Retrieving Subaltern Voices from Epic: A Study of Mahasweta Devi’s After Kurukshetra
Dr. S. Sujaritha, Assistant Professor of English, Pondicherry University Community College
Abstract:
Epics and myths are the rich sources of culture and tradition of any country. Knowingly or unknowingly the epics and myths along with teaching natural emotions like compassion, love and human values, teach the human-constructed division of gender and caste. For several centuries those human-constructed divisions were followed very strictly with the misconception of divine order. Since the emergence of critical theories especially from the mid of 20th-century scholars have started to re-read the old texts to deconstruct and to know the desire of humans in following the hierarchies in the case of gender and caste. Re-reading of Epics and myths from the critical perspective of Feminism, Postcolonial studies and Subaltern Studies enabled the scholars to pinpoint the partial views of the great works. In India, many writers have produced works on the characters of the epics. The hypothesis of the present paper is to analyse the characters re-written by Mahasweta Devi to retrieve the voices of the marginalized characters from the Mahabharata with the theoretical background of Mikhail Bakhtin's concept of Carnival.
Key Words: Subaltern, Epic, Mahabharata, Discourse
The word 'epic' originated from the Greek word 'epos' means 'word, narrative or song'. It is usually a long narrative poem about the life or lives of a heroic person or people. In India, Epic is used to convey religious and moral values to humans. Indian epics occupy a different and important position when compared with the Western epics. The two celebrated Indian Epics Ramayana and Mahabharata are not simply narrative poem like the Western epics as it means much more than that. Meenakshi Mukherjee claims,
[i]n English, both are referred to as epic, but the category for the Ramayana in Sanskrit is kavya (narrative in verse) or mahakavya (long narrative in verse); for the Mahabharata, it is itihasa ("thus it happened"- what is now called history) or itihasa-purana, which is one of the many subdivisions of the generic term Purana (meaning stories of the gods). (601)
Many writers have attempted to rewrite these two epics mostly to translate the stories in other Indian languages. Such kinds of rewritings were mere translations of the Epics. On the other hand, since the mid of twentieth century, many women writers have attempted to re-write the epics from the point of view of the less focused women characters or to give voice to the voiceless characters and to uninvent the invented world (in the case of tradition and culture)by the epics. “They not only create strong characters, but also explore contours of literary definitions beyond the limits of the defined canon of feminist writing. Especially while exploring mythology, they have been informed by this constant political struggle to appropriate their recreated, gendered version as the historical version of a feminine reality” (Shubhrastha).
When many women writers attempt to project the unfamiliar or marginalised women character into the centre in their re-creation of the epics, Mahaswta Devi intends to present the marginalised community (tribal community) along with the women community into the centre. Hence, among the list of re-writings of the Indian epics, Mahasweta Devi's work differs in projecting the proximity of the world of the marginalised community. Her concern towards the tribal community could be understood well from her preference to claim herself as a 'humanist' rather than a 'feminist'. Through her writings and re-writings of great works, Devi gives voice to the issues faced by the subaltern community. The term subaltern originates from the Italian term “subalterno‟ which means “subordinate” or “dependent”. This term is used to refer to the individuals who belong to the lower order of society such as peasants, tribes and others who are denied access to any sociological power in the normal routine. Ranjith Guha in his subaltern studies used the term subaltern thus, “as a name for general attribute of subordination in South Asian society whether this is expressed in terms of class, caste, age, gender and office or in any other way”. (vii) Though Subaltern Studies aims to expose the histories of marginalised groups whose existence itself is undocumented in the colonial and nationalise archives, Devi through this work After Kurushesthra, tries to document the subaltern’s silences in the Epic which was written around 3000 years ago.
The paper aims to read Mahasweta Devi’s After Kurushesthra with the theoretical background of Mikhail Bakhtin's concept of Carnivalesque. He developed the literary concept of Carnivalesque from the cultural festival Carnival celebrated by Medieval Europeans. He saw carnival as an occasion where the authority's power is inverted temporally (for a short period) and people have complete freedom. He looks at it as,
Carnival is not a spectacle seen by the people; they live in it, and everyone participates because its very idea embraces all the people. While carnival lasts, there is no other life outside it. During carnival time life is subject only to its laws, that is, the laws of its own freedom. It has a universal spirit; it is a special condition of the entire world, of the world’s revival and renewal, in which all take part. Such is the essence of carnival, vividly felt by all its participants. (Bakhtin b: 7)
Bakhtin looks at Carnival as a temporal liberation from the existing established rules (social hierarchies and prohibitions). This temporal liberation gives them freedom from those old rules which suffocate them. Bakhtin describes the carnival culture thus:
As opposed to the official feast, one might say that carnival celebrated temporary liberation from the prevailing truth and from the established order; it marked the suspension of all hierarchical rank, privileges, norms, and prohibitions. Carnival was the true feast of time, the feast of becoming, changes, and renewal. It was hostile to all that was immortalized and completed (Bakhtin b: 10).
Bakhtin rendered this occasion of Carnival into a literary form named Carnivalesque that subverts the dominant voice, plot and narration in any literary work.
Literature that was influenced - directly and without mediation, or indirectly, through a series of intermediate links - by one or another variant of carnivalistic folklore (ancient or medieval) we shall call carnivalized literature. The realm of the serio-comical constitutes the first example of such literature (Bakhtin a: 107).
According to Bakhtin, like the festival of Carnival, Carnivalesque too breaks the tone of hierarchy by providing a way for the voices of subaltern. This concept could be used to read the rewritings of characters from Epics and Myths who move from the margin to the centre.
The paper analysis Mahasweta Devi’s three stories from After Kurukshetra to present the deconstructive study of the Mahabharata by Mahasweta Devi to retrieve the subaltern voices. Devi is interested in writing about the history of real people. According to her "history means the blank space between two printed lines. Therein is the true history of the people” (Sethi). She is concerned with using the resources available to her in the form of History, Myth, Epic and Folklore to reconstruct or to critique it with social reality. The work After Kurukshetra is "…not the legendary Dharmayudha of the popular imagination but a cold-blooded power game that sacrificed countless human lives" as stated by Anjum Katyal, the translator of the work in English.
Dharmayudha as Unethical:
The work After Kurukshetra consists of three short stories titled 'The Five Women', 'Kunti and Nishadin' and 'Sauvali'. These stories talk about the aftermaths of the righteous war (Dharmayutha). Through these stories Mahasweta Devi critiques/ satires the 'Dharmayutha' by projecting the way it supported unethical/evil (adharma) war.
With the critical background of Carnivalesque, one could understand that Mahasweta Devi dismantles the views and weightage given for the war 'Dharmayudha' by the royal members and she projects the subaltern who lost their lives and livelihood in the war. Moreover, through this narration, she gives space for the subaltern to express their point of view. According to the writer, only the members of the royal family proudly call it 'Dharmayudha' (righteous war). But it was looked at sarcastically by the common people. Godhumi, one of the five women, in the story "The Five Women" presents the common people’s view of war. She rejects the view of Dharmayudha, by claiming, “So many hundreds of widows! So many homes in which mothers have lost their sons! (22). She also adds, “This was not our dharmayuddha. Brother kills brother, uncle kills nephew, shishya kills guru. It may be your idea of dharma, it’s not ours” (26).
Not only had the common people, even the womenfolk from the royal family doubted the righteousness of war. In "Kunti and the Nishadin" Kunti thinks of Gandhari's view as "She was cursing war and bloodshed on behalf of all the women in the world… This war was a battle for power. A war to wipe out the other and establish oneself as all-powerful. Did dharma triumph? Was adharma vanquished? The heartrending wails of the women and the sight of all those bloodied, savaged corpses was a curse on the word ‘war’ itself! (31).
When the royal family tries to look at war as a kind of unavoidable or natural kind of disaster, it was condemned as a war for greed. “It wasn’t just brother slaughtering brother. We know of quarrel- Jealousies-rivalries too. But such a war for just a throne? This, a holy war? A righteous war? Just call it a war of greed!” (3). Through these views, Mahasweta Devi primarily shatters the image of the ‘Dharmayutha’ as a righteous one. The damages and loss of lives for the power of hunger prove it unethical.
Added to this, Devi through the characters of common people presents the injustices and discriminations shown upon the common people in the war. The war that happens between the family members of the royal blood, takes the lives of the common people. The royal men who had been getting training in war techniques since their childhood were protected by the inexperienced farmers. The innocent farmers from Ahichhattra, Matsya, Kurunjagal, Kosala, Trigartha, Dwaitava, Panchal, and Prachyaare were appointed as foot soldiers to occupy the front line. Devi narrates it as, “… The hundreds of foot soldiers – padatiks- from various other little kingdoms. They had been slaughtered every day, in their thousands, their function being to protect the chariot-mounted heroes. They were issued no armour. So they died in large numbers” (1).
The womenfolk of the foot soldiers follow them to the battlefield, to find the dead bodies of their family members and to do the final rights. Godhumi in "The Five Women" stated that "Our husbands were sent for during the war. We know the foot soldiers would die in huge numbers. We'd watch the fighting from afar. At the close of each day's battle we'd search for our husbands' bodies in the heat of that awful darkness. Little clay lamps in our hands, or flaming torches of deodar wood" (17). The funeral pyre for the royal members and the common people were done separately. All the dead bodies of the common people were piled up together and it was burnt for many days as the death was more. A description like "Row upon row of oil-soaked wood pyres piled high with decomposing bodies" (1), "The earth of Kurukshetra was scorched rock hard by the funeral fires. Waves of anger heat. A heat that hung like a haze over the vast cremation ground" (2) presents the huge number of dead bodies.
Moreover, it is a belief that the royalty who lost their lives in the war will reach heaven (Divya Lok) straight. It was satirised by the common people that only the souls of the royalty who lost their lives in the war will reach heaven and not the soul of the common people. The common people who do not have a direct connection with war lose their life sources due to war. When all the men were called for the war, the womenfolk in the village were unable to complete the process of agriculture. Hence the fields lay unploughed and seeds were not sown and the life of the village was lost.
Rajavritta vs Janavritta:
The three short stories project the differentiation of human lives based on the hierarchy of power. Throughout the stories, the distinction maintained between Rajavritta and Janavritta is unavoidable to notice. Rajavritta (members of the Royal family) consider themselves humans and treat the janavritta (common people) as lifeless stones. Both in the cases of war and normal times, the same segregation is followed in thought and action. “Did the rajavritta- the royalty-ever care to know about the janavritta-common humanity” (11) highlights the disparity.
In addition to the projection of subalterns, Mahasweta Devi indicates the differences exist between the Aryans and the non-Aryans. Even many historians accept this division as fact.
The Vedic people at first distinguished just two classes (varnas), their own (which they called Arya) and that of the people they conquered, whom they called Dasas (or Dasyus, or, sometimes, Panis) ... The early Veda expresses envy for the Dasas’ wealth, which is to say their cattle, but later, ‘Dasa’ came to be used to denote a slave or subordinate, someone who worked outside the family, … (Doniger 2009, 116-117).
Devi used the characterisation into two divisions Aryans and non-Aryans. The rajavritta characters are the Aryan community which is depicted through the address of 'Arya Subadra' and 'Arya kunti' by the common people. In the stories, the non-Aryans do not get the attention of the Aryan royal women. The Aryan women spend their time in “rajavritta, gods, serving the brahmans” (29). In the case of Kunti, she does not even develop genuine bondage with Hidimbo, (wife of Bhima, who gave birth to Ghatotkacha) as she is a non-Aryan daughter-in-law. Through this Devi projects the strict distinction maintained by the royal folk.
Devi maintained and highlighted such hierarchy in the re-written work to present the subaltern position. In ‘The Five Women’, Madraja, the head dasi of the royal women’s quarters, states how the women from the common people were snatched away from their families for multipurpose works. She states, “They brought me here when I was just a bebe. Nothing new about that. We’re the ones they always get. Dasis for the royal household, courtesans for the palace, prostitutes for the soldiers” (17).
In "Kunti and Nishadin" Kunti considers Nishadins (Tribal woman community) as rocks and stones but at the same time when they cross her closely, she is afraid that their shadows falling on the firewood may pollute the sacred rites. Hence she treats them as untouchable and their closeness towards her disturbs her. Here Devi tries to look at the cruel plot of Pandavas and Kunti’s escape from the town of Varanavata and the death of the tribal as a scapegoat. Hence Devi gives voice to the Nishadins to speak about the forgotten characters in the Mahabharata. When kunti laments about the sins that she has committed and begs for forgiveness from the god, Nishadin states Kunti that whatever she considers as sin is a natural feel in the common world. Kunti feels upset as she was addressed by her name by an untouchable. As Kunti is unable to trace her memory about the sin, Nishadin states, "You couldn't even remember this sin. Causing six innocent forest tribals to be burnt to death to serve your own interests. That was not even a crime in your book" (43). She also states that the royal members usually invite only the Brahmins for a feast. But only on that day they invited tribes, the outcastes, for the feast, and they were served an unlimited amount of wine when the hut was burnt, no one bothered to save the lives of the tribes as the royal people were interested to safeguard their life and they escaped through a secret tunnel. The Nishadin woman projects the plan of Pandavas thus, “You live there for one year, knowing full well that the place will be burned to ashes, that you have to save yourself and your sons. You had to provide in refutable proof that the six of you had been burned to death” (41).
In “Souvali” story, Souvali is a Vaishya community woman, who bore a son to Dhritarashtra, while she was in service to him at the time of Gandhari’s pregnancy. Her son was named Yuyutsu by the royal family while he was addressed as Souvalya by the common people. Souvali states that many women from the common people were taken as dasi to the royal house and they bear the king's child and they will not be treated equally. In the case of Souvali's son, he was a son of Dhritarashtra, but he was treated as an illegitimate child as he was borne by a dasi. The male children of the royal family will be separated from their mothers at a young age. They were sent to Gurugriha, for arms training at the age of five and Dasi's children were sent to a separate Gurugriha. But they were not sent only for proper training but to retrieve the arrows and to fetch the birds short by the children of the royal family. Like their mothers, Dasi's children were also used as servants. Souvalya remembers the humiliations he experienced as an illegitimate son, being addressed as ‘dasiputra’ and being ignored constantly for many years.
Double Discriminations:
Two types of subaltern characters are presented in the stories. One is a subaltern in social status based on community and the other is a subaltern in physical condition based on gender. Both discriminations are followed by the Rajavritta; 1. The practice of untouchability and inhuman treatment, 2. Constructing women’s space and enabling women to accept their restricted space as natural. Thus the patriarchal royal family controls both the common people and their women folk.
Devi could be seen as a feminist from the parallel characterisation of women in the royal family and among the common people. She uses the women characters from the royal family to project the exploitations experienced by the women community in the patriarchal society. Her characterisation of the common people indicates the writer's desire towards the natural life without any biased nature. Similar to the concept of Carnivalesque, Devi too dismantles the hierarchy of people based on power and wealth to give space for the subalterns by enabling such characters to speak and break the constructed rules.
In the case of gender-related descriptions, janavritta women act more naturally and lively than the womenfolk of rajavritta. On one-side, the stories project the self-centred attitude of rajavritta and on the other side it highlights how the rajavritta women members were also treated as subalterns under certain restrictions. In all three stories, Devi maintains a binary division between the womenfolk of the royal family and the commoners. The common women enjoy freedom in life whereas the royal women have restrictions in the activities of their daily life. In all the stories Devi projects the commoners’ way of leading life in parallel to the life of natural elements. Thus she highlights the distinction between the lives of widowhood in the royal family and the common people. The loss of many lives during the war obstructed the lifestyle of women. The royal women call their world 'ihalok' where the widows should follow the examples set by Arya Kunti and 'they have no rights to happiness'. The commoner looks at this practice of royal women as strange and thinks, "White-clad widows float around like shadowy ghosts… won't you ever laugh, talk loudly, run outside on restless feet? (19).
In “The Five Women”, the royal family follows very strict restrictions upon the widows. When husbands die in war, the wives were expected to live their life in widowhood, which removed the naturalness of their life. Uttara, Abhimanyu’s wife was pregnant when the war was going on. The death of Uttara's husband with whom she lived only for a short period, changed her life to a barren one. The differences in life in a short period experienced by Uttara are presented by Devi thus,
That Uttara had long unbound trees hanging loose about her as she danced in the wind. That Uttara loved to spend hours on her swing and playing in the garden for hours with her companions. That Uttara dressed in brightly coloured cholis, ghagras and chunnis.
This Uttara wears plain white, with no ornaments, her hair bangs heavy on her shoulders. This Uttara's eyes and mouth have forgotten to smile, her footsteps are timid, hesitant. How long will she survive? How long will that strange reflection haunt her in the mirror? (15).
Moreover when she gives birth to her child, if the child is a boy, soon the boy will be removed from the mother for arm training. "At best, her child will stay with her a year. After that, the wet nurses will take over its upbringing. Royal offspring are not raised by their mothers" (15).
Kunti feels that Gandhari is stately even after losing her 100 sons in the war. She states, “I am not truly pious and dutiful like Gandhari” (31). She believes that it is due to Gandhari’s complete surrender to her husband. Gandhari is such a dedicated woman who blindfolded her eyes as her husband was visually challenged. This complete dedication to her husband gives her confidence in herself. The patriarchal world preaches such kind of moral values to women to have them in a subordinate position. Though the royal women believe that they are superior clad and are not even willing to know about the common people, the free life of the common womenfolk surprises them. In the three stories, on several occasions the practices of widow remarriage, freedom to select a life partner, childbearing before wedlock are presented as a natural practice among the common people. The statement "We worship the earth. After a terrible calamity, the sun always rises. Even after this dreadful war, Nature has not stood still" (25) highlights the lifestyle of the simple people. Regarding remarriage, on several occasions, the common people state it as a normal happening. “We need husbands, we need children. The village needs to hear the sound of chatter and laughter. We will…create life. That’s what Nature teaches us. … never deny the demands of life in order to exist as mere shadowy ghosts, shrouded in silence. Once we had husbands, now we don’t. Crying won’t bring them back” (25).
Contrarily royal women live a secluded life. When the five women tell about their life in villages, being supportive of cultivation work with their men, Uttara states, "…I know nothing about anything! Imagine men and women singing together..." (13). This kind of joyful life at times makes the royal women feel jealous of the common women. Kunti's lamentations about her past indicate her commitment and contribution towards her family members which is the similar case of other women in rajavritta. "She never knew that she carries within her such a burden of unspoken thoughts and feelings. Life in rajavritta was so different. Mother of the Pandavas. Wife of Pandu. The role of daughter-in-law, the role of queen, the role of mothers, playing these hundreds of roles where was the space, the time to be her true self?” (28).
Through her re-writing of Kunti’s character, Devi presents the hypocritical nature of male society. From the sage Durbasa for her service and devotion, Kunti got a boon to summon any god she likes and to bear his son. She used it to summon the Sun and gave birth to Karna. As she was not married, due to her fear of society, she left the child in a river. After her marriage, she came to know that due to a curse from the sage, Pandu is not able to father a child. When Kunti told about her boon, he asked her to summon Dharma (fathered Yudhisthira), Pavana (fathered Bhima) and Indra (fathered Arjuna). Later the same boon was used by Pandu’s second wife Madri to give birth to the twins Nakula and Sahadeva. Devi through Kunti’s character satirises this by stating, “What irony! What irony! Not one of the five Pandavas is sired by Pandu! Yet they are Pandavas. And Karna? A carpenter’s son” (32). Kunti confesses that she is bothered only about the Pandavas and not about her firstborn Karna. Though she bore only three of the five brothers, she treated all equally and cared about all five. The reason for her negligence of love for Karna is a result of the restriction of society. Kunti feels the same way Karna and the first three brothers of Pandavas were born. Still, Kunti herself could not treat all her four children equally. Though none of them were born to her husband, the Pandavas enjoyed the privilege and at the same time, Karna faced humiliation as an illegitimate child. Devi gives reason for this discrimination through Kunti’s lamentations.
No, I never thought of doing anything on my own. Pandu told me, A woman can beget sons with the aid of another man. I got my lord’s permission, I went ahead. The only time I took a man I wanted, of my own free will, I got Karna. I was unmarried then, there was no need for a husband’s assent. In today’s society… if her husband should wish it, a woman can beget a child sired by another. But no young girl can become a mother of her own free will. Madhavi, the rishi’s daughter, on her father’s command, bore four sons sired by four different men. She was unmarried. But she was carrying out her father’s orders, so society accepted her (37).
Through this lamentation, Devi satirises society by highlighting that sin could be accepted as a normal thing if it is done with the approval of a male society.
Bakhtin used carnivalesque by giving four principal categories. One of them is 'Eccentricity' which removes hierarchies and gives space for humans to express themselves. This aspect could be read in parallel to subaltern studies Devi through this re-writing enabled to project the ugliness of some characters and at the same time the plight of those characters from another perceptive. The chances given to them to express their plights and discriminations and their desire for equality could be compared to a carnival. Another important quality of Carnival is degradation, which mocks the official and consequently creates space for unofficial. According to Bakhtin, “To degrade is to bury, to sow, and to kill simultaneously, in order to bring for something more and better. Degradation digs a bodily grave for a new birth: it has not only a destructive, negative aspect, but also a regenerating one”. Similarly, through the critical re-reading of the Mahabharata, Devi does not attempt to destroy or to project the negative aspect of the epic, but she tries to regenerate by giving space for the subalterns.
Bibliography
Bakhtin, Mikhail.Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Caryl Emerson, trans. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota P., 1984a.
---. Rabelais and His World. (Trans.) Helene Iswolsky USA: Indian University Press. 1984b.
Devi, Mahasweta. After Kurukshetra: Three Stories. (Trans.) Anjum Katyal. India: Seagull Books. 2005.
Doniger, Wendy. 2009. The Hindus: an Alternative History. New York: The Penguin Press.
Mukherjee, Meenakshi. “Epic and Novel in India.” The Novel: Volume 1 History, Geography and Culture. Ed.FrancoMoretti. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2006. 596-631. Print.
Shubhrastha.“When women step out of Indian epics to express real desires and choices in real books”. Scroll. in. May 17, 2015. https://scroll.in/article/727933/when-women-step-out-of-indian-epics-to-express-real-desires-and-choices-in-real-books
Sunil, Sethi. “An Interview with Mahasweta Devi. Aug. 2016. https://sunilsethireader.wordpress.com/2016/08/21/an-interview-with-mahasweta-devi/