An Appeal for an Artist: Buy Brushes for Rehana Fathima’s Son


I am making appeal here to all people who really care for children’s rights beyond the hypocrisies of the global child rights discourse.

A controversy is raging in Kerala over a video of body art posted by the body-activist Rehana Fathima in which her two children paint an image of a phoenix on the exposed torso of their mother. The children are not nude, they don’t look outside the frame. Rehana herself does not look out, nor is her body being displayed in any explicit sense. There is nothing pornographic; the video was not made for commercial purposes. However, the video has unleashed a storm of outrage and the bitter conservatism of both Right and Left-wing politics in Kerala now engulfs the family like a toxic fog.

Rehana has been subject to unimaginable violence online. She is no stranger to it; her insistent efforts to keep radical body politics alive…

View original post 402 more words

Is this a Managerial Feudalism or dearest Capitalism?

Bullshit Jobs: A Theory by David Graeber, New York, Simon and Schuster, 2018; pp xv + 368, ₹ 395.  

About the Author  

David Graeber is an American anthropologist and activist who was part of movements like ‘The Global Justice Movement, and Occupy Wall Street.’ At present, he is working as a professor in London School of Economics and he is well-known for his book, Debt: The first 5000 years: Fragments of An Anarchist Anthropology.   

On September 2018, I was listening to Hidden Brain, a podcast by Shankar Vedanta, where he begins with a pitch line, “Have you ever had a job where you had to stop and ask yourself: what am I doing here? If I quit tomorrow, would anyone even notice?” At that moment, the single thought which hit me is that I have heard or read a similar line before. And I remember this book, Eleanor Oliphant Is Completely Fine by Gail Honeyman where the protagonist Eleanor talks about her job and how her existence is so useless that even if she doesn’t appear for work, nobody will notice. While the podcast got 121 likes on cast box, I enlisted this book on my TBR. Recently, I had a chance to go through the lesson plan of paper ‘polity and society’ where this book was listed as a recommended book for the course. And this is why we are here, reading the book and reviewing it.   

Now coming to the book, it is a thought-provoking text. I read the book as having seven chapters, each with a new theme followed from the previous ones. First, it outlines the authors’ reason for writing this book and the methodology followed by the working definition of the bullshit job and the five taxonomy and its impact on the psyche of the individual. In the later chapters, he illustratively builds a theoretical basis of the reasons for the proliferation of the bullshit jobs, ranging from psychological to the socio-economic to the political. The last section offers Universal Basic Income as a normative recommendation with an emphasis on the political implications of these bullshit jobs.  

Based on his 2013 essay in New Yorker, ‘On the phenomenon of the Bullshit jobs’ which received high critical acclaim by the readers, he draws on the ‘neglected aspect of the world of work that constitutes a real social problem-one that most people don’t even acknowledge that it exists.’ Drawing from a substantial qualitative and quantitative research with lots of quotable testimonies from his twitter response and the YouGov poll, he builds a hypothesis that there is an inversely proportional relationship between the social value of work and the economic value of work. For example, a city banker who owns 5million pounds makes a little contribution than the nursery worker who does hard work and contributes more but paid 11500 pounds.  

David Graeber working definition of bullshit jobs is, “ A Bullshit job is a form of employment that is so completely pointless, unnecessary or pernicious that even the employee cannot justify its existence even though, as part of the condition of employment, the employer feels obliged to pretend that it is not the case. If BS jobs get disappeared, it won’t make any difference to the world and perhaps even make it a better place.” Examples of Bullshit jobs are Hedge Fund Managers, Political Consultant, Marketing Gurus, Lobbyist, and Corporate lawyers. He gives us five taxonomy of Bullshit jobs- Funky, Goons, Duct tapers, Box ticklers, and Taskmasters. However, the whole premise of his hypothesis is based on the phenomenological assumption of ‘Self-Identification’ that is, if you feel your job is Bullshit, then it probably is and conversely if not Bullshit then it is not. And then he makes a distinction between the bullshit job and shit job. The Bullshit jobs are identified by white-collar people who are paid more for the job which is BS according to them. While Shit jobs are the ones where the worker is paid less and the job is not BS.   

Nevertheless, in the latter section, he argues that these bullshit jobs do spiritual and psychological violence to the soul of the workers and ‘people are not inherently lazy and they do want to contribute something meaningful to the society.’ Hence the reasons for the proliferation of bullshit jobs and lack of discourse on them is due to social, economic and political reasons. Here he raises a question that if these jobs are so meaningless then why don’t we rebel against them. And it may be because the essence of the bullshit job lies at both structural and ideational level latent in the idea of capitalism itself. For Graeber, it is more political than economic and this is why the population who kept busy with make-believe work is less likely to revolt. Structurally, we are living in an age of managerial feudalism and he brings an analogous relation between classical feudalism and managerial feudalism based on the tendency to create an endless hierarchy. Therefore, the problem of BS jobs is intrinsically intertwined with the problem of Bureaucracy. And the idea that work is an end in itself is so much politically implied to justify the political economy of the ruling class that those who don’t work are looked down upon by the society itself. Also, as he quotes Orwell, “Mobs need to keep busy so that they can’t think” which somehow justifies the Keynesian economics in the times of Great Depression of the 1930s.   

Lastly, he makes a call for the debullshitization of real work than hiring people in unnecessary positions. If the whole idea of capitalism is based on efficient work, then being an anarchist, he brings the idea of Universal Basic Income and mass reduction of working hours as an alternative. Although Graeber main point is not to provide a solution but build a theory of bullshit jobs and pitching a persuasive account to provoke people to think and argue about what constitutes a genuinely free society.   

Although it lacks to consider the examples from eastern and South Asian perspective, I have found this work very polemical and very intellectually engaging as it brings a reference from vast resources. Besides it is an easy and great read and people who are interested in the genre of work and economy and sociology of work must-read.  

Law Teachers and Researchers Condemn Police Brutality, CAA and the NRC


Law teachers and researchers from across the world have strongly condemned the recent police brutality against students of different universities struggling the recent changes in Citizenship law. They have also criticized the CAA and the NRC ideas as majoritarian and one that subverts our Consttitutional vision. Their statement:

We, the undersigned teachers and researchers of law, strongly condemn the police brutality on the peaceful protest by the students at Jamia Milia Islamia, Aligarh Muslim University and other universities.

On 15 December 2019 police entered the Jamia Milia Islamia and Aligarh Muslim University, and assaulted and detained the students. Students were dragged out of campus, and were paraded outside with hands raised. We believe that the action of the police is an attempt to suppress dissent and is an attack on the autonomy of the universities. The police action violates, inter alia, the right to peaceful assembly and freedom of speech…

View original post 1,131 more words

I know why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou- A Book Review

I Know Why the Caged Bird sings, by Maya Angelou, New York: Random House, Inc., 2009 Kindle edition, pp. ii +317, ₹ 338

The United Kingdom has recently celebrated its Black History Month in October of this year. And after the post-Christmas and New Year celebrations, Citizens of the United States and Canada, celebrate a month-long observance of the significant contributions of African Americans. As we often talk about the contribution of Booker T. Washington, Malcolm X and W.E.B Dubois in sociology and history classes. However, the celebration would be incomplete, without reminiscing the courageous life and inspiring work of Maya Angelou in the public sphere.

Maya Angelou, born on April 4, 1928, in St.Louis, Missouri, United States, is the author of five autobiographies, of which I know why the Caged Bird Sings (1969) is the first and best known. Throughout her life, she has been the celebrated poet, teacher, and lecturer who has taught at the University of California, the University of Kansas, and the University of Ghana among other places.

In light of such interesting events and in the contemporary context of status of African American in the United States and politics of race, caste, class, ethnicity, religion across the world, I know why the Caged Bird Sings takes us to the journey of those inequalities, the roots of those struggles and movements through an autobiographical insights and fictional prose. In this book, Angelou brings the personal, delicate, and emotional details of her inner space walled within the Stamps and St.Louis, where she recalls the past to reconcile with her young self. Nevertheless, she also makes an attempt to bring the race consciousness several times in her work, putting forward the question of inequality, religion, God and race. She jitters over the Southern religious upbringing of her grandma and the urban sophisticated life of the North. With a rich recollection of her memories, she sketches the United States of the early and mid-20th century, i.e. America in the World War, the civil war, lynchings, rise of the Black leaders, the Negro consciousness. She beautifully puts the contrast of the lives of Black in North and Black in the South and how her grandma walls herself and protects her family from the world of whites, even if she has to compromise her dignity from the adolescent white girls.

This story is also about the two siblings growing up in Stamps, who find their confinement in each other, inside the writings of Edgar Allen Poe, Langston Hughes, Shakespeare and Mark Twain from the desperate loneliness, and confusion about who their parents are and why did they leave them. The way she crafts this world of colour and disillusion, despair and loneliness, self-doubt and complexed sense of self and beauty is not only a recollection of past, but these are the memory of pain and discovery of oneself. It becomes more visible, when she writes about the transition period from Maya to Margurite, to Maya Angelou, a Woman and Single Mother.

The world of a child and adolescent is very different from the world of the adults, and the way a child thinks and perceive the world of adults is very distinct and worth reflecting. This book, apart from bringing psyche of traumas such as rape of 8 years old Maya, the diminished self-worth of  Margurite and finding a belonging to the parents, it also talks about the complexity of the relationships, the racial inequalities. It helps us to understand the complexities of the world in which we live. The world of differences, conflicts and inequalities, the politics of race, caste, class, and insecurities and fear of getting lynched because of race, caste and religion. Although it is not a theoretical book, it gives an account of the way people are socially excluded centuries after centuries and how they lack the consciousness and passively accepts the subordination and fate forwarded by the religion. We can relate this to the contemporary context as well, especially in India in case of caste and tribals, women and when we talk about subaltern consciousness. In the modern bureaucratic nation, the role of religion is taken over by the political economy as Weber says, so when a regime excludes people based on race and religion, and when immigrants are stopped from entering the nation. And how social goods like citizenship become the acquisition of the state, and people based on their ethnicity, race and religion could be excluded and stripped away from their whole idea of self. The complexities of the modernity and postmodernity hovering it, cornering it and people of differences struggling to enmesh themselves in this social network.

It is relevant for everyone who is a student of social science and humanity, who studies human beings and practice social science. Since this book is mostly about living and growing up as a black girl in the Southern part of America, the way it brings out the complexities of inner lives and the outer world both are very insightful. Since memories are not just recollection of the past, they are tools to understand the past and the meaning behind those events which have shaped us. It is also a way to understand one’s self, it is through the recollection of those details, we make sense of ourselves.

Risky Relations: An ethnographic investigation into the experiences of living with genetic disorders from a familial perspective

Risky Relations Family, Kinship and the New Genetics by Katie Featherstone, Aditya Bharadwaj, Angus Clarke, Paul Atkinson, Berg Publishers, 2006; pp.vii+169, £25.19

About the Authors

Katie Featherstone (Research Fellow), Aditya Bhardwaj (Research Associate), and Paul Atkinson (Professor of Sociology and Associate Director of ESRC), belong to the Centre for Social and Economic Aspects of Genomics, in Cardiff University, U.K. Angus Clarke is professor and honorary consultant in Clinical Genetics at the University of Wales, College of Medicine, U.K.

Since the advent of DNA sequencing, IVF, new reproductive technologies, we have entered into an era of biologization, genetization, biosociality, biological citizenship etc., in which all these things like kinship, or belonging of a different kind, and ideas about wellbeing and health are increasingly imagined, experienced and discoursed through biology or what one calls, life itself, the molecules or the DNA base. This somehow will lead to the idea of belonging- to biological determinism. Although biology and eugenics are becoming pervasive, their effects are not that predictable. This has brought a new series of anthropological discourse in kinship studies, which has been discussed in length by Feminists and later anthropologists in the 21st century. The development of CRISPR has brought a revolution in the genetics and the medicinal anthropology, inspiring several scholars to come up with the literature on kinship and genetics. Risky Relations Family, Kinship and the New Genetics by Kati Featherstone, Aditya Bharadwaj, Angus Clarke, Paul Atkinson, is a welcome addition to this pool of literature. Passionately written and coherent and rigorous in its exposition, this book provides an excellent work on how new genetic technologies impact the social relations, self-identity and how do families make sense of those information around genetically transmitted disease, and how do they disclose and share these inheritance and how medical professionals and other stakeholders respond to the proband and their families. It skillfully highlights the way families perceive the risks and the way they impact their relations and kinship. The sheer empirical evidence that the authors put together with several case studies of families in South Wales in the UK and the wonderful insights that they provide with ethnographic presentations, emphasizing on the ethical, medical and social debates makes this must-read for students of New Kinship and social anthropology.

The book consists of seven chapters but thematically speaking, one can think of the book as consisting of three broad sections. The initial two chapters provide the theoretical context of kinship and recent developments in biomedical science. The next three chapters examine the beliefs on inheritance, and mutual surveillance among family members and how are these knowledge and information shared and distributed within the families. In last two chapters, authors analyze the linkage between the cultural categories practices of inheritance, practical kinship and everyday ethics through an extended case study of one family and conclude it with a detailed summary of the whole thesis of the book.

Intellectual account and Sites of Kinship and Genetics

At the heart of the book are a series of ideas that were developed by Carsten, Atkinson, Housley, Rosaldo and others at the beginning of the 21st century. Unlike many of the discourses on genetics and kinship which focus on the generalization of the impact of diagnosis of the genetic diseases on family and kinship relations, this book deals with the complexities of those experiences from the perspective of family, not limiting itself to the proband i.e. the individual who has been diagnosed with the genetic disease. On this journey, they first take us to the flashback of late 19th century anthropological studies, then to the late 20th-century decline in the studies and back to the 21st century with a radical shift in the whole kinship studies through the advent of CRISPR.

In early 19th century when biology used to be the part of the extensive discourse on the anthropological investigation, where blood was more than the substance, with the introduction of DNA sequencing, the biology has turned malleable, and become more cultural and has disturbed the whole idea of the biological determinism. Although Family has been the key domain for thinking about the natural cultural congruity, the appearance of a child, her traits and attributes are inherited heritage explicable to the certain sets of parentage. Whether it’s Aristotle, who says that in nature like produces like, or Herzfeld who comments that the idea that physical resemblance (the semiotic property of iconicity) reveals the presence of common blood predated the popularization of DNA-based metaphors and is likely to have facilitated that process. Nevertheless, the studies of family and Kinship have been reinvigorated in recent years due to the genetics, which authors have coherently introduced us as a theoretical base on which they build the sites of kinship and genetics.

Interestingly, the interaction between the kinship studies and studies of genetics is two way, both impact each other on diverse lines, especially in the context of the cosmopolitan network of ethnic and cultural differences and how these diverse arrangements impact the study of everyday genetics. The authors argue that the kinship has been medicalized through geneticization and how it has changed the way families perceive their kinship. Notwithstanding, which brings us to the concept of the risks associated with the genetic disorder which they have talked in detail. Borrowing from the Kant to Ewald, to Foucault, they conceptualized the meaning of risk which they have further explained in later chapters when they talk about mutual surveillance and encountering risks.

Based on these, they account to us the sites of kinship and genetics, their methodology, i.e. they have conducted their research by observation of the work of a medical genetics clinic, home visits by professional practitioners and interviewing members of families who were followed up after their clinic consultations. Through such methods, they have tried to build a point of convergence between the everyday experience and medical work and the research activities of the social scientists.

Complexities of Risks: Constructing Kinship through Expert Knowledge of Clinical staffs and lay knowledge of Family beliefs

What do we inherit, how and why? What does it mean to accept, love and belong, what shapes our selfhood? These are the questions which actually gives meaning to the frail identities of our family and kinship. In this book, the author looks into these questions through the lens of the medical staffs through drawing pedigrees, conducting genetic tests and from the stories of the beliefs of the individuals (probands) and their families which they termed as lay beliefs. According to the authors, the knowledge formed from the lay beliefs is, “dialectically produced as a consequence of a sustained engagement with the clinical domain where biomedical ideas of relatedness and inheritance penetrate other (non-biomedical) models of relatedness.” And studying these demands an understanding of inheritance, the routes of transmission, the blood, the substance, where the whole idea of blood demands a cross-cultural resonance where it varies and has a certain similarity across the globe. In India, while the blood is associated with purity and pollution, in South Wales, they talk of bad blood and good blood in terms of the diseases associated with the blood which often lead to the blame, mutual surveillance, and a range of practical and ethical issues. These are mainly related to the disclosure of the information to the kindred group and risks associated with it, where risks could be physical and emotional both. It could also be the risks associated with future, the fate of the upcoming generations, the extent to which they impact and finding ways to lessen and avoid it through changes in lifestyle etc.

The book doesn’t limit to the mutual surveillance, it discusses at great length the whole concept of the surveillance and self-surveillance. The authors describe the lay beliefs of inheritance and how the specific genetic conditions lead to the surveillance of one’s self and other family members. And how family members seek for the patterns within their kinship (past, contemporary and future generations) and identifying the certain members as the carriers of the condition, around which blame, diverse narratives are underplayed and how families become sites of mutual surveillance.

Practical Ethics: a Case study of a family affected by the degenerative condition

While all of the above mention concepts are important, the authors describe us with a case study incorporating all the concepts we have discussed before. They argue how surveillance is linked to beliefs about who is at risk of developing or transmitting a condition and how it can affect decisions about the disclosure of the information about who and when. Followed by the case study of the Veronica, and others with a mitochondrial disorder, they explain the intricacies involving the complex issues faced by the individuals at risk drawing upon the practical ethics and practical psychology and practical kinship. It is not always the straight affair, there are so many essentials involved like the one who is at risk of developing the genetic disease, the reasons for her to develop that disease, and whom to disclose that genetic information, and how to disclose, when and what and which ways. But what was really interesting the way they took one extended kindred and tried to make an ethnographical account of their everyday beliefs about inheritance, their process of surveillance and their appropriate approaches to disclosure which they called practical and ethical approaches.

The book concludes with the reflection on the clinical practice, and how the new biomedical knowledge is transforming the ordinary social actors and their social actions, how they understand themselves and their bodies, their potential risks and their relationships. In this, the author argues about the way the genetics influence the other aspects of our everyday lives (the politics, class, region, nation, and race) through the notions of pedigree and inheritance. Also, how it impacts the social policies, but here, they did not discuss in detail, how the genetics shape the political identity of the individual, how the technologies around kinship, impacts the discourse about race? How much is the linearity and how much is the cross-cultural inclusion of the kinship studies through the medical anthropology. These are few of the unanswered questions which authors could have looked into much detail. Since they have focused on only specific aspects which they have reiterated also for more than once, however, the inclusion of the ambivalence of race, caste, class, and makings sense of political identity could have brought a very interesting argument and diversity to the whole thesis.

I liked the way the book has been structured, the theoretical introduction to set the ground for the empirical investigation and then bringing the methodologies and ethnographies in account to elaborate the whole picture of the argument. The best part was the fine and careful details from the ethnographic account. It was enough to substantiate the whole argument and theorize and comprehend the outcomes of those empirical inquiries. I also liked the way they have balanced the approach, it was not very theoretical, nor it was very empirical and they have included sociological perspective and medical genetics perspective in a balanced way. They have also reiterated the emphasis on their methods to avoid the misunderstanding of biological determinism. They keep on reminding us throughout the book, that the biology is social and cultural and vary cross-culturally. No doubt, I have enjoyed reading the book and it would be a good inclusion in the subsets of medical anthropological studies and also for the students like me who are interested in genetics to understand the nature-culture aspects. Since they accept the cross-cultural variations but they didn’t bring any comparative study from the different culture, it would have been very useful if they had brought out the comparative perspective. Because for a student like me, who have been taught to understand kinship studies in comparative perspective, and which has been emphasized by Srinivas also, it would have provided me with a broad understanding on writing and doing ethnographic investigation through the diverse lens.

Bring me some roads

Bring me some roads

I don’t seek permanence,

I don’t want a home.

​​Can we be the traveller?

​Folks! Bring me some roads.

​I know I am crazy and old.

​​The greyness of my hair folds,

the ages of wisdom rolls.

​Folks! bring me some roads.

The warmth hinges the juggling scars,

​of Youth, the Beauty and,

the gossips from the letters sour.

Weary of Percy, Chesterton and Shakespeare,

​Dickinson inspires the hope far,

The loneliness cheers, the Plath hovers,

​Wishing not.

Not for love and a good marriage,

Not the Austenian home.

​Can we be the odd inspirations?

The Angelou and The Morrison,

Songs of the Phenomenal Women.

Folks! ​Bring me some roads.

I know I am crazy and old.

The greyness of my hair folds,

​the ages of wisdom rolls.

I don’t seek permanence,

I don’t want a home.

Can we be the traveller?

Folks! Bring me some Roads.

Introduce Yourself (Example Post)

This is an example post, originally published as part of Blogging University. Enroll in one of our ten programs, and start your blog right.

You’re going to publish a post today. Don’t worry about how your blog looks. Don’t worry if you haven’t given it a name yet, or you’re feeling overwhelmed. Just click the “New Post” button, and tell us why you’re here.

Why do this?

  • Because it gives new readers context. What are you about? Why should they read your blog?
  • Because it will help you focus you own ideas about your blog and what you’d like to do with it.

The post can be short or long, a personal intro to your life or a bloggy mission statement, a manifesto for the future or a simple outline of your the types of things you hope to publish.

To help you get started, here are a few questions:

  • Why are you blogging publicly, rather than keeping a personal journal?
  • What topics do you think you’ll write about?
  • Who would you love to connect with via your blog?
  • If you blog successfully throughout the next year, what would you hope to have accomplished?

You’re not locked into any of this; one of the wonderful things about blogs is how they constantly evolve as we learn, grow, and interact with one another — but it’s good to know where and why you started, and articulating your goals may just give you a few other post ideas.

Can’t think how to get started? Just write the first thing that pops into your head. Anne Lamott, author of a book on writing we love, says that you need to give yourself permission to write a “crappy first draft”. Anne makes a great point — just start writing, and worry about editing it later.

When you’re ready to publish, give your post three to five tags that describe your blog’s focus — writing, photography, fiction, parenting, food, cars, movies, sports, whatever. These tags will help others who care about your topics find you in the Reader. Make sure one of the tags is “zerotohero,” so other new bloggers can find you, too.

Create your website at
Get started