(IN): Nagaland's Real Dogs

[Guest guest]

Link: http://thewallingstone.blogspot.com/2008/07/nagalands-real-dogs.html

 

 

Monday, July 14, 2008

Nagaland's Real Dogs

I noticed a blink-and-you'll-miss-it Naga mini-cameo in Kiran Desai's 'The

Inheritance of Loss', amidst the backdrop of Gorkhaland (supposedly),

juxtaposed with a contrasting American setting. The phrase just alluded that

Nagas consume dog-meat. Well, fair enough, it's no big deal. But it was the

context in which it was phrased that I found quite insensitive. It went like

this- " they eat dogs there " . Moreover, I'm used to being blithely asked

whether Nagas 'eat anything/everything'. I remember one occasion when an

ultra-orthodox conservative Marwari classmate inquired if there was anything

that the Nagas didn't experiment vis-a-vis food. Finding it provocative, I

got all defensive and fumbled with concepts like 'What do vegans know?',

'It's just a choice' and 'Nutrition related stuff,really' stupidly ending

with 'Nagas are so creative when it comes to food. Don't you think so?' I

could make out from the way he stared that he probably thought I was

disillusioned. The truth was that everything I told him sounded rubbish in

my head. This is Nagaland, I wanted to tell him, and here, non-vegetarianism

goes to a whole new level.

To say that Nagas love meat would be a titanic understatement because meat

is almost the raison d'etre here, besides merry-making (interpret it in any

way you want). Call it typical Naga nature. And it's all okay. What I want

to know is why Nagas are zeroed-in on when topics like 'Backward tribals' or

'Untamed fierceness' come up. Nagas are synonymous with such unfair labels.

It's almost a prejudiced aproach towards us if you consider the

misconceptions that the rest of India (even our six backbiting sisters) has

about us. In the metros, some travel agencies are probably going " You wanna

go there? Just one word, BEWARE " .

In all fairness, it's no secret that Nagas 'are' different. We're

drastically distinct, even for India's diversity standards. However, when

eating dog-meat even equates to " Oh that? Just another example of how raw

they still are " , it puzzles me. There are places on earth where a bull's

testicles are considered a delicacy; and, if sushi was Naga, I wonder if it

would have gone as popular as it is today. Given the present scenario, what

about " Ugh! They eat raw fish? Lyk, uncooked? Freaks... pass the achar,

yaar... " Well, if dog-meat pate was something countries like France or Italy

enjoyed, the whole scene would have been different ( " Ooh la la... they're

just so ingenious! " ).

Or is it that people have a problem with Nagaland's headhunting history and

find the saying 'Some old habits never die' downright spooky when placed

alongside Nagas? I've heard a few people boasting that non-local residents

get alarmingly scared if they threaten to pick up a dao and chop their heads

off. What's unseen is that the reason they're reacting in that way is

because they think we're stuck in the past, both in intuition and mentality.

Ditto for food habits, though I'm not sure if dog-meat was in vogue back

then. Sometimes I wonder if they consider some Naga traits to be like- as

much as I hate to put this word- animals. Wild and highly dangerous (should

we thank our tempers? Or is it something to be proud of?). Overall, NOT a

comforting thought.

Hmm... am I being too defensive? I dont eat dog-meat, you know, I have

simply no intention to (temptation's out of question) and I will, without

second thought, stay hungry with an empty tummy if it was the only thing

available. I eat pork because pigs dont guard it's owners homes (and even

lives) faithfully. I eat beef because I've never encountered a cow that has

been trained to sit, stay, roll or give a hand-shake (therapy work in

hospitals, rescue missions, drugsniffing et al in a universe light years

away). I eat chicken because I just happen to like it, period. I eat fish

because, well, it's fish- and unless it's an amicable dolphin in question,

getting intimate with them will end up in an impasse. Plus, just look at how

healthy the Japanese are! I'm no Maneka Gandhi, but I'm not interested in

eating my best friends. Enough said.

I dont score high on the responsibility factor, though. It's my younger ones

who spoil our pets silly. Even the baths are a two hour affair- complete

with conditioning and blow-drying no less. It is my brother who makes them

wear faux fur during winter and splurges on more accessories for dogs than

the law should allow. It is my sister who makes the biggest fuss in the

world about their immunity shots and visits to the vet on the emergence of

the tiniest spot/ rash imaginable. If Frankenstein (our female dachshund)

gets impregnated, the cautionary measures they impose and exercise must

frankly be equivalent to what Angelina Jolie receives in human terms. By the

time the pups arrive, they practically live in the kennel themselves, trying

to sincerely provide 'Her Majesty' with the best service possible. Table

fans, comfier cushions, a babysitter named Amigo (long story) ...the works,

really.

Two sides of the same coin... Nagaland- a Mobius strip? Hear the dull thud

of a dao chopping the head of a slightly burnt dog (the various means of

killing it could inspire a new Saw movie), and listen to my sibling'

conversation about where the 'family portrait' should be shot ( " shall we

sneak 'em up to the master bedroom when no one's watching? Or the bonnet?

Should it have a theme? Ati Along, help us na!!! " ).

The bottomline is that eating dog-meat has nothing to do with being a Naga.

All this brouhaha is of no accountability as no self-respecting Naga will

apologize for devouring one's favourite dishes- no matter how outlandish it

may appear to others. On a personal level, one can choose to omit dog-meat

(or anything else,for that matter) from the menu.That's about it.

I've heard many anti-Naga accusations from 'junglees at heart' to 'fake

hi-fi wannabes' to 'disgusting kitchen repertoire'. I've focused on food

(dogs,rather) but all of them hurts, because it's done on a microscopic

scale. Nothing-zilch- is spared. There are stews brewed in China where dogs

are an essential ingredient. If eating dogs is a major faux pas for everyone

mainstream, go target our Chinese neighbours, and I can guarantee they'll

break every law in your rule book in one week flat. Even us Nagas, when we

come across odd food habits from across the globe, do go " Oh God- are they

actually eating that? " . But it ends there. No harsh labelling, nasty

stigmatizing and vicious judging because of what one ingests, cannibalism

notwithstanding. It's cool to mind one's own business in the fooding

department. We dont give a dog's burp about what's being said, anyway.

Just for the record, I'm not hurtling bitterness at Kiran Desai. She

deserved the Booker she won for that alluring book which I enjoyed. This

isn't an advertisement either. Your guess.

 

--

http://www.stopelephantpolo.com

http://www.freewebs.com/azamsiddiqui