Shreyasee Datta
Rethinking the Concept of ‘The Woman’
Everywoman has the leading role in her own unfolding life story.... Just as women used to be unconscious of the powerful effects that cultural stereotypes had on them, they may also be unconscious of powerful forces within them that influence what they do and how they feel. (Bolen 1)
The extract focuses on the formation of women as a subject. The nomenclature ‘woman’ in general conception, is derived from man, created to rescue man from loneliness. This belief has to be perpetuated through the society till it settles deep into the psychology of people. And to control an individual’s mindset the meta-narratives prove heavily beneficial. Mythology is one of the major super structures. It supplies idols for society. Such idols are endowed with features that collectively give rise to an imaginary concept of human existence. In similar trend women are expected to step in the boots of mythic women icons. And every real woman is seen in comparison with this mysterious fictive identity. Any minor deviations on their part are considered a fallacy for which they were severely penalised.
With the turn of the century, the unchallenging classical authority is found to lose slowly its strong hold. Questions are raised which set ripples of newer concepts across the still picture of antiquity. Similarly, feminists question the portrayal of women figures in mythologies.
Feminists use myth to refuse the existing representations of gender. With the turn of the 20th century, women were utilising mythic symbols to defy traditional ideas of the feminine. Mary Daly, Andrienne Rich, Annis Pratt, Marta Wiegle and others argue, “Women in mythology are well documented and discussed but generally from male perspectives. Myths represent social issues in imagistic stories drawn from history. Inevitably these stories of the past often present an outmoded set of masculine and feminine characteristics” (Humm 54). Susan Griffin’s Woman and Nature attempts an associational and subjective style for the feminist myth criticism.
Diame Purkiss in her essay “Women’s Rewriting of Myth” in Contemporary Poetry (The Women’s Companion to Mythology, 441 – 457) identifies three different approaches of rewriting. Shifting the focus from a male to female character, secondly transcending the everyday connotations to lend positivity to what was considered till date the negative. And lastly, but very importantly allowing a minor character to tell her tale. These functions shake the complacent mythologies where women are made subjects, devoid of any individual voice, rationality and identity.
The feminist myth interpreters intend to make society look beyond what is seen. Under the facade to uphold the societal norms, myth strait jackets women. It is a game of power politics, where women are always ostracized. Women are considered as an object to be conquered and controlled. John Berger in his Ways of Seeing observed that while “[a] man’s presence suggests what he is capable of doing…”, “a woman’s presence … defines what can … be done to her” (46). The inference obtained from such an examination conceived females as a territory for man’s conquest, control and exploitation.
Thus the main project of feminist myth-critics is to move beyond the myths of masculine constructs. The women writers of the recent years culled mythical women figures and posited an altered picture of them with an effort to recast marginalised women characters by devices like ironic parody, sudden twists in the traditional narrations. Such unpremeditated diversions free the audience of the stock, stereotype responses and inaugurate new vistas with multifarious dimensions. To change the established truths of a society, the most effective way of perpetuating is to present the myths with a new cast, suggesting a new and radical vision of the world. Andrienne Rich appropriately elucidated the significance of the theme of recasting for women in her essay “When We Dead Awaken – Writing as Re-vision”. In her words, it is:
[R]evision, an act of looking back, of seeing with fresh eyes, of entering an old text from a new critical direction – for us more than a chapter in cultural history ... an act of survival. (College English, 34, 18-30)
Nabaneeta Dev Sen in “Lady Sings the Blues: When Women Retell the Ramayana” brings into how the image of Sita has been employed by village women to give them voice. In women’s retellings Sita is no rebel, she is lonely, suffering but speaks of her pain and anguishes. Uma Chakraborty like other theorists read the epics as a controlling agent of human condition. Her radical approach parallels Ramayana to perpetuate the pativrata ideal thereby limiting the freedom of women. She challenges the autocracy of the epics, especially in the presentation of female figures.
Like others, prolific feminist writer Varsha Adalja wrote the play Mandodari originally in Gujarati which has won the Gujarat Sahitya Academy Award in 1997. Later it was translated into English. The play sets Mandodari, the mythic character on a new platform with a broader vision and understanding.
Mandodari is the most beloved wife of Ravanasura, the Lankadhipati. This play originally in Gujarati captures Mandodari’s struggle against her fate. Mandodari here is the central figure of the play. Being a woman besides her womanly attributes she also exhibits qualities like being the war strategist for her husband, questioning the ruler of Lanka on his activities, challenging the inevitable destiny, even at times preaching the great philosophies of life. Thus the drama sketches a reconstructed character of Mandodari with her unwomanly traits, thereby deconstructing the very image of a Woman. Mandodari, the most beloved wife of Ravanasura, the Lankadhipati is counted among the Panchkanyas for deep respect and devotion for her husband. She has also won the acclamation of a Sati.
In brief the story sets an ominous start with Mandodari’s ornaments slipping away. Suddenly terrible and frightening shrieks swallow the palace and among it Mandodari encounters Kaaldevata, the Lord of Death. She requests, pleads, seeks every measure to persuade him to return. When every effort failed, with her head held high with pride she challenges Kaaldevata saying, “I invite you to accept my challenge that your task will remain unfulfilled” (Adalja 102). She proposes him a game which she has herself designed. Kaaldevata seems to have won the game until Mandodari reveals her greater plan long concealed deep within. Thus she successfully carries out her plan in which Kaaldevata becomes a mere pawn. Varsha Adalja’s Mandodari leaves off her primary societal obligations and focuses into her own androgenous being.
Adalja’s Mandodari is a powerful recast through her bold actions and strategies who enlivens the concept of Mary Daly’s new time and new place. Mary Daly in her book Beyond God the Father illustrates problems of women casteism in the society and methods to overcome them. Her essentialist aim calls for a “new space”, a world for all, not dotted with biased gender thinking. She wants women to transcend the diffused identity and recreate their self-image. With this intention Mary Daly involves in the process of creation of “new space”, where women will be able to breathe in a fresher world and opt for ways to cast their true self. This new space is located always “on the boundary”, away from the acknowledged patriarchal institutions. Its centre is the lives of women. Daly herself defines her concept of “new space” as “a flow of healing energy which is participation in the power of being” (Ch 1, 41). Here “being” is more appropriately androgynous being, a novel way of life which comes into existence when women become conscious in casting off their roles of “the Other” - the burden of nothingness imposed on them by the sexist world. Mary Daly further narrows down to the fact that “being” for women is not merely gaining the equal status in the patrifocal world. It is rather, “something like God speaking forth God-self in the new identity of women.” Daly even includes some methods in the creation of the new space. To enlist a few, women should abstain themselves from their traditional role-playings, like non-cooperation, refusing to “play the game” of sex roles, refusing to agree, not yielding to flatter. Now entry into new space also involves entry into new time. Daly defined new time as “women’s own time. It is our life-time. It is whenever we are living out of our own sense of reality, refusing to be possessed, conquered, and alienated by the linear, measured-out, quantitative time of the patriarchal system. Women, in becoming who we are, are living in a qualitative, organic time that escapes the measurements of the system” (Ch 1, 43). This she elucidates with an example where a woman in her working place does not surrender to the purpose and goals set forth by the male-dominated framework. She works on her own schedule, but seems as if working on the company time.
In the palace of Lankadhipati, Ravana who was blessed with the boon of immortality by Brahma, Mandodari encounters the inauspicious shadow of Kaaldeveta. Bewildered Mandodari was hunting for reasons for the arrival of the Lord of Death, when Kaaldevata himself announces that the hour of Lanka’s destruction has been struck. He says, “Lanka’s destruction is destined” (Adalja 101). Though Ravana is blessed with the boon of immortality, but every being has an end; even Gods also are not spared, continues Kaaldevata. Failing in her attempts of pleading, her determination makes her stand face to face with Kaaldevata in a challenge thrown by her. In making him comply with her plan Mandodari delayed the Time. Omniscient and omnipresent Kaaldevata gets head over heels involved into the game. On his first move Ravana is seen entering the palace in sage’s attire kidnapping Sita from the forest. Mandodari though shocked tries to convince him of the grave consequences leading to war, but to no avail. Mandodari in her pensive mood believes that Sita being a chaste wife will never succumb to any illegitimate situations whatever may be the cause and Ravana frustrated will release her. Thus the war can be easily averted. At this Kaaldevata reveals his secret moves of informing Rama and that they are preparing for the war on the opposite coast. Seeing Mandodari’s helpless situation Kaaldevata suggests her to accept defeat. Her determination and spirit does not allow her to yield to the contrivances of Kaaldevata. She asserts her being through her erudition, her confidence, saying, “I am the daughter of the legendary Maydanav and an apsara. I am Ravana’s wife and also his war strategist. I am well versed in Samm, Daam, Danda and Bheda. I can put these to use too. This time I shall surely be successful with my moves, you will see” (107). This quotation needs a little deviation to Mary Daly’s conception of a liberated woman. She says in her book, Beyond God the Father that women who have grown conscious of her present status of a “non-being” and wills for her self-affirmation are inclined to perceive their transcendence from this puppet-hood as a verb where they can “live, more and have [their] being” ( Daly 34). Daly continues, “Women in the process of liberation are enabled to perceive this because our liberation consists in refusing to be ‘the Other’ and asserting instead ‘I am’ – without making another the Other” (34). The above mentioned extract from the play-text becomes a witness to this radical concept. Mandodari declares her self in the phrase “I am”, but here it bears a slight patriarchal tan. She asserts her daughterhood and wifehood on one hand and on the other her erudition, her potential to put her knowledge in practice when situation calls. Thus her position can be interpreted in an intermediary stage, leaving the male-dominated world and heading towards the new space.
Returning to the textual analysis of Mary Daly’s concept of new time, Mandodari is found engrossed in conversation with Ravana to free Sita. Ravana unheedingly exits the scene. Mandodari losing in her efforts sits grief stricken. Suddenly she is reminded of Bibhisana, Ravana’s brother who can be her next pawn in her game. But even then all her efforts went futile and contemptuous Kaaldevata prepares to exit for the battlefield claiming, loudly, “The pace of Kaal cannot be stopped” (Adalja 109). Mandodari again requests him to wait and make herself the last yet most powerful pawn. She went to meet Sita at the Ashokvatika. Even then she is made to face defeat. With heavy steps and gloomy face she returns to her palace which is then shrouded under tearful cries from all around. Kaaldevata informs her of the battlefield where Rama’s arrows have slain many asuras. Suddenly some voices are heard lamenting the death of Ravana. Mandodari sits motionless. Kaaldevata blesses Mandodari once again emphasizes on the long accepted truth that “Kaal can never be defeated” (Adalja 114). Till now the plot champions the obedience to the universal Time where Mandodari left no stone unturned to nullify its supremacy. Apparently Mandodari lost the game. Like a sting on its tail the plot reveals an unexpected twist towards the end. Every interpretation, conception, assumption gets wrong when Mandodari reveals her greater plan lying concealed within her petty strategy to save her husband and her Lanka. As Kaaldevata turns to depart, Mandodari broke out in a loud, scornful laugh. She enunciates, “You are mistaken, Dev. You have lost the game and I have won” (114). Mandodari continues, “[T]hrough Seeta’s abduction and the ensuing war, I sought redemption of my clan. The arrow that killed Ravana actually released his soul and gave the egoistic man his salvation. ... I have succeeded in what I set out to do ...” (114) continuing her tormented mood she appends, “I was waiting for my lord’s death” (114). Kaaldevata was stunned and silently admits his defeat. Mandodari proclaims triumphantly “every move of yours led me towards my ultimate goal”, thereby reduced Kaaldevata to the status of a mere pawn in her game, where she becomes the victor.
Mandodari in this award winning play forms the epitome of Mary Daly’s liberated woman. She does not abide by the patriarchal time. Her challenge to Kaaldevata primarily made him delayed in his pursuit. Later he even realized his defeat. Thus Mandodari follows the “new time”, defying the patriarchal time. Indeed it is a more powerful non-cooperation where Mandodari, the woman not only limits herself to the concept of “new time”, rather includes Kaaldevata, the ruler of Time in it, since he himself unknowingly adjourns the scheduled time of his pursuit and voluntarily got involved in the events overlooking the Time. Thus Mandodari also made him follow her new time giving an organic centre to his activities.
This liberated eponymous character from the Ramayana is in search of a greener pasture, where everything is centre, everything is equal, no “false identity”, (Daly 10) everyone true to one’s own being. Her yearning is echoed by Ambai’s Sita where her heart also throbs with similar intention and her wish found words: “To see the new world / To assume a new form / to create a new Rajya” (Ambai 439). Such wish echoes Mary Daly’s concept of new space which is introduced earlier. Besides her episode with Kaaldevata, Mandodari’s sharp and intelligent retorts to her husband carve out a niche of her own being. She is a liberated woman who not only questions her husband’s deeds but also champions the emancipation of women. When Ravana abducted Sita from the forest and was boasting of it as an instance of his prowess, Mandodari contests him saying, “Kidnapping a helpless lady cannot be an act of valour. I don’t find any bravery in it” (Adalja 103). At a later stage when Ravana is supporting his act with past incidences, Mandodari firmly holds her ground saying, “a woman is not an object to be used to settle enmity nor a victim of lust” (105).
In a conversation with Seeta at Ashokvatika Mandodari highlights the present worrying status of woman in every society. She states that “woman is an object of pleasure ... a mere plaything, to be used like a piece of linen that can be thrown away when it is soiled. To have power over woman is the right of man” (110). She steps forward to dismantle Seeta’s belief on the right functioning of this suffocating patrifocal world. Seeta was satisfied with the blind fact that among her Aryan race woman is worshipped as a goddess. Mandodari bares the truth asking “... don’t you think that there is ambiguity in the treatment of women as goddesses? When the victorious kings confiscate kingdoms, don’t they also take the woman folk of the defeated kings? The gods keep apsaras for enjoyment. Your father-in-law has several queens” (110). Sita’s notion of Sati was also questioned by Mandodari. ‘Does woman become a sati by washing the feet of her husband? No, Janaki. Sati is one who follows the path of truth” (110). Mandodari’s conversation with Ravana shows her as a liberated woman who champions the cause of women sovereignty. On another way these liberated women possess the power to sensitize the rest of the womenfolk who are still surviving in their nothingness. Mary Daly puts it, “The power of presence that is experienced by those who have begun to live in the new space radiates outward, attracting others” ( Daly 41). With this, Mandodari can be seen trying to reawaken the dormant womanhood in Sita who finds solace in her present patriarchal livelihood. Sita should see beyond the patriarchal bind, the “new space”, free atmosphere where she could enjoy her womanhood. At the end, Mandodari the liberated woman accentuates the futility of war, raged against one another where women are left behind identity-less in a white life only to lament the loss of their husbands. She cries out pointing to the throne, “... the lust for power, the rites of ego, the rituals of evil and inhumanity ...” (Adalja 115) lead to devastating wars.
Thus this modern Mandodari left her mythic submissive counterpart behind and takes a step ahead towards liberation from puppet-hood. Deviating from the conventional tracks of stereotyping and generalizing the image of women, Varsha Adalja attempts to project women in their own consciousness. Disavowing the gender masquerade, diligently observed in every community, she further attempts to empower the long suppressed and sharply marginalised women by giving her voice, sovereignty, individuality, altogether her agency. The effort to deconstruct the patriarchal metaphysics recently has accumulated a vast new mass of testimony, of new comprehensions as to what it is to be female.
Works Cited
Adalja, Varsha. “Mandodari.” Staging Resistance: Plays by Women in Translation. Ed. Tutun Mukherjee. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2005. 99 – 115. Print.
Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. New York: Penguin Press, 2008. Print.
Bolen, J.S. Goddesses in Everywoman: Powerful Archetypes in Women's Lives. North Yorkshire: Quill, 2004. Print.
Daly, Mary. Beyond God The Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women’s Liberation. Boston: Beacon Press, 1974. Print.
---. “Our Gender Issue.” Interview by Susan Bridle. EnlightenNext Magazine. Fall 1999. Web. 15 Nov. 2010.
Humm, Maggie. A Reader’s Guide to Contemporary Feminist Literary Criticism. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1994. Print.
Pratt, Annis. Archetypal Patterns in Women Fiction. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981. Print.
Rich, Andrienne. “When We Dead Awaken – Writing as Re-vision”, College English, 34 (1972), 18 – 30. Print.
Sellers, Susan. Myth and Fairy Tales in Contemporary Women’s Fiction. New York: Palgrave, 2001. Print.