Revisioning Women’s Voices from

The Ramayana: A Feminist Analysis of

Volga’s The Liberation of Sita and Sarah Joseph’s
Ramayana Stories

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Award of the Degree of

Master of Philosophy
in
English Studies

by

Silpa Joy
Reg. No 1730029

Under the Supervision of

Sushma V Murthy
Associate Professor

Department of English

CHRIST (Deemed to be University)

BENGALURU, INDIA

December 2018
 Approval of Dissertation

Dissertation entitled ‘Revisioning Women’s Voices from The Ramayana: A Feminist Analysis

of Volga’s The Liberation of Sita and Sarah Joseph’s Ramayana Stories’ by Silpa Joy, Reg.

No. 1730029, is approved for the award of the degree of Master of Philosophy in English

Studies.

Supervisor: ______________________________________

Chairperson: ______________________________________

General Research Coordinator: ______________________________________

Date:

Place: Bengaluru

ii
 DECLARATION

I Silpa Joy, hereby declare that the dissertation, titled ‘Revisioning Women’s Voices from The
Ramayana: A Feminist Analysis of Volga’s The Liberation of Sita and Sarah Joseph’s
Ramayana Stories’ is a record of original research work undertaken by me for the award of the
degree of Master of Philosophy in English. I have completed this study under the supervision
of Dr. Sushma V Murthy, Associate Professor, Department of English.

I also declare that this dissertation has not been submitted for the award of any degree, diploma,
associateship, fellowship or other title. I hereby confirm the originality of the work and that
there is no plagiarism in any part of the dissertation.

Place: Bengaluru
Date:
Silpa Joy
Reg No. 1730029
Department of English
CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru

iii
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the dissertation submitted by Silpa Joy (Reg. No. 1730029) titled
‘Revisioning Women’s Voices from The Ramayana: A Feminist Analysis of Volga’s The
Liberation of Sita and Sarah Joseph’s Ramayana Stories’ is a record of research work done by
him/her during the academic year 2017-2018 under my supervision in partial fulfillment for
the award of Master of Philosophy in English Studies.

This dissertation has not been submitted for the award of any degree, diploma, associateship,
fellowship or other title. I hereby confirm the originality of the work and that there is no
plagiarism in any part of the dissertation.

Place: Bengaluru
Date:
Dr. Sushma V Murthy
Associate Professor
Department of English
CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru

Head of the Department

Department of English
CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru

iv
 Acknowledgements

I express my gratitude to Christ University and the Vice Chancellor Fr. Thomas C

Mathew for the opportunities that are put forward to me to excel in research. I extend my

gratefulness to the Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences, Prof. John Joseph Kennedy and

the Head of the Department of English, Prof. Abhaya N B for the valuable help rendered to

me. I thank all the faculty members of English Department for their support. My special thanks

to Professor Biju, internal examiner, for his informative evaluations and suggestions.

Furthermore, my most sincere gratitude goes out to my supervisor, Dr. Sushma V

Murthy. Her support, patience, friendship and unfailing enthusiasm over the last two years have

ensured the success of this dissertation.

I would like to thank Dr. Sweta Mukherjee and Dr. Kishore Selva Babu, course

coordinators of MPhil in English for their consistent support and encouragement.

I must thank my husband, Dr. Ajay Babu, for his unwavering support over the last two

years. I am indebted to my parents for inspiring and instilling confidence in me to undertake

this work. I owe my gratitude to siblings and friends for their encouragement.

Above all, I thank God Almighty for making this work possible.

Silpa Joy

v
 Abstract

The dissertation focuses on two significant feminist revisionings of The Ramayana,

namely Ramayana Stories by Sarah Joseph and The Liberation of Sita by Volga.

Both collection of short stories create an important space for articulating individual

women’s voices, subverting the grand epic narrative. The project analyses how

Sarah Joseph and Volga articulate women’s oppression based on intersectionality

through a differential treatment of the politics of caste, bodily aesthetics, notions of

chastity and fidelity, disabililty, race and class. The research has implemented

discourse analysis as the method and is grounded in feminism, revisionist

mythology, dialogic consciousness and minority discourses. The chapters further

underline how Sarah Joseph connects these voices to contemporary concerns such

as caste and larger institutions of society. The chapters further highlight Volga’s use

of specific frameworks of feminist resistance to androcentric narratives through

sisterhood and a collective consciousness of subversion and empowerment. This

research extends existing scholarship on the multiple retellings of The Ramayana by

underlining the heterogeneity of women’s experiences and their individual

negotiations with processes of liberation.

Key Terms: collective consciousness, dialogic consciousness, feminist revisionist mythology,

liberation, intersectionality, short story, sisterhood, subversion

vi
 Contents

Approval of Dissertation ii

Declaration iii

Certificate iv

Acknowledgements v

Abstract vi

Contents vii

Chapter 1: Introduction 1-19

1.1. The Ramayana Tradition

1.2. The Representation of Women in the Epics

1.3. Feminist Revisionist Mythology

1.4. Primary Texts and the Authors

1.5. Choice of Genre

1.6. Research Questions

1.7. Research Gap

1.8. Research Objectives

1.9. Research Method

1.10. Research Methodology

1.11. Literature Review

1.12. Outline of chapters

1.13. Scope of the Research

vii
Chapter 2: Subverting the Grand Narrative: The Many Women’s Voices of Ramayana

Stories 21-50

2.1. Sarah Joseph and Revisioning

2.2. Women Writers and Rewriting

2.3. Revisioning Notions of Disability

2.4. Revisioning Notions of Bodily Aesthetics

2.5. Revisioning Notions of Disfigurement

2.6. Treatment of Women and Nature

2.7. Revisioning Notions of Caste

Chapter 3: Sita in Dialogue: Collective Consciousness and Women’s Resistance in The

Liberation of Sita 51-78

3.1. Volga’s Revisioning of The Ramayana

3.2. Volga and The Liberation of Sita

3.3. Sita and Soorpanakha – The Pawns of the War

3.4. Subverting the Notions of Female Chastity

3.4.1. Ahalya in “Music of the Earth”

3.4.2. Renuka in “The Sand Pot”

3.5. Urmila and the Feminist Concerns

3.6. Rama’s Submission to the Arya Dharma

3.7. The Women of Volga and Sisterhood

3.8. Feminist Dialogics in The Liberation of Sita

viii
Chapter 4: Conclusion 79-90

4.1. Importance of the Genre Short Story

4.2. Authors and Revisioning

4.3. The Concept of Intersectionality

4.3.1. Intersectionality of Caste and Sexuality

4.3.2. Intersectionality of Disfigurement and Disability

4.4. Limitation

4.5. The Scope for further Research

4.6. Concluding Remarks

Bibliography 91-99

ix
 Chapter 1

Introduction

Andrew Lang, a Scottish poet, novelist and a literary critic says that “The epics are not

only poetry but history, history not of real events, indeed, but of real manners, of a real world,

to us otherwise unknown” (28). The different ideals and aspirations, temperaments, failures

and achievements, the different creeds displayed by the epics in India, The Ramayana and The

Mahabharata have become part of the Indian tradition. The socio-economic and cultural

conditions of society then, get reflected in the epics. Beyond the cultural tradition and the

religious ethos of the land, the two epics take up prime momentousness. These epics and their

characters have impacted the psyche of Indian minds.

Epics have a long oral tradition, thereby they are not monolithic texts. They belong to

multiple narratives emerging from various points of subjectivity, community consciousness

and disparate experiences of historicity. In a postcolonial framework, epics in India have

become significant tropes of establishing new histories and narrativising marginality in terms

of class, caste, race, indigeneity and other hegemonic politics of differentiation. An important

intervention into the retelling of epics in India has been the feminist appropriation of

marginalized, silenced women’s voices. This dissertation focuses on two significant feminist

revisionings of The Ramayana. The project analyses how Sarah Joseph and Volga articulate

women’s oppression based on intersectionality through a differential treatment of the politics

of caste, bodily aesthetics, notions of chastity and fidelity, disabililty, race and class.

The term revisioning is used to indicate how feminist approaches or retellings of the

epic revise and revision the female characters to give them voice, agency and visibility. For

instance, Ayomukhi, a minor character in The Ramayana, like Soorpanakha, who also

experiences mutilation under the hands of Aryans, is not visible in any of the grand narratives
 Joy 2

of The Ramayana. By situating Ayomukhi in a distinct short story in her collection, Volga adds

a new dimension to the Aryan/Dravidian divide and its resultant atrocities, especially on

women. The Ramayana thus is not the story of Rama, but the enactment of a politics of

difference based on variables of hegemonic oppression.

1.1. The Ramayana Tradition

In the foreword to the book Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala, the translator,

Vasanthi Sankaranarayanan speaks about the prominence, The Ramayana has in India and how

the epic influences the psyche of the Indian minds since ages:

The story of the Ramayanam, one of the two great epics of India, is familiar to most

Indians. For people of my generation, it was a story taught to children at a very young

age. We saw it as a romantic love story, one in which good won over evil and the central

character, Raman, was a role model. The Ramayanam, as told to us, was definitely

‘Raman’s story’. Raman was the evergreen hero, the great archer, the young man who

gave up being crowned and went to the forest to fulfil the oath his father gave to his

second wife, Kaikeyi. He was also quoted as a great lover, a man who stood steadfast

by a single wife and a loving brother. In short, he was the ideal man, a man whom every

boy aimed to imitate and every girl hoped to meet when she grew up. (XVII)

The different retellings of The Ramayana are influenced by specific contexts. Literary

conventions, specific configurations of social relations, beliefs of individual religious

communities and regional cultures influence different tellings of The Ramayana. The political

and the social views of the authors, their own time in history, literary inclinations, their place

in society and their religious beliefs are all expressed in their rewritings of The Ramayana. The

additions and variations reflect the perspectives of the period of composition. The diverse

retellings of The Ramayana from different mediums, languages and styles are referred to as
 Joy 3

‘The Ramayana Tradition’ by A.K. Ramanujan. Since the story of The Ramayana and the

characters in the epic prove to be an influence in the Indian society even today, he calls ‘The

Ramayana Tradition’ as ‘second language’.

In the introduction to Retelling the Ramayana, K. Satchidanandan, cites Romila Thapar

from her foreword to Questioning Ramayanas: A South Asian Tradition edited by Paula

Richman:

No single text in India has ever been exclusively titled Ramayana. It is the name

of a tradition, a multiplicity of oral, written, and performed texts, each equally

authentic as a creation of popular imagination. In her critique of the televised

Ramayana, Thapar comments that the Ramayana does not belong to any one

moment in history, because it has its own history which is embedded in the

many versions which were woven around the theme at different times and

places. The appropriation of the story by a multiplicity of groups meant a

multiplicity of versions through which the social aspirations and ideological

concerns of each group were articulated. (1)

The author also says that “the versions of Ramayana obtained in South Asia are so diverse that

one has to specially look for the narratological resemblances that helps us to identify them as

Ramayanas” (2).

In A.K. Ramanujan’s article “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three

Thoughts on Translation” edited by Paula Richman, Ramanujan cites a story where Hanuman

in search of Rama’s ring that had fallen through a hole to the nether world meets the King of

Spirits. Showing Hanuman a platter with a thousand rings, the king asks Hanuman to pick out

his Rama’s ring. When Hanuman fails to pick one, the King of Spirits said, 'There have been

as many Ramas as there are rings on this platter. When you return to earth, you will not find
 Joy 4

Rama. This incarnation of Rama is now over. Whenever an incarnation of Rama is about to be

over, his ring falls down. I collect them and keep them. Now you can go’ (Ramanujan 133).

Ramanujan further says that “this story is usually told to suggest that for every such

Rama there is a Ramayana. The number of Ramayanas and the range of their influence in South

and Southeast Asia over the past twenty-five hundred years or more are astonishing. Just a list

of languages in which the Rama story is found makes one gasp: Annamese, Balinese, Bengali,

Cambodian, Chinese, Gujarati, Javanese, Kannada, Kashmiri, Khotanese, Laotian, Malaysian,

Marathi, Oriya, Prakrit, Sanskrit, Santali, Sinhalese, Tamil, Telugu, Thai, Tibetan-to say

nothing of Western languages” (133).

In opposition to the conventional view that holds Valmiki Ramayana as the authentic

text, the literary and performative traditions in India have examined and analysed the diverse

narrative traditions of The Ramayana. Thus, these retelling traditions, bring to light, endless

possibilities of interpretation and multiple versions of The Ramayana. These retellings and

their affinity towards political, ideological and cultural positions prompt the readers to read the

text from different perspectives. Even though, these retellings thrive with the dominant grant

narrative, they tend to critique the dominant version. Through these retellings of The

Ramayana, the different cultural identities are trying to deconstruct a monolithic construction.

1.2. The Representation of Women in the Epics

The article “Women in Ramayana -Portrayals, Understandings, Interpretations and

Relevance” by Dr. Prema Kasturi highlights the crucial roles played by women in epics in

shaping the Indian tradition, and the role of women. Dr. Prema Kasturi says:

The strong and quiet story spoke straight to the heart of the people… to this day, no one

force that goes so far towards the moulding of Indian womanhood as the ever living

touch of the little hand of that Sita who is held to have been Queen of Ayodhya…”
 Joy 5

Sister Nivedita. Indian women are practical and “earth-bound”, at the same time they

are passionate and “fiery”; serene and “fluid” (adaptable) with a free and elusive spirit

and craving for “space” for themselves… in a nutshell combining the five elements in

their personalities. As the inheritors of the “Panchakanya” concept, they have dual

personalities. They are bound by strict norms of society on the one hand; yet they are

left free to use the chinks in the armour of social and traditional laws made by the male-

oriented social order. Within the scope of social boundaries they could still express their

personalities and design their own life.

Dr. Prema Kasturi records Swami Nihshreyasananda where he divides the women in the epic

into two main categories, one, saintly women like Ahalya and the second type are the women

like Sita, Mandodari, Tara and the three queens of Dasharatha, and women who remained

within the confines of family and society. Kasturi quotes Swami Vivekananda where he

declares, “Sita is unique; that character was depicted once and for all. There may have been

several Ramas perhaps, but never more than one Sita” (26).

Unlike Dr. Prema Kasturi’s understanding of women in the epic, numerous

interpretations on female characters have come in from different perspectives. The portrayals

of women in The Ramayana bring to light a noteworthy collection of stereotypes found in

myths, folklore and fairy tales from every period and country many times over. Thus these

myths came to be retold in new ways through the act of revisioning and rewriting.

1.3. Feminist Revisionist Mythology

The project falls into the category of feminist revisionist mythology. Adrienne Rich

defines feminist revisioning in the following terms, “Revision-the act of looking back, of seeing

with fresh eyes, of entering an old text from a new critical direction-is for us [women] more

than a chapter in cultural history, it is an act of survival. Until we can understand the
 Joy 6

assumptions in which we are drenched we cannot know ourselves. And this drive to self-

knowledge, for woman, is more than a search for identity: it is part of her refusal of the self-

destructiveness of male-dominated society” (18). This feminist dimension is prominent in

Indian women’s writing. Sarah Joseph’s Ramayana Kathakal (Malayalam), Yashodhara

Mishra’s ‘Purana Katha’ (Odiya), Volga’s Vimukta (Telugu), Muppala Ranganayakamma’s

Ramayana Visha Vrikham (Telugu), Mahasweta Devi’s ‘Dopti’ and ‘Stanadayani’ (Bangla) are

examples for this dimension. From time immemorial, there are different retellings of The

Ramayana, focusing on certain characters, diffusing the emphasis on the protagonist Rama and

not treating it as a continuous story. These retellings narrate the story from the perspective of

marginalized characters, countering the grand narrative.

1.4. Primary Texts and the Authors

The research project is titled “Revisioning Women’s Voices from The Ramayana: A

Feminist Analysis of Volga’s The Liberation of Sita and Sarah Joseph’s Ramayana Stories”

and studies two primary texts, Ramayana Stories from Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from

Kerala by Sarah Joseph (translated from Malayalam by Vasanthi Sankaranarayanan) and The

Liberation of Sita by Volga (translated from Telugu by T. Vijay Kumar and C. Vijayasree).

Ralph T. H Griffith’s translation of The Ramayana is used to analyse the grand narrative.

Sarah Joseph (1946) is a leading short story writer and novelist in Malayalam. Her novel

Aalahayude Penmakkal (Daughters of God the Father) won the Kendra Sahitya Akademi

Award and Vayalar Award. Sarah Joseph is the founder of Manushi (organisation of thinking

women) and she is in the forefront of feminist movement in Kerala. After joining the Aam

Aadmi Party in 2014, she contested the parliament elections in the same year from Trissur.

Sarah Joseph’s Ramayana Kathakal (translated as Ramayana Stories) was published in

the year 2005. The collection is a subversive reading of The Ramayana. The Ramayana Stories
 Joy 7

is a collection of five short stories. Each short story brings in the female characters whose

voices and stories remain unheard in the original version. The short stories of Sarah Joseph

such as “Black Holes”, “Ashoka”, “Mother Clan”, “What is Not in the Story” and “Jathiguptan

and Janakiguptan” revision the female characters like Manthara, Kaikeyi, Sita, Mandodari,

Soorpanakha, Ayomukhi and Sambooka’s daughter.

Volga (1950) is the pen name of Popuri Lalita Kumari. She is a Telugu novelist, short

story writer and a poet and is well-known for her feminist literary articles. She was born

in Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India. In 1986, Volga published her first novel, Sahaja. For her

short story compilation “Vimukta Kadha Samputi” in Telugu, she won the prestigious Sahitya

Akademi Award in 2015. She worked in the scripting division at Ushakiran Movies as a senior

executive during 1986–1995. In 1991, Volga joined as the president of a Telangana-based

NGO, named Asmita Resource Centre for Women, which addresses women's issues. At present

she serves as the Chairman of the organization.

Volga’s Vimukta (translated as The Liberation of Sita) was published in the year 2016.

The Liberation of Sita is a collection of five short stories which subverts the grand narrative of

The Ramayana. “The Reunion”, “Music of the Earth”, “The Sand Pot”, “The Liberated” and

“The Shackled” are the five short stories in the collection. Though each story stands

independent, the character of Sita connects all the other women like Soorpanakha, Ahalya,

Renuka and Urmila who she comes across in the other short stories.

1.5. Choice of Genre

The choice of the genre ‘short story’ has a significant importance in this research. In

the article, "A Short History of the Short Story" by William Boyd, the author highlights the

importance of short story as a genre, he says, “[short stories] seem to answer something very

deep in our nature as if, for the duration of its telling, something special has been created, some
 Joy 8

essence of our experience extrapolated, some temporary sense has been made of our common,

turbulent journey towards the grave and oblivion”

(www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/william-boyd-short-history-of-the-short-story). The

genre short-story stands apart from other genres and proves to be powerful since it gives special

attention to individual characters and their lives. The short stories of Sarah Joseph and Volga

based on episodes from The Ramayana take a deeper look into the marginal female characters

from The Ramayana and gives voice to them to narrate their stories from their perspectives.

1.6. Research Questions

a) How do Sarah Joseph and Volga revision the female characters of The Ramayana?

b) How does the genre of short story subvert the grand narrative of The Ramayana through

multiple women’s voices from marginalities of caste, class, race, disability and body politics?

1.7. Research Gap

Most feminist revisionist mythology focuses on major female characters such as Sita

and Draupadi and appear as fiction or full length plays. Sarah Joseph and Volga have explored

The Ramayana through the genre of short story focusing on the minor female characters,

questioning the intersectionality of caste, race and notions of feminine aesthetics.

1.8. Research Objectives

a) Identify elements of feminist revisionist mythology in the primary texts underlining their

retellings of The Ramayana as contemporary narratives which demonstrate and question the

intersectionality of caste, race, notions of feminine aesthetics and purity in women’s identities.

b) Recognize the heterogeneity of marginal voices of women such as Manthara, Kaikeyi,

Soorpanakha, Ayomukhi, Renuka, Ahalya, Sambooka’s daughter and Urmila in the texts as

subversions of the grand narrative.

 Joy 9

c) Examine the narrative techniques employed to create sisterhood and community

consciousness among women.

1.9. Research Method

The research has implemented discourse analysis as the method to study this topic,

since it encompasses a wider sphere that incorporates individuals, institutions and social

practices that helps in the complete understanding of the research question, the research gap

and the objectives. Researching into the short stories of Sarah Joseph and Volga through the

concept of feminist revisionist mythology substantiates discourse analysis since it involves not

only the examination of the short stories and their structure, but also examines the ways in

which patriarchal institutions affect the psyche and lives of the characters.

1.10. Research Methodology

The research is grounded in feminism, revisionist mythology, dialogic consciousness

and minority discourses. Thus it is that the following chapters are an endeavour to trace the

aspect in which these ten short stories might indeed be classified as feminist revisionist

mythology for the manner in which they firstly subvert, critique and unmask The Ramayana

responsible for patriarchal hegemonic practice in both secular society and religious institutions.

1.11. Literature Review

This section of the project have been divided into two namely, a)

Epics/Mythology/Revisioning and b) Feminist Revisioning/Approaches to The Ramayana, for

the balanced analysis of articles, books, interviews and online articles which have contributed

the methodological framework for analysis.

 Joy 10

1.11.1. Epics/Mythology/Revisioning

The article, “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on

Translation” by A.K. Ramanujan explores the diversity of Ramayanas through different

narrative genres and their influence in South and Southeast Asia. Ramanujan, studies how the

different religious traditions, cultures and languages relate hundreds of tellings of The

Ramayana. The author looks into what gets transposed, translated and transplanted by the end

of this tradition. Ramanujan’s exploration of The Ramayana through different genres like

novels and poetry highlight the gap that is left in the genre short story where not many retellings

are made focusing on the minor female characters.

Ramanujan has observed the shift that has happened, in the narration of The Ramayana

from the story of victor’s genealogy and greatness, to the story of the defeated. This mechanism

of narration employed by Sarah Joseph and Volga, gives voice to the multiple marginal female

characters who are neglected in the original version, enhancing the plot. According to

Ramanujan, “in the conception of every major character there are radical differences, so

different indeed that one conception is quite abhorrent to those who hold another” (155). The

article brings in an understanding that each retelling is told for different reasons and also for

different aesthetic expectations. Thus the intention of female authors in rewriting The

Ramayana, reconceptualising, revising and rethinking from feminist perspective gets validated.

To conclude, Ramanujan says, “These various texts not only relate to prior texts

directly, to borrow or refute, but they relate to each other through this common code or common

pool. Every author, if one may hazard a metaphor, dips into it and brings out a unique

crystallization, a new text with a unique texture and a fresh context. 1n this sense, no text is

original, yet no telling is a mere retelling-and the story has no closure, although it may be
 Joy 11

enclosed in a text. In India and in Southeast Asia, no one ever reads the Ramayana or the

Mahabharata for the first time. The stories are there, 'always already'” (158).

The article “When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-Vision” by Adrienne Rich

substantiates reading of the primary texts as feminist revisionist mythology. The article raises

many concerns around women like, “ how we live, how we have been living, how we have

been led to imagine ourselves, how our language has trapped as well as liberated us; and how

we can begin to see-and therefore live-afresh” (18). Adrienne Rich says “Re-vision-the act of

looking back, of seeing with fresh eyes, of entering an old text from a new critical direction-is

for us more than a chapter in cultural history: it is an act of survival. Until we can understand

the assumptions in which we are drenched we cannot know ourselves. And this drive for self-

knowledge, for woman, is more than a search for identity: it is part of her refusal of the self-

destructiveness of male-dominated society” (18). Adrienne Rich claims for a change in the

concept of feminine identity. “We need to know the writing of the past, and know it differently

than we have ever known it; not to pass on a tradition but to break its hold over us” (19).

The rewritings by women authors uphold the concerns of Adrienne Rich, when she

says, “No male writer has written primarily or even largely for women, or with the sense of

women's criticism as a consideration when he chooses his materials, his theme, his language.

But to a lesser or greater extent, every woman writer has written for men even when, like

Virginia Woolf, she was supposed to be addressing women” (20).

The article “Combating ‘Otherness’: Revisionary Mythmaking in Divakaruni’s The

Mistress of Spices” by Aparupa Mookherjee analyses The Mistress of Spices using revisionist

framework to reconstruct female identity. The approach adopted by the author to analyse the

work helps the researcher to understand the application of methodology into the primary texts.

The article studies how the female experiences and sensibilities gets centralized through the
 Joy 12

various references to mythic tales and characters and through the appropriation of mythic

content. This study helps the researcher to understand the attempts made by female authors like

Sarah Joseph and Volga to revise, retell and rewrite the ‘constructed images of what women

collectively and historically suffered’ (96) in the patriarchal narratives. Thus revisionist

mythmaking questions assymetrical relationship between men and women enabling writers

across the globe to re-write myths and fairy tales.

1.11.2. Feminist Revisioning/Approaches to The Ramayana

The article “When Women Retell the Ramayan” by Nabaneeta Dev Sen can be read

along with Ramanujan’s article discussed above. The article gives sufficient proof for the

argument that women’s Ramayanas tell a different story. Nabaneeta Dev Sen in the article says,

“In a study I did a couple of years ago, I noticed that out of the thirty-eight basic things upon

which most epic narratives of the world are based, only nine are associated with women” (18).

The author focuses on contemporary rural women’s Ramayan songs in Bengali, Marathi,

Maithili and Telugu.

When women retell The Ramayana, according to Nabaneeta Dev Sen, there are many

alternatives. “1. You could tell it like it is, by borrowing the traditional eyes of the male epic

poet, as Molla does in her 16th century Telugu Ramayan. 2. You could tell it like it is, looking

at it with your own women’s eyes, as Chandrabati does in her 16th century Bengali Ramayan.

3. You could tell it like it is by borrowing an ideological viewpoint as Ranganayakamma does

in Ramayan Vishabriksham, rewriting the Ram tale from the Marxist point of view. 4. You

could tell your own story through the story of Sita, as the village women of India have been

doing for hundreds of years” (18). This particular analysis of the ways in which the women

rewrite The Ramayana helps the researcher to understand the ways adopted by Sarah Joseph

and Volga in their rewritings of The Ramayana.

 Joy 13

The character analysis done on Sita by Nabneeta Dev Sen helps in understanding the

portrayal of Sita in the short story “Ashoka” by Sarah joseph and in The Liberation of Sita by

Volga. Nabaneeta Dev Sen says “Just as the Ram myth has been exploited by the patriarchal

Brahminical system to construct an ideal Hindu male, Sita too has been built up as an ideal

Hindu female, to help serve the system. Although Sita’s life can hardly be called a happy one,

she remains the ideal woman through whom the patriarchal values may be spread far and wide

and through whom women may be taught to bear all injustice silently” (19).

The author’s findings on the strategy adopted by the village women to use Sita’s myth

to give themselves a voice is similar to the method advocated by Sarah Joseph and Volga in

the politics of giving voice to minor characters of The Ramayana, thereby subverting the grand

narrative. Nabaneeta Dev Sen in her article gives justification for this, “They have found a

suitable mask in the myth of Sita, a persona through which they can express themselves, speak

of their day-to-day problems, and critique patriarchy in their own fashion. This is possible

because the women’s songs are outside the canon. Women’s Sita myth, where Sita is a woman,

flourishes only on the periphery. The male Sita myth, where she is a “devi” (deity), continues

in the mainstream” (19).

In the women’s folk tradition in India, women’s responses, their feelings, their choices

of events, their perceptions, and their expressions are all one and they echoes each other. They

identify themselves as the sisters of sorrow. Thus concept of sisterhood and collective

consciousness shared among the characters of Sarah Joseph and Volga find tune with the

women in the villages who relate themselves with Sita. To conclude, the author says “When

women retell the Ramayan, Sita is the name they give themselves: the homeless female, the

foundling, unloved, rejected and insecure”.

 Joy 14

The article, “Sita: My Story” by Dr. Anjali Tripathy analyses Mallika Sengupta’s

“Sitayana”, Shashi Despande’s “The Day of the Golden Deer” and Vijaya Lakshmi’s “Janaki”

to understand the contemporary presence of Sita that offers resistance to the existing patriarchal

system.

The article draws a parallel between the views of Nabaneeta Dev Sen and Nilimma

Devi. Nilimma Devi’s Kuchipudi has the following musical score in the rendering of Sita’s

story:

“I entered the depthless embrace

Everyone calls me ‘Sita’

But I have other names too

Seema, Sara, Sophie.

(Lal and Gokhale, eds. 114)

The carefully chosen names in the last line shows that beyond geography and language,

Sita exists within every woman” (45).

The author observes the power within Sita as portrayed in Shashi Despande’s “The Day of the

Golden Deer” and Mallika Sengupta’s “Sitayana”. Sita questions the injustices done by Rama.

The nature of questioning Rama is evident in the short story “Ashoka” by Sarah Joseph. These

stories emulate Sita’s qualities of self-determination, inner strength, self-sufficiency and

dignity.

The author further quotes, Velcheru Narayana Rao from his essay “When Does Sita

Cease to be Sita”, “In choosing to return to the earth, she has accomplished two things: she has

proven her chastity and demonstrated her independence, as well. It is both a declaration of her

integrity and a powerful indictment against a culture that suspects women. It is difficult not to
 Joy 15

interpret this as Sita’s protest against the way she was treated by her people and by her

husband” (47).

Tripathy quotes Anamika from her essay “Sita in My Dreams,” “The questions raised

by Sita will remain perennial. Each woman will answer them differently, but meaningfully,

and with relevance to her time and place” (Lal and Gokhale, eds. 238). This quote justifies the

character portrayal of women from The Ramayana by Sarah Joseph and Volga in their short

stories. In The Liberation of Sita, Sita’s questions are answered by Soorpanakha, Ahalya,

Renuka and Urmila differently but meaningful in connection with what life had taught them in

different situations.

The article, “Five Holy Virgins, Five Sacred Myths: A Quest for Meaning” by Pradip

Bhattacharya deals with five female characters from the epics who are known as Panchakanyas.

The article analyses the stories of these women, their choices and the consequences these

choices led to.

“There is an ancient exhortation naming five maidens as pratah-smaraniya, urging that

they be invoked daily at dawn:

Ahalya Draupadi Kunti Tara

Mandodari tatha

Panchakanya smaranityam

mahapataka nashaka

(Ahalya, Draupadi, Kunti, Tara and Mandodari: constantly remembering these virgins

five destroys great failings)” (4). The article points out the ambiguity in categorizing Ahalya

and Draupati as kanyas (virgins) and not as naris (women), when these two women do not

satisfy the standard of monogamous chastity. The article further explains the reason for them

being categorized as virgins, for their sexual encounters with the men other than their husbands
 Joy 16

are unique, they are neither rape nor adultery. “None of these maidens breaks down in the face

of personal tragedy. Each continues to live out her life with head held high. This is one of the

characteristics that set the kanya apart from other women” (32). The observations in this article

regarding the character Ahalya, as a strong woman who utilized the years of penance for

discovering herself and her authority over her life, helps the researcher to justify the portrayal

of Ahalya by Volga in the story “Music of the Earth”.

Ahalya’s capability of fulfilling her womanhood in a manner that she found appropriate

and her independent nature are explored both in the short story and also in the character analysis

done in this article. Whether she saw through the disguise of Indra is not a question anymore

in the short story. Thus to conclude the article “It is the ability to distinguish the masculine

power of logos, the power of words, of thought, of will and of acting in the outside world, that

makes the kanyas so significant to women today” (37).

1.12. Outline of chapters

The Chapter One titled “Subverting the Grand Narrative: The Many Women’s Voices

of Ramayana Stories” examines how Sarah Joseph recreates a distinct story for each of these

marginal characters such as Manthara, Kaikeyi, Soorpanakha, Ayomukhi, Renuka, Ahalya,

Sambooka’s daughter and Urmila, underlining concerns of chastity, fidelity, disability and

disfigurement, politics of caste and subalternity. The chapter further underlines how Sarah

Joseph connects these voices to contemporary concerns such as caste and larger institutions of

society.

Chapter Two titled “Sita in Dialogue: Collective Consciousness and Women’

Resistance in The Liberation of Sita” highlights Volga’s use of specific frameworks of feminist

resistance to androcentric narratives of The Ramayana by way of concepts of intersectionality

and sisterhood.
 Joy 17

The Conclusion Chapter pays closer attention to the politics of rewriting The Ramayana

through multiple female voices of Manthara, Kaikeyi, Sita, Mandodari, Soorpanakha,

Ayomukhi, Sambooka’s daughter, Ahalya, Renuka and Urmila in Sarah Joseph’s Ramayana

Stories and Volga’s The Liberation of Sita. The chapter concludes by comparing the treatment

of intersectionality and feminist revisionist mythology in the short stories. Finally the chapter

also concludes on the importance of short story as a genre in feminist revisionist mythology.

By affirming the revisionist stances of body, race, fidelity, chastity, disability and

disfigurement, undertaken by both authors, the conclusion chapter considers how, by changing

the dynamics of the story itself, writers are able to subvert and revise the very myths on which

the legitimacy of patriarchal social structures are based.

1.13. Scope of the Research

This research extends existing scholarship on the multiple retellings of The Ramayana

by specifically underlining emerging feminist revisionings of the epic narrative within the

framework of minority discourses. Through the heterogeneity of voices of minor characters

from The Ramayana, the project highlights Sara Joseph’s and Volga’s attempts at envisioning

Sita through dialogue, sisterhood and a collective consciousness of subalternity, subversion

and empowerment. The project will also bring special focus to the genre of short story as an

important space for articulating individual women’s voices, questioning the tradition of the

grand epic narrative.

 Joy 18

Works Cited

Bhattacharya, Pradip. “Five Holy Virgins, Five Sacred Myths A Quest for Meaning.” Manushi,

pp. 4-12,

www.manushi.in/docs/362.%20Five%20Holy%20Virgins,%20Five%20Sacred%20M

yths.pdf

Bhattacharya, Pradip. “Living by Their Own Norms: Unique Powers of the Panchkanyas.”

Manushi, pp. 30-37,

www.manushi.in/docs/576.%20Living%20by%20Their%20Own%20Norms.pdf

Erndl, Kathleen M. “The Mutilation of Surpanakha.” Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of a

Narrative Tradition in South Asia, edited by Paula Richman, University of California

Press, 1991, pp. 67-88.

Joseph, Sarah. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala, by C.N. Sreekantan

Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. xiii-xv.

Kasturi, Prema. “Women in Ramayana -Portrayals, Understandings, Interpretations and

Relevance.” C.P. R. Institute of Indological Research, Feb 2013,

file:///C:/Users/Silpa%20Joy/Downloads/mafiadoc.com_abstracts-of-ramayana-c

conference-2013-wordpresscom_59d7a1fb1723dd1f07a84e5f%20(1).pdf

Kumar, T. Vijay, and C. Vijayasree, translators. The Liberation of Sita by Volga (P Lalita

Kumari), HarperCollins Publishers, 2016.

---. “Forging a Vision of Liberation”. The Liberation of Sita by Volga (P Lalita Kumari),

HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 107-112.

 Joy 19

Kumar, T. Vijay. “Volga: An Interview”. The Liberation of Sita by Volga (P Lalita Kumari),

HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 113-127.

Lang, Andrew. Homer and the Epic, London, 1893, pp. 7.

Mookherjee, Aparupa. “Combating ‘Otherness’: Revisionary Mythmaking in Divakaruni’s

The Mistress of Spices.” Research Scholar, vol. 4, no. iii, Aug. 2016, pp. 96-103,

researchscholar.co.in/downloads/16-aparupa-mookherjee.pdf

Ramanujan, A.K. “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on

Translation.” Many Ramayanas : The Diversity of a Narrative Tradition in South Asia

edited by Paula Richman, University of California Press, 1991.

Rich, Adrienne. “When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-Vision.” National Council of

Teachers of English, vol. 34, no. 1, Oct., 1972, pp. 18-30,

www.jstor.org/stable/375215

Sankaranarayanan, Vasanthi, translator. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala, by C.N.

Sreekantan Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005.

---. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala, by C.N. Sreekantan Nair and

Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. xvii-xxiv.

Satchidanandan, K. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala, by C.N.

Sreekantan Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. 1-16.

Sen, Nabaneeta Dev. “When Women Retell the Ramayan.” Manushi, no. 108, pp. 18-27.

www.manushi.in/docs/906-when-women-Retell-the-ramayan.pdf

Tripathy, Anjali. “Sita: My Story.” April 2017, pp.46-48,

magazines.odisha.gov.in/Orissareview/2017/April/engpdf/Sita.pdf
 Joy 20

Volga, (P.Lalitha Kumari). “Sita Herself can Save Us.” The Liberation of Sita, translated by

T.Vijay Kumar, HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 101-106.

 Joy 21

Chapter 2

Subverting the Grand Narrative: The Many Women’s Voices of Ramayana Stories

The chapter examines the following short stories of Sarah Joseph from the collection

Ramayana Stories - “Black Holes”, “Asoka”, “Mother Clan”, “What is Not in the Story” and

“Jathiguptan and Janakiguptan”, narratives which recreate a distinct story for each of the

marginal female characters from The Ramayana such as Manthara, Kaikeyi, Soorpanakha,

Ayomukhi, Mandodari and Sambooka’s daughter, subverting the grand narrative. The chapter

looks at the ways in which Sarah Joseph’s women question patriarchal concerns of chastity,

fidelity, disability and disfigurement, politics of caste and subalternity. The chapter further

underlines how Sarah Joseph connects these voices to contemporary concerns of caste and

larger institutions of society. The chapter explores how various references to mythical female

characters from The Ramayana and their tales, and the appropriation of mythic content serve

to consolidate feminine experiences and sensibilities.

2.1. Sarah Joseph and Revisioning

Women writers like Sarah Joseph bring female characters to light adopting the

dimension of feminist revisionist mythmaking in order to rectify patriarchal constructions of

feminine identity. This dimension helps to develop gender consciousness resisting gender

assumptions. The revisionist framework unmasks the misogyny embedded in the mythological

tales. In the article “Stealing the Language” written by Alicia Ostriker, the author says: “ the

motivating force behind women writers’ revisionist myths is the subversion of the dominant

ideology’s hidden male bias” (214) . According to Alicia Ostriker, in order to redefine feminine

identity, revisionist mythmaking proves to be an effective strategy. This dimension of feminism

reconstructs the images of women who have historically and collectively suffered” (73).
 Joy 22

Sarah Joseph has employed the techniques of re-visioning, re-imaging and re-

interpretation to re-read the grand narrative of The Ramayana. By re-visioning the myths of

disability, disfigurement, politics of caste and subalternity that subjugate women of The

Ramayana such as Manthara, Soorpanakha, Ayomukhi, Sita and Sambooka’s daughter, the

author demands a change in the narrative perspective subverting the ideologies and intentions

of male authors. Sarah Joseph thus re-reads these women using a feminist lens through her

short stories such as “Black Holes”, “Asoka”, “Mother Clan”, “What is Not in the Story” and

“Jathiguptan and Janakiguptan” displacing patriarchal elements from the centre to the margins.

Joseph’s re-imagination of the women from The Ramayana from a feminist angle helps her to

subvert patriarchally defined characters and androcentric myths, re-defining feminine

identities.

In the article “Combating ‘Otherness’: Revisionary Mythmaking in Divakaruni’s The

Mistress of Spices” by Aparupa Mookherjee, the author quotes Adrienne Rich:

‘Revision’, as defined by Adrienne Rich, is ‘the act of looking back’ to an already

existing text to construct a reality which has been deliberately ignored in patriarchal

narratives. It inevitably involves a re-reading and re-writing of earlier texts from a

feminist perspective. By becoming a ‘resisting reader rather than an assenting reader’

women writers and critics undertake to revise male assumptions through subversion of

androcentric ideology in malist writings. Thus revisionist mythmaking enables writers

across the globe to re-write myths and fairy tales which serve to perpetuate and promote

an asymmetrical relationship between men and women. (96)

Sarah joseph thus revisions mythologies of women which substantiate traditional customs, rites

and social systems, all of which subjugate women within the language of patriarchy. C. G.

Jung, the noted psychologist, declares that the collective consciousness of the human race is
 Joy 23

projected through the myths. To quote Jung , “ The study of myths reveals about the mind and

character of a people . . . And just as dreams reflect the unconscious desires and anxieties of an

individual , so myths are a symbolic projection of a people’s hopes , values ,fears and

aspirations” (Guerin , 83) .

Thus these short stories subvert the traditional, stereotyped, cultural model of The

Ramayanas. In the article “Rewriting Classical Myths: Women’s Voices in “Los motivos de

Circe” and “Penelope” by Lourdes Ortiz, the author quotes Hélène Cixous from the “The Laugh

of the Medusa”:

a feminine text has to be subversive; and it is important that a woman be the subject of

her own inscription: Woman must write her self: must write about women and bring

women to writing, from which they have been driven away as violently as from their

bodies –for the same reasons, by the same law, with the same fatal goal. Woman must

put herself into the text– as into the world and into history– by her own movement […]

She must write her self, because this is the invention of a new insurgent writing which,

when the moment of her liberation has come, will allow her to carry out the

indispensable ruptures and transformations in her history. (309, 311)

Sarah joseph has adopted this method of rewriting the grand narrative, where she took a new

position within the discourse deconstructing the patriarchal language that reduces women into

inferior positions.

2.2. Women Writers and Rewriting

Sarah Joseph and Volga while rewriting the great epic stand apart with their uniqueness

in the choice of themes, ideology and language. These women writers question The Ramayana

and its hero Rama and his ideals, as part of the patriarchal literature of ancient India. Their
 Joy 24

focus on the particular events and characters, especially the marginalized and their radical

interpretation is the result of their profound understanding of The Ramayana.

Both collections of short stories underline concerns of the female writers regarding the

women in The Ramayana. The strengths and the vulnerabilities of these women are portrayed

in a manner which endorse their comprehensive understanding and also their feminist

perspective. Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni’s statement in her novel The Palace of Illusions

correctly underpins the purpose of these women writers in rewriting the lives of the women in

the The Ramayana, “…they remained shadowy figures, their thoughts and motives mysterious,

their emotions portrayed only when they affected the lives of the male heroes, their roles

ultimately subservient to those of their fathers or husbands, brothers or sons” (xv). Divakaruni

further explains the style of writing that she adopts to bring forth the stories of these women,

“I would uncover the story that lay invisible between the lines of the men’s exploits. Better

still, her struggles and her triumphs, her heartbreaks, her achievements, the unique female way

in which she sees her world and her place in it” (xv).

Like Divakaruni, Sarah Joseph and Volga have attributed autobiographical monologues

to their female protagonists. The emotions and thoughts of these female writers are evident in

their short stories. Joseph and Volga motivate their female characters to raise their voices and

to speak for themselves to bring forth women’s concerns which have been buried under the

patriarchal narrative of The Ramayana. Thus two levels of writing can be observed from these

short stories. First one is that of the empowerment of the characters themselves and the next

level is the critique of the larger hegemonic structures. Sarah Joseph in an introduction given

to her collection of Ramayana Stories explain the kind of images of Rama that are imprinted

in everyone’s minds from their childhood:

 Joy 25

It seems to me that the image imprinted in children’s minds is one of ‘Raman’ soaked

in a ‘rain of flowers’ from heaven. The devas shower flowers upon the head of Raman,

who, upon slaying and extinguishing the rakshasas, stands upright. The children are

reassured at that moment that peace prevails everywhere. All the versions of

Ramayanam that children hear and read were filled with cruel rakshasas and rakshasis.

They had been obstructing yagas, and attacking hermits. I continue to read and study

that Raman killing them has become even a child’s need. The death of every rakshasa

is marked by devas showering flowers. (XIII)

Sarah Joseph through her Ramayana Stories contradicts this image of Rama which got

imprinted in her mind as a child. Joseph criticizes Rama from Sita’s point of view. According

to Sita, Rama was never victorious. For her, the killing of Ravanan does not become an excuse

to proclaim Rama a hero. Joseph’s Sita, her vision, voice, life and questions are reflected in

Kanchana Sita-A Play by C.N. Sreekantan Nair. For Rama, power played a more important

role than love. Urmila, Sita’s sister is questioning Rama who abandons Sita for the sake of

people’s welfare in Nair’s play:

And who decides the will of the people?...Enslaved by the cruel thoughts of inferior

people you brutalize the truth. Oh king, is there no value for truth in Ayodhya? Aren’t

you the king? A follower of truth? An observer of dharma? What protection does a

chaste and pure woman have in this Ayodhya? If in future a woman’s life is unsafe in

this Aryavartham, don’t forget that you are responsible. Also, don’t forget that

tomorrow you may be labelled as the one who showed the way for heartless men to

drive their wives out. (42)

Joseph observes that Sita’s decision to jump onto the pyre is very similar to ‘Sati’ a funeral

custom where a widow jumps on her husband’s pyre. For Sita, Rama is already dead from the
 Joy 26

moment he became suspicious about her chastity. Valmiki questions Rama in Nair’s play

regarding Sita’s replacement with an insignificant ‘golden Sita’:

Is the better half of King Ramachandran just metal…mere lifeless material? Does this

mean that even though a wife is invaluable, she should not have any consciousness? A

being without any consciousness, or thoughts, an unquestioning, lifeless lump! After

all, Ramachandran’s heart is also metal, isn’t it? Please go and tell the great king what

this forest dweller has to say…even gold melts in the fire…but, Sita cannot be burnt or

destroyed even by fire… The life of Ramachandran, muddied with impurities is not

fortunate to relish the divine abundance of that pure and wonderful glow. (65)

Sarah Joseph further points out that “the victorious Raman was actually the defeated one.

Whatever anyone says, this defeat was pasted in Raman’s heart like burning embers scorching

him every moment and hunting him till his very end” (XIV).

The short stories definitely subvert the original but at the same time they also reinterpret

The Ramayana in a feminist and contemporary way. Vasanthi Sankaranarayanan observes the

style of writing adopted by Sarah Joseph:

…she is using the personal, subjective point of view when she relates the stories. Joseph

is the protagonist of every narration. In this sense it becomes in the broader sense,

Joseph’s story. She gives a political tinge to these stories by bringing in the dialectics

between the victor and the vanquished, the dominant and the dominated, the man and

the woman, the tribal and the urban dweller. And the Aryan and the Dravidian. In every

case, the victim is the woman. So, while the stories’ focus is the female protagonist, the

broader political implications are also sewn in at appropriate times. She also points out

the great affinity between women and nature (natural elements), thereby hinting that

insulting a woman is equal to polluting the environment. In short, she is presenting an

 Joy 27

alternate point of view which is complete in itself and different from the existing

patriarchal one. (xxi)

2.3. Revisioning Notions of Disability

The article “Representation of Disabled Characters in Literature” by Dr. Somdev Banik,

highlights the stereotyped representation of disabled people in literature. The author says:

In literature ranging from epics to classics to children’s literature, disabled characters

are not only set apart from other normal characters, but they are often seen to be plotting

against innocent idealistic heroes and heroines, putting them into unnecessary hazards,

difficult travails and agonising separations from beloved ones. And often without any

genuine justifications. The great Indian epics Ramayana and Mahabharata have given

us two such prototypes, immortalised though, through their Machiavellianism, namely

Dasi Manthara and Shakuni. (199)

Sarah Joseph’s ‘Black Holes’ tells the story of Manthara, who is traditionally portrayed as a

hunch-backed, ugly woman in The Ramayana. She is characterized as the evil servant of

Kaikeyi and is believed to be the main reason behind the exile of Rama and the worst outcomes

that follow. In Sanskrit, the name Manthara means ‘hunchbacked’ and it also bears the meaning

‘someone who conspires’. Thus her name itself carries a negative remark about her character.

From the origin of literature, stories have been invested with deformed or disabled characters,

be it mythologies or fantasies, folk or fiction, oral or written. But such disabled characters are

always presented antithetically or as derivatives to able-bodied characters, surviving at the

periphery of the normal world. Dr. Somdev Banik, analyses this depiction of disabled

characters in the following manner:

In the world of fiction, dis-abled characters find their justification in accentuating the

normality and correctness of the able-bodied characters by demonising or

 Joy 28

misrepresenting their abnormality or deformity, thereby reducing them as stereotypes

instead of normal human beings. Such negative depictions of disabled characters in

literature remain etched in our memory even long after we forget the storyline. (198)

The author also quotes Bowe: “Our memories of these and other characters often become

indelible, impervious to any experiences we may have with disabled individuals in real life.

Somewhere in the back of our minds we associate disabilities with sin, evil, and danger” (109).

Disabled people suffer because of such prejudices that lead to their ill treatment denying equal

rights to livelihood and opportunities.

Unlike the typical portrayal of Manthara in The Ramayana, Sarah Joseph takes a

different stand in narrating the story of Manthara. Manthara herself gives the actual reasons for

the kind of misdeeds she performed. When everyone blamed her as the cause of all their

misfortunes, no one cared to dig deep into the conspiracies that had happened and the persons

behind these were never questioned. Every blame was showered onto Manthara. Joseph moves

a step ahead thinking from the view point of Manthara bringing forth the actual persons behind

Manthara who forced her to perform such deeds. Manthara’s job was entrusted by Aswapathi

of Mathara to provoke Kaikeyi to banish Rama and claim the throne for Bharathan. Joseph

sympathizes with Manthara as a victim of power. She becomes a typical subaltern. She does

not have a voice anywhere in the traditional patriarchal The Ramayana. The character of

Manthara in the story unravels double standards and discrimination based on a hegemonic

politics of difference. Somdev Banik thus says in his article:

Disabled characters in classics are often not portrayed as real life people, rather as

literary devices to suggest their potential for mischief and evil doing. They are one-

dimensional and type-characters, not realised fully. Manthara is a minor character in

Ramayana, appearing for a brief period, but playing a crucial role which changes the
 Joy 29

whole course of action not only of the life of Prince Rama, but Ramayana as well.

Manthara, the hunch-backed woman, thus becomes associated with instigation and

jealousy in the general Indian’s psyche, maligning the image of any hunch-backed

woman whatsoever. (199)

‘Black Holes’ begins with Manthara trying to escape from the palace of Kosalam. As a woman

spy she is threatened from all four sides. When her hand suddenly goes to the handle of the

knife tucked into her waist for self-protection, she is reminded of the prejudices possessed even

by Gods, “it is no divine weapon…for that one should have secret assignations with the devas.

Also, the devas preferred very beautiful women” (99). She was a fair game played by the ones

in power to hide their errors. Sarah Joseph showcases the power within the character Manthara

through her monologues:

At dawn tomorrow, there would be no Manthara in Ayodhya. The secrets that she had

guarded without the slightest leak would soon become the street gossip of Ayodhya.

Dasaathan’s lust and betrayal, Aswapathi’s greed, ambition and anger-would all fall

like a flaming comet on Ayodhya’s head. She, the hunchback would be the one to set

fire to its tail. She would tear down the hypocritical veils of Ayodhya in the presence

of the people. Then and only then would the people understand what kings do when

seized by lust and anger. (Joseph 99)

In literature, the inner defects of the mind often gets portrayed using the device of outer

deformity. In order to convey the idea of the evil and the sinister, “twisted mind in the twisted

body” (Banik 199) is the very popular literary device employed. “The author achieves this by

highlighting the deformity in the character to the extent of caricaturing it, making it a type

character. In these stories, physical beauty is equated to goodness of the soul, while disability

to evil. The conflict between normality and deformity is presented as the archetypical conflict
 Joy 30

between good and evil, where the evil crippled characters are hell bent on destroying the good

ones, and eventually getting eliminated themselves” (Banik 199). Manthara in the short story

further criticizes the kings for their hidden agendas and conspiracies:

Kings! All figures of clay made in the same mould. The moment they sense power

slipping from their hands, they grow furious. When they meet each other, face to face,

they embrace and kiss. But, when their backs are turned they do not hesitate to stab

each other. Even the great God of Death is frustrated with these men who are unwilling

to die without ensuring that the throne goes to their offspring. They roar, shake their

swords, and enact tragedies. Finally, before their bottoms touched the thrones they have

snatched violently, they fall. (Joseph 103)

Manthara describes Ayodhya as a stage and all the so called powerful people in the palace as

actors performing their designed role without the least consideration towards the powerless,

“What a first-class stage Ayodya is! An unusual play was being performed where everyone

takes on the role of the sutradharan (narrator). Naivete was written on the faces of all actors

and actresses. The white clothes that spoke of extreme satwa. The canine and tusk alone kept

hidden and invisible from the spectator” (Joseph 101).

In order to sustain their lives among these powerful humans, the oppressed like

Manthara are assigned with different roles for which they have no choice. Joseph, through the

story tries to free Manthara from her depiction as a bad character in the traditional The

Ramayana. The hunch back that is given to her in The Ramayana becomes symbolic of the

blames that she carried on her back throughout her entire life. Joseph is trying to unburden

these blames in the story “Black Holes”. Our perceptions of disabled people are shrouded by

ignorance and are restricted by transportational or social barriers so that direct and personal

acquaintance with disabled characters is limited. “This gradually engenders a perception of fear
 Joy 31

and suspicion which is used by literature to portray them as evil and malicious characters.

Having such an attitude towards deformity and disability, it is no wonder then, that the tragic

fates of such characters do not perturb us, we accept them as cases of divine justice or poetic

justice” (Banik 200). We rarely regard disabled characters as human beings, capable of feeling

and desiring like any other self-respecting individual. Somdev Banik in the article further says

that Gartner has compared this discrimination to racism in the following lines: “Just as whites

have imposed their images upon blacks, and men upon women, people without disabilities have

imposed their image upon people who are disabled. These images have told us not only what

is beautiful-and right; they have also warned us that the image of disability is ugly -and evil”

(31).

Like Sarah Joseph, “Swaminathan takes a sympathetic view that Manthara behaved the

way she did because the society did not recognize her wisdom. Instead it ridiculed her for her

physical deformity: ―Not only status was denied to this genius, she was a butt of ridicule.

Society saw only her ugliness and deformity. If society had treated her like any other woman,

perhaps Ayodhya would have a woman as Minister. Manthara was such a woman, a political

genius” (Banik 76). Manthara is given immense power by Joseph and this becomes evident

when she says to Kaikeyi in the end:

Then for at least four days we will live like human beings, not like worms, but like

human beings…I feel no gratitude towards you. Aswapathi, Raman, or Dasarathan. I

am grateful only to the rewards that I get…A she-devi now, a while ago a divine spirit!

daughter of Kekaya! Thrones have been installed in the blood of innocent persons. Only

the cries for murder will emerge from them. Who knows it better than me? On this

frightening night, in this dangerous forest, in the shadows where predators lurk, let the

ghost of Dasarathan save you. (106, 107)

 Joy 32

The power that is attributed to Manthara by Joseph is remarkable. She is able to raise her voice

against the queen herself. Even though the mention of Kaikeyi in the story is brief, she is

supported by powerful dialogues. Kaikeyi is no exception from patriarchal subjugations.

Manthara reminds her of the misfortune that she is going to face, when she says: “Where to?

To Aswapathi, your ‘loving father’? do you think he will accept you with a hundred

outstretched arms if you go to him after losing Ayodhya? Who would want you? ... ‘Saketam’

was always your prison. Now it has turned into your grave. Never, you will be able to escape

from there” (Joseph 106).

Joseph highlights the fact the Kaikeyi, even when she is the queen with power, is no

exception from the discrimination that is shown by patriarchy. The Ramayana always portrays

Kaikeyi to be the cruel queen who is the main reason for the banishment of Ram. Joseph tries

to bring out the softer side of Kaikeyi. When she finds that she will not be accepted by anyone,

even by her father, she requests Manthara to take her to her mother. Manthara becomes the

only person who Kaikeyi believes, will accept her, forgetting her misdoings.

2.4. Revisioning Notions of Bodily Aesthetics

“Asoka” tells the story of Sita. Joseph’s portrayal of Sita is very different from the

images of Sita in other retellings of The Ramayana. Joseph’s Sita is not the beautiful one, every

girl adores, rather she is the woman with all the scars and bleeding wounds inside and outside

her body:

The Body! Clay, battered and destroyed by continuous onslaught of snow, rain,

sunlight, lustful gazes, destructive stares, falling one upon the other on her face, neck,

hands, breasts, navel, waist. Legs and feet. Scars of severe brutalization, scabs of drying

tears, wounds of humiliation. Trailing in mud and dust, hair so matted that the strands
 Joy 33

could not be separated. Nails grown long, distinct from fingers. Skin drying and peeling

off. (108)

When Rama ordered Sita to take a bath of complete immersion, she asks “which dirt had she

been ordered to cleanse by bathing, immersed?” (108). The bond that Sita develops with the

women in Lanka is that of sisterhood. Sita partakes in the sorrow of the women of Lanka.

Joseph places the suffering of Sita along with these women. The actions of Sita are similar to

these women who have lost their beloved ones. The women, just like Sita immersed themselves

in the sea, came out without drying themselves and stood with folded hands. It is as if she

foresees the denial of Ram and the kind of sufferings that await her. Mukharjee says that

feminine identity has been traditionally defined with reference to others and that women’s roles

have been limited. In her study about the normative models among Hindu women, she sums

up: “Proceeding down the ages we find that the ideal held up before a woman is to be a

submissive, dutiful and loyal wife totally dependent upon her husband. An ideal woman is she

who is an ideal wife. In other words, it was rather an ideal wifehood, and not an ideal

womanhood, that all these authorities were describing at great length” (17).

Neera Desai, while analysing the normative structure of traditional Indian society

describes how laws of Manu laid down that women should be devoted wives and loving

mothers. She says that “Indian society like many classical societies was patriarchal. The

patriarchal values laid thrust on sexuality, reproduction, etc, restricting them from specific

activities” (148). The critic says, “But more subtle expression of patriarchy was through

legends highlighting the self-sacrificing, self-effacing pure image of women and through the

ritual practices which day in and out emphasised the dominant role of a woman as a faithful

wife and devout mother”(28). Feminists believe that gender roles and identity are socially and

culturally imposed and constructed. The women of Lanka who were subjugated as demonesses
 Joy 34

show compassion towards Sita when she expresses her desire to these women “I wish to see

my husband now-before taking a bath.”

Vibhishanan’s women held her in their arms. This is not our justice, we, a subjugated

people. This is the order of the Victor. Thus they consoled her and put drops of breast

milk in her burning eyes that had no tears left to shed. Her throbbing breast filled with

suppressed sobs was caressed by their touch as soft as a lullaby. She was embraced and

held on laps wide enough to hold a whole universe. (Joseph 110)

The contrast between Aryan and Dravidian cultures is visible in text quoted above. The

Dravidians, who are blamed for their lack of manners are the ones who are able to understand

the emotions of a helpless woman and console her in the time of need. The women in Lanka

are not given any specific names by Joseph. She addresses them as Vibhishanan’s women. This

is to highlight the attitude of the patriarchal society to keep women under control. Sarah Joseph

brings Vibhishanan’s women into focus to underline how even Vibhishanan, a virtuous man

who sided Rama, was equally patriarchal. Women from his harem are thus able to relate and

empathise with Sita. Sita, when taken to the seashore by Vibhishanan’s women, looking at the

destruction war has caused to the lives of the living and their livelihoods, is questioning Aryan

virilily: “Whose was the sin? Was it that of Aryan virility that had slashed the nose and ears of

a lower caste woman who dared to make the mistake of begging for love? Or was it that of the

justice of the subjugated, which seeking revenge, laid hands on the woman and the land of the

dominant? Finally, who suffered the result of the sin?” (Joseph 111)

Joseph finds striking resemblance between Sita and Mandodari. Sita considers

Mandodari’s loss to be her own. She even does the last rites for Ravana along with Mandodari:

Sita stood next to Mandodari, who stared at the sea, her face ash-pale, her eyes dry and

tearless, her hair thick like a dense forest sweeping the seashore. In her heart was the
 Joy 35

sound of someone clapping and beckoning…Sita, along with Mandodari, dipped herself

in the sea of Lanka. For a moment, Lanka observed complete silence…After the

immersion Mandodari and Sita got out, one behind the other. With her wet clothes on,

Sita circled the sacrificial rice. The tip of the grass, plucked and thrown between her

and the vanquished lay on the ground, unwithered. (Joseph 112)

This episode in the story is analysed by Praseetha K in her article “Nature and Myth as a

Feminine Language: A Study Based on Sarah Joseph’s ‘Puthu Ramayanam’” in the following

manner: “After taking bath, Sita followed Mandodari. And the contradiction points out the

physical death of Ravana and emotional death of Rama as a loveable husband” (53).

The article “Varsha Adalja’s Mandodari: Reworking the Pativrata Myth” by Sushila

Vijaykumar analyses the Gujarathi play Mandodari by Adalja, where the character of

Mandodari is attributed with immense power. “The play explores women’s multiple conflicts

and the implicit gendered nature of hierarchies in the hegemonic discourses of

varnaaasramadharma/patnipatidharma through a careful selection of alternative stories recalled

in bits and pieces enabling Mandodari’s self-reflexive theatrical confrontation with

Kaaladevata, Ravana, Sita and her own alter-ego” (2). In the article “Hindu Women: Normative

Models” by Prabhati Mukherjee, the author says: she (Mandodari) becomes the mouth piece of

all wives and mothers suffering from the battles that men fight to satisfy their greed and their

egoistic pursuits of love and lust” (98). Like Sarah Joseph, Adalja too portrays Mandodari as a

strong, independent woman. The further episode in the story narrates the way Sita is presented

infront of Ram and the way Ram welcomes her:

His legs firmly planted on the soil that he had conquered, the victor stood, one eye

blazing with anger and the other with disgust. Squeezing and pressing her way through

the crowd of bears, monkeys, and demons who pushed and pulled to move forward,
 Joy 36

Sita walked behind Vibhishanan. She shrank into herself at the humiliation of being led

as a culprit into the presence of the victor, instead of the dream she had nursed about a

separated lover who on winning the war fought over her, would throw down his bow

and arrow and run to her like water flowing from a burst dam. Even now her heartbeat

quickened, anticipating a glimpse of a face rising like the sun from the cover of black

clouds. But, it was difficult for her to distinguish that face, black as poison, filled with

suppressed anger and dark with suspicion, from those of monkeys and demons. When

she did recognize him, Sita stood stunned amidst the crowds! The victor’s anger blazed

like a fire flaring, overfed with ghee! The despoiled one. The object of a depraved gaze.

One who had sat on the lap of the Vanquished. One who had spent the night in his

house. Before that face, suffused with the darkness that smothers the sun in an eclipse,

Sita stood, tired, withered by the nearness of a scorching fire. (Joseph 113)

Rama doesn’t even show half of the compassion shown by Ravana towards her. Here again

Joseph contradicts Aryan and Dravidian attitudes towards women. Joseph never mentions the

name Rama anywhere in this story. He is mentioned as the ‘victor’ contrasting the

‘vanquished’. This again becomes a subversion of the grand narrative where the name Rama is

uttered a thousand times and glorified above all the other names. The words delivered by Rama

at the sight of Sita are unbearable for her, “How long would he have resisted the sight of a

beautiful woman such as you in his possession?...As for you-you stand before me as a woman

whose chastity is suspect. As harmful as a lamp to a diseased eye are you to me. Henceforth

you are nobody to me. So bid me farewell and take refuge in any of the ten directions before

you” (Joseph 114). Rama admits that he has won the war to reclaim Sita, but to wipe off the

insult inflicted upon him and his clan. He even informs Sita that she can live with any one of

his brothers and that too doesn’t bother him.

 Joy 37

2.5. Revisioning Notions of Disfigurement

The story “Mother Clan” narrates the life of Soorpanakha. Through this character Sarah

Joseph subverts the notions of body and its aesthetics. Once the substitute of beauty,

Soorpanakha is made to rethink about her notions on beauty. The story begins with a dialogue

which subverts typical notions of beauty, “Claws that spread like sieves must be shaped,

sharpened. Eyes as soft as flowers must be scratched and slit. Cheeks fluffed like fresh butter

must be pierced and torn” (117). Soorpanakha’s nose and breasts are mutilated when she

overtly expresses her desire for Rama. She thus symbolises the greatest threat to patriarchy-

female sexuality which is unbounded and fearless.

The article “The Mutilation of Surpanakha” by Kathleen M. Erndl sheds light on the

patriarchal attitudes toward female sexuality taking into context, the episode from The

Ramayana where Soorpanakha gets mutilated by Rama and Lakshmana. The author details the

extensive ways in which Soorpanakha and her tale are narrated through the commentators and

authors of various Ramayanas. She says:

On the one hand, there is the desire to show Rama as a fair, chivalrous protector of

women and other weak members of society. On the other hand, there is a deep suspicion

of women's power and sexuality when unchecked by male control. On the one hand,

there is an effort to evade the question of whether Rama's behaviour in teasing and

goading Surpanakha before having her mutilated was appropriate. On the other, there

is in many tellings the not-so-subtle suggestion that Surpanakha, as an immodest would-

be adulteress, deserves whatever treatment she receives. (68)

Kathleen M. Erndl has studied this particular episode taking into account several other versions

of The Ramayana such as Ramayana (Valmiki), Iramavataram (Kampan), Adhyatma

 Joy 38

Ramayana, Ramcaritmanas (Tulsidas) and Radhesyam Ramayan, so that common patterns of

the episodes come through each episode shedding light on to the other.

She observes that in Valmiki’s Ramayana, there is an instance where the poet contrasts

the appearance of Rama with Soorpanakha when she approaches Rama with her request:

His face was beautiful; hers was ugly. His waist was slender; hers was bloated. His eyes

were wide; hers were deformed. His hair was beautifully black; hers was copper-

colored. His voice was pleasant; hers was frightful. He was a tender youth; she was a

dreadful old hag. He was well spoken; she was coarse of speech. His conduct was

lawful; hers was evil. His countenance was pleasing; hers was repellent. (Erndl 69)

The construction of Soorpanakha as an ‘other’, because of the fact that she is a demoness and

the humiliations she faces on the grounds of her widowhood and the free expression of her

sexuality become factors which the patriarchal world finds non-negotiable. K. Ramaswami

Sastri in the article “The Riddle of Surpanakha” delivers the following commentary:

The Surpanakha episode is one of the many examples of the wonderfully creative

inventiveness of Valmiki's imagination. The story of her lasciviousness is a cleverly

contrived prelude to the story of the lustful abduction of Sita by Ravana and gives ample

scope to the poet to make the best of a situation which could afford him an ample

opportunity for comic portrayal. Rama and Laksmana crack jokes at her expense. The

poet says there is no humour in her mental composition (parihasavicaksana). He

probably suggests that the cruel and egoistic Rakshasas were not capable of humour.

(71)

The cruel treatment of women who are categorized as ‘others’ by the Aryan men is evident in

several episodes of The Ramayana. “In the Balakanda (26.18), Rama kills the raksasi Tataka

for her crimes against sage Visvamitra, after Laksmana first cuts off her hands, nose, and ears
 Joy 39

as punishment. Similarly, there is a multiform of the Surpanakha episode later in the

Aranyakanda. (69.17), in which Laksmana kills the raksasi Ayomukhi for making lustful

advances toward him” (72). The character, Ayomukhi whose story is given the least importance

in the grand narrative of The Ramayana is taken up by Sarah Joseph and is foregrounded in the

short story “Mother Clan”, when Shoorpanaka narrates Ayomukhi’s beauty and power:

Ayomukhi who dances in the forest like a peacock during the monsoon. With a body

as black and shining as gingelli seeds! As she walks, swinging her forest-thick hair

shining with oil, darting her restless, fish-shaped eyes, the colour of dark clouds,

swaying her hips and buttocks, even the great King Ravanan misses a step. She has the

grace and beauty of Goddess Kali! Heavy breasts to suckle two or three generations of

children! (Joseph 119)

Soorpanakha proclaims the humiliation done to the two women by the Aryans:

Even her, they did not simply beat, strike down, or wound with arrows. They didn’t

break her hands and legs and throw her in the forest; nor did they gouge her eyes out

and send her running. They cut off the source of her breasts milk. With blood spurting

from her breasts and face, it was at Soorpanaka’s feet that she fell. Her cries reaching

all directions, she rolled on the ground and wept unceasingly. When I dragged her up

from the ground, and stood face to face, it was our clan’s honour that was completely

shattered! “Two people! Two women whose bodies and feminity were despoiled!

(Joseph 119)

The portrayal of Soorpanakha in Kampan’s Iramavataram is unique when compared to all

other versions of The Ramayana. Kampan expresses considerable sympathy for the plight of

Soorpanakha and also portrays her as beautiful. However Kampan too contrasts the notions of

beauty and purity between Sita and Soorpanakha. When Soorpanakha sees Sita for the first
 Joy 40

time, she says: “Would he look at me as well, I who am so impure? . . . That woman is all

purity, she is beautiful, and she is the mistress of his broad chest” (74).

Kampan also draws attention towards the treatment of women by Aryans and

Dravidians. Ravana picks up the earth around Sita, so that her body is not even touched. On

the other hand, Lakshmana humiliates Soorpanakha and cuts off her nose, ears and breasts. In

Tamil culture, the mutilation of breasts is considered to be the most heinous action since the

breasts stand for a woman’s power. Sarah Joseph too brings this contrast between the Aryan

and Dravidian treatment meant of women in her short story. Ravanan always considered as a

rakshasa and ill-mannered is contrasted with Rama who is considered to be the perfect man

and well-mannered. The character of Soorpanakha brings out this contrast:

To this day no one has ever done such a deed. In my forest, no man has shown such

cruelty to any woman. Filled with passion, if a woman approaches a man and he is

unable to fulfil her desire, he should speak to her as he would to a sister and show her

another direction. King Ravanan had never lifted his sword to turn a woman’s body

into a barren land. No one in my clan has posed as a hero after destroying a woman’s

shape and form. (118)

In Ramcaritmanas, written by Tulsidas, the narrator blames Soorpanakha and he humiliates

women in general, when he says:

At the sight of a handsome man, be he her own brother, father, or son, O Garuda, a

woman gets excited and cannot restrain her passion, even as the sun-stone emits fire

when it is brought before the sun" (16.3). 28 This interjection sets the tone for the rest

of the episode, in which the emphasis is placed not so much on Surpanakha's raksasa

nature as on her female nature. She has fallen in love with both brothers, since they are

both handsome, not just Rama: like all women, she lacks self-control. (77)
 Joy 41

In the article Erndl observes that for a woman, the society allows only three possible

constructed statuses, unmarried daughter, wife or widow. Any woman who dares to go beyond

these constructions declaring her independence and free sexuality is cruelly punished by

society. The chastity and fidelity of women are considered to be the most crucial elements that

uphold family honour. Hence Sarah Joseph gives voice to Soorpankha when she says, “He

severed the very roots of my clan; insulted my colour and my class; despoiled my body and

speech” (123).

The Soorpanakha episode in Radhesyam Ramayan is different from all other versions

of The Ramayana. In this episode, Sita justifies the action of Lakshmana who initially intends

to kill Soorpanakha, but restrains himself by mutilating her following the orders from Rama.

In response to Sita, Lakshmana says: “You have abided by the warrior code. But even killing

her would not have been a wrong action. The guru of whom we were disciples [Visvamitra]

and who increased our zeal had us kill Tataka in our childhood. He used to say, 'It is not a sin

to kill a fallen woman. It is not a sin to rid the earth of heinous things” (80).

Breasts and nose are identified as the most important organs of a woman, since breasts

stand as symbol of female power and nose symbolises honour. Thus the mutilation of breasts

and nose indicates a woman being deprived of her power, honour and dignity. In the short story

“Mother Clan” Sarah Joseph highlights the humiliation and the torture Soorpanakha undergoes

when her breasts are mutilated, “Today is also the day when that thief must die at the hands of

the mothers, he who lost all sensitivity and propriety had, sat amidst the enemy, pointed out his

own flesh and blood and urged them to aim arrows at his own mother’s birth throes” (117).

She stared at the bandaged wounds on her chest. An empty space beneath scraps

beneath scraps of green medicinal paste! A place like a bare field after the harvest, so

vast, so empty, so fruitless…They butchered the root and source of my breast milk. The
 Joy 42

roots of my clan and blood! My breasts were full-round and black-like the graceful

breasts of Karimkali sculptured by Maya. I have suckled three or four generations!

(118)

In the article “Mutilation of Surphanaka” by Kathleen M. Erndl, the author highlights society’s

tendency to compare and contrast women especially in terms of their sexuality. Signifying

chastity and overt sexuality as binary oppositions, Soorpanakha and Sita exemplify two

stereotypes of women. Soorpanakha is portrayed as inauspicious, evil, dark, insubordinate and

impure, whereas, Sita is portrayed as auspicious, good, light, subordinate and pure. “According

to an oft-quoted injunction, a woman must obey and be protected by her father in youth, her

husband in married life, and her sons in old age; a woman should never be independent”

(Manusmrti V.147, IX.3). Soorphanaka’s unmarried state, or her widowhood in some other

versions, and her status of being a raksasi are major factors contributing to her ill treatment by

the patriarchy. Soorpanakha being an independent, strong woman becomes a threat to the

patriarchal society as a result of her overt sexuality. Hence she is portrayed as dangerous and

inauspicious. On the other hand, Mandodari, even though she belongs to the raksasa clan, is

never humiliated or insulted since she is under the control of patriarchy.

When Rama uses Sita as an excuse for the mutilation of Soorpanakha, a bad woman is

mutilated for the sake of a good woman. It sets an example for the fate of a woman if she

violates the rules and norms of patriarchal society. But Sarah Joseph highlights the fact that

even Sita is not exempted from the cruel hands of men. She brings in the irony of the situation

when Ayomukhi narrates to Soorpanakha, the misfortune of Sita under the hands of her

husband:

They did not cut off

Her nose and breasts

 Joy 43

But, for the sin of

having spent her days

fearful, weeping,

In King Ravanan’s garden

They prepared a blazing coal-fire

And asked her to jump into it! (125)

Erndl concludes in her article that the mutilation of Soorpanakha is significant to the story of

The Ramayana from multiple perspectives. “From a narrative point of view, it serves as the

catalyst for the key events: only after Surpanakha reports her disfigurement to Ravana does he

decide to abduct Sita. From an ethical point of view, the episode raises complex questions about

Rama's supposedly exemplary character, questions which authors and commentators have

attempted to resolve in diverse ways. From a cultural perspective, the episode sheds light on

Hindu attitudes toward female sexuality and its relationship to such polarities as good and evil,

pure and impure, auspicious and inauspicious” (84).

2.6. Treatment of Women and Nature

Sarah Joseph interweaves mythical women from The Ramayana and nature in depth.

This narrative style acts as weapon which resists the patriarchal narrative and language. As

Praseetha K says in her article “Nature and Myth as a Feminine Language: A Study Based on

Sarah Joseph’s ‘Puthu Ramayanam’”, “The very challenge in using the myth and nature as a

system of language is, that both were defined under the patriarchal system” (51). Sarah joseph

uses this narrative style, combining nature and women to liberate feminine writing from the

patriarchal language.
 Joy 44

Sarah Joseph establishes, the relationship that Sita shares with nature in the short story

“Asoka” in a powerful manner:

Leaning, Sita rested her head on the bosom of the Simpasa tree. That immoveable

creation which had stood as both support and witness, understood that there was

something impure in the essence of the Victor’s order. The tree extended a solitary

hand, a branch from a world beyond spoken words and consoled the soil. When the

tender green leaves caressed her head, Sita felt helpless and weary. Embracing the

mother trunk, slowly turning into ashes from the fiery arrow embedded inextricably in

its chest, she fell into its lap of roots, dazed. (Joseph 110)

Sita considers nature to be her fellow being. Even the tree is able to understand the feelings

that is there in Sita’s mind but not her husband, for whom she was waiting from the past one

year. Joseph’s feminisim is a kind of inclusive feminism where she embraces every being

especially the ones that were left unnoticed. Towards the end of the story, Sita sees herself as

the earth:

Sita realized that the earth that used to be wet and ready at his touch like the ploughed

land at the onset of rains, was now dry and barren. Never again would his hands be able

to rouse any feeling in the earth. Never again would a single kiss stir a shiver in the

veins of the earth, nor from those shivers rouse the heady, wild fragrance of the forest.

Now, forever the only thing to remember were his harsh words, rock hard slivers of

stone flung at her, in broad daylight, in the presence of a crowd. (115)

Patriarchal world establishes their superiority over women and nature in a similar manner,

considering them as mere properties. The objectification of nature and women allows

patriarchy to invade them and extend their territories over them. On the other hand, women
 Joy 45

finds emancipation through nature, by associating and identifying with it. Women attain

wisdom from nature and thus nature opens new ways of self-discovering for women.

The power that lies within, Sita becomes evident in the last paragraph of the story, when

she jumps into the pyre and utters the monologue:

The daughter of earth stepped into the fire, her right foot first. I am Sita! The soil that

quenches fire! From the beginning of time, I bear in my belly the rains showered on the

soil. My mind is focused on the memory of unchanging rains to come in the future. The

one who accepts rain and seeds, mixing them with fire to spread the cool, green spark

of life. Around Sita the fire rose and spread, roaring. Once again, burnt pure, the earth

lay shining, waiting for the rain and the seed. (Joseph 116)

From the text quoted above, it is evident that Sita finds console in nature. Nature acts as Sita’s

mother, providing shelter to her and thus takes revenge against Rama’s injustice. Rama

becomes a mere warrior incapable of fertilizing the earth he conquered, while Sita recognizes

herself as the Earth itself, which is capable of extinguishing even fire. Similarly in the short

story “Mother Clan” the relationship Soorpanakha establishes with nature is that of

mother/daughter one. Soorpanakha considers nature to be her mother:

The scents of Panchavati, waiting with outstretched arms to press to its breast the one

who was returning after a long separation, poured oil into her anger that blazed like a

fire. Swaying from one creeper to another, Soorpanakha ran and fell into the bosom of

Panchavati…I used to sleep on the banks of Godavari like a daughter on her mother’s

lap. Now, with a heavy heart I change my tracks to stay away from her, wandering

aimlessly. But, still I realize that the blood from my breasts has mingled with

Godavari’s waters turning it muddy and red. (Joseph 122, 123)

 Joy 46

Soorpanakha is inseparable from nature. The story compares nature with women, where Joseph

questions the patriarchy for humiliating both of them for expressing their self and sexual desires

with complete freedom. The strength of women and also the bond that the women and nature

share between them is also highlighted in this story. Soorpanakha considers the nature as her

mirror through which she sees herself.

2.7. Revisioning Notions of Caste

The story that narrates Sambooka’s misfortune is named “What is Not in the Story”

which itself justifies the motive of the author. She presents minor characters who were

marginalized in the grand narrative and the life surrounding them. The writer brings forth

characters which were left unnoticed and voiceless in the epic. Joseph brings forth the story of

the Shudra ascetic, Sambooka who was slain by Rama for violating dharma by performing a

penance, which resulted in the death of a Brahmin’s son. Joseph narrates the unjustified action

of Rama through the voices of the children of Sambooka, Lava and Kusa and also the

Brahmin’s son.

Joseph brings a contrast in the less heard story of Sambooka. When Valmiki taught

Lava and Kusa the story of Rama, Sambooka’s wife taught her children the story of their father.

In the story, Sambooka’s daughter tells her brother that they need to raise their voices so that

the world would know the injustice done to them and their father and them, “…Wasn’t mother

crying when she sang all these songs to us? But, we have to sing and open up our voices. That

won’t happen if you cry. Do you know that they may not let us in. Then, if we have to stand

outside, won’t we have to sing in a loud voice to be heard?! (130)

Joseph, through Sambooka’s children, tries to tell the world that the song in the

beginning that was heard from the love bird was the story of Sambooka and not that of Rama’s,

“This is not a song. Those words were not composed by anyone. There are no palm leaves.
 Joy 47

This is a lament. That is the sobbing sound that was heard all over the forest and emerged from

the she-bird that cried out when the hunter felled one of the two love birds” (133).

The story asserts that there is no death for Sambooka. The story of Sambooka is retold,

rewritten and critiqued by several authors, though Rama’s actions are justified in the grand

narrative. Sambooka’s daughter questions Valmiki for his negligent attitude towards the story

of Sambooka. Hearing her question, “Writer, why didn’t you give us a place in your

writing?”(133), Valmiki for the first time falls into a deep meditation, withdrawing his five

sense organs and slowly a termite hill starts growing around, covering him. Joseph purposefully

brings the Brahmin’s son into the story. Though Sambooka was killed for the sake of reviving

the Brahmin son, the children never showed any atrocities toward each other. Preys and

predators are united in this story and their mission is also shown as similar, both of them aimed

to narrate their version of the story to the world. The conversation which Unni (Brahmin’s son)

has with the other children tries to prove the innocence of Sambooka, “I won’t be able to sleep.

I am one who is already dead. The pain of returning to life from death is unbearable. To come

to life from a source other than the mother’s womb! The loneliness of it is terrible. After that I

have not slept” (135).

Unni even questions Valmiki “From the sleep in the oil tub, why did you bring me back

to this pain of wakefulness, of never being able to sleep?” (136) to which Valmiki replies “The

ability to write does not at any time become an inalienable right, Unni” (136).

Joseph indirectly accuses Valmiki as responsible for the death of Sambooka. The story

ends with a note of unsorted doubts about the lives and stories of these children:

Did Unni get his calf back? Perhaps he did. Till his next death he may have lived

suffering the pain of sleeplessness. In Naimisaranyam, Sita’s sons recited the

Ramayanam and they were the focus of the eyes and ears of all who listened, says the
 Joy 48

narrator of the epic. But what we do not have any information about is Sambooka’s

children. Did they reach Naimisaranyam? After the recital of the poet’s version did they

sing their version of Sambooka’s story? We do not hear anything of them in history,

epics, or even oral folklore. (136)

Thus “What is Not in the Story” makes a new dimension on The Ramayana and its author

Valmiki, where all the characters in the short story become narrators subverting the notions of

a single narrator and his perspectives. “Here in the short story the characters are presented by

Valmiki but the text itself gets emancipated from the author and authorship” (54). In the article

“Nature and Myth as a Feminine Language: A Study Based on Sarah Joseph’s ‘Puthu

Ramayanam” by Praseetha K, the author highlights the importance of “What is Not in the

Story”, she says: “And the story itself presents the duality between oral and written language

and positions the oral literature as more natural, unrefined and nearest to life experience. The

story demythologizes the Ramayana Myth. More than that it is a narrative technique to form a

feminine ideology which questions the sovereignty of the writer over the work” (54).

Sarah Joseph’s Ramayana Stories redefines the traditional myth as a writer and

acknowledges the creative role of the reader. “As to Roland Barthes, ‘the best weapon against

myth is perhaps to mythify it in its turn, and to produce an artificial myth’ (Barthes, Roland,

1993:35). Here myth provides rich structural elements for redefining the myths and to form a

feminine language” (Praseetha 51). Sarah Joseph revisions and rewrites the subjugated women

through different notions of caste, bodily aesthetics, etc. and gives them a unified voice

constructing and destructing grand narrative of The Ramayana.

 Joy 49

Works Cited

Banik, Somdev. “Representation of Disabled Characters in Literature.” IJELR, vol. 3, no.2,

2016, pp. 198-201,

www.ijelr.in/3.2.16/198-201%20Dr.%20SOMDEV%20BANIK.pdf

Divakaruni, Chitra Banerjee. The Palace of Illusions. Picador, 2008.

Erndl, Kathleen M. “The Mutilation of Surpanakha.” Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of a

Narrative Tradition in South Asia, edited by Paula Richman, University of California

Press, 1991, pp. 67-88.

Goosen, Adri. “Stealing the Story, Salvaging the She”: Feminist Revisionist Fiction and the

Bible”. University of Stellenbosch, December 2010, M.A. Dissertation, pp. 1-115,

www.researchgate.net/publication/48339878_Stealing_the_story_salvaging_the_she_

feminist_revisionist_fiction_and_the_bible

Joseph, Sarah. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N. Sreekantan

Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. xiii-xv.

K, Praseetha. “Nature and Myth as a Feminine Language: A Study Based on Sarah Joseph’s

‘Puthu Ramayanam’.” Malayalam Literary Survey, vol. 33, no. 3 - 4. Dec. 2013. pp.

50-54.

Mookherjee, Aparupa. “Combating ‘Otherness’: Revisionary Mythmaking in Divakaruni’s

The Mistress of Spices.” Research Scholar, vol. 4, no. iii, Aug. 2016, pp. 96-103,

researchscholar.co.in/downloads/16-aparupa-mookherjee.pdf

Mukherjee, Prabhati. Hindu Women: Normative Models. Orient Longman Limited, 1978.
 Joy 50

Ortiz, Lourdes. “Rewriting Classical Myths: Women’s Voices in “Los motivos de Circe” and

“Penelope.” Cultural & History Digital Journal, vol. 2, no.1, 2013,

cultureandhistory.revistas.csic.es/index.php/cultureandhistory/article/view/23/99

Ostriker, Alicia Suskin. Stealing the Language: The Emergence of Women’s Poetry in America.

The Women’s Press, 1987.

Sankaranarayanan, Vasanthi, translator. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N.

Sreekantan Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005.

---. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N. Sreekantan Nair and Sarah

Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. xvii-xxiv.

Satchidanandan, K. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N.

Sreekantan Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. 1-16.

Vijaykumar, Sushila. “Varsha Adalja’s Mandodari: Reworking the Pativrata Myth.” New

Delhi: Author Press, 2014, pp. 141-148,

www.academia.edu/19403791/Varsha_Adaljas_Mandodari_Reworking_the_pativrata

ideal
 Joy 51

Chapter 3

Sita in Dialogue: Collective Consciousness and Women’s Resistance in The

Liberation of Sita

This chapter studies approaches to feminist revisionist mythology in Volga’s short stories,

with specific focus on dialogic consciousness and sisterhood. It explores how Volga’s

revisionist mythology consists of rewriting the whole story rather than individual parts of the

story. The chapter elaborates on Volga’s critique of the popular notions of female chastity,

employing the characters of Ahalya and Renuka subverting the grand narrative of The

Ramayana, questioning its androcentric narrations.

3.1. Volga’s Revisioning of The Ramayana

In the article “Stealing the Language” by Alicia Ostriker, the author says “Whenever a

[writer] employs a figure or story previously accepted and defined by culture, the [writer] is

using myth, and the potential is always present that the use will be revisionist: that is, the figure

or tale will be appropriated for altered ends, the old vessel filled with new wine, initially

satisfying the thirst of the individual [writer] but ultimately making cultural change possible

(212-213).

Such an endeavour is important because, as we discussed in Chapter Two, most of the

Ramayana stories manifest the silencing, marginalisation and subjugation of women. In effect,

they become patriarchal texts which perpetuate our culture and society to be androcentric. It is

in this background that we can begin to recognize how the re-writings of such myths, can hold

the “potential” to be “revisionist” in that they not only constrict the original stories and their

patriarchal agendas, but also “appropriate them for altered ends”, liberating women from the

positions they were originally ‘written into’. As Ostriker explains, “myths – a category which

includes “folktales, legends [as well as] scripture” – are “the sanctuaries of language where our
 Joy 52

meaning for ‘male’ and ‘female’ are stored”; to “rewrite them from a female point of view” is

both a means of “redefining …women and culture” and a way of “discover[ing] new

possibilities for meaning” (Stealing the Language 11, 211, 11).

In the light of such theory, the chapter will look into the five short stories in The Liberation

of Sita, namely, “The Reunion”, “Music of the Earth”, “The Sand Pot”, “The Liberated” and

“The Shackled” analysing the female characters, Soorpanakha, Ahalya, Renuka, Urmila and

Sita. The stories of these women have historically had a negative effect on the perceived role

and position of women in society. As we explore these texts and trace the manner in which

they offer “transforming alternatives” to original narratives – alternatives which undermine,

destabilise and ultimately openly challenge patriarchal tropes, symbols and thinking – this

chapter will propose that such tales become “revisionist mythology” and offer readers new

ideas on gender and society (Stealing 211; Feminist 78).

In the article “Streevadham Kosame Katha Rachana Chepattanu”, Volga says: “I am a

feminist. I proudly call myself as a soviet feminist…. I am not a writer who writes for the sake

of writing. I took up writing as an aid for propagating the ideas of feminism in the form of

literature” (254-255). Telugu feminist literature opened up new ways for the discussion of

women’s issues through the works of Volga, who works and writes for the political

empowerment of women.

In an interview conducted by Malini Nair on Volga, when asked about her decision to

do a feminist rewriting of The Ramayana, Volga says: “I am fascinated by the fact that the wars

in our epics never really ended – they were wars fought over the bodies of women, the honour

of wives, daughters and sisters. There is no end to the violence perpetrated by men over the

chastity of women, their proprietorial rights over women. From The Ramayana to

the Mahabharata to the Partition to honour killings and sexual harassment, the everyday

violence that women like the Delhi gang rape victim face forms a continuum. Even today,
 Joy 53

women have to be punished, put in their places, disciplined, for real or imagined sexual

transgression, by men who are strangers as well as men inside their homes” (Mar 02, 2017 ·

08:30 am).

3.2. Volga and The Liberation of Sita

The stories in The Liberation of Sita wheel around the character Sita and Sita in

dialogue with other female characters like Soorpanakha, Ahalya, Renuka and Urmila. Volga

clarifies her forethought in writing these stories. “The Reunion” was inspired from a scene in

her dance drama War and Peace. The grand narrative always accursed Sita and Soorpanakha

as liable for the onset of the Great War, however Volga denies this argument and she depicts

Sita and Soorpanakha as worshipers of beauty and lovers of peace. These women are in reality

the pawns of the Rama-Ravana war intended to expand the Aryan empire, yet they cannot

rescue themselves from humiliations, disgrace and distrust.

The grand narrative of The Ramayana portrays Soorpanakha as a demon. Popular

retellings concentrate more on the pangs of Sita and other women characters in the epics such

as Draupathi. However, Volga endeavours to bring in woes of Soorpanakha in her short story

“The Reunion”. Her sufferings were never justified since they were the result of her lusting a

married man. Besides this, Sita and Soorpanakha are always regarded as rivals, they are never

delineated as confidants. Volga moves a step forward to illustrate them as acquaintances. The

story characterizes Soorpanakha’s empowerment and the efforts she undertakes to achieve it.

Soorpanakha who is always sketched as a dreadful character is imparting favourable insights

to Sita in Volga’s work.

Sita was subjected to the disdain and insults of Rama, the same man whom she loved

and adored so much. However she was courageous enough to walk away from this man, even

deserting her children to follow her own path. Volga illustrates the Sita, which she sees in her
 Joy 54

light, the constant struggles that she undertook and the other women who joined her in her

journey in the article “Sita Herself Can Save Us”:

Sita must have struggled hard with herself to leave Rama. Merely being angry with him

would not have been enough to separate herself from him. Psychoanalysts say that

anger and hatred tie people together. More than love, anger and malice bind people to

each other rather than liberate them. Therefore, Sita did not leave in anger. She left with

a matured mind. I felt that her maturity may have come from her worldly experience.

She must have internalized the strength that she got from outside. (104)

Like Sita, there are many women in The Ramayana who were the victims of the patriarchal

norms. Ahalya, Renuka and Urmila are the ones who have had almost similar experiences of

Sita. Volga brings these women in dialogue with Sita to share their wisdom, knowledge and

experiences so that Sita is been empowered even more. Volga in her article further explains,

how she connects these women to the contemporary women:

While some women overcome the restrictions, insults and violence they are subjected

to, many others remain trapped, unable to escape, and unaware of the need to escape.

Women who are unaware of the need to liberate themselves from abusive husbands

continue to hang on to them, even while loathing them. Women are used to inflicting

violence upon themselves out of hatred. (105)

Volga through the collection of these five short stories was able to develop a sense of collective

consciousness among these women. Each story emerges as an independent story narrating the

lives of different women from The Ramayana, yet these stories are connected developing a

bond among these women through Sita. Each story and the woman character in the story helps

Sita take a step forward towards her liberation.

 Joy 55

3.3. Sita and Soorpanakha – The Pawns of the War

“The Reunion” unfolds the story of Soorpanakha and her meeting with Sita in her

garden. Sita is led to the garden of Soorpanakha by her sons. She has devoted herself to raising

her sons in the Valmiki’s ashram after being abandoned by Rama. Sita is quite surprised to see

Soorpanakha who had created a state of heavenly joy for herself by creating a beautiful garden

after recovering from the humiliation and mutilation. Sita questions the intention of Rama in

mutilating Soorpanakha, “Do women exist only to be used by men to settle their scores? Rama

and Lakshmana would not have done this to Surpanakha if they did not know that she was

Ravana’s sister. Rama’s objective was to provoke Ravana; his mission, to find a cause to start

a quarrel with Ravana, was accomplished through Surpanakha. It was all politics” (Volga 4).

Volga apart from the common myth surrounding Soorpanakha’s mutilation, moves a

step forward to rethink the entire episode from the view point of a mask created by Rama to

hide his political intentions. The story further progresses when Sita realizes the wisdom that

Soorpanakha acquired through the course of her life. Soorpanakha’s definition of beauty

changes after she conquers her rage and revenge. She realizes that, beauty is the truth of nature

and is not a physical attribute. She reveals to Sita, the inner conflicts that she had overcome to

attain this state of complacency:

To come out of that spitefulness, to love beauty once again, to understand the essence

of form and formlessness-I had to wage a huge battle against myself. My only

collaborator in that battle was this infinite nature. I struggled a lot to grasp that there is

no difference between beauty and ugliness in nature. I observed many living creatures

and understood that movement and stillness are one and the same. I discovered the

secrets of colours. I had no guru in this matter. I pursued it on my own. I searched every

particle in nature, and in the course of that search, my own vision has changed.
 Joy 56

Everything began to look beautiful to my eyes. I, who hated everything including

myself, began to love everything including myself. (11, 12)

She attains contentment in growing a garden that resonates the beauty of nature. “All the

creepers, plants and trees in this garden are my children, Surpanaka said” (9). The self-

contained person she becomes enable her to find her soul mate, Sudhira who respects her

prudence and discernment. She realizes that the meaning of success for a woman does not lie

in her relationship with a man.

Sita comprehends the fact that her life is somehow entangled in the expectations of

society and thus her fulfilment does not lie solely in bringing up her children but in liberating

herself. The wisdom that she attains from Soorpanakha empowers her to promise, “I will

certainly come, Surpanaka. After my children leave me and go to the city, I will become the

daughter of Mother Earth. Resting under those cool trees, I shall create a new meaning for my

life” (15). Thus Sita and Soorpanakha developed a bond of sisterhood in the quest for self-

realization, shattering the chains of patriarchy.

3.4. Subverting the Notions of Female Chastity

3.4.1. Ahalya in “Music of the Earth”

“Music of the Earth” is the revisioning of the story of Ahalya who in the grand narrative

is diminished to the role of a scapegoat of the patriarchal norms of female fidelity. Enticed by

her beauty, Lord Indra enjoys her, disguising himself as sage Gauthama, Ahalya’s husband.

When Gauthama catches them red handed, he curses Indra and turns his wife to a rock. Only

the touch of the feet of Rama could save Ahalya from her accursed state. In the story, Sita first

hears about Ahalya from Rama where he praises her beauty but disapproves of her as a

characterless, woman:
 Joy 57

When I looked at her large eyes, I felt frightened for a moment, finding in them the

depth of an ocean that contains both fire and ice. Her enigmatic smile still haunts me.

Anger, grace, detachment, compassion, love-everything was there in that smile. The

symmetry of her body was not just physical; it was a balance that comes from gaining

control over both mind and body through rigorous discipline. (Volga 19)

All these qualities are submerged by the word ‘characterless’. Sita is disturbed by the word

‘characterless’. She cannot understand why Ahalya is termed characterless. When Kausalya

narrates to Sita, the unfortunate life of Ahalya, Sita starts developing a connection with Ahalya,

“Ahalya. A beautiful name that means ‘land untouched by a plough’. I am the daughter of Earth

tilled with a plough. The one who does not even know the stroke of a plough is Ahalya” (Volga

19).

Volga aims at portraying atrocious patriarchal norms which define women’s fidelity

through the character of Ahalya. The meeting of Sita and Ahalya educates Sita about discursive

notions of female fidelity:

Did I see through his disguise? That is the question that bothers many people in this

world. But to my husband, the question was irrelevant. It was the same to him either

way. His property, even if temporarily, had fallen into the hands of another. It was

polluted. Pollution, cleanliness, purity, impurity, honour, dishonour-Brahmin men have

invested these words with such power that there is no scope in them for truth and

untruth. No distinction. (26)

According to Ahalya, man’s strategic manoeuver to put women’s fidelity to test is the core

issue and not women’s chastity or the lack of it.

 Joy 58

In the article “The Ahalya Story through the Ages”, the author Renate Sohnen Thieme

narrates the ending of the Ahalya story in the light of the events from the first book of The

Ramayana:

Inside Rama beholds Ahalya who is invisible to everyone else. But appears to him in

her beauty and splendour, ‘like some divine illusion fashioned by the creator’; Ram and

Lakshmana touch her feet, and she offers them hospitality. Thereupon showers of

blossoms fall down from heaven, celestial drums are sounded, and gods, gandharvas

and apsarases appear and cry, ‘sadhu, sadhu!’ (‘well done!’), while Gautama accepts

Ahalya again as his wife. (44)

The author then sees the entire story from a different perspective. He questions the age old

narration of the Ahalya story and the portrayal of her as an adulteress. He finds it strange that

the rehabilitation of an adulteress is given so much honour even by gods and thus he sees this

as the rehabilitation of an unjustly suspected person. The author validates his argument by

highlighting Indra’s disguise as Gautama, “It is unlikely that he hopes to deceive the husband

who knows only too well that the other man cannot be he, his disguise can only be meant to

deceive the wife, who would not have agreed to make love to anyone but her husband, not even

the king of the Gods”

The author proves that Ahalya was actually innocent and that she believed that it was

with her husband that she made love. Until the day when Sita was asked to jump onto the pyre,

she never understood the implication of the arguments raised by Ahalya:

It becomes easier if I accept that I have made a mistake. Then there is atonement for

every sin. If I argue that I have not made any mistake, they will take pity on me. They

will take my side, seeing me as the victim of an unjust allegation. But if I say, “Right
 Joy 59

or wrong, it’s my business, what has it to do with you? Who gave you the right or

authority to judge”, then nobody will be able to tolerate it”. (27, 28)

The grand narrative portrays Ahalya as a rock exposing herself to the sun, rain and wind for

several years until Rama’s foot touches hers. But Volga characterizes Ahalya in a different

light. Ahalya is portrayed as having gained a lot of meaningful insights about her and her life.

She has utilized all the years of her life to identify herself, “…I have spent all these years

thinking about my identity in this universe. I have learned how the world runs-on what morals

and laws, and what their roots are. I have gained a lot of wisdom” (Volga 28).

The light through which Volga sees Ahalya is very similar to the depiction of Ahalya

by Rabindranath Tagore in his poem “Ahalya” translated by William Radice:

What were your dreams, Ahalya,

when you passed
Long years as stone, rooted in earth,
prayer
And ritual gone, sacred fire extinct
In the dark, abandoned forest-
ashram? …
Today you shine
Like a newly woken princess, calm
and pure.
You stare amazed at the dawn world.
…
You gaze;
your heart swings back
from the far past,
Traces its lost steps. In a sudden
rush,
 Joy 60

All round, your former knowledge of

life returns…
Like first
Created dawn, you slowly rise from
the blue
Sea of forgetfulness. You stare
entranced;
The world, too, is speechless; face
to face
Beside a sea of mystery none can
cross
You know afresh what you have
always known. (Bhattacharya 6)
Sita recalls the words of Ahalya when she is asked by Rama to jump on to the pyre to prove

her chastity:

What does conducting an enquiry mean, Sita? Distrust, isn’t it? Wouldn’t it be better,

instead, to believe in either your innocence or guilt? All men are the same, Sita…War

is for demonstrating the valour of men. Rama has proved his heroism. He is awaiting

the demonstration of his wife’s chastity. Isn’t this what Ahalya called distrust? (Volga

31, 32)

The visit of Ahalya during her days in Valmiki’s ashram, empowers Sita. She learns to look

into herself for self-realization. She understands that she does not belong to a single individual

but belongs to the whole world:

You means you, nothing else. You are not just the wife of Rama. There is something

more in you, something that is your own. No one counsels women to find out what that

something more is. If men’s pride is in wealth, or valour, or education, or caste-sect.

 Joy 61

for women it lies in fidelity, motherhood. No one advises women to transcend that

pride. Most often, women don’t realize that they are part of the wider world. They limit

themselves to an individual, to a household, to a family’s honour. Conquering the ego

becomes the goal of spirituality for men. For women, to nourish that ego and to burn

themselves to ashes in it becomes the goal. (Volga 38, 39)

Volga in the end gives Sita the immense power of self-authority and Rama is depicted as

defeated for the first time in his life, devoid of the presence of Sita, “I am the daughter of Earth,

Rama. I have realized who I am. The whole universe belongs to me. I don’t lack anything. I

am the daughter of Earth…devoid of Sita’s support, Rama tasted defeat for the first time in his

life. By refusing to bow down to external authority, Sita had fully experienced, for the first

time, the inner power of self-authority” (Volga 41).

The article “Mythicising Women who make a Choice: A Prerogative of the Indian

Collective Unconscious to Demarcate Modesty and Right Conduct for Women” by Shyaonti

Talwar, points out Sita and Ahalya as the recurring archetypes of female chastity. The author

proves her argument quoting Wendy Doniger ‘in the Valmiki text there is evidence that Sita is

sexually vulnerable’ (1999: 12). Sita falls prey to the attraction of Marica, the asura, disguised

as the golden deer and she desires and lusts for him. Sita’s vulnerability is doubled when she

sends first Rama and then Laxmana to capture Marica and when she fails to distinguish between

Marica and Rama’s cry for help. Laxmanrekha stands as her confinement to protect her chastity

and it is a line drawn by a male who is supposed to be her protector. Her choice of stepping out

of a man’s protective line is portrayed to be the reason for her abduction and captivity. Sita’s

self-assertion to be one with the Mother Earth when she was asked to undergo a second ordeal

is less glorified in the epics, rather she is been glorified and worshipped for her devotion and

faithfulness to her husband. This is the only quality or aspect by which she is judged and praised

and all her other mortal qualities which make her more human is neglected.
 Joy 62

The images of Sita created by the epics remain in our collective consciousness as the

ideal woman, “Sita enters our households as a deity with her husband Rama and brother-in-law

Laxmana by her side and the devoted Hanuman at her feet, the virtuous mistress of any Indian

household who keeps the family together and is benevolent towards those who serve her” (65).

Sita’s silent acceptance of giving up her physical being is never read as her mute resistance but

is considered to be the great sacrifice of a virtuous woman.

Further the article discusses Ahalya’s character like Sita, who is mythicized in the

retellings and is portrayed as the symbol of eternal chastity. Ahalya who has been objectified,

petrified and silenced by a male, ironically can be redeemed only through the touch of the feet

of another male. In the epics, Sita and Ahalya are symbolically rescued by the same male,

Rama. Volga has a different take on their resurrection. These women rescue themselves in her

short stories. The images of Ahalya in the epic again inculcate in the collective consciousness,

a woman who patiently accepts the punishment given by her husband, who patiently does her

penance and then ultimately finds redemption at the feet of Rama.

The article further points out the fact that, the popular retellings on the story of Ahalya

never celebrate Ahalya’s union with Indra. The author says that the union between Ahalya and

Indra was a conscious choice made by Ahalya and since it is a conscious choice, it is left

undiscussed:

It is interesting to note that although the Bala Kanda mentions that Ahilya consciously

commits adultery (Bhattacharya pp.4-7), the Uttar Kanda of the Ramayana and the

Puranas (compiled between the 4th and 16th centuries CE) ‘…absolve her of all guilt

and declare her a passive victim who falls prey to Indra’s passion and manipulation.’

(Ray, pp. 256). To acquit her further and in order to emphasise her objectified and pure

status the Uttar Kanda recasts the tale as Ahilya’s rape by Indra. (Doniger, pp. 89-90,
 Joy 63

321-2). Subsequent retellings of her story glorify her as a woman epitomizing chastity

so much so that she is the first amongst the five virgins or panchakanya to be

worshipped by orthodox Hindus. (Bhattacharya, pp. 4-7). (66)

The tendency to view the female body as a site of exploitation, the one which is meant to be

punished and put to trial for any kind of offence is shattered through the short stories of Volga.

Volga states that a woman attains a glorified status when she discovers herself and not when

her body undergoes trial and sufferings.

The paper “The Making of Womanhood in Early India: Pativrata in the Mahabharata

and Ramayana” by Myungnam Kang examines the ways in which the ideology of

pativratadharma established by the brahminical society enhanced the subordination of women

as can be studied through the characters particularly Ahalya, in The Ramayana. The author

questions the tendency to consider Ahalya as an anti-pativrata because she was an innocent

victim of patriarchy. The article also points out the traditional practice that exists in the Indian

society where Ahalya is considered to be the black rock on which the bride touches her foot

with while making an oath to be never like Ahalya but to be a chaste, devoted, submissive wife

(208).

The author Pradip Bhattacharya begins his article “Five Holy Virgins, Five Sacred

Myths A Quest for Meaning” pointing out the irony in labelling Ahalya under the title

‘Panchakanyas’ when she is blamed for contaminating the notions of monogamous chastity.

Bhattacharya praises the independent woman in Ahalya, who fulfilled her womanhood in a

manner which she found appropriate:

Although Ahalya already had a son, Shatananda, yet the deepest urges of her femininity

remained unfulfilled. The kanya is not just mother but is also beloved, and it is this

aspect that had not been actualised in her relationship with Gautama. The first kanya
 Joy 64

not-born-of-woman, Ahalya has the courage to respond to the call of her inner urge, but

does not challenge the sentence pronounced on her by patriarchal society. (5)

Bhattacharya further quotes Chandra Rajan, who has captured the psychological nuances of

Ahalya’s situation:

Gautama cursed his impotence

and raged…
she stood petrified
uncomprehending
in stony silence
withdrawn into the secret cave
of her inviolate inner self…
she had her shelter
sanctuary
benediction
within, perfect, inviolate
in the one-ness of spirit
with rock rain and wind
with flowing tree
and ripening fruit
and seed that falls silently
in its time into the rich dark earth. (7)
Such questioning of the grand narratives form part of the feminist revisionist mythology,

representing and transforming the predicament of a mythical woman who is subordinated in

The Ramayana.
 Joy 65

3.4.2. Renuka in “The Sand Pot”

Renuka is the spokesperson of the story “The Sand Pot”. She is the wife of Sage

Jamadagni who asked his son Parasurama to behead his own mother for the guilt of desiring a

gandharva. Gifting Sita a sand pot and narrating the story of her life, Renuka gives her insights

regarding to the paativratyam or fidelity of a married woman which she says is as delicate as

a sand pot. Renuka criticizes her husband for his unthoughtful act:

In my case, a man became the cause of distraction. My husband was enraged. He

believed that my paativratyam was violated by the mere act of looking at that man. A

good pot is a product of many things-practise, concentration, sand, the right amount of

water and so on. Sage Jamadagni was a man of great wisdom, yet he did not understand

such a simple truth. But such is the wisdom of these spiritual seekers. No matter how

much wisdom they earn through penance, they continue to have a dogmatic view on

the paativratyam of their wives. (Volga 51)

She becomes an adulteress in the eyes of her husband due to a fleeting feeling of desire for a

gandharva and is beheaded by her son, taking the orders of her husband. This incident provokes

Renuka to think about her life and the entangled relationships that she carries throughout her

life:

In front of me-I, who had returned from the threshold of death-were three figures: of

my husband, whom I had served with my thoughts, words and deeds, and my wifehood;

of my son, whom I had carried for ten months, given birth to and raised, and my

motherhood; and of this pot, the result of my focus and my art. All these three are the

same. They are shattered by the slightest cause and life hangs on a sword’s edge (Volga

51, 52)
 Joy 66

Though initially Sita does not follow the words of Renuka, later her life experiences make her

rethink Renuka. There comes a situation in the life of Sita where she is supposed to give away

her sons, whom she raised with much care and affection, to their father Rama, who did not

even care to know about their whereabouts. Ahalya’s words resonate Sita’s conflict: “A

situation where children ask their mother who their father is or where a husband asks his wife

who fathered her children comes only in the lives of some women, Sita. Think of the

predicament of those women and you’ll understand my words” (Volga 55).

In the end, Sita’s sons were eager to find the identity of their father and to be united

with him. No one cared about the miserable life and struggles Sita undertook to bring up the

children:

…Though she had brought them up like they were her very life, though they knew

nothing about their father, though their father did not even know about their birth or

growing up-they wanted him. Sons needed to grow up inheriting their father’s

name…She was Janaki-daughter of Mother Earth. Yet, she became Janaki-daughter of

Janaka-under his care. These boys would get recognition only when they were regarded

as Rama’s offspring. (Volga 59)

Through the character of Sita, Volga brings in light the lives of Ahalya, Renuka and Urmila.

Sita says that the tortures faced by all the other women were different from that of Renuka:

Sita had now seen it all-sons, fathers, sons’ obedience to fathers, wives’ faithfulness to

husbands, motherhood. But there was one thing she had not seen. Nor had Ahalya,

Surpanakha or Urmila experienced it. It was what Renuka had faced-the brutality of her

own son. She had seen the dharma bound cruelty of her son who, taking his father’s

word as the word of the vedas, was ready to hack her head off. (Volga 62)
 Joy 67

In the end, Sita too gets merged with the pain of Renuka when she gets separated from her

sons. She decides to join Mother Earth when asked to undergo a second trial to prove her

chastity. The story ends with a note on Sita’s sons, when they get enraged with their mother

for choosing her own life, refusing to prove her chastity to their father, “They were not little

boys growing up in an ashram any more. They were Aryan heirs, princes, future kings: Sita,

on the other hand, was the daughter of Mother Earth. Would she ever be understood?” (Volga

65).

3.5. Urmila and the Feminist Concerns

The affinity that Sita and her sister Urmila shared is explicitly pictured in the story “The

Liberated”. Urmila was believed to have spent fourteen years of separation from her husband

in deep sleep. Volga sees this period of Urmila in a different light. Urmila makes Sita

understand that she was meditating these fourteen years in search of truth which she eventually.

The wisdom that she acquired during this period sustained her to love and respect herself. She

became free from the tangles of relationships, “I’ve acquired the wisdom to ask questions not

out of hatred but for the sake of justice. My relationship with Lakshmana will depend on

whether he understands my wisdom and how much he respects it” (Volga 76).

Urmila tries to empower Sita with her insights. Urmila explained to Sita the constant

struggles she faced within herself when Lakshman accompanied Rama into the forest leaving

her abandoned and dejected. She purposefully withdrew herself into a self-imposed exile out

of rage and annoyance. But slowly her fury turned into a quest for truth. She tried to understand

the relation between her body, feelings and emotions. She started desiring solitude in which

she conversed with herself. She understood that the dependence on others creates hate, jealousy

and respect, they are all the shades of the same condition, “When I understood my relationships

with others, I felt I understood everything. Power is the root cause of all sorrow…We must
 Joy 68

acquire this power. And then give it up. I shall not submit to anyone’s power. Then I will feel

I have liberated myself. I will feel only joy within myself! Great peace! Much love!

Compassion for all!” (Volga 77).

Urmila came to Sita’s help at the hour of her distress, when Sita was immersed in

thoughts regarding the Aswamedha Yaga which was about to be performed by Rama. She was

disturbed by the thought that in order to become eligible to perform the ritual, Rama might

choose another woman. Urmila empowers Sita saying it is inappropriate whether Rama takes

another wife or not. She tells Sita:

Assume authority. Give up power. Then you’ll belong to yourself. Then you’ll be

yourself. We should remain ourselves. (Volga 79)

Each of those trials is meant to liberate you from Rama. To secure you for yourself.

Fight, meditate, look within until you find the truth that is you. (Volga 81)

The article “Urmila: Existential Dilemma and Feminist Concerns” by Ayesha Viswamohan

describes Urmila as the ‘recipient of undeserved indifference’ in the The Ramayana. The author

brings up the fact that, ‘Urmila is relegated to the sidelines, rather inexplicably’. The author

identifies that until the present century, all other versions of The Ramayana have dismissed

Urmila as Janaka’s daughter and Lakshmana’s wife.

The author further brings in the character traits of Urmila. Like her sister Sita, Urmila

is also considered to be the embodiment of Indian femininity. Saket describes that Urmila has

mastered the skills of painting and music and thus she has a highly developed sense of

aesthetics. And like the women of her class, she is elegant, charming, witty and attractive. The

news about Rama’s exile and Lakshmana’s decision to accompany his brother was not very

easy for Urmila to digest. The separation of Urmila from her duty bound husband, who didn’t

even care to bid her farewell, made her unconscious and it took some time for her to understand
 Joy 69

the decision made by Lakshmana and the higher purpose he was destined to serve. Viswamohan

describes this phase of Urmila in the following manner, “This new awakening heralds the end

of Urmila’s age of innocence; till now she had led a sheltered existence, oblivious of the world

of –palace intrigues. She senses the precarious nature of her being as juxtaposed with her earlier

life of domestic bliss” (186). All these sudden shifts which occur in Urmila’s life reduce her to

a hapless victim who shrinks into a shell and thus separates herself not only from the outer

surroundings but her own self.

The author further questions the decision of Lakshmana to accompany his

brother, totally neglecting his wife. Urmila is not even given a chance to express her decision

and her wish was taken for granted. She was left in the palace to take care of her in-laws. The

author says that “with all his attributes, Lakshmana here represents self-centeredness, as he

thinks of himself only as brother, not as a husband” (187).

The author further quotes from The Second Sex, to support Urmila’s preclusion from

the forefront of her society as a result of her deprivation of her rights to make her own decisions:

Often older with masculine prestige, legally ‘head of the family,’ her husband has a

position of moral and social superiority; very often he seems, at least, to be

intellectually superior also. He has the advantage of superior culture, or at any rate,

professional training; since adolescence he has taken an interest in world affairs. That

is what a great many young women lack. Even if they have read, listened to many

lectures, toyed with accomplishments, their miscellaneous information does not

constitute culture. The husband, if older and better educated than his wife, assumes, on

the basis of this superiority, to give no weight at all to her opinions when he does not

share them; he tirelessly proves to her that he is right. (187)

 Joy 70

The views expressed by the author in this particular article are very evident in the short story

of Volga. Estranged from society, Urmila starts understanding the meaninglessness of the

society. This realisation took her to a different level of her life, “This epistemological

consciousness signifies the disparity between separateness and relatedness and between earthly

and spiritual love. Though her body withers away, she is happy with the realization of her

authenticity and self-unification brought about by the exclusion of the forces of eros and

admittance of agape” (186). Urmila, at this point, realises her individuality and identity

independent of her husband. She gains an insight and a mature vision in the course of her quest

for identity.

3.6. Rama’s Submission to the Arya Dharma

The short story “The Shackled” unravels the interior monologue of Rama. Rama’s

entire life, his actions and even thoughts were surrendered to Arya Dharma, he never had a

personal life and freedom. In the story Rama is thankful to Kaikeyi who is responsible for his

banishment into the forests, for that was the only time Rama could just be himself. That period

not only freed him from the chains of royal power but he was also able to live his life freely

with Sita for thirteen years. Towards the end Rama realizes his mistakes and weaknesses. He

admits the power of Sita to Lakshmana:

Sita and I are inseparable, Lakshmana. None of you understand that. I am grieving for

both of us. Nothing untoward will happen to her. She is the daughter of Earth. She is a

strong and able woman. She will give birth to a good son and fully enjoy the pleasures

of bringing him up. I am the one who is weak and incapable. My exalted nobleness is

my handicap. With this political power, I have lost power over myself. I have lost my

Sita. I have lost my son. (Volga 88)

 Joy 71

Towards the end of the story, Rama is chained by his own thoughts and deeds and Sita becomes

liberated:

Sita was not coming back into his life. She would entrust the children to him and liberate

herself. But he could not find liberation until he turned them into heirs to Raghu Vamsa.

But by giving him his sons, Sita had cleared the way for his liberation. She had always

stood by him. She had always protected him. In Ayodhya, everyone swore by Rama’s

protection. Who knew that Sita was Sri Rama’s protective charm? (Volga 97)

Volga’s short stories open new spaces within the old discourses, enabling women to view their

life and experiences from different perspectives. They recreate a world of freedom in which

they not only willingly bear the responsibility of their own survival, but also have a sense of

joy and complete freedom. Women are no longer means to serve someone else’s ends, nor are

they merely the prizes in men’s quests and conquests. On the contrary, they are questers seeking

their own salvation.

3.7. The Women of Volga and Sisterhood

In “Volga: An Interview” conducted by T. Vijay Kumar, Volga reveals her intention in

writing The Liberation of Sita:

I wanted to show the kind of strength Sita got through others. It is not possible to

achieve liberation all by ourselves, we need fellow groups-women or other exploited

groups. Their experiences help us. Likewise, the experiences of these women help Sita.

Sisterhood is an important concept in feminism. I have been able to grasp that concept

through these stories. The other women are all Sita’s sisters. (126)

Sisterhood is a concept that was developed during the course of second wave feminism. It was

in 1970 that Robin Morgan published the most influential feminist text of the century

Sisterhood is Powerful. Sisterhood is Forever is the successive collection of essays by the same
 Joy 72

author which emphasizes the continued connection of women to sisterhood. The concept of

sisterhood is explained as “an organization of women with a common interest, as for social,

charitable, business, or political purposes.” It is also “congenial relationship or companionship

among women; mutual female esteem, concern, support, etc.”

(www.dictionary.com/browse/sisterhood)

In an interview conducted by Malini Nair, Volga expresses her intention behind

encouraging the notion of sisterhood to bring together women of The Ramayana:

All the women characters in the Ramayana except Sita are unimportant. Surpanakha

gets her one scene but we don’t get any glimpses into her life. How did she live? To

me, the cutting off of her nose by Laxman for daring to make an overture to Rama is

like the acid attacks on women today. Like Surpanakha they go through life faces and

bodies deformed. We always talk of brotherhood between men, it is a recurring, strong

theme all around us. But women are supposedly the enemy of their own sex. In Telugu

there is a popular saying: “Moodu koppulu voka chota immadavu.” Even three women

can never co-exist peacefully. Sisterhood is always discouraged, treated with suspicion.

I refuse to toe this line. (Mar 02, 2017 · 08:30 am)

The article “Sisterhood: Political Solidarity between Women” by Bell Hooks begins by

pointing out the fact that sexist oppression victimises women the most. Sexism like, other forms

of group oppression is perpetuated in numerous ways. Individuals who oppress, dominate and

exploit, social and institutional structures and the “victims themselves who are socialized to

behave in ways that make them act in complicity with the status quo become bearers of the

sexist oppression”. Women are encouraged to believe that they are valueless. The male

supremacist ideology also tend to make women believe that only their relation with men makes
 Joy 73

them valued and worthy. Hooks bring in the concept of sisterhood in her article in the following

manner,

“We are taught that our relationships with one another diminish rather than enrich our

experience. We are taught that women are “natural enemies, that solidarity will never

exist between us because we cannot, should not, and do not bond with one another. We

have learned these lessons well. We must unlearn them if we are to build a sustained

feminist movement. We must learn to live and work in solidarity. We must learn the

true meaning and value of sisterhood” (43)

Unlike the grand narrative of The Ramayana where Sita shines as the ideal, characters in The

Liberation of Sita like Soorpanakha, Ahalya, Renuka and Urmila share a bond of sisterhood

with Sita and all the short stories revolve around this bond of sisterhood.

3.8. Feminist Dialogics in The Liberation of Sita

The article “Feminist Criticism and Bakthin’s Dialogic Principle: Making the

Transition from Theory to Textual Analysis by Friederike Eigler centres around the analysis of

specific literary works through the application of “feminist dialogics” and Mikhail Bakthin’s

“dialogic consciousness”. Eigler clarifies her thought behind combining these two theories, “In

the last decade, Bakthin’s theories have become especially attractive for a number of feminist

critics who are interested in the social dimensions of language and literature. On a meta-critical

level, his dialogic principle has in fact fostered analysis conscious of competing “voices”

within feminist criticism” (189).

In the epic The Ramayana, Sita represents the “voice” of a socially constructed

femininity, i.e; as Eigler says, only one aspect of a more complex character that is ultimately

suppressed and eliminated, while the five short stories in The Liberation of Sita are shaped by

the very tension between the characters and their voices.

 Joy 74

The five female characters of Volga, challenge the narratives that harmonize

differences and the tendency of the patriarchal narratives to reduce their stories or voices to a

single (“monologic”) meaning. These characters explore their differences (multiple voices),

when they narrate their stories to the character of Sita. “Bakthin employs the terms “dialogic”

and “dialogization” to capture the specific modes in which voices are related to each other,

including different degrees of tension and struggle” (191). The voices of these female

characters does not exist in isolation, but are always related to the other voices within and

outside the text. Thus the emerging “multi-voiced” narrative threatens or undermines the

authoritarian language of the grand narrative. As Eigler says: “Yet dialogized language,

including its critical potential, is never entirely the product of the author’s (or any speaker’s)

intentions but a result of the “heteroglossia,” i.e; the language that constitute the author’s

particular socio-historical context. This socially and historically grounded concept of language

lends itself to feminist criticism that is concerned with the disruption of patriarchal language

and the exploration of marginal voices within dominant discourses” (191).

Characters like Ahalya, Renuka and Sita question the dominant notions of female

chastity and fidelity, while characters like Soorpanakha question the politics of bodily

aesthetics. Thus as Eigler says: “Rather than merely reversing patriarchal discourse and

producing a “feminist monologic voice” that makes universal claims about “woman” in a

patriarchal society, “feminist dialogics” supports critical approaches based on the concept of

“positionality”. Thus a “feminist dialogics” includes consideration of specific contexts and

conditions of women (men) and, in regard to literature, the recognition of narratives as

inherently “multivocal” (4), i.e; representing more than one (authorial voice)” (192). Thus the

subversive and marginalized aspects within a dominant discourse can be explored and analysed

using the terms “voice” and “dialogic”. A Bakthinian approach thus analyses the discursive
 Joy 75

features of a literary text in terms of their particular historical and social contexts rather than

limiting itself to the textual analysis of the plot and character.

Thus this chapter has considered how the five short stories and the female characters of

Volga engage in revisionist mythmaking as they “[appropriate] the tale for altered ends”, fill

the “old vessel” with “new wine” and ultimately create new stories to offer readers new visions

of genesis, gender and women’s ‘place’ in both history and culture”. (Ostriker, Stealing the

Language 212-213). The chapter shows how such revisionist tales effectively free women from

an inherently androcentric and patriarchal ideology, acting as liberating and transforming

alternatives to the original. The chapter has also looked at how these short stories, question the

infallibility of The Ramayana through their revisionist strategies, questioning and subverting

the originals.
 Joy 76

Works Cited

Bhattacharya, Pradip. “Five Holy Virgins, Five Sacred Myths A Quest for Meaning.” Manushi,

pp. 4-12,

www.manushi.in/docs/362.%20Five%20Holy%20Virgins,%20Five%20Sacred%20M

yths.pdf

---. “Living by Their Own Norms: Unique Powers of the Panchkanyas.” Manushi, pp. 30-

37,

www.manushi.in/docs/576.%20Living%20by%20Their%20Own%20Norms.pdf

Eigler, Friederike. “Feminist Criticism and Bakhtin's Dialogic Principle: Making the Transition

from Theory to Textual Analysis.” Women in German Yearbook: Feminist Studies in

German Literature & Culture, University of Nebraska Press, vol. 11, 1995, pp. 189-

203.

Goosen, Adri. “Stealing the Story, Salvaging the She”: Feminist Revisionist Fiction and the

Bible”. University of Stellenbosch, December 2010, M.A. Dissertation, pp. 1-115,

www.researchgate.net/publication/48339878_Stealing_the_story_salvaging_the_she_

feminist_revisionist_fiction_and_the_bible

Hooks, Bell. “Sisterhood: Political Solidarity between Women.” Feminist Theory: From

Margin to Center, South End Press, 1984.

Kang, Myungnam. “The Making of Womanhood in Early India: Pativrata in the Mahabharata

and Ramayana.” Journal of Social Sciences – Sri Lanka, pp. 206-212,

repository.kln.ac.lk/bitstream/handle/123456789/11055/54.pdf?sequence=3&isAllow

ed=y
 Joy 77

Kumar, T. Vijay, and C. Vijayasree. “Forging a Vision of Liberation”. The Liberation of Sita

by Volga (P Lalita Kumari), HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 107-112.

---, translators. The Liberation of Sita by Volga (P Lalita Kumari), HarperCollins Publishers,

2016.

Kumar, T. Vijay. “Volga: An Interview”. The Liberation of Sita by Volga (P Lalita Kumari),

HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 113-127.

Nair, Malini. “Once, we accepted the right to question mythology. Now, we are intolerant': Telugu

writer Volga” (Interview). Mar 02, 2017 · 08:30 am, scroll.in/article/830571/once-we-

accepted-the-right-to-question-mythology-now-we-are-intolerant-telugu-writer-volga

Ostriker, Alicia Suskin. Stealing the Language: The Emergence of Women’s Poetry in America.

The Women’s Press. 1987.

Talwar, Shyaonti. “Mythicising Women who make a Choice: A Prerogative of the Indian

Collective Unconscious to Demarcate Modesty and Right Conduct for Women.” pp.

63-70, standrewscollege.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Mythicising-Women-who-

make-a-Choice-A-Prerogative-of-the-Indian-Collective-Unconscious-to-Demarcate-

Modesty-and-Right-Conduct-for-Women.pdf

Thieme, Renate Sohnen. “The Ahalya Story through the Ages.” Myth and Myth Making:

Continuous Evolution in Indian Tradition. Edited by Julia Leslie, Curzon Press, 1996.

Viswamohan, Ayesha. “Urmila: Existential Dilemma and Feminist Concerns.” Indian

Literature, vol. 45, no. 6 (206) (November-December, 2001), pp. 184-189,

www.jstor.org/stable/23345768

Volga, (P.Lalitha Kumari). “Sita Herself can Save Us.” The Liberation of Sita, translated by

T.Vijay Kumar, HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 101-106.

 Joy 78

“Volga: Women deconstructing Paradigms.” Streevadham Kosame Katha Rachana

Chepattanu, 20 Oct. 2018. pp. 142-189, webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?

 Joy 79

Chapter 4

Conclusion

The short stories of Sarah Joseph (“Black Holes”, “Ashoka”, “Mother Clan”, “What is

Not in the Story”, “Jathiguptan and Janakiguptan”) and Volga (“The Reunion”, “Music of the

Earth”, “The Sand Pot”, “The Liberated”, “The Shackled”) and the female characters bought

into light by these women authors, like Manthara, Kaikeyi, Sita, Mandodari, Soorpanakha,

Ayomukhi, Sambooka’s daughter, Ahalya, Renuka and Urmila uphold the concept of

intersectionality. Both authors have preferred to choose different episodes from The Ramayana.

The choice of these female characters was purposeful in order to deviate from the traditional

emphasis on Rama and to explore the experiences of marginalized female characters.

4.1. Importance of the Genre Short Story

The choice of the genre ‘short story’ by the women writers for rewriting The Ramayana

claims primary attention. Volga in an interview conducted by T. Vijay Kumar asserts her

preference for the genre short story. She says: “In a short story, you can convey what you want

to concisely and with density. Short story has greater reach-it reaches more number of people”

(114). Unlike popular revisionist fiction based on mythology in India, which is largely

controlled by the publication industry and market demands, Sarah Joseph and Volga have

undertaken feminist rewriting in the genre of short story. Short stories bring in the

heterogeneity of voices unlike novels where the entire story centres on a protagonist. In short

stories, feminist voices and perspectives do not come from a single source but from multiple

sources as evident in Sarah Joseph and Volga through their female characters.

4.2. Authors and Revisioning

Sarah Joseph and Volga through their short stories advocate revisionist myth-making.

In the article “Forging a Vision of Liberation” by T. Vijay Kumar and C. Vijayasree, the
 Joy 80

authors says that, “In the process, re-vision no longer remains a simple act of looking back nor

a mere act of survival. It evolves into an active remaking of the past and a re-invention of

tradition. In other words, re-vision has turned into an act of creation and trans-creation” (108).

In Indian women’s writing, the reinvention of myths had figured a prominent place. The stories

from the myths and the retelling of specific characters in it opened up new ways of revisioning

from a feminist perspective. T. Vijay Kumar and C. Vijayasree quotes Patricia Yaegar, “A

women play with old texts, the burden of tradition is lightened and shifted; it has the potential

of being remade” (18). The authors further says that, “through their retellings, women not only

break the hold of fixity and take it to a free zone where multiple mutations and transmutations

become possible” (108).

Joseph and Volga empower their female characters to speak for themselves. These

female characters narrate their stories from their individual experiences. The thoughts and

perspectives of Volga and Joseph are reflected in each of these stories. As Vasanthi

Sankaranarayanan quotes on Sarah Joseph, “It becomes at one level the commentary of the

characters themselves on the events related in the story of the Ramayanam and its patriarchal

ideology and at another level the commentary of Joseph, the woman, the author, and the

ideologue on the literary text and its underlying feminist perspective” (xviii, xix). These authors

retell the story of the female characters from a new perspective, presenting an alternate points

of view, which are different from existing patriarchal ideologies and indicative of strength and

fullness of character.

4.3. The Concept of Intersectionality

The article “Intersectionality 101” by Olen Hankivsky explores the characteristics and

elements of intersectionality and differentiates it from the other approaches to equality.

Hankivsky most importantly, explores “how intersectionality can fundamentally alter how
 Joy 81

social problems are experienced, identified and grasped to include the breadth of lived

experiences”. Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, an American critical legal race scholar was the

first to coin the term “intersectionality” in 1989. However the historic roots and the

fundamental ideas of intersectionality is with and beyond United States. Hankivsky points out

the fact that “Black activists and feminists, as well as Latina, post-colonial, queer and

Indigenous scholars have all produced work that reveals the complex factors and processes that

shape human lives” (2). Olen Hankivsky defines intersectionality in the following manner:

Intersectionality promotes an understanding of human beings as shaped by the

interaction of different social locations (e.g., ‘race’/ethnicity, Indigeneity, gender, class,

sexuality, geography, age, disability/ability, migration status, religion). These

interactions occur within a context of connected systems and structures of power (e.g.,

laws, policies, state governments and other political and economic unions, religious

institutions, media). Through such processes, interdependent forms of privilege and

oppression shaped by colonialism, imperialism, racism, homophobia, ableism and

patriarchy are created. (2)

Sarah Joseph and Volga portray characters who are multi-dimensional and complex. The

characters, Manthara, Kaikeyi, Sita, Mandodari, Soorpanakha, Ayomukhi, Sambooka’s

daughter, Ahalya, Renuka and Urmila cannot be read by taking into account single categories

like race, gender or sexuality.

4.3.1. Intersectionality of Caste and Sexuality

According to Hankivsky, “lived realities are shaped by different factors and social

dynamics operating together” (3). Hankivsky also emphasis the point that “People can

experience privilege and oppression simultaneously” (3). This becomes evident through the

character of Sita. Though she was from an upper caste, the Kshatriyas, the humiliations and
 Joy 82

oppression she faces are no less than compared to Soorpanakha and Ahalya who belonged to

the lower castes. Sarah Joseph and Volga have explicitly portrayed the character of Sita

showcasing the kind of ordeals she underwent. The images of Sita pictured by Sarah Joseph

reclaims her body from the Kshatriya images that associated with her in the larger narrative of

aesthetics:

The Body! Clay, battered and destroyed by continuous onslaughts of snow, rain,

sunlight, lusful gazes, destructive stares, falling one upon the other on her face, neck,

hands, breasts, navel, waist, legs and feet. Scars of severe brutalization, scabs of drying

tears, wounds of humiliation. Trailing in mud and dust, hair so matted that the strands

could not be separated. Nails grown long, distinct from fingers. Skin drying and peeling

off. (Joseph 108)

Like Sarah Joseph, Volga too redeems the images of Sita associated with the Kshatriya clan,

when Sita accepts the advice of other women like Soorpanakha, Ahalya and Renuka. It is the

conversation with these women that helps Sita achieve self-realization, which then helps her to

evolve as an independent empowered woman.

Sita is praised for her chastity and fidelity under the general story-telling and the

narrative of The Ramayana. However Volga makes Sita gets empowered through Ahalya and

Renuka whom the grand narrative accuses as adulteresses. Volga reclaims the notions of

chastity and fidelity from the myths associated with these in the patriarchal society.

Similarly the grand narrative describes Sita and Soorpanakha as rivals, however Volga

sees this in a different light. According to Volga, these women were the pawns of the Rama-

Ravana war intended to expand the Aryan empire. In Volga’s short story “The Reunion”, Sita

and Soorpanakha shares a bond of sisterhood.

 Joy 83

4.3.2. Intersectionality of Disfigurement and Disability

In the article, “Sita Herself Can Save Us” written by Volga, the author explains the

reason behind writing a short story like “The Reunion”:

I was inspired to write it by a scene in my dance drama War and Peace. Declaring that

they are not the cause of the battle between Rama and Ravana, Sita and Surpanakha

sing and dance together:

Desire to expand the Aryan Empire

Ignited the Rama-Ravana war
It’s an Arya-Dravida clash
Women too became pawns
At first, Sita and Surpanakha sing separately that they are lovers of peace and pastoral

life, worshippers of beauty, yet could not escape insults, suspicions and humiliations.

Later, they dance together to the above song. (Volga 102, 103)

Volga says that initially when this dance drama was presented, she received lots of appreciation

and compliments for the character of Soorpanakha. However she was criticised by some people

for her portrayal of Soorpanakha as a worshipper of beauty and a friendly and loving person.

The Soorpanakha they knew was a monstress. The dancers hesitated to play the character of

Soorpanakha. “They were convinced only after it was explained to them that Soorpanakha was

a Dravidian woman, and that the traditions and customs of the Dravidians were different from

those of the Aryans, and that the Dravidians were depicted as demons in the Puranas” (Volga

103). Doordarshan too refused to telecast this dance drama because they couldn’t see

Soorpanakha as a human being. Volga mentions the kind of questions that were raised against

her character portrayal, “They were used to understanding the suffering of Sita and Draupadi,

but how could one place Soorpanakha by their side? What did Soorpanakha suffer in the first
 Joy 84

place? She got punished for lusting after an unknown man. Other than that, what was her

distress? In fact, aren’t Sita and Soorpanakha rivals? How can they dance together?” (103)

Characters like Soorpanakha and Ayomukhi are those women who are neglected, and

portrayed as victims of the patriarchal norms in the grand narrative because they do not fulfil

the characteristics of womanhood. Those women who confine themselves to the womanly traits

attributed by society are accepted and others are neglected and even harmed. Sarah Joseph and

Volga highlight the nose and breasts of Soorpanakha being mutilated. Sarah Joseph brings

together Soorpanakha and Ayomukhi, both of whom faced the same punishment from the

hands of the Rama and Laxmana for individually expressing their sexuality. The character of

Soorpanakha in the short story “Mother Clan” questions the motives behind despoiling the

bodies and femininity of two women:

They butchered the root and source of my breast milk. The roots of my clan and

blood! My breasts were full-round and black-like the graceful breasts of

Karimkali sculptured by Maya. I have suckled three or four generations! To this

day no one has ever done such a deed. In my forest, no man has shown such

cruelty to any woman. Filled with passion, if a woman approaches a man and

he is unable to fulfil her desire, he should speak to her as he would to a sister

and show her another direction. King Ravanan had never lifted his sword to turn

a woman’s body into a barren land. No one in my clan has posed as a hero after

destroying a woman’s shape and form. (Joseph 118)

By calling attention to the mutilation of the breasts of these two women, the author is trying to

give voice to women who are seen as incapable of entering into the vows of marriage and

motherhood once they are disfigured. The retelling of these female characters also highlights

the heartless behaviour of patriarchal society in punishing women who individually expresses
 Joy 85

her sexuality. According to their norms, these women are incapable of entering into any of the

institutions set by society. Sarah Joseph also affirms the fact that even women belonging to the

upper strata of society are not excluded from ordeals and trails, through the mention of Sita in

the short story “Asoka”:

They did not cut off

Her nose and breasts

But, for the sin of

having spent her days

fearful, weeping,

In King Ravanan’s garden

They prepared a blazing coal-fire

And asked her to jump into it! (Joseph 125)

This excerpt from the short story is substantiated by Laura Bates, in her article “Sexism, Double

Discrimination and More than One Kind Of Prejudice”, “Intersectionality means being aware

of and acting on the fact that different forms of prejudice are connected, because they all stem

from the same root of being other, different or somehow secondary to the "normal", "ideal"

status quo”

(www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/mar/31/laura-bates-everyday-sexism-

double-discrimination-intersectionality). Vasanthi Sankaranarayanan praises Sarah Joseph’s

courage to portray Soorpanakha as universal, eternal woman:

I also feel that the ‘subaltern ideology’ in this story comes through the ideas and

expressions and not through the language. Soorpanakha is depicted as a tribal, a

Dravidian, and a woman from a lower caste. Her identities cannot be separated. In the

final analysis, she has to be treated as a passionate, sensual woman, very close to nature
 Joy 86

and the elements, who has been marginalized, ignored and humiliated. Usage of the

dialect is only one part of the literary expression. Her thought process, awareness, and

questioning is that of a woman rebel. In that sense she is not just a regional heroine, but

a universal. Eternal woman. (xxii)

The treatment of the character of Soorpanakha by Sarah Joseph is very similar to that of Volga.

Volga tries to visualize the life led by Soorpankha after many years of her mutilation and

humiliation. Volga’s Soorpanakha has come to terms with herself. She has accepted her

disfigurement and understood the real meaning of beauty. She comes to the conclusion that

there is no difference between beauty and ugliness in nature. Soorpanakha is the first among

female characters in the collection to empower Sita. In the article “Intersectional feminism”

Ava Vidal quotes, “The view that women experience oppression in varying configurations and

in varying degrees of intensity. Cultural patterns of oppression are not only interrelated, but are

bound together and influenced by the intersectional systems of society. Examples of this

include race, gender, class, ability, and ethnicity” (www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-

life/10572435/Intersectional-feminism.-What-the-hell-is-it-And-why-you-should-care.html).

This quote justifies the portrayal of characters by Sarah Joseph and Volga.

Soorpanakha’s character is bound with the systems of race and disfigurement, similarly the

character Manthara portrayed in the short story “Black Holes” is the victim of caste and

disability. Sarah Joseph and Volga reclaim women from patriarchal notions of race, caste,

disfigurement and disability by retelling the stories of these women, where each character is

given the opportunity to narrate personal experience and subjective negotiations with

empowerment.

In the article “Intersectionality 101”, Olen Hankivsky says that “resistance and

resilience is integral to intersectionality because these can disrupt power and oppression. Even
 Joy 87

from the so called ‘marginalized’ spaces and locations, oppressive values, norms and practices

can be challenged” (11, 12). This is exactly what the characters created by Sarah Joseph and

Volga to reflect challenges faced by women historically upto the present society. From their

marginal spaces these characters in the past are trying to challenge oppressive norms, values

and practices, but at the same time, articulating concerns of concerns of women in

contemporary times. The collective consciousness and sisterhood which is reflected in these

collection of short stories destabilize the dominant ideologies. One mechanism of resistance

from subordinated groups has been to use collective actions. “Conversely, policies and

discourses that label groups of people as inherently marginalized or vulnerable undermine the

reality that there are no ‘pure victims or oppressors’” (Hankivsky 12).

4.4. Limitation

The research limits itself to the collection of short stories on female characters by Sarah

Joseph and Volga. Other regional writers and their works written on the basis of revisionist

framework are not explored because of the non-availability of their translations.

4.5. The Scope for further Research

Since the genre of fiction is very popular, the research on revisionist mythology can be

further extended to other genres especially the ones which belong to the public domain like

street plays, theatre and films. Appropriation of these mythological characters and the strategies

advocated in the rewritings of these characters in the public domains can be studied. Rewritings

on the minor female characters in Mahabharata can be studied in a similar manner. For example

the characters like Shakuntala, Savitri and Damayanti who are known only in sketches and also

Sulabha, Suvarchala, Uttara, Disha, Madhavi and Kapoti who are hardly known can be

explored using the same methodology.

 Joy 88

4.6. Concluding Remarks

Sarah Joseph and Volga advocate notions of feminist revisionist mythology to liberate

their female characters from patriarchal structures embedded in mythical texts. They create

collective consciousness and sisterhood among women adopting strategies of feminist

revisionist mythology and intersectionality and thus network women across ages and

generations. When these women therefore rewrite The Ramayana, they are also actively

rewriting themselves, rethinking their place in the world and re-imagining their relation with

society. Whether we label their efforts as feminist subversions of patriarchal narratives,

imaginative mythical recreations or acts of feminist revisionism, they are artistic, accessible

and popular embodiments of women’s liberation. In the end, these works engage in the creation

of what we might term new feminist texts and offer readers new ideologies, new myths and

new perspectives – all of which place women, at the centre of power and significance.
 Joy 89

Works Cited

Bates, Laura. “Sexism, Double Discrimination and More than One Kind Of Prejudice.” The

Guardian, Mar 2014,

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/mar/31/laura-bates-everyday-

sexism-double-discrimination-intersectionality

Hankivsky, Olen. “Intersectionality 101.” The Institute for Intersectionality Research & Policy,

SFU, April 2014, pp. 1-34,

www.researchgate.net/publication/279293665_Intersectionality_101

Joseph, Sarah. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N. Sreekantan

Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. xiii-xv.

Kumar, T. Vijay, and C. Vijayasree, translators. The Liberation of Sita by Volga (P Lalita

Kumari), HarperCollins Publishers, 2016.

Kumar, T. Vijay, and C. Vijayasree. “Forging a Vision of Liberation”. The Liberation of Sita

by Volga (P Lalita Kumari), HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 107-112.

Kumar, T. Vijay. “Volga: An Interview”. The Liberation of Sita by Volga (P Lalita Kumari),

HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 113-127.

Sankaranarayanan, Vasanthi, translator. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N.

Sreekantan Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005.

Sankaranarayanan, Vasanthi. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N.

Sreekantan Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, Pp. xvii-xxiv.

Vidal, Ava. “Intersectional feminism.” The Telegraph, Jan 2014,

 Joy 90

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10572435/Intersectional-feminism.-What-

the-hell-is-it-And-why-you-should-care.html.

Volga, (P.Lalitha Kumari). “Sita Herself can Save Us.” The Liberation of Sita, translated by

T.Vijay Kumar, HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 101-106.

“Volga: Women deconstructing Paradigms.” Streevadham Kosame Katha Rachana

Chepattanu, 20 Oct. 2018, pp. 142-189, webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?

 Joy 91

Bibliography

Anamika. “Sita in My Dreams.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited by Malashri

Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 233-238.

Anand, Madhureeta, and Rina Tripathi. “Laying Janaki to Rest.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting

Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 118-

123.

Banik, Somdev. “Representation of Disabled Characters in Literature.” IJELR, vol. 3, no.2,

2016, pp. 198-201,

www.ijelr.in/3.2.16/198-201%20Dr.%20SOMDEV%20BANIK.pdf

Bates, Laura. “Sexism, Double Discrimination and More than One Kind Of Prejudice.” The

Guardian, Mar 2014,

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/mar/31/laura-bates-everyday-

sexism-double-discrimination-intersectionality

Bhattacharya, Pradip. “Five Holy Virgins, Five Sacred Myths A Quest for Meaning.” Manushi,

pp. 4-12,

www.manushi.in/docs/362.%20Five%20Holy%20Virgins,%20Five%20Sacred%20M

yths.pdf

Bhattacharya, Pradip. “Living by Their Own Norms: Unique Powers of the Panchkanyas.”

Manushi, pp. 30-37,

www.manushi.in/docs/576.%20Living%20by%20Their%20Own%20Norms.pdf
 Joy 92

Desai, Meghnad. “Sita and Some Other Women from the Epics.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting

Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 3-

9.

Devi, Nilimma, and A.K. Ashby. “The Diary of Sita.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology,

edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 112-117.

Divakaruni, Chitra Banerjee. The Palace of Illusions. Picador, 2008.

Eigler, Friederike. “Feminist Criticism and Bakhtin's Dialogic Principle: Making the Transition

from Theory to Textual Analysis.” Women in German Yearbook: Feminist Studies in

German Literature & Culture, University of Nebraska Press, vol. 11, 1995, pp. 189-

203.

Erndl, Kathleen M. “The Mutilation of Surpanakha.” Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of a

Narrative Tradition in South Asia, edited by Paula Richman, University of California

Press, 1991, pp. 67-88.

Gabriel, Karen. “Draupadi’s Moment in Sita’s Syntax.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting

Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 76-

80.

Gokhale, Namita. “Sita: A Personal Journey.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited

by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. xiii-xvii.

Goosen, Adri. “Stealing the Story, Salvaging the She”: Feminist Revisionist Fiction and the

Bible”. University of Stellenbosch, December 2010, M.A. Dissertation, pp. 1-115,

www.researchgate.net/publication/48339878_Stealing_the_story_salvaging_the_she_

feminist_revisionist_fiction_and_the_bible
 Joy 93

Goswami, Indira, and Manjeet Baruah. “Ramayana: The Human Story” In Search of Sita:

Revisiting Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books,

2009, pp. 95-100.

Griffith, Ralph T.H. The Ramayan of Valmiki, London: Trubner &Co, 2008.

Hankivsky, Olen. “Intersectionality 101.” The Institute for Intersectionality Research & Policy,

SFU, April 2014, pp. 1-34,

www.researchgate.net/publication/279293665_Intersectionality_101

Hooks, Bell. “Sisterhood: Political Solidarity between Women.” Feminist Theory: From

Margin to Center, South End Press, 1984.

Imhasly-Gandhy, Rashna. “Matrilineal and Patrilineal.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting

Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 71-

75.

Jain, Chandra Ghosh. “Sita’s Letter to Her Unborn Daughter.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting

Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 224-

229.

Joseph, Sarah. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N. Sreekantan

Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. xiii-xv.

Joseph, Sarah. The Vigil. Harper Perennial, 2014.

Kandathil, Alex, translator. Sita Her Untold Story. Translation of Kumaran Asan’s

Chindavishtayaya Sita. Authorspress, 2017.

Kane, Kavitha. Lanka’s Princess. Rupa publications India Pvt, 2017.

 Joy 94

Kang, Myungnam. “The Making of Womanhood in Early India: Pativrata in the Mahabharata

and Ramayana.” Journal of Social Sciences – Sri Lanka, pp. 206-212,

repository.kln.ac.lk/bitstream/handle/123456789/11055/54.pdf?sequence=3&isAllow

ed=y

Kasturi, Prema. “Women in Ramayana -Portrayals, Understandings, Interpretations and

Relevance.” C.P. R. Institute of Indological Research, Feb 2013,

file:///C:/Users/Silpa%20Joy/Downloads/mafiadoc.com_abstracts-of-ramayana-c

conference-2013-wordpresscom_59d7a1fb1723dd1f07a84e5f%20(1).pdf

K, Praseetha. “Nature and Myth as a Feminine Language: A Study Based on Sarah Joseph’s

‘Puthu Ramayanam’.” Malayalam Literary Survey, vol. 33, no. 3 – 4, Dec. 2013, Pp.

50-54.

Kishwar, Madhu, and Rina Tripathi. “Trial by Fire.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology,

edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 101-111.

Kumar, T. Vijay. “Volga: An Interview”. The Liberation of Sita by Volga (P Lalita Kumari),

HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 113-127.

Kumar, T. Vijay, and C. Vijayasree, translators. The Liberation of Sita by Volga (P Lalita

Kumari), HarperCollins Publishers, 2016.

Kumar, T. Vijay, and C. Vijayasree. “Forging a Vision of Liberation”. The Liberation of Sita

by Volga (P Lalita Kumari), HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 107-112.

Lahiri, Ratna. “The Justification of Rama.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited

by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 62-71.
 Joy 95

Lakshmi, Vijay. “Janaki.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal and

Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 209-217.

Lal, Malashri, and Namita Gokhale. “Sita’s Voice.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology,

edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 83-88.

Lal, Malashri “Sita:Naming Purity and Protest.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited

by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 55-61.

Lang, Andrew. Homer and the Epic, London, 1893, pp. 7.

Madhavan, N.S. “Domestic and the Neurologist: Ahalya.” Ramayana Stories in Modern South

India: An Anthology, edited by Paula Richman, Indiana University Press, 2008, pp.

160-172.

Mansingh, Sonal, and Rina Tripathi. “Sita’s Luminous Strength.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting

Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 89-

94.

Mookherjee, Aparupa. “Combating ‘Otherness’: Revisionary Mythmaking in Divakaruni’s

The Mistress of Spices.” Research Scholar, vol. 4, no. iii, Aug. 2016, pp. 96-103,

researchscholar.co.in/downloads/16-aparupa-mookherjee.pdf

Mukherjee, Prabhati. Hindu Women: Normative Models. Orient Longman Limited, 1978.

Nair, Malini. “Once, we accepted the right to question mythology. Now, we are intolerant': Telugu

writer Volga” (Interview). Mar 02, 2017 · 08:30 am, scroll.in/article/830571/once-we-

accepted-the-right-to-question-mythology-now-we-are-intolerant-telugu-writer-volga
 Joy 96

Nath, Aman. “Reading Pictures: Sita in Victorian Indian Prints.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting

Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 191-

200.

Ortiz, Lourdes. “Rewriting Classical Myths: Women’s Voices in “Los motivos de Circe” and

“Penelope.” Cultural & History Digital Journal, vol. 2, no.1, 2013,

cultureandhistory.revistas.csic.es/index.php/cultureandhistory/article/view/23/99

Ostriker, Alicia Suskin. Stealing the Language: The Emergence of Women’s Poetry in America.

The Women’s Press, 1987.

Paley, Nina, and Malashri Lal. “Sita Sings the Blues.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology,

edited by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 124-127

Pattanaik, Devdutt. Myth=Mithya: Decoding Hindu Mythology. Penguin Books. 2006.

Pattanaik, Devdutt. “Sita as Gauri, or Kali.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited

by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 18-20.

Pattanaik, Devdutt. Sita: An Illustrated Retelling of the Ramayana. Penguin House, 2013.

Pudumaippittan, “Consequences of a Misdeed: Deliverance from the curse.” Ramayana Stories

in Modern South India: An Anthology, edited by Paula Richman, Indiana University

Press, 2008, pp. 146-157.

Puttappa, “Kuvempu” Kuppalli Venkata. “Transforming a Brahmin: Shudra Tapasvi

(excerpt).” Ramayana Stories in Modern South India: An Anthology, edited by Paula

Richman, Indiana University Press, 2008, pp. 119-134.

 Joy 97

Ramanujan, A.K. “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on

Translation.” Many Ramayanas : The Diversity of a Narrative Tradition in South Asia

edited by Paula Richman, University of California Press, 1991.

Rao, Ranga. “R.K. Narayan’s Ramayana.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited

by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 27-33.

Rich, Adrienne. “When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-Vision.” National Council of

Teachers of English, Vol. 34, No. 1, Oct., 1972, pp. 18-30,

www.jstor.org/stable/375215

Richman, Paula. Ramayana Stories in Modern South India: An Anthology, Indiana University

Press, 2008, pp. 1-32.

Richman, Paula. “Shambuka’s Story Anew: Basavalingaiah Re-presents Shudra Tapasvi.”

Ramayana Stories in Modern South India: An Anthology, edited by Paula Richman,

Indiana University Press, 2008, pp. 135-140.

Richman, Paula. “Sita in Context.” Ramayana Stories in Modern South India: An Anthology,

Indiana University Press, 2008, pp. 37-40.

Richman, Paula. “So-Called Demons.” Ramayana Stories in Modern South India: An

Anthology, Indiana University Press, 2008, pp. 173-180.

Richman, Paula. “Stigmatized Characters.” Ramayana Stories in Modern South India: An

Anthology, Indiana University Press, 2008, pp. 111-118.

Sankaranarayanan, Vasanthi, translator. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N.

Sreekantan Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005.

 Joy 98

Sankaranarayanan, Vasanthi. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N.

Sreekantan Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. xvii-xxiv.

Satchidanandan, K. Foreward. Retelling the Ramayana: Voices from Kerala by C.N.

Sreekantan Nair and Sarah Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. 1-16.

Sattar, Arshia. Lost Loves. Penguin Books. 2011.

Sattar, Arshia. “Valmiki’s Ramayana.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited

by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 10-17.

Sen, Nabaneeta Dev. “When Women Retell the Ramayan.” Manushi, no. 108, pp. 18-27.

www.manushi.in/docs/906-when-women-Retell-the-ramayan.pdf

Sengupta, Mallika. “Sitayana.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited by Malashri Lal

and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 218-223.

Sivasekaran, S. “The Nature of Stone: Ahalya.” Ramayana Stories in Modern South India: An

Anthology, edited by Paula Richman, Indiana University Press, 2008, pp. 158-159.

Sreedevi, K.B. “Ahalya Later: Woman of Stone.” Ramayana Stories in Modern South India:

An Anthology, edited by Paula Richman, Indiana University Press, 2008, pp. 141-145.

Talwar, Shyaonti. “Mythicising Women who make a Choice: A Prerogative of the Indian

Collective Unconscious to Demarcate Modesty and Right Conduct for Women.” pp.

63-70, standrewscollege.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Mythicising-Women-who-

make-a-Choice-A-Prerogative-of-the-Indian-Collective-Unconscious-to-Demarcate-

Modesty-and-Right-Conduct-for-Women.pdf

Thieme, Renate Sohnen. “The Ahalya Story through the Ages.” Myth and Myth Making:

Continuous Evolution in Indian Tradition. Edited by Julia Leslie, Curzon Press, 1996.
 Joy 99

Tripathy, Anjali. “Sita: My Story.” April 2017, pp.46-48,

magazines.odisha.gov.in/Orissareview/2017/April/engpdf/Sita.pdf

Vidal, Ava. “Intersectional feminism.” The Telegraph, Jan 2014,

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10572435/Intersectional-feminism.-What-

the-hell-is-it-And-why-you-should-care.html

Vijaykumar, Sushila. “Varsha Adalja’s Mandodari: Reworking the Pativrata Myth.” New

Delhi: Author Press, 2014, pp. 141-148,

www.academia.edu/19403791/Varsha_Adaljas_Mandodari_Reworking_the_pativrata

ideal

Vijay, Tarun. “Janaki: The Fire and the Earth.” In Search of Sita: Revisiting Mythology, edited

by Malashri Lal and Namita Gokhale, Penguin Books, 2009, pp. 21-26.

Viswamohan, Ayesha. “Urmila: Existential Dilemma and Feminist Concerns.” Indian

Literature, vol. 45, no. 6 (206) (November-December, 2001), pp. 184-189,

www.jstor.org/stable/23345768

Volga, (P.Lalitha Kumari). “Sita Herself can Save Us.” The Liberation of Sita, translated by

T.Vijay Kumar, HarperCollins Publishers, 2016, pp. 101-106.

Volga. “Forest of Possibilities: Reunion.” Ramayana Stories in Modern South India: An

Anthology, edited by Paula Richman, Indiana University Press, 2008, pp. 91-98.

“Volga: Women deconstructing Paradigms.” Streevadham Kosame Katha Rachana

Chepattanu, 20 Oct. 2018. pp. 142-189, webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?

 Joy 100

Zacharias, Usha. “Union with Nature: Prakriti and Sovereignty in Aravindan’s Kanchana Sita.”

Ramayana Stories in Modern South India: An Anthology, edited by Paula Richman,

Indiana University Press, 2008, pp. 99-107.