Nationalism in Colonial and Post-colonial India
Nationalism
in Colonial and Post-colonial India through the narrative framing of
the Metaphorical representation of
‘Female
Bodies’.
The piece of my writing will be addressing
the issues that concern the narrative that was woven through the
metaphoric representation of female body, which was derived from the
episodes of mythological drama in colonial and post-colonial India.
These issues point out the representation of female body in the
episode from Mahabharata where Draupadi was staked in the court by
the Yudhishthir while playing the game of dice with Duryodhana and
Shakuni.
"Kichaka - Sairandhri"
(after 1890 oil painting by Raja Ravi Varma)
Photography: Clay Kelton
Cast: Cop Shiva and Pushpmala N
Archival inkjet print
Bangalore, 2013
The episode has a theatrical approach in the representation of the issues like; Draupadi’s resistance to the public disrobing, questions about having five husbands, her character as a woman and the agency that she derives through her own courage. The list does not end here. The theatricality comes here from the gesture that functions as a part of the bigger performance in the assembly in context of Draupadi and in the palace with curtains in context of Sairandhri. Even though it seems as if the female bodies have the agency and voices, they are marginalized in the greater canopy of male dominated politics.
"Kichaka - Sairandhri"
(after 1890 oil painting by Raja Ravi Varma)
Photography: Clay Kelton
Cast: Cop Shiva and Pushpmala N
Archival inkjet print
Bangalore, 2013
The episode has a theatrical approach in the representation of the issues like; Draupadi’s resistance to the public disrobing, questions about having five husbands, her character as a woman and the agency that she derives through her own courage. The list does not end here. The theatricality comes here from the gesture that functions as a part of the bigger performance in the assembly in context of Draupadi and in the palace with curtains in context of Sairandhri. Even though it seems as if the female bodies have the agency and voices, they are marginalized in the greater canopy of male dominated politics.
Draupadi is the metaphorical
representation of the nation, that was also going through all the
issues that Draupadi had to face in the court once she was staked and
lost to Duryodhana in the game of dice. In my opinion the role that
was played by the political leaders of India and the colonial rulers
of India in order to claim the reformation of the nation was as
shallow as the dialogue among themselves and this dialogue reflected
a futile attempt to solve the riddle of that question between the
courtly figures in the assembly of Duryodhana. I would conclude my
argument with the idea of the nationalism as propounded by Tagore and
open it out for the debate on the representation of women body all
through the Nationalist discourse in colonial and post-colonial
India.
It was an image of ‘Keechak –
Sairandhri’ up for public display at a recently held Exhibition on
Pushpmala’s work titled:- ‘The Body Politic’ in the capital
city of New Delhi, Which incited me to engage with the episode of the
game of dice and see it through the lens of post-colonial/nationalism
debate. In this image, Pushpmala N. portrays herself as Sairandhi in
the original setting of 1890 oil painting by Ravi Varma. This idea of
performing the mythological personality through one’s own body
urges a line of inquiry about how the idea of politics around the
female body has evolved through recent history, tracing it directly
to a certain episode from Hindu mythology. Pushpmala brings in this
new perspective and vision because of her idea of experimenting with
the original art work and creating several subjective realities and
narratives regarding one particular event from the history. This
analysis is further substantiated by the seminal work of Gurcharan
Das on understanding Draupadi in ‘Draupadi’s Courage; Whom did
you lose first, yourself or me?’ This article derives from the
structure and presentation from the episode from the Mahabharata in a
theatrical setting of the court scene along with the central
protagonists of the epic involved in an intense and heated
engagement.
The very first revelation that
this episode brought was- from Draupadi’s courageous question to
Yudhishthir ‘Whom did you lose first, yourself or me?’ - How does
such a seemingly simple question managed to challenge the male ego
and in turn asserts her agency as well in the larger sociopolitical
realm? Draupadi jolts the consciousness of the men in the assembly
and makes them not only answer her question but also to answer the
inner turbulence that they felt in that moment. The question posed by
Draupadi in the assembly to Yudhishthir carries within several
nuances and issues. She raises pertinent questions of her own
existence, her own agency and what gave anyone the right to bet
someone’s life in the game of gamble? Can someone’s life be
anyone’s material possession to be staked? How can one stake one’s
conscience and soul for the sake of a game? All these issues and
nuances provoke me to see the thread of engagement in context of
nationalism through the metaphoric representation of a female body.
In this case Draupadi’s, Sairandhri, or Pushpmala’s engagement
with the image certainly become the voice that challenges the male
ego and makes them introspect that realm of Body politic. This realm
of Body politic is explored from the engagement of woman body and
voice in the domain of male dominated sociopolitical space. All these
challenges and questions try to break away from the power dynamics
and the hegemonic idea of representing ‘Female body’ in the
colonial discourse and narrative becomes consciously visible. Das
writes in the article that when Draupadi poses the question ‘Whom
did you lose first, yourself or me?’ to the assembly, Bhishma, the
grandfather of the warring cousins, rises to speak and looks upon
Draupadi’s question as a legal challenge. This vision of seeing the
question and its issues through such lens consolidates the agency and
space of participation of Female body in the sociopolitical horizon
not merely as a puppet but as an independent being. Contextualizing
this idea in the frame of metaphoric representation of woman’s body
in the nationalist discourse of colonial and post-colonial India, I
see, they are imposed with the identity of ‘Mother Nation’ but
without taking into consideration the opinion they carried regarding
this representation of themselves.
"Bharat Bhiksha"
(after 1878-1880 calendar print by Calcutta Art Studio)
Archival inkjet print
(Photography: Clay Kelton)
Cast: Shreelata Rao Seshadri, Ranna Nandesha and Pushpmala N
Banglore 2013
"Bharat Bhiksha"
(after 1878-1880 calendar print by Calcutta Art Studio)
Archival inkjet print
(Photography: Clay Kelton)
Cast: Shreelata Rao Seshadri, Ranna Nandesha and Pushpmala N
Banglore 2013
Draupadi’s question towards
Yudhishthir first and the assembly later shows the consciousness that
a nation gains against the vested purpose of the nationalist leaders
before and after Independence. The marginalization happens at various
levels in subtle forms. In theater, their position vis-a-vis the
position of the male protagonist on the stage was already determined.
They were instructed to play these characters in a meek and
submissive way. When Draupadi challenges the idea of being a slave
through her well composed question, we see a voice of courage and
determination. We see a voice with agency, that, challenges several
generations of patriarchy and inferior position of women in the
gender hierarchy. This voice of courage challenged that hegemony
laden with certain ‘rationality’ that is not dependent upon the
male body only to play the exploitative functioning of the hierarchy.
Why I am saying that this ‘rationality’ is not dependent upon the
male body only because there are certain incidents that clearly
depict the hegemony of that rationality being visible in opposite
gender as well. The incidents show the hegemony carried through
woman’s body against male body and female body against female body
as well.
The incident that happens when
Karna was rejected by Draupadi even when he had won her fairly at her
swayamvara
in a difficult test that she had posed to all her suitors. She
rejects Karna, saying, ‘I do not chose a charioteer!’ Instead she
had chosen the handsome Pandava, Arjuna. This incident helps me to
look at the issue of ‘rationality’ that becomes a political
paradigm for the exploitation of body irrespective of the male body
or the female body in the narrative. Draupadi here is not the victim
female body unlike the incident where Yudhishthir had staked her but
what she becomes here is to fall in the place of Duryodhana or
Yudhishthir and become a carrier of that hegemonic ‘rationality’
that carries biased perspective and derogatory approaches towards the
body that belongs to different caste, social status and class. I am
stressing on this argument because it clarifies the resembling nature
of narrative weaving of the nationalist discourse through ‘female
body’ and the ‘female body’ is not only biologically a female
body but is embodied through a cultural, socio-political gendered
discourse, a body which has to live through the societal atrocities
and biased politics of certain hegemonic ‘rationality’. So if at
one point in the epic of Mahabharata, Draupadi becomes that
victimized ‘female body’ at a lower position in the gender
hierarchy.
At another point in another
situation from the tale, I see that Karna certainly falls in the domain of
that position in the caste hierarchy. Violence is done here as well
by Draupdi upon Karna when she rejects him by saying the mean and
insulting things about Karna’s caste and societal status. It can be
argued here that Karna certainly does not have any role in
determining the place and socially assigned status to his natural
born caste. It shows the same patterned violence that is inflicted
upon the body always. What it does is to make the ‘female body’
feel voiceless or without any agency because of the already given
title to that body. ‘Does the low status of a body in the society
gives the dominant and hegemonic group of the society a right to
inflict violence and exploit that body for the sake of their selfish
and tyrannical wills? This form of ‘rationality’ encourages the
repetition of violence upon a body and consolidation of the hierarchy
in different social circles. These social circles may be the assembly
of Kurus
or the Swayamwar
held at Draupadi’s
maternal place or the scene where Kunti tells her son Arjun to share
Draupadi among his brothers equally without seeing what/whom he has
brought home.
Does not Draupadi’s opinion
regarding Karna’s status and caste show the prevalent but subtle
interplay of attitude of the people when it comes to entertain and
execute the power and whimsical authority. At one point it may seem
to be a progressive thinking characters from the mythology but on the
contrary in some specific situations these characters reduce their
agency to be a slave of their own prejudices and masculinity of
thought. What really happens here is that the hegemony becomes the
primary/driving rationale, which when comes into play in the
sociopolitical realms, always tries to ensure that the status quo
remains, the power dynamics and the structure of control remains so
that this ‘mentality’ does not feel vulnerable and ‘fallible’.
The hegemony becomes a tool for the people to weave in the
application of ‘female body’ in their version of nationalist
narrative. Nationalistic discourses and narratives woven with the use
of Female body in a politically and selfishly motivated way becomes a
subject matter for mythological female character like Draupadi to
look at and re-evaluate the status and values asserted to these
bodies in that time frame.
Another instance that I think
also reflects the identical issue is the event where Arjuna had
brought Draupadi home in the company of his brothers. At the door,
they had shouted to Kunti, ‘See what we have brought, mother.’
Without looking up, Kunti had replied, ‘Well, I hope you will share
it equally.’ And they did, and this is how she had to be married
tothe five husbands. At initial phase it appears as if she did
nothing wrong from her side. But, what Draupadi had to live with all
through her life was a matter of great difficulty for her. She is
humiliated in the assembly by Karna on the ground of her having five
husbands. When the event is analyzed it can be argued that Draupadi
was living the decisions and fate assigned by Kunti without even
trying to know what Arjuna had brought at home. It is the incident
which points out the injustice done by that ‘Mentality’ towards a
‘Female body’. This injustice also became possible because of the
lack of agency with Draupadi. These specific situations show how
anyone can become the perpetrator and make the person- on the lower
pedestal of the hierarchy- a victimized body.
Das writes in his article that
‘Draupadi will not
leave it there. ………..Knowing that Dharma can mean both what is
‘lawful’ and what is ‘right’, the real question that she is
leading to: Is it right or fair that a woman, let alone a queen,
become a slave because her husband staked her in a gambling game? Her
assumption is that the law, too often, reflects the will of the
powerful in society and diverges from the right thing to do. It is
especially true for those who are vulnerable and powerless- the poor,
the low castes, slaves and women- and historically it has been the
role of the Left to fight to change that. In
the context of nationalism we see how the idea of right and wrong
morality is entertained through the representation of ‘Female
Body’. When Das writes that law reflects the will of the powerful,
then the powerful are those people that carry the hegemonic
‘rationality’ with themselves. The idea of right and wrong can be
a matter of subjective approach and so the issues become a debatable
issue in every society where such a shallow representation is
assigned to the ‘female body’. It is from this vantage point
possible to see a mythological incident in the realm of political
spectrum because here mythology meets the contemporary political
understanding of the subtle form of vested politics of that
patriarchy upon ‘Female body’. When Draupadi is being disrobed of
her clothes, something miraculous happens. An inexhaustible stream
of garment appear from nowhere to protect her. This miraculous act is
shown to have happened -in many bhakti
redactions – because
Krishna came to her rescue. Das says his own opinion regarding the
miraculous act that takes plsce with Draupadi. He refers back to
Franklin Edgerton’s book named Sabhaparvan
where Edgerton and his
colleagues rely upon the version without Krishna. Edgerton argued
that it was ‘cosmic justice’ that protected her.
Das writes I
tend to agree with Edgerton. I believe the narrative is stronger
without Krishna…...It heips build Draupadi’s character- it is her
own agency, her own dharma, which is responsible for the miracle
rather than God’s intervention. It vindicates her courage as she
stands up to the political ans social order, reminding the rulers
about the dharma of the king. The
public disrobing of Draupadi, Public humiliation of Karna after
Swayamwar, Kunti’s
order to Arjuna to share Draupadi among the five brothers and
Draupadi’s humiliation by Karna in the assembly show the consistent
pattern of the hegemonic ‘rationality’ with the moral paradigm of
patriarchy played upon ‘female body’. The representation of
‘female body’ was also suffering through the stigma assigned by
that patriarchy. All these incidents reflect the agency that these
‘female bodies’ gain through their own courage and wit. They
become assertive towards their rights and position in the society.
Iravati Karve writes about
Draupadi that she was
only a young bride of the house and yet spoke in the assembly of men,
something she must have known she must not do……….which is why
her husband called her “a lady pundit” hardly a complimentary
epithet.’ I think
Karve is only focusing upon the societal liabilities and engagement
of Draupadi with Pandavas as a woman and not as a free being. She is
reducing the spirit and courage of Draupadi and her question to be
the troublemaker for her plight. She is not culling out the factors
of her knowledge and courage and wit, from the narrative that were
able to save Pandavas from becoming the slaves of Kurus and asserted
her own right and agency as well. The ‘Female bodies’ in these
incidents certainly depart from the domesticity and passivity of
their lives. Their insistent questions have troubled and baffled the
patriarchal mentality which is consistently present in bodies
irrespective of gender, class, caste and social status. These
questions show the shallowness of the laws and values that are just a
whimsical representation of the dominant groups’ idea about the
representation of ‘Female bodies’.
The rape of the body certainly
happens there in the frame. Going through The
Kreutzer Sonata we can
understand what is happening with Draupadi when her character is
humiliated. Das writes in the article that All
cultures, I suspect, contain the seeds of violence when it comes to
female sexuality. The Kauravas’ wish to humiliate Draupadi and turn
her into slave may well be related to the disgust that many men feel
towards the sexual act. The attempted disrobing of Draupadi is a
clear insult to womanhood. The
reason why her body becomes a character of mockery is because of her
sharing five husbands. What Das is saying here is certainly
contributing in the greater debate that is happening over the issue
of the representation of ‘Female body’ in the public domain. The
patriarchal mentality at the same time looks at this representation
as a threat to their set norms and values of the society.
The idea of uni dimensional
existence of ‘Female bodies’ is always visible in this attitude.
This one dimensional existence is channelized to the mechanical
notion of their bodies. Uni dimensionality comes into play through
the reduced and channelized performance of the body in bigger
narrative. They become a meek body or just a puppet, which can
function depending upon the will of the puppeteer. Looking at the
pattern of their presence in the nationalist narrative we find a huge
gap between the ‘female body’ as a complete individual entity as
distinct from the function of the individual entity by representing
the community symbolically. The gap is seen in terms of the
shallowness of the assigned function in the sociopolitical domain
without these bodies and communities getting any visible and
meaningful participation. The participation happens but that
participation is completely controlled and predictable. Because of
these authorities the ‘Female bodies’ turn out to be a
marginalized community in the mainstream narrative of society. The
marginalized community of these ‘Female bodies’ are in a larger
sense given the functional value with representation in the
anti-colonialist narrative but it mainly served the exploitative will
of the hegemonic ‘Mentality’. In Nationalism
in India Tagore writes
There are habits that are not merely passive but aggressively
arrogant………………….Europe has been cultivating these
hedges of habits for long years, till they have grown round her dense
and strong and high. The pride of her traditions has sent its roots
deep into her heart. I do not wish to contend that it is
unreasonable. But pride in every form breeds blindness at the end.
Like all artificial stimulants its first effect is a heightening of
consciousness, and then with the increasing dose it muddles it and
brings an exultation that is misleading. Looking
at Tagore’s idea here
from the essay I
see a similar situation in the episode of Draupadi
cheer-haran where the
pride of the Kurus make them feel as if they are having a heightened
consciousness but that consciousness is a misguiding one because the
source of their pride is coming from public humiliation and
molestation of Draupadi. Tagore inclines towards a poetic approach
that has the aura of generating a sensibility towards one’s own
self. It criticizes the deep rooted arrogant and narcissistic
approach that the anti colonial leaders had towards the nation
building process through the shallow portrayal of ‘Feminine bodies’
in their approaches. These bodies were treated as a mere site of
experimentation and pleasure. This shows us the manner in which
Nationalism tends to become an infantile disease. Indeed, the
representation becomes vapid, and shows the hypocritical attitude of
the leaders who claimed to have such a shallow and banal pride in
their act.
Coming back to the image of
Pushpamala, it can be observed that the presence of her body in that
image carries the weight of all the debates, histories, contested
ideas of mythology that has been argued above but ultimately what
remains is the bare presence of a female body, who is portrayed in a
calm and composed manner with her hand raised meekly to stop the
advancing Keechaka. Even though her body is almost merging into the
wall with an intent to protect herself from the advancing move of
Kichaka, her eyes meet the gaze of Kichaka directly, challenging his
move, not in fear but with a stern ‘no’. In the assembly of
Duryodhana where Draupadi executes her agency we see that the
curtains falling and enwrapping her in a way recreates the image of
the act of her getting disrobed in the court of Dhritrashtra. Her
gaze, the posture of her body and the whole setting then seems to be
questioning that how many times do I have to face this? Is this
perpetration of my body ever going to end? These are the questions
that come back to the human conscience and provokes us for an
engagement with all the ‘Beings’.
Chandan......
Chandan......
References:-
- Das, Gurcharan. 2009. “The difficulty of being good; On the subtle art of Dharma” Draupadi’s courage; Whom did you lose first, Yourself or me? 33-50. Panchseel park, Penguin Books
- Tagore, Rabindranath. 1918. “Nationalism” 97-130. St. Martin’s street, London, Macmillan and co,.Limited.
You are doing great job
ReplyDeleteThank you for the appreciation!
DeleteWhom did you lose first, yourself or me?’, the answer to this question is very impactful that change whole circumstances. if he told that I lose myself first then the whole circumstances seem to be quite different today...but you know people keep a point that if God and even intellectual people do that, then why not I am...
ReplyDeleteI do agree with your opinion regarding the answer to the question(Whom did you lose first?) that demands an agency over the structure, but finally it is not about losing oneself or winning over the other. It is about the co-existence of the 'beings' and engaging in a meaningful and life enriching paths.
Deletethis is seriously mind boggling
ReplyDeleteWunderschoen......Vielen Dannk!
DeleteI liked your argument that critiques the notion of gendered perspective independent of male or female body..
ReplyDeleteI liked your argument that critiques the notion of gendered perspective independent of male or female body..
ReplyDelete