Friday 27 April 2007

Reverse Racism - & Contempt for Servants

One thing the European visitor notices almost immediately is that his skin-colour will mark him out for special treatment. You might say that that would be blindingly obvious, but the fact is that India is one of the world's leading nations (in the top twelve states in terms of GDP, believe it or not) - so it has no reason to be over-respectful to the outsider. So, I was surprised.

But, frankly what is more interesting, is that, while it might also be said that class-distinctions among Europeans are gradually disappearing (though Europe has much to learn in this respect from the Australians and Americans), a person’s class seems to me a disproportionately major factor among Mumbaikers.
And in one of the world’s most established democracies, that observation struck me as being very curious. More later...

Back to colour. Here in Mumbai, there are both advantages and disadvantages to being a white foreigner.
As an Indian friend coyly said, after I was charged ‘foreigner price’ for mangoes: “You are, I’m afraid, a victim of your colour.” Very amusing.
But one can forgive it I suppose. It’s true that prices are regularly a third of what I would pay back home, so I can afford ‘foreigner price’. In fact it becomes a sort of tax for living in a country I love living in… and taxes are inevitable.

What is less easy to take is the reverse – what might be deemed by some as an ‘advantage’ but in fact is something that just feels rather creepy: it’s the obsequious behaviour of flunkies in opulent hotels and expensive shops.
Examples: the fawning displayed by shop assistants in rich people’s department stores; the self-debasing eagerness of some lift attendants in well-off apartment blocks; the humble, self-effacing way subordinates just accept the open contempt of their employers.
Now, it’s not just the foreigners who get all this bowing and scraping stuff. Peons will debase themselves as much before members of the Indian professional classes.

To a Westerner, who will often be a firm political egalitarian, this obsequiousness just appears like a lack of self-respect from these employees, or, worse, an unmanly fear of the 'boss'; in fact, this kind of behaviour appears to be simply demeaning to the person exhibiting it, and, well, just plain sad.
(Yes, yes, I know, some visitors, like me, are quite flattered by this excessively boot-licking attention at first. Believe me, it just gets tiring to have to deal with it after a while though).

So... why do (some) Mumbaiker working-class people do it?
After all, they are a minority. Out on the streets, at roadside vendors’ stalls, in small cafes, in independent shops, in government offices even (!), there is no such behaviour. Mumbaikers here can be as rude and as peremptory as any other folk on Earth!

No, the toadying that I refer to most often occurs in places that the well-off and/or the professional classes inhabit. Why?
Are the assistants told to behave like this by their managers? But then... are the managers stuck in some ancient past where “kow-towing to a master” was demanded? And do they think most modern foreigners find it pleasant?

It struck me (though I know very little about how caste actually works), that these assistants might just be observing the rules of caste, they being lower-caste, those they serve being upper-caste. But then why bother scraping to a tourist like me? Tourists are not from a higher caste (are they?). Tourists are from no caste at all – surely.
I guess that’s where one’s white-skin might play a role; and if colour does play a part, then such behaviour really is truly unpleasant – it’s a sort of reverse racism that does neither party (those who behave obsequiously, and indeed those who accept it) any credit.

However. Some people I have spoken to say that it’s more than just obsequiousness before Foreign Riches, but also has undertones of the colonial past – and that some Indians find it difficult to shake off memories of the days of the sahibs. Could that be possible? If so, I find it truly odd – as it is now some sixty long years after the bitter Independence strggle.

But… and here I might be getting into really hot water… let me point the finger elsewhere to explain at least part of this behaviour.

From what I see on the streets of Mumbai or in the more expensive homes and restaurants of the city, there are members of the Indian professional classes who seem to have little ability to communicate with members of the lower classes.
I have been shocked by the rudeness and arrogance shown by otherwise extraordinarily cultivated people toward their own servants or to shop assistants or waiters. In the US, in ninety per cent of cases, those people would have not been allowed to get away with it, as the abusers would quickly have been equal measure back.
Don’t forget, when I say ‘professional classes’ I mean people like dentists, or small-businessmen, or teachers – that is to say, relatively ordinary folk. Yet, sometimes, I have been so embarrassed that I have had to look away when they are so curt and harsh and rude to their ‘inferiors’ – which, to the shame of all, seems somehow acceptable.

And, do you know what I think is at the root of this bad behaviour? (Oh dear, here I get into more trouble). My answer: widespread use of domestic servants.
I can think of very few other democracies where the ordinary middle-classes have full-time domestic help (usually ‘maids’) as a matter of course.
Sure, in Britain, a middle-class home might have a cleaner who comes in part-time, but even in America, it is only the upper middle-class that will have live-in servants. But here in Mumbai these maids or ‘boys’ are common to many households, even quite ordinary ones. They are often brought in from rural India, or the city’s slums, and are on long hours and very meagre wages (which is why they can be afforded in the first place of course).

The trouble is that because these servants are often so badly trained, poorly-paid and so lowly, the people in the household, including older children, often feel they can be openly contemptuous of them. (Though, there are exceptions to this rule, where some servants are treated like members of the family; that is true too, I admit).
These servants, who have few options open to them, are often cowed by their employers’ arrogance and abuse.

This kind of relationship seems to me an unhealthy one all round, and yet it seems to be a defining characteristic for how certain other exchanges take place outside the home and in Indian society at large.
For example, as this particular wheel turns, you can see how it manifests itself in industrial companies, where I have seen managers rant and rave at unhappy and powerless employees for hours – all the while accusing their employees of not showing initiative (as if they dared!).
I leave it to sociologists to suggest how much such powerlessness affects a man’s or a woman’s attitudes. But it must have some effect.

So… here is a final (I hope interesting) thought – wouldn’t it be better, in the drive toward a truly equal and classless society in Mumbai, if the middle classes learnt to stop looking down on someone simply because he or she is employed by them, and started to wash their own socks?

**

Please feel free to comment - just click on 'comments' below. Commenting is open on this site - you do not need to register or even to leave you real name.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am not entirely sure I agree with all of the statements in the above blog.

I think this 'boot-licking' or people-pleasing behaviour is far more to do with innate nature than class distinction (though it does play an active role).

This is common everywhere in the sub-continent. There's a lot of boot-licking to immediate superiors and wealth. Not quite sure where it stems from. The prime example is the exultation of celebrites being treated liked dieties (Amitabh, Shahrukh, Aishwarya, Rani etc).

Maybe it's a cultural and traditional thought process well and truly in grained into one's system.

As for India being a leading nation. It's economy is brittle and fragile and in a nation where 40% of the people are living below the poverty line, I wouldn't call it a leading nation. I also don't agree with an established democracy - it is corrupt to the core. It is not the voice of the average suffering man which is what a true elected government of India would be. And for a country with a very high GDP, far too many of its inhabitants are living in sub-standard environments. India is a fabulous market place where the rich and wealthy reside along with very poor. India's a country where the rich are fabulously and out of this world rich. I can hardly say I have first hand experience of it but history proves that being economically sound doesn't make you a better nation (at the height of its empire, 20% of the British population was living below the poverty line and things in Britain only became better after she lost her empire and had no choice but to focus on her people).

Anonymous said...

Gypsy Child is right about one thing. There was a lot of boot-licking in Britain before the Second World War, when the aristocracy and the rich controlled the purse-strings of society, so an Englishman should not feel too superior to present day India.
The rich and upper castes will always behave badly; and India needs a social revolution, like Britain's in 1945, to produce equality.

Mark R said...

Thanks Gypsy Child for your comments.
About democracy. I can't talk about the rest of India, but in Mumbai, every man and woman's right to vote is taken at least as seriously as in England. I watched the last municipal elections take place, and people did feel their vote was important.
In fact, there is no way India could now succumb to a army coup, as in Pakistan, and I doubt any prime minister will be able again to be as arrogant as Nehru or Indira Gandhi. I think Democracy is here to stay, no matter how bruised it gets sometimes.

Anonymous said...

What is the point of democracy if its corrupt to the core and is nothing more than the appearance and fascade of an institution? Is it not worse and far more contemptible?! Plus Mumbai is one city, it doesn't account for the rest of India where the voice of every man isn't noted.

Debbie Ann said...

wow again you capture what I was thinking too. I can't believe the way people talk to their servants and others. And I had an even bigger shock the other day - my driver bumped into another car and the driver got out and SLAPPED my driver. In the US that would be far worse than bumping a car.I felt so ashamed even to be seeing it, but I talked to other people who said it was normal!

I've been here 5 months - going to be here a year or two - a lot to get used to. I hate the shop assistants following me, the honking all the time as I am walking anywhere. I hope I get used to it.

rameshsubrahmaniam said...

Corruption is the legacy of Britishers. I agree with the author, to some extent. Slavish mentality is still prevalent in my country.Basically, this is prevalent in most of the countries, where ever I have worked.I was an NRI for about 20 years. Indian"s were treated very badly including in my own embassy/consulate in those countries. A plumber/carpenter/painter from UK/USA was given more respect than an Indian Engineer/Manager. I am not saying that,illtreatment/misbehaviour with the servants is allright,but some times even educated Indians are also treated very badly. But it is changing slowly and for a westerner it may be shocking. Secondly, if you have this amount of population, anarchy will always be there, as in US/UK, for every 100 persons, there may be a law enforcing authority, where as in India, there is a Policeman for 100,00 persons. If you have a problem like this, probably,by this time your country would have sunk.Sometimes, i wonder, even with all this problems, we are still a Democratic country, whereas look at my neighbours, We still respect you, and are courteous to you,even when people like you call us names. The problem in your country is scarcity of labour to do your work, and hence you will have to treat them well otherwise, you will be the sufferer, whereas in this country, there is always a person a waiting to take my place. It is a question of demand and Supply. Good day to you. however, have you noticed that we do not use the FOUR LETTER ADJECTIVE, WHICH you normally use in front of everybody(right from children,women etc.,) in your language.