July's cultural awakening for a Bangladesh 2.0
When I took charge of Bangladesh’s Ministry of Cultural Affairs, I knew two things. First, the interim government would not have the luxury of time. Second, culture would prove as important to Bangladesh’s future as economics or politics.
Our immediate task was cultural healing. But our larger challenge was to begin imagining a different cultural future…one capable of supporting a democratic society and strengthening national confidence.
To that end, we commissioned a draft cultural policy and began discussing a long-term roadmap for the creative economy. The ideas that follow emerge from those discussions.
Many observers view the events of 2024 purely as a political transition. I see them differently. They were also a cultural rupture. Political power changed hands, but so did the assumptions that had governed Bangladesh’s cultural life for decades.
To understand what comes next, we must first understand how culture helped create the conditions that made authoritarianism possible.
For decades, Bangladesh’s cultural sphere was shaped by a narrative that elevated one political tradition above all others. History was often presented as a story with a single protagonist, a single ideological framework and a single legitimate cultural identity.
The result was the gradual narrowing of the national imagination.
The Language Movement of 1952 remains one of the foundational chapters of Bangladesh’s history. Yet when national history begins and ends there, other experiences disappear from view.
The struggles of peasants against colonial landlords, the legacy of anti-zamindari movements, the economic and social realities of colonial Bengal and many other strands of the country's past become marginal.
History becomes less a field of inquiry than a mechanism of selection.
The same process affected historical figures. Maulana Bhashani, despite his immense influence on democratic politics, occupies a surprisingly limited place in mainstream cultural narratives.
Sher-e-Bangla AK Fazlul Huq rarely receives the cultural attention his historical significance warrants. Ziaur Rahman often appears through a partisan lens rather than as a complex historical actor.
The issue is not whether these figures should replace others. It is whether a nation can understand itself honestly while ignoring large portions of its own history.
The importance of cultural awakening
Cultural production matters because it shapes collective memory. Films, novels, museums and television programmes often determine what future generations remember and what they forget.
Consider the questions our cultural industries rarely ask.
Why was General Osmani absent from the surrender ceremony of December 1971? Why have the abuses of the Rakkhi Bahini received limited artistic attention? Why are the political conflicts and crises of the early 1970s often treated cautiously?
Why do some historical episodes attract endless examination while others remain largely untouched?
These omissions matter because culture does not merely reflect political power…it helps sustain it.
Over time, a distinction emerged between what was considered “progressive” and what was not. Certain political traditions were treated as culturally legitimate; others were not. Certain tragedies deserved sympathy; others passed with little notice.
This hierarchy shaped public perception in ways that proved politically consequential.
When a society begins dividing citizens into culturally acceptable and culturally unacceptable categories, empathy becomes selective. Once empathy becomes selective, democratic culture begins to weaken.
This helps explain how authoritarian tendencies can survive within societies that consider themselves culturally enlightened. And the problem extends beyond politics.
Bangladesh suffers from a deep crisis of cultural confidence. Few nations seem as uncertain about their own language, clothing, traditions and intellectual heritage.
Our cultural establishment often sought validation elsewhere. Too frequently, cultural legitimacy appeared to flow from external approval rather than internal conviction.
The treatment of Lalon is instructive. Bangladesh possesses one of the most original philosophers in South Asian history. Yet Lalon rarely occupies the central position in national cultural discourse that his significance merits.
The same can be said, in different ways, of Kazi Nazrul Islam.
Nazrul’s political imagination, anti-colonial spirit and commitment to freedom make him one of the most relevant figures in modern Bangladesh. Yet he has often occupied a secondary place in the cultural hierarchy.
A nation that hesitates to celebrate its strongest cultural assets inevitably develops an inferiority complex.
The events of 2024 created an opportunity to challenge that mindset.
The power of inclusion
Within the Ministry of Cultural Affairs, our approach focused on three broad priorities. The first was inclusion.
Bangladesh contains multiple ethnicities, religions and cultural traditions. Yet cultural policy has not always reflected that reality. We attempted to move beyond both exclusionary nationalism and cultural frameworks that viewed some communities with suspicion.
For the first time, indigenous communities participated in the national New Year celebrations on equal footing. Religious festivals associated with Hindus, Buddhists and Christians received greater cultural recognition.
Eid remained central, but it ceased to be treated as the sole expression of national identity.
We also sought to elevate figures who embodied Bangladesh’s pluralistic traditions. Lalon became a particular focus. National celebrations of his life were held across all 64 districts, reflecting a broader attempt to place indigenous intellectual traditions closer to the centre of public life.
The second priority was memory. Authoritarian systems survive partly because societies forget.
Through documentaries, theatre productions, exhibitions and the July Museum, we attempted to document the experiences of recent years and preserve them as part of the national record.
Culture after all is, at its core, a system of memory. If memory disappears, accountability soon follows.
The third priority was preparing the ground for democratic culture.
Political institutions alone cannot sustain democracy. Democratic habits and expectations must also exist within society. Cultural production can help create those habits by encouraging participation, diversity of opinion and critical thinking.
Yet these initiatives addressed only immediate concerns. The larger question remains: what should Bangladesh’s cultural future look like?
The starting point must be a modern cultural policy built around two principles: many ethnicities, one nation; many religions, one nation.
Such a framework would recognize diversity without sacrificing national cohesion. It would also move Bangladesh beyond the sterile cultural binaries that have dominated public life for decades.
The second requirement is economic. Around the world, culture is increasingly viewed as industry. Music, film, television, publishing, fashion, gaming and digital content generate substantial economic value.
Bangladesh has barely begun to explore this potential.
The country’s creative sectors remain fragmented and poorly coordinated. Public funding often emphasizes expenditure rather than outcomes. Institutions operate in isolation. Long-term planning is limited.
A serious creative-economy strategy would focus resources where Bangladesh possesses genuine comparative advantages. And music is perhaps the most obvious example.
Working along diversified verticals
Few countries possess such a diverse musical inheritance. From Lalon and Hason Raja to Bhawaiya, Bhatiyali and contemporary rock, Bangladesh has an extraordinary range of traditions. Yet these assets remain underutilized both culturally and commercially.
The same applies to film and television. Bangladesh’s strengths lie less in spectacle than in humour, emotional storytelling and social observation. Rather than imitating larger industries, the country should develop content rooted in its own comparative advantages.
South Korea did not become globally influential by copying Hollywood. It developed a distinctive cultural identity through K-pop, television dramas and food. Indonesia has achieved something similar in horror cinema.
Bangladesh must identify its own strengths and build upon them. Doing so requires institutional reform.
At present, cultural administration remains scattered across multiple agencies and ministries. Planning, implementation and evaluation are often disconnected from one another.
The Ministry of Cultural Affairs should concentrate on administration and policy oversight. A stronger and more specialized cultural commission could coordinate broader strategic planning across the creative economy.
Equally important is the integration of culture, heritage and tourism.
Modern tourism depends on experiences. Visitors increasingly seek immersive encounters involving music, food, storytelling and local traditions.
Bangladesh possesses significant archaeological and cultural resources, yet many remain underdeveloped.
Sites such as Paharpur, Panam Nagar and numerous regional heritage locations could become major attractions if properly curated and integrated into broader cultural experiences.
Museums also require urgent reform. Many museums continue to operate as repositories of objects rather than centres of storytelling. Modern audiences expect narrative, immersion and engagement.
The July Museum demonstrated how contemporary exhibition techniques can transform historical understanding. Similar approaches should be adopted elsewhere.
The goal is not simply to display artefacts but to create meaningful encounters with history.
The same principle applies to archives.
Archives should not function exclusively as spaces for researchers. Through digital outreach and innovative curation, they can become vibrant institutions connecting citizens with their collective past.
Perhaps the most ambitious cultural project would be the creation of a dedicated cultural district near Dhaka.
At its heart would stand a national music museum celebrating Bangladesh as a land of music. Around it could emerge spaces devoted to film, visual arts, theatre, literature, fashion, crafts and food.
Such a district would serve simultaneously as a cultural institution, educational centre, tourist attraction and economic hub.
Cox’s Bazar offers another opportunity. Rather than remaining solely a beach destination, it could evolve into a cultural city combining arts education, festivals, creative industries and international exchange.
Film schools, music academies, theatre institutes and technology labs could transform the region into a centre for creativity.
None of this should be understood as luxury.
Culture as infrastructure
Culture shapes how societies imagine themselves. It influences how nations are perceived abroad. It affects social cohesion, democratic resilience and economic development.
Cultural diplomacy therefore deserves greater attention.
Bangladesh should present itself internationally through the strengths it genuinely possesses: music, hospitality, cuisine and cultural diversity.
Nation branding cannot be manufactured through slogans. It emerges from authentic cultural confidence.The same confidence should shape domestic policy.
Women’s football offers a useful example. Its significance extends beyond sport. It challenges social assumptions, expands possibilities for young women and reshapes cultural expectations. Supporting such initiatives is therefore a cultural investment as much as a sporting one.
Education must also play a role.
Historical complexity should find its way into textbooks. Students deserve exposure to multiple perspectives and competing interpretations. Democratic societies require citizens capable of engaging with complexity rather than memorizing official narratives.
Ultimately, the question facing Bangladesh is larger than culture. What kind of country does it wish to become?
For decades, cultural life often revolved around a narrow framework of legitimacy and belonging. Certain histories were privileged. Certain identities were celebrated. Others remained peripheral.
That approach has reached its limits.
A confident Bangladesh should be capable of embracing its full historical inheritance—its peasants and poets, its reformers and revolutionaries, its religious traditions and secular aspirations, its successes and failures.
A mature culture does not fear complexity. It welcomes it.
The future therefore lies not in replacing one orthodoxy with another. It lies in creating a cultural ecosystem broad enough to accommodate disagreement, diversity and experimentation.
Only then can culture become what it ought to be… a foundation for freedom.
—
Mostofa Sarwar Farooki is a filmmaker. He was the Cultural Adviser of the Interim Government.