By Ashna Patil
Last month, the Haj committee office in Uttar Pradesh faced strong backlash when the state government decided to repaint the formerly white outer walls. This is ordinarily not a very controversial act; that is, until the choice of colour was factored in. The new colour was saffron.
Political denotation to saffron
Saffron was chosen as one of the colours of the Indian flag as it denoted renunciation; the same reason it is often worn by monks and various holy men across the country. Cultural denotation is, however, erratic at best and misleading at worst. Saffron is now and has been for a while, associated with Hindutva and right-wing ideologies, particularly perpetrated by aggressively nationalist parties like RSS and BJP. BJP leader Dayashankar Singh admitted to as much, claiming the colour represented Hinduismand through it, as can be concluded, specific political parties who subscribe to the religion. BJPs symbol was an orange lotus before they changed it to a black-and-white outline for mass appeal. Saffron is far from an innocuous colour, and choosing it to be displayed on government buildings has a direct message.
Saffron is a bright and energetic colour. It has made the building even more beautiful. The opposition has no big issues against us so they keep raising inconsequential matters, said token Muslim state Haj minister Mohsin Raza, who often wears a waistcoat in the same hue. Raza later backed down under the pressure of the media, removing R.P. Singh from the post of the committee secretary. Even then, the notice mainly focused on the fact that the wall was repainted 24 hours after it evoked criticism, leading to unnecessary expenditure. The government refused to acknowledge the significance of the chosen shade.
Mayawati, during her tenure, changed road dividers and police uniforms to blue and white, while the Samajwadi party often flew red and green banners. Politicisation of colour has long held ground in Uttar Pradeshbut never as much as under Yogi Adityanath. In the eleven months since he has held office, the Chief Minister has been on a vigorous saffronisation drive. Some examples, when isolated, seem innocuous enough. Draping his chair in saffron, for example, seems like a harmless personal decision considering Adityanath was formerly a monk and still heads the Gorakhnath temple. Looking at it in the broader sense of the steadily increasing occurrence of symbols in government institutions tells another storyone of clever polarisation politics and steadfast promotion of self-ideologies.
It started with inaugurating a fleet of fifty saffron buses, from a saffron pandal, and spread to repainting his main office building. The government school students in the state are provided saffron bags, and international cricket teams in the country are given scarves in the same shade. Recently, the Gomti Nagar police station, situated in one of the more expensive localities of the city, was painted saffron. There are also reports of a temple being built on the premise. This follows the footsteps of another station in Qaiser Bagh which was also painted in the same manner.
The deeper meaning of saffronisation
Symbolism, especially that linked to religion, reflected in government institutions goes against the tenets of secularism. The aggressive promotion of saffron paves way for majoritarian ideals and militant Hindu sectarianism.
It is not the symbols on their own, per se, which are dangerous. A colour, whatever it represents, does not have enough power to provoke anything more significant than anger. Symbolistic propaganda does not invoke significant strife on its own. What we have to take into consideration, however, is the socio-political structure of India today, and how strategically placed symbols play into it, thus exacerbating the present scenario. Communalism is widespread in the country, with social tensions at a high. The central governments hard stances have driven a rift between many, and minorities are discomforted by the growing atmosphere of intolerance. It does not take much to alienate them further and acts such as painting public institutions saffron send a clear message: You are not welcome if you do not subscribe to these specific ideals.
Members of the ruling party have said that saffron is a part of the flag and that it represents feelings towards ones country. This ties into the ongoing problem of aggressive promotion and selective interpretation of nationalism, in a situation where minorities are already tired of being demanded to prove their loyalty to the country. Associating nationalism with arbitrary symbols decided upon by the majority parties feeds the existing formerly moderate middle-classs foray into rising anti-secular narrative by adding to their connection with tangible things. At the same time, people who do not belong to this narrative see oppression of their cultural and religious identity and greater prioritisation of Hinduism by the state. This potentially leads to an eco-system where the legitimations of violence are not far away.
“The BJP is a party known for changing colours. It is indulging in these antics only to hide its faults and failures. If the BJP really considers saffron colour as sacrosanct, it should not indulge in the politicisation of the colour and blatant saffronisation,” SP spokesman Sunil Singh Sajan said. All India Shia Personal Law Board spokesperson Yasoob Abbas also criticised the move. “What is this? The BJP will paint it saffron, the SP will choose green and the BSP blue…This is politics of colour and should be avoided,” he said.