[In this section, we discuss the radical views on education of two non-Western thinkers Rabindranath Tagore and Paulo Freire to see if their projects meets the demand for incorporating indigenous knowledge]
Education for fullness
Tagore was deeply troubled by the
extreme elitism of the British-enforced education system that catered only to
the children of the privileged. As is well known, he was also deeply critical
of the kind of education that was imparted, the rote learning that Freire later
identified as the ‘banking’ method. Instead, Tagore advocated an enlightened
and elaborate version of education for fullness: sarbangin shiksha. This included not just the education of the
intellect, combining the most universal aspects of Western and Eastern high
culture, but also the education of feeling for the other that extended to
feeling for nature and cosmos. In this sense, he criticised the one-sidedness
of an education that only imparted bookish knowledge in a narrow pragmatic sense.
His conception of education did not reject the ideals of Western enlightenment,
but sought to embed it in a wider conception of learning that, he thought,
embraced the whole human (Mukherjee 2013).
There
is no convincing evidence that the knowledge systems for ‘fullness’ that
constituted Tagore’s conception of sarbangin
shiksha included the knowledge systems of the unlettered even in its
margins. So, his lament about the absence of the poor from the field of
education may be viewed as a ‘humanitarian’ lament, not really a ‘humanistic’
one, to use a distinction suggested by Freire and to which I return.
In fact, there is
evidence that Tagore viewed the poor and the marginalised as ignorant, dull and
voiceless, to whom language needs to be imparted, and hope needs to be aroused
in those broken hearts. And, the knowledge that is supposed to enlighten the poor is the highculture
knowledge already imparted to the elite. Needless to say, this task of pulling
the poor out of their misery through sarbangin
shiksha required novel educational practices such as teaching in the mother
tongue, using local flora and fauna as examples, active agency of the learner,
the tapovana model of
shunning bounded classrooms and holding learning sessions in the open air, etc.
Yet, the knowledge that was so imparted consisted of the products of the elite
high-culture, from the upanishads to modern science, via literature, art and
sophisticated musical forms.
I think the point
about the ultimately elitist character of Tagore’s otherwise enlightened
conception of education can be strengthened with an example of the novel
educational practice followed in Tagore’s school. I could not locate any
official document for this, but I can recount this curious practice from my own
experience as a student in Tagore’s school at Santiniketan. Every
afternoon, children from Patha Bhavana were transported in the university bus
in batches to Silpa Sadana at the rural setting of Sriniketan, the location for
rural education and reconstruction. There, we sat down on the floor to learn
about woodcraft, papier mâché, basket weaving, lac work, etc, from the ill-clad
and impoverished, but highly skilled village artisans. During that period of
active hands-on learning, some of the rural folk were our teachers. Our
education, thus, included some of the knowledge systems of the unlettered, and
a reversal of class roles. No wonder this novel education practice was soon
abandoned due to logistical reasons.
Yet, the point
remains that the appreciation and adoption of rural culture was restricted to
the ‘crafts’ of a folk nature. Elite, high culture still formed the central
ingredient for the development of sensitive intellect. Similarly, farmers are
sometimes consulted about various agricultural practices such as variety of
seeds, condition of soil, multiple cropping, organic fertilisers, etc. This is
the traditional domain of the unlettered where knowledge is accumulated through
sheer practice over centuries. Beyond this, rural culture (not to mention
tribal culture)—except ‘folk art’—is not ascribed any enlightenment value. The
tribals, the indigenous people, are not even in view. They are curiosities
hiding in hills and forests.
Humanistic education
Several decades later, Paulo Freire,
in his classic work, Pedagogy of theOppressed (1970/2005), addressed the issue of resistance to the
ideologies and institutions of the elite more directly. The task for education,
he felt, was to reverse the process of dehumanisation in which the oppressed
found themselves:
The struggle for humanisation, for the emancipation of labor,
for the overcoming of alienation, for the affirmation of men and women as
persons ... is possible only because dehumanisation although a concrete
historical fact, is not a given destiny but the result of an unjust
order that engenders violence in the oppressors, which in turn dehumanizes the
oppressed (Freire 2005, 44).
Following George
Lukacs, Freire elaborates that a revolutionary educational practice aims to ‘explain
to the masses their own action,’ to clarify and illuminate that action, both
regarding its relationship to the objective facts by which it was prompted, and
regarding its purposes (53). The more the people unveil this challenging
reality, which is to be the object of their transforming action, the more
critically they enter that reality. In this way they are ‘consciously
activating the subsequent development of their experiences’ (53). Freire
insists this form of education to be essentially pre-revolutionary, such that
the oppressed can proceed to a revolutionary overthrow of the unjust order.
Freire, thus, goes beyond Tagore to view education not only as a humanitarian
mode to include the oppressed, but as one which triggers humanisation of the
oppressed by enabling them to erect the other side of the barricade. Let us
call this mode of education the proletarian
mode.
It is unclear if
the envisaged overthrow of the unjust order will in fact enhance the prospects
for the species as a whole. The humanised education achieved through the struggle
of the working masses will no doubt usher in an era of proletarian freedom.
But, will it ensure survival for all? The answer will depend on the content of
the proletarian mode, the knowledge systems so advocated. Here, the prospects
do not appear to be as revolutionary as the emancipation of a section of
people.
There is little
evidence that pre-revolutionary education practices among the masses,
undertaken by revolutionary forces, address the issue raised here. In his
writings, Freire makes frequent references to politico-educational work of Mao
during the pre-revolutionary phase. Following these examples and their
implementation during, say, the struggles in Yan’an and Vietnam ,
certain forms of educational practices have emerged. For example, following
lessons from Vietnam, Maoists in India have organised Young Communist Mobile
Schools (or, Basic Communist Training Schools), which host select groups of
25–30 tribal children in the age group of 12–15 years.
These children
receive intensive training for six months in a curriculum consisting of basic
concepts of Marxism–Leninism–Maoism, Hindi and English, mathematics, social
science, different types of weapons, computers, etc (recall their age group).
Needless to say, lessons are conducted in Gondi, and local song and dance forms
are used to motivate the children. Beyond this, there is no evidence that the
ancient knowledge systems of the tribals form any significant part of the
curriculum, even though the pupils concerned consist entirely of tribal children.
In fact, much of the curriculum, including lessons in modern science go
directly against the foundations of tribal culture; especially, weapons
training involving not bows and arrows, but automatic rifles, light machine
guns, high-powered explosive devices, and the like (Mukherji 2012). While the
children in mainstream India
sit through modernist curriculum under the aegis of not-so-subtle capitalist
propaganda, tribal children sit through roughly the same curriculum, even if
they have been asked to wear Maoist lenses. Education is imparted in the
proletarian mode, not in the indigenous mode. It is difficult to dispel the
impression that modernist educational thinking has deeply penetrated even the
most revolutionary minds.
(To be concluded)
Do you think that tribal/indigenious people are non-educated since they were not educated through modern european method of learning/schooling ? I think, it will be better if you give them some space as well though your point larks around Tagore and Freire
ReplyDeleteJust the opposite of what you ascribe to me. The main point is that, despite the radical features, educational thinking of both Tagore and Freire are in the liberal mode that has led to the near-extinction of the species. Incorporation of indigenous knowledge systems, which are historically isolated and segregated from the liberal mode, is the only option left for the survival of the species.
ReplyDelete