' There must always have been some jealousies of those who enjoyed a more favourable station, but this is an entirely different thing from the seething unrest and bitterness which often characterise the relationships of caste and of religious groups in recent years" (p 44) . The caste system then worked well in the past.

THE JOINT FAMILY

Where was this solidarity nursed and preserved? In the family. The chapter on Indian family is writ ten by Mrs M u r p h y and it is a very sympathetic interpretation. She writes:

" Indian children in the villages still do grow up in the large joint family, where the married sons and unmarried daughters have rooms or apartments in the house of their parents; children feel accepted by and at home wi th , a large number of people. There is no need for strange baby-sitters; a baby is

always wi th some one fami l ia r ' ' (P 49).

There is a constant togetherness in the family. " This constant togetherness and participation may mean that the small chi ld is rarely exposed to new experiences without the support of a trusted person; it also provides an experience of kinesthetic and empathic richness which children brought up in cribs, play pens, carriages and other art i­cles of furniture could not possibly have. The child comes to know and to feel and intuitively to under­stand people, wi th a depth grown from the time he is close to the muscles and bodies, the movements and feelings of people, just as our children learn to understand the mechanics of objects through the hours and days they spend playing wi th . taking apart, and putting together the objects which are their toys and their vehicles.

" This same empathy extends to the world of animals and the world of nature generally, for the same reason; this is the world of the child's experience. He learns to un­derstand growth, and change, and continuity, cause and effect through his closeness to the processes of nature, not through changes he causes h i m s e l f in mechanical th ings" (p 50).

There is, '' the flexibility, the acceptance of children in the every­day pattern of family l iving the easy participation of people of any age in the activities of the rest" (P 58 ) .

LIVING TOGETHER

Mrs Murphy is very appreciative of these aspects of the Indian family and observes that while the

. American might teach Indians the higher standards of living, they have to learn from Indians the " standards of l iving together' ' . From the point of view of the smooth running of society these are the desirable aspects of child deve­lopment and family life. But the care, affection and the comforts showered on the child make it soft and dependent on others and adults refuse to take initiative and responsibility. When the hour of decision c o m e s the individual decides not in terms of his inclina­tion and aptitudes, but in terms of

February 27, 1954

249

Caste and Fami ly I P Desai

* In the Minds of Men. By Gardner Murphy. Basic Books Inc Publishers, New York, 1953. $4-50.

the interest of the group of his attachment, namely, the family. Consequently, his action may not be socially as gainful as it would otherwise have been and the system is perpetuated at the same level. The total social effect of this is that though the society runs smoothly, it does not develop.

It is true that over a long period no fundamental changes took place' in Indian society though some modifications might have occurred. How far is family and child deve­lopment responsible, for this'; It cannot be denied that the social heritage is passed from generation to generation in the family. It may be that in America the family does not perform this function to the same degree as in India. But in India it wi l l take quite a long time before family ceases to transmit social heritage. At any rate, the portents at present are that care and allection wi l l continue to be bestowed on the child in split joint families and even in the nuclear family. A microscopic and ineffec­tual section of the Indian family may be an exception to this trend. W i l l then the Indians not change? And how do we explain those Indians who show initiative and a sense of responsibility?

INITIATIVE

In the first place it is not true that Indians lack the initiative and the sense of responsibility as some Indian officials believe (p 48) . The fact is that the fields of initiative and responsibility are different from those in the contemporary western industrial society. H o w far is it true that the joint family curbs the initiative, inclinations and aptitudes of the individual?

Let -us first understand the joint family as it exists today in India, There are three or four types of families existing in India today. Since we do not have enough data we cannot say which is the prevail-ini; type. We can therefore only state the types. There is the tradi­tional joint family. There are the jo int families wi th common pro­perty hut separate residence. There are the split joint families of either type, and there are the nuclear families, It w i l l be difficult to find the family consisting of husband,

wife and children, unless the parents of the husband are dead. These different types are differently dis­tributed over different occupational groups and economic strata of society and over rural and urban areas. The assumption or the Hindu law that the Indian family is a joint family unless proved otherwise is tine even today. hut in terms of" the composition of the family, there are several types. One cannot say how far the change has occuried in terms or authority in the family. Again the preval­ence of authority in different strata and groups has been different. In the literate "and higher castes prob­ably it is not as much authoritarian as it was in the past. We must observe how far and in what sense an individual was not and is not permitted to use his initiative, and follow his inclinations and aptitudes in these types of families.

LESS AUTHORITARIAN

(Generally it is the traditional type of joint family that is assumed as a deadweight on the individual. The other types an the results of the individual's freedom of action and apart from the legal position, they are partnerships and not cor­porations. It follows from this that they are by constitution less curb-ing and less authoritarian. Now. these several types are of compara­tively recent growth and when the joint family is attacked, no distinc­tion is made between its several types. The traditional type which is generally under attack must be understood in the context of its situation. It prevailed in an un-expanding agricultural economy, and at that time there were practi­cally no alternative channels for an individual's ability and initiative. But there is nothing to prove that wi th in the limited channels, the individual had no scope. The observation of recent and contem­porary traditional family shows that though the eldest reigned, the ablest ruled. Although in the early stages of the changed circumstances, the traditional type of family did hinder the initiative and ability of the individual, it was this trait w h i c h made the transition to differ­ent tvpes possible. What is worth observing is that very quickly the joint family adjusted itself to the new circumstances and it changed its function of hindrance to that of help. Large number of indivi­duals who could take education and careers afforded by new opportuni­ties could do so not in spite of the

joint family but wi th the help of the joint family. This is true even today. This aspect of the Indian family is overlooked while assessing its strength and weakness and in judging its future.

The group always restrains an individual. What matters are the concrete and particular restraints. The Indian joint family, as we have seen above, does not exert much of a restraining influence in matters of choosing a course of study or career. But in other matters it does. The technologically efficient a n d economically independent member of the family still respects the family sentiments and might probably feel restrained in social matters. How far he feels restrain­ed would depend on the values that he has. The judgment that we pass on his actions are in terms of the values that we hold. Whose values are correct is not a problem within the scope of this article. What is significant for us is that though Indians are adjusting to technological a n d occupational changes, they have not accepted the value of the society from which the industrial impact came. Conse­quently, there are no corresponding structural and organisational .chan­ges in the Indian society.

I D E O L O G Y A N D S O C IA L. C H A N G E

In terms of social change this presents an interesting situation. How far does the impact of an industrial society on a non-indus­trial society bring about changes exactly corresponding to the indus­trial society? What is happening in India and in Africa raises serious doubts about the usual assumption that the impact of industrial society on a non-industrial society changes the latter in the direction of the former. This assumption appears to ignore the ideological streunof society and concentrate on tin " social structure ". Ideo­logy is a hard point " in social change. particularly in a society like the Indian which has a strong and long ideological heritage. Fur­ther, it also depends on the strength of the ideology of the impacting society. The ideology of the com­petitive industrial society has not the same appeal to the Indian today that it had in the past. It has lost the vigour of its youth, and the world looks at it with growing suspicion. The Indian refuses to accept the concept of an individual of the competitive indus­trial society. He may be called orthodox, unprogressrve, conserva­

tive and so on. But is it not worldly wisdom on his part not to accept the doubtful ideology? Why should he abdicate his position in the family which gives h im educa­tional opportunities, medical relief and protection against unemploy­ment and old age? Apart from the men of means, the individual who leaves his parents because of their quarrels wi th his wife starts a new family, hut he does not like to be abandoned by his children and aspires to rear up a joint family.

W i l l the Indian joint family per­petuate itself and with it , the caste system? The daring among the sociologists may speculate and the astrologer may predict. But we shall not attempt to answer the question. We shall say only this much. These are the important problems of the Indian family and not so much the questions raised by the psychiatrist and the psycho­logist the toys with which the Indian child plays and the kind of stimulation to achievement and to motor activity. These problems are important when the family pattern is settled. This is not to maintain that the manner of bringing up children in India does not require any change. The change ought not to mean the application of copy­book maxims from American or western society but it should be based on the study of indigenous conditions wi th in and outside the family. If we do not do that we shall raise problems which do not exist today,

II

In the next chapter Murphy dis­cusses some factors associated wi th the rise of tensions. The tensions could be observed in the village and in the city. l i e emphasizes the role of cities because large-scale group hostilities are quickly aroused in the cities and the new in almost every type of institutional practice makes its appearance first in the cities (pp 61-62). " T h e village is in­evitably conservative, inevitably the bastion of traditional stability, poise, reverence for the past." A n d the movement of the village popu­lation into the cities is a factor making for the most rapid social change and also for the rise of tensions.

The overall position is that a tussle between the forces of conser­vatism and forces of social change is going on. Murphy very correctly maintains that, " the traditional

February 27, 1954 THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY

250

situation could be maintained as long as economic specialisation existed at the village level; as long as each caste group has a clear idea of its position and is not altogether frustrated in that posi­tion, and as long as disturb­ing practices and ideas are not introduced f r o m outside" ( p 66). But these conditions can no l o n g e r be maintained in modern India due to a long series of economic and political changes under the, British regime and after independence.

Most of us wi l l agree wi th Mur ­phy, The disagreement is likely to arise on the estimation and evalu­ation of the situation. T w o ques­tions arise: (1) How deep and wide is the change? (2) In what direction and at what rate are the forces of change moving?

The evidence presented by Mur ­phy in the chapter entitled '' Crum­bling Patterns of Social Distance" is an answer to the first question. The evidence is neither strong nor adequate. But Murphy's conclu­sion is very cautiously worded. " In overall summary we seem to find that one prominent form of social tension in India is the strug­gle of castes to improve their rela­tive status; the urbanisation and education are two of the factors tending to weaken the rigidity of caste system; that changes in att i­tude occur more rapidly than chan­ges in behaviour; but that change in attitude has already gone so far as to set going new policies in both the central and the state govern­ments which are already exerting iheir own pressures to undermine caste prerogatives" (p 116).

ECONOMIC, FACTOR S

One should agree with Murphy that the caste prerogatives are crumbling and to that extent, the tensions wi l l also ease. But are the caste prerogatives the real cause of tensions? And, are the forces be­hind prerogatives weakening? We are told by him that the real trouble is economic and it is being partly solved by land legislation. On page 67 Murphy writes, " We find a three-cornered struggle among those who own, those who have perma­nent tenancy and those who have no rights whatever. This three-cornered situation is being altered both by the struggle to give absolute-ownership to tenants and by the struggle to give either tenancy or absolute. land r i g h t s to those who have been landless."

upon men whose status is at present low if they should be forced to compete on terms which t h e y cannot understand" -(p 101). If as we said before there is an increase in the landless low castes, caste may tend to be pre­served among them, because all the factors mentioned above are pre­sent in that group. Murphy men­tions Koris and Khatiks refusing to be classed in upper class schedule. Many more such cases w i l l come to light when the Backward Glass Commission publishes its report. A n d again read what Murphy him­self says, " One is reminded that in a scarcity economy in a country wi th l imited development of re­sources, ineffective utilization of natural resources, and a low level of technology those who are poor w i l l inevitably constitute 90 per cent or more of the total and wi l l cling wi th the desperate conserva­tism of the poor in many parts of the world to such securities and adequacies as they already have" (p 102). Under these circum­stances what are the possibilities of the break-up of the caste system?

PERSISTENT CASTE SYSTEM

From the foregoing it is clear that though in the process of modi­fication, the system persists. Murphy writes, " Immediately the question arises: ' W h y then does the system persist? ' To answer this one must go back to the problem of joint family and arranged marriages as already noted. It is one thing for an individual to be dissatisfied wi th an institution and an entirely differ­ent thing for that individual to act as if the institution had already come to an end. What normal father or mother, looking forward to the welfare of his son or daughter, could possibly act as if no such system existed?" (p 68) . He adds, iV We ourselves ran into a few cases ol outcasts, men and women who were respected but who were rela­tively isolated in the social life of their cities, not having the support which normal members of the com­munity enjoy."

So, then, joint family and arrang­ed marriages perpetuate the caste system, according to Murphy. But the arranged marriage's cannot be separated from the joint family. We have seen that the joint family is quite alive both structurally and functionally, though, there are modifications in the structure. At this rate there does not appear great danger to the caste system. The changes that are taking place

252

February 27, 1954 But in the next paragraph we are informed that, " there is also a rela-tive increase in the numbers of the lowest castes many of whom of course are landless, in such fashion as to force them in effect off the land. The land which they cult i­vate may be relatively barren and the share of the crop which falls to their lot may be insufficient to keep them alive. Under such conditions they may wander in quest of a livelihood, and some of them appear among the migrants who seek employment in the cities."

Here is the trouble spot. It may lead to reform or to reaction. Actually a huge class of lumpen proletariat is being created and if this section is not absorbed in some occupation the social tensions would not ease. These economic" and class forces may align them­selves on caste basis. We do not have enough field data for gauging the probability. But the argument ran be as follows: When the-castes are trying to improve their relative status by improving their economic position, they are not discarding the caste consciousness. On the contrary, they are achieving their ends through caste, action. This happens because of the triangular association between caste, economic and occupational status. This makes it possible for the occupa­tional mobility and economic im­provement to follow the caste lines. A reshuffling in the relative status of some castes may take place. But, the " we feel ing" behind the castes does not disappear. Profes­sor D R Gadgil's observation in this connection is worth noting. 11 There is an obvious tendency for social observances and rules to be­come loose and therefore1 the autho­rity of the governing bodies of castes to become less and less effec­tive. But on the other hand there has been an equally strong though perhaps not equally noticed tend­ency for caste organisations to take new forms, to cover wider fields and to launch into new activities." (Poona—A Socio-Economic Survey. V o l I I , 1952, p 185.)

Thus though the existing caste prerogatives may be undermined new prerogatives may arise, which on one hand may be based on class and on the other hand on caste. The class may also be coloured by its caste origination. Add to this possibility, the other factors which tend to preserve the caste system, namely, " the insecurities, responsi­bilities, and unknown dangers which might certainly be imposed

February 27, 1954 in marriage customs are confined to the urban areas and to certain and class. Among them marriages are not arranged. They are managed. When we are con­demning arranged marriages the alternative that we have in mind is the choice marriage. Choice marriages are very exceptional. We are thinking of choice and even managed marriages in relation to their effect on the caste system, and we must remember that these concepts just do not touch eighty to ninety per cent of the population.

Quantitatively the inter-caste marriages arc insignificant in pro­portion to the total number of marriages performed every year. But in terms of their influence on the attitude of the people they have greater significance. But this effect is also different on different tastes and classes and in the rural and urban areas. To the consider­ably large mass of the population the question of inter-caste marriages does not arise and therefore they have no effect on them. In the urban areas and among the higher castes, the attitude towards such marriages is cither of indifference, resignation or tolerance. But the change in the behaviour is not pro­portionate to the change in att i­tude. It is true that the change in attitude v precedes the change in behaviour. But the change in behaviour would depend, firstly, on the attitude and, secondly, on its depth and intensity. The attitude towards inter-caste marriages is not that of encouragement. They are not opposed. Indifference, resigna­tion and to a large extent, tolerance are passive attitudes. Those others do i t . Let them do it . We do not do i t . This is the result in terms of activity of these attitudes. It is here that the quantitative aspect of inter-caste marriage is of import­ance. If the number of such mar­riages is not large and does not affect the large mass of the popu­lation, the passivity would settle down to activity towards the status quo. As it is, inter-caste marriages are not threatening the caste system.

INTER-CASTE MARRIAGES

The question, w i l l or can the inter-caste marriages break the caste system? is based on curiosity and wish. We can answer this question in terms of logical possibi­lities. But the test of these possibi­lities is the answer to the question, are they breaking the caste system?

T h e jo in t family system and

marriage are perpetuating the caste system. The change in them is neither deep nor widespread. How­ever weak the change may be let us inquire into the forces of change.

What are the forces against the persistence of the caste system? This leads us to the second ques­tion raised on page 252. As M u r ­phy has pointed out, and as most of us would agree wi th h im, urban­ization and education are two of the factors tending to weaken the . rigidity of the caste system. What is the relative strength of these forces as against the forces of con­servatism discussed above? Here it is necessary to distinguish between the urbanization in ancient civiliza­tions, urbanization, ie, growth of towns and cities in the middle ages clue to commerce and the modern industrial urbanization. In modern times when we refer to urbaniza­tion, we associate it wi th industrial­ization. The growth of towns and cities in modern times as forces of social change are thus dependent on industrialization. Understood in this way one finds a good deal of fake urbanization in India. For example, purely from the demogra­phic point of view Saurashtra is a highly urbanized state. But these urban units existed due to their being the capitals of numerous chieftains. They have the palaces, modern buildings, electricity, water works, flour mills, and such other modern amenities. But life in these urban units was and is largely-rural. They are village communi­ties on larger scales. This descrip­tion suits most of our cities barring the ones like Bombay. They are not industrialized and it is a mis­take to consider them as the forces of social change in the sense in which industrial cities are. Nav. in some cases it may be found industrialism has adapted itself to the conditions of these rural-urban units.

INDUSTRIAL WORKERS

Murphy writes that there are probably not over three mil l ion industrial workers in all India , about one per cent of the popula­tion (p 202). Let us look at this fact in association wi th Murphy's opinion that, " rapid industrializa­t ion in the sense in which the West­ern world would use the term is not confidently to be predicted " (p 203). Obviously the rate of industrializa­t ion is very slow and quantitatively urbanization as a force of change is not likely to be very effective. What is the effect of urbanization

as a qualitative force? Murphy writes, " The arrival of industrial workers in the urban regions is large­ly a result of the extreme pressures upon the land already noted and there is no strong desire, to remain beyond the time required. Inquiry for example, among the Ahmedabad workers indicated t h a t t h o s e who had come from the coun­try districts p r e f e r r e d to go back " (p 202). T h e migra­tory character of the industrial worker in India is a matter of common and usual complaint of the trade unionists, labour officers and industrialists. If this is so in Ahmedabad, which is a fairly big industrial centre, the conditions in other cities must be still worse.. And how can these rural towns urbanize the worker?

EDUCATION

Education is another force of social change. It works largely through what is called the white-collar class. Here again we must make the distinction between the content of education, the educa­tional institutions and the recipients of education, Content of educa­tion is the same everywhere and it contains a good deal of western influence. But this influence is modified in the institutions. In a city like Bombay different colleges have different traditions and one can observe the difference in the attitude towards life in general of the students of different colleges. Each college caters to the needs of different social types of .students and it adjusts itself to their needs. This fact has greater significance when schools and colleges exist and are being started in those rural towns. Contents are the same but the reaction to the contents is different in these town institutions from that in the institutions in a city like Bombay, Even in con­tents, the Indian ideology is receiv­ing greater attention. The reci­pients of education are different in their social background in different ' schools and colleges in the same city and in the rural areas. The aim of receiving education is also different wi th different students coming from different strata of society. Thus education has differ­ent influences on the attitudes of students of different social strata.

W i t h the opening of schools and colleges in the rural parts of the country the lower stratum is beginning to receive education. But their minds are burdened by the " uncertainties, responsibilities

253

February 27, 1954 THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY

and unknown;., dangers;" which Murphy cites as' the factors of con-seivatisim W i l l those ideas have the same, effect on their minds as on the minds of the students

from the strata which has a comfortable living?

How far are we correct in assuming the uniform influence of education as a force of social change? The contents of education are the same for all. students. But their effect on students coming from different strata of society is different, Murphy's view that the attitude have changed, in the parti­cular direction is open 10 doubt, We can even explain the develop-men! between attitude; and behavi­our on. .our view, The behaviour has not changed because the att i­tudes have not changed or that the change in. behaviour is superficial.

OPTIMISTIC ESTIMATE

' Murphy's. estimate of the efficacy of the two factors of social change iii based, on abstract considerations. This is one defect of this very read­able book, But Murphy is not wr i t ing as an expert on India and the book is a report of his impres­sions. We need, not find much fault wi th h im. He is interpreting Ind ia to the Americans and lie writes in the terms which they understand and appreciate. We can examine: his view which has coloured his observations, assess­ments and evaluations throughout the hook. He is very optimistic about the influence of the-ideas of western liberalism. His book wilt have an appeal to those who revel in wishes. But the hard-headed roan man a difficult position. He may agree w i t h many things taken discreetly and ' abstractly. But he can draw different conclusions from Murphy ' s own premises. We have already made the. point that the values of western industrial society are being questioned and that Indians as a mass have not accepted them. The few educated and enlightened appear to have accepted them. This can be judged from their behaviour. But can it not be an. imitat ion of western behaviour rather than behaviour a rising out of conviction? Is their " westernisation " not superficial or a matter of convenience?

The source of defect in observa-tion. and inference is in the theory that contact initiates change, Con­tact may push forth the change if it is compatible w i th the change, '.But it does not initiate change, Change arises out of the. internal

developments "" in. a - given".". "society,, I t is true that Ind ian society" d i d ' not change in fundamentals over a long period. But it is equally true that the caste and the family have been in the constant" process of .modification even before India's contact wi th industrial society. 'The history of these two systems is necessary for understanding their present and the future. It might

show that internal inconsistencies arose withih them .and in relation to to other systems such as economic, political and ideological, But the family and the caste d id not break. They could make up wi th their internal inconsistencies and. their: outer relationships. They won't break un t i l their internal and. outer relationships become irreparably in-consistent.

254