Can anyone simply claim Tangail shari as their own?
Experts weigh in on the Tangail shari GI tag claim by India, migration of weavers and both the countries’ rich cultural heritage
When India obtained the GI (Geographical Identification) tag for Tangail shari, it sparked a debate on social media, which gradually spread to newspapers, television channels etc.
Emotions ran high as people responded with shock and disbelief; according to them, the very name 'Tangail' was a good enough indication that it belonged to Bangladesh, as there is no other place by this name in India.
Moreover, there is a long history of the Basak weavers in Pathrail, Tangail who are still active in the business. These weavers came from Murshidabad to Kishoreganj. From here, they went to Dhamrai, eventually settling near the banks of the Louhajang River in Tangail.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
Just like Jamdani shari, which required the water from Shitalakshya River to be made, Tangail shari also required the water from Louhajang River and a special starch called 'zorra' made from 'pora binni dhaaner khoi' (popped or puffed rice from binni rice).
The 'Tangail' shari in India is actually Fulia or Shantipuri taant shari (following the two districts Fulia and Shantipur of West Bengal). But these weavers also migrated from Bangladesh due to various reasons.
On 25 April, Industries Minister Nurul Majid Mahmud Humayun distributed the GI registration certificate of Tangail shari along with other products at an event where he said, "Bangladesh followed all the legal procedures to retain the status of Tangail shari as a product of the country.
"Another country may show interest in Tangail shari, but it is our product, it will remain ours. We got the Geographical Identification (GI) tag for Tangail shari by following all legal protocol," the minister added.
Stakeholders in Bangladesh have expressed strong emotions regarding India's move, saying it would be a false claim, since Tangail shari originated from Bangladesh, and geography cannot be changed. A GI indicates a sovereign state's identity, after all.
Bangladeshi weavers further shared that the two sharis look and feel different too. Tangail sharis increase in width (bohor) after wash, and has a more glazed finish.
Some experts, however, are not as worked up about the issue. They believe that there are not many differences in design or motif among the two sharis, hence the debate may be immaterial.
Bangladesh's long historical tie to Tangail shari
Pavel Partha, a researcher and writer on ecology and diversity, geographical ecosystems and occupational groups of GI products, said that any community can give any name to a product but when it comes to GI, there is a specific definition for it.
"Both India and Bangladesh have GI Acts, maintaining the WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organisation) regulations. The most important thing for GI is geology or a geographical location; it can be a village, country or a continent, it can be the world as well, but in this case, it doesn't mean anything big like a country, it means specifically one area."
"When we say Tangail shari, we mean the ones made in gorto taant or pit loom [there are two kinds of loom: Chittaranjan loom and pit loom]. The pit loom weaves are finer," he said.
There are several villages in Tangail's Pathrail Union, such as Chandi, Krishnanagar-Majhipara, Nolia, Baljan, Nolshudha etc. The Basak weavers are specifically based in Chandi, Nolshudha etc.
There are Muslim weavers in Dhulutia, also known as 'jola taanti.' There are other Hindu weavers (not Basaks) in Majhipara etc.
"But the debate should not be about the type of loom or motifs or designs, the debate should be about geography. Tangail motifs woven elsewhere will not make it Tangail shari. You can't take the Louhajang River to India or bring Nadia or Fulia to Bangladesh," he said, adding that in no way does he mean to belittle the weavers in both countries; but geography matters.
The weavers took their memories, but they could not take the zorra from pora binni, the Louhajang River's water, or the weather or the soil, he believes.
However, "the problem is not the weavers. In fact, they were not involved in the process [of getting GI tag] at all."
He believes that both states are actually not concerned about Tangail shari and they have both neglected it. "Both countries have laws, both know where the Tangail shari is made. But they should have stood for the weavers.
India should have registered it as Fulia shari because, then, those weavers' intellectual property would have been respected. Bangladesh could have done it too."
A product cannot receive a GI tag if its production is discontinued, or if it becomes unpopular. But that is not the case with Tangail shari, which is one of the most sought-after sharis in the country. Moreover, every year, it is exported, legally, to India.
"They [India] must have been aware of it all," said Pavel.
Can Tangail shari be distinguished from a Fulia taant shari?
Raghunath Basak, proprietor of Jagneswar and Co, one of the most renowned shari stores in Chandi, Pathrail, has been in the business for 52 years.
He says that simply using the name Tangail does not mean much. "Before they [the weavers] went to Fulia [from Bangladesh], did Tangail shari exist? Not really. Then how did it become theirs?"
"The designs may not look different, but we can tell that they are not the same. The look and feel is different."
He adds that there are salespeople who add to the confusion because they try to sell any taant shari - say the ones from Shahjadpur - as Tangail shari. "Tangail shari must be sold as Tangail shari and nothing else."
Pavel Partha said that while there are many motifs which became lost over time, the ones used by the weavers, such as fish, trees, mythical characters etc, were inspired by this region. "The weavers did not make kangaroo or ostrich motifs because they are not found here. Similarly, the motifs used by weavers in Fulia are inspired by that particular region."
"You can cultivate our tulshimala or kalijeera (aromatic rice varieties) elsewhere, but it won't give the same aroma. Simply copying something won't give you a GI recognition. We have to come to the geography every time we have a debate about GI."
Logic vs Emotion
Renowned fashion designer of the country, Chandrasekhar Shaha, says the technique of making the two sharis are almost the same, but the main difference lies in the weavers' skill and experience.
He said that we ought to find out what India put in their defence while filing for a GI tag before we come to any conclusions. He pointed out the moment they mentioned Tangail is the moment they would be rejected, because it is not a place in India. Which is why, they likely placed a more comprehensive reasoning.
"Tangail is not in India. If we say South Indian Tangail shari, it would be wrong. But those who give the GI tags do not do it out of emotion; meaning, they must have placed a logical argument in their appeal which goes beyond simply claiming Tangail Shari as theirs, in one line."
He said there are instances when such claims can be argued. For example, Mirpur Benarashi is made in Bangladesh, but the shari originates from Benaras in India.
"So, we can also [pursue] a GI tag for Mirpur Benarashi. If they ask us, our answer will be simple: the weavers came to Bangladesh after partition in 1947 and created something new, inspired by the new environment. And we appreciate it."
Handicraft items have been brought from one region to another since time immemorial. The British brought cross stitches to the subcontinent, the Portuguese brought crochet and Nawab Salimullah brought zardosi workers to Bengal who introduced zari work in the clothes of ordinary people.
Worldwide, a mix and match of flavours is quite common in cuisine too, and there is nothing wrong with it.
"A woman from Faridpur who marries in, say Barishal; her cuisine will be influenced by both areas. She brings back some cooking skills from Faridpur, learns something from her mother-in-law in Barishal and her food reflects both cooking styles."
Pavel, on the other hand, believes when it comes to GI, matters need to be taken seriously because "it [GI] adds a different value to the product for buyers in the global market. It impacts whether the weavers can continue their production. We should have the debate over whether the weavers or farmers are going to be benefitted from it."
"We were once the same country, but we are not talking about that time. We are talking about whatever is happening at this moment. And I think they are confusing patent with GI [referring to those who are saying we were once the same country]," he concluded.
