Tell you a Story Afresh

Long time ago, there lived as prince king riding high on his own oedipal might and transformed to demigod by group of fanatics, takes 24,000 verses classified under seven cantos, to sing his glory and a single affidavit to negate the claim.

Re-telling the epic saga fashioned with my ubiquitous thought I largely view ‘Ramayana’ as a sexist and racist literature glorifying a nondescript king, as Victorian or Elizabethans court poet. Ramayana is a work of exultation that contributed to deification of its prince king ‘Ram’; nonetheless an insignificant and immature character.

Cash in to the recent controversy of Ram Setu which split this part of the world’s sub-continent into two factions I might conclude within few paragraphs over the perfunctory myths associated to the ‘bloody religiosity’. Isn’t that an irony? But, I must have reasons.

On contrary to its mythical aspect, RAMAYANA, if studied in historical per se is an epic saga that aims to reinstate and consolidate the supremacy of Aryan race in Indian land. As portrayed, the superior pure-blooded race who migrated to northern terrain of India now on a siege to Eastern and Western plateau, inhabited by large-bodied barbaric race with a ten-headed king, Ravana. This is a conscious attempt wherein the aboriginal natives are portrayed as vile, vicious, and immoral by their disposition compared to ‘Great Aryan’ tribe. Thus, by negating the mythical aspect and focus to the interpretative history of the great Indian epic, the literature consciously portrayed Dravidians in a lighter realm to establish the supremacy of Aryans using discriminatory overtone.

This isn’t a standalone feature, but an universal practice applied to all invaders’ literature who represent natives or aboriginal groups as too vicious compared to their own and Ramayana is not an exception.

Let’s not debate, if I claim, the epic saga sanctifies observance of chastity and sexual repression as a signature to womenfolk/feminity, thus conforming to the Aryan concept of ‘bad girl’ and ‘good girl’. The stereotyped woman with a meeker disposition and object of lure or sex is a concept initiated in Aryan literatures. In significance, prominent women characters belong to Aryan blood are fragile, dependent, and abused (drawing a commonality to the prevalent state of women in northern part of India).

Except few of the female characters, like Kaikeyi, her hunch maid, and Surpankha who were sexually receptors and have shamelessly used/flaunt it as the tool to meet objectives. Comparatively, the main female protagonist, ‘Sita’, (seen to be rebelling against prejudices on few minute events) remained as protected, self-guarding, meek, all-accepting, and dependent. Interestingly, women belonging to lower races or natives are independent, vocal, rebellious, and sexual. The portrayal of women is more consciously drafted to give back male dominion and categorize women as much lesser gender thus reducing them to a mere sexual object. Further, subjugation of womanhood would indirectly lead to character deformity and grow lack of confidence thus defunct their behavioral and psychological disposition. (This practice can be evident among modern Indian states and tribes, especially the Northern regions.) Most of the women are groomed to be perfect resemblance of Sita—chaste, dependent, meek, and loyal while girls who’re independent are categorized as sexually schematic and to punished.

When I was a child, my grandmother told me the story and made me bow to the deity of Ram (a common deity to every Indian household). Ages later, I discover a feeble, lethargic, and immature bloke being in distress and never a demigod but a mortal man with frailties. The story of Ram and Ramayana no more does allure or awakens the mind of unmindful unless its time to celebrate the chaos.