Abstract
In The Making of a Modern Temple and a Hindu City, Donnie Moodie explores the interaction between religion and class by observing how the rise of the middle class can impact religious sites and cities through her study of the Kalighat temple worshipping goddess Kali located in the Indian city of Kolkata. Her detailed analysis of what contains modernizing of the temple premises reflects on the perspective of middle class Hindus envisioning a religious space as a cultural site for the global audience. The book discusses themes ranging from the historical foundation of the city and the role of Goddess Kali, the legal history of colonial and post-colonial periods creating dominant role of the Hindu middle class regarding the temple premises, to the impact of the modernizing projects on different classes of Hindus and means of resistance towards the projects.
Moodie begins by arguing the meaning of modernity in the Indian context is inclusive of temples and Hinduism in the public spaces (1). She discusses what characterizes modern Kalighat temple in the eyes of the middle class Hindus; grand architecture, cleanliness and removal of anti-social elements such as beggars and hawkers (21). Basing her analysis on Bourdieu’s concept of “multiple forms of capital—economic, cultural, social and symbolic” (22), she explores access to forms of capital or lack thereof as the reason behind the temple holding different meaning to the middle class Hindus, sevayets (Brahmin priests conducting worshipping rituals), pandas (male Brahmin temple officiates and temple guides), hawkers and beggars present in the temple premises. Her presentation of the narratives of Hindus of all class backgrounds and their take on modernizing the temple premises (4) help reflect on how the everyday life of Hindus is closely associated with the temple. For example, the beggars who are dependent on devotees’ contributions visualize the temple as a means of survival as opposed to the middle classes wanting the temple premises devoid of the ‘unwanted’ elements.
Moodie observes attempts in modernizing Kalighat is not a new affair but began in the nineteenth century by discussing the works of four middle class authors who opposed the view that the city was discovered by a Britisher. It is access to cultural capital that allowed these authors to disagree with the English version of progress and civilization introduced by the colonizers and argue that the city was founded on sacred soil (49) and had prior civilization. Similarly, for this reason, the Hindu reformers and scholars were able to distance themselves from Tantric forms of Kali worshipping involving the practice of animal sacrifice and move towards vedic forms of worshipping (42).
The changes in laws around religious and charitable endowments also allowed middle class Hindus to intervene in Kalighat-related matters in the mid-twentieth century (67). In chapter two, Moodie explains how the temple becoming “public” contributed to the shift in control over Kalighat from the sevayets to the middle class Hindus (69). Furthermore, the judges acting as modernizers with their own perspective towards religion, impacted the livelihood of the sevayets whose incomes were generated from the temple resources which was historically acceptable (75). The details on the lawsuits targeting the sevayets as corrupt and the formation of temple management committees to keep a check on the sevayets highlight the shift in control over temple resources through legal interventions.
Moodie’s reflection on modernizing projects as a way of maintaining the Hindu identity in the third chapter shows the role of NGOs in cleaning the temple premises. These projects carried the vision of middle and upper class Hindus; removal of ‘dirt’ associated with alcohol, beggars, refugees and immigrants along with the practice of animal sacrifice for Kali from the temple premises. While the reader is able to understand conflict over access to public space around Kalighat, Moodie discusses the contradictory role of the state government first siding with the lower class Hindus and then shifting their interest towards foreign investments (111) in order to free Kolkata and Kalighat from the reputation of being dirty driven by political and electoral motivations. This chapter becomes an appropriate segue for chapter four where Moodie reflects on the forms of resistance put forth by the lower class Hindus and those working in the temple, excluded from civil society. Resistance was in the form of unions resisting court orders, reclaiming public spaces around the temple or non-cooperation towards modernizing projects. Lastly, she reflects on the non-resistance by certain devotees who do not see any need for Kalighat to be modern but instead find peace and comfort in the chaos (156).
In her conclusion, Moodie ties up all these themes and gives insights on how the modernization project of Kalighat is exclusivist in nature reflecting on how the goddess and Hinduism are visualized differently by different classes of Hindus. More so, the projects allow readers to reflect on how the ‘modern’ temple creates an outlook of the city as a cultural site for the world which disregards lower class Hindus’ access to the religious sites for devotion or economic support. While Moodie disagrees with Nehru’s vision of industries as temples of Modern India (1), she does show how the middle and upper classes (comprised of the judiciary, NGOs, political parties) redefined the religious space around Kalighat through their modernizing projects. Furthermore, since the principle of secularism in the Indian context requires legislature and judiciary to maintain equidistance from all religions, this book opens a discussion on the role of state and judiciary in religious matters that lead to serving one class over the other. She also clarifies that the Hindutva ideology (vision of having a Hindu nation) present in North India does not have a stronghold in Kolkata because the middle class Hindus want to maintain a multicultural environment (133) alongside BJP (political party supporting the ideology) lacking base in the city.
One minor but significant critique is the book’s inability to provide strong argument in support of those dependent on the temple finances, such as the sevayets. Although it is agreed that there were some corrupt sevayets, Moodie questions if it is correct to call those corrupt who have historically been gaining finances from the temple earnings. Furthermore, the sevayets do not see the temple as public making acquiring its profits a non-issue. However, justifying actions because they have historically been done can be dangerous. There are historical practices that are deemed as discriminatory and are still prevalent which should be questioned, such as the caste system that allows upper caste Hindus domination and oppression towards the lower caste Hindus. Thus, an important remark is that historically practiced actions should be critically examined.