Description
The paper examines the politics of display behind curating the world’s first Partition Museum at Amritsar (PMA). Taking the example of the Sindhi experience, the article critically evaluates the framing of the partition within the narrative arc of the museum. Sindh provides an interesting vantage point for two reasons. Firstly, unlike Punjab or Bengal, Sindh was never partitioned and became a part of Pakistan completely. Secondly, while Sindh had an overwhelming Muslim majority, the Partition was not as violent as it was in the neighbouring Punjab. Through its assortment of objects and curatorial notes on display, the paper endeavours to flesh out the frames of reference within which the narrative of Sindh been recessed within the PMA. The article argues that the PMA’s narrative of Partition and Sindh is ostensibly centred around the loss of homeland and coerced migration, with a focus loss of home, homeland, and a consequent plunge into misery. However, a closer look reveals an insidious element at play here – that of provincialism, which by the nature of Partition itself, borders on majoritarianism by presenting Sindhi Hindus living in India as the sole victims of Partition. Relying on existing literature, the paper argues that the Museum’s curation is myopic to say the least. It shows what is absent in the Museum’s narrative by exploring how Sindhi Muslims and the Muslims who migrated to Sindh from places that became India, were affected by the Partition.
