Boundaries of Nativity and Modernity in South Asian Women's Clothing

Shifting Boundaries of "Nativity" and "Modernity" in South Asian Women's Clothes
Author(s): VINAY BAHL

Source: Dialectical Anthropology, Vol. 29, No. 1 (2005), pp. 85-121
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/29790729
Accessed: 15-12-2019 14:02 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Dialectical
Anthropology
This content downloaded from 117.240.50.232 on Sun, 15 Dec 2019 14:02:31 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Dialectical Anthropology (2005) 29:85-121 ? Springer 2005
DOI 10.1007/sl0624-005-4173-z
Shifting Boundaries of "Nativity" and "Modernity" in South Asian

Women's Clothes
VINAY BAHL
Integrated Studies, Pennsylvania College of Technology, Williamsport, PA, USA
(E-mail: vbahl@pct.edu)
Abstract. In the last two decades the postmodernist (POMO) scholars have popularized
the concepts of subjectivity, authenticity, modernity, and nativity in academia while
rejecting the role of larger structural, institutional and historical forces (referred as
meta-narrative) in understanding social and cultural issues. This essay challenges
POMO scholar's approach by focusing on the case of South Asian women's personal
experiences and choices (subjectivity) historically with their every day clothes (everyday
culture), both nationally and trans-nationally. This essay highlights the role of various
local, historical, social, economic, political, colonial, and international forces that
contributed in creating particular dress code and style (social reproduction of customs)
for women of different social groups in South Asia in different historical times. With this
approach it was possible to eliminate the binary concepts of nativity/modernity, pro?
gressive/primitive, developed/undeveloped etc., and treat all societies in the world with
the same yardstick, while at the same time acknowledging the unequal relationship
between the colonizers and colonized. This essay is also an attempt to suggest how
everyday cultural issues can be historically explained in an inclusive manner without
sacrificing the role of human agency, (human creativity, human capabilities, actions,
and subjectivity), the role of imagination (creativity), the role of structural and insti?
tutional forces (meta-narrative), and the role of cultural forces (religion, nationalism,
customs, and others), and cultural experiences in everyday life. At the same time
everyday cultural issues are contextualized historically (time and space?locally and
globally), politically, culturally, and economically as well.
Introduction
It is not easy to define a "modern (as "progressive")" or a "native (as

"backward")" dress because same "native" style of dress can be the
most visible symbol of defiance, as in the case of Iran feminists, African
American Muslim women, as well as of conformity, as in the case of
Afghan women under Taliban rule. In many societies particular style of
attire is used sometimes as a social control mechanism and sometimes as
a ploy to change social norms. Besides the political and social uses of
women's dress, how a person uses her/his dress, and in what context, is
equally important.1 For example, one generally finds that men's formal
dress in most contemporary societies is Westernized. But it is not nec
86 VINAY BAHL
essarily the same for woman's formal dress. What does this mean? Are
men being conformists to Western fashion or, are they being "pro?
gressive" within their own society? Are women being conformists to
"native" culture or resisting the pressure of Western culture by wearing
so-called "traditional" dress? Do women wear "traditional" dress be?
cause of personal choice or, as a consequence of larger global politics
(oil diplomacy and related wars), or simply due to ascribed social gender
role, the prevailing idea of beauty and style, as well as, to hold on to the
so-called native "tradition"?2
For example, some Indian religious documents provide a clear
stipulation for women to wear clothes according to their 'caste/class'
and marital status. One Sanskrit manual, titled The Guide to Religious
Status and Duties of Women, which was written between 600 and 400
BCE and later compiled in 1720-1780,3 stated that married women (and
not widows) of higher status should wear a bodice. Women of the
middle strata should wear no bodice but should cover their breasts with
the loose end of the sari. Women of lower status should leave the breast
uncovered. As Hardgrove maintains, in Kerala the rules of breast cloth
for women were considered as a mark of respect to the upper caste. But
under the influence of Christian missionaries lower caste Nadar women
attempted to wear breast cloth and this led to a major controversy in
Travancore in the first half of the 19th century.4 Restrictions also af?
fected the choices of different women's clothes in different areas in
particular historical time. Similarly, the conversion to Islam was met?
aphorically referred to as "wearing a shirt". For the lower castes the
conversion to Islam marked, in fact, an end to the semi-nakedness
imposed by caste restrictions.5
These examples show that pattern of clothing also signify a variety of
social and political ideas - hierarchy, seclusion and respect, a relation?
ship between dress and social order in terms of power, authority, gen?
der, status, and class.6 Explaining this issue K.N. Pannikar, a South
Asian historian, points out that the body cloth relationship in India as
in other cultures, was contingent upon the "prohibition and com?
mandments" internal to the culture. In support of his argument, he
explains how the interaction of internal and external views were taking
place during the British times. Pannikar's explanations are useful in
understanding the process of interaction between internal and external
views, but it omits many important unresolved issues.
For example, do people choose to follow certain ways of wearing
clothes because they simply accept their gender, caste roles, and resist
any external force to change it? Do people reproduce their daily lives
SHIFTING BOUNDARIES OF NATIVITY AND MODERNITY 87
through their choices of clothes, rituals, and related norms which are
necessary to deal with their lives at that point in time, and do they keep
on adjusting their choices of clothes as the pressures of life situations
grow or diminish, both internally and externally? To what extent are
people "free" to make choices of their life styles and clothes? Simply
highlighting differences and how people use them or impose them for
controlling the social status, is not sufficient. Nobody is free to choose
their individual clothes because such freedom is restricted by: (a) the
economic condition of the society, (b) the colonial/non-colonial/neo
colonial status of the society, the economic purchasing power of people,
(c) control over personal choice, (d) variety of alternative clothing style
available (and availability of technology), (e) the existence of the notion
of conspicuous consumption, (f) the ability to experience satisfaction
from one's choice.
In postcolonial times dress as a symbol of establishing so-called
"authenticity", identity, and freedom is getting more complicated. This
trend is a product of another global historical process - which is also
created through the interactions between societies - that is changing the
organization of work and labor globally leading to the large scale
migration of both labor and capital. Such a large-scale mobility of
people has complicated the meaning of identity, subjectivity, and has
also increased the importance of the role of larger forces in shaping
individual identities and freedom of choices. For example, the daily task
of choosing a dress to fit into a society one has adopted is itself a
tedious, oppressive, and even frightening one for an immigrant Indian
woman. Dress, including hair style - both aspects of the material culture
of every society in every historical time - arouses strong feelings, some
intensely pleasant and others very disagreeable. Unfortunately, they
are also the most important element in making a first impression which
is why it is very frightening.
Moreover, dress gives contradictory messages depending on the
gender, age, nationality, ethnicity, and class of the audience. For
example, Indian males find an Indian female in Western attire as less
accessible than the one in the "Indian" style attire. Whereas Indian
females, wearing Western dress assume that females wearing Indian
dresses must be very conservative in their outlook (also called desi -
home grown-narrow minded - and penjijbhenji - sister - as not "sexy").
Obviously, one cannot win the appreciation of both Indian males and
females at the same time, and this does not include the third problem of
getting accepted in the American (or any other) society. This means
Indian women within America have to perform a juggling act to please
88 VINAY BAHL
three categories of people: Indian males, Indian females - younger

group, older group, in-laws, and peer group - (because Indian - or any
society - women in each age group judge women of other age group
differently) and American society. For an Indian woman to juggle those
conflicting demands is difficult and often exhausting, if she has not
already completely "assimilated" in the adopted society.
The confusion of those Indian women who wear Indian style dress -
meaning various things to various age and regional groups of Indian
women - within the USA is further complicated by the confusion that
prevails within the Indian subcontinent about the definition of an
"authentic" Indian dress. In the last decade or so, within Indian society,
the meaning of so-called "authentic" Indian dress has also drastically
changed. For example, one regional dress called salwar kameez1 has
acquired a national status and most of the regional ethnic clothes - even
when ethnic styles are becoming more fashionable in the designing of
salwar kameez - are abandoned by young Indian girls.8 Interestingly, it
is happening at a time when the focus on local identity, authentic
ethnicity, and so on, has increased. This North Indian dress is consid?
ered as "progressive" and modern, whereas, other regional dresses are
seen as "backward" or "exotic". For instance, Mundu and Vesti, a south
Indian regional dress for young women, has been relegated to a
'backward' status and salwar kameez - North western regional dress -
has become the fashion of the so-called "progressive and modern". But
at the same time salwar kameez is treated as less "progressive" than blue
jeans or western dresses.
While Northern dresses are moved to the status of being "progres?
sive", the Indian educated elite is pushing the concept of indigenism and
"authenticity" through ethnic dresses, which are also different for the
elite within the academic world. Mass media especially TV and popular
cinema have also contributed in important ways to the imaging of the
new "indigenism", an indigenism that takes up elements from diverse
and continually changing folk traditions and presents them as "local",
"authentic" and "specific". The internationalization of markets has
played an important role in this as it demands the formation of new
identities, which has resulted in the reinvention of all the local dresses
according to the new consumerism. Interestingly, new consumerism is
presented in the form of "traditional" or "ethnic" clothes, which are
mass-produced. But this mass production of "traditional" and ethnic
clothes has made "indigenousness" a commonplace. Thus a neo
nationalism is being created for multinationals while the struggle to
look "modern" and "progressive" is also increasing with two opposite
styles: denim jeans, the American style, and salwar kameez, also widely
worn in Islamic countries.
It is interesting to note how in India these dresses have acquired a
status of "progressive" even when they represent opposite values. It
seems that there is a hierarchical "progressive" status between these two
dresses: a woman wearing jeans is considered to be more outgoing than
the one with salwar kameez. But salwar kameez is considered more
"progressive" than sari and other regional Indian dresses. Besides this
hierarchical status of denim jeans and salwar kameez, the basic idea of
keeping Indian women in "traditional" dresses is quite intact. Whereas
in the USA, Indian women face many other pressures which create a
constant need for balancing contradictory demands of workplace, eth?
nic, regional, and national identities. Thus, it seems geographically de?
fined regionalist identities are closely linked to geographically defined
markets, and related values of the present time.9 These ground realities
cannot be ignored while understanding the pressures on the Indian
women (for expressing subjectivity and being creative) in India and
Indian women in the US to select a dress and a mode of fashion. It
means these women's creativities are expressed only in the choice of
dress they prefer to wear from available contemporary designs and
styles based on their class, caste, profession, status, region, and religion.
They can use their creativity only in very minimal ways by using some
accessories, putting a patch here or there or find some different color
combinations.
Competing for the "progressive" label: blue jeans and salwar kameez
The prevailing idea about the image of Western dress as "progressive

and modern" is not new, as this process started a long time ago with
the colonial rule. Today in India, as well as in the US, regional and
"native" dresses are seen as exotic or as costumes,10 meaning "back?
ward" or, fit for theater or museum only. In spite of these hierarchical
images of different dresses most of the Indian women abroad and
within India choose to wear distinctly contemporary Indian "native"
styles, when most of the women in the world have long since adopted
Western styles of clothes. Generally, in India, it is the young Indian
woman who prefers to wear, or can afford to wear Western style skirts,
blue jeans and long boots to establish their more "progressive" image
while distancing from women wearing Indian style clothes. In spite of
a large number of women wearing Western clothes, the Indian people
90 VINAY BAHL
in general do assign "progressive" or "backward" values to these

dresses.
These various categorizations of Indian women's dresses accompa?
nied with their "progressive" or "traditional" status are a product of
another historical process, which bestows such hierarchical status upon
those women "choosing" to wear western or Indian clothes. Thus, the
subjective choice of wearing clothes of certain colors and styles in cre?
ative ways can make one feel acceptable, comfortable, and at the same
time, appear to be moving upward, is not simply an individual
psychological phenomenon - though I do not deny the role of the
psychological conditions of a person in choosing one or another style at
a given one point in time. It is rooted in the historical times these women
learn to choose clothes of particular colors, style, and forms11 according
to how they are placed in society - their roles, their social status, and
their age and location they come from. The location of these women in
society is also, in turn, influenced by the interaction of people with other
cultures and societies, colonial or non-colonial status of the society. For
example, the role of MTV, the role of popular films in India, as well as
the availability of surplus clothes discarded from the export quota of
Western style clothes, also have an important impact in creating a new
condition for changes in women's clothes and the concept of beauty.
The fashion trends are also influenced by tons of used clothes imported
from the West as rags - cast offs from the US - in various Third World
countries including India, that has loosened the standard of decency for
women's clothes rendering western styles more acceptable in their daily
lives.12
At the same time, in spite of these influences, many Indian women
are still choosing to keep their distinct Indian style, especially the ethnic
styles promoted by the elite Indian women. How can we explain these
various contradictory dimensions of subjectivity, creativity, and broader
historical forces within which a large number of Indian women are
wearing particular styles of clothes? It cannot be explained simply as
differences between women's choices; there are various social and his?
torical forces that are creating different pressures for different group of
Indian women based on caste, class, age, region, religion, type of work,
and many other social locations. To understand this question with its
full implications one needs to look further at the long history of the
subcontinent as well, and its interaction with other societies, to find out
how various Indian women's clothes - "traditional" and non-traditional
- evolved over the centuries?
Moreover, what is an Indian traditional dress? This is important to

point out because the way we understand India today is a recently
constructed entity and there was no such concept before the arrival of
the British. Is there any one such traditional dress or was it created
deliberately for other purposes? How are traditions formed and ex?
pressed through different styles of clothes? What forces contribute to
these cultural changes manifesting in women's clothes for different
classes and castes? These questions are also closely connected with the
issues relating to a large number of Indian women who are settled
abroad and are struggling to maintain their distinct styles of clothes -
also referred as "ethnic" clothes. These women, living in the UK and the
US, are not only maintaining their Indian style clothes but are also
helping in the promotion of an "ethnic clothes" industry. At the same
time, many younger women born in these countries are looking for an
"authentic" (imaginary) Indian identity through newly manufactured
"ethnic" styles, also called "ethnic chic". Interestingly, not long ago the
same Indian women living abroad used to resent wearing "traditional"
Indian dresses.13
Changing attire of South Asian women since antiquity
Three simultaneous processes influenced the changes in the Indian

women's clothing throughout the long history of the Indian subconti?
nent. Major cultural diffusion - in clothes as well as in other cultural
fields - took place mostly when Indian society faced an intrusion by
invasion or colonization. At the same time it is important to notice that
the change in clothing was always an adaptation to new styles. This
means that people did not just throw away their earlier styles (customs)
under new circumstances. They tried to make sense of their new cir?
cumstances, new social, political, cultural, and economic needs and then
adapted to those needs as and when they felt it necessary or useful to
their daily existence. In that sense, the changes in clothing was a three
way process in which the human capacity for ingenuity was most
important along with the choices and actions of people in any given
circumstances. But all these actions and choices were mostly made
within two set of circumstances which were created by (1) people to
people interaction within a society for fulfilling daily human needs;
(2) society's interaction with other societies either by trade, or foreign
invasion or colonialism. In other words:
92 vinay bahl
(a) Clothing changed by the changing social needs, changin

institutions and changing customs within the Indian socie
the process of social interaction of people.
(b) Clothes changed under the influence of, and interactio
other societies when it was either forced by invasion,
trade and commerce, or by the initiative of a noble or
king.
(c) Clothes changed by the creativity of individuals: tailors, women
of upper class, village women creating clothing styles and
embroidery for various reasons which include customs, market
forces, keeping class and "caste"14 distinction through clothing
styles, religious influences and entrepreneur ship.
Changes due to people's interaction within the Indian society
In the absence of detailed information about the context in which

clothes were designated for each gender in the Mohenjodaro and
Harappa (app. 3250 b.c.e) societies, I suggest the following. These
highly urban societies developed over a long period of time in the
process of people interacting with one another while fulfilling their basic
human needs including their survival and social reproduction. It is in
this process of social interaction within their own societies as well as
their interaction with other societies, which were flourishing during the
same time period in the middle east Asia and North Africa, that they
created various social institutions and customs (and craft of making
clothes) including the custom of wearing specific types of clothes for
each gender. Information derived from various artifacts from Harappa
and Mohenjodaro shows that women during this time wore close fitting
sari above the knee, and the width of the front portion of this sari was
much less than that of the back portion.15 It was tied to the waist with a
girdle. It also seems that sewn clothes were in vogue though some his?
torians claim that sewn clothes came to India with Muslim rulers only.16
Extinction of these two earlier societies seems to be so complete that
they had no interaction with the Aryans who migrated to the same area
later on and lived an agrarian life for a long time. Aryans learned to
fulfill their daily human needs by interacting with local people and
finding ways to survive in their new surroundings. In this process of
interaction they imbibed from local cultures as well as created their own
new social institutions and social customs, rituals, and taboos according
to their daily needs of that time. Over a period of time, Aryans using
their creativity while interacting with nature and other people were able
to improve techniques of agricultural production, which in turn created
large agricultural surplus (about 3000 B.C.E.). This large surplus wealth
created conditions for the formation of new social differentiation within
the Aryan society. These social differentiations were also reflected in
different people's clothing styles.
Pandey's study suggests that women of the upper strata wore three
garments visa (garment), adivasa (over garment), and nivi (a piece of
cloth tucked round the waist like dhoti), and it was also worn by men.
Pratidhi a garment covered the breasts made of one or two strips of
cloth worn by brides at the time of marriage. The author claims that
during Buddhist times (600 B.C.E.) upper class women wore silk in
appropriate seasons as saris (lion cloth) and sheets. But heavy clothes
were worn in winter.17
Between 6th century B.C.E. to the third century B.C.E. cloth
industry was highly developed in India due to the growth of commerce
and subsequent growth of large towns. But the growth of commerce
also led to further social divisions of society based on "class/caste". The
social groups that controlled the social and economic resources felt the
need to protect their authority over labor and labor supply which led to
the rigidity of "class/caste" division. Probably that was also the reason
that during this time period garments of different kinds were prescribed
to be worn by different sections of society. Female household wore a
kanchuka (tunic) and a sari. The dhotis were worn in different styles and
individual creativity was reflected in various forms of sari draping
around the body. In this period, not surprisingly, shoes and sandals
formed an important part of dress. It continued in the Maurya period
(325-232 B.C.E.) and did not change much under foreign rulers
Satvahan and Sungas (184-105 B.C.E.).18 After the Mauryan rule, the
central authority declined and urban centers started decaying leading to
the formation of a closed economy and the rise of self-sufficient regional
production units.
Later during 335-530 A.C.E. (Gupta Period) Indian society was
becoming prosperous leading to the creation of many regional cultural
units, distinct languages, and literature, while at the same time, it
witnessed the emergence of a "feudal" structure in labor relations. This
formation of a "feudal" structure made jati system (also known as
"caste system") further rigid which is why the "class/caste" distinction
in clothes is clearer in the Gupta period. More information about dress
and ornaments is also available for this time period.19 It seems lower
94 VINAY BAHL
class people wore only one garment: the Kanchuka (resembling modern
maxi) worn by women mostly came down to the feet. Kurpasaka, came
from Central Asia, was worn by both men and women. This was
brought to India by Uzgar Turks and Hunas who had settled in Chinese
Turkistan beforehand.20 Three kinds of trousers were worn: svasthana, a
pair of trousers sticking to the calves with a narrow circumferences of
the lower opening, Pinga was a loose pair of trousers like the modern
salwar and covered the legs up to the calves, and Satula also called
ardhoruka (similar to modern underwear). It can be regarded as the
Indianised form of svasthana or pinga, but it covered the legs only up to
the knees and not up to the heels.21
During this time the images of goddesses in the temple showed no
garment for the upper part of their bodies. Nuns were not permitted to
wear sari either in front or behind like housewives. They were also not
allowed to wear a girdle. Other women wore upper and lower garments
and sometimes a tunic. The upper garment was generally wound round
the left arm.22 Upper class women also wore a stitched garment
kanchuka that was loose and long compared with a kirpasaka. These
women also wore many types of tunics of different lengths.23 Women
did not generally wear upper garments. The sari was worn as a sarong
or a dhoti with one end protruding from at the rear, as it is worn by
some males in 20th century India. The sari was worn in a manner that
the navel and the three wrinkles of skin above the navel which are
regarded as a mark of beauty might not be covered, and it did not cover
the heels and the anklets. The petticoat with a wide circumference which
covered only the upper half of the thigh was called chandaraka?4
Changes due to people's interaction with other societies
With the coming of foreign rulers, Indian people adapted to the new
economic and political conditions and made some important changes in
their clothing while keeping some earlier features intact. Under the new
ruling class India increased its import of fabric from China, Bahlika,
Pari Sindhu, as well as the increased use of tunic and coats. The
majority of women covered their head with head-dress - using many
different style of tying - during this time. The lower garment of women
was the sari, and like the male garment, covered the legs only up to the
knee while the front part of the body was covered with the pleats of sari.
The upper part was kept naked. But during the period of the ruling
dynasties Sungas, Satvahanas, and Sakas, (184 B.C.E.-225 A.C.E.) a
major change in the dress was in the designs of caps. In the south of
India the dress was similar as in the north, except that upper class
women wore turbans. It seems under the rule of Sakas women began to
wear tunics as well, and more sewn clothes came into use, especially by
charioteers, soldiers, and by foreigners.26 During this time, with greater
division of labor and specialization of work and craft in society, the
class distinction in dress also started becoming more defined. For
example, during the Kushana period (25 A.C.E.-150 A.C.E.), muslin
was made and exported to Rome while Chinese silk and Indian varieties
in silk were worn by the rich. But monk women or forest women wore
clothes made of hemp. Kushanas who came from the North-West
borders of India influenced mainly the culture of upper strata. By this
time shoes were not considered impure. Women of the upper class also
changed the style of wearing dhoti by placing one end of the sari on the
shoulder in the opposite direction, thus distinguishing their style from
the one worn by a common woman. They also started wearing different
sleeves and lengths of tunics with varied colors. The class division of
color worn by different women was also becoming clear at this time.
Rich women wore red, the cowherd generally wore blue, and women
also paid due attention to matching colors. Rich women wore silken
clothes for the events pertaining to entertainment or amusement.27
Pandey, a South Asian scholar, suggests that the foreign influence of
Kushan period on dress was Indianised by the Gupta period. Similarly,
Indians adopted from Saka, Iranian, and Chinese these caps, coats, and
trousers. Kushanas came from a cold region and their garments were
thick and heavy. But the clothes in the Gupta period were getting
lighter. Women incorporated the blouse in their attire as earlier they did
not use any upper garment.28 But other clothes remained the same. For
example; dhoti, sari, chadar, and pugri were worn entirely by draping
and tucking, (tucking was done in an amazing number of ways showing
the abundance of creative ideas) and their manufacture required neither
tailoring nor stitching.29
Under the Muslim rule (977-1526 A.C.E.) the state started inter?
vening in all aspects of people's lives and broke the village isolation. A
new market mechanism was developed to transfer wealth from villages to
the state. This new process increased the social stratification leading to
the pauperisation of lower class people. This new economy created new
players in the village economy: money changers, usurers, traders, and
gave more power to zamindar (landlords). The "caste system" started
corroding. The ruling class and members of the royal families all owned
large orchards, plantations, or cash crop and karkhanas (factories). It is
96 VINAY BAHL
in this context that a variety of sewn clothes started emerging with

elaborate embellishments for the ruling class and royalties.30
Abdul Halim Sharar has provided some information in this regard.31
He suggests that dress started to make advances when the Abbaside
court of Bengal adopted Sassanide culture and evolved trousers, tunic
cloaks, and well fashioned turbans for the elite Arabs. Later it was
adopted by Muslims everywhere. Women in general used to wear a
garment to cover the upper portion that was called ungia in the North,
but in the South it was known as choli. Later they became differentiated:
in the choli of the south a wide band of cloth was passed from the back
to the front and knotted between the breasts so that while covered,
breasts were scarcely prominent. The ungia of the North had two
receptacles fitting the breasts, which were sewn together with a hem of
two or three inches and fastened at the back. It was attached to two
half-length sleeves and the garment was put on by passing the arms
through the sleeves. Unlike choli, the ungia gave prominence to the
breasts, which seems a more recent development.
Muslims introduced pyjamas, and kurtas. Muslim women wore wide,
loose Persian pyjamas, which were gathered and fastened round the
ankles. Later, the hems became narrow and the legs tight at
the extremities, but the body remained loose. Gradually, it became the
fashion to wear them so tight that the extremities had to be sewn round
the legs after the pyjamas had been put on and unstitched before they
could be taken off. The early dress of the Muslim ladies in Lucknow was
pyjamas which were very tight at the hems, tight fitting ungia over the
breasts with half sleeves and a kurta covering the lower front and the
back. The kurta had no sleeves, did not cover the breasts, and was cut
low in front below the ungia. The front and back were kept in place by
two long straps hanging from the shoulders. Over this was a duppata, a
light mantle three yards long, which was at first draped over the head
but later only hung across the shoulders.
The Indian climate compelled people over time to render all these
garments lighter and shorter. Ungias of fine silk and mantles of crepe
became the fashion for elite women. At the time of Nasir ud Din
Haidar, ghutannas went out of fashion and in their stead women wore
loose, wide pyjamas tied at the waist and attractively draped in front
below the navel in such a manner that the pyjama hems could not be
soiled by touching the ground. Towards the end of the Navabi rule a
shaluka, a short sleeved, tight blouse, was worn. It was first worn over
the ungia in place of kurta and eventually did away with the necessity for
the ungia. But this dress proved inadequate as it was made of a very fine
material and especially since the arms were left bare, it was eventually
replaced by a loose kurta. However, all these garments were superseded
one by one by British style jackets and blouses.32
In Mughal times (1526-1761 A.C.E.) there used to be a dress for each
type of servant separately as well as for indoor and outdoor servants.
Their occupational dress also became their everyday apparel. The
watchman, caretakers, and the messengers all had special and distinctive
clothing and the case was similar for the superintendents, seamstresses,
and water drawers in the women's quarters. The personal servants,
valets and ladies' maids wore the same kind of clothing as their masters
and mistresses because they would wear their employer's cast-off
clothes. The comparatively limited range of stitched clothes available in
pre-medieval India were, however, greatly expanded during the Sultnate
(977-1526 A.C.E.) and Mughal (1526-1761 A.C.E.) periods when
various types of trousers, robes, and tunics gained in popularity.33 The
popularity of these different types of clothes indicate that there must be
a large number of upper class people who had disposable income, they
also had the need to maintain upper class status under the Mughal and
Sultanate regime for achieving material rewards and related status.
In late 17th century, India was one of the greatest producers and
certainly the greatest exporter of cloth in the world.34 The penetration
of European goods during the 19th century and the end of royal
patronage for India's weavers and spinners represented a crisis in eco?
nomic history leading to the destruction of the Indian cloth industry. In
this context, some Muslim women started switching to sari wearing
(unstitched clothes, earlier considered a sign of "backwardness") dis?
carding their old fashions (stitched clothes, earlier considered as a sign
of "progress"). India being a warm country, poor people wore only
sufficient clothing to cover what is essential and leave the rest of their
bodies uncovered. Similarly in the Delhi court light and airy garments
were preferred to thick and heavy clothing. Halim Sherar noted35 that
before the Mutiny of 1857 (an armed resistance of Princely states
against the British administration and its expansion in India), the elite
used to wear many gold embroidered clothes, but after the Mutiny
(when British rule was properly established in India), the taste for dress
of this sort decreased. In face of the dying Indian cloth industry, upper
class people took care of their expensive clothes which were worn for
special occasions in such a way that they could maintain them for
generations while looking new and fresh.36
It is not surprising that by the late 19th century many educated
Hindu families regarded stitched clothes as superior to the comparatively
98 VINAY BAHL
scanty dhoti. While in religious contexts, they saw them as defiling; in

secular contexts they saw them as proof of educational advancement
and sophistication. This is when clothes assumed the status of "pro?
gressive" and "backward", denoting not only class but the idea of
"progress" which accompanied stitching rather than just wrapping -
even though wrapping clothes artistically in different ways itself is an art
and creative form. Stitching clothes entails the skill of cutting and
fabricating a cloth and decorating with embroidery and other embel?
lishments. It also allowed further creation of a more social distinction
between the female body and the male body while sexualizing female
dress and making the female more of a sex object.37 It would be useful
to find out why the objectification of the female body became more
important during this period.
Changes due to people's interaction with colonial forces
During the final years of the Mughal political system, after 1740, the first
English broad-clothes and cotton goods were beginning to be imported
into India. During this time, new regional consumer aristocracies were
establishing themselves notably in Lucknow, Bengal, and Hyderabad.
The elaborate patterns of consumption that emerged in these sub
Mughal courts proved to be an excellent medium through which Euro?
pean clothes could become valued articles.38 Clothes were used as a
political display because English broadcloth was associated with military
prowess and was considered a specialty for being imported in styles and
fabrics.39 Moreover, these styles were associated with tailored garments
that were considered as "progressive" and sophisticated during that
time. Thus, European styles of clothes, which were introduced princi?
pally by European traders, missionaries, and colonial administrators,
gained importance. European dress differed from most forms of Indian
dress in the way it was cut, stitched, and shaped to the contours of body.
Gender differences were also strongly demarcated in European dress,
with women's skirts and dresses giving them a distinctive and exagger?
atedly curvaceous outline in relation to the more linear forms of men's
dress.40
Under the British rule the process of change, and related conflicts
and compromises in the Indian women's dress codes, was very different
than any other time in Indian history. For example, Mughal rulers
actively insisted on the adoption of Mughal styles by all officials in
government employment and forced many Indian elites into Mughal
dress in the public sphere. But the British did not try to force their own
garb upon Indians.41 On the contrary, they actively sought to discour?
age what they called "meaningless imitation". Tarlo, a South Asian
anthropologist, claims that the British sought to reinforce their sepa
rateness from the Indian population by rigorously adhering to British
standards of dress and by encouraging Indians to dress in an "oriental
manner". British tried to control and discourage the Anglicization of
Indian dress and ridiculed what they considered "inappropriate dress?
ing" 42 But British were not very successful in their efforts because
imported machine-woven cloth from abroad was easily available.
Since British rulers were not very successful in stopping Indians from
looking more like "English men", they increased their efforts in con?
trolling the clothing style and code of conduct for the British Civil
Servants. The new social values and codes of conduct were based on the
assumption that the British were "superior beings" and Indians were
"inferiors". Therefore, British civil servant should not wear Indian
clothes in order to justify their "civilizing" presence in India.43 It is
important to note that before the enforcement of new social values of
"superior/inferior", many British travelers adopted Indian clothes and
customs when they mingled with Indians, sometimes marrying Indian
women. As the British consolidated their political dominance in India in
the early 19th century, the wearing of Indian styles among the British
officers became increasingly unacceptable. In the 18th century, England,
as a measure of protection against competition from Indian cottons,
forbade everyone to wear calico in that country. In 1830 legislation was
introduced banning employees of the East India Company from
wearing Indian dress at public functions.44 Those who de-Europeanized
through long residence in India were called white babus.45 Elwin
informed that people have sometimes sarcastically spoken of the spread
of Christianity amongst the heathen as being made a matter of "trou?
sers". Interestingly, conversion to Islam at other times was considered a
matter of "wearing a shirt".
Tarlo suggests that British rulers wanted to "civilize" Indian dress
but did not wish to make it completely "European". British feared too
much integration of the Indian elite when they noticed that Indians were
increasingly looking like "Europeans". In this process of "civilizing"
India the role of the Christian missionaries had been very important.
For example, under the influence of Christian missionaries the lower
"caste" Nadar women attempted to wear breast cloth that led to a
major controversy in Travancore in the first half of the 19th century.
Members of the upper "caste" viewed the attempt of lower "caste"
100 VINAY BAHL
women wearing such breast cloth as an infringement of their status.

Thus, while lower class women under the influence of Christianity tried
to imitate upper "caste" women's breast cloth, upper "caste" women
were adding European accessories to their Indian dress. Upper class
Indian women only added accessories such as; shoes, blouses, petticoats,
and jackets to their existing dress. They retained the distinctive sari but
followed European fashion in fabrics, colors, and designs, thereby
incorporating the latest trends from Europe and giving them a new
Indian form.46 Upper class Indian women's "reluctance" to adopt
"European" styles dress was indicated in a debate that arose in the
1930s concerning what they should wear for playing tennis and earlier in
the 1920s in the context of finding an appropriate Indian women's dress
in order to create a national identity.47 However, by this time upper
"class/caste" Indian men chose to adopt the complete "European" dress
as they found it useful for interacting with British rulers for gaining
favors, getting well paid jobs and going to official parties and be
accepted as "progressive" and modern in their outlook. As I shall point
out later, a similar choice of wearing western dress was made by many
Indian women who later went and worked abroad.
Changes due to people's interaction with the nationalist movement
With the emergence and development of the nationalist movement some

national leaders realized the importance of Indian women's dress.
Joytindra Nath Tagore (the brother of Rabindranath Tagore) was one
of the first Indians to suggest that a redefinition of Indian dress could
bring about a sense of political unity. Thus, what to wear, especially for
upper middle class Indian women, became a problem of national
identity. The matter of national identity also entails the issue of Bengali
middle class women's education and their participation at social func?
tion, at which British and other unrelated males would be present.
Therefore, these issues became matters of intense debate from the 1920s
onwards both among Hindu reformers and conservatives alike. Earlier,
elite Bengali women used to wear a sari, an expensive but semi-trans?
parent muslin cloth wrapped around the body. But when they went out
of the house they covered themselves with a chador (a shawl). While
such a dress code was comfortable and adequate in a segregated and
secluded society, this was not well-suited to modern urban life. Hitherto
only prostitutes and poor laboring women, who wore a scanty sari,
worked outside the home and they had already established a style of
clothing for their work. The issue of clothing middle class Bengali
women thus became important because now they were also participat?
ing in the public life outside their homes. Therefore, the effort was to
create a dress for middle class Bengali women that would distinguish
them from prostitutes and laboring women, at the same time that dress
would not resemble European male attire, while it would help in
maintaining the Indian national unity.48
The solution to this complex issue of national identity through
women's clothes was found by adapting the Victorian dress - high
necked, long sleeve blouse, petticoat, and long chemise intact - and then
disguising it by draping the sari material over it. It means that middle
class women's clothing now needed additional three to four yards more
cloth for the blouse and petticoat which reinforced the class status of
middle class women. Peasant and tribal women could ill afford the extra
fabric as they continued to wear the thick cotton sari shorter in length
and narrower in breadth, as they always had. From this time on the
modest .win-clad middle class women, symbol of "Hindu Indian
national identity", became the everyday face of "tradition" and now
these women could be presented in public. Women got further confir?
mation of their modern sari style from the temples where goddesses
were now wrapped in modern sari style instead of earlier scanty
clothing.49
Thus, through the construction of a national dress for Indian
women, and later promotion of khadi (hand spun cloth), the Indian
upper class men were able to create a "social movement" against the
Westernization of Indian society. Upper class Indian men even allowed
some elite family (including rural elite) women to join Indian politics
(with khadi saris, a national symbol) under the force of nationalist
movement. But a large proportion of the female village population
remained either in the cheaper, finer mill-cloth they had recently
adopted or, in other forms of regional dress.50
Changes due to people's interaction with 'modernization', and global

cultural forces
Soon after India's independence, the Indian politicians once again

changed their position on the issue of clothes. Nehru, the first Prime
Minister, by choosing to wear Sherwani pyjama, tried to create a dis?
tance from dhoti of Hindu peasants as well as from the Western suit.51
Khadi also lost its national image but it remained in use only for
102 VINAY BAHL
important political occasion. Indian women's dress also lost its earlier
political oppositional role. Women's sari now acquired the status of
representing "authentic" Indian clothing and its aesthetic "traditions".
But politicians chose to put India itself on the path of Western model of
industrialization and "modernization".52 This path of "modernization"
soon led to many attitude changes among the urban middle class and
they quickly chose to switch their affiliation back to mill cloth instead of
khadi. Many young Indian women also adopted European styles, such
as skirts, blouses and later trousers and denim jeans. Many women
(mostly city working women) while keeping the "tradition" of sari in?
tact started adopting synthetic fabrics. And many of them also switched
to wearing salwar kameez because of their functional usefulness and
inexpensive upkeep as well as a so-called, "progressive" image.53 The
"modernization" of India helped the development of the film industry
which promoted western images, fashions, and styles through Hindi film
stars.
During the 1960s and 70s, as the US immigrant policies changed
towards opening its borders to Asians, many educated Indian elites
started having a close association with the US and the West where a
social-political movement (the civil rights movement) was already
emerging. Within this context a section of American people also started
appreciating Indian tradition and its cultural heritage. The Beatle,
George Harrison, became a disciple of sitar maestro Ravi Shankar and
helped to create Western interest in Indian sitar. The Indian educated
elite felt stimulated by this newly found pride in the "native" Indian
clothes and heritage which in turn led to the creation of a new Indian
"ethnic chic" (young women who wear "ethnic" style clothes). The
creation of the Indian "ethnic chic" was very timely as Indian elite
women were searching for ways to distinguish themselves from com?
monly worn synthetic clothes. This new "ethnic chic" not only distin?
guished herself from the common person, but she also now became a
"voice" against Western aesthetics, for now personal choice of ethnic
clothes was considered as representing an anti-modern, anti Western
approach to dress. A similar development took place in the field of
"classical" music and in the revival of yoga.54
Along with the influence of western social movements during the
1970s, another process also influenced the tastes/aesthetics in clothes of
Indian educated elite and the public at large at that time. During the
1970s, the import of second hand discarded western clothes (due to the
over consumption of world resources by the western world) shipped as
"rags" started making way into the daily life of many lower class urban
people. At the same time, many rejected manufactured clothes (created

in Indian sweatshops styled for the western world) also became available
to common Indian people in the big cities. The availability of western
style clothes to common person created two situations: people became
more "tolerant" of Indian women wearing skirts and long kaftans in
their daily lives. In order to differentiate themselves from common per?
son wearing discarded (and second hand) western clothes, the Indian
elite and Hindi film stars started to depart from a so-called "progressive"
western image and returned to the village women's dress.55
Thus the elite educated minority redefined its position in clothes and
tastes by adopting ethnic dress and adopting village dress which, for
most of the century, has been associated with a low social sphere.56
Thus for the elite women village dress, worn in a new context or urban
life, was a statement of "high" fashion. But for the real village women,
who were and are wearing their routine village dress, the stigma of
"backward and illiterate" remained intact. Tarlo has pointed out that
this move to the village woman's dress was not based on the same
philosophical principle as Gandhi's return to khadi during colonial rule.
The basic principle of ethnic chic is similar to other commercial ventures
which are based on the extraction of the aesthetic and marketable
elements of peasant and tribal India, and marketing them back as an
"authentic" representation for personal or commercial use. Festival of
India, in Apna Utsav (our festival) and in numerous staging of folk
dances now so popular in India's major cities, are some examples of
such commercialization of village life.
Thus elite Indian women's choice of "ethnic" clothes cannot be
strictly called anti-modern or anti-west. Tarlo has noted that the fashion
shows in India (specifically in Hauz Khas, New Delhi) indicate that the
"ethnic" clothes were to be viewed as designer fashion garments and not
as traditional handicraft or even as genuine peasant clothes. "Ethnic
chic" is, therefore, not only a means of differentiation from other
Indians and from the West, but also a means of identification with an
increasingly cosmopolitan "global elite" who share common tastes.57
The elite Indian women's clothes changed because they were in a
position to make choices and because of their ability to create one image
one day but be able to abandon it the next day, if required. This new
trend offers the potential for transforming "identities" rather than
trying to establish an "identity" definitively. It also goes hand in hand
with individualism, i.e., to express one's self through fashion.58 Diana
Crane has also pointed out a similar trend emerging at the same time in
the West.59 One wonders if the simultaneous emergence of similar
104 VTNAY BAHL
trends in both India and the West are mere coincidence or are they a
manifestation of the global economic forces of the time? By rearranging
elements of village dress, women of the Indian urban elite can express
their individuality and their exclusivity with more choices. But common
village woman cannot have as many choices and opportunities to
change their clothes and style60 even when they are the ones who are
constantly creating various patterns and designs in embroidery work for
"ethnic chic" of urban areas in order to earn their living.
But by the 1980s this exclusivity of "ethnic" dress was minimized
when fashion spread down the social hierarchy with machine made
replicas of "ethnic" clothes readily available for more popular con?
sumption 61 In reaction to the mass production of "ethnic" dresses, elite
women found "art-wear" (a dress is used as a canvas for special
exclusive painting and the wearer of the dress becomes part of the
painting), which is worn only once an outfit and very expensive, to
distinguish themselves from mass produced "ethnic" dresses.62 Inter?
estingly in the US the "art-wear" was created by artistically minded
people whose clothes and jewelry are sold in special galleries. But within
India, other alternative styles also started emerging at that time along
with "art-wear", as more women from lower middle class started joining
the labor force in the expanding large service sector under the forces of
liberalization and globalization. In the new context of the increasing
number of women in the formal labor market the sari was rapidly
becoming unpopular.
Changes due to people's interaction with liberalization

and the changing global and local structure of labor market
But with the liberalization of the Indian market in the 1990s once again
the sari is emerging as an erotic wrap for some upper class, trendy
women;63 the blouse is being discarded (in some cases), and the sari
itself is changing in size, altering its form and being tied in a variety of
new ways. Experimentation with the sari is one of the latest means by
which a woman can be elegant, exclusive, Indian, unconventional, sexy,
and classy looking all at the same time. By 2002 this trend, at least in
upper echelons, has gained strength with another twist; in the work
place it is being taken beyond the uniform of ceremonial hospitality.
The Salters, a multinational corporations dealing in steel, have com?
missioned a Delhi based designer to design silk saris as corporate attire
for their female stalf in India. Even the historical nine yard sari of the
Indian epics is making a come back with multifarious pleats on one side
and the tuck-in on the back, a representation of how opposites com?
plement each other similar to the Chinese Yin Yang symbols. This was
to indicate both the male and female aspects of a person's body as
depicted in Indian philosophy and navel as the source of life and cre?
ativity. After decades of puritanical cover up, the sari is again increas?
ingly being draped with the navel showing. And the ancient male female
symbolism is being re-interpreted in dozens of new sari tying methods.64
Indian designers describe these new saris as the fusion music, because
the upwardly mobile urban women found the ethnic alluring, but felt
that it restricted their mobility at work. Their new need for "lookism"
(a phenomenon about individual statement and choice in their self
presentation) without sacrificing functional mobility for urban women,
created a new sari which is different in length and size, depending on
who wears it. Relative to draping style the New Age sari can be made to
look like a divided skirt, flowing trousers, or even and ankle-length
dress. Thus the sari once again has become a functional, heady mix of
sex appeal, feminine mystery, elegance, individuality and adaptability.
As one designer stated, "Sari is the garment of the past with limitless
possibilities for the future."65
There is a lot of resistance to Western influence as well and the search
once again for 'authentic' (Indian Elite) Indian dress, which is both non
Western and fashionable, is on.66 But Indian women have not aban?
doned native styles on a mass scale; they have successfully adapted
Indian outfits such as salwar kameez (a North Indian regional dress) to
the whims of contemporary fashion.67 Denim jeans are a product from
America and therefore are not considered as having colonial implica?
tions. Thus, it has become more popular in provincial towns and cities
than in cosmopolitan ones. Whereas, in the cosmopolitan areas elite
women are showing their anti-colonial attitude by adopting village
dresses or exclusive "art-wear". So, anti-colonialism has acquired dif?
ferent meaning and expression in clothing in different localities and in
different classes.
The opening of trade barriers in the 1990s encouraged a new wave of
"international spirit", and an increased emphasis on things foreign
including clothes. By 1996 Princess Diana chose to wear salwar kameez
to a charity ball in London which was considered as the arrival of kurta
on the international scene.68 By the year 2003 "kurta" is available in all
fashionable shops in Paris, New York and London as well as low cost
marts. Now the focus is on how India should best make its mark in the
world. At the same time Indian designers are digging into the museums
106 VINAY BAHL
of Mughal times to find more "native" styles for making salwar ka

meez.69 An increasing number of Indian and Pakistani designers are
working to keep some of the old cuts and styles alive. The popularity of
salwar kameez with all the age groups in India at the end of the century
is also due to the availability of various cuts of the outfit that can make
most Indian women with bottle figures look elegant while they go out to
work in the service sector that is expanding in all the regions of India.
With the increased awareness of "lookism" in the era of MTV and
Bollywood (another name for Bombay film industry), it is not surprising
that most of the women who work outside their homes (their number
has been increasing since the 1990s as is the globalization process of
international division of labor) in India are trying to combine "tradi?
tional" dress with flexibility. This situation allows them to appropriate
both Western and native styles at the same time, without going to two
extremes and destabilizing the established norms of "native" Indian
dress. The definition of "native" Indian women's dress has already
changed fundamentally even when some people label these dresses as so
called "authentic" Indian dresses. A recent report (2001) suggests that
most of the Nonresident Indians use Bollywood style and fashions
for their choice of clothes believing them to be "authentic" Indian.
Ironically, Bollywood is increasingly using taller, thinner and more
Caucasian looking girls with blue eyes and fair skin in Western style
clothes.70 But one model's complaint was that companies were looking
for "authentic" Indian looking model with dark circles around the eyes
and darker complexion. One wonders, how to define "authentic" Indian
dress or "authentic" Indian looks and whose definition would prevail
within the fashion industry, and among the masses in India and abroad?
Can we understand these questions by raising the issue of "subjective
choices" only?
Changes due to neo-imperialism, migration and people's interaction with

adopted society: Crisis in subjectivity, identity and authenticity
The search for "authentic" Indian clothes and exclusive fashion does
not stop at the borders of India. In fact, it becomes more intense when
Indian women migrate to the US or to the UK. In the wake of new
international division of labor, and opening of national borders,
increasing numbers of Indian people are settling abroad. In the new
environments of adopted societies Indian women face various types of
pressures to choose their attire. These pressures are from the Indian
"community" to which they belong, as well as from the American or

Western social, cultural and economic forces. Thus, Indian women have
to find their style of clothes within the context of traditions of two
different (in many ways culturally opposite) societies. As mentioned
earlier, within India the concept of "progressive" and "traditional"
dress is daily becoming more confusing. Fashion within the US is tilted
towards masculinity and is a product of people's interaction within their
own internal/external social, political and cultural history. In order to
understand the American pressure on Indian women attire, a brief
history of the evolution of clothing styles within the American society is
in order.
Changing clothing styles within the US society
In the US men's clothing style started changing in the late 18th century
with the advent of the industrial revolution and the emergence of the
middle class. Manliness - as culturally defined - itself came to be
associated with sober dress and since then male dress has remained
largely unchanged even when in the 90s, as it was during the 1960s,
many younger American men started wearing long hair and jewelry
piercing nose, ears and other parts of body. But female dress has
undergone frequent and often dramatic changes. These changes are
reflected in accentuating breasts at one moment, the waist at another
and the legs at another time.
In the mid-19th century, reforming women's dress was a huge issue.
In 1851 Amelia Bloomer advocated women's trousers as comfortable
and practical which imitated Turkish trousers or harem pants. These
pants could not become popular because pants were considered strictly
male attire (sign of power) and there were laws against wearing male
clothing. Women, who dared to wear the new costume (meaning
acquiring power), were arrested and many of them were sent to jail
because women were not supposed to express power. But all that
changed by the end of the 19th century when the safety bicycle was
introduced. And pants for women became more common when women
started working in munitions factories during the first and second world
wars.
The first half of the 20th century (until the 1930s) witnessed th
development of sports and casual wear-largely for the leisured and
elite of Europe and the United States. But in the 1950s casual sp
wear became associated with the young people of all classes. During
108 VINAY BAHL
Second World War, women joined the armed forces which allowed them
to enjoy wearing uniforms, and in many cases live in female commu?
nities. From 1939 fashion in women's dresses had wide, padded
shoulders and pinched-in waists that were comparable with the military
look of the war years. In the United States the uniforms of the armed
forces were designed specifically to appeal to women and to give a smart
appearance; they provided a glamorously modified military look. In the
US and Britain shortages and restrictions dictated that skirts and
clothes in general were skimpy. War time fashions, therefore, combined
hints of pre-war Paris with militarism and austerity to produce a style
that was slightly masculine yet also, at its best, both sexy and elegant.71
After the Second World War, however, the expansion of bohemianism
and its marketing via films and other media, and the development of
working class, rebellious youth styles, contributed to a different view of
dress and adornment. These new alternative styles had nothing to do
with what was considered natural or comfortable. Instead, they ex?
pressed allegiances and social attitudes. In 1969, trousers were seen as a
problem for women. But within two years, many working people were
wearing torn jeans, gym shoes, and bra-less T-shirts. The long hair and
droopy clothes for both sexes were popularized by the hippies and the
emerging "unisex" style of clothing was considered as erotic. The erotic
charge of "unisex" was associated with general social rebellion and the
sexual radicalism of that time; it threatened distinction between gender
differences. It was later in the 1970s that feminism used "unisex" as a
denial of difference and/or sexual commodification.72
But the masculinization of all fashion has continued into the 1980s.
Fashion has promoted a hard tough image of women as much or even
more than for men. For example, miniskirts are worn with thick black
tights and a leather jacket, which are supposed to be the sign of
"freedom" and even "aggression". These new trends have further made
it harder to "look fashionable" because now women have to decide,
which fashion they want to express as it is the era of "lookism". Even
when people claim that in the 1990s "it is hard to look deviant these
days", the same is not true in the case of Indian women's experiences.73
South Asian women's attire in North America in the era

of multiculturalism
For example, Indians living in New Jersey are well aware of the
"dotbuster" gangs (a hate group of white young men who are attacking
Indian women for wearing a red dot on their forehead) who shook the
Indian immigrant community in 1987 with their violent acts con?
demning Indians and specifically targeting Indian women's "native"
dresses. There is a mounting demand for assimilation (in other words,
look like and package like "white" people) in North America. The
problem is not simply a question of switching to the Western style of
dress. On the one hand, Indian women's attire is closely related to the
norms set by the immigrant Indian "community" which is very patri?
archal and expects women to maintain the image of a so-called
"traditional" India. On the other hand, the demands of the work place
and the problem of social acceptance in the North American society
require a Western outfit. The problem for Indian women in America is
exacerbated because the difference between Indian and Western dress is
very wide in hem lines as well as in the definition as to what constitutes
decent attire for married women and for different age groups in different
work environment. Since the ties with the home country are generally
strong, the immigrant Indian women are also under the pressure of
people back home (including parents and in-laws) to maintain Indian
femininity in the US.
Another aspect to this problem is the dichotomy created in the minds
of Indian women living in the US about "traditional" (primitive) verses
"progressive" (Western) dress. It seems that Indian immigrant women
can choose only either one or the other. Some people have chosen to
wear "American" clothing for the workplace and "Indian" clothing at
home, juggling between two (or more) identities everyday, or struggling
with the idea of "to be or not to be", since some do not find it easy to
choose either of these labels.
Today, North American society seems to be promoting conformity
more than differentiation even when American society claims to have
achieved diversity and "multiculturalism". Therefore, blending into the
mainstream melting pot often means renouncing in clearly public ways,
one's subjectivity and culture and as far as possible, in colors (aes?
thetics) and dress as well. To date, the prevailing arguments in support
of "multiculturalism" have been articulated in terms of "identity and
difference". But the discussions based on the issues of "identity" and
"differences among social groups" have further reinforced the differ?
ences among the communities on racial and ethnic lines without
achieving critical multiculturalism.74
Most of the Indian immigrant women do not think and recognize
the "problem" of subjectivity in choosing their dress in the same
way proposed in this essay. The issue discussed here is how Indian
110 VINAY BAHL
immigrant women are coping with contradictory demands made on

them: (a) to maintain Indian tradition of "Indian-ness" through wear?
ing their saris, (b) maintaining regional images of being a South Asian,
(c) maintaining the image of being an "ideal minority"75 (d) work place
demand to look efficient and represent the company by wearing pro?
fessional Western suits, (e) protecting themselves by hiding their
"Indian-ness" from "dot-busters" or such violent racist gangs, (It
should be pointed out that earlier, Indians in America used bindi to
establish their distinct identity from Hispanic people) (f) trying to be
socially accepted in the larger American society.76
These questions, while dealing with the issue of self-image, and social
acceptance, also impinge on the economics of maintaining a large
wardrobe. But most Indian people do not wish to deal with these issues,
while ignoring that it is the Indian women who really bear the burden
of keeping "Indian-ness" alive while juggling with different image de?
mands of workplace and home. Some of these women were and are
successful in keeping their "traditional" saris even at the work place.
But most of them have given in to the demands of the market for
earning a livelihood and becoming socially accepted. Most of the
Indian women do not even question these pressures and in fact accept
them as necessary tools for survival. Some women feel that wearing
Western dress is a "liberating" experience because they can wear male
attire and also wear skirts which are easily available in American malls.
Saris for that matter are cumbersome and getting blouses stitched is
very difficult. Under these circumstances Western dress is seen as a
welcome change.77
But many Indian women do not feel that wearing "America" dress is
liberating, and most of the women immediately change into "Indian"
dress as soon they reach their homes, "becoming my own self again."
(This may be similar to what everyone does when people relax at home
but the difference is in completely changing one cultural identity for
another from simply wearing workplace clothes and relaxed clothes).
The constant need for finding the latest fashion in Indian dress styles
does not diminish even when these women change into Western clothes.
In the process, Indian women in the US accumulate Western garments
for summer and winter for the work place, for daily use, for parties, for
attending marriages. Then they update these dresses with latest fashions
from India both in forms of saris and salwar kameez. This accumulation
of a variety of clothes needs constant updating, which costs more
money, energy, and time as well as frustration. For in spite of having so
many dresses of all varieties, whenever these women return to India they
look "backward" in comparison to the fashion prevailing in India at

that time. It seems it is not possible to be casual in the US unless one is a
student, or works at home, or is self-employed.
South Asian (American) womens' aesthetic experiences in clothing
An Indian woman has to struggle to understand the dress code of

Western styles which has its own history and meaning that is not nec?
essarily in accordance with her tastes or degree of comfort. Moreover,
the choices in style and colors offered in the US are not necessarily
"pleasant" to Indian sensibilities or within everybody's reach. How can
anyone perform any task efficiently if one does not feel comfortable with
one's appearances? The problem is not only to wear Western dress but
clothing should be of recent fashion as well, and this requires extra
expenditure. It means looking constantly for sales. Indian women, it
seems, are asked to set aside Indian regimentation and adopt American
regimentation without supposedly losing their "Indian-ness", and their
"subjectivity".
As was pointed out earlier, dresses in the US have evolved in the
course of their own social, political, cultural and economic history,
including the sexual revolution. This means that the meanings given to
different part of the female body are different in the US than in Indian
society. Dress is a non-verbal language, and most of the Indian women
cannot completely turn on to this new language (as it is with acquiring
any foreign language) and feel comfortable with it. Indian women have
to move between two non-verbal languages poles apart in their symbolic
meaning. The biggest handicap in such non-verbal language is that the
participant and the observer cannot clarify the specific meaning being
given to a symbol in their minds. For example, if one wears a sari during
a job interview it would be perceived by the interviewer in the US that
the person is making a statement of rigid ethnicity. Nothing can be done
by the woman wearing a sari to change that perception except by
wearing a Western suit, which would then be perceived as a sign of
flexibility. This situation seems to leave no choice to the Indian women
in the US in expressing her cultural preferences.78
A woman brought up in India, which is, of course, rapidly adopting
many American fashions, is still bound by a large number of dress
codes designating feminine identity. It cannot be a smooth transition
for the average Indian woman who migrates to the US and also works
outside the home to change from one socio-cultural context to the
112 VINAY BAHL
other. Dress is tightly associated with the ideas of self identity and self
presentation. How can Indian immigrant women in the US balance the
demands of dress codes without going through a basic transformation
of their own identity or becoming a victim of racism. Or, perhaps they
become more ambiguous in regard to their identities. The pressure of a
daily eight hour identity change somehow is perceived as non-prob?
lematic, as if our sense of identity or cultural affiliation or "subjectiv?
ity" takes leave of us for eight hours and comes back intact when we
reach home.
It may be pointed out that there is nothing exceptional with this
balancing act because immigrant people have to survive and they try to
make the best of any situation. But in the context of "multiculturalism"
and the opposing demand to assimilate, the struggle over "native"
dresses becomes important. Most Christian countries have adopted
Western dresses both for working men and women. Indian male dress
was westernized a long time ago and men did not go through the same
process of adopting the Western dress codes as Indian women have had
to do. In that sense, it remains mainly an Indian (both Hindu and
Muslim) women's problem.
Labeling ethnic and exotic attire (as "not progressive")
Indian women are told, and they believe that Western dress is "pro?
gressive"; therefore, changing from Indian attire to Western attire is
acceptable. Ethnic garments are seen as exotic, des-functional, good for
theaters and museums, marriage parties or fancy dress programs only.
Thus the living culture of India slowly discards its culture and assimi?
lates the dominant white culture to get Americanized.79 But this process
does not change the racial attitude of American society towards Indian
immigrants. African-Americans were systematically stripped of their
cultural memory and today they are Americanized. But they are con?
stantly trying to reassert their identities by wearing African dresses, or
other African symbols and artifacts and also searching for African-ness
within the "white" culture in the areas of language, food, music, fash?
ion, etc. But nothing makes them feel better than the "white" dominant
culture.
Indians who are labeled as a "model minority" refuse to accept that
Western culture is largely based on racism and that nothing changes
their subordinate status in this country. They easily fall into the trap
that if they work hard they will be amply rewarded. Moreover, the
recent Indian immigrants are not all professionals, as skilled, as edu?

cated as the Indian people who were allowed to enter the US in the 60s
and 70s. Most of these people, both males and females, have to work
harder to make ends meet. With the restructuring of the North Amer?
ican economy it has become difficult to find jobs in the US. In these
contexts, when the resources are diminishing, Indians have to compete
with other racial groups to obtain jobs. It will not be long before an
increasing number of Indians will find it easier to shed their "Indian
ness" to fit into the market and hence be more socially acceptable. It is
easier to shed a garment if it means avoiding poverty and marginali
zation. Therefore, a major change would be in the outfit of the Indian
women since this is the most visible sign of standing out.
So far, Indian women who can maintain their saris at the workplace
are very few and some of them are guided by strong nationalist feelings.
For example, one woman said that she wanted to make the point that if
Western women could maintain their style of dress while they lived in
India, why couldn't she maintain her dress in the US.80 Most of the
women I talked to about this subject felt that dress is an individual choice
and they did not complain about social pressures. But they all agreed that
when they were getting ready for the job market they were conscious of
the problem. This fact was further confirmed by the female audience
during the presentation of this paper. They knew that the employers are
generally men who do not feel comfortable interviewing women with
native attires and native names. There is a study called Name Game which
explains that certain names bring better associations than others, which
in turn influence the behavior and attitude of the people towards those
names even if they had had no experience with the actual people. Intu?
iting these consequences and eager to assimilate quickly, many Asians
and Indians adopt American names to make it easier for American
people to address them, rather than giving Americans an opportunity to
learn about their cultures.
Pressure from the Indian patriarchcal "community" within North

America
The Indian "community" in the US insists that the first rule (along with
adopting an American name) for being successful in US society is to
wear business suits for a job interview. Most of the Indian women I
spoke to did not see this as a problem but as a normal demand of their
life situation.81 People forget that changing from one code of dress to
114 VINAY BAHL
another does not come easily, when dress is closely connected with
cultural identity. The problem is complicated if a woman does not have
proper knowledge of the new culture and can become a laughing stock if
she wears the "wrong" clothes. Again, one can find a difference in the
experiences of women, depending upon the type of family they come
from, what work they are involved in, their age group, their generation,
and their solidarity with the Indian "community" in the US, or a
"community" back in India. But the problem remains that the choice is
either to assimilate completely on the terms of the dominant "white"
culture, while facing racism, or just cling to saris and "Indian-ness".
This means being controlled by the conservative patriarchal Indian
"community" and remaining a target for Americans who perceive
Indian women as exotic and "primitive".
In this, the construction of a "national identity" of the "model
minority" assumes dominance. In such a process it is the Indian woman
who becomes a context of conflict and control within the Indian "com?
munity". As noted earlier, most Indian women have not yet recognized
this as a major problem, and they are choosing various mixed methods to
fulfill the demands made on them. The younger Indians born and
brought up in the US seems to be easily and completely Americanized,
and probably assume that all those who are not Americanized must be
"primitive" and conservative. These children feel embarrassed if their
mothers wear Indian dresses. Therefore, for them there is no question of
coping with the balancing act. They somehow do not see any difficulty in
being Americanized in their tastes, dress, and daily life, and meeting the
demands of the Indian "community" to maintain "Indian-ness". But
when they need to decide on their marriage partners many studies show
that these children are confused about their identity. Some of them are
rushing back to India to find their roots demanding Indian style
marriages, marital partners, and Indian attires.82
South Asian women's experiences in Britain
It is important to note that Asian girls who grew up in Britain in the

earlier days of immigration also hated to dress like Indians and felt
embarrassed by the wide Punjabi trousers. So they chose to become
British on the streets and Asian at home. But in the early 1980s all that
changed, at least for the Westernized middle classes in Britain. The
activities of the National Front and attacks on Black people who were
often specifically Asian - thrust Asian youth into action.83 Galvanized
by the murder of Gurdeep Singh Chaggar in South Hall many cam?

paigning groups developed such as, Anti-Racist demonstrations, the
Anti-Nazi League, Rock against Racism. Soon afterwards, local Asian
designers and clothes boutiques was set up which aimed for an East
West synthesis. Their clothing was readily accepted because it was felt
that it did not involve a choice between two different cultures since these
designs were created to minimize the conflicts. At the same time, their
clothes mirrored their confidence in presenting themselves on their own
terms as Westernized Asian women. The cultural experience of the In?
dian people in Britain can give us useful cues in understanding Indian
women's experiences in the United States.84
In the US multiculturalism is promoted as "non-conflictual" (no
conflict between cultures or between dominant and minority culture).
But this approach does not address how conflicts are created within a
cultural group. For example, most of the Indian women living in the US
are pressured to wear uniform masculinized Western attire for the
workplace and to wear sari at home to maintain patriarchal traditions.
Nevertheless, the stresses of changing identities are not acknowledged
by them or by the general public. Indian women believe that they are
free to choose their attire to express their subjectivity while they
are dealing with simultaneous demands with opposite cultural values.
And as one scholar has pointed out "Indian-ness", including wearing
sari, is an important requirement for receiving any help from the
immigrant Indian "community" in the US. In fact, the Westernization
of dress and family values are also seen as part of the increasing
problem of domestic violence within the Indian "community". Thus the
Indian "community" within the US refuses to blame the patriarchal
structure of Indian society, western racism and the new international
division of labor under the force of neo-imperialism and so-called
globalization. Instead it demands that Indian women adhere to "Indian
ness" to resolve family problems.85
The history of the changing forms of South Asian women's clothes
within India and within the US allows us to reassert our main point:
South Asian women's clothes are not part of established "authentic"
Indian culture but are constructed in the process of the historical
development of Indian society. It means that any style of dress is not
inherently either "traditional" or "modern", but is a product of the
historical process within which these labels are assigned. In the context
of such a historical process, many social relations are redefined espe?
cially gender roles. In the immigrant Indian community what Indian
women wear is often the site of unresolved cultural conflict.
116 VINAY BAHL
Notes
1 R. Barnes and J.B Eicher (eds), Dress and Gender, Making and Meaning (Provi?
dence, Rl/Oxford: Berg, 1992): 202-207
2 In my own experiences while growing up in India, I found it always useful to cling
to the traditional ways of wearing clothes, choosing muted colors to avoid male
attention or any other social accusation, and always trying to look unattractive and
invisible. This was specifically important to convince my parents for letting me go on
with my education beyond 10th grade. On similar lines Rubinstein has pointed out
that women in the New York city are trying to elude the street thieves, robbers and
muggers by defensive dressing. "These women no longer carry handbags, as they are
afraid to draw unwanted attention, a young career woman with long blond hair will
tuck every last strand under a beret before leaving home in the morning. She takes
the beret off only when she reaches her office building. Fear of sexual harassment is
often a reason for choosing attire that enables the individual to be "invisible". Some
female graduate students seeking to escape undesired attention wear shabby jeans
and oversized work shirts, and their faces are half covered by unkempt stringy hair."
R. Rubinstein, Dress Codes: Meaning and Messages in American Culture (Boulder,
CO: Westview Press, 1995): 253. Also see U. Eco, "How Culture Conditions the
Colors We See" in M. Blonsky, (ed.), On Signs (Baltimore: John Hopkins University
Press, 1986).
To understand different meaning of clothes in the US culture see also A. Hollander,
Seeing Through Clothes (New York: Viking, 1978). For discussion about veil and Is?
lamic culture see Abu Odeh, Lama "Post Colonial Feminism and the Veil: Thinking
the Differences" Feminist Review (43) (Spring, 1993): 26-37; A.M. Karam "Veiling,
Unveiling and Meaning of 'the Veil" Challenging Static Symbolism" Thamyris:
Mythmaking From Past to Present 3 (2), (1996): 219-236. For the contemporary
trend towards a reversal to puritanical culture in the US see "An Open Letter to
John Ashcroft-Spirit of Justice" by C.B. Valentine. She read this letter as 2002 year's
celebration of the Muse, Cabrillo College. USA.
For discussion on how women's so-called freedom to choose their dress, slogan has
been used as one of the justification (belated) for war in Afghanistan, see M.B Pratt
"Women and Oil" in www. Answer.org. Bystydzienski also pointed out that conser?
vative women who are surrounding Bush administration have captured a popular and
mainstream feminist commitment for purpose of war-making. J. Bystydzienski "Con?
necting Humanist Sociology and Feminism: Recognizing Our Global Humanity and
its Local Diversity" in Humanity and Society 25(2) (2001). For discussion on imperi?
alism and politics of beauty see also K. Peiss "Educating the eye of the beholder
American Cosmetics Abroad" Daedalus (2) (Fall, 2002). Peiss explains how selling
beauty became entangled with a set of ideological positions that supported the larger
political and economic goals of the United States in the World. Freedom, democracy
and modernity were signified by an image of artificially enhanced female beauty,
youth and glamour. She writes that earlier images of beauty were tied to national
identities. But when American firms began to cultivate foreign markets for their
beauty products they made American product as symbolizing opportunity and free?
dom. In Asia and Africa using imported cosmetics means woman's growing distance
from patriarchal families and local traditions. By linking aesthetic ideals and
beauty rituals to the "American way" it has made cold creams and lipstick and skin
lighteners into improbable emblems of women's modernization and independence.

Also see T. Burke, Lifebuoy Men, Lux Women: Commodification, Consumption and
Cleanliness in Modern Zimbabwe (Durham: Duke University Press, 1996); N. Kristof,
"Let Thousand Lipsticks Bloom" The New York Times (3 May, 1992).
3 R.L. Hardgrove, Jr. "The Breast-Cloth Controversy: Caste Consciousness and
Social Change in Southern Travancore" in The Indian Economic and Social History
Review 5(2) (1968): 171-187.
4 K.N. Panikkar, "The 'Great' Shoe Question: Tradition, Legitimacy and Power in
Colonial India" Studies in Histoy (14) 1(1998) n.s.
5 D. Roche, The Culture of Clothing: Dress and Fashion in the 'ancient regime'
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), trans, by Jean Birrell, 1994).
6 P. Storm, Function of Dress Tool of Culture and the Individual (N.J.: Prentice Hall,
2000)
7 Salwar kameez is specific to North-western region of India, called Punjab and it is
also a dress worn by women of Pakistan and other Islamic countries and now by
Afro-Americans in the USA after their conversion to Islam.
8 D. Nandwani and S. Seth, " Salwar: Recolonizing India" in Little India (June,
2001); L. Melwani "What's Hot" in Little India (June, 2001); N. Khan, "Asian
Women's Dress from Burqah to Bloggs: Changing Clothes for Changing Times" in
J. Ash and E. Wilson (eds.), Chic Thrills: A Fashion Reader (Berkeley: California
University Press, 1992).
9 A. Rajadhyaksa, "Beaming Messages to the Nation" The Journal of Arts and
Ideas (19) (1990) 33-52. Capitalist system is one form of creativity which feeds on
other people's creativity. People admire capitalist managers' creativity in finding ways
to appropriate other people's ideas to make more money. But people forget that
manager's creativity is only one side of the story as they could not do anything if la?
bor or an artist had not created something in the first place.
10 It seems the regional dresses and ethnic dresses got the label of "backwardness"
when more women started joining the formal labor market in a bigger way with the
increased pace of modernization. The formal workplace required a functional dress
but within India it also required to wear a functional dress without sacrificing tradi?
tional female image. It is in this context that most of the Indian younger women
adopted salwar kameez that could combine functional dress with the image of Indian
ness. This dress had an added advantage because it could be easily manipulated to fit
with latest western styles or ethnic styles without losing its Indian-ness.
Western feminists and public in general treat Indian dresses as exotic. By doing so
they automatically suggest that only Western female dress is the appropriate dress for
being a feminist. How is this suggestion different from the claims of dominant culture
that considers only western dress (and their way of life and religion) as the only civi?
lized superior form? This idea of superiority of the west has also extended in other
spheres as well. India Today, a popular Indian weekly, reported that one US entre?
preneur did not think he was insulting Indian religious sentiments when he used pic?
tures of Indian gods and goddesses (not of Jesus Christ) on toilet seats to increase his
sale. It was difficult for this entrepreneur to treat a non-western religion with equal
status and sanctity as Christianity.
11 U. Eco, "How Culture Conditions the Colors We See". I remember how hard it
was for me to wear red color for a long time because in India red is associated with
bride's clothing. Whereas in the West, it is the white color that is associated with
118 VINAY BAHL
bride's clothing, but in India white color is associated with widow's clothing. My par?
ents anxious to save us from male attention gave us only white clothes and did not
care that our classmates labeled us as child widows. More recently I find it difficult to
wear the following color combinations: orange and navy blue together as it is a
Halloween color, blue, red and white for US flag and orange color for Hindu Funda?
mentalist. More and more colors are associated with various political or religious insti?
tutions that makes it difficult to appreciate those colors for their own beauty. This is
particularly important as people read meaning into the colors based on their social and
political environment and make judgment. Thus the subjective meaning to color and
appreciation of color is really not a subjective thing. I read one newspaper article long
time back which explained how motor companies prepare consumers to buy a car of
certain color. Motor companies have to plan 10 years ahead and it is crucial that the
color they wish to sell in 10 years time should be already a hot color in the minds of
the consumers. So the question is: how much the taste of a color is really subjective?
12 Since the late 1970s India has been importing Rags (used clothes so-called) from
the USA. One could find piles of them sold in specified areas and even a rickshaw
puller could afford to buy western coats or dress with small amount. Since western
clothes became available to lower strata of society, elite women discarded western
styles and switched to shawls or ethnic style coats to distinguish themselves. I also
read somewhere about Zimbabian poor people using imported rags and also a report
in the New York Times about the piles of discarded American clothes available to
poor Mexican people.
13 A. Bhattacharjee, "The Habit of Ex-nomination: Nation, Women and the Indian
Immigrant Bourgeoisie" Public Culture (5) 1 (1992): 19-44.
14 For a discussion on the concept of "Caste" see my "Terminology, History, and
Debate: 'Class' Formation or 'Caste' Formation" in The Journal of Historical Sociol?
ogy 17(2/3) 2004.
15 I.P. Pandey, Dress and Ornaments in Ancient India (Delhi: Bhartiya Vidya Praka
shan, 1988).
16 A.H. Sharar, Lucknow: The Last Phase of an Oriental Culture (London: Paul Elk
Trans, and edited by E.S. Harcourt and Fakhir Hussain, 1975); M. Chandra,
Costumes and Textiles, Cosmetics and Coiffure in Ancient and Medieval India (Delhi:
Orient Longman, 1973).
17 Pandey, Dress and Ornaments.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid., 9, 118.
20 Ibid., 111.
21 Ibid.
22 Ibid., 114.
23 O.P. Joshi, "Continuity and Change in Hindu Women's Dress" in R. Barnes and
J.B. Eicher (eds.), Dress and Gender (1991) 191, 219.
24 Discussion based on Ibid.
25 Pandey: Dress and Ornaments 14.
26 Ibid., 15.
27 Ibid., 41-90.
28 Ibid.
29 E. Tarlo, Clothing Matters: Dress and Identity in India (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1996) 28.
30 Ibid.
31 Sharar Lucknow: The Last Phase.
32 Ibid.
33 N. Choudhuri, Culture of Vanity Bag (Bombay: Jaico, 1976) 51.
34 C.A. Bailey, "The Origin of Swadeshi (home industry): Cloth and Indian Society,
1700-1930" in Arjun Appadurai (ed.), The Social Life of Things: Commodities in
Cultural Perspective (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).
35 Sherar, Lucknow: The Last Phase, 302.
36 Ibid.
37 Discussion based on Tarlo Clothing Matters.
38 Bailey, The Origin of Swadeshi, 303.
39 Ibid., 305, 315, 317.
40 Tarlo, Clothing Matters, and Choudhuri, Culture of Vanity Bag, xi.
41 Tarlo, 24.
42 Ibid., 25; Cohn "Cloth, Clothes and Colonialism"; Choudhuri, Culture of Vanity
Bag.
43 E.F. Elwin, Indian Jottings: From Ten Years' Experience in and Around Poona City
(London: John Murry) 1907, 43 and Tarlo Clothing Matters.
44 B. Cohn, "Cloth, Clothes and Colonialism: India in the Nineteenth Century"
in A. Weiner and J. Schneider (eds.), Cloth and Human Experience (Washington:
Smithsonian Institute Press, 1989) 310.
45 Baboo means, according to British, superficially cultivated ambitious semi-angli?
cised, educated and effeminate Bengali man, and was often used to refer to those na?
tive clerks who wrote in English.
46 Tarlo: Clothing Matters, 39,46; ILM, 1920, 1930 (Quoted in Tarlo).
47 Ibid., 47; ILM 1933.
48 Discussion Based on Tarlo Clothing Matters, 59.
49 S. Mazumdar, "Women, Culture and Politics: Engendering the Hindu Nation" in
South Asia Bulletin (XII) 2 (Fall, 1992).
50 Tarlo, Clothing Matters, 320.
51 Ibid., 322
52 Ibid., 323
53 Ibid., 328.
54 Ravi Shankar's success in the USA stimulated a new appreciation of classical mu?
sic in India. Within India in the 70s and 80s the craze among the educated elite wo?
men for saris made in Bengal, Maharashtra and other regions with specific regional
patterns depicted in borders and palluv (loose far end of sari that is thrown over the
shoulder), was at its height. Many efforts were made to revive the old regional pat?
terns and weaving methods to create exclusive saris for the elites. It also revived an
interest in khadi cottage industry. Taking advantage of this new phenomenon many
regional state emporiums were opened in major cities of India to boost their trade.
56 Ibid., 325; India Today 1/15/90.
57 Tarlo, Clothing Matters.
58 Ibid., 327.
59 D. Crane, Fashion and Its Social Agenda: Class, Gender and Identity in Clothing
(Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2000).
120 VINAYBAHL
61 Ibid, 328; A. Venkatesh, "Gender Identity in the Indian Context: A Sociocultural

Construction of the Female Consumer" in Janeen Arnold Costa (ed.), Gender Issues
and Consumer Behavior (Sage: Thousand Oaks, 1994); R.W. Belk, "Third World
Consumer Culture" in E. Kumcu and A.F. Firat (eds.), Marketing and Development:
Toward Broader Dimensions (Greenwich CT JAI, 1998).
62 India Today 6/30/89.
63 Ibid., 2/25/02.
64 Ibid.
65 Ibid.
67 L. Malwani 'What is Hot" Little India (June, 2001).
68 Ibid.
69
Ibid.
70
Ibid.
71 Wilson, Adorned in Dreams (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987).
72 E. Wilson, Adorned in Dreams; E. Wilson and Lou Taylor, Through the Looking
Glass (London: BBC Books, 1989); E. Wilson. "Deviant Dress" in Feminist Review 35
(Summer, 1990); E. Wilson, Elizabeth, (ed.), Chic Thrills: A Fashion Reader (Berkeley:
California University Press, 1992); E. Ewing, Women in Uniform (London: Batsford,
1974); C. Evans and M. Thornton, "Fashion, Representation, Femininity" in Feminist
Review 38 (summer, 1991); K. Silverman, "Fragments of a Fashionable Discourse" in
A.C. Herrman and Abigail J. Stewart (eds.), Theorizing Feminism: Parallel Trends in
the Humanities and Social Sciences (Boulder: Westview Press, 1994).
73 Wilson, "Deviant Dress'; H. Kuper, "Costume and Identity" Comparative Studies
in Society and History 15 (1973) 348-367.
74 Ibid.
75 India Today 12/15/87; J. Lessinger, From the Ganges to the Hudson Boston, Allyn
and Bacon, 1995; Haines, W. David and C.A. Mortland, Manifest Destinies: Ameri?
canizing Immigrants and Internationalizing American (Westport: Praeger, 2001).
76 Sufia-Uddin, 1996 " the Oral History project of South Asia in the greater Phila?
delphia areas" sponsored by the Balch Institute for Ethnic Studies, Philadelphia.
77 Bhattacharjee "The Habit of Ex-communication"; S. Hammed "Iranian Exiles and
Sexual Politics: Issues of Gender Relations and Identity" Journal of Refugee Studies
(9) 1(1996) 43-72; J.E. Tucker (ed.), Arab Women, Old Boundaries, New Frontiers
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993); Parker, Andrew, Mary Russo, Doris
Sommer and Patricia Yaeger (eds.), Nationalisms and Sexualities (New York: Routl
edge, 1992).
78 D.T. Goldberg, Multiculturalism: A Critical Reader (Blcakwell: Mass, Oxford,
1994).
79 This is based on my interviews with various Indian women living in different parts
of the USA. I learnt hard way that it was not sufficient to have a Ph.D degree and a
book published for getting a job in the USA. When I consulted some sympathetic
white females about job market they mailed a flyer to my home address suggesting to
get a handout of a business suit from a shelter in Philadelphia. Similarly, some well
established Indian females in the US academia also suggested that in order to be suc?
cessful in the US, I must transform my whole being and be presentable in a non
threatening way that means I must get short hair, learn to have proper make up and
wear a business suit. They dismissed as irrelevant the issue of individual level of
comfortableness in new hair style, make up, and clothing, and the issue of multicul
turalism. It was surprising to me that these women did not see any conflict in acquir?
ing a new identity and learning a new non-verbal language and living with it every
minute and not feeling the pressure and clashes with pre-existing sense of color, styles
and rhythms of life. Also see M. Rucker, D. Taber and A. Harrison, "The Effect of
Clothing Variation on First Impressions of Female Job Applicants: What to Wear
When?" in Social Behaviour and Personality 9(1) 1981: 53-64; J.T. Molloy, Dress for
Success (New York: Warner Books, 1978); J. Schlenker, Impression Management: The
Self Concept, Social Identity and Interpersonal Relations (Monetery: California
Brooks-Cole, 1980).
80 My discussion with Indian women in Philadelphia 1995.
81 I am making this observation based on my own experiences in the USA with
many feminists, and with white 'community' and including Indian women who have
been able to assimilate in the US society without feeling similar pressure due to their
predisposition, class background or, may be due to some other traits which I am not
aware of.
82 One can find similar experiences in Muslim 'communities' as well. See various arti?
cles published in Little India during 1999-2002. See M.P Fisher, "The Indian Ethnic
Identity: The Role of Association in the New York Indian Population" in P. Saran
and E. Eames (eds.), The New Ethnics: Asian Indians in the United States (New York:
Praeger, 1980); N. Kibria, "The Racial Gap: South Asian American Racial Identity
and the Asian American Movement" in L.D Shankar and R. Srikanth (eds.), A Part
Yet Apart: South Asians American (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1998).
C. Lynch, "Nation, Woman and the Indian Immigrant Bourgeoisie: An Alternative
Formulation " in Public Culture 6 (1994) 425-437. It may also be pointed out that
among the younger generation of American Indians some progressive trends are visi?
ble. For the discussion on the emerging progressive groups and their contribution in
changing political thinking among American Indian see R.C. Sethi, "Smells like Rac?
ism: A Plan for Mobilizing Against Anti-Asian Bias" in K.A. San Juan (ed.), the
State of Asian American (Boston: South End Press, 1993).
83 Khan, "Asian Women's Dress from Burqah to Bloggs".
84 Discussion based on Ibid.
85 C. Lynch, "Nation, Woman, and the Indian Immigrant Bourgeoisie: An Alterna?
tive Formulation" in Public Culture 6 (1994): 425^37.
Biographical note
This essay is adapted from V. Bahl, 'What Went Wrong with 'History
from Below': Reinstating Human Agency as Human Creativity' Kolkata:
K.P. Bagchi, (2005). Earlier, a shorter version of this essay titled
"Balancing Two Worlds: Indian Women's Clothes and Identity" was
presented at a South Asian conference on "Balancing Two Worlds," 16
September, 1995, at the Montclair State University, New Jersey. Most
of the Indian women in the audience appreciated my observations but
Indian males objected to them.

Boundaries of Nativity and Modernity in South Asian Women's Clothing

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Boundaries of Nativity and Modernity in South Asian Women's Clothing

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Shifting Boundaries of "Nativity" and "Modernity" in South Asian Women's Clothes

Author(s): VINAY BAHL

Shifting Boundaries of "Nativity" and "Modernity" in South Asian

It is not easy to define a "modern (as "progressive")" or a "native (as

three categories of people: Indian males, Indian females - younger

The prevailing idea about the image of Western dress as "progressive

in general do assign "progressive" or "backward" values to these

Moreover, what is an Indian traditional dress? This is important to

Changing attire of South Asian women since antiquity

Three simultaneous processes influenced the changes in the Indian

(a) Clothing changed by the changing social needs, changin

Changes due to people's interaction within the Indian society

In the absence of detailed information about the context in which

Changes due to people's interaction with other societies

in this context that a variety of sewn clothes started emerging with

scanty dhoti. While in religious contexts, they saw them as defiling; in

Changes due to people's interaction with colonial forces

women wearing such breast cloth as an infringement of their status.

Changes due to people's interaction with the nationalist movement

With the emergence and development of the nationalist movement some

Changes due to people's interaction with 'modernization', and global

Soon after India's independence, the Indian politicians once again

people. At the same time, many rejected manufactured clothes (created

Changes due to people's interaction with liberalization

of Mughal times to find more "native" styles for making salwar ka

Changes due to neo-imperialism, migration and people's interaction with

"community" to which they belong, as well as from the American or

Changing clothing styles within the US society

South Asian women's attire in North America in the era

immigrant women are coping with contradictory demands made on

look "backward" in comparison to the fashion prevailing in India at

South Asian (American) womens' aesthetic experiences in clothing

An Indian woman has to struggle to understand the dress code of

Labeling ethnic and exotic attire (as "not progressive")

recent Indian immigrants are not all professionals, as skilled, as edu?

Pressure from the Indian patriarchcal "community" within North

South Asian women's experiences in Britain

It is important to note that Asian girls who grew up in Britain in the

by the murder of Gurdeep Singh Chaggar in South Hall many cam?

lighteners into improbable emblems of women's modernization and independence.

61 Ibid, 328; A. Venkatesh, "Gender Identity in the Indian Context: A Sociocultural

Вам также может понравиться