In our country, handlooms are equated with a culture that ensures a continuity of tradition. This idea has become part of the public policy-framing and provides a legitimate basis for the State to support the sector. But the notion of tradition as a single, linear entity is being strongly contested today. The narratives dominant in defining culture/tradition in a particular way are seen to have emerged as the identities and histories of large sections. The discounted and, at times, forcibly stifled identities are fighting for their rightful place in history. Against this backdrop, when we promote handloom as a traditional industry, it is not surprising that large sections of our population choose to ignore it.

Correct Option (D)

Assumption I is invalid. The passage critically examines the prevailing narrative surrounding State support for the handloom sector, rather than advocating for a complete absence of State involvement. It implies a need for re-evaluation of the approach to support, not its outright abolition.

Assumption II is also invalid. The passage indicates that handloom products are often overlooked due to their perceived association with a restrictive interpretation of tradition. This suggests a challenge in perception and marketing, not an inherent lack of appeal or relevance in the contemporary world.

Since neither assumption I nor II is valid based on the provided passage, option D is the correct choice.

Incorrect Options:

Options A, B, and C are incorrect because both assumptions I and II are not supported by the passage. The passage does not suggest that State involvement is unnecessary (invalidating I), nor does it state that handloom products inherently lack appeal (invalidating II). Therefore, options asserting the validity of either one or both assumptions are incorrect.