1
Citizenship,subjectivityandsenseofagencybytheinfluenceofradioinruralNepal
JacobThorsen,Dept.ofInformationandMediaStudies,AarhusUniversity,June2010
WORKINPROGRESS–PLEASEDON’TQUOTE/CITE
Abstract
ThesocialanddiscursivenatureofsubjectivityisinNepaloftenoccludedbybroader
developmentalconcernsemphasisingon“equalrights”anddiscussionsthatfocusonlegal
rightsandcitizenship.Tounderstandthedebateaboutcitizenshiponlyintermsoftherole
ofthestateistoremaintoonarrowlywithinaliberalframework,inwhichthecitizenis
consideredprimarily,ifnotexclusively,anindividualsubject.Thecreationofsubjectivities
isbroaderthansimplyaquestionofrightsandindividuallegalsubjects.Rather,asIdiscuss
inthispaper,itisalsocontingentonhailingpractices,patternsofspeech,andtalksabout
whospeaksandwhoshouldbecalledtospeakinwhichcontemporaryapproachesto
developmentandthemediaareembedded.
Introduction
Severalscholarschallengetheliberalunderstandingofcitizenshipaslegalrightsand
responsibilitiesbestowedbythestateandarguetobringthediscussionofcitizenshipout
ofthe‘empiricalvoid’(Kabeer2005,Gaventa2002),asdiscussionsoncitizenshipoften
centersolelyonequalandlegalrightswherebythesubtlesocialanddiscursivenatureof
subjectivitybecomeoccluded.InthispaperIdiscuss(a)howinterpellativepracticesin
Nepalsubjectivelymakecastesandgroupsofpeoplerecognisingthemselvesasbeings
andwhotheyarevis‐à‐visoneanotherandhowtheirsenseofagencybecomeinscribedin
thesesubjectivitiesanddiffersaccordingtoposition,classandcaste,and(b)someofthe
2
indicationsthattheintroductionofmoderncommunicationtechnologyinNepalmayhave
providedtheverymeansthroughwhichthesesubjectivitieshavebeenevenfurther
manifested.
Duringfall2009IstayedonemonthinRolpadistrict,Nepaltocaptureinformation
regardingnorms,feelings,representationsandactionssignifyingvariouslevelsofsocial
life.InthisperiodI,togetherwithateamofassistants,conductedamediasurveywith
500representativerespondentsandqualitativeinterviewswith44respondents
proportionallyselectedbasedonage,gender,caste/ethnicity,location(rural/urban)and
language.InthispaperIpresentpreliminaryfindingsbasedonthequalitativeand
quantitativedatacollectedandIprimarilyconcentreonnarrativesfromtwointerviews
(BalmikiBKandShardaKC–botharefictivenames)tooutlinesomeoftheextreme
positionsinthediscursiveterrainofcitizenrynegotiationandmediaconsumptionin
Rolpa.Alaterfieldstudyscheduledfall2010inthesamelocationhasasoneofits
objectivestoverify,calibrateandobtainnuancesrelatedtothepositionsoutlinedinthis
paper.
Development’sencompassmentofsocialexperience
Nepal’sfirstdevelopmentprogramswerelaunchedinthe1950sandmarkedcitizensfirst
contactwiththeideasandinstitutionsofmodernizationandcommencedamodeofstate
interventioninpeople’slifeinordertomanagethewelfareofthepopulation.Institutions
rangingfromministriestosmalllocalprojectsofNGOsimplementthepromotionand
pursuitofdevelopmentinNepal.Althoughpriorities,programsandphilosophiesdiffer,all
developmentinstitutionsshareacommonfaiththatplannedchangecanbringabouta
bettersociety.Implicitinthisdevelopmentvisionareasetofmeaningsthatbothjustify
institutionalstructuresandprovideanauthoritativewayofrepresentingasocialworld.
Unavoidablywherethereisapushforprogressthroughdevelopment,thereisthe
creationofastateofbackwardness.Wherethereareinstitutionsandexpertswith
answers,theremustnecessarilybepeoplewhohaveneed.Judgingfromthechangesin
3
Nepal,developmenthasprovedmuchmoreeffectiveasanideologythanasasetof
technicalsolutions.
Developmentofferspersuasivenewframeworksthroughwhichsocialrelationsand
especiallysocialdifferencesarediscussedwherebydevelopmentbecomespartof
people’severydaylifeinNepalnotonlywhenanagencyestablishesaprogramintheir
village,butalsowhenthisideologybecomescompellingintheirsocialimagination.Esteva
(1992:10)remindsusthat:
(…)fortwo‐thirdsofthepeopleonearth,thispositivemeaningoftheword‘development’
–profoundlyrootedaftertwocenturiesofitssocialconstruction–isareminderofwhat
theyarenot.Itisareminderofanundesirable,undignifiedcondition.
DevelopmentnarrativesaboutNepal(asrecordedingenresasdiverseasagencycountry
reportsandtelevisiondocumentaries)stressthatNepalwasonly“opened”totheoutside
worldinthe1950s.TherecognisedNepaliauthorManjushreeThapainarecentarticlein
NewYorkTimesquotestheIrishwriterDervlaMurphy,thatinher1967travelogue
describedNepalasacountrythathadjustemergedfromcenturiesofisolationandwas
baffledabouthowtobepartofthemodernworld.MostofwhattheNepaleseandshedid
wastowaitforsomethingtohappen.“Wewaitedendlesslyforeverything,”Ms.Murphy
wrote.“Forglassesofteatobecarriedontraysfromthebazaar,forapoliceman’sbunch
ofkeystobefetchedfromhishomedowntheroad,foranadjustablerubberstampwhich
wouldnotadjusttobedissected(andfinallyabandonedinfavourofapen),forapassport
officertotrackdownIreland(whoseexistenceheseriouslyquestioned)inadog‐eared
atlasfromwhichtherelevantpageshadlongsincebeentorn,andforthechiefcustoms
officer,whowasafflictedbyavirulentformofdysentery,towithdrawtoanearbyfield
betweeninspectingeachpieceofluggage.”1Thesephrasescreatetheimpressionthat
historybeganforNepalonlywhencontactwiththeWestactivatedit.
1http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/opinion/06thapa.html
4
TruetoitsSanskritrootdevelopment,bikasinNepalisignifiesgrowth,evolution–justas
itsEnglishequivalentdoes.Ineverydayconversations,however,bikasforthemostpart
meansthings:especiallycommoditiesthatcomefromelsewhere.StacyPigg(1992)
explainshowthebikasideologymeanttounitethenationthroughthecommongoalof
thestruggletomodernizesocietyandtheeconomy,butthatthisverylogicalsodivides
thecountry(bothmateriallyandsymbolically)intoareasoflesserandgreater
development(bikasitandabikasitrespectively).Notsurprisingly,thekeyaxisaround
whichthesedevelopmentaldistinctionsarisewithinNepalisthatofruralandurban
society,thecountrysideandthecity.MeanwhileNepalitselfischaracterisedasabikasitin
relationtocountries,includingIndiathatisrelativelymorebikasit(developed).
Pigg(1992)arguesthatalthough‘development’isembodiedinobjects(shecitesnew
breedsoflivestock,waterpipes,electricity,videos,schools,commercialfertilizer,roads,
healthpostsandmedicinesasexamplesofwhat‘development’typicallyconnotesin
commonusage)andassuchisquantifiablewithareasbeingclassifiedasofgreateror
lesserdevelopmentdependingonhowmanyofthesethingstheyhave,theessenceof
developmentistherelationshipsthatthenpertainbetweentheseareasandthepeople
thatinhabitthem.Whilsturbanareasareplacesof‘muchdevelopment’(dheraibikas),
ruralareasandvillagestendtobe,atbest,placesof‘littledevelopment’(thoraibikas),or
even‘nodevelopment’(bikaschaina).Sheclaimsthat:
Thisinverserelationbetweenruralareasanddegreesofbikasgivesrisetotwowaysof
representingnationalsocietyandlocatingoneselfinit.Oneusethetermsofbikasas
coordinatestodemarcatesocialterritoriesandpinpointsocialpositions;theotherturns
bikasandvillageintothecompasspointsaccordingtowhichsociallylocatedpeople
orientedthemselves(1992:499).
‘Development’hasinotherwordsbecomeawayofcategorisationandrepresentationand
asIshalldiscussinthefollowingparagrapharecommunicationandmovementacross
5
thesefissureinthesocio‐economiclandscapealsostructuredaccordingtothelogicof
bikasiideology.
Figuresofvoiceandsubjectivity
Thefigureofcommunicationandvoicefunctionsasasignofinteriority,intimacyand
presenceandreiteratesmodernliberaldiscourseaboutdemocracyasitproducesanidea
ofpersonhoodandagencytiedtothepresumeddirectnessofthevoice.Inlinewithbikasi
ideologytheterm‘villager’(gaulemanche)haspejorativeconnotationsthatare
reinforcedthroughnumerouschannelsofeverydaydiscourse.Pigg(1992)provides
examplesfromschooltextbooksandliteraturedistributedbyINGOs,includingpictures
thatcompareandcontrastchildrensupposedlyofthepresentshowninragscarrying
heavyloadsindokos(thetraditionalwickerbasketseenthroughoutNepal)slungacross
theirforeheads,withchildrenofthefutureincleanclothesandwhoareplayinghappilyor
readingschoolbooks.Socialrelations,atleastastheypertaintoclassandcaste,are
mediatedthroughbikasicultureandrestupontheabilityofagentstoinfluencetheflow
ofresources,encompassingmultipleformsofcapital(economic,educational,politicaland
cultural)betweenpositionswithinthatlandscape.AccordingtoUNDP(2009),Brahman
andChhetriscompriseone‐thirdoftheNepalipopulationbutholdsaroundtwo‐thirdof
theleadingpositioninthestateandcivilapparatus:thebureaucracy,politicalparties,civil
societyorganisations,andthejudiciaryandexecutivebodies.Inthelegislativeand
constitutionalbodiesoftheConstituentAssemblyasof2008,however,thefigureof
Brahman/Chhetryrepresentationis40percent.OneoftheleadcausestheMaoists
initiatedtheirarmedrevoltin1996wastodismantlefeudalismandcastebased
inequalitiesandalthoughdiscriminationhasdilutedoverthelastyearsandespecially
amongtheyouth,itisstillaninfluentialsocietalcondition,subjectfordisputes,andoneof
thecontemporaryverysensitivediscussionsinNepalipolitics.
6
ShardaKCisaBrahmanladyinherearlyfortiesandasocialleaderinhercommunity.She
outlineshowsheandothertwocommunityleaders(alsoBrahmans)invitethecommunity
todiscussdevelopmentprogramsorreconcilewhentherearedisputesinthecommunity.
Interviewer:Forexample,thereisaproblemofdrinkingwaterinyourwardandyouhave
todecidehowtobringdrinkingwater.Dothethreeofyoumakethatdecisionordoyou
inviteallpeoplefromthewardandexplaintothemwearetryingtodothisandthis?
ShardaKC:Weinviteallpeoplefromwardandtheymakeusgroupleader.Andtheygive
advice;wedonothavedrinkingwaternearby,wedonothavedrainchannelhere,and
theyaresayingwedonothavethisandthat.Fromthatdecisionwemakeprogram.
[WadaKasabaivaktaharooLaibolaune,uhaharooLehamiLaigroupleader
banaunuhunchha.]
IntheinterviewShradaKCutilizestheverbbolaunetoaddresshowsheandthe
communityleadersinvitethecommunityformeetings.Bolauneisthecausativeformof
theverbbolnu“tospeak”andasacommonNepaliwordbolauneisoftentranslatedby
theinnocentterminvitingoraddressing.However,translatingbolauneusingthemore
pointedEnglishglossesarecapturedthesocialrelationsembeddedintheword:
summoning,callingorhailing.TranslatedliterallyintoEnglishbolaunemeans“tomake
someoneelsetospeak”.2
Bolauneisacentralpracticetoanalysebecauseitrevealstensionsbetweentheideasof
democraticspeechandpoliticalconsciousness.Kunreuther(2009)tracestherelation
betweenvoice,subjectivityandshiftingnotionsofintimacyandaccordingtoherbolaune
2Thefigureofvoiceactivatedinthisdebatesuggestthinkingaboutconnectionsbetweenthepatternsofrecognitionestablishedwithin
thesubjectsofbolauneandtherelationsemergingbetweencitizenandstateduringthistransformativemoment.Forhistorical
precedent,onecanturntoRichardBurghart’sanalysisofvoiceandlisteningduringthemonarchicalPanchayatregime(1960‐1990)
when,hesuggests,criticismagainstthestatewassimultaneouslyanefforttocommunicatewiththeking.Hearguesthatonlyafterthe
creationofamoralspace(whichisassumedtobepartofcivilsocietyinEuro‐Americanliberaldemocracies)dosubjectsacquirevoice
(Burghart1996:317).
7
appearstobeaharmless,everydaypractisethathaslittletodowiththebroaderpolitical
significanceasthetermisusedinmanycontextstosimplyrefertotheactofcallingoutto
someoneonthestreetortoinvitingafriendorrelativetoaparty,awedding,orone’s
house.However,intheparticularcontextofaleaderofaNGOcallingorinvitingsomeone
toameetingthewordcarrieswithinithierarchiesofcaste.Theactofcallingoutto
someone,bolaune,constitutesthatpersonasaspeakingsubjectthroughthespeechof
another.Thiscallingisalsoarequestforresponse.Acalleranticipatesrecognitionthrough
theparticipationoftheother;theyservetoreinforcehisorheridentity.Ona
fundamentallevel,then,bolauneisapracticeofmutual,butasymmetrical,recognition
betweencitizens,vis‐à‐viseachotherandthemselves.
Practicesofbolauneproduceformsofrecognition,speechandagency.FollowingLouis
Althusser’s(1971)notionof“interpellation”,Kunreuther(2009)suggeststhatpracticesof
bolauneareconstitutiveofcaste‐basedsubjectivityandthemeansbywhichpeople
positionthemselvesinrelationtooneanotherasthetermrevealsanddefinethe
hierarchiesofcaste.Bolaunecharacterisesasubjectivitydefinedthroughrelationshipsof
dutyandobedience,whichcharacterisesthehierarchiesstillexistinginNepal.Kunreuther
(2009)continuesherlineofargumentationthatthepracticeofbolaunecorrespondsto
whatLoisAlthusser(1971)calls“hailing”–amodeofaddressthatestablishesaperson’s
subjectivity,andevenbody,throughspeech.Hailing,orusingAlthusser’smoretechnical
terminterpellation,revealsthediscursivenatureofidentityandsubjectivity.
Interpellationoccursthroughreiteratedformsofaddressandconventionsthatdelineate
asocialposition.Throughinterpellation,apersoncomestorecognisehim‐orherselfnot
onlyasanindividualbutalsoasasubjectpositionedwithinasocialworld.
8
ReflectingonAlthusser’snotion,JudithButler(1997)writes
(…)interpellationisanaddressthatregularlymissesitsmark,itrequirestherecognitionof
anauthorityatthesametimeitconfersidentitythroughsuccessfullycompellingthat
recognition.Identityisafunctionofthatcircuit,butdoesnotpre‐existit.Themark
interpellationmakesisnotdescriptive,butinagurative.Itseekstointroduceareality
ratherthanreportanexistingone;itaccomplishesthisintroductionthroughacitationof
existingconvention(1997:33).
Theprocessofinterpellationthuscontinuouslytransformsindividualsintosubjects,even
thoughindividualsarealwayssubjectsthemomenttheyentersociallife.Bolaunedoes
notsomuchconstructasinglesubjectasconstituteasocialrelationshipandthesubjects
formedwithinit.Thepractiseofbolaunecompelstherecognitionofthecallerbythe
called,therebycreatingtheirdifferences,theiridentitiesandtheirsubjectivities.Itboth
recognisessomeone’spresenceinthecommunityandmarkshis/herabsenceand
exclusionfromtheactivitiesinthecommunity.Indoingso,itre‐membersamemberofa
communityhe/sheisn’tmemberof.BalmikiBKisaDalitwomaninherlateteensand
claimssheandhercommunityarenotinvitedforcommunityprograms.
Interviewer:Andyousaidthatyouarenotgoingforthevillagediscussionprogram,why
didyounotgothere,isthatbecauseyoudislikeorwhat?
BalmikiBK:Especiallytheydonotinviteus.Theythemselveswithheadpeoplearedoing
allthingsbuttheydonotcallus.
[Nimatapanigardainan.UniharoothulathulamanchheHaroolegarchhanrahamiLai
bolaudapanibolaudainan.]
BalmikiBK’sstatementreaffirmshersubjectivityandindicatesimplicitlyshewouldhave
expected(oratleastwanted)aninvitationfrom“they”(theBrahmanandChhetry
leaders).IfbolauneisawaytointerpellateaDalittemporarilyasamemberofa
9
community,theprocesscanonlyworkifBalmikiBKactuallybeginstoactandspeakabout
herselfinthesamefashionastheBrahmincalltoher(hamiLaibolaudapanibolaudainan–
notinviteus),asinterpellationrestsonthenotionthata“speechactbringsthesubject
intobeing,andthen…thatverysubjectcomestospeak,reiteratingthediscursive
conditionsofitsownemergence”(Bell1999:165).
AsWebbKeane(1997)haspointedoutinhisbookonrituallanguageinIndonesia,itisnot
onlylanguagethatgrantsrecognitioninasymbolicworldbutalsothewaylanguageand
materialobjectsworktogethertocreatesocialconnectionsanddivisions.Keane’sanalysis
wasspecificallyaboutritualandperformativelanguagebuthispointmightbeextendedto
everydayformsofperformativespeechandpractice.Theimaginedeffectsuggeststhata
birthrighttobeacommunityleader(Brahman/Chhetry)iswhatdrivesShardaKCtolead
andinvitethecommunity–evenbyforceifneeded.
Interviewer:Areyouincludingallcastesinyourcommunity’sprograms,meetings,
discussionsanddecisions?
ShardaKC:Yes,nowinourforestsocietywearesayingtherehavetobeJanjati,Dalit,
Brahman,Chhetry,buttheyarenotwillingtocome,sobyforcewearekeepingonefrom
eachcaste.
[Hajur,ahilehamrobansamuhaMapaniJanjatihunaparyo,dalithunaparyo,bahunhuna
paryo,aa‐afnochhetryhunaparyobhanerahamile…,abaunhaHarooaunaimannuhunna
aunaimannuhunnaaunaimannuhunnajabarjastiekekjanarakhekachhaun.]
Thecombatofcasteinequalitiesbymeansofquotasandaffirmativeactionhasfora
numberofyearsbeenadevelopmentstrategyofNGOstoassureequalgender
representationandinclusionofallethnicgroupsinprograms.Itisinterestingtonote
ShardaKCmentions“Yes,nowinour…”(Hajur,ahile…),indicatingthisisanewpractice.
Hence,perhaps,thereforeShardaKC’‘eagerness’toassuretheworkofherNGOhas
participationofallethnicgroupsandcastesintheprograms.Notsurprisingly,however,
10
thisforcedapproachtodealwithissuesofcommunityconcernisn’tanappealingwayfor
alltheinvited.ToBalmikiBKpublicspaceisn’talwaysasecurespacetoenter.AsBalmiki
BKexpressesit:
(…)ifwegotoafriendshometheygoinside[theBrahman/Chhetryhouse]andwe[the
Dalit]havetostayoutside.Thatmakesusfeelsad.ThattimeIaskmyselfthequestion
whythishappens?Whenweareathomewearelikeakingsotherearenoproblems,but
whenIgooutsidethenIfeelalittlesad.
AlthoughinthisquoteBalmikiBKtalksaboutaccesstocertainprivatehousesandnot
publicspaceperse,herremarksuggests‘outside’toherhasundertonesofdiscomfortas
leavingherhousehastheriskshemightbeconfrontedwithdiscrimination.Agencyand
equalsocietalstatus,however,wouldhaveenabledBalmikiBKtoalsodothecallingand
speakingsoshecouldargueandrequiretheBrahmantorespondtoherwhysheisn’t
invitedinsidethehouse.Insteadbolaunehasbecomeapracticeandone‐waycircuitin
whichonlytheBrahman/Chhetryaddressesandtheotherpersonisaddressed.
AssuccessivepoliticalmovementsinNepalhaveworkedtoreshapeevenmoreradically
therelationshipbetweenmonarchandsubject,citizenandsubjectivity,thequestion
raisedbyKunreuther(2009)aboutvoiceandsubjectivitymayhavebecomeevenmore
usefulforgainingamorenuancedunderstandingofwhatisatstakeinthewidely
divergentapproachestodevelopmentandcitizenshipincontemporaryNepal.
11
Bikasandthemedia
TheideaofbikasalsodeterminesmuchmediaactivityinNepal.Electronicmediahasbeen
usedinstrumentallyinthecreationofdevelopmentandamassaudiencebaseduponthe
unificationofanationalpopulationaroundacommonmediatedcultureand“havebeen
deployedbycentralgovernmentsasanintegrativeforce”(PageandCrawley2001:26).
However,theroleplayedbythemediainthecreationoftheNepalistatehasnotfollowed
anysimplepattern,especiallyafterindependentmediaemergedafterdemocracywas
introducedin1990andmostsignificantlyafterthesecondpeople’smovement(Jana
AndolanII)in2006.Inslipstreamofthemushroomingofindependentmedia,twolocal
radioshaveemergedinRolpadistrictwithinthelastcoupleofyears.RadioRolpawas
foundedbyalocalNGOaffiliatedwiththenationalhumanrightscommissionandthe
MaoistfundedRadioJaljalawasonairshortlyafter.
Radio TVThosewithradio
havingaTVMagar 78.7% 7.6% 8.2%Brahman/Chhetri 71.1% 53.2% 51.1%Dalit 66.1% 25.9% 30.8%Total 74.3% 27.2% 26.2%
Table1:OwnershipofradioandTVinRolpacross‐tabbedwithethnicgroup.N=497.NotethatsamplesfromMagarcommunitywerecollectedfromalocationwithoutelectricity.ThetelevisionvariablesrelatedtotheMagarcommunitythereforehavetobeusedwithprecaution.
RadioisthemostpopularmediainRolpadistrictwiththree‐quartersofpeopleowinga
radio:theDalitcommunity,however,lessthanaverage,theMagarcommunityslightly
more,andtheBrahman/Chhetricommunityroughlyonaverage.Thesignalofthetwo
localradiostationsisreceivablebyall,whereas69percenthouseholdscanreceivethe
statebroadcasterRadioNepal.Television,incomparison,isownedbyone‐quarterofthe
households.Overall,theBrahman/Chhetry’shouseholdshavemoretelevisionscompared
totheotherethnicgroups.Thereiscorrelationbetweenthosehavingaradioreceiverand
thoseowningatelevision,withaminormarginof1percentpointofhouseholdshavinga
televisionnothavingaradioreceiver,althoughintheDalitcommunitytheproportionof
12
thosehouseholdshavingradioalsoowningaTVsetisslightlyhighercomparedtothe
otherethnicgroups.
RadioNepal RadioRolpa RadioJaljalaMagar 7.0% 49.3% 42.3%Brahman/Chhetri 3.1% 67.5% 29.4%Dalit 17.6% 49.0% 33.3%Total 6.8% 56.1% 36.4%
Table2:Preferredradiostationcross‐tabbedwithethnicgroup.N=426
AlthoughRadioRolpaoverallisthemostpopularradiostationasthetableaboveindicates
therearesomedisparitiesintermsofradiopreference.TheMagarethniccommunityhas
somepreferencetowardsRadioJaljalacomparedtotheotherethnicgroupswhereas,by
meansofcomparison,BrahmanandChhetristendtopreferRadioRolpa.TheDalit
communityhassomepreferencetowardsthestatebroadcasterRadioNepalcomparedto
theotherethnicgroups.Itwouldbehastyandunwisetomakeanysimpleconclusions
solelybasedonthefiguresoutlinedinthetableabove,althoughthedatadoesgive
indicationsthatethnicgroupssympathywiththeMaoists,suchastheMagarcommunity,
alsomanifestsaspreferenceforradiostation.Likewise,thereareindicationstheDalit
community,comparedtootherethnicgroups,toalessdegreeidentifythemselveswith
localradiobuthasgreaterappealfornationalradiobroadcasting.TheBrahman/Cheetri
community,incomparison,toalargerdegreeseemstoidentifythemselveswithRadio
Rolpa.AsShardaKCcomments:
Mostofmyattentiongoestothis[RadioRolpa]communityradio,becausethisradiois
everyone’scooperativeradio.RadioJaljalaisjustlikeanownparty’sradio,theyaretalking
onlyabouttheirownpartyactivities,andtheyhavetheirownpartysongs.Andwhatother
thingstheyaredoingIdon’tgivemyattention–Iusetohearthis[RadioRolpa]radio
more.
13
ShradaKC’preferenceforRadioRolpamightberelatedwiththefacttheradiostation
givesairtimetoher.Shesays:
Inradio,ourpresidentoftheradio[RadioRolpa]hasinvitedmemorethan10times.He
asksmetocomefortheprogram‘SamayaSambad’(TimeofConversation).HesaysthatI
in‘SamayaSambad’cananswerourquestionsorsharewhatyouknowandyour
experiences.Ididn’twanttogothereandtoldhimI’manuneducatedpersonanddon’t
knowhowtospeakasImightspeakincorrectly.Butheaskedmemanytimes.Ihavealot
ofworktodosomanypeopleareinvitingme.
[RadioMahamroAdhyakhsyajyooLemalaidashaun(morethantentimes)patakbolauna
aaunubhayo.]
InShardaKC’referencetohowshewasinvitedtotheprogramSamayaSambadshe
utilizestheverbbolauna,whichunderlinestheintimaterelationshipshefeelsshehas
withRadioRolpa.Thisisalsoemphasizedinherreferencetothepresidentwhoshecalls
‘ourpresident’(hamroAdhyakhsya).Fromthequoteabovewealsolearnshehasbeen
invitedtoshareherknowledgeandexperiencealthoughsheisuneducated.Inher
capacityasasocialmobilisorsheobviouslyhasalotapracticalknowledgetoshare,butit
couldalsobeinterpreteditisherintimacyandcaste‐basedbondswiththepresident(that
isBrahman)thatgiveshertheairtimeandclosefeelingofrelationshiptoRadioRolpa.In
contrast,theimpactofradioseemtobelessontheDalitcommunity–asBalmikiBKsays:
Interviewer:AndIthinkyoulistenradioalot.Whatkindsofprogramstoyoulistento
mostoften?
BalmikiBK:HowtosaywhichprogrambecauseIdon’tlistenthatmuch.
14
Thepictureemergingfromthequotesaboveandthefiguresfromtheaudienceoverall
radiopreferenceisthattheintroductionofradioinRolpamayhaveprovidedthevery
meansthroughwhichthedistricthasbecomeevenfurtherfragmented.Whilstnational
unitywastheidealisedaimofsuccessivegovernment’smediapolicies,theresultsin
practiceatdistrictlevelcontributedtothegrowthandre‐emergenceoffissurewithin
Nepalesesociety.Paramountamongstthesehasbeenthegrowthofjati(ethnic)
consciousnessmostnotablyseenwiththeMadhesiupraisinginthelowerbeltsofNepal,
Terai,butalsoinruraldistrictsinhillareassuchasRolpawherestrongethnicsentiments
supportedbytheMaoistsareontherisetheseyearsastheMaoistsadvocateforafederal
structureofNepalalongethniclines.HencemaybeanexplanationtotheMagar
community’srelativesupportforRadioJaljalaandShardaKCstrongreservationtowards
RadioJaljala,whichalsohasanundertoneoffearthattheradiowillundermineherand
RadioRolpa’srelativepower.
Furthermore,thereisasplitbetweenbikasiandabikasi(developedandunderdeveloped)
sectionsofsocietyandnotsurprisinglyisthislattersetofdistinctionsprimarilymade
manifestinthecontrastingformsofurbanandruralsocietythathaveariseninNepal
duringthepastthreedecades.BalmikiBK’slittleinvolvementwithlocaldevelopment
activitiesandidentificationwithradioingeneral,andtheDalit’soverallandrelative
supportfornationalradiobroadcastingcouldexplaintheDalit’ssubjectificationasabikasi
andthusidentificationwithnationalthoughtschemesastheyfeelexcludedfromlocal
programs.Thepictureemergingfromtheoutlinedpositionshereseemstobeinlinewith
whatKievelitz(1996:5)calls“politicallyvociferousform[s]ofethnicity[which]only
developedasaresponsetothethreatofnationalismwhichtendedtoneglect,eventried
toeradicateethnicdifference”,referringheretoageneralprocessofethnicidentity
formationwhich,heasserts,is“auniversalprocessintimeandspace.”
InmyfieldstudiesscheduledlaterthisyearthisissomethingIwillexploreingreater
detailstodetectmorenuancedpositionsinthisdiscursiveterrain.
15
Conclusion
ThesocialanddiscursivenatureofsubjectivityisinNepaloftenoccludedbybroader
developmentalconcernsemphasisingon“equalrights”anddiscussionsthatfocusonlegal
rightsandcitizenship.Tounderstandthedebateaboutcitizenshiponlyintermsofthe
roleofthestateistoremaintoonarrowlywithinaliberalframework,inwhichthecitizen
isconsideredprimarily,ifnotexclusively,anindividualsubject.Thecreationof
subjectivitiesisbroaderthansimplyaquestionofrightsandindividuallegalsubjects.
Rather,asoutlinedinthispaper,itisalsocontingentonhailingpractices,patternsof
speech,andtalksaboutwhospeaksandwhoshouldbecalledtospeak.
Tochallengecommunicativerelationsmeanstoassessexistingpracticesofspeechand
alsohowthesepracticesareembeddedincontemporaryapproachestodevelopmentand
themedia.Toassumethepositionofaspeakerwhosummonsratherthanissummoned
andwhotherebyacquiresaplaceofpublicrecognitionissimilartotheasymmetrical
relationsbetweendevelopmentexpertiseandlocalvaluesandknowledge.Thepracticeof
bolauneandbikasshowthefundamentallysocialnatureofsubjectivitycontinuedthrough
hailinganddiscursivepractices.Throughinterpellativeandprescriptivepracticessuchas
bolauneandbikasdifferentcastesandgroupsofpeoplerecognisethemselvesasbeings,
makingthemwhotheyarevis‐à‐visoneanotherasone’ssenseofagencyisinscribedin
thesesubjectivitiesanddiffersaccordingtoposition,classandcaste.Likethepractiseof
bolaune,theimplicitpremiseinwhichtheraisond’êtreofbikascanbefoundandits
outcome,isaformulationabouttheidentityofthosewhoneeddevelopment.The
combinedinterpellativepracticesofbolauneandbikasasinthecaseofNepalisdouble
problematicbecausethesamepeopletypicallypracticingbolaunearealsothosewhoare
entrenchedwithbikas.Thereby,theobjectiverealityofthestateapparatus,largepartsof
civilsocietyandcertainmediabecomemergedwithsubjectiverealitiesreinforcingeach
other.Esteva’s(1992)reminderof“whattheyarenot”isthereforeimportanttoexplore
asoneapproachtoenterandunlocktheviciouscircleofself‐fulfillingprophecyof
incapacityandlackofagencyofcertaingroupsofpeopleinNepal.
16
Referencescited
Althusser,Louis(1971):IdeologyandtheIdeologicalStateApparatuses(Notestowardsaninvestigation).InLeninandPhilosophyandOtherEssays.NewYork:MonthlyReviewPress1971.Bell,Vikki(1999):OnSpeech,RaceandMelancholia:AninterviewwithJudithButler.Theory,CultureandSociety16(2):163‐174.Burghart,Richard(1996):TheConditionsofListening.NewDelhi:OxfordUniversityPressButler,Judith(1997):ExcitableSpeech:APoliticsofthePerformative.NewYork:RoutledgeEsteva,Gustavo(1992):Development.InWolfgangSachs(ed.)TheDevelopmentDictionary:AGuidetoKnowledgeasPower.London:ZedBooks.Gaventa,John(2002):ExploringCitizenship,ParticipationandAccountability.IDSDevelopmentBibliography33.2.Sussex:InstituteofDevelopmentStudies(IDS)Kabeer,Naila(2005):Thesearchforinclusivecitizenship:meaningsandexpressionsinaninterconnectedworldinInclusiveCitizenship–meaningsandexpressions.London:ZedBooks.Kievelitz,U.(1996):EthnicityandnationalismintheNepalicontext:aperspectivefromEurope.OccasionalPapersinSociologyandAnthropology.Kathmandu:CentralDept.ofSociologyandAnthropology,TribhuvanUniversityKunreuther,Laura(2009):Betweenloveandproperty:Voice,sentimentandsubjectivityinthereformofdaughter’sinheritanceinNepal.AmericanEthnologist,Vol.36,No.3Page,DavidandCrawley,William(2001):SatellitesoverSouthAsia:Broadcasting,CultureandthePublicInterest.NewDelhi:SagePublicationsPigg,StacyLeigh(1992):UnintendedConsequences:TheIdeologicalImpactofDevelopmentinNepal.SouthAsiaBulletin,Vol.XIIINos.1&2UNDP(2009):UNDPDevelopmentReport2009:StateTransformationandHumanDevelopment.Kathmandu:UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgrammeWebb,Keane(1997):SignsofRecognition:PowersandHazardsofRepresentationinanIndonesianSociety.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress
