What constitutes identity in todays’ world for a weaver? His caste, and his income; what ‘rakham’ he weaves, which village he comes from, does he weave silk or cotton? Does he weave for the co-operative or for the master weaver? Can he design or market his own product? Does he go to the masterweaver, or does the master weaver come to his house, to collect the sarees he weaves? Does he know his customers, has he seen his saree being worn? Padmasali? Netagani? In the village, or in the town? Handloom? Power loom? Or IT?
Each of these categories offer a different possibility, and locate the weaver in a different hierarchy with respect to his peers. From each of these identities he draws a different community, but at the same time they are continuous. These identities have to combine to sustain him, to build his self esteem, so that he can carry on from one day to the next, in a fast changing world.
If in the last hundred years, modes and technologies of production have changed beyond recognition; in the last fifty years, modes of transacting these products have moved beyond the horizon of understanding of the producer. He is now dependant on mechanisms that leave out the possibility of negotiation on a personal basis; the interaction is impersonal, as it would be with a machine that produced fabric. Where is the space where a weaver is respected for his skill, where is the acknowledgement of his capability which can sustain him. All that he is offered by society, is a financial transaction. It is not surprising that the weaver is bewildered, weaving an uncertain income, that tells him only that his financial needs will not be met. He translates it to mean that his skill and technology have no larger intrinsic value. What does this do to his identity? And is this perception true? Who will invest in the weavers’ self esteem? And what kind of investment can bring back his sense of self worth?
In defining sustainability as experienced by the weaver, we define unsustainable livelihoods; which are not just economically unsustainable, but are livelihoods that do not provide life sustanance to their practitioners.
Each of these categories offer a different possibility, and locate the weaver in a different hierarchy with respect to his peers. From each of these identities he draws a different community, but at the same time they are continuous. These identities have to combine to sustain him, to build his self esteem, so that he can carry on from one day to the next, in a fast changing world.
If in the last hundred years, modes and technologies of production have changed beyond recognition; in the last fifty years, modes of transacting these products have moved beyond the horizon of understanding of the producer. He is now dependant on mechanisms that leave out the possibility of negotiation on a personal basis; the interaction is impersonal, as it would be with a machine that produced fabric. Where is the space where a weaver is respected for his skill, where is the acknowledgement of his capability which can sustain him. All that he is offered by society, is a financial transaction. It is not surprising that the weaver is bewildered, weaving an uncertain income, that tells him only that his financial needs will not be met. He translates it to mean that his skill and technology have no larger intrinsic value. What does this do to his identity? And is this perception true? Who will invest in the weavers’ self esteem? And what kind of investment can bring back his sense of self worth?
In defining sustainability as experienced by the weaver, we define unsustainable livelihoods; which are not just economically unsustainable, but are livelihoods that do not provide life sustanance to their practitioners.
No comments:
Post a Comment