On Marxist, Feminist, Ecocritical, and Queer
Criticism
Introduction
In contemporary literary studies, critical theories
such as Marxism, Feminism, Ecocriticism, and Queer Criticism have provided
fresh lenses to interpret literature and the socio-cultural dynamics it
reflects. These approaches not only expand our understanding of texts but also
shed light on issues like power dynamics, environmental ethics, gender
representation, and sexual identity. Through these critical frameworks, we
interrogate traditional narratives and unravel the influences of ideology,
patriarchy, ecological consciousness, and heteronormativity.
Marxist
Criticism
Rooted
in the theories of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Marxist Criticism
explores the socioeconomic forces that shape literature. It positions
texts as products of the cultural and economic structures of their time.
Key texts like The German Ideology emphasize the impact of ideology
on societal structures, while thinkers like Antonio Gramsci and Fredric
Jameson explore hegemony and cultural materialism. Marxist critics often
analyze class struggle, the role of the author’s social background, and
the ways literature reinforces or challenges dominant ideologies.
Feminist
Criticism
Feminist
Criticism examines literature through the lens of gender inequality and
the patriarchal structures embedded in cultural narratives. Foundational
texts like Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
and Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own advocate for women’s
intellectual independence and critique male-dominated literature.
Feminist critics such as Simone de Beauvoir and Elaine Showalter analyze
the marginalization of women, the social construction of gender, and the
representation of women as "Other" or aligned with nature,
which has traditionally subordinated them in the cultural hierarchy.
Ecocriticism
Ecocriticism
engages with literature to highlight environmental concerns and human
relationships with nature. Influential works such as Rachel Carson’s Silent
Spring and Aldo Leopold's A Sand County Almanac emphasize
ecological preservation and critique the anthropocentric exploitation of
nature. Ecocritics interrogate the binary between nature and culture,
exploring how literature reflects the socio-ecological consciousness and
promotes sustainable, ethical interactions with the environment. This
approach often includes postcolonial and gendered perspectives,
acknowledging how ecological degradation disproportionately impacts
marginalized communities.
4. Queer
Criticism
Queer
Criticism, or Lesbian and Gay Studies, challenges heteronormative
ideologies and examines the representation of queer identities in
literature. This framework not only uncovers homoerotic subtexts in
mainstream literature but also questions rigid gender roles and
boundaries. Texts like Judith Butler’s Gender Trouble have
profoundly influenced Queer Theory, introducing the concept of gender as
performative rather than inherent. Queer critics deconstruct societal
norms around sexuality, gender fluidity, and the visibility of queer
identities in canonical literature, providing a broader understanding of
identity.
Gender and Language: Challenging Stereotypes and Fostering Inclusion
Dilip Barad
Introduction
Language is a powerful tool that not only reflects our thoughts but also shapes them. It carries the potential to reinforce or challenge societal norms, including those related to gender. In the pursuit of equality and justice, both UNESCO and the Supreme Court of India recognize the crucial role of language in combating gender stereotypes. UNESCO's 1999 Guidelines on Gender-Neutral Language and the Supreme Court of India's 2023 Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes provide valuable insights into reshaping our language to create a more inclusive and equitable society.
UNESCO's commitment to justice and non-discrimination in education is evident in its call to transform behavior and attitudes that perpetuate the social exclusion of women. One of the fundamental aspects addressed by UNESCO is the use of gender-neutral language. The organization acknowledges that language is not merely a reflection of our thoughts but also influences them. When language perpetuates the assumption of male superiority, it becomes imperative to adapt our language as our ideas evolve. Ambiguous language that defaults to male imagery or perpetuates stereotypes can inadvertently contribute to bias, discrimination, and demeaning perceptions. By urging individuals to be more mindful of their language choices, UNESCO emphasizes the importance of precision and sensitivity in communication.
The Supreme Court of India's Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes
The Supreme Court of India's 2023 Handbook serves as a beacon for the legal community, specifically judges, in challenging harmful gender stereotypes. It recognizes that stereotypes often find their way into our thoughts and expressions due to societal conditioning. While acknowledging the inevitability of encountering stereotypes, the handbook stresses the significance of identifying and addressing them to foster an equal and inclusive society. In the realm of judiciary, the handbook underscores the pivotal role judges play in combating stereotypes. Relying on stereotypes in judicial decision-making distorts the objective application of the law, perpetuating discrimination and exclusion.
The handbook takes a three-pronged approach to address gender stereotypes:
Language Transformation: The handbook provides guidance on identifying language that reinforces stereotypes and offers alternative words and phrases that promote gender neutrality. By consciously choosing words that encompass all genders, the judiciary can contribute to dismantling stereotypes deeply ingrained in language.
Challenging Reasoning Patterns: The handbook sheds light on common reasoning patterns rooted in gender stereotypes, particularly concerning women, and explains why they are flawed. This empowers judges to critically assess their judgments and decisions, ensuring they are free from the influence of prejudiced notions.
Precedents and Rejecting Stereotypes: The handbook highlights binding decisions by the Supreme Court of India that have explicitly rejected gender stereotypes. Judges can draw from these cases to counter stereotypes in their decisions and writings, thereby contributing to a more impartial application of the law.
Conclusion
Language shapes our perceptions and attitudes, and its power can be harnessed to dismantle harmful gender stereotypes. The combined efforts of organizations like UNESCO and the judiciary, as exemplified by the Supreme Court of India's handbook, underscore the importance of language as a catalyst for change. By choosing words thoughtfully, challenging biased reasoning, and drawing from legal precedents, we can collectively pave the way for a more equitable, inclusive, and compassionate society where gender-neutral language reflects and reinforces the principles of justice and equality.
Cyberfeminism: Artificial Intelligence and the Unconscious Biases
Cyberfeminism appeared in the 1980s and founded on the ideas post-humanist feminist thinker Donna Haraway expresses in her A Cyborg Manifesto. In this manifesto, she lays the groundwork for the concept of the internet being a revolutionary tool to overthrow patriarchy, destroy the existing gender binary and achieve feminist liberation. She sees the internet as a new neutral space women need to ally with and that needs to be shaped by women in a way that will allow them to overthrow the existing social order.
Cyberfeminism had grand ambitions for the internet; however, it failed to acknowledge that the internet does not necessarily represent a fresh start or a free space in which gender does not matter, but is a new space that is very much embedded in society, and that sexist, racist etc. assumptions are imported into the cyberspace. Online spaces and innovative technologies are human creations and therefore biased from their very creation. Nonetheless, although the internet and online technologies are an extension of society, replicating the same problems therein, and even if the platforms are somehow biased, it still represents a separate space for expression, which “negotiates the border” between our public and private lives (Harris, 2008, p.491). It presents opportunities for self-creation and reinvention of identity. This separate space, of course, also offers new opportunities for harassment, exacerbating certain types of behaviours because of the possibility for the perpetrator to hide behind the anonymity of the internet (Evans, 2015). All this leads us to the necessity of questioning the idea of space, safe space, and online versus offline identities and more importantly, to understanding the importance feminist activism online plays in shaping those safe spaces and identities. (Paula Ranzel)
a label for women—especially young women who might not even want to align with feminism's history—not just to consume new technologies but to actively participate in their making;
a critical engagement with new technologies and their entanglement with power structures and systemic oppression. (in "Cyberfeminism", Encyclopedia of New Media, SAGE Publications)
Bruce Grenville in The Uncanny: Experiments in Cyborg Culture mentions: "The dominant cyberfeminist perspective takes a utopian view of cyberspace and the Internet as a means of freedom from social constructs such as gender, sex difference and race. For instance, a description of the concept described it as a struggle to be aware of the impact of new technologies on the lives of women as well as the so-called insidious gendering of technoculture in everyday life.".
It has been proved in several researches that the unconscious biases are creeping in the coding of Artificial Intelligence also. Virtual world is nothing but mirror image of real world. The AI coders are also human beings. If these coders are unconsciously biased or are not made about their unconscious gender biases, the aritificial intelligence / machines / robots / algorithm made by them is bound to have similar biases. If this is not given serious consideration then the hope that people dreamt of, the world free of gender bias, will be lost, even in this digital era.
Here are some interesting observations made by these researchers:
1. Kirti Sharma: How to keep human bias out of AI?
In 2008, Adichie was awarded a MacArthur Genius Grant. She was described in The Times Literary Supplement as "the most prominent" of a "procession of critically acclaimed young anglophone authors [who] is succeeding in attracting a new generation of readers to African literature".[4] Her most recent book, Dear Ijeawele, or a Feminist Manifesto in Fifteen Suggestions, was published in March 2017.[5](Wikipedia).
In this talk - Novelist Chimamanda Adichie tells the story of how she found her authentic cultural voice -- and warns that if we hear only a single story about another person or country, we risk a critical misunderstanding.
नारीवादी ओ को नारी प्रधान फिल्मो जैसे की पिंक और दंगल में एक बात खटकती है। ऐसा क्यूँ की इन फिल्मों में सुधारवादी या नारी सशक्तिकरण की बाते कोई बूढ़ा सा पुरुष की जबान में कही जाए?
एक जवाब है।
एक हिंदी कविता में ये लिखा है जो काफी महत्वपूर्ण है।
तुम्हारे भीतर है सदियों पुराना एक खूसट बूढ़ा जो लाठियां ठकठकाते अभी भी अपनी मुंछों को तेल पिलाते रहता है आखिर तुम कैसे उसकी झुर्रियों के जाल से बाहर आ पाओगी
आखिर कोई कैसे सदियों तक अपनी जमीन बंधक रहने दे सकता है।
इस कविता में यह बात को पुष्टि मिलती है कि कही न कही बूढी दी पुरुषप्रधान समाज व्यवस्था नारी के subjugation का कारण है। इस व्यस्था का विद्रोह, विरोध और रेजिस्टेंस होना चाहिए। यह जबतक सुबजुगटेड इडेन्टिटीज़ नहीं समजेगी और रेजिस्टेंस नहीं करेगी तब तक मुक्ति नहीं मिल सकती।
इस समझ के साथ, यज भी समजना जरूरी है कि इस सुधारवादी सफर में अगर हेजिमोनिक पॉवर साथ ना देकर अगर खींचातानी में उतर आता है तो पूरी व्यवस्था में अराजकता फ़ैल जाती है।
इसलिए इस प्रकार की सुधारवादी मूवमेंट्स में हेजिमोनिक पोजीशन में रहे लोगो को आगे आने की जरूरत रहती है। एहसान करने या कुछ देने के लिए नहीं परंतु एक उत्तरदातित्व समझ कर यह करना अनिवार्य है।
बस यही पिंक और दंगल जैसी नारिप्रधान फिल्मों में बुड्ढे पुरुष कर रहे है।
यह अनिवार्य सलूशन नहीं है। इसके बिना भी यह हो सकता है। लेकुन किंतु परंतु, अगर ऐसे पेरीफेरल रेजिस्टेंस को सपोर्ट हेजिमोनिक सेंटर से मिले तो समाज अराजकता से बच कर , एकजूट हो कर प्रोग्रेस कर सकता है।
सबसे महत्वपूर्ण है अपने (self) अंदर से दुसरो (other) को समझने का प्रयास करे।
इस ऐनक के साथ रिजर्वेशन पालिसी को देखे तो आज समाज को जो बंटवारा हो रहा है उसे अराजकता से बचाया जा सकता है।
भारत के बहुत सारे राज्यो में सुवर्ण जातीओ को अल्प संख्यक या पछात जातियो में शामिल करने की मुहिम चल रही है।
इस मूवमेंट का एक कारण यह है कि बहोत सारे पछात या बिछड़ी जाती के लोग अच्छी पोजीशन में पहुँच चुके है। यह लॉग ना सिर्फ अमीर बन चुके है पर यह अब पॉवर पोज़िशन्स में है और अपना हेजिमोनिक स्ट्रक्चर बना रहे है। यह थोड़ा हानिकारक है।
जौसे पिंक और दंगल में दिखाया गया है की कोई पुरुष अगर आगे आएंगे तो बात बिना अराजकता से सुलझ सकती है, वैसे अगर वह बिछ्ड़ी जाती के लोग जो लिबरेट हो चुके है वह आगे आकर अपना सैविधानिक हक जाने दे और अपनी नई पीढ़ी को यह समझ दे तो आनेवाले कल को हम सामाजिक अराजकता से बचा सकते है।
यह परिवर्तन इन्ही जाती के लोगो से आना अनिवार्य है।
इसके साथ सवर्ण जाती के लीगो को भी अपनी नई पीढी को ऐतिहासिक समझ देनी है। इतिहास में जिन लीगो के साथ अन्यायपूर्ण व्यवहार हुआ उसकी भरपाई करनी अभी बाकी है - यह समझ भी इतनी ही जरूरी है।
हो यह राहा है कि जिन बिछ्ड़ी जाती के लोगो ने बेनिफिट्स लेके एक मुकाम हासिल किया है , किसी प्रकार के पावर पोज़िशन्स में पहुँच चुके है, वह लोग भी मिल रहे बेनेफिट्स का त्याग नहीं कर रहे। जिस तरह पिंक और दंगल में बुड्ढे पुरूष की आवश्यकता है, ठीक उसी तरह बैकवर्ड क्लास में प्रोग्रेसिव लोगो को आगे आने की भी आवस्यकता है।
जिस तरह महावीरसिंह फोगाट की कहानी लड़कियों के सशक्तिकरण में एक महत्वपूर्ण कदम है, ठीक उसी तरह, बिछ्ड़ी जाती से क्रीमी लेयर के लोगो को आगे आने की जरूरत है।
यह प्रक्रिया में भी अंदर के लोग ही मदद कर सकते है।
अब हम समय की ऐसी कागार पर खड़े है जहाँ इन दो प्रकार की ट्राजेक्टरी बनाना अनिवार्य है - सवर्ण जाती के लोग अपने बच्चो को ऐतिहासिक सत्य, सामाजिक अन्याय के तत्थयो को बराबर समजाये
और बिछ्ड़ी जाती के वह लोग जो आर्थिक, सामाजिक तौर पर क्रीमी लेयर बन चुके है वह आगे आये और अपना सैविधानिक अधिकार त्यागे।
हम सब जानते है यह मुश्किल है लेकिन नामुमकिन नहीं है। लोगो को एजुकेट करे तो यह हो सकता है।
एक और रास्ता भी है।
थोड़ा कठिन है।
इसमें दो जनरेशन का समय लग सकता है।
लेकिन परिणाम बेहतरीन हो सकता है।
हमें सिर्फ यह करना है कि - आजसे जन्म लेने वाले हर एक बच्चे को नाम नहीं नंबर दिया जाये।
न पहला नाम, न दूसरा नाम, न आखरी नाम। सिर्फ और सिर्फ नंबर।
हमारी भाषा और लिपि सेक्युलर नहीं है। भाषा सांप्रदायिक, धार्मिक, सांस्कृतिक, जातिगत, लिंगजन्य है। हमारे आंकड़े इन विभाजनों से मुक्त है। भाषा और लिपि को छोड़, आंकड़े की और जाने से शायद हम एक बेहतरीन समाज की व्यवस्था का निर्माण कर सकते है।
यूटोपिया वैसे तो ख्याली पुलाव है फिरभी मानव सहज है कि हम यूटोपिया की ख्वाहिश और सपना छोड़ नहीं सकते, तोड़ नहीं सकते।
The article attempts to view kamala Das as an identity that is stranger to herself in her poems. Critics have termed her as one of the best voices in Indian poetry where feminine sensibility finds its best expression. This article looks at Kamala from psycho-linguistic point of view and tries to exemplify that her identity is lost in the strangeness of language. Another’s language, man’s language has failed her is her attempt to reveal her true feminine identity. She is nothing more than stranger to herself. Taking help of Julia Kristeva and Lacan’s theory of Otherness of Language, the writer has aimed to prove his point with the help of several poems written by Kamala Das.
How to cite this article:
MLA Citation:
Barad, Dilip. “Kamala Das: Stranger to Herself.” Charisma of Kamala Das. Ed. T. Sai Chandra Mouli. New Delhi: Gnosis, 2010. Print
K R S Iyengar (677) puts Kamala Das under the title of ‘New’ poets in his comprehensive and masterly survey of the whole body of writing in the English language by Indian writers. The fifth edition of the book entitled Indian Writing in English was published in 1985. For last two and half decade, Kamala Das still remains ‘New’ and strikingly fresh poet to the Twenty First century reader. Her poetry spoke with fierce and unsparing honesty about the difficulties of being a woman and a wife in a time and for a culture which had trained women to a long tradition of silence (Mehrotra 251). With all her honesty and ‘Newness’, Kamala remained stranger to her own identity. In her real life, Kamala ‘Nair’ by birth, became ‘Das’ after marriage, ‘Madhavikutty’ as a bilingual write and later on ‘Suraiya’ after converting to Muslim religion. Her search for true self-identity never ended. In her poems also the same striving for self-identity is reflected. The problem with Kamala Das the poet is the problem of any or all female writers. Any female writer, be it poet or novelist, face same dilemma when it comes to express their genuine self with sincerity. The dilemma leads towards anguish and anxiety. The dilemma is because of the language they use to express their sensibility. The language is such a tool, which on one hand helps to given vent to our emotions and feelings; on the other, it is the weapon which kills genuine expression of feminine sensibility. The language which is male oriented and patriarchal in its nature does not allow freedom of expression to feminine sensibility. Kamala Das is almost frantic to own this language:
The language I speak
Becomes mine, its distortions, its queerness
All mine, mine alone…..
It is as human as I am human, don’t
You see? It voices my joys, my longings, my
Hopes,… (From An Introduction).
But her unconscious, as reflected in her choice of words, voices another story all together.
It is well said by Roland Barthes (Qtd in Belsey 19): “Linguistically, the author is never more than the instance writing.” Kamala Das, the person – is not to be found in her writings. What we get is true feminine sensibility, feminine spirit; and the desperation of feminine sensibility for its expression in the language which is not hers.
When Kamala Das wrote about ‘musk of sweat between the breast’, ‘menstrual blood’, ‘male/female body’, ‘female hungers’, ‘beat sorry breasts’, or ‘stand nude before the glass’, it was considered as ‘a far cry … a fiercely feminine sensibility that dares without inhibitions to articulate the hurts it has received in an insensitive largely man-made world’ (Iyengar 680). But these words studied from psycho-linguistic view point and with the help of the theories of Julia Kristeva, Jacques Lacan, Carl Jung, Northrop Frye, would give contrasting impression of Kamala Das as a poet. She emerges as a poet struggling to express her genuine sensibility in man-made language. The words as signifier do not signify the signified. What they signify is not acceptable to her, yet she has to as there is no way out. Julia Kristeva (Belsey 16) calls this signifying capability which is not derived from the meanings of the words ‘the semiotic’. It evokes, she maintains, the sound produced by the rhythmic babbling of small children who cannot yet speak. The semiotic exists prior to the acquisition of meaning, and psychoanalysis links it with the drive towards either pleasure or death. These sound effects, as they reappear in poetry, are musical, patterned; they disrupt the purely ‘thetic’ (thesis-making) logic of rational argument by drawing on a sense or sensation that Kristeva locates beyond surface meaning. Thus the surface meaning in Kamala Das misguides us to believe what Iyengar believed. But in true sense, she has failed to give vent to her feminine sensibility. She is failed by the very language she tries to express herself. The language is the prison within the limits of which she has to function. Her address to Krishna, in Krishna is symbolical address to the language she uses:
Your body is my prison, Krishna,
I cannot see beyond it.
Your darkness blinds me,
Your love words shut out the wise world's din. (Krishna).
Krishna becomes the symbol of man-made language. She is imprisoned within the limits of the language. She cannot see beyond the language and it blinds her. Its words shut out the feminine spirit which she wants to express. Thus she remains ‘stranger to herself’ in her poems. The female voice in her poems pines for Krishna’s love, the unconscious female self of the poet pines for her own language.
But in absence of her language, she makes use of man’s language in an attempt to express her true sensibility. In The Looking Glass, she writes:
… the musk of sweat between the breasts,
The warm shock of menstrual blood, and all your
Endless female hungers.
The reference to breast is her inner heart – which throbs for true love – menstrual blood is life giving and life enhancing – which flows out in absence of life in womb to nurture… There is hunger in this reference to nurture life. It is cry for true love. Absence of love from gay oriented husband and hidden love affaire represses her desires to be what she is. She finds outlet of her repressed desires and emotions through poems.
In her first novel, Alphabet of Lust (Das 9) she writes, “But then she would not have been a poetess, for her poetry had burst out of the mire of her utter hopelessness like a red lotus”.
But she needs to be read and understood with much deeper significance and interpretation. The Otherness of language (Lacan, Kristeva as qtd in Belsey) becomes hurdles in her expression and reader’s interpretation. What Julia Kristeva writes in Strangers to Ourselves (189, 191) is quite true for Kamala Das: “You improve your skills in the new language but it is never quite yours, and you lack the authority that goes with unthinking fluency. You are easy to ignore and thus easily humiliated. … You become a kind of cultural orphan, never at ONE with anyone anywhere”. She is not comfortable with man-made language and thus never at one with herself.
In The Maggots, she writes:
At sunset, on the river ban, Krishna
Loved her for the last time and left…
That night in her husband’s arms, Radha felt
So dead that he asked, What is wrong,
Do you mind my kisses, love? And she said,
No, not at all, but thought, What is
It to the corpse if the maggots nip?
(From The Descendants)
In this small poem, she expresses women’s desire to be with her love. When married to other man, she languishes. For her the husband is maggot… Krishna is symbolic of the language which female writers from Mary Wollstonecraft to Elain Showalter and Julia Kristeva have desired to have as theirs own. But as Krishna is of none and is illusive avatar, the language, which is patriarchal and male dominated, is also not acquired by these female writers. And in absence of that language, they have to be satisfied with kisses of maggot like husband. As maggot’s nip has no effect of corpse, the language they use have no effect on what they really want to express.
In ‘An Introduction’, Kamala Das’s attempt to own Otherness (Lacan web) of language is reflected:
‘The language I speak
Becomes mine
Here again, linguistic study of the words reflect repressed desire to own something which is not hers and in that attempt something is lost (From An Introduction).
…. Its distortions, its queerness
All mine, mine alone.
Why is it that she makes use of words that are denotative of negation? Words like ‘distortion’, ‘queerness’, they denote negation. Perhaps, consciously she want to say that language is hers own, but the hidden unconscious, the feminine consciousness, expresses the hidden angst against the language. She is true to her feminine sensibility when she make use of negative adjectives like ‘distortions’ or ‘queerness’. Her feminine sensibility and consciousness know it very well that the language which she uses can never be hers.
Later see writes in the same poem:
You see? It voices my joys, my longings, my
Hopes, and it is useful to me as cawing
Is to crows or roaring to the lions…
These lines from ‘An Introduction’ clearly signify what Lacan has said about Otherness of language. Lacan uses a capital ‘O’ to distinguish the Otherness of language and culture from the otherness of other people, though of course it is from other people that we learn and internalize the Otherness of the signifier. (Belsey 58)
Catherine Belsey (58) simplifies what Lacan has said in ‘Of Strucure as the Inmixing of an Otherness Prerequisite to Any Subject Whatever’ and in Subjectivity and Otherness: A Philosophical Reading of Lacan (2007) by Lorenzo Chiesa. The big Other is there before we are, exists outside us, and does not belong to us. In the course of asking for what we want, for instance, we necessarily borrow our terms from the Other, since we have no alternative if we want to communicate. In this way, the little human organism, which begins with no sense of a distinction between itself and the world, gets separated off from its surroundings and is obliged to formulate its demands in terms of the differences already available in language, however alienating these might be. Then there is desperate attempt, anxiety and agony to express and to belong to. In this attempt to achieve fit full expression for desires and emotions, one finds oneself in very awkward situation. The Otherness of language, which we have acquired to ask and say what we want instead of crying helplessly, does not permit us to express what we want to. Because the language is irretrievably Other. For female the distance is ever greater. It is not only Other’s language; it is also man’s language. It has developed and acquired its uniqueness in patriarchal society.
Something is lost here – experienced, perhaps, as a residue of the continuity with our organic existence, or as wishes that don’t quite fit the signifiers that are supposed to define them. Belsey (59) writes, “Lacan calls what is lost is real. The real is not reality, which is what culture tells us about. On the contrary, the real is that organic being outside signification, which we can’t know, because it has no signifiers in the world of names the subject inhibits. The real, repressed because it has no way of making itself recognized in our consciousness, returns to disturb and disrupt our engagement with a reality that we imagine we know.”
In the above lines quoted form ‘An Introduction’, we find this lost of real and desperation to own it. She says that the language is hers and it expresses her longings and hopes. She is longing to express herself but her hopes are thwarted. She fails to express her ‘real’ self. The imagery that follows these lines signifies how she is lost in search of her real self. This strange self is reflected in the imagery she uses. Why is the language and its ownership like ‘cawing of craw’ and not like‘music in the Koel’or the sweet songs of Nightingale? Why are predator birds and animals like crow and lion used to signify it? These predators are archetypes of tragic world. Such recurrent archetypes are held t be the result of elemental and universal forms or patterns in the human psyche, whose effective embodiment in a literary work evoke a profound response from the attentive reader, because he or she shares the psychic archetypes.( Abrams 13) In Archetypes of Literature, Northrope Frye (Fry 1951) denotes tragic sense to the animal world belonging to the class of predatory. The use of imagery of animals belonging to archetypal tragic world, exemplifies that poet’s ‘real’ is dissatisfied. She is unable to find better images to show the general effect of loss. The loss of something that was never her own. A gap now exists between the organism and the signifying subject, and in that gap desire is born. Desire, Lacan (Belsey 60) says, is for nothing nameable, since it is unconscious, not part of the consciousness language gives us. But it is structural. The consequence of the gap that marks the loss of the real, and thus a perpetual condition. Although desire is unconscious, most of us find a succession of love-objects, and fasten our desire onto them, as if they could make us whole again, heal the rift between the subject and the lost real.
Thus we find following lines in ‘A Widow’s Lament’:
My man, my sons, forming the axis
While, I, wife and mother….
She wants to be identified as individual and as someone attached to husband and son. She desired to be one with her ‘real’. She longs to be ‘wife’ and ‘mother’… But as Lacan puts it, the rift between the subject and the lost real is reflected in the line following these:
Insignificant as a fly
Climbed the glass panes of their eyes…
In her search of her real identify ultimately she finds her nothing more than ‘insignificant fly’. She is stranger to herself. The rift between the self and real lost is clearly manifested in several of her poems.
It is human as I am human, don’t
You see? … (An Introduction)
She longs to be human. The capital ‘Y’ in ‘You’ signifies all the male gaze which considers women’s body as ‘thing’ and nothing more but a toy. She can be scornful of male desire, as for ‘The Latest Toy’, which asks that the woman not speak with
A voice, softened as though with tears. He said then, his
Dark brow wrinkling, oh please don’t become emotional,
Emotion is the only true enemy of joy.
Her obsession for sex and body is also expression of the repression born out of the desire. To heal the rift between the subject and the lost real, she seems to be obsessed with body and sex but in the end, it is difficult to heal the rift. It is possible to have a good time in the process of finding the lost real self but it is not possible to find better form of expression. And more she tries to get near to her true self, more she is dragged in the realm of strangeness.
She tries to be honest and sincere with her feminine sensibility when she writes about her obsession for body and sex:
And, I loved his body without shame, (Winter)
In The looking Glass, she writes about total submission to man, may be to get her identity:
Getting a man to love you is easy
Only be honest about your wants as
Woman.
She goes to an extent of saying:
Stand nude before the glass with him
So that he sees himself the stronger one
And believes it so, and you so much more
Softer, younger, lovelier.
She is ready to succumb her entire self to man to gain her real identity:
Gift him all,
Gift him what makes you woman, the scent of
Long hair, the musk of sweat between the breasts,
The warm shock of menstrual blood, and all your
Endless female hungers.
Man, like Krishna, here becomes symbol of the language, his language. The female poet in an attempt to achieve true sensibility and its expression is ready to give all she has. She also gets objective correlative or negative capability in form of Krishna’s image. Krishna is the symbol of that language which she wants to master in order to express herself. The otherness of language blindfolds her and she ‘cannot see beyond it. It darkens her vision and imagination. Her power of expression as poet is ‘shut out’.
The craving to voice her sensibility is thwarted. She beats her ‘sorry breast’ and writes:
Some beat their drums; others beat their sorry breasts
And wailed, and writhed in vacant ecstasy. (Dance of Eunuch)
Thus, the language betrays her. She somehow fails to speak of the various depredations the human is susceptible to with a poignancy which is more stark for being clear-eyed. (Mehrotra 252). Thus, she finds herself beaten, crushed and in pitiful situation.
But my sad woman-body felt so beaten.
The weight of my breasts and womb crushed me.
I shrank Pitifully. (An Introduction)
It seems that in The Stone Age, she is very happy and enjoys her love. The poem end with following lines:
Ask me why life is short and love is
Shorter still, ask me what is bliss and what its price….
She seems to be happy and so wishes for longer hours of loving with ‘another’ man.
If we read a few lines above it we may find that in reality she is not happy. It again is his craving to give vent to her feminine sensibility but all in vain. The strangeness of language does not help her to do so.
As soon as his husband leaves the house in the morning, she goes to meet his lover:
I drive my blue battered car
Along the bluer sea. I run up the forty
Noisy steps to knock at another’s door.
Though peep-holes, the neighbours watch,
they watch me come
And go like rain. Ask me, everybody, ask me
What he sees in me, ask me why he is called a lion,
A libertine, ask me why his hand sways like a hooded snake
Before it clasps my pubis. Ask me why like
A great tree, felled, he slumps against my breasts,
And sleeps.
The images used in the sensuous expression are again archetypes of tragic world. Say for instance, ‘Lion’, ‘hooded snake’, and ‘felled tree’ are all archetypes of tragic vision. Northrop Frye (1951) writes that the archetypes of tragic vision denote tragic sense. Archetypes, according to C.G. Jung (1922) are the reflection of collective unconsciousness. These archetypes are expressive of the fact that she is not at ease while expressing her genuine feelings and emotions. It does not mean that she is not sincere towards her sensibility. Yes, she is genuinely true towards feminine sensibility. But like all humans, she does not have control over her unconscious. When she is true with her emotions and feelings, she is true with her unconsciousness also. Here though the poet seems to express her joy in having sex with ‘another’, actually she is not happy with the act of sex. Going in ‘battered car’ does not speak about a happy journey. The entire process recalls the mechanical sexual process depicted in the episode between the typist and an unknown guest in T.S. Eliot’s The Waste Land.
These lines also express the attempts of a female poet to own man’s language. The poet drives in her blue imagination but they are battered as she fails to get better form to externalize it. The ‘knocking at another’s door’ is knocking at man’s language. But she can only peep through it. She cannot have fuller expression of her feminine sensibility through this language. That language like hooded snake ‘clasps her pubis’, symbolically gets hold of her emotions and feelings, but the result is not worth celebrating. The poem created is like ‘a great felled tree’. The creation ‘slumps’ against her breast. It cannot go deeper than skin. The language fails to touch the heart and soul of female poet. The poet has not found an expression of her true sensibility but the true meaning escapes from her grasp. The language has failed her. She merely remains a poet of body and sex. The genuine feminine sensibility that she wants to express is lost somewhere in the lacuna created because of Otherness of language. She remains stranger to herself.
Works cited:
·Abrams, M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. Delhi: Thomson Wadsworth. Rpt 2007.
·Belsey, Catherine. A Very Short Introduction: Post structuralism. New York: OUP. 2002.
·Chiesa, Lorenzo. Subjectivity and Otherness: A Philosophical Reading of Lacan. MIT press. 2007.
·Das, Kamala. Alphabet of Lust. New Delhi: Orient. 1976.
·Frye, Northrop. The Archetypes of Literature. The Kenyon Review: Vol. 8. 1951.
·Iyengar, KRS. Indian Writing in English. New Delhi: Sterling Pub. Rpt 2001. 1985.
·"Introduction"Contemporary Literary Criticism Ed. Tom Burns and Jeffrey W. Hunter. Vol. 191. Gale Cengage 2004eNotes.com 1 Jan, 2010 <http://www.enotes.com/topics/kamala-das#critical-essays-das-kamala-introduction>
·Jung, C.G. On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to Poetic Art. 1922.
·Kristeva, Julia. Strangers to Ourselves. Columbia University Press. 1991.
·Lacan, Jacques. Of Structure as the Inmixing of an Otherness Prerequisite to Any Subject Whatever. 18 July 2009. http://www.lacan.com/hotel.htm
·Mehrotra, A.K. An Illustrated History of Indian Literature in English. Delhi: Permanent Black. 2003.
·Wikipedia contributors. "Kamala Surayya."Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 30 Dec. 2009. Web. 1 Jan. 2010.
An Introduction
I don't know politics but I know the names
Of those in power, and can repeat them like
Days of week, or names of months, beginning with Nehru.
I amIndian, very brown, born inMalabar,
I speak three languages, write in
Two, dream in one.
Don't write in English, they said, English is
Not your mother-tongue. Why not leave
Me alone, critics, friends, visiting cousins,
Every one of you? Why not let me speak in
Any language I like? The language I speak,
Becomes mine, its distortions, its queernesses
All mine, mine alone.
It is half English, halfIndian, funny perhaps, but it is honest,
It is as human as I am human, don't
You see? It voices my joys, my longings, my
Hopes, and it is useful to me as cawing
Is to crows or roaring to the lions, it
Is human speech, the speech of the mind that is
Here and not there, a mind that sees and hears and
Is aware. Not the deaf, blind speech
Of trees in storm or of monsoon clouds or of rain or the
Incoherent mutterings of the blazing
Funeral pyre. I was child, and later they
Told me I grew, for I became tall, my limbs
Swelled and one or two places sprouted hair.
WhenI asked for love, not knowing what else to ask
For, he drew a youth of sixteen into the
Bedroom and closed the door, He did not beat me
But my sad woman-body felt so beaten.
The weight of my breasts and womb crushed me.
I shrank Pitifully.
Then … I wore a shirt and my
Brother's trousers, cut my hair short and ignored
My womanliness. Dress in sarees, be girl
Be wife, they said. Be embroiderer, be cook,
Be a quarreller with servants. Fit in. Oh,
Belong, cried the categorizers. Don't sit
On walls or peep in through our lace-draped windows.
Be Amy, or be Kamala. Or, better
Still, be Madhavikutty. It is time to
Choose a name, a role. Don't play pretending games.
Don't play at schizophrenia or be a
Nympho. Don't cry embarrassingly loud when
Jilted in love … I met a man, loved him. Call
Him not by any name, he is every man
Who wants. a woman, just as I am every
Woman who seeks love. In him . . . the hungry haste
Of rivers, in me . . . the oceans' tireless
Waiting. Who are you, I ask each and everyone,
The answer is, it is I. Anywhere and,
Everywhere, I see the one who calls himself I
In this world, he is tightly packed like the
Sword in its sheath. It is I who drink lonely
Drinks at twelve, midnight, in hotels of strange towns,
