There are times when we look forward to some special occassions or events and feel we can learn so much from this! This is such an awesome opportunity! But at the end of the event, you feel disappointed at how lousy it turned out to be and how disappointing it was. One such event for me was the National Seminar organized by Dept of History, Pune University. There was such an enthusiasm and zest regarding this seminar. The co-ordinator Sir had asked each and every student for volunteering, the whole department had been cleaned and made posh. Even the fans were cleaned from inside out, huge banners were put up at the entrance and in the lecture halls, students were asked to dress appropriately because "Historians" from all over India were to come to present their paper in the Seminar. So all in all, every one was waiting for the Seminar to commence.
Finally the mighty day of 23rd February arrived. On the 1st day, there were almost 6 Ph.D. holders who presented their paper to the audience. I would not call them "Historians" as they did not fit my definition of "Historians". I will dwell on that concept later, after I have done describing about the Seminar. Coming back to the topic, Ph.D. holders had come from Orissa, Mumbai, Nagpur, Rajasthan, New Delhi, Pune and Belgaum (Karnataka). All in all, there were almost two dozen Ph.D. holders who presented their papers in the span of 3 days. According to me, the first day was not so bad. They presented their paper and yes, my mind did drift away many a times but I thought it was my fault as many a times I have been called Impatient and Fickle minded. On the second day, I did a resolution with myself that I will concentrate completely and try to listen to every word they read as the information can be useful for me in near future and after all, it is good to know new stuff. ALAS! My resolution remained just that, Resolution. I could not put it into action how much ever I tried. My mind just did not want to listen to those papers. At one point of time, it even told me, these papers are so boring. I am getting so bored of History. My mind was having mind of its own. It refused to listen to my brain. Finally, I got horified of my own thoughts and decided by lunch break that I have had enough. If I want to get back to loving my own subject, I had to get out of this Seminar, which is exactly what I did. After coming back home, I learnt more in half an hour than I had learnt sitting there for 4hrs, though I did nothing more than working on my project. On the 3rd day, I merely went as it was last day and I had given my word to Sir about volunteering and I did not want to break that. (Techincally I breached the so called word when I decided to leave the half of the second session, but thats inconsequential.) Thankfuly, 3rd day did not have 10 or so papers but just 4 which I again tried to listen with great concentration. The day ended with Valedictory function and that was the end of the National Seminar.
Now comes the big question, why did I get bored of the Seminar when it was about History and What was the topic of the Seminar? The topic of the Seminar was "History of Marathas- New perspective." There are many reasons on why I did not like the seminar. First and foremost, I did not find any "New Perspective" in the papers presented. Yes, there were few, who tried to look at Maratha History through a different angle such as Art and tried to define it but other than that, rest were just trying to throw the light on the subject which were neglected. Every Ph.D. holder called themselves Historians but they did not have the necessary qualities required of Historian. Formost of it, they brought religion and regionalism in their studies and when the audience objected to it, they did not take criticism in healthy attitude. They acted defensive against the caste or region. This showed they lacked objectivity and the foresight required for any Historian. Second, they were not aware of the conditions and the situations of the world. I can remember atleast 2 Ph.D. holders calling Africans as Negro, which as we all know, is as horrifyingly derogatory term. This fact is known by even 16yr old kid living in the age of computers. Ignorance of this fact by Historians showcase their limited vision. Thirdly, all the papers presented were too factual. They were just facts, uncovered from unpublished documents. There was no different interpretation of it and no theories put forward through those facts. Historian's main job is to interpret the events that took place and understand the reason behind it, which was never accomplished by these Ph.D. holders. Now my questions is- How can they call themselves as Historians?
The so called Historians, who had come in this Seminar, had a narrow minded approach and did not bother to look outside their realm and comfort zone. In my words, they assassinated History. I am even inclined to think that, because of these kind of "Historians" the subject seems so boring and lengthy to the masses. I am not blaming all the Historians out there. But from what I have seen so far, Indian Historians need to think about their mindset and about their work ethic. Ph.D. is not just some degree, it is a doctorate and it should not be taken lightly. Being an Historian, is not an easy accomplishment. It requires tremendous knowledge and effort on the part of a person. He should not only know his own subject but also possess the knowledge of the whole wide world because Whatever Significant Happens Today is the History of Tomorrow.
"For Historians ought to be precise, truthful, and quite unprejudiced, and neither interest nor fear, hatred nor affection, should cause them to swerve from the path of truth, whose mother is history, the rival of time, the depository of great actions, the witness of what is past, the example and instruction of the present, the monitor of the future." --Cervantes
