Baghban V

Parents, even if they try to, cannot live without expectations from their progeny. This is perhaps a natural instinct – a give and take relationship. There were already films in ’70s which raised the issue of children ignoring their parents while they grew old. Others sensitized the tension of difference in thought between the generations. Recent films like Baghban, Dil chahta hai, etc bring out several issues of this gap very sharply. Where does the problem actually lie? Every age is a generation, so there ought to be a generation gap in a parent and child span. 30 years.  Very few of the older generations actually are able to connect to their children. There is a change in the value systems, in the way things are understood around them and even the priorities of children change. Then how are relationships understood and expected to remain ideal? Parents always expect their children to take care of them, to support them, to help them financially. Yes, they did that for us too when we were small. But didn’t they know they had to do it anyway before having a child? Are children investments - Social, moral, financial, emotional? And when they do not give expected returns, issues spring up.

I don’t think there has been any film constructed from the point of view of the children. There is a tremendous pressure on the children itself – balancing their own ambitions, managing the family (starting a new one, and keeping the old one), etc. The argument will be: “We did that too” – to which the counter argument is “then why don’t you understand the situation? The circumstances and the complexities of life today have increased, only because the number of options available have increased.” It’s infinitely difficult to communicate this to the parents. Communication has always been a tricky issue in conventional Indian families. Most of the children fear the head of the family. Hence, all talk is routed through someone.

When children grow older, able, and self dependent, they do not understand what kind of a relationship to maintain with the otherwise head of the family. Ours is a patriarchal family system. This head of the family is generally a head primarily because he supports the family financially, according to me. Another is of course the political power that he has in the family. When this head retires, the power automatically transfers to the succeeding financial figure. But how does this new financial position get constructed? I mean, when does a son or daughter decide that he/she would start contributing money for household affairs? How are such decisions taken – these are extremely political, and what when the number of earning heads are more than one?

Education, although on one hand enables children to become more sensitive to parents, it also makes themselves more ambitious and rational. In the pursuit of rationality, children question most things – what they wear, eat, drink, live, use and even relationships. How must parents handle this? Or what should the parents expect out of such relationships? Parents try and educate their children as much as possible, but isn’t it hitting their own heads? Because children are going to be more self contained, self exploratory and self sufficient – perhaps a law of nature. Each time in each generation is a new individual constructed. This is bound to be different from the old one. But this new and old creates a lot of friction.

Someone told me that some friction is good. If a child chooses to keep his/her parents happy, is it necessary that his/her happiness too lies in that? These questions bother me all the time. My ethical stance is to keep everyone around me, related to me in any way, happy. How does that help me though? I wonder. But relationships are complex. And expression towards such relationships is very difficult. The generation gap is what perhaps makes the expression difficult. How must the parents deal with children to make them more comfortable to talk to them? May be, here I must get specific about certain kind of conventional families, where children in their formative years face this kind of extreme difficulty to convey their emotions to parents.

In traditional Indian family systems, the childhood is a period is which the child is trained in family values – social, moral, ethical codes of conduct. The aspect of communication within a family is never dealt with. The emphasis is on teaching – in a crude sense, giving. It is never believed that one could learn anything from kids. Kids are to be attuned to the society and in the process of training in social values, a lot is already lost. Moreover, while communication is not the agenda, it itself is institutionalized. Implied codes regarding what must be spoken and what not are inflicted. Sharing of emotions at a later age becomes a gestural act. Emotions are then to be understood through acts and are not really expressed. At a mature age, it is even embarrassing for most to publicly express happiness or sadness since it has either never been done before or it seems a socially misfit act.

It becomes very difficult for my father to acknowledge or appreciate me in public. He stumbles and doesnot know what to say. My mother ends up expressing her happiness by talking about it to as many people as possible – neighbours, friends, relatives, etc. On father’s promotion, a silent sweet is prepared at home. The tastefulness of this sweet is not orally acknowledged, but suggested by eating a bowl extra. During a festival, new clothes suggest happiness. Gifts on the table for success become ways to express happiness. All becomes suggestive. Such over-suggestion is repressive. It is implosive.  Objects, than something that was once emotive, become more important. This lack of communication suppresses a lot of expression.

On the other hand, during tough times, a maudlin silence pervades the atmosphere of the home. Behaviour becomes stricter. Television programmes are moderated, volume of talk is regulated. Eye contacts are stolen; everyone looks at the walls or dead vantage points. Low moods are never discussed – the feeling of vulnerability is seldom a part of the institution of the family.  The family always presumes an ideal role for itself. Perhaps it is due to its hegemonic social function of keeping all the state of affairs at home in a happy condition.

But I am very concerned about the how members of a family talk to each other. I believe that the hermetic way in which traditional Indian families behave is detrimental to furthering of social values and the problem lies in the training period of the child during early days.

This is a highly “under construction” post. Feedback is most welcome.
Earlier threads of 'baghban' can be searched at "Search This Blog" Section (Type Baghban)