Copyright by Kenneth Leland Price 2004
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Copyright by Kenneth Leland Price 2004 The Dissertation Committee for Kenneth Leland Price certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Discourse and Development: Language and Power in a Rural Rajasthani Meeting Committee: James Brow, Supervisor Shama Gamkhar Laura Lein Joel Sherzer Kathleen Stewart Discourse and Development: Language and Power in a Rural Rajasthani Meeting by Kenneth Leland Price, B.A., M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin December 2004 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research represents the fulfillment of a dream I have long held – to be able to sit with an elderly person in a village of rural India and to simply chat with him or her about whatever comes to mind. When I first came as a graduate student to the University of Texas at Austin, I hoped to learn how to ask good questions should I ever have that opportunity. First, I must thank my advisor throughout my journey and project, Dr. James Brow. He stood up for me and stood by me whenever I needed his support. He opened doors for my dreams to wander. He taught me the importance of learning how to ask better questions, and to keep questioning, everything I read, hear, and see. He directed me to the study of development in South Asia. Without Dr. Brow’s guidance, none of this would have been possible. The members of my dissertation committee contributed to my preparation for going “to the field” and my approach to the data after returning. Dr. Joel Sherzer introduced me to possibilities for examining language and culture as a way to begin weaving the study of micro- and macro-processes of communication into a larger, integrated discussion. Dr. Katie Stewart prompted me to carefully place myself within the research, giving new meanings to my understanding of how to be respectful as a researcher and writer of other people’s perspectives. Dr. Laura Lein taught me how to conduct research with “human subjects” and encouraged my hope that for some participants and readers this project may iv eventually suggest useful applications of certain ideas to their efforts in development. I look forward to Dr. Shama Gamkhar’s comments on the project both as an Indian familiar with some of the settings and issues described here and for her expertise in policy development as it relates to the findings here. Seated on the verandah of my friend Mawaram’s home one afternoon in February of 1996, his father came and sat next to me. He asked why I kept coming to his village and home, and I realized in that moment that my dream was becoming reality. In order to speak with Mawaram’s father, I first had to learn Hindi, then a smattering of Mewari. For this, I must thank Drs. Herman Van Olphen and Sagaree Sengupta, who pushed me to learn what it might be like to think in the language of many Indians. For what I could think of in that moment, I must also thank Drs. Robert Hardgrave and Tom Januzzi, who provided me with tools for examining political and economic histories of India and their impact on local lives today. One of my first professors of anthropology, Dr. Ward Keeler initiated me, with great patience, into the field of social theory, which to this day informs much of my own worldview. Many other professors also contributed to my ability to complete this project, and I thank them all for their instruction and insights: Drs. Deborah Kapchan, Elizabeth Keating, Gail Minault, Greg Urban, and Kamala Visweswaran. In Delhi, I wish to thank Drs. Ashish Nandy and Yogendra Yadav of the Centre for Developing Societies for their input and support during the research. For funding this project, I thank the Department of Education’s Fulbright-Hays for Doctoral Research program, and the American Institute of Indian Studies Junior Fellows grant for doctoral research. v The many friends and colleagues I met in Udaipur District during the course of my research between late-1994 and mid-1996 still provide me with the primary motivation to share my findings with everyone there who helped to make the project possible. I cannot name all of them here, but the managers and staff of Shramdaan Vikaas Sansthhaan (SVS) were remarkably open and helpful as I studied their documents, projects and practices. They referred me to other organizations, even those that consider themselves as “competitors,” and they always supported my efforts to obtain unbiased versions of their own work and development processes in the region, more generally. Many people at SVS treated me as a friend even when they did not entirely understand my purpose in hanging around their offices and accompanying them to villages. Many of my best days in Udaipur passed drinking chai on the SVS lawn with an ever-rotating group of staff, professionals and village workers coming to share in the gupchup (“light conversation”). I would also like to thank my friends Krishna, Mohan, and Mawaram at Prayatna Samiti, a small NGO with just five main staff members, who introduced me to very different styles of development work, as well as to my friends at Gudli in Girwa Block of Udaipur District. Rajiv Khandelwal continues to be my guide and conscience for approaching this complex topic of rural development relations. Without our many nights spent together pondering and philosophizing, my understanding of NGOs and rural development could have never advanced enough to complete this project. vi My assistants for this project, Yakuub-jii, Mahesh and Ambalaal each made critical contributions to this project. Yakuub-jii and Mahesh patiently transcribed hours of cassette tapes and assisted me in translating many of them for inclusion in the notes. Mahesh and Ambalaal accompanied me to villages where their abilities to establish rapport and assist me to “connect” with local residents allowed me to later ask the challenging and sometimes strange questions that make up the themes of this project. In some cases, Mahesh’s questions were also much better than my own, as he internalized the goals for my research and made them his own during the period we worked together. The many development professionals who took time to meet with me in Delhi, Ahmedabad and Mumbai each contributed to my ability to ask better questions each time I returned to Udaipur. They also openly shared their own perspectives and experiences, allowing me a glimpse into their personal and professional lives, some of which has been described here. In the face of mounting evidence suggesting otherwise, my family continued to believe that I could and would finally complete my dissertation writing. My father, Bill, and my mother, Sherron, provided me from a very young age with the strength to choose a different path than only those already known to me or them. Their sustained confidence in me later gave me the strength to reach the end of this particularly challenging path toward attaining the Ph.D. degree. Finally, my greatest inspiration for all I aspire to emanates from my wife Angela and our son, Matthew. Angela’s unbelievable patience with me vii throughout this process rests somewhere beyond my comprehension, I feel. I don’t know how I can return all that she has done to love and support me along the way, but I am grateful that I now I will have more time to just sit quietly with her during weekends and evenings. Matthew was born three months before I completed a draft of the dissertation, and I know that I was impelled to work harder and finish because his opinion and respect matter more to me than anything else in this world. viii Discourse and Development: Language and Power in a Rural Rajasthani Meeting Publication No. ________ Kenneth Leland Price, Ph.D. The University of Texas at Austin Supervisor: James Brow Within the broad field of international development, issues of communication and power between funding agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and rural “beneficiaries” are paramount in the minds of participants at all levels. This dissertation examines communication, relations and expressions of power and resistance between individuals from each of these three groups as they interacted at a meeting in an Adi-Vasi village of southern Rajasthan in 1995. This “Big Meeting,” as referred to here, represented a relatively rare occurrence in international development projects in which representatives from all three groups (funding agency, NGO, and villagers) were present. Employing Foucauldian notions of discourse, relations of power between members from each group as expressed at the “Big Meeting” are examined in their social contexts, including interpretations of development language (e.g. “participation,” “partnerships,” and “development” itself). Having introduced the setting and characters of the “Big Meeting” in the second chapter, the following chapters examine the backgrounds and perspectives on development held by individuals present that day from among the villagers, NGO managers and staff, and funding agency representatives from Delhi and ix abroad. Informed by certain sociolinguistic tools for studying discourse and culture, detailed presentation of transcripts from the meeting set alongside contextual information taken from interviews with participants at the meeting yields clues to their perspectives on the interaction and on development processes, more generally. As a kind of “multi- sited ethnography,” this research shifts attention between the perspectives and desires, and the specific contexts for the birth of those perspectives and desires, from one group to another (i.e. Adi-Vasis in a rural Rajasthani village, NGO staff and managers in a small Indian city, and funding agency project managers and consultants in Delhi).