Beard Weird

(Written in 2012)

What the hell!!!.... why has he left so much?? Has he got dumped or what? Whats the matter with him ? Is there a personal issue???... Has he become psyco?..Is he following any deity….?? Or has he left it for a wish???....
Ha ha ha… these are some of the questions that I have been asked or listened. People these days see me with both curious and suspicious way. Curious is ok but what bother me is the suspicion. So what is this all about…. Or what topic does these question has meaning full answers. Its all about my “Beard” which I decided to leave at a weird time(in and around valentine days) . It’s about my Beard which made me Weird(in other eyes).
It all started with the Asch conformity experiment(sociology students know it better if not better to know). I always asked myself , whether I am or can be subjected to group conformity. I tried to find one such example ,where I can see social conformity. In a quest I found a startling evidence of existence in every walk of life, from morning till we go to bed. As IT professional I am happy to announce that here also conformity dances. Conformity(in IT) is synonym to social cloning. We have same behaviour , same psychology, ideas , mentality etc. This cloning is so wide spread that if a non clone ie those who doesn’t get conformed or deviant character are looked as the enemy cell of the immune system (society). 

Being non-conform doesn’t mean being deviant. It’s the problem of conformity group not to take non-conform’s character as one of its own character. It is said that both(non-conformity and deviance) supplement each other. However my own experience tell me that former is cause and later is the effect. 

So was it just like that or was it intentional??... one of observation that I made about deviant characters is that , they are not random. Some pattern or planning is always required(knowingly or unknowingly) to be non- conformable, this non-conformity yields some sense of deviance in once character. I better remind readers that it’s the majority that always call the minority a deviant character, rather minority character calling themselves. Even though most of our moves are conformable in nature. I always try to identify those I make. Its very tough to be non- conformable . It indeed requires a lot of confidence and positive attitude to wards yourself and your nature. Non-conformable people are those , who doesn’t breakdown easily(its my view not to be generalized. Lot of research has to be carried out to come to general conclusion , where all attributes influencing subject is taken into consideration). Hence in my view deviant character are non random and do have pattern .

Now question arises “Being clean shaved(beard)” is one of the conformable social act. I have gone through history , social life of people of various time and foreign influence other parameters that can give clue of the beard clad men. Historically and sociologically we had a group (which unfortunately became barber caste), which used to carry out shaving activity. This makes us to conclude that previously people of both shaved and unshaved exist and unshaved character was not called deviant. Rajas maharajas, common people used to leave beard and mustaches both in Indian and all over the world. People never used to have suspicious look over those who used to keep it. So what made same old character that persisted before came to known as deviant character. And why at this point the social attitude has changed.

While going through some of the photos of the Pre-British era, British era and Post-British era, I noticed a slow and gradual change of appearance both in British officers and Indian Elites. Change in Indian elites became more predominant during Independence time and post-independence. Indian elites who were the external interface of Indian society with British were the first to adapt “Gentle men“ look. Gentle men look itself came with the package (package explanation out of scope), which included “Being clean shave”. This character as outward character ,is the most influential character. As the time passed it formed one of the norm of British administration that was followed by most of British officers. This eventually got applied to the Indians serving British. As the character of the superior forces were always admired, applying such character by individual or group , brought some favour from superior forces. This also helped in achieving behavioral mobility for certain section of the society. Favourism and mobility nature of this character (BCSb “Being Clean Shaved(beard)”) has lead to spreading of this, all over the society. With more than 300 year+ of its existence as “Gentle Men” character, this has developed into dominant character against which most cant go and hence a conformative character. 

Entertainment sector, media and Gentle Men character

Entertainment sector which has huge influence, has always nurtured Gentle men character and with time, knowingly or unknowingly non Gentle men character has been crafted and showed as a bad character. There by, entertainment sector had started a mass conformable process. Adding to it is demonizing non- Gentle men(keeping beard) character by media. If you want a criminal or looter or terrorist just bring a figure with having beard or shabby look, and people with no question start to believe that. People that I have observed most time try to find non gentle men character in the criminal and most of time this try is intentional. Another misconception that runs around in society is that people having beard(excessive) are muslims(else sikh if they “pagdi”). This is one of the effect of Islamophobia .

Modern industry, especially IT sector has used this character to commoditize its employee. I really appreciate that all IT employees have become “Gentle men” at the stake of their freedom of carrying once look. It make me laugh when I see information posted with regards to adhering to “clean shave” policy on notice board in my company. When enquired about the information , people tell that exception are made if you are sikh or Mohammadian or on religious basis . Here even beard gets communalized(communalization is Indian gift to British dictionary). The same people doesn’t question if the style (beard style) is French. This is again Orientalism, which is westernization rather then modernization (both terms are different and sociological term which are out of scope). 

Conformity of “Gentle men” character in my surrounding (which include society and IT sector) is such that; if some body with enough beard(in this case myself. I had been keeping this beard since last month) walks along the street . People feel it hard to believe that such people do work in IT company. Some people even think that I am of different religion or of different region(especially of Bihar). I have been having some of the interesting experience with this look, both with known and unknown people. Some of them are listed below.

• People gave me different names such as Surendra Singh, psyco, baba, devdas, swamiji, some even called me Nityananda(this was hilarious).
• Some people compaired photo present in old Id card and new look.
• People to whom ever I met, every body had only one question.Whats this?Why this?
• Some asked ..Have you been dumped? As I developed this look in march.
• Some asked religious or Baptist reason or some ideologist or following some deity.
• Some even said that,I might have been drinking a lot (although it was irrelevant joke, but for a person who studies sociology, its tough to ignore ).

Most of time I never told anything, giving them time to come to conclusion. By doing this there natural comparison can be brought and idea imposition will be nullified. This eventually help us to know which image(got form various sources or influence by various media) will suit my look and their imagination. Hence most of answer they themselves gave were listed in first point along with other which better be with myself , so that it reminds me of hilarious but suspicious mind of the people.
Some of the most weird thing that happened were.
• When I was sitting at the back of auto(shared auto in Hyderabad), a beautiful young lady came and asked service to driver. I was lone passenger and every criteria for a drop matched. As she was about to get in , she suddenly got out and moved towards another auto. I thought this can’t happen due to my look and thought as an isolated act. But in a week , I was made to realized that pretty lady doesn’t necessarily want to travel or be comfortable co-passenger.
• While I was walking along the road in madhapur, Hyderabad. A muslim youth who wore a traditional dress, whished me. It wasn’t of any surprise for me as I had beard thinknesss much more then him. In return to the respect I replied back with same notion ie “walikum Aslam”(diff people say diff but I spell like this).
• Not to forget curious eyes, un-interrupted and un-intensional looks of passer by. This remind me of one scene of film “Inception”, when Ellen Page as Ariadne starts to modify the dream world (Leonardo DiCaprio dream) while walking along with Leonardo and all of a sudden projection in dream starts to stair at Ariadne and Leonardo explains her how modification made by her is treated as alien by his projection and also cautious her about this.

There were countless such experience which were both hilarious and non. Some of them better be bind to my memory, darker part of these interpretation must be left to my mind itself which formulated this experiment. However I am interested in how a gentle men character was turned into non-gentle men character without actually being the one. Every one asked me for the reason for having beard(only 1 or 2 had a serious doubt on my intention. It show clarity of their thought). Should there be a reason always?... No I suppose. Even if exist(in my case it experiment), it can or can’t be same as society expects it to be. This is not so systematic sociological study , however I can make out things like :
• Society as a group and individuals are pre-occupied with the things(here gentle man character).
• Unknowingly most of the things or characters are being made conformable and no one is asking or asked why so? NO one is asking why are we made to follow the things.
• Most of interaction between unknown depends on the first look. media has created such a prejudice of non-Gentle men character that , most of interaction are spoiled by this prejudice .
• Given an option to judge about the people based on look, majority of people starts judging with bad notion rather than good.
• In city like Hyderabad, leaving beard increases your identity and respect from certain section of the people. Autowalas and other class of people shows more respect then usual. This beard has helped me to increase bhai chara in certain sector.

If a very systematic study involving various parameters involving in social conformity is carried out , we can get some of the striking evidence of how prejudice our society has become and gets clue how mob gets mobilized during violence or during chaos, how riots gets built up . In all these case we see common people with pre-occupied mind (that was casted by media and its family) has resulted in a syndrome which I can call as “Acquired Social Prejudice Syndrome”. A society built on this very notion , will and is weak and vulnerable to chaotic situations. I have tried to study this syndrome with what ever I had. This may be small but yield some of the striking effect of this syndrome and how it is spreading. There are lot other parameters that effect this syndrome , which has to be studied extensively. “Islamophobia” is one such result of this syndrome. If left uncheck for a long time this can shake the very foundation of our society.

The Idea of “COMMON”

The Idea of “COMMON”

Societies are built on ideas, the ideas that were the result of intuition and discussion among groups… Groups; some are small, some big. Some intelligent, some mandabuddhi .We all are part of one or the other group. Various topics are discussed by various groups. Some discuss all that comes under sun; from lady to lakadi , some restrict to serious things. In all (most serious one) discussion, some where in the middle, some one will drop a word “COMMON+ bla bla”. This common+ or common++ (eg. Common sense,”lets talk about something that is common”,common man, common social ideology)are like anti aircraft instrument which will bring any aeroplane down(most of time jo banda bat kata rehat hai uski lag jata hai).I hope people have experienced this. Aur yebhi sach hai ki, in every group there are people who know where to, when to fire the anti aircraft guns. Muje “common+bla bla” se koyi problem nahi hai, problem iss batka hai ki, whether we really understand what “common+ or common++” stand for. Is word “common” is so common to use. Is idea of common, equal to idea of majoritism or democracy. Does individualism hurts common feeling or vice verse. Does idea personal sphere be opened to idea of common or should there be limit to common or personal or both ideas. Or should idea of “COMMON” be imposed or let personal space be absorbed in common. In the oceans of views, mine is small try, people can add their views.

Idea of common, can’t be so common. There has to be something that define the common. For me , Its elements (of subject) that define common. element or elements of comparison define the vastness of the definition of common . While comparing 2 person, elements of comparison may be few and therefore may be common in few, more the common ness more you are common to the compared one. But what, when comparing a group, a colony, a city, a society , a religion or human kind. Vastness of definition depends on the no of elements taken for comparison. Hence when we speak about common man that to with reference to people in India, we better be aware what we are speaking and on whose be-half. Most people have a belief that they represent the common man, his aspiration and need. Its not their mistake, its herd effect. People being the part of group doesn’t venture much or develop much 1-1 relation beyond certain limit. Research say that a person don’t maintain 1-1 relation with not more than 80-90. People make Generalization of the confined group applying the same to the universe.Universe is very vast and diverse to be generalized. Even while solving the problems, assumption and generalization are good for getting answer what is required rather than what it is . Most of discussion tends to have large number of assumption. However world is not sphere of assumption. Assuming and solving problem has its inherent flaws. However every thing cant be taken in real scenario. Assumption if made must be near to reality and sample taken as to variability of the universe. Which people fail to do so. Sampling and its quality is also key thing. Any thing that is to be generalized has to have a subject that is 1) objective 2) quantifiable 3) valid frame work. People make use of pain taking research, carried over period of some years, to come to generalization on social issues. Its this idea, that restrain me from generalizing things using Idea of “COMMON”. So, Is the assumption and generalization of elements of such a small number by people using “idea of common”, be deemed correct? Even if we add information, that person has collected, then what percent of elements of generalization is possible. I am not saying that we cant come to generalization, my point is , generalization need study, a study that involves all the stack holders of the subject and conclusion excepted by majority involved.

Idea of “COMMON” is a feeling that make people one among themselves. It has to be taken in aggregated sense rather than as a presumption of section of people. It is equally true that those who make much noise, will be able to put forward their version when subject feature is anarchy or undefined. Even in democracy minority views are respected or atleast are given chance to be expressed. While in majoritism people know which way to go. There will be no clandestine. Idea of common is like lamb under lion’s skin. Ideas are ideas, but what makes different is proponents of idea.Eg. antisemitism was present well before Hitler was even born but it was orator like him who gave devilish face to anti semitism. Idea of “COMMON” can be glorified by best orator. Its impossible for people not to believe such voice, but point is ; Is it right to accept without scrutinizing? Is it right to except all without voicing decent, when there exist enough content that threatens the idea of being “YOU”.
Sphere of personal or private is an idea that has linear relation with the growth of the society and its commitment to individual freedom. Freedom in conservative society is cusp of Individual freedom and society at large. Sphere of personal or private is element of the Individual freedom. As society mature, freedom will be respected with respect to the personal sphere. People some time ridicule those who distinguish personal sphere from community sphere or who introduce choice in the personal sphere. Personal sphere has grown over years and will continue to grow, adding things present other sphere. These ideas of society cant be made back benchers as these have strong assertive forces. I have seen people taking this idea aboard as on when required or case maybe. Point is simple personal sphere of others much not be encroached.
Personal sphere may be new and worrying concept with respect to community within freedom framework. This expression is protectionism and somewhere linked to the defeatist attitude. Defeatist attitude must not over shadow once broader understanding of society . People have ways to win, which has to be respected at all cost. Defeatist attitude must not venture in the presumptive area and draw vulgarity to the success. And about Protectionism, it doesn’t add value to society or add developmental story to the society, in this respect. Human being by nature are “Self”. It’s the degree of self that defines whether ideology is “Right” or “Left”. Those who think of being champions of community sphere fails to follow basic rule of consultation and ideology of midway. Lack of these lead to a presumption which gives idea of pseudo-moderator or pseudo-leader. World has seen a lot of such leaders, at individual level it effect personal sphere of others and imposition of Idea of “COMMON” on the personal sphere. Those who oppose and try to create awareness are labelled as morally corrupt, dis-illusion ed, ideologically degraded and worst case “Instigator” or infidel or outsider. Point is not, being called like that, but the point is about respecting each others ideology. Ideological tolerance which has to be one of the core element of community sphere , appears to clouded. This has to be revoked . I vow my ideological tolerance to personal sphere concept.

Right to freedom does include Right to individual freedom, however proponents of Idea of “COMMON” fail to respect that. Personal sphere has been back bencher not only in society but even in the policies that we see. India being a jewel of diversity must apply the Idea of “COMMON” with broader perspective. Absorption of personal sphere in the name of community or Idea of “COMMON” is a dangerous precedent. The Idea of “COMMON” represents shallowness of the opinion among some section of the society. It is baffling if it comes from learned one. Deep ignorance of anything that is outside their sphere of influence can provide hyperlink to stunted growth in the Idea of “COMMON”. Ignorance is not confined to lower stratum of society but also percolates the well read section of the society ie so called Elites of the society. Ignorance cant be passed on, as this is not the age of ignorance. Reading of literature related to various aspect of society, who it works, what necessary for its growth, whats necessary for social upliftment etc could help in clearing once view and understanding others. If not Idea of “COMMON” seems to be a primitive response of shrugging your shoulders and saying that some things are beyond once comprehension. Proponents of Idea of “COMMON” are undermining the diversity there by insulting both diversity and the idea itself.

Shivaprakash Yaragal