Let me start with an apology for a mistake the readers might make in equating worms with young women who are the subject of this post. The link is clearly not mine nor the error, but still the apology is worth making for its in a good cause, namely, today's young women.
The proverbial turning of the worm is supposed to denote a victim giving up his victimhood and successfully turning on his tormentor. Or, as in this case, her tormentor.
What brought on this inquiry into victims, worms, women and tormentors? Simply put, some recent stories of matrimonial match-making in my extended family.
Recently an uncle of mine was very upset with his cousin's daughter for embarrassing the family (and no doubt him personally). He was trying to get the girl - the girls' parents actually - interested in his wife's cousin's son. For those unfamiliar with this format of matrimonial alliances, let me briefly add that in this part of the world, marriages are arranged between two families with the bride and the groom constituting two necessary but not sufficient components. If they are happy, it's considered a bonus. Their happiness is not, in the crude American neologism, a "deal-breaker". It was assumed that with the efflux of time (a phrase we love in these parts) the two would find a satisfactory working arrangement somewhere between physical war on the one side and happiness on the other. In my younger days when my thoughts were quicker and my tongue was a swashbuckling and somewhat irresponsible organ, I would have - actually was known to have - described such alliances as driven purely by the economic considerations with one side aspiring to greater wealth and the other needing to find a match for a fast-depreciating asset. With age has come certain circumspection and amusement has replaced anger. Enough said about me.
The young lady in question was allowed to meet the eligible young man who, as already noted, was the said uncle's wife's cousin's son. My uncle in a way was the meat in the sandwich and was caught in the middle. His stakes were very high indeed. The young lady met the young man suitably supervised. Not in Chennai the Victorian-style chaperoned meeting for the lads and the lasses with the chaperon trailing discreetly behind, within eyesight but out of earshot..
She reportedly took the lead in what my uncle described as an "inquisition". Considering that the current day Chennai boys of certain social stratum are best described as "duhs", I was not surprised that it was so. She proceeded to ask him about his career, future prospects, pay ("gross as well as net", my uncle recalled with indignation) etc. Then he was queried on his "liabiliies" which my uncle felt was very forward and very impertinent. He is a product of the times and mores in which the women were supposed to concern themselves with making and raising babies and the men took care of everything else. Then came the clincher which blew my uncle off. Even at this distance in time he is barely able to contain himself, thinking about it.
The girl asked the boy if he would come into the marriage with "any baggage", a line of inquiry which even in retrospect has my uncle seeing red and seething with unspeakable anger. "The audacity of it" he exclaims while narrating the story. For a while I wondered if I should let him know that being a modern girl she could have been inquiring after his "package" which she would have to live with the rest of her life.Wiser counsel prevailed and I resisted the urge. He would have burst an aneurysm. Needless to add that the boy's family didn't take kindly to being considered "baggage" and the talks broke down.
Another recent story involves the parents of the boy going to meet the girl. The plan was that if they approved of her, then a "skype meeting" would be arranged. It amazes me how a traditional ritual is being modernized in its structure but not intent. This process known traditionally as "seeing the girl" involves the boys family visiting the girl's home where she would have to serve refreshments (expected to be made by her own hand, but much cheating has been known in this aspect), speak when spoken to, pay her respects by genuflecting before the boy's family, sing a song or two (classical - Bollywood a definite no-no) and may be even do a step or two of dance where such proficiency has been claimed by her family. In other words a thoroughly humiliating experience for the girl (to briefly slide back into my youthful ways of describing it) while the boy's side took it all in to the accompaniment of sweets, savouries and coffee.
This story has a happier ending - at least in my opinion. But I am in a minority of one. The boy's father for one was totally aghast. When the boy's family walked in, the girl was reportedly seated one leg crossed over the other (a cardinal sin and sign of utter and unspeakable disrespect in these parts), and in deep conversation on her cell-phone. Much to the annoyance of the visitors she failed to get up. She also failed to genuflect before them. She continued her phone conversation, after waving a "Hi" somewhat airily in their direction. That the visitors were offended is putting it mildly. Saner counsel prevailed and she quietly withdrew deeper into her home with her phone leaving her parents with the by-now-impossible task of carrying on a conversation with the visitors.
See what I mean by worms turning? de Beauvoir, Friedan, Steinem, Greer, Firestone, Millet, et al may have written tomes on women freeing themselves from the men-allotted historical roles. But here in Chennai we see them actually doing it.
And I am loving it (despite having have a son who is yet to marry)
The proverbial turning of the worm is supposed to denote a victim giving up his victimhood and successfully turning on his tormentor. Or, as in this case, her tormentor.
What brought on this inquiry into victims, worms, women and tormentors? Simply put, some recent stories of matrimonial match-making in my extended family.
Recently an uncle of mine was very upset with his cousin's daughter for embarrassing the family (and no doubt him personally). He was trying to get the girl - the girls' parents actually - interested in his wife's cousin's son. For those unfamiliar with this format of matrimonial alliances, let me briefly add that in this part of the world, marriages are arranged between two families with the bride and the groom constituting two necessary but not sufficient components. If they are happy, it's considered a bonus. Their happiness is not, in the crude American neologism, a "deal-breaker". It was assumed that with the efflux of time (a phrase we love in these parts) the two would find a satisfactory working arrangement somewhere between physical war on the one side and happiness on the other. In my younger days when my thoughts were quicker and my tongue was a swashbuckling and somewhat irresponsible organ, I would have - actually was known to have - described such alliances as driven purely by the economic considerations with one side aspiring to greater wealth and the other needing to find a match for a fast-depreciating asset. With age has come certain circumspection and amusement has replaced anger. Enough said about me.
The young lady in question was allowed to meet the eligible young man who, as already noted, was the said uncle's wife's cousin's son. My uncle in a way was the meat in the sandwich and was caught in the middle. His stakes were very high indeed. The young lady met the young man suitably supervised. Not in Chennai the Victorian-style chaperoned meeting for the lads and the lasses with the chaperon trailing discreetly behind, within eyesight but out of earshot..
She reportedly took the lead in what my uncle described as an "inquisition". Considering that the current day Chennai boys of certain social stratum are best described as "duhs", I was not surprised that it was so. She proceeded to ask him about his career, future prospects, pay ("gross as well as net", my uncle recalled with indignation) etc. Then he was queried on his "liabiliies" which my uncle felt was very forward and very impertinent. He is a product of the times and mores in which the women were supposed to concern themselves with making and raising babies and the men took care of everything else. Then came the clincher which blew my uncle off. Even at this distance in time he is barely able to contain himself, thinking about it.
The girl asked the boy if he would come into the marriage with "any baggage", a line of inquiry which even in retrospect has my uncle seeing red and seething with unspeakable anger. "The audacity of it" he exclaims while narrating the story. For a while I wondered if I should let him know that being a modern girl she could have been inquiring after his "package" which she would have to live with the rest of her life.Wiser counsel prevailed and I resisted the urge. He would have burst an aneurysm. Needless to add that the boy's family didn't take kindly to being considered "baggage" and the talks broke down.
Another recent story involves the parents of the boy going to meet the girl. The plan was that if they approved of her, then a "skype meeting" would be arranged. It amazes me how a traditional ritual is being modernized in its structure but not intent. This process known traditionally as "seeing the girl" involves the boys family visiting the girl's home where she would have to serve refreshments (expected to be made by her own hand, but much cheating has been known in this aspect), speak when spoken to, pay her respects by genuflecting before the boy's family, sing a song or two (classical - Bollywood a definite no-no) and may be even do a step or two of dance where such proficiency has been claimed by her family. In other words a thoroughly humiliating experience for the girl (to briefly slide back into my youthful ways of describing it) while the boy's side took it all in to the accompaniment of sweets, savouries and coffee.
This story has a happier ending - at least in my opinion. But I am in a minority of one. The boy's father for one was totally aghast. When the boy's family walked in, the girl was reportedly seated one leg crossed over the other (a cardinal sin and sign of utter and unspeakable disrespect in these parts), and in deep conversation on her cell-phone. Much to the annoyance of the visitors she failed to get up. She also failed to genuflect before them. She continued her phone conversation, after waving a "Hi" somewhat airily in their direction. That the visitors were offended is putting it mildly. Saner counsel prevailed and she quietly withdrew deeper into her home with her phone leaving her parents with the by-now-impossible task of carrying on a conversation with the visitors.
See what I mean by worms turning? de Beauvoir, Friedan, Steinem, Greer, Firestone, Millet, et al may have written tomes on women freeing themselves from the men-allotted historical roles. But here in Chennai we see them actually doing it.
And I am loving it (despite having have a son who is yet to marry)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.