The big news of the week was that the Scots said ‘no’ to independence from Britain.
The big question of the week was ‘Who cares?’
Scottish independence seems like such a strange thing to fight for in the 21st century, though maybe there is a cosmic significance to the fact that Braveheart came out 20 years ago this year. The Scots have been going on about it for centuries (think of Macbeth and the best intrigue-ridden British period films you’ve ever seen). I honestly was surprised that a point of contention so historic as to have become a legend is still fighting for airtime in our news cycle. Of course the English pushed for a “no” vote but I think it’s the Queen who probably took it the worst. I imagined the Queen wandering around the palace late at night, staring up at portraits of Elizabeth I and apologizing for failing for not continuing the family tradition: “I’m sorry, Granny! I’m so sorry! They’re at it again….”
[quote]Independence isn't as easy as painting your face half blue and running into the sunset in a kilt[/quote]
As pundits and historians the world over have noted, independence isn’t as easy as painting your face half blue and running into the sunset in a kilt (don’t we know it). For all intents and purposes, an independent Scotland would be an insignificant Scotland. It wouldn’t have much money, trade, foreign policy muscle or business, and I think it would feel like a teen who moved out of its parents’ house but only has a degree in Communications or something equally silly.
The first comparison that comes to my mind here is Quebec in Canada, a French-heavy province that also had a referendum for independence several years ago. Now I lived in Quebec when I was younger. I say Quebec and not Canada because, like NYC and USA, they are not necessarily the same thing. The French-Canadians really do think of themselves as transplanted Parisians, rather than inhabitants of an arctic swathe on the edge of civilization (truth hurts). A distinct national identity is an integral part of what it means to be Québécoise, often an identity completely independent of (and, for a few people I knew, antithetical to) being Canadian. It wasn’t unusual to run across waiters or grocers or butchers who didn’t speak any English (if you heard their accent, you’d swear they didn’t speak French either) and never felt the need to. So obsessed are they with being considered French that it’s hard to find English language entertainment, like plays etc., in Montreal. When you meet other Canadians, you realize how remarkable this little bubble is. The French-Canadians also came very close to succeeding (the vote was lost by 1%), despite the fact that it’s kind of weird that they wanted a separate country but not separate currency.
I think we were all interested in the Scottish vote because ‘independence’ is a heavy word in our part of the world, not least because it raises questions of similar votes in Kashmir (and yes, Baluchistan and South Punjab too. Boo!). While this was going on in the news, my family was hosting the daughter of an Indian family friend. Actually she too was visiting from Quebec, though her family’s from Delhi (and before that was from Lahore – we’re all so complicated na.) She’s doing her M.F.A and for her thesis has chosen to work on the Partition of India.
Her project was to document the objects that people brought along with them during the Partition, things ranging from jewels to letters to bricks from houses left behind. For the most part they chose small, expensive, easily transportable things that could be sold to ensure a good life in a new place. I imagine part of the reason she felt drawn to the subject was that her family are what she called “refugees” (that’s what the Indians call people who migrated to India after Partition.) It’s telling that after three generations of her family living in the finer parts of Delhi, they still use the term. Personally, it seems like a very tired way to approach the subject but there is no doubt that the subject needs to be addressed.
One of the things she brought up while we were discussing Scotland and Independence movements in general was the idea of reparations and reconciliation. In places like South Africa or Rwanda, countries subject to major upheavals that tore the national identity apart (to put it lightly), one of the only ways to get over the trauma was to talk about it. To discuss openly and honestly what happened, on both sides, in an effort to forgive. Countries, she said, are like people: only once you’ve said your piece can you have some peace.
This urge to recount and repair is not something Pakistan and India have acted on yet – at least not on any scale that matters. I think it’s one of the reasons our societies still cling to the trauma of the Partition. People still carry that event around like a wound, several generations on, an open cut that bleeds out inherited memories of properties lost and lives stolen.
But Pakistan has been through more than one Partition, though we like not to think about Bangladesh or what we did there. The idea of an open and truly honest account of what happened (on both sides) is too painful a thing for most of us to contemplate.
And that’s half the trouble with independence.
Write to thekantawala@gmail.com and follow @fkantawala on twitter
The big question of the week was ‘Who cares?’
Scottish independence seems like such a strange thing to fight for in the 21st century, though maybe there is a cosmic significance to the fact that Braveheart came out 20 years ago this year. The Scots have been going on about it for centuries (think of Macbeth and the best intrigue-ridden British period films you’ve ever seen). I honestly was surprised that a point of contention so historic as to have become a legend is still fighting for airtime in our news cycle. Of course the English pushed for a “no” vote but I think it’s the Queen who probably took it the worst. I imagined the Queen wandering around the palace late at night, staring up at portraits of Elizabeth I and apologizing for failing for not continuing the family tradition: “I’m sorry, Granny! I’m so sorry! They’re at it again….”
[quote]Independence isn't as easy as painting your face half blue and running into the sunset in a kilt[/quote]
As pundits and historians the world over have noted, independence isn’t as easy as painting your face half blue and running into the sunset in a kilt (don’t we know it). For all intents and purposes, an independent Scotland would be an insignificant Scotland. It wouldn’t have much money, trade, foreign policy muscle or business, and I think it would feel like a teen who moved out of its parents’ house but only has a degree in Communications or something equally silly.
The first comparison that comes to my mind here is Quebec in Canada, a French-heavy province that also had a referendum for independence several years ago. Now I lived in Quebec when I was younger. I say Quebec and not Canada because, like NYC and USA, they are not necessarily the same thing. The French-Canadians really do think of themselves as transplanted Parisians, rather than inhabitants of an arctic swathe on the edge of civilization (truth hurts). A distinct national identity is an integral part of what it means to be Québécoise, often an identity completely independent of (and, for a few people I knew, antithetical to) being Canadian. It wasn’t unusual to run across waiters or grocers or butchers who didn’t speak any English (if you heard their accent, you’d swear they didn’t speak French either) and never felt the need to. So obsessed are they with being considered French that it’s hard to find English language entertainment, like plays etc., in Montreal. When you meet other Canadians, you realize how remarkable this little bubble is. The French-Canadians also came very close to succeeding (the vote was lost by 1%), despite the fact that it’s kind of weird that they wanted a separate country but not separate currency.
I think we were all interested in the Scottish vote because ‘independence’ is a heavy word in our part of the world, not least because it raises questions of similar votes in Kashmir (and yes, Baluchistan and South Punjab too. Boo!). While this was going on in the news, my family was hosting the daughter of an Indian family friend. Actually she too was visiting from Quebec, though her family’s from Delhi (and before that was from Lahore – we’re all so complicated na.) She’s doing her M.F.A and for her thesis has chosen to work on the Partition of India.
Her project was to document the objects that people brought along with them during the Partition, things ranging from jewels to letters to bricks from houses left behind. For the most part they chose small, expensive, easily transportable things that could be sold to ensure a good life in a new place. I imagine part of the reason she felt drawn to the subject was that her family are what she called “refugees” (that’s what the Indians call people who migrated to India after Partition.) It’s telling that after three generations of her family living in the finer parts of Delhi, they still use the term. Personally, it seems like a very tired way to approach the subject but there is no doubt that the subject needs to be addressed.
One of the things she brought up while we were discussing Scotland and Independence movements in general was the idea of reparations and reconciliation. In places like South Africa or Rwanda, countries subject to major upheavals that tore the national identity apart (to put it lightly), one of the only ways to get over the trauma was to talk about it. To discuss openly and honestly what happened, on both sides, in an effort to forgive. Countries, she said, are like people: only once you’ve said your piece can you have some peace.
This urge to recount and repair is not something Pakistan and India have acted on yet – at least not on any scale that matters. I think it’s one of the reasons our societies still cling to the trauma of the Partition. People still carry that event around like a wound, several generations on, an open cut that bleeds out inherited memories of properties lost and lives stolen.
But Pakistan has been through more than one Partition, though we like not to think about Bangladesh or what we did there. The idea of an open and truly honest account of what happened (on both sides) is too painful a thing for most of us to contemplate.
And that’s half the trouble with independence.
Write to thekantawala@gmail.com and follow @fkantawala on twitter