Savarna Students and the Shift to IITs/IIMs
The pattern of Savarna (upper-caste) kids attending private schools until 12th grade and then switching to government-aided institutions like IITs and IIMs is a fascinating intersection of economics, social capital, and structural inequality. Private schools in India often provide better infrastructure, smaller class sizes, and access to specialized coaching—resources that give students an edge in cracking competitive entrance exams like JEE (for IITs) or CAT (for IIMs). These schools are expensive, so they’re already skewed toward families with means, which often overlap with upper-caste communities due to historical wealth accumulation and social privilege.
Once these students ace the exams, IITs and IIMs become the obvious next step. Why? These institutions offer world-class education at heavily subsidized rates—tuition at IITs, for example, is around ₹2-3 lakh per year (as of recent figures), compared to private universities like Ashoka or OP Jindal, where fees can exceed ₹10-15 lakh annually, or studying abroad, which could run into crores. Plus, the prestige of an IIT/IIM degree opens doors globally, often outshining even pricier alternatives. So, it’s a no-brainer: maximum return on investment with minimal additional cost.
The exclusion angle—specifically keeping out Shudras (historically lower castes)—isn’t an explicit policy but emerges from the system’s design. Entrance exams reward preparation, and preparation requires resources: coaching classes (costing ₹1-2 lakh for top-tier programs like Allen or FIITJEE), stable internet for online study, and time free from economic pressures. Lower-caste students, especially from rural or economically disadvantaged backgrounds, often lack these, even with reservation policies (which guarantee seats but don’t level the prep field). A 2021 study on IIT admissions showed that while OBC/SC/ST students fill reserved seats, the general category remains dominated by urban, upper-caste profiles—about 70% in some IITs. The meritocracy, then, isn’t as neutral as it seems; it’s built on a foundation that favors the already privileged.
Quality, Class, Money, and Exclusion in the Film Industry
Second point about the film industry is a classic case of how prestige and profit reshape access. In its early days, Indian cinema—especially regional industries like Telugu or Tamil—wasn’t seen as “respectable.” Female roles were often filled by women from marginalized communities, like Bogam or Nutch (Devadasi) girls, because upper-caste families wouldn’t let their daughters enter a field tied to stigma and low status. These women were skilled performers, but their participation was born of necessity, not choice.
As cinema grew—think 1950s onward with Bollywood’s golden age or the rise of South Indian blockbusters—money and glamour poured in. Suddenly, acting wasn’t just a job; it was a cultural force. Upper-caste women entered, often under the banner of “art” or “classical culture”—think of how dance forms like Bharatanatyam, once tied to Devadasis, were “purified” and claimed by Brahmin performers in the 20th century. This wasn’t accidental. It’s a pattern: when a domain gains value, those with social power reposition it to fit their norms, sidelining the original players. By the 1970s, heroines from “respectable” families—like Hema Malini or Jaya Bachchan—became the face of Indian cinema, while the earlier performers faded into obscurity.
This isn’t unique to film. Look at tech: early programmers in India were often middle-class tinkerers, but as IT boomed post-1990s, elite institutes and upper-caste graduates took over. Or fashion: handloom weaving was a Dalit and artisan trade until haute couture made it “heritage,” and now it’s marketed by urban designers. The thread is consistent—quality and money attract class, and class enforces exclusion, often cloaked as merit or refinement.
Systemic Flaw or Trend?
Both examples point to a systemic flaw: opportunity in India is still shaped by caste and class, even in supposedly modern, merit-based arenas. The IIT/IIM pipeline rewards early privilege, not raw talent alone. The film industry’s shift reflects how cultural capital gets weaponized to gatekeep once a field’s worth rises. It’s not just a trend—it’s a feedback loop where historical inequities (land ownership, education access) keep reproducing themselves in new forms. Reservations and policies try to dent this, but they’re bandaids on a deeper wound: unequal starting lines.
Comments
Post a Comment