The production of communal violence in contemporary india By Paul R. Brass, Oxford, Rs 495

The persistence of communal violence is a permanent slur on the history of independent India. India became independent under the sign of communal violence. Hindu-Muslim riots in Calcutta preceded independence and similar riots all over North India followed independence and Partition. Since then communal violence has erupted like a virulent boil again and again and has made a mockery of India’s secular claims. Paul Brass looks at this phenomenon and tries to understand it.

The significant word in the title of the book is “production”. It suggests that Brass does not see religious riots as a natural symptom of Indian society and body politic. It is produced by certain elements and agents in a given area and in a given context. Brass draws his conclusions on the basis of a very detailed case study. His chosen case is the town of Aligarh and he looks at events there spread over three decades.

Brass brings together the methods of an ethnographer and a historian. Some part of his data is based on his field notes which he made while watching communal strife unfold and the other part is based on research done in libraries and archives.

One of the important questions Brass addresses in this book has acquired a certain urgency after the events in Gujarat. The question is as follows: How is it that when Muslims are killed, mostly by the police, it gets to be classified as riots rather than pogroms. Brass’s answer is somewhat along the following lines: The violence of a riot occurs at two different levels. One is between rioting groups and the other is between the rioters and the police who are involved in the task of quelling the violence. Brass suggests that the classification takes place during the second stage. But the classification is also influenced by certain prevailing dominant ideas (called master narrative by Brass following current fashion) .

In India, the master narrative argues that Hindu-Muslim riots are spontaneous and they arise out of petty local quarrels. These quarrels are fed and magnified, according to this view, by innate prejudices and hostilities that exist between the two religious groups.

Brass argues against this view. He demonstrates that in communal violence, “the decisive factor is the action that takes place before the precipitating incidents and immediately thereafter, action that is often planned and organized..’’ Hence the significance of the word “production” in the title.

Brass’s argument is hindered by his style. He is prone to jargon and needlessly clutters his style with terms borrowed from sociology and behavioural theory. The analysis of communal violence is too important a subject to be obscured by jargon.

The brass needs a lot of polishing.