Date: 3, 4 August 2012
Venue: The Seagull Foundation for the Arts
36C, S.P. Mukherjee Road
Calcutta 700 025
Participating Schools: Akshar and Lakshmipat Singhania Academy
The PeaceWorks School Curriculum Debate, was organized by The Seagull Foundation for the Arts, to give young minds the opportunity to critically analyze concepts of identity and human rights, exchange ideas on these issues and put forward their individual opinions. It was designed with the aim of initiating a discussion and debate that provokes thought and encourages looking at others’ perspectives.
Day One: The programme was facilitated by Shailza Rai who began with a brief introduction to PeaceWorks followed by an interactive introductory session that encouraged the participants(nine students from Akshar and four from Lakshmipat Singhania Academy) to describe themselves and talk about their likes and dislikes. After the ice breaking exercise, the participants were given a notebook each to scribble notes on their personal identity. This was followed by reading a literature piece by Jerry Pinto—A Question of Identity. Once the piece was read out to everyone, they were asked to return to their notebooks, relook at what they had put down in the first instance and make changes if they wished to.
Shailza asked the students to share with the others what they had written earlier and the changes that they may have made post reading the text. Students came up with interesting thoughts and very fluid ideas on identity. The discussion gradually gained impetus over the question of how identity is formed and what influences one’s identity. Whether it is social constructs that determines and shapes the identity of individuals, or it is the individual’s upbringing, education, background, peer pressure and mental make up that determines it, was a question that gave rise to various opinions. While some of the participants felt that the individual has the capability and the choice to decide who one wants to be or what one’s identity ought to be, the others had a feeling that sections of society known as the majority and the minority (determined by the power to influence/economic power/ political preference/religious identity, etc.) determine one’s identity. The views brought out a lot of voices and the participants gradually moved from the idea of individual identity to greater identities of a community, a nation, or the collective identities of people with the same ideology, or religious beliefs.
By the end of the discussion, participants looked at the concept through multiple perspectives and opined that there is not one single, fixed aspect that determines one’s identity, and that it changes and evolves as one gets older.
Day Two: The second daystarted off by reading a poem by Ben Okri, To Martin Luther King. Shailza asked the participants to ponder upon the idea of ‘dream children’ and elucidate on what they thought about it.
One of the thoughts that triggered off instant discussion was that dreams are fantasies and therefore they can hardly be rational. Immediate response to this was—do rational minds not dream—is the entire act of dreaming or fantasizing irrational and meaningless? The discussion gradually moved to wants, expectations, needs, and how dreams are an expression of every human beings desires. The participants elucidated on the idea that each of us are dream children in one way or the other, that every individual has dreams that inspire and motivate and make them who they are.
Shailza provoked them by asking can every human being be allowed to get what one dreams of or wants. One bright student replied that each and every individual has the right to work towards his cause, rights, or dreams, as long as this does not harm or hinder others. This led to an in-depth discussion on rights and responsibilities. Homosexuality became a topic of discussion as a result of exploring the concept of rights and dreams.
Shailza further provoked by talking about Philip Pullman’s recent writing which has been censored on grounds of hurting the Christian community. She asked the students whether they agreed that censorship was a necessary measure taken by the state or the authority to protect an entire community and maintaining law and order. Every single participant had a strong opinion on this. While most felt censorship deprives people of their rights, some believed that in order to avoid disorder, or mayhem rising out of hurt sentiments, the state sometimes needs to intervene and impose harsh restrictions.
The discussion on rights and responsibilities naturally steered towards discrimination, with all the timely prompts from Shailza. Why some people enjoy greater rights than others—larger sense of freedom—more facilities—the ability to raise a louder voice in public—where does all of this stem from. Why is one section of society deprived of their basic rights? And who creates these divisions? The participants had many interesting answers. They stressed on aspects of power play in a nation—in a family or even a class room—where one section invariably dominates the other. Racial discrimination, religious conflicts, prejudices, political pressures and other social structures that create divisions were discussed at length.
At the end of the discussion the participants were asked to sum up the two sessions and talk about their feedback on the discussions that took place. Most believed that the discussion helped them see things from multiple perspectives—taught them to listen—be more receptive towards others’ opinions and ideas.
With the hope to conduct many such debates and discussions, PeaceWorks bid goodbye to the participants. We hope that this interaction would leave a lasting impression on the participants young minds and that it would help them think and ideate with a deeper perspective and critical understanding of issues that effect us and our world.
By Purbani Das
