Village Walks: Tourism and Globalization among the Tharu of Nepal
ARJUN GUNERATNE AND KATE BJORK
Summary Arjun Guneratne and Kate Bjork focus on what it was like for an ethnic
group, the Tharu, to become the objects of tourists’ curiosity (the “tourist gaze”). The
article describes tourists arriving in Pipariya, a Tharu village located near the Chitwan
National Forest in Nepal’s tarai region in 1989. They report on what the tour guide says
and how the tourists and villagers respond. The so-called “village walk” is a good
example of cultural tourism (there is also recreational, medical, religious, eco-, and sex
tourism). It is usually one stop on a more broadly structured tour of Nepal’s mountains,
cities, and the Chitwan forest itself. The authors stress the importance of the
anthropological study of tourism as a significant part of globalization research. They
point out that nearly 100 million people go on tour every year and spend billions of
dollars. Their impact on local economies as well as on people’s ways of life represents a
significant globalizing force.
From the Tharu’s point of view, the way they are characterized by Nepal’s tourist
industry is both significant and humiliating. Originally the tarai was a heavily forested
area bordering the foothills and valleys of the Himalayan Mountains. Despite the land
made inhospitable by malaria, the Tharu still managed to settle there, tilling small forest
plots and hunting for their subsistence. All this changed in the 1950s when the
insecticide DDT largely eradicated the mosquitoes that carried malaria. As a result,
settlers from Nepal’s hills and India’s plains soon infiltrated the area and cleared most of
the land for cultivation. Settlers soon outnumbered the Tharu, who adapted to the
newcomers. Tharu now worked in tourist hotels and farmed in the same way as other
rural Nepalese, and their children attended school. For the tourist industry, however, the
Tharu past seemed like a natural tourist attraction. Tourist brochures claimed that the
Tharu were “a primitive native people” who were “untouched by civilization.” Tour
guides echoed this view as they walked tourists through Pipariya. In addition, most
guides belonged to Nepal’s two highest-ranked ethnic groups, the Brahmin and Chhetri,
and treated the Tharu as inferiors. They brought tourists into Tharu houses without
permission and treated those inside with disrespect. Tourists themselves were largely
ignorant of the Tharu and occasionally treated villagers like zoo exhibits. From the
Tharu perspective, tourists could usually be tolerated as guests. (There is no word for
“tourist” in their language; they call them “guests.”) Their greatest concern was the
negative way they were portrayed by the tourist industry.
In 2009, one of the authors revisited Pipariya and encountered a different picture. The
Tharu had constructed a small museum. Museum exhibits represented how they used to
live, successfully divorcing their past from the present. (The “tourist gaze” often makes
people more aware of their culture and its past.) The museum was the first place that
tourists visited and deflected most of them away from the village’s residential
compounds. Globalization had also impacted the Tharu in other ways. Many young men
have gone to work in foreign countries and send money home regularly. A few have
even managed to acquire green cards for work and residence in the United States.
In “Village Walks,” Guneratne and Bjork note that, despite the incursion of tourists
during the dry season, the Tharu residents of Pipariya managed to live much as they had
before the 1950s.