Our time puts adult perspective on a higher pedestal in the hierarchy of age. This is revealed in the way we approach childhood. Of late, baal-buddhi became an element of discord in a Lok Sabha debate. The invocation of children’s intellect alludes to some kind of retardedness in the adult perspective. From political debates to neighbourhood banter, a child is deemed to be clay to be modelled by adults.
Unfortunately, the common tendency is towards not understanding a child in spite of the noble intentions of the greater common good in a democracy. Such noble intentions were at the core of manifold universal conventions, including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Child, 1989. India ratified and signed the Convention in 1992 which forwarded the goals of the Geneva Declaration of the Rights of the Child. Subsequently, this Convention was recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Convention underlines the commitment to the safety of child rights pertaining to education and health, particularly addressing the children of marginalised social groups. Another milestone in India is known as the National Policy for Children in 1974, which articulated a national imperative of protecting childhood against neglect, cruelty and exploitation. Subsequently, there have been many policy articulations by the Government of India on child rights, equity of growth and welfare.
Paradoxically, the policy commitments have not ensured a watershed moment in the way childhood is looked at in various walks of life. In this context, it is worth recalling Philippe Ariès who wrote a book, Centuries of Childhood, in the early 1960s, to help us understand the historically evolving ideas concerning childhood. The book can help us comprehend the perpetuity of the negative perceptions of childhood that are rife in society.
The cultural scene in India engaged with the modernity of childhood without losing sight of tradition. Traditionally, a romantic perception of the divine childhood had attracted poets and philosopher storytellers. Nachiketa was such a curious and critical child in the Kathopanishad, one of the principal Upanishads. He not only questioned his father, the sage Vajashrava, but also went on to have a critical dialogue with Yama. In medieval times, saint poets such as Surdas and Tulsidas had found a muse for their epic poetry in mythological child protagonists such as Krishna and Rama. The details of the poetic engagement with divine childhood are an uncanny instance of critical romanticism. Researchers ought to map diverse cultural and religious traditions to make sense of the deeper nuances of childhood embedded therein.
In the wake of modernity, children did not lose the romantic profundity in spite of the unfolding realism. The sociologist, Patricia Uberoi, interpreted the national flag-holding child in calendar art as an icon of the optimism of the post-Independence society. Besides, children made cameos as well as lead appearances in various popular Hindi cinema. The cultural scene gets richer and complex with the inclusion of poetry, literature and cinemas from across the vernacular region of India.
Furthermore, a wide spectrum of academic scholarship has aided in unravelling the unusual modernity of childhood in India. The debates on the constraints to childhood have benefitted from psychologists, sociologists, educationists and professionals working with NGOs. In addition to presenting logical criticism of undue romanticism and the essentialisation of childhood, they have also paved the way for transformative interventions. The lens of caste, class, gender, and subalternity has enabled the critical understanding of childhood to uplift underprivileged children.
This is the broader context of adult judgement on childhood. Childhood matters given the rich and complex cultural texts and contexts.
Dev Nath Pathak is Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, South Asian University, New Delhi
