The Irony of Primitivism

Until a hundred years ago (let us say 1913, the eve of the Great War), many Europeans thought that it was a part of their world-destiny to spread the light of their effulgent civilisation to the distant parts of the slumbering Orient steeped in primal darkness. More specifically, the Victorian anthropologists who travelled throughout the heartlands of India believed that the native Indians were disgusting and obnoxious primitives who needed a good deal of polishing through a thorough education in English etiquette, mannerisms, philosophy, and history.

Today, the wheel has turned full circle. The only place in the world where the 'primitives' of India are studied, and are in fact praised for having kept alive 'organic', 'synthetic', and 'cohesive' familial and kinship structures, are the socio-anthropological departments of UK, Europe and USA. I will not be very surprised if one of these days some British or American NGO decides to set up a Helpline for the people of these communities, or some Ph.D. students from Chicago, John Hopkins and Harvard establish a forum called 'Save The Indian Tribals' to exhibit their personal distaste for the homogenising effects of American globalisation. In short, within a span of one hundred years, the status of the primitives (or 'tribals') of India has shifted from being an object of the West's ridicule and abomination to being one of celebration and adulation. At the same time, however, go and ask any educated (and especially Anglicised) Indian where the tribals of India live, and you will receive the highly indignant and exasperated reply : 'For Christ's sake, I am telling you this for the last time! There are no tribals in India. Do you hear me? Blimey, we are a civilised nation now. Why can't you get that into your head?'