The ପରିଚର୍ଚ୍ଚା Podcast

DISCLAIMER: This is an AI-generated audio version of Paricharchā's essay. Some of the regional words might be pronounced incorrectly. Why do we keep returning to dead kings, poets, reformers, saints, and rulers every time the present becomes difficult to explain? Across India, history is no longer only remembered. It is invoked, claimed, contested, defended, and often weaponised. Political parties, cultural groups, regional communities, and public institutions repeatedly turn to historical figures to justify present-day positions. A king becomes a symbol of pride. A poet becomes a marker of identity. A reformer becomes a moral certificate. A saint becomes a political inheritance.But this return to the past is not accidental. It reveals something important about the present.When people feel culturally ignored, linguistically threatened, politically underrepresented, or historically erased, they return to figures who once gave them dignity. For Odisha, this is especially significant. Our relationship with figures like Kapilendra Deva, Kharavela, Fakir Mohan Senapati, Gopabandhu Das, and the Gajapati lineage is not merely academic. It is tied to questions of language, identity, statehood, cultural memory, and civilisational confidence.The problem begins when these figures are reduced to slogans.To invoke Fakir Mohan without protecting Odia education is hypocrisy.To invoke great kings without building accountable institutions is convenience.To invoke heritage without studying it seriously is performance.To invoke the past while failing the present is escapism.History can guide us. It can remind us of courage, resistance, imagination, and responsibility. But history cannot replace governance, scholarship, civic accountability, or cultural work. The dead kings can inspire. They cannot govern. That responsibility belongs to the living.Read the article ⁠here⁠.