When Food Is a Weapon
Food is not a mere act of consumption but a model for a way a society thinks of itself
FOOD IS NOT A MERE ACT of consumption but a model for a way a society thinks of itself, anthropologists Mary Douglas and Claude Lévi-Strauss point out. Whatever does not fit the category 'edible' is seen as violative of identity. For example, intensely vegetarian landlords refuse to give meat-eating tenants accommodation in Delhi and Mumbai. Even in the police service, canteens or messes are grouped along caste lines by the food and the styles of cooking each caste is familiar with. Anthropologists like R.S. Khare, Andrew Kempson and Kristina Nauer-Statham have repeatedly expounded that food creates solidarity. That food is a part of oneself and to give away food is to give away a part of oneself (See 'How Food Brings Us Together', page 64).
Indeed, people often express togetherness through the exchange of food. They also create a similar solidarity with nature by treating an animal as taboo. The sacredness of the cow has to be seen in this context. It embodies the gratefulness of an agricultural society to the bountiful cow, which because of its milk is seen as mother.
Reports from Jain Panjrapoles [animal shelters] in Gujarat record remarkable stories of this bond. The Sociologist Chandrika Parmar recounts the story of a farmer who leaves a cow at his shelter during a drought. He comes back the next day because he could not bear to be parted with the animal. Yet the drought is so intense, that both man and animal commit suicide by jumping into a well.
As a society urbanizes, nature becomes distant and more abstract. Hence, the cow, which was everyday, now becomes the symbol of a fading world. A political symbol and the source of an aggressive identity.
As we become increasingly politicized, the ban on cow slaughter turns into a blatant electoral plank. What is life-giving in terms of the cow, becomes life-threatening. The recent murder of Mohammad Akhlaq on the mere suspicion that he had cooked beef is a case in poi...
FOOD IS NOT A MERE ACT of consumption but a model for a way a society thinks of itself, anthropologists Mary Douglas and Claude Lévi-Strauss point out. Whatever does not fit the category 'edible' is seen as violative of identity. For example, intensely vegetarian landlords refuse to give meat-eating tenants accommodation in Delhi and Mumbai. Even in the police service, canteens or messes are grouped along caste lines by the food and the styles of cooking each caste is familiar with. Anthropologists like R.S. Khare, Andrew Kempson and Kristina Nauer-Statham have repeatedly expounded that food creates solidarity. That food is a part of oneself and to give away food is to give away a part of oneself (See 'How Food Brings Us Together', page 64).
Indeed, people often express togetherness through the exchange of food. They also create a similar solidarity with nature by treating an animal as taboo. The sacredness of the cow has to be seen in this context. It embodies the gratefulness of an agricultural society to the bountiful cow, which because of its milk is seen as mother.
Reports from Jain Panjrapoles [animal shelters] in Gujarat record remarkable stories of this bond. The Sociologist Chandrika Parmar recounts the story of a farmer who leaves a cow at his shelter during a drought. He comes back the next day because he could not bear to be parted with the animal. Yet the drought is so intense, that both man and animal commit suicide by jumping into a well.
As a society urbanizes, nature becomes distant and more abstract. Hence, the cow, which was everyday, now becomes the symbol of a fading world. A political symbol and the source of an aggressive identity.
As we become increasingly politicized, the ban on cow slaughter turns into a blatant electoral plank. What is life-giving in terms of the cow, becomes life-threatening. The recent murder of Mohammad Akhlaq on the mere suspicion that he had cooked beef is a case in point. A beef ban is now often accompanied by the imposition of Section 144. The wonderful rituals of feasting and fasting have now turned hostile, distancing communities.
The recent controversy over the beef ban, in fact, revealed how food, which often establishes reciprocity and unity between groups, becomes a battle for livelihoods, an issue of deprivation. Beef is consumed by poor Hindus and Muslims. By banning beef, one threatens the livelihood of Muslims and the nutrition of the poor.
A democracy must be sensitive to forms of exclusion and inclusion. Food and marriage can become modes of dividing a society. For example, vegetarianism is a Sans-kritic tool adopted by certain castes to enhance their ritual status. It is not an expression of solidarity with nature but an act of aspiration. This is precisely why it is important to unravel these strategies so we understand the complex dynamics of food and how it can be a weapon in the hands of a few.
Shiv Visvanathan is a Delhi-based anthropologist and human rights activist. Currently he is Professor and Vice Dean at the Jindal School of Government and Public Policy, Sonipat, Haryana.