Jyotsna Siddharth is an actor, artist, activist, and writer. She is also the India Lead for Gender at Work, a feminist network of organisations working towards institutional change. Her work is based on using multiple forms and formats, an integrated approach to look at the intersectional issues of caste and gender, queerness, and politics. Jyotsna is a founder of several projects on Instagram like Project Anti Caste Love, a community that focuses on narratives, discourse, and consultations on caste, gender, religion, love, and relationships; Sive which is a transdisciplinary collective, building caste-gender dialogues through creative and community pedagogies; and JS Attic Studio, her personal page as an actor.
You have a very interesting performance piece called “Janeu Prompts” on your Instagram handle. Would you like to tell us about it?
Sure. This is a new project that I’ve begun to work on this year. This idea started by responding to caste based and sexual violence, through body and body movement. I’ve only posted one video yet, but I think the scope of the project is very large. It addresses the apathy of the state towards marginalised communities while using ‘janeu’ as a symbol and marker of Brahmanical patriarchy. The case I started with is the incident that happened in Gujarat, where four Dalit men were tied to the car and beaten up in broad daylight. I think I’m going to continue working on it. It’s also really difficult. I created a small database to track from 2000-2021 the cases of caste based violence and the sheer number was so overwhelming.
Theatre is accused of being an upper caste, upper class space. Do you agree with that and if yes, how do you hope to change the meta-structure of theatre to make it more inclusive?
One of the things that I have been trying to do is exactly that, changing the space instead of simply placing marginalised communities into it. While there are several playwrights who have actively addressed caste based issues like Vijay Tendulkar, the representation has always been very one sided and linear. Who is representing whom? When I do theatre, I feel like there are still very few people who are open and vocal about their caste identity in the theatre space. It’s not like there are no Dalit women or Dalit trans folks in the space, but not everyone is open and ready to talk about this because the space itself is so exclusionary. The idea is to break that.
Another project that I am trying to work on with a few actors and theatre directors peers is to bring the conversation of intersectionality into the cinema and theatre space. We are a group of 8-10 people who are deliberating and working towards making theatre a more inclusive and intersectional space. While the process is slow, we have been addressing these questions through the process of discussions and looking at casting calls etc – really trying to question the nitty-gritties and create a nuanced, sensitive discourse about the same. It goes beyond acting, it’s about the caste and class privileges of the people involved in the theatre making process.
These are the two ways that I have been using to change theatre spaces. Additionally, physical theatre is very niche and not a lot of people in India are aware of it. There has not been any project that has used embodied practice to do a play on caste. I’m currently working on a solo piece where I will be playing with my body to explore caste and its intersections with gender, aesthetics, and desire. This is in fact the first physical theatre piece on caste in India.
“It’s not like there are no Dalit women or Dalit trans folks in the space, but not everyone is open and ready to talk about this because the space itself is so exclusionary.”
When talking about performance and caste, it is impossible to avoid the question of representation – a topic which continues to be contentious. I’m curious about where you would place yourself in that debate.
For me, representation is not an issue. We are always representing people and ourselves everywhere – in our lives, in our work. We can’t be everywhere so we need allies. But I think here what becomes important is the context in which certain things are represented and who is representing them. It does not mean that a particular person of a particular identity always has to be represented by a person of the same identity. We have to consider questions like – What is the motivation? What is the context? When talking about representing marginalised communities, I think it is very important to ask ourselves – Am I the right person to play the role? If yes, what am I bringing by approaching or by embarking on this issue or direction? If you are able to answer these questions and are able to create a space where you are creating genuine solidarities, representation is fine. We cannot reach a point where we exclusively talk about people we know because in that case, we would be able to do very limited or almost no work. We cannot reach a place where one can say, “I only want to be represented by a Dalit person” or that an upper caste person should only be represented by an upper caste person. That is impossible to do logistically, practically, realistically all the time. What needs to happen is that we need to do the work, we need to understand our motivations towards representation. Thoughtful representation, in my opinion, is the way forward.
Also, thinking that the caste system exclusively impacts Dalit people, is a very limited understanding of the system. Caste affects everyone and the experience of each part of that system needs to be taken into account.
“What needs to happen is that we need to do the work, we need to understand our motivations towards representation. Thoughtful representation, in my opinion, is the way forward.”
Right, and how does one execute that without watering down the efforts of Dalit activists? How do you keep the movement intact and still address the caste experience of each individual?
There are several layers to this and therefore it requires a nuanced understanding of caste. It is impossible to simplify. Yes, Dalits are the people who have to bear the brunt of the caste system the most and their lives have been adversely impacted by it. The caste system however, was not started by Dalits. Dalits cannot do away with the system because they were not the initiators of it. We have to address this issue from the point where it emerged. Which is why I think that the onus of this does not solely fall upon the shoulders of Dalits.
Talking about COVID-19 in India, Dalits are the ones who are working on the frontlines. They are the ones who are cremating the bodies. In situations where even families of upper caste people don’t want to touch the bodies because they are scared, Dalits are cremating them. But, when it comes to rituals and ceremonies, a pandit or a Brahmin are called upon to do last rite ceremonies. Which is why I circle back to the point that it is a system of oppression. The system always works in a dynamic and not in a vacuum. A lot of Dalit activists may not agree with me, but this is a position I continue to hold. I repeat, it is not just the prerogative of the Dalit community to annihilate caste. The accountability mostly lies on the upper caste people because while the dissent of the Dalit community is critical, upper caste involvement in an empathetic, sensible, and humble way is vital.
“The caste system was not started by Dalits. Dalits cannot do away with the system because they were not the initiators of it.”
Do you think the political left of our country is ‘caste blind’?
I completely identify myself as a leftist and also as an Ambedkarite. I don’t find refuge in one identity exclusively. That being said, it is important to criticise the left. The situation that we are in at the moment, politically, is a result of the left refusing to recognise caste as the fundamental structure of Indian society. What is often missed out is that Marx was not writing in the context of India. The failure of the left in South Asia is tied in with their refusal to move beyond the class aspect. They didn’t want to question their own caste privileges. Most of the leftists in the country are largely upper caste and upper class, therefore, questioning caste would make them question their own intergenerational privileges and benefits.
I also want to point out that the leftists’ belief of themselves being intelligent is shattered by the fact that they haven’t been able to extend their discourse to the grassroots. The inability of the left to penetrate ideologically to the common person is telling of their failure in the country. We also have to laud the right wing for their usage of different strategies to really get to the grassroots of the country. In fact, I believe that the left can learn a lesson or two from the right in this aspect.
You see, even in the NRC-CAA protests that took place in the last two years, there was suddenly a lot of evocation of Ambedkar. Why did that happen, now? Because ultimately you realise that unless you have constitutional rights and duties, you won’t even have the right to be alive. That is where I feel that you need to push more. Regardless of your ideological standing, it is vital to understand that by the virtue of simply being humans, we have certain rights.
“Most of the leftists in the country are largely upper caste and upper class, therefore, questioning caste would make them question their own intergenerational privileges and benefits.”
The left has also been accused of fetishing Muslim women while completely turning a blind eye to Dalit, Bahujan, and Adivasi women. Do you think there is some truth to that?
Yes. Caste discrimination is not limited to Hinduism; it is prevalent in most mainstream religions, be it Sikhism, Islam, or Christianity. This understanding is obviously limited to India and South Asia. We are of course questioning casteism in Hinduism, but as a society we still are not ready to talk about caste discrimination in the rest of the communities.
I have been in Shaheen Bagh since day third. We have seen the amount of books, projects, and content that has emerged from that one political site. Artists, activists, writers who were there for even two-three days have come up with so much content. In contrast, some of us were there for the entire duration and have still not been able to write something. As a matter of fact, I’m still processing those months we spent with women, children, and people of Shaheen Bagh. The culture of instant consumption in the left, that everything has to be consumable, has to be shown in a particular way. If you’re not immediately producing a book or a write up, it puts you in a difficult position. A lot of work is just being produced without much recognition or cognition in a sense, without thinking, without being in it.
I have constantly refused opportunities to speak in Shaheen Bagh, not because I did not belong there, not because I couldn’t have spoken, and not even because of my identity. I simply didn’t do so because for me it was important to be a part of it, amplify it, and create solidarities as opposed to simply occupying space. Who am I to talk to these women who on their own accord have started a movement like that? What do they need to learn from me? We, in fact, have to learn from them. The movement broke several stereotypes about Muslim women and our contribution had to simply come from our roles as allies and amplifiers of their voices. What everybody did, was to take up that space and appropriate it, as if those women had to learn from celebrities, artists and woke people.
I believe there is a fetishisation of bodies of Dalit, Adivasi, Bahujan, and Muslim women. Unless we learn to widen our scope of anti-caste and our solidarities, fetishisation, appropriation, and misrepresentation will continue to be rampant.
“A lot of work is just being produced without much recognition or cognition in a sense, without thinking, without being in it.”
Do you think there has to be a debrahminising of queer discourse in India like there has been an effort to decolonise queer discourse?
Absolutely! In the context of India as well, these heteropatriarchal ideas come from Victorian notions of morality. This has completely messed up our (South Asian) understanding of our sexualities and sexual identities. South Asian societies have always been queer. We have undone and removed our own culture of queerness and intimacy. There has in a sense been an erasure of all of these aspects because of the colonisation which continues till date.
If you witness queerness in the Dalit community vis-a-vis a dominant caste community, the fundamental difference is that marginalised communities have always been queer. Queerness is not for them to “discover” or embrace. Queerness is very much part of their assertions and the way they have lived their lives. Having same sex relationships and intimacy of that kind is not out of the ordinary. We are therefore, nowhere close to decolonisation and I assert that we are reliving colonisation in a very different way today.
“South Asian societies have always been queer. We have undone and removed our own culture of queerness and intimacy. There has in a sense been an erasure of all of these aspects because of the colonisation which continues till date.”
Are you referring to neo-colonialism and capitalism when you say that?
Yes! Now what has happened is that capitalism is not just capitalism. It is extremely intertwined with caste, religion, and gender, in addition to, of course, class tensions. It is extremely nuanced, especially in our (South Asian) context. All aspects of our identities exist in tension with each other and are very important realities that need to be addressed. This is evident even today, in the context of COVID-19. The entire discourse and practice of vaccination and cremations – it is all a manifestation of capitalism in intersection with caste and class.
There have been various standpoints about the comparability of race and caste. Where would you place yourself in that context?
Firstly, yes, they are both systems of oppression. Yes, they are parallel to each other and there are several lessons to be learnt about the oppressive tactics at play to learn about both the systems. But I think caste and race are absolutely different. In India we see that it’s not just casteism and caste, we also see racism and colourism.
Caste is not intrinsically linked to colour; it may be in some cases, but it is not necessarily the case. You cannot look at a Dalit and be able to identify them as Dalit, until and unless you know other factors like their surname, profession, etc. Race on the other hand is linked to colourism and therefore, creates the scope of differentiation. Even then, we can grossly misidentify a person’s racial identity. It is important to understand both the systems independently, and then perhaps find interlinkages. It is difficult to understand caste and race independently, and it gets complicated because we don’t understand caste on a global level yet. The only present way to understand caste is always in comparison with race which in my view a very myopic view.
Could you please elaborate on what you mean by caste on a global level?
In the context of South Asia, we are quite aware of how caste plays out. But when you consider this internationally, an Indian overseas will firstly be seen as an Indian and not from their particular caste identity. This is, of course, changing with the anti-caste discourse spreading globally. But earlier, people who migrated to the West were largely upper class and upper caste, that is, people who had the resources – social or cultural capital – to immigrate. This meant that they could reproduce the South Asian cultures in the West. The anti-caste discourse was therefore always missing as the upper caste and upper class Hindus almost never talked about caste but also invisibilised the Dalit identity for decades. We are therefore still very new to forming an understanding about caste and its global effects. The Cisco example and the California textbook controversy, where they are trying to remove caste from the textbooks – all of these examples point to this phenomenon.
Another aspect that is interesting is that all the people who were talking about Black Lives Matter in India – you know, celebrities and the privileged – were almost never talking about Dalit Lives Matter.
“Earlier, people who migrated to the West were largely upper class and upper caste, that is, people who had the resources – social or cultural capital – to immigrate. This meant that they could reproduce the South Asian cultures in the West. The anti-caste discourse was therefore always missing.”
That was very insightful! Do you have any final thoughts that you would like to share before we wrap up?
I think we need to focus on building genuine authentic solidarities, not just performance that a lot of people are engaging in. I don’t see any hope or scope for this country until and unless we learn to form authentic, compassionate. and generous solidarities. Love has to be the centre of our lives. Love beyond binaries, identities, beyond a normative understanding of what love means. We need to recenter that in our assertions – love for our parents, families, country, communities, for the collective. That is one tool we have and I continue to push for it. You know it’s like love in the face of hate. Love as a radical, political tool to come together to build better individuals, relationships, communities, and society is a thought I would like to leave you with.
This interview was conducted in April 2021 as part of TYPF’s digital campaign to commemorate Dalit History Month. The conversation was led by Aparna Agarwal, an intern with TYPF’s Communications team.