Page 244 - DSOC202_SOCIAL_STRATIFICATION_ENGLISH

Unit 11: Social Mobility

Such a mobility is, however, relatively absent among the lower and ‘untouchable’ castes. This is Notes
mainly due to their poor family background and low caste ranks. The exceptions are of a Nai
telephone operator and a school teacher in Roopgarh and a Gadaria railway inspector in Murwara.
Mobility at group level is more pervasive and pronounced among these castes.
As a result of mobility in caste structure at the level of family, horizontal status distinctions have
increased and some significant patterns in regard to dress, use of utensils, house type, hospitality,
expenditure on marriages and food, etc. have emerged. Use of costly clothes, saris (in place of
traditional dress), stainless steel utensils, furniture have become a status symbol for these families.
Mobility at this level does not bear a corporate basis. In fact, some families have mobilized their
respective resources individually to improve their status. They might have felt frustrated regarding
their status comparing it with their own status in the past or to the status of other communities
and families in the other villages and towns. The families which did not have resources to enhance
their status enjoyed lower status within the same caste. Such status polarizations refer to a class-
like horizontal distinctions (Majumdar, 1958). Status mobility of such a character cannot be termed
as ‘vertical mobility’, because vertical mobility implies lessening of status distinctions. Vertical
mobility brings about perceptible reduction in hierarchical distance as the lower takes the place of
its immediate higher castes. Such a process of mobility in course of time generates hopes for an
equalitarian character of society. But this is not happening in India. Caste structure remains more
or less the same in spite of structural changes induced through structural innovations.
Mobility at the family level, which is of horizontal (class-like) nature, cannot be explained with the
concepts of sanskritization and westernization or secularization. Because these concepts do not
take a cognizance of motivations and aspirations of these few families. Sanskritization is essentially
an analytical tool in the context of group mobility and particularly with reference to ‘dominant
caste’ (Srinivas, 1959). As we have made clear that at this level mobility is not of a ‘group’ and
‘even’ character, and as such sanskritization does not help in understanding mobility at the level
of family. Westernization too does not provide a basis for taking a note of resources, capabilities
and aspirations of these families. Westernization implies only ‘references’ for mobility, but it lacks
a provision for understanding the motivations and aspirations of the ‘climbing’ families. As such
varied forms of reference group, for example, membership (own caste families) and non-
membership groups and both ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ (Merton, 1962) help analysis of such a
mobility.
Mobility of a Group or a Majority of Families of a Group

Mobility of a group or a majority of families of a caste is not essentially in contrast with mobility
at the level of family. The same family may have mobility simultaneously at both the levels. The
major distinction between the two levels is that the ‘corporate’ (group) interests are given priority
at the caste level, whereas at the family level the interests of family concerned predominate. In the
former, collective striving is involved, while in the latter individualistic-achievement is stressed
for status upgrading. Another distinction is that mobility at the caste level generally operates with
regard to socio-cultural customs or matters regarding pollution-purity while mobility at the family
level takes place in the socio-economic and political domains, and it is concerned with real power
and influence in the village community.
In the six villages studied by the author, Khatis, Nais, Meenas, Chamars, Naiks and Brahmins
have tried to improve their caste positions by discarding certain practices and occupations attached
to their respective castes which they considered impure and degrading. For example, the Khatis
(carpenters) in Roopgarh, Sabalpura and Harmara used to accept kucha food and water from most
of the clean peasant castes, such as Jats, Malis, Gujars, Kumhars and Ahirs about fifteen years ago.
But now they refuse to take kucha food from these agricultural castes and claim a higher caste rank
equivalent to the Brahmins, and label themselves as the ‘Jangir’ Brahmins—the direct descendants
of the Lord Viswakarma (the creator of the world) and have started putting on the sacred thread.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 239