M.N. Srinivas’s Concept of Westernization and its Critical Evaluation. M.N. Srinivas, 1916-1999.
M.N. Srinivas’s Concept of Westernisation and Its Critical Evaluation
Lecture Prepared by
Dr Anil Kumar
Assistant Professor of Sociology
Patna Women’s College, Autonomous
Brief Biography of the Author M.N. Srinivas
Mysore Narasimhachar Srinivas (16 November 1916 – 30 November 1999)
born in a Brahmin family in Mysore, Karnataka. He is popularly known as M.N. Srinivas.
He was a pioneering Indian sociologist and anthropologist renowned for his influential theories on caste and social change. Educated in Mysore, Bombay, and Oxford, Srinivas combined rigorous academic training with immersive fieldwork to study Indian society from within.
His most notable contributions include the concepts of Sanskritization—the process by which so-called “lower castes” emulate (imitate) the practices of higher castes, especially the Brahmin, to elevate or rise their social status—and dominant caste, referring to castes with numerical strength, economic resources, and political clout (power) in a given region.
Srinivas emphasised the importance of ethnographic fieldwork, advocating for participant observation to grasp the lived realities of Indian communities.
He held key academic positions at the University of Delhi and, University of Baroda, and founded the Institute of Social and Economic Change in Bangalore.
Meaning of Westernisation
The Concept of Westernisation was introduced by M. N. Srinivas in India. He introduced this term to analyse the socio-cultural change in India over the last 150 years. Or better to say to analyse the socio-cultural change during the British Rule in India, in particular, and the rest of the world in general. For him, Westernisation refers to “the change in technology, institutions, ideology, and values of a non-Western society for a long period.” (1962)
Definition of the term “Westernisation”
M. N. Srinivas defined Westernisation in his book “Social Change in Modern India” (1966: 47) as - “Westernisation” refers to “the changes brought about in Indian society and culture as a result of over 150 years of British rule and the term subsumes change occurring at different levels – technology, institutions, ideology, values.”
M. N. Srinivas has criticised Lerner’s concept of “Modernisation” because it is a value-loaded term. Because, for him, “Modernisation” is normally used in the sense that it is good. Therefore, he prefers to use the term “Westernisation”.
Westernisation is different from Urbanisation
M. N. Srinivas said that - It is necessary “to distinguish conceptually between Westernisation and two other processes usually concomitant (i.e. natural association) with it – (a) Industrialisation, and (b) Urbanisation.” For him, the reason is that Urbanisation is not a simple function of “industrialisation” and there were cities in the Pre-industrial world also.
Main Features of the Process of Westernisation
1. Westernisation is a simple concept compared to the Sanskritisation
2. Some main areas were affected by the Westernisation, like: Technology, Institutions, Ideology, and Values
3. Westernisation is an inclusive and multi-layered concept.
4. Westernisation made a great impact on daily Indian social life. Due to its influence, some Indians abandoned certain traditional values and customs, while others adopted new ones.
5. Involvement of different sections of people who accelerated the process of Westernisation.
(5.A) Among the British: High-Level Army Officers, Bureaucrats, Merchants, Christian Missionaries, etc.
(5.B) Among the Indians: People who served in the house of British Officials, persons who served as domestic servants, persons who converted to Christianity, Western-educated persons with their profession. These exerted (to make use of something):
(A) Western and
(B) Indian confluence on those Indians with whom they had close contact.
6. The form of pace (rate) of Westernisation in India. According to M. N. Srinivas, the rate of Westernisation varied from region to region and from one section of people to another. Example:
1: the region where the British ruled directly or had headquarters was Westernised first, then the others, like Kolkata, etc. Example
2: For M. N. Srinivas, Brahmins adopted English Education and Gadgets faster than others, but they did not adopt the British diet (non-veg), etc.
COMMENT: This is a wrong assumption by M.N. Srinivas that all Brahmins were vegetarians. However, this distinction is only relative, not absolute.
7. According to M. N. Srinivas, “In the political and cultural fields, Westernisation had given birth not only to nationalism but also to Revivalism (=religious fervour/ intense and passionate feeling), Communalism, Casteism … Regionalism …” (Social Change in Modern India, 1966, 55-56)
COMMENT: This is a factually incorrect assumption by M. N. Srinivas, as both caste and casteism existed in India long before British rule.
8. According to M. N. Srinivas, “The term Westernisation, unlike 'Modernisation, ' is ethically neutral. … whereas modernisation is normally used in the sense that it is good.”
COMMENT: In India, some section of people also says that Westernisation is good/ bad in terms of cultural and ideological influence. E.g. Inter-caste Marriage, Gender Equality, Idea of Equality, etc
9. Westernisation may speed up the process of Sanskritization. For M. N. Srinivas, both Sanskritization and Westernisation can go simultaneously. To some extent, Westernisation accelerate the process of Sanskritization. For example, postal, railways, roads, and the press are a result of Westernisation, which further facilitates more organised religious pilgrimages and caste solidarity.
COMMENT: This is contradictory because Caste solidarity is not part of the Sanskritization. No evidence supports that pilgrimage supports Sanskritization, eg. becoming vegetarian from non-veg, imitation of Brahmins, etc. In Indian society, sometimes people worship the gods, goddesses, and deities by offering animal sacrifices
Dimensions of Westernisation
Westernisation is an exogenous source/ force of social change in India. For Yogendra Singh, “Westernisation's emphasis on humanitarianism and rationalism is a part of Westernisation which led to a series of institutional and social reforms in India. Establishment of scientific, technological and educational institutes, rise of nationalism, new political cultural leadership in the country are all by-products of Westernisation.” M. N. Srinivas prefers to use the term Westernisation over Modernisation. And he also prefers to use the prefixes ‘primary’, ‘secondary’ and ‘tertiary’ in the process of Westernisation.
M. N. Srinivas elaborates on the various dimensions of Westernisation. He writes:
“Following the analytical scheme we develop for the study of cultural change in India through the exogenous sources, we shall describe the ramifications of Western impact both on the Little and Great Traditions of India.”
#NOTE: The theory of Little and Great Traditions was proposed by Robert Redfield and was extensively applied in India by Irawati Karve.
Types of Dimensions of Westernisation
For M. N. Srinivas, there are two dimensions of Westernisation:
(1) Primary Westernisation, and
(2) Secondary Westernisation:
Dimensions of Westernization: (1) Primary Westernization
Primary Westernisation refers to the changes in Indian culture and tradition resulting from Western influence.
There are two types of Primary Westernisation:
(i) Sub-Culture, and
(ii) Diffusive Sub-Culture.
Dimensions of Westernization (1) Primary Westernization (i) Sub-Culture
The Hindu tradition, which came into contact with the Western tradition, did not undergo radical and all-inclusive change all of a sudden. From the Renaissance to the Industrial Revolution, the Hindu tradition was in conflict with the Western tradition.
It was opposed at both levels: Little Tradition and Great Tradition. However, a small section of Indian intellectuals and Scholars who adopted some aspects of Western culture and lifestyle were able to support the expansion of Western culture. However, their impact was very little.
(a) The Subculture of the Commercial Middle Class. Some Merchants who come into contact with the Western Traders become Westernised. (Language, Dressing, Way of Operating Business, Eg, Birala, etc.) They adopted the Western business model because they were advanced.
(b) The Subculture of Professional Groups, Middle Class, emerged in India after Western Education during the 19th Century. They had Western Values, Ideology, like individualism, equality, liberty, eternity, democracy, attitude, moral values, outlook, philosophy, etc. Like Gandhi, Nehru, Ambedkar, etc.,
(c) The Subculture of New Literary Tradition, the Western-educated person translated Western literature into the Indian language, which influenced the Indian Literary Tradition. Even in Western countries before the Renaissance, they were mainly producing Religious texts.
(d) The Subculture of Social Reform Westernisation process led to some social reform movements in India. E.g.. Brahma Samaj by Raja Ram Mohan Roy (1772-1833), Santyshodhak Samaj by Jyotiba Phule (1827-1890), Self Respect Movement by Erode Venkatappa Ramasamy Periyar (1879 – 1973), Social Reform by Law led by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (1891-1956). And many more.
Dimensions of Westernization (1) Primary Westernization (ii) Diffusive
According to Yogendra Singh, another aspect of Primary Westernisation refers to the modernisation of the daily lives, customs, and habits of the people in general. This includes: Adoption of New Technology, Dress, Food Habit, Rituals, Vocabulary, and Material Culture.
This diffusion type is virtually different from the subcultural types in two respects.
First: It has its basis merely in imitation of external forms of culture, and as such, there is no scope for assimilation of values.
Second: It has diffusion into a wider area covering both laymen and scholars, villagers, and urbanites.
Dimensions of Westernization: (2) Secondary Westernization or Cultural Modernisation
The western impact was not only on the Little Tradition. On the contrary, it affected the various aspects of the Great Tradition. The Cultural Modernisation refers to the form of Westernisation which occurred at the National Level, that is, at the level of the Great Tradition.
According to Yogendra Singh, some of the institutional developments which have been responsible for the creation of a Great Tradition of Modernisation in India can be mentioned below:
1. The growth of the Universalistic Legal System, Warren Hastings, Lord Cornwallis, Thomas Babington Macaulay.
2. Expansion of Education, Cultural Context, and Organisational Structure of Education
3. Urbanisation and Industrialisation
4. Increased Network of Communication and Modernisation
5. Growth of Nationalism, Politicalization, and Modernisation of Society.
Each of the factors mentioned above had a national character and was not a subcultural or localised process as primary Westernisation.
Preference of the “Lower Caste” People: Sanskritization or Westernisation
At present, the (so-called) lower caste people feel it is easier and more advantageous for them to elevate their social status through “Westernisation” than “Sanskritization”.
Through “Sanskritization”, they could only imitate the (so-called) upper caste people and their lifestyle to claim a higher status in society.
Whereas Westernisation provided a wide opportunity for the (so-called) lower caste people to attain equality on par with the (so-called) upper caste people in important areas such as education, profession, politics, financial matters, etc.
Westernisation helped them to withstand and resist the domination of (so-called) upper castes, especially in the fields of education, government jobs and politics. Hence, there is a greater trend towards Westernisation rather than Sanskritization.
The extent (area covered by something), effectiveness, tempo (the speed of an activity) and the urge towards Sanskritization seem to be diminishing, giving place to the process of Westernisation. In fact, these days people are enjoying the highest status in society on the basis of achievement, not based on rituals, or being vegetarian, or even being a priest.
Westernisation: Some Comments
M. N. Srinivas has pointed out that, “One of the many interesting contradictions of modern Hindu social life is that while the Brahmins are becoming more and more Westernised, the other castes are becoming more and more Sanskritised. In the lower reaches of the hierarchy, castes are taking up customs which the Brahmins are busy discarding.” (Caste in Modern India and Other Essays, pp. 54-55).
This is also true that due to Westernisation, the caste loses its rigidity. And:
1) The concept of Westernisation is useful to understand and analyse the social mobility out of the caste framework.
2) The idea of Westernisation (and Sanskritization) was also supported by social scientists like Bernard S. Cohn and Milton Singer. For them, “while the upper caste was Westernising its style of life and religious beliefs, the lower caste was Sanskritising and assuming more traditional forms of ritual practice and belief.”
COMMENT: Both M. N. Srinivas and others fail to recognise or deliberately do not recognise many movements which was based on secular (free from Caste and Religion) demands for upward social mobility. Even many movements were against the caste hegemony, for example, the Self-Respect Movement led by Periyar.
Westernisation: Comments on Limitations
1. Both Sanskritization and Westernisation analyse the social change in terms of culture, not (social) structure.
2. His analysis is based on the caste system, which is not useful for other societies.
3. Though M. N. Srinivas claimed that the term “Westernisation” is “Ethically Neutral”, it is not really true. He himself has said that it implies “certain value preferences” such as humanitarianism, egalitarianism, secularism, and some degree of rationalism. Therefore, in reference to these values, Westernisation is, in general, good and desirable.
4. Daniel Lerner (American scholar, 1917-1980) has raised a few objections to the use of Westernisation as conceived by M. N. Srinivas:
(i) In a major way, the model which was imitated may not be a Western but a Russian.
(ii) Western elites are not always positive. Non-Western countries were more attracted to communism (From Russia).
(iii) Westernisation in one area or level of behaviour does not result in Westernisation in another related area or level. The two remain discrete. E.g. Wearing a Western dress and having Western Values are two different values.
(iv) The term is vague because, despite having some common features of Westernisation, every Western Country has a significantly different culture from other countries.
#BOOK: Mistaken Modernity: India Between Worlds by Dipankar Gupta.
5. Yogender Singh points out that considering Britain or the British Government for Westernisation is too narrow a view. India was also affected by the non-British values and development. We can not ignore the impact of the USA, Russia, Germany, etc. He states: “it is therefore, more value-loaded than the term modernisation, which we would better substitute.”
6. Daniel Lerner has said that “Westernisation” had only an impact on the upper class; however, “Modernisation today diffuses among a wider population”, touching not only public institutions but also private aspirations.
7. The concept of Westernisation is contradictory. For M. N. Srinivas, Westernisation has good values like rationalism, humanitarianism, equalitarianism, etc., but they too have some social problems like racial prejudice and exploitation.
In conclusion, we can say that the processes of Brahmanization, Sanskritization, and Westernisation are not sufficient to understand the process of social change in India. Therefore, according to Yogender Singh, only the concept of “Modernisation” can provide a satisfactory answer to these questions.
Anil Kumar ~ Student of Life World | Stay Social ~ Stay Connected | Keep Visiting ~ Stay Curious | Study With Anil | StudyWithAnil | #StudyWithAnil | @StudyWithAnil |
0 Comments