Give an account of Ranajit Guha’s approach in studying ‘subaltern class’. (UPSC CSE Mains 2019 - Sociology, Paper 2).
Subaltern School
Italian Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci first coined the term “subaltern” to describe a class of people, such as peasants and workers, who are dominated by a more powerful class through hegemony.
The Context of Emergence of the Subaltern School:
- Prior to the emergence of the Subaltern School, mainstream scholarship on South Asia was either a result of colonial Eurocentrism or was dominated by the concerns of native elites, heavily influenced by colonial frameworks and narratives.
- For example, James Mills’ classification of Indian history into ancient, medieval, and modern periods is an imposition of a prevalent framework used to study European history and misses out on the diversity of experiences in historical study.
- Even Left-wing academics were unable to shed European frameworks and Marxist orthodoxy, leading to an incomplete understanding of Indian society.
Ranajit Guha and Subaltern Studies
- Being a reader of history at the University of Sussex, Guha recognised the inadequacy of mainstream historical narratives in and about India for studying the complexity of India’s past.
- The voice of the subaltern, i.e. the underclasses were absent from traditional narratives.
- In the early 1980s, with like-minded colleagues, Guha picked up the term ‘subaltern’ in their attempt to “rectify the elitist bias characteristic of much of research and academic work” in the field of South Asian studies.
- Meaning of the term ‘Subaltern’:
- In the introduction of the inaugural issue of Subaltern Studies, Guha explains that the term “subaltern” denotes inferior status and, in the context of South Asian society, is generally associated with subordination based on factors such as caste, class, gender, and occupation.
- Ranajit Guha’s book, “Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India,” offers a distinct perspective on peasant resistance. Rather than viewing peasants solely as objects of administrative concern, Guha examines their consciousness and modes of dissent.
Impact of Guha’s Subaltern Studies:
- Guha not only highlights the historical neglect of subaltern concerns in mainstream academia but also acknowledges the subaltern as a construct rather than an innate category.
- He explained that the concept of the subaltern is a product of the power dynamic between elites and subalterns, rather than a preordained, immutable status.
- This approach forms the basis of a new historical school that challenges long-held beliefs in favour of a more nuanced and complex understanding of society and history.
Criticisms of the Subaltern School
- Subaltern School idealises the agency and resistance of subaltern groups while neglecting the impact of social and political structures that limit their actions. This has led to accusations of presenting an overly optimistic portrayal of the subaltern agency.
- Subaltern Schools neglect the significance of class-based politics. This overlooks the potential for subaltern groups to participate in transformative struggles that challenge the prevailing economic and political structures, particularly in the School’s recent work.
- Subaltern School rejected universal theorising to challenge Eurocentrism, but it went too far and completely denied its utility in explaining South Asia’s complexities.
Next
previous
Latest News
EDITORIALS & ARTICLES
General Studies