On Language and Objects

Towards the end of the talk by Dr. Taymiya R. Zaman, there was a discussion about the ‘white man’ living inside of you. She spoke about how when we or anyone approaches history it is usually like our understanding of the white man, who tries to understand different cultures or pasts by using their own framework or understanding. It was quite heartening to hear Dr. Zaman read out her essay, her approach to history of living through the experience to understand something by way of language, the body and the objects is perhaps one which moves the audience away from the traditional way that we view history. This blog will talk about the discussion with regards to objects and language which took place in the talk with Dr. Zaman and how this approach of history is quite exciting.

She talks about how she expects to relate with people in New Mexico because of a colonial past, she jokes about how this is also what people in Latin America expect South Asian historians to do as well. But surprisingly that ends up to not be the case, she relates more because of her similar physical features than with the way Mexico City has dealt with their colonial past. Spanish has been accepted and owned as a language in Mexico unlike the ‘elite’ status of English in the subcontinent. I don’t wish to go reproduce all that was said in the talk, the point being made here is that many people in Latin America have come beyond this idea of being stuck between the colonial culture and the indigenous one by creating a workable hybrid, after all it’s ‘just language,’ no need to attach a higher power to it. Yes, the context of colonial hold in India and Mexico are very different but that isn’t the way this was being looked at or discussed; Dr. Zaman was not breaking down the facts and varied behaviors of different actors like the white historian who keeps resurfacing (as discussed above), she was telling us a narrative as it simply is and lived by people not of how a specific ‘frame’ helps us make sense of it.

To observe history by such a lens truly helps you to answers which you may not be able to reach using the way that we’ve been acquainted with in the past – this is not to say that the latter approach has no unique value of its own. Dr. Zaman’s description of her grandmother’s bracelet and her mother’s diary in understanding history, how it may have been felt by them keeping in mind those objects taught me of new ways to look at things, ones which can exist in the absence of written documents or archives.

This piece may sound a lot like a typical stereotype of anyone who walks out of a talk or an art exhibition and discusses it with their peers. The key take from the talk and this piece is that there are different ways to look at history, we can not implant our view or experience onto different groups even if they may share a history. There are many more subjects present within the session like gendering of language(s) on which a lot can be written on, I am sure will find space in the blogs of my peers.