Contentious Conversation - )

Social Research, Fall, 1998 by Charles Tilly

In the BJP's approach to Ayodhya, we saw contentious repertoires in full action. The chariot pilgrimage, the ostentatious building of temples on sacred sites, the bloody encounter between demonstrators and baton-wielding police all form recurrent performances of India's contemporary contentious conversation. The high stakes of such performances give us a salutary, reminder not to take our theatrical metaphor as an indication of artificiality or triviality. In Ayodhya, Hyderabad, and elsewhere, these are deadly serious conversations.

Among other things, political identities are at stake. To continue with theatrical metaphors, claim-makers are acting out answers to the question, "Who are you?" When contentious conversation arises in the course of routine social life, the answers are often obvious; we are whoever we were before the contention began, employees of a given company, purchasers in a weekly market, worshippers at a shrine, public officials doing public business, police officers patrolling their beats. Much of the time, however, identities remain unclear until participants dramatize them. All people have multiple identities at their disposal, each one attached to a somewhat different set of social relations: neighbor, spouse, farmer, customer, tenant, schoolmate, lover, or citizen. Some available identities appear in public only intermittently, as is the case with many varieties of party affiliation, association membership, and adhesion to social movements. In these circumstances, participants in contentious conversation regularly make a point of the capacities in which they are interacting, of the identities they are activating

As in ordinary conversation, some performances actually center on the assertion of identities rather than the making of specific claims. One side say's, "Recognize us as significant actors of a certain, kind," while the other side accepts or contests that assertion of identity. Social movement activists often initiate performances whose central message declares that the activists and/or the constituency they claim to represent are "WUNC": worthy, united, numerous, and committed. Demonstration of worthiness varies by cultural setting, but often includes evidence of decorous self-control and standing in the community. Unity calls for moving in time, speaking together, broadcasting the same message, and collaborating in the same actions--even when the occasion calls for displaying how wide a range of community members support a given program. Numbers matter greatly, as frequent disputes among activists, observers, rivals, and police over how many people actually participated in an action indicate. Claims of numbers, however, may also refer to supporters as indicated by association memberships, financial contributions, opinion polls, electoral results, or other quantitative signs. Commitment, finally, comes across in evidence that participants are willing to bear costs and face risks on behalf of their common cause; the costs and risks can vary from laying down your life to coming from tar away to join a collective action.