My becoming the 12th Principal of St. Stephen's is the freakiest event in the educational history of India. It was insanely improbable, to put it mildly.
I had resigned and left St. Stephen's in 2003. Prior to that I had resigned as Vice Principal and Head, Dept. of English in 1996 and as Chaplain in 1992. It seemed as though I had turned my back on the College forever.
But not quite. I returned to St. Stephen's as Principal (OSD) in May 2007 only to resign again in March of 2008. I wonder if there is a comparable history of a person becoming Principal twice of the same institution, the two tenures being sandwiched by resignation from the same post. That's by way of an aside.
I returned to St. Stephen's primarily to seek answers to two questions that had been bothering me for some time.
(a) I had travelled all over the country for three decades, addressing administrators of educational institutions. Whenever I exhorted them to keep the "sanctuary of education uncompromisingly clean" the response was invariably cynical. None believed it possible. So I had to test it out on the ground.
I did. Here is my finding. It is difficult. Very difficult. But possible. The price is high; but it is worth paying. And it has to be paid in the coin of unpopularity and prolonged, low grade persecution.
My absolute conviction is that corruption and pursuit of excellence cannot go hand in hand.
(b) The second question pertains to the compatibility of social justice and academic excellence. There is a dogmatic assumption in nearly all relevant quarters that the two are incompatible and mutually exclusive. It was something I could not accept blindly from anyone; for I had been poor and my socio-economic deprivation was the fire in my belly that made me want to kick the stars. Given my experiences, I could not separate passion for excellence from commitment to social justice.
Hence it was that I took my life in my hands in 2007 and enunciated an admission policy - the first of its kind in the history of the College - and carved a little niche for social justice. This made me, only too predictably, a traitor to a segment of the alumni and a fall guy for the media. Prophets of Doom, led by Ram Guha, predicted the premature "burial" of St. Stephen's several kilometers underground in quick time.
Sadly for them, nothing of the sort happened. Instead, the College went from strength to strength. When I became Principal in 2007, the College was not listed among the top 5 colleges in the country either in sciences or humanities. By 2010, we became first in Sciences. And by 2013 we became first in sciences and humanities, for the first time in the 17 years that the India Today survey had been in existence.
I have always been somewhat disappointed with the academic culture of the College. We were prestigious. But that prestige was not founded firmly on sound academics. St. Stephen's was - barring proverbial exceptions - a sort of club for the leisure class. Children of privilege, having had the benefit of public school education, walked into St. Stephen's, bringing with them a baggage of class-and-caste importance which rubbed off on the College. So Mani Shakar Iyar is right in a sort of way when he argues that the sheen of the College is entirely because of students and that Principals and teachers don't count. Children of privilege do. They decide, arbitrarily, that St. Stephen's is a secular, liberal institution. This "liberal tradition" is then equated almost wholly with the "spirit of irreverence" and "exploit". So, in one instance under-wears were hung on the Cross over the dome of the College and diurnal cafe raids would be conducted as applauded demonstrations of male virility. [If a poor boy steals an
unda (egg), it is theft; if the children affluence steal dozens of
undas it is fun. There you have the leisure class funda.]
Various stories, presumably of a humorous flavour, used to be invented, many of which were attributed to Amin
saheb who, irrespective of their merit, never seemed to either deny or acknowledge them. He only smiled. It always puzzled me that many of these stories and nuggets struck me as inane, whereas most others found them excrements of sheer genius. A case in point is the cheap reference to the Hindu college as "the college across the road," which always struck me as a sentiment of bad taste. But each time this inanity was uttered by anyone there was hilarious laughter, which left me wholly behind. So most people came to the conclusion that I had no sense of "Stephanian humour," which I regret not.
But this one I do regret. I am yet to come across an alumnus who has told me that he used him time and opportunities fully while in College. Without exception everyone has told me, "I wish someone had told me to take my academics a little more seriously. Sadly, no one did." This niggling reality is then covered up with the Stephanianism, "Real learning takes place outside the class room."
But had anyone counseled them to the contrary, he or she would have been dismissed as a bore. And who wants to be unpopular? These are days when teachers go to any extent to secure popularity. There is this colleague of mine who, when two of his students were caught with psychedelic drugs, tried to run away with the contraband. He capped it, by getting the poor constable on the ridge-beat suspended for apprehending the law-breakers. Can such heroic expressions of solidarity with students fail to be popular? (Of course it never became a "controversy"; for the Principal was not involved.)
I began with the rough estimate that St. Stephen's had not fulfilled even 50% of its academic and institutional potential. I was keen to bridge the gulf between promise and performance. Constraints of space will not allow me to go into details. I have made an effort. Whether I succeeded in it or not is not for me to tell. My assessment today is that St. Stephen's falls short by 75%.
I have enjoyed my crackling, scintillating relationship with the media. There never was a dull moment. I wonder what I would have done without this sharp, searing stimulation! Died of boredom, perhaps? I did not have to, and I am grateful. Contrary to popular perception or assumptions, controversies or public abuses don't trouble me. There is something healthy about controversies. When abuses come from fellow Stephanians even that is a sort of honour! If a controversy is genuine we can learn from it. If it is bogus, it gets quickly discarded and a new one is manufactured. So, there was a veritable succession of controversies! Splendid.
I leave with a heavy heart. The establishment of higher education is in shambles. There are very many aspects to it. I hope to write in detail about the issues and challenges involved. For the time being it suffices to say that accountability and discipline need to be re-established, at least to a rudimentary extent, in academia.
I really wish the media would play a more constructive role in bringing about an educational renaissance in this country. Nothing is of greater importance or urgency than this. I don't see anyone else doing this.
Certain elements among the Alumni have been a corrosive embarrassment. Fortunately, they can be counted on one's fingers. But the way they have conducted themselves towards their Alma Mater is an undying shame. Among them I shall remember forever a retired bureaucrat who came to the College only to flash his middle finger to the institution three times in full view of the embarrassed lady students who were his hapless onlookers. If this is the outcome of education, we shall serve the country better by refraining from it. At least we can remain noble savages!
Yet another thing that pains me is the attitude to poor students and physically handicapped students as well as faculty. This has, thank God, improved in the recent years. The presence of the poor was barely tolerated in the past. This has been the most inhuman aspect the snobbery and social elitism that corrupted St. Stephen's. It is a frontal insult to the soul of the College which was founded for the poor, a fact that now sounds so very strange!
I am happy, nonetheless, as I leave. Happy to have been able to survive; for no one gave me a ghost of a chance to last even 3 months. Happy to have realized several of my goals; though it was a lonely journey all the way. Happy to have impacted a few lives, though this sounds a bit presumptuous and politically incorrect to claim. I am happy, most of all, to leave, making room for a successor who, I am convinced, will take good care of the College, especially its spiritual foundation.
(Valson Thampu is the Principal of St. Stephen's College, University of Delhi. He retires later this month.)Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.