Politics over Ravana

Lord Ravana

Like any other Indian kid I used to revel the sight of burning effigy of Ravana, a gigantic structure made of firecrackers disseminating into nothingness.  There was a sadistic pleasure in this sight of violence, of creation and destruction, of celebration of this violence year after year. I used to watch the structure disappearing into thin air each year in movies; but the first time when I came full face to reality of Politics over Ravana was when I asked my parents in fifth standard a very innocent question.  "Why don't we go out to see the effigy in the town?", knowing my age my parents did not had any justifiable explanation at that time but; when I grew up a little I was told "Ravana was a Brahmin and we cannot see him burning to death"

This was a very strange predicament for me, I was always told that Ravana was this villain from a story, who like in an other Indian tale dies for good in the end. Not watching him die to me was like showing him some respect for who he was instead of denouncing his evil spirit for what he was. Years after reading the various tales that surround the character I have come to a very simple conclusion, Ravana in this philosophical war of interpretation and reinterpretations has become a political tool.

Ramayana is a tradition and not a single interpretation can be called the only interpretation. In south India Ramayana has been written from the perspective of most other characters including Ravana. Last summer I had an opportunity to go through this book and it can be very nicely summed up by this quote "Only those who hang the heroes are the ones who write the history". Lately due to rise of intolerance and lack of fluidity in thoughts and acceptance of new and conflicting ideas this room for interpretation is narrowing down.

The fight of identity and roles of Ravana becomes grave when there are only few narrative. When we start considering a lot of other narratives probably we will able to disassociate him with our own identity and understand the real message. In the present scenario we have two major narratives, Ravana, the king from the south and Ravana, the evil Brahmin.

Ravana, the evil Brahmin is the tale which most people in India like to remember Ravana as, someone who did not accept the authority of the God himself and did wrongful acts which necessitated his death. This is a story of victory of good over evil, however there are some pockets within India who feel uncomfortable in associating him with evil given his identity and I became victim of one such thought.

Ravana, the king from the south is what is running most of the politics in Tamil Nadu. People who support the Aryan theory of invasion like to claim that Ram was this evil king; an Aryan who fought a war with a Dravida from the south. The caste politics therein likes to associate the upper caste as Aryans who ruled and played foul with the original inhabitants, Dravidas but in their quest to prove a theory right they sometimes forget who Ravana himself was, a Brahmin and by that analogy an Aryan himself.

The battle of narratives can only be stopped when more alternative narratives to the given translation come up; which was how the whole thing was meant to be. The voice of divisive politics over Ravana can be buried under the noises of all these new narratives. While the debate between his identity and his deeds will continue what modern Indians will have to do is to separate these characters of the stories from there own selves.