A SUBALTERN READING OF ANAND NEELAKANTAN’S ASURA

TALE OF THE VANQUISHED

A dissertation submitted to The Research Department of

English, Fatima College (Autonomous), affiliated to Madurai

Kamaraj University, in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of

MASTER OF PHILOSOPHYIN

ENGLISH

by

DAIS MARIA JAMES

Reg No: 2014LMP05

Under the guidance of

Dr. S. SAIRA BANU

Associate Professor

The Research Department of English

Fatima College (Autonomous)

Madurai – 625 018

April 2015

CERTIFICATE

Dr. S. SAIRA BANU

Associate Professor

The Research Department of English

Fatima College (Autonomous)

Madurai - 625018

This is to certify that the project titled A

SUBALTERN READING OF ASURA TALE OF THE VANQUISHED is

the bona fide work carried out by DAIS MARIA JAMES,

student of M.Phil English, Fatima College (Autonomous)

affiliated to Madurai Kamaraj University, in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the

Degree of Master of Philosophy in English and that the

dissertation has not formed the basis for the award

previously of any degree, diploma, associateship,

fellowship or any other similar title and that the

dissertation represents independent and original work

on the part of the candidate under my guidance.

Signature of the Head of the Department

Signature of the Supervisor

Dr. S. Geetha, Associate Professor and Head,

The Research Department of English

Fatima College (Autonomous)

Madurai - 625018

Place: Madurai

Date:

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the dissertation titled A

SUBLATERN READING OF ANAND NEELAKANTAN’S ASURA TALE OF THE

VANQUISHED, submitted for the award of M.Phil Degree, is my

original work and the dissertation has not formed the basis

for the award of any degree, associate ship, fellowship or

any other similar titles.

Place: Madurai Signature of

the Candidate

Date: Dais Maria

James

Reg.No: 2014LMP05

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

My gratitude goes to our dynamic Principal, Dr. Sr. A.

Jospin Nirmala Mary for providing me an opportunity to do

this course.

I am very grateful to Dr. S. Geetha, the Head and

Associate Professor, the Research Department of English, who

motivated me to do this dissertation innovatively.

My heartfelt gratitude goes to my guide Dr. S Saira

Banu for her constant support and guidance without which

this dissertation would have been incomplete. She helped me

in all possible ways. She took the pain to go through my

work several times and provided me with numerous valuable

suggestions each time. She was a guiding pillar and

motivated me to complete this dissertation successfully. She

helped me in doing research amidst her busy schedule.

I extend my gratitude to my class teacher, Mrs. A.

Roselin Mary for her motivation and guidance.

I also extend my gratitude to all the professors of

English department, for giving their valuable suggestions

throughout my work.

I express my thanks to the staff members of Rosa

Mystica Library, who rendered their help in collecting

secondary sources for my dissertation.

I also thank my parents, and friends for their

encouragement and help.

Last but not the least I thank the Lord for giving me

good health and mind to complete my dissertation.

Table of Contents

CHAPTER I Introduction.....................................1

CHAPTER II Theorising Subalternity; A Background Framework..........................................................29

CHAPTER III The ‘Othered’ Asura Community.................45

CHAPTER IV Devas as Subalterns- Breaking the Stereotype. . .77

CHAPTER V Summing Up......................................93

WORKS CITED..............................................101

ABBREVIATION

ATV - Asura Tale of The Vanquished

CHAPTER I

Introduction

Literature often is an expression of society. It is a

medium to promulgate ideologies. Literature always serves as

a vehicle of change and transformation of society. India

speaks of her own cultural heritage and modernization of

values and systems through the voices in Indian writing in

English.

Post independence India witnessed a noteworthy growth

in Indian- fiction writing in English. The fast development

of this field of literature is remarkably wonderful. The

Gandhian national movement by 1920s served as the driving

force of precolonial Indian English novelist. In the past

there was a time in which, Indian writers in English were

considered inferior and the western intellectual world was

suspicious about the “authenticity of artistic, linguistic

expression, and imaginative creation” (Wakchaure 101). But

today, the status of original world class literature is

given to V S Naipaul, Kiran Desai, Jhumpa Lahiri, Agha

Shahid Ali, Rohinton Mistry, Salman Rushdie, Vikram Seth,

Arundhati Roy, and other Indian English writers. One of the

remarkable features of Indian English writing is the absence

of schools or literary movements and regional groups within

its orbit. It has got a scattered, discontinuous and

transnational history. British rulers and administrators

were the readers of Indian English novel during colonial

period and that is the reason why Bankimchandra Chatterjee’s

Rajmohan’s Wife(1864), the first Indian English novel was

intended to emphasize the Indian social realities to the

colonial rulers.

“When the Indian English novel emerged, it became a

literary fashion to associate it with the British colonial

rule” (Wakchaure 103). For instance, defeat of Prithviraj

Chauhan, a similar happening as compared to British takeover

of India is the theme of K.K. Sinha’s historical novel

Sanyogita or The Princess of Aryavarta. Also his The Star of Sikri is a

notable contribution to the development of Indian English

novel. Spirit of nationalism became the driving force and

major theme of Indian English novelists at the beginning of

twentieth century as can be seen in Sarath Kumar Ghosh’s

Prince of Destiny: The New Krishna (1909),and A. Madhavaiah’s Thillai

Govindan. “During colonial India, Indian English novel was

written mainly by Hindu upper caste men who described the

ambivalence of western civilization- as the liberating force

on one hand and on the other hand, depicted its threat to

Hindu civilization and Indian identity (Wakchaure 103).

Novelists of 1930s and 1940s wrote about the issues of

‘home’ and still belong to the ‘world’ at the same time.

Anti-colonial nationalism stands as the powerful expression

of this period. “Declaration of independence in 1947 created

optimistic mood among novelists after long period of

political slavery and social frustrations” (Wakchaure 105).

Communal harmony was brought by both Hindu and Muslim

novelists of this period, that was disturbed after the

partition. “Elitist modernism, Nehru –inspired socialism and

a synthesis of ‘east’ and ‘west’ at the intellectual and

philosophical level are the characteristic features of

novels of this period” (Wakchaure 105) For instance

nationalism, cosmopolitanism, modernism, Marxism were the

different ideologies that existed in the works of Mulk Raj

Anand.

Mulk Raj Anand, Raja Rao and R K Narayanan are

considered as the “founding fathers of the Indian English

novel. As K R Srinivasa Iyengar points out, “as writer of

fiction, Anand’s notable marks are vitality and a keen sense

of actuality” (Wakchaure 107). As Leela Gandhi says “more

than any other writer of his generation, perhaps, Rao stands

out for his outrageous generic anarchy, as also for an

unusual band of south Indians – French cultural hybridity,

very different from the predominantly north Indian- English

fusion of contemporary Indian writing in English” ( qtd.in.

Wakchaure 107). As per the comment of Tabish Khair, “like

Rao, Narayanan too has tried to give voice to certain

silenced aspects of lived Indian life, to make a small town

and a certain middle –class Indian narratable” (qtd.in.

Wakchaure 107).

Dissatisfaction with the metropolis and modernity

served as the major theme of the novel of 1950s and 1960s.

It focuses on the native issues like partition, migration,

cultural conflict and so on, and in doing so opens up the

avenues for Indian English novel to develop. Perfect

character development and psychological depth marked by

powerful sense of individual alienation was yet another

important characteristic feature of the Indian English novel

during the period of 1950s and 1960s. Major novelists of

this period were Manohar Malgaonkar, Khushwant Singh and

Arun Joshi. Many women writers like Kamala Markandaya, Ruth

Prawer Jabhabvala, Nayantara Sahgal and Anita Desai also

emerged during this period.

Writing by Indian diaspora is yet another important

genre that has to be considered while dealing with Indian

English novel. Anita and me, a novel by Meera Syals renders

an optimistic definition for diaspora which expresses the

condition of diaspora as a chance to experience new world.

Bharati Mukherjee is an Indian-born American writer who

is currently a professor in the department of English at the

University of California, Berkeley. Her fame lies in her

works The Tiger's Daughter (1971), Wife (1975), Jasmine (1989), The

Holder of the World (1993), Leave It to Me (1997), Desirable

Daughters (2002), The Tree Bride (2004), Miss New India (2011).

Jumpa Lahiri, an Indian-American author who often focuses on

the India diaspora in her work, has become one of the most

famous of American writers who harken back to the South Asia

of their forerunners. Her major works include her short

story collection Interpreter of Maladies, and her 2013 novel The

Lowland Making. She portrays the slow process of cultural

assimilation for second generation immigrants.

Amit Chaudhuri is a professor who lectures in

contemporary literature at the University of East

Anglia. Chaudhuri’s fictions determinedly cross-examine the

rapid modernisation of India and the complex shift that this

is causing in many people’s relation to their culture and

tradition. This is most obvious in his first novel A Strange

and Sublime Address, and in his two recent works, The

Immortals and A New World. Kiran Desai is one of the most

highly praised Indian diasporic writers of her generation,

despite only releasing two novels thus far in her career.

Her prominent works include Hullabaloo in the Guava Orchard, The

Inheritance of Loss. The Inheritance of Loss won the 2006 booker prize.

The novel of 1980’s and 1990’s “witnessed new spirit

of revolution and transformation of thematic, linguistic,

and structural aspects of Indian English fiction. The most

notable novelist of this period is Salman Rushdie, whose

continuous experimentation in the novel form made it a new

genre” (Wakchaure 116). Postmodern issues like cultural

mongrelisation and hybridity are the issues that have been

dealt in his novels. Intersection of history, narrative and

national and racial identity are also explored by him. As

commented by Anuradha Dingwaney, “there is an entire

generation of novelists from India who feel the weight of

Rushdie’s influences as enabling their own talents” (qtd. in

Wakchaure 116). Other major novelists of this period include

Rukun Advani, Upamanya Chatterjee, Shama Futechally, Amitav

Ghosh, Shashi Tharoor, Shashi Deshpande, Gita Hariharan,

Arundhati Roy and so on. “Amit Chaudhari, Vikram Chandra,

Kiran Nagarkar have also made remarkable contribution to the

gamut of contemporary Indian English fiction. As said by R.S

Pathak,

Despite all its problems and challenges, Indian

English novel have stood the test of time and

proved its worth and relevance. For its verve and

resilience, it has been found to be “a meritorious

outlet”. The prose fiction in English written by

the Indians is undoubtedly” the most popular

vehicle for the transmission of Indian ideas to

the wider English speaking world (qtd. in

Wakchaure121)

Socio-cultural and human problems of people belonging

to different parts of society such as Dalit, Black, Slaves

or African, native Americans, Parsi and Muslim minorities

due to their tangential place in the country is dealt in

literature of marginality. The marginalized groups of people

exist all over the world. “Writers who are at periphery try

to occupy a marginal or a borderline position, sit on the

periphery of the past, causing the future to take shape”

(Ram Sharma 1-2). Exploitation, humiliation, inequality,

injustice, marginality, agonies, pains and suffering form

the themes in their literature. “These writers at periphery

are trying to subvert, remap, redefine, re-identify, the

socio, politico, economic, geographical, historical aspects

of life which are deeply rooted in their consciousness with

their past, present, and future, which are present in the

perpetuality of time” (Ram Sharma 2)

While the marginalized or common is represented by the

periphery, the power is represented by the centre. As per

Bill Ashcroft, Gareth, Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin,

marginality is explained as:

Marginality as a noun is related to the verb to

marginalize, and in this sense provides a trap for

those involved in resistance by its assumption

that power is a function of centrality. This means

that such resistance can become a process of

replacing the centre rather deconstructing the

binary structure of centre and margin which is a

primary feature of post-colonial discourse.

(qtd.in Ram Sharma 2)

Farida Karodia, Meher Pertonji, Kavery Nambisan excels

in their role of writers as historians and myth makers

through their fictional world. Marginalised sections of

society’s voice are raised through these writers and their

characters. These writers try to make apparent the internal

dilemma of marginal consciousness through their works.

“Language and literature which was employed by the

‘West’ to colonize and civilize the ‘East’ was gradually

adapted by the native to ‘return the gaze’ of the superior

centre; break down its hegemony and write back to it”

(Ghanshyam 12). Indian mythological genre has also served as

a rich repository of literary material. A rich, complex

mythology was created by the Hindus which are still very

much alive. Thousands of millions of people carry on with

their beliefs in the god’s which reside the Hindu Pantheon.

The Indian culture which serves as crossroad of many

cultures has integrated numerous ideas from diverse faiths.

Still, one cosmic truth holds in Hindu thought,

and that is that all things are simply a part of a

greater, whole one. In early Hindu belief, which

still holds true, for nothing in Hinduism is ever

discarded, this Universal whole was called

Brahmam. All beings and things, from the god and

demons, through humans, on to the lowliest pebble

on the beach, where and are part of this one.

(Doyle)

Later the term ‘Brahmam’ became equivalent with

Brahma, but the original idea has the foundation in Hindu

thought. Hindu mythology’s history can be divided into

several ages. The first is said to be pre-Vedic age, which

can be counted back to the time of Indus valley

civilizations of Harappa and Mohenjo-daro, which were

founded around 2400 BCE and which were destroyed by 1700

BCE.

Hinduism properly begins by the Vedic age. Although the

position of the lords of India was replaced by the Indo-

Aryans and their Gods, earlier gods were still honoured;

different roles were given to them. The Aryans along with

the Gods also carried with them a distinct class structure,

which included a priestly class, a warrior or ruling class,

and the trade or merchant class.

The native people who were subject to Aryan rule

were incorporated into a fourth class. This is the

basis for the caste system which still is very

much a part of Indian life. By the end of the

Vedic period, these castes were called Brahmanas,

Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras, respectively. The

next age was the Epic or classical period, the

time of the great Hindu epics the Ramayana and the

Mahabharata. These great works were compiled into

their present form during this time, but their

origins go back at least to Vedic times. The

puranas were also composed at this time. Finally,

around 1000 BCE we come to modern Hinduism, when

the religion once again became the dominant faith

on the subcontinent. (Doyle)

Every aspect of life and culture in India are coloured

by Hindu belief and mythology. Mythic stories serve as a

base for countless works of art, from plays about Rama

written in the 700s to modern Indian movies. Everywhere

temples and images of the deities are found. Traditional

gods, heroes, and myths are kept alive by festivals –such as

the ten-day autumn celebration of Rama and his wife, Sita.

Names of some places too have sacred associations. For

instance, Calcutta comes from Kalighat, the place where

sacrifices to the goddess Kali once took place.

Along with inspiring generations of Indian artists and

thinkers, Hindu mythology has appealed many in the west as

well. Brahma, a poem celebrating the creator god was written

by Ralph Waldo Emerson, an American writer of the 1800s.

Also, the legends of Savitri become familiar with English-

speaking readers through Edwin Arnold’s poem Savitri, or Love and

Death in 1800. The god and the Bayadere (dancing girl), a poem by the

German writer Goethe deals with God Siva’s appearance on

Earth.

Myths are very essential since they emphasize the

origin or the particular world view of a society and they

are also interrelated to literature and life in common. Myth

in Contemporary Indian literature reflects these enquiries from the

view point of scholars like Alok Bhalla, Vishwanath

Khaitre , R Sasidhar and others.

These enquiries reveal the epistemological

potential that myths possess to unravel many

truths. Interestingly these truths make possible

diverse interpretations of even the sacred texts

such as Mahabharata and Ramayana. Myths help us

ask even more basic questions about human meaning

and this is what gives them continued relevance in

successive ages of men (Satchidananthan xv).

Myths are solely conventional. They exemplify accepted

ideas on natural phenomena. Obviously, they provide

fascination and appeal to the modern generation and modern

writers. A fundamental significance of Indian mythological

stories is their closeness with contemporary reality. Since

myths offer abstract story pattern, writers employ them in

their works. As Northorp Frye says, “Writers are interested

in myths for the same reason that painters are interested in

still life arrangements, because they illustrate essential

principles of social issues (qtd. in Dubey 31). “The

Literacy Nature” of myths is another reason for its usage in

literature. Myth is ethical, philosophical, religious and

cultural. Indian myths are essential part of Indian embodies

the nature and spirit of literature” (Dubey 32).

Indian writers have to turn towards the mythology of

their own culture to create abstract patterns of fiction and

it is more of a creative challenge for them.

But for an Indian English writer, it becomes

easier because people of India are close to

mythologies and they are deeply conscious of their

culture- their rich past. They still grow up

absorbing the myths and legends of the country.

The influence of epics in our life is significant

and dominating and so-far reaching that if a world

view is required to make literature profitable and

meaningful in terms of shared human experiences,

they can offer a widely accepted basis of such a

common and general background, which permits the

collective consciousness of the whole nation. The

epics and puranas are among few common links which

constitute an all India frame reference (Dubey

33).

In literature, myths are used in two ways, conscious

and unconscious ways. Conscious use of myth is in such a way

that it becomes a popular literary device in the works as

used by T S Eliot in The Waste Land, James Joyce in Ulysses and

unconscious use of myth lies in the fact that mythical

situation or characters are not used deliberately but it is

possible for readers or critics discover the unconscious way

in which myths are operated in the literary works as can be

seen in Hamlet in which “Gilbert Murray traced to a primitive

myth connected with the ritual battle between summer and

winter, of life and death (Dubey 38).

As per historians more than 300 versions of the story

of Ramayana exist in Indian and South East Asian literature.

As per Somshankar Bandyopadhyay, staff member of Gulf News:

Historians have roughly placed the writing of the

original story around the 4th or the 5th century

BC, and the part where Rama and Lakshman wander

the forest in search of Sita is viewed as the

spread of the Aryan civilisation through the

central-southern parts of the subcontinent as

these areas progressively came under Hinduism.

Thus, it is hardly surprising that in several

tribal versions of the story Ravana is treated as

a fallen hero rather than as the villain, a

refrain Neelakantan draws upon in his work.

In an article called “Best Selling Myths”, Reena Singh

opines that, “Mythological fiction is one of the tastes of

the time, with Shiva, Krishna, Sita and Ravana popular as

protagonists. People may ask, hasn’t mythology been around

for ages? It has, but in the contemporary period, it is lot

more than just a well-spun legend”. These new narratives

take freedom with the plot, often introducing characters in

a contemporary context. The deep insights provided in the

contemporary mythological stories no longer sit heavy on a

reader’s mind. For instance, if looked upon Amish Tripathi’s

The Immortals of Meluha, few hours can be passed happily and

satisfactorily. Towards the end, people come away richer,

for they have chosen up some gracious divine leader from a

fictionalised Shiva”.

In an article published in Indian express it is said,

 The genre has been gaining popularity for almost

a decade. The trend began in the early 2000s with

Ashok Banker’s series on the Ramayana and

Mahabharata followed by a number of books, mostly

slick, fast-paced thrillers, based on characters

from Indian mythology. This was followed by

Tripathi’s Shiva trilogy and Anand Neelakantan’s

Asura which is based on a re-interpretation of the

Asura king, Ravana. Currently, the market is

flooded with a number of books belonging to the

myth and fantasy genre and many of them are doing

well. This is part of a global trend that favours

books in the pure fantasy and myth genre; however

in India it is based on a re-interpretation of

ancient Indian mythology but told in a

contemporary, fast-paced style.

As per Krishna Udayasankar, Ramayana and Mahabharata,

the “two epics are the cultural and mythological foundation

in India as they deal with magic, heroes, destiny and lots

of other things” (Wanchoo). Krishna Udayasankar who is a fan

of history and mythology is famous for her “The Aryavarta

Chronicles”. Amish Tripathi is a contemporary Indian

mythological writer. All his books are based on Hindu

religion since he is a devoted worshipper of Shiva. His

famous works are The Immortals of Meluha, The Secret of the Nagas and The

Oath of the Vayuputras. These three books are known as the Shiva

Trilogy.

Dr. Devdutt Pattanaik is another Indian mythologist and

author whose works centre largely on the areas of mythology.

Two of his works related to Hindu mythology are Myth = Mithya: A

Handbook of Hindu Mythology, a novel and The Pregnant King, Jaya: An

Illustrated Retelling of the Mahabharata.  Ashok Kumar Banker is also

famous for mythological retellings.  He came to be famous

with his eight-volume Ramayana Series, which has been

recognized with the revival of mythology in Indian

writng. His Epic India Library is an effort to go over all the

myths, legends and itihasa of the Indian sub-continent in

one massive story cycle comprising over 70 volumes, "an epic

library of India".

Shivaji Sawant was a famous novelist in Marathi. He is

known as Mrityunjaykar (meaning Maker of Mrityunjay) for

lettering the renowned novel Mrityunjay, based on Karna, one

of the major characters of the epic Mahabharat. Another work

is Yugandhar, based on the life of Krishna. Ashwin Sanghi is

a writer of the new era, retelling Indian mythology and

history in a contemporary context. His main works include The

Krishna Key, The Rozabal Line, and Chanakya’s Chant.

Anand Neelakantan is a contemporary Indian

mythological author who is known for his debut novels Asura

Tale of the Vanquished and Ajaya: Epic of the Kaurava Clan – Roll of the Dice. He

was born on 5 December 1973 in a little village in Kerala

called Tripunithara, which is famous for its hundred odd

temples; it has produced various classical artists and there

exist many music schools. It was not a wonder that Ramayana

and other mythological stories or epics and purana stories

fascinated him since he grew up in a village with many

temples. His biggest supporter is his father who tells that

questioning is the first step in understanding something.

Neelakantan has written two books and they are based on

Ramayana and Mahabharata respectively. His first novel is

Asura Tale of the Vanquished on which the current research is

conducted. He says that he was ironically drawn to the anti-

hero of the epic- Ravana, and to his people, the Asuras. He

was bothered by the Asura emperor, Ravana, in his dreams,

walks for six years and insisted on writing his version of

the story. In other words, Ravana was haunting him

continuously. Along with him, several minor and irrelevant

characters of the Ramayana kept coming up with their own

versions in order for their stories to be told. One of them

was Bhadra, who had a remarkable story to tell. “And both

stories are different from the Ramayana that has been told

in a thousand different ways across Asia over the last three

millennia. This is the Asurayana, the story of the Asuras,

the story of the vanquished”, says the author in one of his

interviews. “It’s the classic tale of the underdog, “the

loser”, and the human foibles that lead up to Ravana’s

downfall” comments Reena, the author of the article titled

“Best Selling Myths”.

  Neelakantan's debut work Asura Tale of the Vanquished

turned out to be a surprise bestseller of 2012. This work

found its space into the top seller charts within a week of

its launch. Neelakantan was chosen as one of the six most

remarkable writers of 2012 by Daily News Analysis. The

author had written the book from a very different

perspective. No studies were conducted regarding the

subaltern issues in the novel. Only some reviews about the

book, and some interviews of the author has been published.

No researches have been done on this novel. And both, the

book and author had a massive reception. It is always good

to analyse a text that has received such a massive appraisal

within a short span of time that justifies the selection of

the book.

G.A. Ghanshyam in his The voice of the other said,

Society has always been divided into hierarchical

structures of power and powerlessness. Literature

being a mirror to society has reflected this

lopsided division of power between the ‘Centre’

and the ‘Other’. In this play of dominance and

subjugation, the centre has always suppressed the

Other into silence. The marginalized voice; low

and hardly audible strives continually to make

itself heard and be recognized. (12)

Thus, it is hardly surprising that in several tribal

versions of the story Ravana is treated as a fallen hero

rather than as the villain, a refrain Neelakantan draws upon

in his work. The present study tries to trace the

subalternity among Asuras and Devas as per portrayed in the

novel Asura Tale of the Vanquished by Neelakantan. The research

comes under mythological genre and Resistance Literature and

re-interpretation within the wider domain of Indian

Literature in English. Indian mythological genre had

contributed much to the domain of Indian literature as a

whole. The whole research is looked at from a subaltern and

oriental point of view. This paper will make use of

subaltern concept of Gayatri Spivak, the theory of Other

postulated by Edward Said, and the concepts of Paulo Freire.

The whole approach of subaltern and oriental issues that

this paper is focussing depends on the post colonial view

point of subalternity.

A review of literature written on this work gives a

comprehensive idea of what kind of research work has been

undertaken so far on this writer and the novel chosen for

present study.

In reviews about the book it is said that the novel

deserves credibility as it demystifies the myth, as it gives

important details like who ruled which kingdom and minute

details like the mentioning of Pushpaka as a prototype for

flying machine and the bird named Jatayu attacked by the

Pushpaka. Bhadra is used excellently in the final events of

the novel, and the author leaves ample clues for the reader

to predict it. The author tries to show that in many ways,

things have remained unchanged like the caste system, the

generation gap existing between various characters.

In Ramayana both Rama and Ravana are given equal

importance. “Ravana is considered the fallen hero rather

than an outright villain,” says Neelakantan in one of his

interviews. As the author got to know different narratives

of Ramayana, a desire arose in him to write a ‘humanised’

version of Ravana. “I did quite a bit of research, but,

overall, I depended on my imagination” he says.

In the novel, Neelakantan narrates the contrast between

Rama and Ravana. “Both Rama and Ravana are champions, but

Rama is controlled by the customs, rituals and practices and

Ravana is someone who entirely breaks away from these

traditions and conventions and gets demonised”, says

Neelakantan in his interview.

In his interview to The Hindu daily, he said:

Asuras have been portrayed in a particular manner

in our tradition and the view has been reinforced

by constant retelling through religious

discourses, popular plays, films, books and so on.

I had to create a world that is contradictory to

popular perception and yet one that is believable

and relatable,” says Neelakantan, “It was tough

but I understood that the Asura world was no

different from our present world. Once I started

modelling it on present-day India, things fell in

place and became easy.

When thinking about Asura Tale of the vanquished, most people

think that it is a deconstruction of myth. But Neelakantan

says that deconstruction is never possible in myths. Myths

usually develop with time and get amended and reinterpreted

again and again. The Ramayana and The Mahabharata are not

stagnant narratives. Different people from various

subcultures have reinterpreted The Ramayana a number of times

According to the epic Ramayana, Lord Rama underwent

only pain till his death since it was his virtuous duty. But

Ravana lived and died like a king. ‘Just because Ravana is

the enemy of Rama, a man we know to be god, that doesn’t

necessarily make him evil’. According to him, both Rama and

Ravana are like two sides of a paper. Neelakantan justifies

his writing of book by saying:

Rama is imperfect without Ravana and the same

applies to Ravana too; Ravana in his book, for

instance, is symbolic of everything that humankind

is at this point: angry, arrogant, conceited,

proud and ambitious. There are shades of Ravana in

each one of us. Rama, on the other hand, is what

every human wants to be — sacrificing, dutiful,

selfless and devotional – but cannot fully be. My

book is an attempt to make the masses realize that

everything cannot be black or white. Good and

evil, both, co-exist in each one of us.

Neelakantan has shaped Bhadra as a representation of

the common man. Bhadra’s voice is the voice of the silenced

and suppressed majority. Bhadra was portrayed to draw

interest to this fact. Bhadra anchors the story. ‘His

character gives it a third perspective. Bhadra is the bridge

between the ancient world of the Ramayana and today. He is

the window that allows us to gaze at that hazy period

through modern eyes’ states the author in an interview.

Neelakantan in his introduction to the novel discusses

the reason behind the portrayal of Ravana as Dasamukha or

Ten-faced. He begins his Ravanayana by narrating the death

of great Asura king Ravana. The whole book is divided into

65 chapters. Neelakantan portrays both Asuras and Devas as a

kind of tribals rather than giving them the position of

demons and Gods respectively. Ravana speaks about himself

and his exploits, stressing his fights as a half-breed (his

father is a Brahmin and his mother an Asura woman), growing

from poverty to becoming King of a kingdom which was

extended over the entire country. Bhadra’s narrative tells

about a group of people who lived plain lives and how these

common people’s lives were desolated by war in which they

had no pledge.  Sita is Ravana’s daughter in the novel.

There was a prophecy that she would be the cause of the

collapse of the Asura race. So she had been thrown into a

swam to die. Then she was found by King Janaka and she grew

up as the princess of Mithila. The novel also reinterprets

the ten heads of Ravana as ten emotions of man. Novel

explains how Ravana was elected as the king of Lanka by the

common Asuras. Common Asuras looked upon Ravana as their

saviour, who had the strength to release from the clutches

of Devas. They thought that a better world is awaiting for

them under Ravana. To an extent their hope was fulfilled.

But even when Ravana achieved success, the poor Asuras found

that their life has still not changed to a great extent.

Then it proceeds to the events that led to the great war of

Ramayana. This novel also seeks to expose the mistakes of

the Deva race, which is depicted as conventional and

prejudiced. It speaks about the freedom the Asura community

benefitted from. The story of Vamana and Mahabali is

illustrated, along with the Agni Pareeksha underwent by Sita

and the meeting between Bali and Ravana. There exist human

emotions behind these stories’. And these human emotions are

looked from a different approach.

It is also important to note how Neelakantan has

digressed from the original version of Ramayana. Ramayana is

undoubtedly the most popular and timeless Indian epic read

and loved by all. The term "Ramayana", literally means "the

march of Rama" in search of human values. As a literary

work, it combines "the inner bliss of Vedic literature with

the outer richness of delightfully profound story telling."

This story of Sri Rama by the great sage Valmiki is referred

to as the "AdiKavya" (Original Epic). About the Valmiki

Ramayana, Swami Vivekananda has said that compared to the

language in which Valmiki has depicted the life of Rama, no

other language can be more pure, chaste, beautiful and

simpler.

It is important to know that there is not one Ramayana

in India. In reality, the original composition in Sanskrit

by Valmiki is left over with the elderly citizens and rarely

read these days. The most common Ramayana’s are in the

vernacular Indian languages. For example, the Ramayana of

Kamban, written in Tamil in the eleventh century in south

India; in north India it’s the Ramayana of Tulsidas, called

the Ramacharitamanasa that is celebrated. Even among the

Hindus living in far off places of the Indian Diaspora, such

as Fiji and Trinidad, the Ramacharitamanasa is the

devotional text of Hinduism par excellence.

In the Bengali version of the story, Ravana is turned

into the hero and this description was again taken up by the

nineteenth century Bengali writer, Michael Madhusudan Dutt

(1824-73), whose own epic retelling of the Ramayana portrays

Rama as a weak and womanish figure representing an earlier

stage of innocence. It is no surprise that one American

scholar, Paula Richman, has written of the "many Ramayana’s"

in a book by the same title.

The Ramayana, originally authored by Valmiki, consists

of 24,001 verses in six cantos; some say seven including the

Uttarakhanda. Ramayana tells the story of Rama a prince of

Ayodhya, whose wife Sita is abducted by the King of Lanka,

Ravana. In the original Valmiki Ramayana, Valmiki wrote that

Rama was nothing more than an ideal human being. However,

Brahmanical rewriting of Ramayana finally introduced Rama as

a supreme deity.

The epic contains the following books: ‘Bala Kanda’

which narrates the boyhood and adolescence of Rama, ‘Ayodhya

Kanda’ that tells about the court of Dasaratha, and the

scenes that set the stage for the unfolding of the story,

including the exchange between Dasaratha and Kaikeyi, and

the exile of Rama, ‘Aranya Kanda’ that discusses life in the

forest and the abduction of Sita by Ravana, ‘Kishkindha

Kanda’ which narrates Rama’s residence in Kishkindha, the

search for Sita, and the slaying of Bali, ‘Sundara Kanda’

that describes the landscapes over which Rama roams, and the

arrival of Rama and his allies in Lanka; Sundara means

beautiful, and this portion of the book has passages of

lyrical beauty, ‘Yuddha Kanda’ which is also known as the

Lanka Kanda: the book of war: the defeat of Ravana, the

redemption of Sita, the return to Ayodhya, and the

coronation of Rama. Also ‘Uttarakhanda’ that details Rama’s

life in Ayodhya, the banishment of Sita, the birth of Lava

and Kusa, the reconciliation of Rama and Sita, her death or

return to the earth, and Rama’s ascent into heaven.

Ramayana’s narration operates at many levels; it

depicts the society of the time: vast empires, the life of a

prince destined to become the next king, the contest between

mothers and stepmothers, the bond of love and faithfulness

among brothers, contest to win the hand of a princess, and

male chauvinism. It describes how a just human being and a

leader of men behaves at all times, facing circumstances

with calmness, rising to occurrences to lead his people

independent of his own personal calamities and limits,

humanizing love and admiration of his people. It is a story

of the seventh manifestation of Lord Vishnu, incarnating as

a human this time, fighting evil, bringing back justice in

the land, fully aware of his divinity and yet resorting to

using his superhuman powers only when it was absolutely

needed.

The essential tale of Rama has also spread across South

East Asia, and evolves into unique interpretations of the

epic - incorporating local history, folktales, religious

values as well as unique features from the languages and

literary discourse. The Kakawin Ramayana of Java, Indonesia,

the Ramakavaca of Bali, Hikayat Seri Rama of Malaysia,

MaradiaLawana of the Philippines, Ramakien of Thailand (which

calls him Phra Rama) are great works with many unique

characteristics and differences in accounts and portrayals

of the legend of Rama. The legends of Rama are witnessed in

elaborate illustration at the WatPhraKaew Buddhist temple in

Bangkok. The national epic of Myanmar, Yama Zatdaw is

essentially the Burmese Ramayana, where Rama is named Yama.

In the Reamker of Cambodia, Rama is known as Preah Ream. In

the PraLakPra Lam of Laos, Buddha is regarded as an

incarnation of Rama.

The Ramayana speaks of how the Goddess Bhumidevi, came

to the Lord Creator, Brahma begging to be rescued from evil

kings who were greedy of her possessions and destroying life

through bloody wars and evil behaviour. The Devas also came

to Brahma terrified of the rule of Ravana, Emperor of Lanka.

Ravana had overpowered the Devas and now ruled the heavens,

the earth and the netherworlds. Though he was a powerful

monarch, was arrogant, destructive and a supporter of evil

doers he had boons that gave him immense strength and was

invulnerable to all celestial beings, except man and

animals.

Brahma, Bhumidevi and the Devas worshipped Vishnu, the

Preserver, for liberation from Ravana's tyrannical rule.

Vishnu promised to kill Ravana by incarnating as a man - the

eldest son of king Dasaratha. His eternal consort, Lakshmi

took birth as Sita and was found by king Janaka of Mithila

while he was ploughing a field. Throughout his life, no one,

except him and a few select sages as Vasishta, Sharabhanga,

Agastya and Vishwamitra knew of his destiny. Rama was

continuously revered by the many sages as he encounters

through his life but only the most learned and exalted knew

of his true identity. At the end of the war between Rama and

Ravana just as Sita passes her Agni Pariksha, Lord Brahma,

Indra and the Devas, the celestial sages and Lord Shiva

appear out of the sky. They affirm Sita's purity and ask him

to end this terrible test. Thanking the Avatara for

delivering the universe from the grips of evil, they reveal

Rama's divine identity upon the conclusion of his mission.

Dasharatha, King of Aydohya, has three wives and four

sons. Rama is the eldest. His mother is Kaushalya. Bharata

is the son of his second and favorite wife, Queen Kaikeyi.

The other two are twins, Lakshman and Shatrughna. Rama and

Bharata are blue, perhaps indicating they were dark skinned

or originally south Indian deities. A sage takes the boys

out to train them in archery. In a neighbouring city the

ruler's daughter is named Sita. When it was time for Sita to

choose her bridegroom, at a ceremony called a swayamvara,

the princes were asked to string a giant bow. No one else

can even lift the bow, but as Rama bends it, he not only

strings it but breaks it in two. Sita indicates she has

chosen Rama as her husband by putting a garland around his

neck. The disappointed suitors watch.

King Dasharatha, Rama's father, decides it is time to

give his throne to his eldest son Rama and retire to the

forest to seek moksha. Everyone seems pleased. This plan

fulfills the rules of dharma because an eldest son should

rule and, if a son can take over one's responsibilities,

one's last years may be spent in a search for moksha. In

addition, everyone loves Rama. However Rama's step-mother,

the king's second wife, is not pleased. She wants her son,

Bharata, to rule. Because of an oath Dasharatha had made to

her years before, she gets the king to agree to banish Rama

for fourteen years and to crown Bharata, even though the

king, on bended knee, begs her not to demand such things.

Broken-hearted, the devastated king cannot face Rama with

the news and Kaikeyi must tell him.

Rama, always obedient, is as content to go into

banishment in the forest as to be crowned king. Sita

convinces Rama that she belongs at his side and his brother

Lakshman also begs to accompany them. Rama, Sita and

Lakshman set out for the forest. Bharata, whose mother's

evil plot has won him the throne, is very upset when he

finds out what has happened. Not for a moment does he

consider breaking the rules of dharma and becoming king in

Rama's place. He goes to Rama's forest retreat and begs Rama

to return and rule, but Rama refuses. "We must obey father,"

Rama says. Bharata then takes Rama's sandals saying, "I will

put these on the throne, and every day I shall place the

fruits of my work at the feet on my Lord." Embracing Rama,

he takes the sandals and returns to Aydohya.

Years pass and Rama, Sita and Lakshman are very happy

in the forest. Rama and Lakshman destroy the rakshasas (evil

creatures) who disturb the sages in their meditations. One

day a rakshasa princess tries to seduce Rama, and Lakshmana

wounds her and drives her away. She returns to her brother

Ravana, the ten-headed ruler of Lanka (Sri Lanka, formerly

Ceylon), and tells her brother (who has a weakness for

beautiful women) about lovely Sita.

Ravana devises a plan to abduct Sita. He sends a

magical golden deer which Sita desires. Rama and Lakshman go

off to hunt the deer, first drawing a protective circle

around Sita and warning her she will be safe as long as she

does not step outside the circle. As they go off, Ravana

(who can change his shape) appears as a holy man begging

alms. The moment Sita steps outside the circle to give him

food, Ravana grabs her and carries her off to his kingdom in

Lanka. Rama is broken-hearted when he returns to the empty

hut and cannot find Sita. A band of monkeys offer to help

him find Sita. Ravana has carried Sita to his palace in

Lanka, but he cannot force her to be his wife so he puts her

in a grove and alternately sweet-talks her and threatens her

in an attempt to get her to agree to marry him. Sita will

not even look at him but thinks only of her beloved Rama.

Hanuman, the general of the monkey band can fly since his

father is the wind, and Hanuman flies to Lanka and, finding

Sita in the grove, comforts her and tells her Rama will soon

come and save her.

Ravana's men capture Hanuman, and Ravana orders them to

wrap Hanuman's tail in cloth and to set it on fire. With his

tail burning, Hanuman hops from house-top to house-top,

setting Lanka afire. He then flies back to Rama to tell him

where Sita is. Rama, Lakshman and the monkey army build a

causeway from the tip of India to Lanka and cross over to

Lanka. A mighty battle ensues. Rama kills several of

Ravana's brothers and then Rama confronts ten-headed Ravana.

(Ravana is known for his wisdom as well as for his weakness

for women which may explain why he is pictured as very

brainy.) Rama finally kills Ravana.

Rama frees Sita. After Sita proves her purity, they

return to Ayodhya and Rama becomes king. His rule, Rama-

rajya, is an ideal time when everyone does his or her dharma

and ‘fathers never have to light the funeral pyres for their

sons’.

Valmiki opened his conversation with Sage Narada by

expressing his eagerness to know who among his

contemporaries was considered the embodiment of all virtues.

The list of qualities was exhaustive, including valour,

truthfulness, self-control, firm adherence to vows and a

desire to secure the welfare of all creatures. In reply

Narada gave him an account of Rama. So Valmiki with his

yogic powers saw the life of Rama, Lakshman, Sita and others

unfold before him.

Throughout the story Valmiki himself represents Rama as

an avatar and everyone else subordinate. Many argue, if

indeed God took shape among us, as one of us, he did so for

the purpose of giving us instructions how to live, how to

prepare our role in our life. In reading Ramayana closely,

it is understood that Rama was not a man in whom there was

all knowledge, all propriety, and all virtue from the very

beginning unfailing till the very end. He is being seen as a

man who struggled, who was tempted, and who had his

weaknesses. His greatness was in overcoming and surpassing

the weaknesses. He suffered and had human emotions like all.

Rama's character portrayed the passion for righteousness,

the passion for high honour and the passion for dharma.

Sita was outspoken and got her way with both Rama and

Lakshman. Rama was persuaded to take her to the forest only

when she complained that her father thought of him wrongly

when he accepted Rama as his son in law. Rama really seems

to be a woman inside and a man just outside. A second person

has never come to her mind and so she certainly has the

right to accompany him.

In their marriage, Sita was not oppressed. And, there

was no sphere of life in which Sita did not give council.

For example, (a) Once, Sita warned him to not fight the

rakshsas unprovoked. (b) When she set her heart on the deer,

Rama went to get it to please her even though Lakshman

warned him not to. (c) She forced Lakshman to go and help

Rama who she thought was hurt. Sita implied Lakshman may

have wrong intentions towards her, hence, did not want to

follow Rama. She left Lakshman no choice but to go. She even

threatened to kill herself. She later repented at her angry

words and gave a true and glowing picture of Lakshman to

Hanuman in the gardens of Lanka. Well, Sita knew what to say

to get her way.

Sita followed traditions. Ravana came to Sita in the

guise of a mendicant. She was doing her duty in serving him.

She was an intelligent woman. When Ravana kidnapped her, she

had the presence of mind to throw her jewels to the monkeys.

She repeatedly warned Ravana of his danger. She knew her

husband as a kshatriya would avenge this act. Rama was grief

stricken without Sita. The poet describes in great detail

Rama's anguish, thereby, demonstrating the depth of his

feelings.

Rama's character had common qualities of human nature.

The most striking proof is at the end of yuddha kanda where

just after the battle, Sita is summoned to his presence.

Then he gave expression to sentiments that shocked everyone.

Sita did not come back to the warm bosom of a loving husband

from whom she has been separated for a long time, but to an

angry man who berated her. He knew she was untouched but he

saw her surrounded by temptations. After all, Ravana's harem

was full of women he had taken. At that time Ravana also had

considerable wealth and knew how to seduce women. Ravana,

himself, was portrayed as a strong character. So Rama swayed

between the positive and negative feelings. And, no one

murmured a word of protest. Perhaps no one approved. Yet, to

his enemies, Rama had said no man shall seek my protection

in vain. When it came to his beautiful wife who was coveted

by others, Rama certainly was suspicious. He allowed

sinister thoughts and then later repented. It is interesting

to note: Rama freed Ahalya from her curse for adultery, yet,

he was so harsh with his wife.

Neelakantan through his work Asura Tale of the Vanquished,

looks upon Ramayana a different way. When Valmiki Ramayana

gives importance to Rama and his dharma and more importantly

the life of Rama itself Neelakantan views Ramayana from

Ravana’s and Asura’s point of view. Although Ravana has been

described in valmiki Ramayana as a great intellectual, his

actions and words are described in a negative tone.

Neelakantan attempts to give an alternative picture in

which, he gives the story that describes who is Ravana, who

are Asuras, how they survived, and so on.

While the epic Ramayana is divided into 7 Kandas,

through which the whole life of Rama is described in detail,

Asura tale of the Vanquished is divided into 65 chapters beginning

with the death of Ravana and ending with a hope for new

beginning. Asura tale of the Vanquished begins with a

soliloquy of Ravana at the time of his death. He mourns

about himself, his family, his kingdom, and his people.

Neelakantan then describes the childhood of Ravana, which in

turn describes the reason behind Ravana becoming the king of

Lanka, providing a new hope among the common people of

Lanka.

Valmiki Ramayana portrays in detail the attack of

Asuras against Devas, while Neelakantan describes the first

attack of Devas against Asuras and how it had affected the

smooth and peaceful living of Asuras. Neelakantan tells how

the seed of revenge got sown in the minds of Asuras. He also

narrates how the mixed caste people like Ravana and his

siblings were oppressed and suppressed by the Asuras who are

pure in blood like Kubera. Then Neelakantan describes the

journey of Ravana and his siblings in search of success and

their training under the leadership of another great Asura

Mahabali. Neelakantan then reveals the fact behind Ravana

being portrayed as Dasmuka or Ten faced.

Traditional Indian wisdom places importance on the

control of one’s emotions and projects the

intellect alone, as being the supreme. The great

king Mahabali, advises Ravana to shun the other

nine base emotions of anger, pride, jealousy,

happiness, sadness, fear, selfishness, passion,

and ambition. Intellect alone is to be revered.

But, in his response to Mahabali, Ravana justifies

and exults in the possession of all these ten

facets, as they make him a complete man. Mythology

thus portrays Ravana as Dasmuka or the ten-faced

one, while his twenty hands denote prowess and

power (ATV 5).

Neelakantan then narrates how Ravana, with the help of

a common Asura named Bhadra captured the kingdom of Lanka

from Kubera and how Ravana became the king of Asuras. Then

he depicts in detail how Asuras under the leadership of

Ravana conquered half of the world.

Neelakantan’s version of Ramayana depicts Sita as the

daughter of Ravana. At the time of her birth, there came a

prophecy against Sita that, she would cause the destruction

of Asura race. Ministers of Ravana, without the knowledge of

Ravana, ask Bhadra to kill Sita. But Bhadra is unable to

kill Sita and finally leaves her in the forest from where

Janaka took her and brought her up as the princess of

Mithila. Ravana even after knowing the truth forgot to take

her back from king Janaka.

Later Ravana learned that Rama, his daughter’s husband,

disrespects women since Rama and Lakshman behaved cruelly to

Shoorpanaka, Ravana’s sister. Ravana wanted his daughter to

have a good caring husband. Ravana felt that Rama is not

able to take care of his daughter since he took her to the

forest and gave hardships to her. So Ravana wanted to save

his daughter from Rama and wanted to give her a better life

and this led to the kidnap of Sita which in turn led to the

famous war of Ramayana.

Rama fought a war against Ravana for gaining back Sita.

But later Rama along with other Brahmin gurus forces Sita to

undergo Agnipareeksha in order to prove her purity. Valmiki

Ramayana says that, due to the force of temptations Sita

would have faltered and he wanted to make sure Sita is pure.

But Neelakantan portrays Rama as a subaltern husband who

does not have even have the agency to have a say in the

matters relating to his wife.

Again Valmiki Ramayana portrays Rama as the synonym of

Dharma. But in ‘Asura’ Rama is portrayed as a subaltern king

who is not able to do justice. Shambuka, the Asura

untouchable, is killed by Rama for the great fault of being

educated. Shambuka being a lower caste, was not supposed to

have education. But he got educated and even raised his

voice against the injustices in the society. Rama’s gurus

force Rama to kill Shambuka. Though Rama knew that it is

unjust to kill Shambuka he had no other choice. He was

forced to obey Brahmin gurus.

Rama even after Agnipareeksha, asked Sita to leave the

kingdom and to be in exile, after hearing some foul words of

a drunkard, and that too when she was pregnant with his

babies. But Ravana instead, proved his virtue by taking back

Mandodiri, even after she is being raped by his enemies, at

the time of the war. This instance actually gives Ravana a

better position and better value than Rama.

Although Rama won the Ramayan war, it was not fought in

a right way. Rama and his people have used unfair means at

various instances of the war. Rama asked Sugreeva to kill

Bali by hiding himself. Vibhishana actually cheated his

race but he is given a heroic picture since he joined the

good people. It is because of Vibishina that Rama was able

to win over Ravana. Ravana and his people never deviated

from the ethics of war throughout.

Valmiki Ramayana ends with the heavenly reunion of Rama

and Sita while Asura Tale of the Vanquished ith the death of both

Rama and Sita and a mourning of the Asura people for the old

good past days and hope to return to those days. Although

Rama is given a godly picture in Valmiki Ramayana, he is

being given a human picture and that too a human with some

flaws by Neelakantan. Valmiki Ramayana does not express Sita

as a subaltern or suppressed or the one who has no voice in

certain matters concerning her life, but Neelakantan,

portrays Sita as a subaltern.

CHAPTER II

Theorising Subalternity; A Background Framework

Post colonial Studies may be considered as the

“critical analysis of the history, culture, literature, and

modes of discourse that are specific to the former colonies

of England, Spain, France, and other European imperial

powers” (Abrams 306). Orientalism (1978), by the Palestinian-

American scholar Edward Said, is one of the important texts

in establishing the theory and practice in this field of

study. It “applied a revised form of Michel Foucault’s

historicist critique of discourse to analyze what he called

“cultural imperialism (Abrams 306). Cultural imperialism

imposed its power by the effective means of disseminating in

subjugated colonies a Eurocentric discourse that assumed

normality and pre-eminence of everything occidental. It

associates with its depictions of the “oriental” as an

‘exotic and inferior other’.

The master-narrative of Western imperialism

subordinates, marginalizes and even deletes the colonial

other as a cultural agency. Post colonialism rejects these

narratives and replaces it with a counter narrative in which

the colonial cultures fight their way back into a world

history written by Europeans. Disestablishing Eurocentric

norms of literary and artistic values and expanding the

literary canon to include colonial and post colonial writers

are included in the agenda of post colonialism.

Post colonial literature deals with a very wide range

of writings from once colonial countries or the countries

that were dependent on European powers. The major luminaries

include Gayatri Spivak and Homi K Bhaba “Post colonial

theory considers vexed cultural-political questions of

national and ethnic identity, otherness, race, imperialism,

and language during and after the colonial periods. It draws

upon post-structuralist theories such as those of

deconstruction in order to unravel the complex relations

between imperial centre and colonial periphery” (Baldick

265).

Of the various theories that come under post

colonialism, the present study employs subaltern theory and

the theory of Orientalism in the study of Asura Tale of the

Vanquished. Third-world countries and women are the two groups

on whom these theories are based. These theories show how

colonial power and authorities who have power utilize the

powerless, and how their voice is taken away from talking

and fighting for justice. These theories even talk about how

even the thinking of the poor and powerless people are

influenced by the authorial power.

The Subaltern Studies Group, brought in the

terms ‘subaltern’ and ‘Subaltern Studies’, into the realm of

post colonial studies. By the 1970s, the colonized people of

the Indian subcontinent also began to be included in the

category of Subaltern. The areas that frequently use the

term subaltern include history, anthropology, sociology,

human geography, and literary criticism.

The Subaltern Studies, which started in the beginning

of 1980s promoted the study and discussion of the

subalternist themes in South Asian Studies. To rectify the

elitist bias found in most of the academic works in South

Asian Studies was its principle aim. "Guha believed that the

politics of the subalterns did not constitute an autonomous

domain, for it neither originated from elite politics nor

did its existence depend on the latter. Subordination in its

various forms has always been the central focus of the

Subaltern studies" (Biswas 202). The whole concept of

subalternity underwent various shifts throughout its

subsequent volumes. Divergence in interest, motives and

theories was reflected in the essays of the subsequent

volumes. Although various shifts occured, one aspect of the

Subaltern Studies has remained unchanged. "It is an effort

to see and rethink history from the perspective of the

Subalterns and to give them their due in the Historical

process. The new contributors ended up giving new form and

substance to subalternity" (Biswas 202).

Since subaltern studies persisted to be a Eurocentric

method of historical enquiry when dealing with the

colonized, it is impossible to call it an intellectual

discourse. Subaltern studies turned into a method of

historical outlook since it has been devised as a historical

research model for learning the subjugation of the south

Asian people. When looked upon as a method of intellectual

discourse, the notion of the ‘subaltern’ is challenging

because it continued to be a Eurocentric method of

historical examination when analysing the non–Western people

of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. The applicability of

the techniques of Subaltern Studies transformed a model of

intellectual discourse into a method of ‘vigorous post-

colonial critique’ since it originated as a historical-

research model for studying the colonial experience of South

Asian peoples.

English Marxist historical practice of ‘histories from

below’ had strongly influenced Subaltern Studies. Dipesh

Chakrabarty, one of the major contributor of Subaltern

Studies, later described the emergence of subaltern studies

project from within Indian Marxism, with the intention of

producing better Marxist histories. There emerged important

dissimilarities between subaltern studies and English

Marxism that even included the project’s exclusion of an

ecumenical, teleological history, and centering on

stratifications other than class.

In the essay “Relevance (or Irrelevance) of Subaltern

Studies in Reading Subaltern Studies” edited by David

Ludden, Vinay Bhal says,

Members of Subaltern Studies group felt that

although Marxist historians produced impressive

and pioneering studies, their claim to represent

the history of the masses remained debatable.

Their main thesis is that colonialist, nationalist

and Marxist interpretations of Indian History had

robbed the common people of their agency. The

Subaltern Studies collectively thus announced a

new approach to restore history to the

subordinated in order to rectify the elitist bias

characteristic of much academic work in South

Asian Studies. The subaltern’s agency was restored

by theorising that the elite in India played a

dominant role and not simply a hegemoneous one.

Thus, with the logic of this theory the subaltern

were made into autonomous historical actors who

then seemingly acted on their own since they were

not to be led by the elites (qtd. in Biswas 204).

Antonio Gramsci’s works and theories also influenced

Guha and the subaltern studies project and it also enabled

Guha to define subordination more broadly than limiting it

only to class. “Building on the theories of Gramsci, Guha

radically redefined subordination as ‘expressed in terms of

class, caste, age, gender and office or in any other way”

(Altern 59). Indian historiography and political context is

also important while analyzing subaltern studies. Guha

states that ‘the historiography of Indian nationalism has

for a long time been dominated by elitism – colonialist

elitism and bourgeois-nationalist elitism’ (Altern 60). This

statement reveals his reaction against the fact of Indian

historiography avoiding the space for peasants and other

marginalized groups in its history.

To the subaltern studies project, colonialist and

bourgeois-nationalist histories were problematic

because they failed to recognise the agency and

actions of subaltern people. Instead, the credit

for India’s independence and the nationalist

movement that preceded it was given to either

colonial policies or the altruism of the Indian

elite. The failure of contemporary historiography

to acknowledge the agency of the socially and

economically marginalised – or subalterns – was

highlighted throughout the 1970s and early 1980s

by periods of peasant action and demonstration,

sparking a broader interest in peasant agency

throughout Indian academia. As a Maoist activist

Guha had directly engaged in peasant insurgency,

and had, perhaps during this period, been witness

to ‘the contribution made by people on their own’.

During Guha’s role as editor of Subaltern Studies, he

continued to emphasise the need to ‘negate’ this

historiography, before a new one could be created

(Altern 60).

The members of the subaltern studies project were

moderately unified by discontent with existing Indian

historiography. As they had a concern in recuperating

subaltern politics and voices, they made use of various

methodologies in an effort to discover those voices. “In

Subaltern Studies II, for example, a diverse range of techniques

were used to find subaltern voices in official material:

from Roland Barthes’ linguistic technique of ‘bifurcation’,

to a combination of Michel Foucault and Marx’s understanding

of power and surveillance”(Altern 60). English Marxism,

Gramscian theory, and the political and intellectual context

of India combined on the subaltern studies project meant it

symbolized a foremost transformation from the present

historiography of India.

“Can the Subaltern Speak?” relates to the manner in

which western culture investigates other cultures. Spivak

uses the example of the Indian culture of sati, the practice

of widow suicides in this essay. However the main argument

of this essay is in its first part which presents the

ethical problems of investigating a culture based on

“universal” concepts and frameworks. Spivak’s argument is

that knowledge about the third world was always tainted with

the political and economic interests of the west. Here

Spivak criticizes the intellectual west’s desire for

subjectivity. Spivak claims that research and knowledge are

served as prime justification for the conquest of other

cultures and their enslavement as part of the European

colonial project.

“Can the subaltern speak” critically deals with an

array of western writers starting from Marx to Foucault,

Deleuze and Derrida. Spivak argues that western academic

thinking is produced in order to support western economic

interest. She holds that knowledge is like any other

commodity that is exported from west to the third world for

financial and other kinds of profits.

Spivak points out that research is in a way always

colonial, in defining the “other” as the object of study.

Researches always say that which knowledge should be

extracted from west and brought back to East. Basically she

talks about white men speaking to white men about colored

men and women. Spivak examines the validity of western

representation of the other, and says that the discursive

institutions which regulate writing about the other are shut

off to post colonial or feminist scrutiny. This limitation,

Spivak holds, is due to the fact that critical thinking

about the other trends to articulate its relation to the

other with the hegemonic vocabulary. This is similar to

feminist writers who abide by the patriarchic rules for

academic writing. Spivak explains that west is talking to

itself and in its own language about the other. Like other

commodities data or raw material is harvested in the third

world country and taken back to the west to be produced and

sold for the benefit of the western readers.

Spivak also considers the work of the Subaltern Studies

Collective which studies the colonized subject. While she

understands and supports the aim of the group, she expresses

concern over the fact that the voice of the subaltern is

being heard through a group of intellectuals like white or

other non-oppressed people. She likens this to what Foucault

and Deleuze do when they speak about oppressed groups like

the workers or Maoists. Additionally, she points out the

subaltern Studies Collective, like Foucault and Deleuze

suppressed the heterogeneity of the subaltern itself when

they attempted to describe “subaltern consciousness” by

talking about it as one single homogeneous entity.

In the final part of her essay, Spivak broadens the

definition of the subaltern including women and the

histories. Spivak uses the example of sati in colonial India

and the story of Bhubaneshwari Bhaduri to affirm that it is

either the white man explaining why sati is a barbaric

custom and must be abolished, or the brown man insisting

that it is a ritual that renders the woman sacred. At no

point is the voice of brown woman heard. It is the woman who

becomes sati, yet no one comes across the testimony of the

woman’s voice consciousness. She is continually written as

the aspect of either patriarchy or imperialism. Spivak tells

that the relatives of Bubaneshwari and the intellectuals in

West Bengal seemed to believe it to be a case of “illicit

love”. Thus the intellectuals are complicit in silencing the

voice of the subaltern. She concludes her essay by

emphatically stating that the subaltern cannot speak as long

as the subaltern continues to be represented.

Spivak’s answer to ‘can the subaltern speak?’ is no,

since they cannot, when the western academic field is unable

to relate to the other that is its own paradigm. In

conclusion it is proper to say that Spivak, in her essay,

does not ask whether the subaltern does speak but what she

asks is if it is possible for the subaltern to speak. In

other words, she asks if the subaltern has the agency to

speak. Leela Gandhi says that

By ‘subaltern’ Spivak meant the oppressed subject,

the members of Antonio Gramsci’s Subaltern Classes

or more generally those of inferior rank and her

question followed on the work which began in the

early 1980s by a collection of individuals now

known as Subaltern Studies Group. ‘‘The stated

objective of this group was to promote a

systematic and informed discussion of Subaltern

themes in the field of South Asian Studies.

Further they described their project as an attempt

to study the general attribute of subordination in

South Asian Society whether this is expressed in

term of class, caste, age, gender and office or in

any other way”. Fully alert to the complex

ramification arising from the composition of

subordination, the Subaltern studies group

sketched out its wide ranging concern both with

the visible history, politics, economics, and

sociology of subalternity’ and with the occluded

“attitudes, ideologies and belief systems- in

short, the cultural informing that condition.” In

other words, Subaltern Studies defined itself as

an attempt to allow people finally to speak within

the jealous pages of elitist historiography and in

so doing, to speak for, or to sound the muted

voices of, the truly oppressed. (1- 2)

This thesis is grounded on the concept of Spivakian

subalternity among third world people and women. In the

essay, she brings together passionate accusations of the

harm done to women, non-Europeans, and the poor by the men,

privileged West, and the rich respectively. Similarly in the

novel, the Asuras can be compared to third world people

since they were also once conquered by the Devas and much

harm was done to their civilization, their nature, their

livelihood and their race. Also Asura women were mentally

and physically harassed by Asura and Deva men.

Edward Said through his work Orientalism challenged the idea

of orientalism or the difference between east and west. When

the Europeans started colonization, they came in touch with

the lesser developed countries of the east. Finding the

civilization and culture of the east as very exotic,

Europeans established the science of orientalism, which can

be described as the study of the orientals or the citizens

from the mysterious east civilization.

Said argues that the Europeans divided the world into

two parts; the east and the west or the occident and the

orient or the civilized and the uncivilized. This was

totally an artificial boundary; and it was laid on the basis

of the concept of them and us or theirs and ours. The

Europeans used orientalism to define themselves. Some

particular attributes were associated with the orientals,

and whatever the occidents were not, the orientals were. The

Europeans defined themselves as the superior race compared

to the orientals; they justified their colonization by this

concept. They said that it was their duty towards the world

to civilize the uncivilized world. The main problem,

however, arose when the Europeans started generalizing the

attributes they associated with orientals, and started

portraying these artificial characteristics associated with

orientals in their western world through their scientific

reports, literary work, and other media sources. What

happened was that it created a certain image about the

orientals in the European mind and in doing that infused a

bias in the European attitude towards the orientals. This

prejudice was also found in the orientalists (scientist

studying the orientals); and all their scientific research

and reports were under the influence of this. The

generalized attributes associated with the orientals can be

seen even today; for example, the Arabs are defined as

uncivilized people; and Islam is seen as the religion of the

terrorist.

Said explains the development of the science of

orientalism. The orients were given the labels of uncivilized

people; the westerners who considered themselves as refined

race thought that to civilize the underdeveloped east was

theirs and for that to be possible the west must colonize

the east and must rule the orients. West believed that

orients by themselves were incompetent to run their own

government. Europeans also believed their right to represent

the orients in the west all by themselves. “In doing so,

they were orientalizing the orients. The occidents silently

observed the orientals and everything the orients said and

did was recorded irrespective of its context, and projected

to the civilized world of the west and resulted in the

generalization”(Khalid). Even if something irrational is

done by an individual, the west took it as the general

culture of east.

The most important use of orientalism to the Europeans

was that they defined themselves by defining the orientals.

For example, qualities such as lazy, irrational,

uncivilized, crudeness were related to the orientals, and

automatically the Europeans became active, rational,

civilized, sophisticated. Thus, in order to achieve this

goal, it was very necessary for the orientalists to

generalize the culture of the orients.

Said says that there is a slight change in the attitude

of the Europeans towards the orients. Literary works by the

writers of east were the medium by which the east got

publicized in the west. The European poets and writers

highly romanticize Oriental land and behaviour and then

present it to the western world. In fact, the orient lands

were so exceedingly romanticized that western writers found

it essential to offer pilgrimage to these unusual lands of

pure sun light and clean oceans in order to get familiarized

with peace of mind, and thus to get an inspiration for their

writing. “The east was now perceived by the orientalist as a

place of pure human culture with no necessary evil in the

society. Actually it was this purity of the orientals that

made them inferior to the clever, witty, diplomatic, far-

sighted European; thus it was their right to rule and study

such an innocent race” (Khalid). Another explanation , the

west provided for their colonization was that, since they

have developed sooner than the orientals as a nation, they

were biologically superior, and secondly it were the

Europeans who discovered the orients and not vice versa. In

order to justify their superiority biologically, the

Europeans put forward Darwin’s theories.

Said also explicates how Silvestre de Sacy and Ernest

Renan, the two most renowned orientalists of the

19th century, worked and gave orienatlism a new dimension.

Sacy’s contribution in this field is complimented by Said.

“He says that Sacy organized the whole thing by arranging

the information in such a way that it was also useful for

the future orientalist. And secondly, the prejudice that was

inherited by every orientalist was considerably low in him.

Renan who took advantage of Sacy’s work was as biased as any

previous orientalist” (Khalid).

 Said also discusses how the geography of the world was

shaped by the colonization of the Europeans. The quest for

geographical knowledge formed the foundation of orientalism.

The author then talks about the changing

circumstances of the world politics and changing

approach to orientalism in the 20th century. The

main difference was that where the earlier

orientalists were more of silent observers the new

orientalists took a part in the everyday life of

the orientals. The earlier orientalists did not

interact a lot with the orientals whereas the new

orientals lived with them as if they were one of

them. This wasn’t out of appreciation of their

lifestyle but was to know more about the orients

in order to rule them properly. Lawrence of Arabia

was one of such orienatlists. (Khalid)

USA became the centre of orientalism after World War I.

In order to deal with the orient countries, by assisting

their government to come up with policies, the orients were

studied by the occident. “With the end of World War II, all

the Europeans colonies were lost; and it was believed that

there were no more orientals and occidents, but this was

surely not the case. Western prejudice towards eastern

countries was still very explicit, and often they managed to

generalize most of the eastern countries because of it”

(Khalid). For instance, the portrayal of Arabs as cruel and

violent people, Muslims as terrorists and so on. “Edward Said

concludes his book by saying that he is not saying that the

orientalists should not make generalization, or they should

include the orient perspective too, but creating a boundary

at the first place is something which should not be done”.

(Khalid)

Theory of Orientalism by Edward said involves theory of

the Other. This theory of the Other forms a major part of

the present study. The powerless and the poor are considered

as the other by the powerful authorities and by the west.

Said discusses the treatment of eastern countries as other

by the so called privileged west. He also examines the

negative qualities that are imposed on the east by west. In

the present study, the Asuras are considered as the other

and inferior by the Devas. Also even the Asura authorities

view the common Asuras as the other and the untouchables.

Devas consider the culture and beliefs of Asuras as inferior

and Devas even make Asuras believe that they are inferior.

Vanara race, one of the mixed races among Asuras are being

looked down as inferior even by the common Asuras, is just

one instance of ‘Othering’ being done.

Paulo Friere talks about the general world set up.

According to him, two types of people exist; the oppressed and

the oppressors, or the rulers and the citizens. Both the

parties are significant and there is a clear understanding

about the roles that each party must play. The oppressed

always think that the oppressors or rulers are more

important than themselves and they must live according to

their wish. He says that the oppressed and the oppressors

need to find a way to live among them. The oppressors need

the oppressed to rule over. The oppressors earn their

freedom by conquering the oppressed. "Freedom is acquired by

conquest, not by gift. It must be pursued constantly and

responsibly. Freedom is not an ideal located outside of man;

nor is it an idea which becomes myth. It is rather the

indispensable condition for the quest for human completion"

(Friere 47). Friere says that the oppressed have to be

educated, and be united with each other so that they can

overcome and pursue the right to be human and have freedom.

He also talks about the concept of dehumanization.

“Dehumanization, which marks not only those whose humanity,

has been stolen, but also (though in a different way) those

who have stolen it, is a distortion of the vocation of

becoming more fully human.” (Freire 44)

Freire explains a comparison and contrast of two

methods by unfolding the relationship between teacher and

students followed by the outcomes. The banking method of

education is the first method Friere describes in his book.

Following is the first definition he gives for this method

–“Education becomes an act of depositing, the students as

the depositories the teachers as depositors. This type of

education is “suffering from narration sickness” (Freire

71). A non-progressive world of dictatorship and power in

the wrong hands- in the hands of the oppressors is the

result that the banking concept of education brings to the

world.

Oppressors describe this concept of education as

“knowledge is a gift bestowed by those who consider

themselves knowledgeable upon those who are considered to

know nothing” (Friere 72). The students try to adapt to the

world as it is and to the disjointed view of reality

deposited by the teacher/oppressor. “Banking education

anesthetizes and inhibits creative power” (Friere 73) .Thus

the oppressors manipulate and control the students who are

empty vessels as can be seen from the examples as seen in

the time of slavery and rule of Hitler. “Friere expresses

this as a characteristic of the ideology of oppression,

negates education and knowledge as inquiry.” (Friere 72)

In the allegory of the cave this concept is presented

in which the cave dwellers have no concept of what reality

of the outside world is. In this way students fail to become

a generation of free thinking individuals. The oppressors

conclude that the oppressed, the students, are ignorant, and

with arrogance justify their own existence giving the

oppressors unwarranted power. Plato sums up this concept as

he expresses in The Republic, an image of ignorant humanity. As

in “The Allegory of the cave”, the oppressed are trapped in

the depths and not even aware of their own limited

perspective.

The next concept of education that Friere talks about

is the problem posing education. It discusses the concept of

liberal education for students. “Problem posing education

breaks the vertical patterns characteristic of banking

education and the teacher and the student become jointly

responsible for a process in which both can grow.”(Friere

80). The activity of teacher is not subdivided from student

in this concept of education, but on the contrary, the

instructor continuously transforms his or her reflections to

the reflections of the students. In order for the students

to feel increasingly challenged and obliged to respond to

the challenge, they create a level of knowledge together.

“Such a person is then the best equipped to govern in

society, having knowledge of what is ultimately most

worthwhile in life and not just knowledge of techniques

(Plato, Allegory of the cave). These techniques are

described in the banking method as a way of teacher

instruction to the alienated student” (Rizzoch). Through

this method, the oppressed have a chance to live. They

become equipped to fight for a just world where everyone

lives in harmony, share ideals and thus try to create a

unified determined world. “To alienate human beings from

their own decision making is to change them into objects”

(Friere 85). He raises questions like, while striving to

prevent others from being human, how can the oppressors

consider themselves human.

Our past does not dictate our future. The past should

be used as a clear path for individuals to contribute freely

to better our nation as a whole. Our future is the way to

strive for taking progressive steps forward. People being

subjected to domination and dictatorship should no longer

exist. Friere explains that people subjected to domination

must fight for their emancipation. In this way it enables

teachers to overcome authoritarianism; the students are no

longer alienated and are enabled to freely engage in

learning. This process no longer allows opportunities to

serve the interests of the oppressor.

Freire also explains the importance of interaction

among people and also talks about the proper way of dialogue

that should be used in the interaction. “Friere explains

that dialogue is an encounter between men and women, and is

an act of creation, meaning that it must not serve for

domination or forceful purposes” (120). Encounter is the

space where people learn together the facts that they are

unaware of. Critical thinking is a must among the

dialoguers. Communication is incomplete without dialogue,

and without communication education is impossible and it is

the same reason why numerous political and educational plans

have become a failure. Humans who exist in a world that is

constantly changing and altering, by separating themselves

from their own activities, execute their own decisions and

test their relationships with others and the world.

Finally, Friere does an in depth study of "the

oppressed", "the oppressors", and the "revolutionaries". The

oppressed have different relationships with the oppressors

and the revolutionaries. Friere believes that for

transformation to take place it is necessary to obtain

communion between these three categories. He addresses the

oppressors as dominators just because they dominate the

oppressed rather than rendering a hand of help to achieve

transformation. Selfish mind of oppressors do not allow the

oppressed to think for themselves and they always think of

their own status in life.

The ways that the oppressors keep the oppressed in

this state are through conquest, dividing,

manipulation and cultural invasion. These are all

theories of antidialogical action. They use

conquest in a way of controlling the lives of the

citizens. They divide the people and deny

unification. They manipulate them through myths

and accomplish this by pacts between the dominant

and dominated classes. And finally they maintain

domination through cultural invasion in which the

leader installs their own beliefs and standards

into the citizens. In order to become liberated

the oppressed group must form a unity although the

dominators may show resistance. Also as Friere

would say, we cannot say that in the process of

revolution someone liberates someone else, nor yet

that someone liberates himself but rather that

human beings in communion liberate each other."

(Freire 133)

The concepts like dehumanization, banking method of

education, prescription, self- depreciation, by Friere are

also taken for this study. He talks about the different

tools by which people are oppressed. The novel discusses how

the banking method of education followed by the Deva

Brahmins leads to oppression among the people. The study

also analyzes how certain tools of oppression, like

dehumanization, that are mentioned by Friere can be applied

to the study of the novel Asura Tale of the Vanquished. In order to

have a subaltern and oriental reading of Asura Tale of the

Vanquished, the concepts and theories of Spivak, Said and

Friere can be excellently used.

CHAPTER III

The ‘Othered’ Asura Community

Subaltern studies render a helping hand to appreciate

the history of working class and the future of working class

liberation. In India there is relevance for subaltern

studies since India was once a subaltern under British

colonial power and even after the independence by becoming

subordinated to the neo-colonialism of the West. Gayatri

Spivak, in her work Can the subaltern speak , has coalesced the

aggressive harm done to women, non – Europeans, and the poor

by men, the advantaged west, and the rich and radically

questions it. Taking a look at Asura Tale of the Vanquished by

Anand Neelakantan from Spivak’s perspective, it is possible

to see various similarities with these types of

discriminations that eventually lead to subalternity. In the

novel oppression take place at various levels. Also, “In

recent times the figure of the other, hitherto silent and

effaced, has made claims to speak, indeed to speak back,

disrupting the realm of politics in radical ways: thus

women, ‘natives’, minorities, deviants, subalterns, now

claim to speak as others” (Rajan). Neelakantan has also made

such an effort.

Nancy Scheper-Hughes in “Mixed Feelings: The Recovery

of Spoiled Identities

in the New South Africa”, speaks of the identity of half

castes in New South Africa as “spoiled identity” in which

half castes are purposefully erasing their mixed identity

for the sake of having a peaceful life without the

speculation about their roots. In her study she focuses on

“the vexed social history and the current dilemma of the

Cape "coloured" (or racially "mixed") population in terms of

their marginalized "in betweenity" in the South African

system of race apartheid” (Hughes 2). Havocs of two world

wars resulted in the decline of German – American social

self identity which in turn has forced Americans who had

German backgrounds to conceal their German identity and to

live in a Euro-American identity. “One of their strategies

is to erase the subtle but persistent stigma of German

ethnicity by marriage to Italian-Americans or Irish-

Americans whose own ethnic identity is strongly marked and

vibrant and which lends children their ethnic identity in a

"mixed marriage" (Hughes 2).

In Asura Tale of the Vanquished Ravana and his siblings were

Half-castes. Their father was a famous Maharishi and the

mother belonged to an unknown Asura caste. Since they were

half –castes, Ravana and his brothers never got educated.

Brahmins, the learned men at that period and who were

supposed to give their learning to young generation, were

reluctant to teach them for free, even if they were ready to

work for them. They were considered as wild, black and

naughty. They were born of a Brahmin, but education was

rejected for them since their mother belonged to a lower

caste called the Asura caste. Here Brahmin learners

belonged to the higher caste and power existed in their

hands, and the half- castes like Ravana are the subalterns

here, since they did not have the agency to decide about the

matter of education for themselves. Agency is the capacity

and power to determine one’s actions and life. For Ravana

and his siblings, everything is decided by others. They

‘followed no tradition’ and they were treated as ‘bastards’.

In the beginning of the novel, Ravana and his siblings

were captured by Mahabali, the great Asura king. When

Mahabali asked them to introduce themselves, Ravana feels

that even their address is borrowed. They don’t even have an

identity as Asuras, because they do not have pure blood.

When Ravana introduces himself and his siblings, the

response of Mahabali is noteworthy. Mahabali responded to

them: “I think your mixed blood has got to do with this

total incompetence. Stop playing a buffoon and be worthy of

the ambition that burns in your heart. It is unfortunate

that the Asura tribe produces such useless hotheads as you”

(ATV 29). Half-castes were treated as incompetent, hotheads,

buffoons and so on. They were defined by the powerful races,

communities and authorities. They do not even have the

freedom to define themselves.

Asura race are supposed to be great warriors and

Brahmins are supposed to be great learners. But the mixed

caste children could not afford a good teacher because of

poverty and because of their caste. And also they do not

have the opportunity to learn to be good warriors due to the

same reason. So mixed caste people are doubly subjugated

since they do not get the opportunity to be educated or to

become a warrior.

As per Cornal West quoted in Contemporary Literary and Cultural

Theory: From Structuralism to Ecocriticism by Nayar, “race has served as

a marker of difference, a difference that leads to slavery,

exploitation and death. While biological evidence for the

superiority of one race over another has not emerged, social

and political fields remain exploited within discourses that

consistently, if subtly deploy race as difference” (222).

Subaltern can be defined as “the inferior or colonized

classes who does not have any opportunity to express

themselves and are thus reliant upon the language and

methods of the authoritative class to articulate them.

Intermingling of different tribes, in which “deep black

Asuras mixed with pale Devas (the Brahmins who held a post

below the rulers that conquered the Asuras), who in turn

mixed with various shades of skin colour ranging from the

yellow of the Gandharvas, to the pure white of Kinnaras, and

the pitch black of the Yakshas” (ATV 24) and results in the

formation of mixed race.

Orientalism by Said includes the theory of the other,

in which occident considers orient as the other and are

weak, poor, loutish, idle, indolent, unrefined, uncivilized

and so on. Correspondingly the Vanara race was considered

as the other by the Devas and also by the Asuras who are

pure in blood.

Mixed races were held in contempt earlier. The

Devas shunned them like lepers and they were

laughed at by the Asuras. Stung by social

antipathy and disdain, a group of this mixed race

withdrew to the forests of central India. They

were weak and uncultured, even by Deva standards

and chattered incessantly without doing any

productive work. They led a crude and miserable

existence collecting berries and honey from the

forests, living in tree houses and caves and

occasionally raiding nearby villages in search of

gold and women. They came to be called the monkey

tribe- the Vanaras. They were mostly ignored and

often considered boors. In the Deva or Asura

languages, the word Vanara was a curse word and to

call someone a Vanara was the ultimate insult

which resulted in duels and death. (ATV 25)

With the above quote, the oppressed condition of

Vanaras becomes quite clear. Here both Asuras and Devas have

taken the role of oppressors. As per quoted by Barry, Du

bois argues that a proper mixing of races is thwarted by the

isolation and separation of races and that will in turn

infuse hatred among different races. Banton opines that

racial difference is the basis for disempowerment and

discrimination and Spivak says those who are disempowered

and discriminated are subalterns.

The Vanaras, when expelled from their ethnic

communities, lose their opportunity to mingle and mix with

the so called pure races that gave birth to this mixed race

called Vanaras. This expulsion of the Vanaras has caused

hatred in them against the pure races. The Vanaras, the

mixed race, are subalterns since they are subject to

contempt because of their race. They do not have the agency

to express themselves or resist to the injustices done to

them because they are weak and thus subaltern. They do not

even get the status of humans. They are banned from

accessing the public resources. They are forced to refrain

from the so called ‘pure races’, who boast of pure blood.

But the fact that Vanaras are born from the mixing of the

‘pure races’ is often forgotten when the pure race harms

them. For a long time they have been silenced. They are

forced to obey the higher races, and that is why they are

forced to move away from their ethnic places. They are

forced to leave their ethnic communities since they were

powerless and inferior while the pure races are superior.

They were also deprived of education, since none were ready

to teach them.

With the coming of Bali and Sugriva, two powerful

characters of Vanara tribe in Ramayana, the fate of Vanaras

changes. They also become powerful and at a point even the

Asuras and Devas got frightened of them. It is the hatred

towards pure races that encouraged them to fight Devas and

other pure races.

The work Asura tale of the vanquished brings out various

instances where Asuras were treated as subaltern. The novel

describes Ravana as a dreamer, but while analysing the novel

it is clear that he becomes such a dreamer as a result of

the subalternity that he is subject to. It is clear from his

questions:

Why were our people so meek and humble? Why were

only a few able to control the power and wealth

while the rest obliged them, and even laid their

lives to help this small selfish gang that oppress

them and their children? Wherever I looked I only

saw oppression. Money, caste, rituals, traditions,

beliefs, and superstitions all conspired together

to crush the humble majority. Why could not there

be a more just way of living? (ATV 19)

When Ravana started questioning the injustices done to

his race, he was branded a hothead, some Brahmins even tried

to evict him from the village. Another painful reality about

Subalterns are they “have no scope for convincing things and

they are forced to maintain age old tradition of silence”

(Gaijan 238). It is clear from the instance/ the fate of

Shambuka, another individual of Asura race. He also

questioned the authority for not allowing them to be

educated. Death was his punishment for his questioning.

When Shambuka started learning and began to see the world

with proper reasoning, Bhadra, one of the main narrator of

this novel, who considers Shambuka as his own grandchild,

and Shiva, Shambuka’s father tried to protest against the

fact of educating him. It was not because they do not want

their child to be educated but they were afraid of the rule

that Asuras, who are the lower caste, are not allowed to be

educated. But finally Bhadra and Shiva had to submit to the

compulsion of their respective wives Mala and Arsi, their

and reluctantly agree to educate him. He got educated from a

Brahmin Guru, who was a disciple of Jabali, another Brahmin

who declaimed the absurdity of caste system. Jabali asked

his disciples to educate people irrespective of class,

caste, or gender. Until Shambuka got educated, he was

drowning in the world of darkness and restrictions; he was

under the power and authority of the higher caste. With

education a new awakening about the social system came to

his mind. Shambuka started to sing about a world of freedom,

which is far-away from him and his race and beyond their

reach. All the lower caste people in his area became fond of

him since he had given them a hope of freedom, at least in

imagination. The audience sometimes even joined him by

singing with him, by appreciating his rhythm and some even

weep quietly. This makes it clear that they were deprived of

independence and they worked for the higher castes and were

subalterns, because their existence was decided by the

higher caste people. Shambuka’a community were washer-men

and washer-women. This job too is imposed on them.

The author describes Shambuka’s songs by saying: “He

sang in Sanskrit, but the emotions that pulsed were

universal and the yearnings that radiated were primeval. It

penetrated the thick muck of religion, caste, and custom

that had pasted itself over men’s hearts and instead

appealed to the inner goodness of all human beings” (ATV

477). As the fame of the boy started to increase, Bhadra

tried to stop him because his life had taught him a lesson

about the world outside that is dark and cruel, inhabited by

higher castes, who would not tolerate any challenge to their

supremacy. Bhadra had tried to tell him that according to

Vedas they are outcastes and were not allowed to study

anything beyond our caste duties. But the taste of freedom

is so exiting that Shambuka did not listen to the wisdom of

Bhadra. But he argued with Bhadra quoting from Vedas. He

clearly argued that Vedas were not the dominated area of any

single caste or profession. No one was able to question him

about his reasoning. The similar notion regarding the

content of Vedas was once told by Ravana himself, after he

got educated from Mahabali and his palace guru. He says that

Vedas are the works of absolute scholars and men of

brilliance. “It was a far cry from the trivia that people

like my father was propagating in the name of Vedas. The

rituals, curse of caste- none of these had the sanction of

the Vedas nor were they divine proclamations or edicts” (ATV

35). Sacred text’s real meaning presented him the courage

and fortitude to attack evils like caste, and other rituals

being propagated by the priestly class. “He was determined

to curb meaningless rituals and sacrifices and put an end to

the curse of caste” (ATV 35). So it is clear that the

Brahmins are giving their own versions of the sacred texts

to meet their own good and to prolong their superiority and

to continue to keep the lower caste as subalterns.

Shambuka once had to meet head-on with a group of

Priests, who do not want the lower caste people to pollute

the highway. The boy questioned the very authority of the

priests to ‘condone such an atrocious thing’ as walking

through the highway. Infuriated priests tried to intimidate

him with certain obscure Sanskrit verses, but the boy

challenged the priests with other accepted Sanskrit verses.

But the result was his death. When the Asuras questioned

their subalternity, banishment from the ethnic places and

even death is the consequence. Asuras are forced to face

these consequences due to their subalternity. They lack

power and authority. The question of Spivak, ‘Can the

Subaltern Speak?’ gain importance here, can these Asuras,

the subalterns, speak? Can they raise their voice?

At the time of his marriage, Ravana questions the

injustices done to him and his family by his father. Ravana

raises the questions like where was his Brahmin father, when

they were hungry, when they were begging for food and

clothes, when they were living insecurely in their small

hut, often swaying in the monsoon rain and other such

questions. But the response of his father is noteworthy. He

has done all the injustices to his wife and children and

when he was asked to give justification for his unfair

doings, he replied to Ravana, “I should not blame him alone.

He is after all an Asura. A more blighted race I have yet to

see. Debauchery, sodomy, avarice, you name any evil and this

devilish race can easily claim monopoly over it. Black-

skinned ugly creature . . . ” (ATV 175). These lines clearly

depict how Brahmins viewed the Asura race. Whatever words

that Ravana’s father used to abuse Asura race, are the words

that are commonly addressed at a subaltern race because all

these descriptions show their weaknesses and helplessness

thus making them subaltern.

In a project called Caste-Based Discrimination in

South Asia, A study on Nepal, conducted by Indian Institute

of Dalit studies, evils of caste system on the people of

Nepal is described in detail.

The Action Aid, Nepal's study report on caste

based discrimination, including untouchability, in

Nepal, identified 205 existing practices of caste-

based discrimination in the eight sample sites. Of

these, 54 are related to denial, which includes 10

related to entry, 14 to services, and 6 to access

to common resources, 10 to kinship and other

relationships and 14 to participation. Out of the

205 existing practices of caste-based

discrimination, 9 are related to forced or

discriminatory labour, 20 to dominance, and 20 to

inhuman treatment, 3 to social boycott, and 18 to

attitudinal untouchability. Out of the 205

existing practices of caste-based discrimination,

81 are discrimination in different fields. It

includes 18 related to occupation, 11 to

educational institutions, 10 to political rights,

14 to government policy and programs, 7 to

government and NGO offices, 13 to development

programs and donors, and 8 to religious and

cultural activities. (3)

In God of Small Things, Arundhati Roy brings forth the

pathetic conditions of the individuals who are isolated on

the basis of their caste. In such a contemporary scenario,

it is relevant to analyse the caste based discriminations in

the novel. Caste based subalternity is a major theme

present in the novel. All Asuras, especially Asura civilians

are victims of caste subalternity. Vibishana, Ravana’s

brother, brought some Brahmins into Lanka and those Brahmins

in course of time introduced the Deva tradition of caste

system into the Asura community. The rich people among the

Asura race started converting into Brahmins. “The elite

began to convert in droves and wore the sacred thread which

a Brahmin was supposed to wear always. They began to look

down on anyone who did a useful job” (ATV 260).

Soon the Asura civilians begin to realize that they are

being excluded from the mainstream society. The important

government positions are being reserved to Brahmins.

Resentment built up. Stout and fair Deva Brahmins began to

turn up in hoards from northern India and thus Brahmin

colonies started to spring up in important Asura towns and

villages.

Merchants who did not accept the Deva ways were

slowly excluded from the palace. Roads and other

public contracts for temples got allotted only to

the neo-converts. Then the roads were closed to

people like us. My shop witnessed angry and

impotent resentment against the way things were

being done in our own land. The grand, new temples

which had been constructed were barred to us. The

old priests were thrown out of temples and filled

hastily by Brahmins. Dust accumulated over past

glory (ATV 352).

Brahmanism slowly crept into Asura society and they

considered the poor, black, original Asuras impure and

higher caste even refused to touch them. “It divided our

society into a million parts, with the Brahmins at the top”

(ATV 352). Ravana itself once admitted that the Asura race

had lost the purity of thought and simplicity of life due to

the creeping of Brahmanism. Like the Brahmins, they too

began to consider some people as heavenly, that “some were

pure and others not- not because of their deeds or their

minds, but because of their birth” (ATV 352). After the

death of Ravana, a meeting was held under the leadership of

Rama and he divided the whole Asura race into four castes

and each caste was allocated a profession each;

The Brahmins, who came from the face of the God,

would be the supreme caste. They would dispense

knowledge, act as representatives of God on earth

and it was imperative that everyone listen and

obey them. The Kshatriyas, who had the great

fortune of coming from the limbs of God, would

rule over society as per the advice of Brahmins.

The Vaishyas who came from the thighs of the God

would be given permission to run business and

trade and would be under two castes. All others,

who did not fall into the mentioned categories,

would be considered pariahs or untouchables. (ATV

452)

Author describes how caste system affected common Asura

civilians. The people, especially black Asuras have to obey

whatever the higher caste orders them to do. God is not

creating a person as a Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, or

Shudra or untouchable. It is society who creates all these

boundaries. Common folk is having hell in the community

headed by caste system. They are not able to resist against

any of the injustices. If anyone tries to resist those

injustices she/he had to risk his or her own life. In other

words the common people are subjugated by the evil caste

system making them subalterns, which is relevant even to

this contemporary period.

Just as the occident colonized and ruled orient for

several years, Devas colonized Asuras and ruled over them

making Asuras subalterns. Devas’ attack on Asuras was

justified by the uncivilized and uncultured nature of

Asuras, the qualities that were labelled on Asuras by Devas.

Asuras originally had a very magnificent civilization and

empire. Their empire “sprawled from the Indus in the west to

the Brahmaputra in the east, and from the Himalayas in the

north to the Narmada in the South” (ATV 21). The democratic

system of Auras had laid roads, drainage systems, hospitals

offering all basic amenities for the people. Such a vast

civilization was conquered by the Devas.

Just as the Europeans forced the colonized people to

follow Christianity, Devas forced the Asuras to worship God

Brahma. The Brahmins gained the control over the whole Asura

race. The conquered Asuras were given the name Dasas, just as

the Africans were called “niggers”, and were ordered to do

all the jobs demanded by the Brahmins. The suppressors

ensured that they lived in perpetual ‘mirth and enjoyment’

while the Dasas were working hard.

Occident’s considered orients as underdeveloped and

inferior and they also thought that it is Occident’s’ duty

to make orients’ educated. Similarly Asuras were considered

as lazy, weak and inferior and Devas considered educating

and civilizing Asuras as their burden. So Asura civilization

was destroyed by Devas. They shattered Asura cities,

schools, temples and everything that supported Asura’s

progress, which in turn viewed by Devas as the mark of

uncivilization and inferiority. Devas started building new

scattered cities and founded their own school of art and

architecture with their own principles in order to civilize

Asuras, which in truth cannot even be compared to the Mayan

school of Art and Architecture which was built by Asuras

even though the Deva School took ideas from Mayan school.

Apart from this there is another terrible depiction of

the attack of Devas in the novel. It is told through the

story of Bhadra. He and his fellow villagers were living so

peacefully in their village by taking care of their own

livelihood, by turning happy and sad for even simple things.

Although his hamlet was so small, it had everything that his

people need to live happily like the “sacred grove, a small

shrine for Shiva, a toddy shop, a small school where basic

crafts like masonry, farming, mathematics , and other

necessary subjects were taught, a house of pleasure, a quack

who himself called a doctor, and so on” (ATV 43).

But when the Devas came the whole village changed. One

night he was woken by his wife and he saw a group of

strangers in his bedroom. The first thing that came to his

mind was how to receive the guests. Hearing the cries and

wails from the neighbourhood he became afraid. He saw his

neighbour being burnt alive and his wife is being gang

raped.

The whole village was burning. People were running

like scared chickens. I saw people being hacked.

Houses are being blazed. Warriors on horseback

with their fair, devilish faces, were jeering,

howling and killing people. A boy from the group

lifted my girl by her legs and smashed her hard

against a mud wall. I heard my beloved daughter’s

skull crack open. Her blood and brains splattered

across our faces. (ATV 45)

When strong Devas in groups, along with arms and

weapons attack weak people Asuras who were peacefully

sleeping in their huts, they turn helpless. Attacking and

oppressing the helpless and weak in any method is

subalternity. The scenarios presented is similar to those

found in various third world countries, which were once

colonized by British and other colonial powers. Many

theorists like Spivak, Said, and Homi Bhaba and so on, have

spoken about the effects of colonization in these third

world countries. All these theorists have said about how the

third world countries have become subaltern at various

levels with respect to culture, civilization, education, and

so on. Edward said in his Orientalism explains how the third

world countries were made and treated as Other, inferior and

underdeveloped and how the west consider themselves as

superior and developed. In other words he is also in a sense

agreeing with Spivak’s idea of Subaltern. West considered

East and is considering East as subaltern and that is why

they forced their culture, religion, civilization and so

forth into the eastern countries. Freire’s concept of anti-

dialogical action can also be applied here since it talks

about conquest as a way of controlling in the lives of

people.

In the novel, Asura Tale of the Vanquished, Devas replace the

British. When they realized the greatness of Asura

civilization and Asura soil, they conquered Asuras and

brought control over them. They practised their own rules

and regulations over Asuras making them subaltern. Devas

thought of Asuras as underdeveloped, primitive, and dark and

had given for them various other descriptions that mean the

same.

Ravana has been suffering from identity crisis due to

the subalternity that he has been facing at different phases

of life. He as an Asura child had lost many opportunities to

succeed in life. Poverty, filth, flies, shattered childhood

is the picture that comes to his mind when he thinks of his

childhood. “My mother’s leering face jeered at me, screaming

repeatedly that I was a black and a good for nothing evil

spirit loser who was a burden to the world. I wept for the

blackness of my skin” (ATV 31-32).

At a point in the novel, Asuras, under the kingship of

Ravana, attacked King Anarnya of Ayodhya. There Ravana was

so powerful and King Anarnya was an old, weak king. Ravana

after fighting the soldiers, asked the king to surrender.

Then it was said that king is in his prayer, he can be met

only after the prayer. Asuras waited for him for a long

time and when they ask for the king the same reply was

repeated. Being angry, Ravana went inside the prayer room

and after waiting for a few moments he tapped the old man’s

shoulder. “The old man turned and stood up falteringly.

Ravana extended a supporting hand to the old king but he

shook off Ravana’s hand and shouted in a voice that belied

his age, Do not pollute me, you untouchable Shudra” (ATV

210 ). Ravana was stunned for a moment and mumbled something

which sounded like my father, he is also a Brahmin. King

Anarnya continued, “you untouchable, if your mother is

casteless, so too are you” (ATV 210). Furiously, Ravana

asked king Anarnya to surrender, for which he replied, “I

will not surrender to a Shudhra” (ATV 210). And when Ravana

asked king Anarnya to fight him; he again replied “I will

not demean myself by fighting a Shudhra” (ATV 210)..

Frantically he killed King Anarnya and destroyed the palace.

When he reflected over the attack, various thoughts came to

his mind. He asked himself:

Why did I try to seek his approval by saying that

my father was a Brahmin? I wanted to kick myself

for that. What did that mean? Was there a racist

devil lurking inside me or was I uncomfortable

with my Asura identity? Prahastha, in his one of

those professorial moods, might have said it was

because I still yearned for my father’s love. I

hated my father and all that he represented. I

hated the Brahmins, the Devas and their culture or

the lack of it. I hoped no one had heard. I was

their leader. These poor people had left their

homes, their wives, children, and old parents, to

follow me in my quest for glory. I ought to have

been ashamed. Never again, never again would I

consider myself a Brahmin. I hated my fair skin. I

hated my height. I was an Asura. I am an Asura

(ATV 212).

It is clear that he is having/suffering from an

identity crisis. Many a times he is torn between his Asura

identity and Brahmin identity. His original identity

comprises his Asura identity and Brahmin identity. When he

rejects one identity, an imbalance of identity is created

there leading to an identity crisis. Moreover, he did not

have proper personality development. According to Eric

Ericsoni, there are eight stages of personality development.

Right from the first stage, it had gone wrong for Ravana.

The basis of this identity crisis is subalternity. It is

because of the subaltern position of his race, that he is

totally neglected by his father and his community. Again it

was because of his subaltern race, that he gets insulted by

King Anarnya. Again when he is reflecting over the

humiliation caused by King Anarnya, he is stuck between two

races- Asura race and Brahmin race. It is because of the

superiority of the Brahmins and the inferiority of the Asura

race that he is forced to neglect his Brahmin identity.

These oppressions in his daily life force him to hate the

Brahmin community, (here Devas) and the Brahmin identity

within his self, thus leading to his identity crisis.

Roy in her God of Small things portrayed subalternity

through depicting hierarchical structure of power. Asura

authority who are higher in the hierarchical structure of

power, have not given proper prominence for the Asura

civilians. They were treated as weaker sections of society.

After Ravana got educated, he comes out to conquer the

world. He started organizing the troops to attack Kubera,

who is his half brother, who in turn was the ruler of Lanka

i Eric Erikson is a psychoanalyst who articulated eight stages of psychosocial development and that includes Hopes: trust vs. mistrust (oral-sensory, birth – 2 years),Will: autonomy vs. shame and doubt (muscular-anal, 2–4 years),   Purpose: initiative vs. guilt (locomotor-genital, preschool, 4–5 years),   Competence: industry vs. inferiority (latency, 5–12 years),   Fidelity: identity vs. role confusion (adolescence, 13–19 years) , Love: intimacy vs. isolation (young adulthood, 20–24, or 20–39 years),   Care: generativity vs. stagnation (middle adulthood, 25–64, or 40–64 years), Wisdom: ego integrity vs. despair (late adulthood, 65 – death).

at that time. Ravana was slowly becoming the leader of the

troop, and was preparing to become the king of Lanka. As

time passed he got an inherent authoritative power, which he

used to control his troop. One day Ravana was organizing an

attack against Kubera. Then Bhadra asked Ravana’s permission

to give his suggestion. The reaction of Ravana towards

Bhadra is noteworthy. “I was surprised and irritated to find

the man showed no fear of my authority and did not act

humble. It was absurd; the very notion that he was my equal

was absurd” (ATV 65).

Bhadra said that he can serve Ravana and he and the

other common members of the troop consider him as the “God

sent king, who has come to rescue the Asuras from the

clutches of Devas (ATV 65). Then he cried and burst out into

emotions and he clung to Ravana’s feet and wept. Suddenly he

thought, “How amazing! If more people fell at my feet like

this, I might not only start enjoying it but even start

demanding it. I could feel that he was completely under my

power. I could kick him, drag him, and even behead him, and

no one would raise a finger” (ATV 66).

Ravana too was once like this. He too had fallen at

Kubera’s feet in his childhood. At that time Ravana was

powerless and Kubera was powerful. There Ravana had been

treated as a subaltern. Now the situation has slightly

changed. Kubera is replaced by Ravana and Ravana is replaced

by Bhadra, but the result or effect is the same. When the

power had come to his hand, he becomes authoritative and

treats the weaker people as subaltern. If Bhadra had the

equal power of Ravana, he would not have thought of Bhadra

as powerless and weak. Since Ravana knows that Bhadra is

powerless and weak, Ravana is having such thoughts. Here

Ravana is enjoying the power and is misusing the power by

considering Bhadra as weak and subaltern.

Again when Bhadra offered help, he was labelled a

‘traitor’ and was imprisoned. It was the fate of all

civilians. Whatever the authorities want to do to them, they

did it, and civilians cannot even resist because of the

difference between authority and civilians. Civilians

always have to follow the rules and orders of the authority,

whether they were right or wrong.

At another instance Ravana describes Bhadra as “the

scum of the earth, the lowliest of the creatures that I am

destined to rule” (ATV 143). At one moment Ravana thinks of

considering Bhadra as his friend and equal, but at the next

moment he considers himself as master and Bhadra as slave,

and thinks how can a master and slave be equal? This again

shows how common Asura people’s life remains unchanged even

after they got a powerful Asura king.

Even after Ravana becomes the king, the burden of tax

collection was not removed from the society, rather the new

king, Ravana has forced further taxes and “additional tolls

on the highway which adds to the cost” (ATV 129). At an

instance a civilian woman commented on the new king and his

rule like this:

I do not care for any king. They are all the same.

What is so fancy about the new one? Devas, Asuras,

Gandharvas, half castes, they are all the same.

They only worry about how to glue their fat asses

to the throne and screw the people. They talk big,

like the emancipation of the Asuras, getting even

with the Devas, preservation of culture, and all

that humbug. But finally it boils down to the same

thing. Screw the people, enjoy a luxurious life in

the palace and cling to power (ATV 130).

The above comment clearly says how the civilians are

suffering under the new rule. Earlier, it was Devas who

oppressed and suppressed them in the name of rule and

civilization. But now it is the Asuras who is in authority,

that have once been suffering like them, suppressing and

oppressing them in the name of rule and the civilians are

always under the category of subaltern. The oppressed Asuras

turn into oppressors when they encounter the weaker Asuras,

making the latter doubly oppressed.

For a few months, Bhadra worked in an inn called

Ilango’s inn and the inn was actually a platform for hot

discussions about the current politics of the period and it

also served as a stage for conducting hot debates on the

affairs of state. The voice of the common Asura people “who

were incapable of changing things, but who were forced to

bear whatever burden the ruling class dumped on their

backs”, (ATV 132) was heard in that stage. The common folk,

who hoped a new world with the coming of Ravana, lost their

whole hope, when they saw the new changes in the society

which overburdened their already burdened and pathetic

condition.

When it was the time of Ramayana war, for the common

Asura civilians, it was actually the fight against

‘heartless Casteism and Untouchability and against degraded

Brahmanism’. Bhadra is having another thought at the same

time that they were the “lesser children of the Gods, and

even a compassionate God like Shiva, would look at the

colour of our skin and flinch” (ATV 345). This statement

shows how the Asura civilians were suffering due to their

lower caste and their skin colour making them subalterns.

According to Paulo Freire in Pedagogy of the oppressed,

dehumanization occurs to those people whose humanity has

been stolen by others who consider themselves as superior.

Freire again says that “dehumanization is not a given

destiny but the result of an unjust order that engenders

violence in the oppressors, which in turn dehumanizes the

oppressed”. When the novel is looked from this perspective,

Asura race is dehumanized since their right of freedom is

taken away by the oppressors- both Asura authority and

Devas. Also the oppressors use violence in the oppressed,

both physical violence and mental violence.

Physical violence is exercised by the Devas to the

Asuras while they conquered the Asura kingdom. When Ravana,

the king from Asura race itself, ruled the people in same

way or in a much worse way than the Devas, the Asura common

people were suffering from both physical violence and mental

violence, thus becoming dehumanized. The basis of this

dehumanization lies in oppression, which is the result of

the imbalance of power between authority and the common

folk, which in turn leads to the subalternity of the Asura

common people, because when there is oppression, and

imbalance of power , subalternity comes into existence.

As per Friere, prescription serves as “one of the

fundamental elements of the relationship between oppressor

and oppressed” (28). When an individual’s choice is imposed

upon another, and when the prescribed person’s consciousness

is altered into one that corroborates with the prescribers

consciousness. Usually oppressors impose their choices into

oppressed people taking away their freedom at various levels

making them subaltern. Thus subaltern people’s behaviour is

the prescribed behaviour.

In the novel, when Devas conquered Asuras and started

ruling them, they imposed violence on the Asuras. Also Devas

and other so called pure communities behaved so badly with

the mixed races. Actually Vanaras and other mixed races have

the right to access public resources and have the right to

live in their ethnic places. But the “pure communities” do

not want the mixed races to live in their place and as a

result the mixed races were banned from their ethnic place.

Its prescription and it is possible because of the

subalternity of the mixed races.

Friere, states that oppressors are fearful of losing

freedom to oppress the subalterns, because that might turn

the earlier oppressor into a subaltern. If the oppressed

become oppressors, then the condition of early oppressors

will be worse and they will be forced to replace the

position of the earlier oppressed people, who were the

subalterns. This fear can be seen in Devas when Asuras

attack them back. If Devas lose the fights, it means that

Devas are weak and powerless and Asuras can do whatever they

want to the Deva community, making them subaltern

Freire brings out the thought that suppression and

oppression encourages oppressed becoming oppressors.

Oppressed people are so dehumanized by the oppressors that,

the oppressed even forget the fact that they are human

beings. During their suffering they have a propensity to

become oppressors. “Their ideal is to be men; but for them

to be men is to be oppressors. This is their model of

humanity” (Freire 27). While Asuras were under the rule of

Devas, they were in slavery and they were not having a

proper identity. What Asuras saw was the authoritative Devas

ruling them and living happily and courageously. So

naturally, Asuras dreamt to be in Devas positions to live

like them. Moreover Asuras were proud of their own race and

they even had a great civilization. Thinking from their

position, Asuras were ashamed of being suppressed and

subaltern to other powers. Due to the suppression Asuras

felt themselves as subaltern which in turn provoked Asuras

to be the oppressors of their oppressors, i.e. Devas.

The novel is narrated by both Ravana and Bhadra. Bhadra

represents civilians of Asura race. Throughout the novel it

can be seen that his voice is silenced in front of the

authority. He is the one who helped Ravana to become the

king. Even then he is not given any importance. Many a times

Bhadra helps King Ravana during emergencies. But no one from

the authority has even thanked him. Whatever or how much

ever he has done for the king and his kingdom goes

unacknowledged. He is paid back only with brutalities. At

times when he tries to save the kingdom by passing right

information, the authorities have not even listened to him

just because he is a common low caste, untouchable, civilian

Asura.

For instance when Bhadra tried to give warning about

the arrival of Hanuman, who had burnt half of Lanka, he was

been beaten up. When he came to give the information, he was

called as ‘scoundrel’, by the police who are supposed to

protect the kingdom. The reward he got for his patriotism

is a series of blows and as a result “tears of anger, shame,

and pain blinded him” (ATV 320). He, as a civilian, has

done the right thing of informing the police, when he found

something suspicious. But the police did not listen to him

just because he belonged to the lower caste and he was an

untouchable. This was the fate of a common Asura who even

helped the king to get his kingdom. Then the condition of

other civilians is beyond imagination.

In the novel none of the civilian Asuras can raise

their voice against the injustice. But even when they raise

their voice for their own country, it is silenced as in

Bhadra’s case. So silencing of the subalterns, i.e. the

Asura race is a common theme in the novel Asura Tale of the

Vanquished.

The eternal other, the perpetual minor, an

occasional and incomplete being, a kind of

imperfect man- a woman is everything but a person.

She suffers during wartime and she suffers in

peacetime. She has to fight in a situation where

every revolution has a meaning but feminism. She

is tagged along for every protest that concerns

the society, yet, she has to wage her own war in a

situation where only empty rights prevail (Gaijan

240).

Memories of Nirbhaya, the girl who became the victim of

a brutal gang rape still exists fresh in every human’s mind.

The girl herself stands as a testimony for her victimization

due to her subjugation and subalternity. The case stands as

evidence for the exploitative patriarchal treatment women

are subjected to as objects to play, objects to satisfy the

sexual perversions of men. Indians speak about women as

mother, and the same Indians who talk vibrantly about the

value of women, give their sisters and mothers the great

gift of insecurity, death, threat of dehumanization,

victimization. The list does not end with Nirbhaya, it is

still going on. Women are deprived of their right to

education. They are also denied of the simple pleasures of

watching television, learning music and going shopping. The

life experience of Malala Yousafzai, who is a Pakistani

activist fighting for women’s education, shows that women

who raise their voice against such injustices are forcibly

displaced.

A creation of patriarchal setup, which views males

as superior and females as inferior gender serves

the male flair of domination. There are structures

of domination, in particular constructions of

gender, which ensure the overall subordinate

position of women in society. Although much of the

overt discrimination has been reduced and

opportunities for women have been expanded, the

hierarchical system in which men are given

preference is still actively functioning and the

experiences of men and women continue to be

different. She is “ventriloquised” in her social

participation (Ram Sharma 66).

The Asura women are used as toys to play with when the

Asura men are in anger. Double subjugation of women as seen

in African communities can be seen in Asura race too. Audre

Lorde talks about double subjugation of African women in her

essay, “Age, Race, Class and Sex: Women Redefining Difference”.

Similarly Asura women also faced the same reality. They were

oppressed because they were women and that too Asura women

by Devas and other higher castes and they were suppressed

and oppressed in their own home by their husbands in the

name of patriarchy.

At many instances in the novel, Bhadra physically and

mentally harasses his wife, as if he is her creator. Just

because he protects her, he hurts her whenever he wishes.

Since they are weak, and because of the social construction

that women cannot live without the protection of a character

named husband, however bad and cruel he is. In the novel

too, male characters are explained in detail. Even when the

author discusses Asura civilians, he mostly focuses on Asura

men rather than women. There are only very few mentions of

women.

When his sister’s husband died, Ravana, burdened with

guilty, drank a lot and approached his wife. But she did not

allow Ravana to touch her in a drunken state. Ravana ran out

of the room in great anger, in murderous and helpless rage.

What he saw first after getting out from the room was a maid

sweeping the floor. Unable to control the rage and

frustration, he raped that woman.

After Shambuka’s death both Shiva and Bhadra started

drinking to mourn for the child, but later it became a

habit. But every day after being drunk, they vent out their

anger and frustrations on the poor women of the house.

Another day, Bhadra came home drunk and started hurting and

abusing his wife. And when she tried to resist him, he

“kicked her down and screamed her entire past history for

the whole world to hear. Her entire story as a whore in

Lanka, her past lovers, her being raped by Ravana, were all

laid bare for my neighbours to drool over. I dragged her out

of my compound and showered her with my kicks” (ATV 487).

As commented by Simone de Beauvoir, a woman is always

defined with reference to men and not vice-versa. She is

always considered as the other, while man is often depicted

as the subject and the Absolute. She is the inessential.

“The women’s chains, nevertheless are no fictions. They

exist and they are getting heavier. If you hold down one

thing you hold down the adjoining. In the end, though it all

blows up in your face” (Ray 91)

Mandodiri, Ravana’s wife was raped in the midst of war

and various responses towards the incident by different

people are discussed in the novel. If the responses toward

her pathetic state caused by Asura soldiers and other common

men are analysed, her subalternity as a women can be

understood. When Ravana decided to stand by his wife when

needed, his subordinates made fun of their king and queen.

One of them said, “Fancy that, the king will now taste the

leftovers of a dirty monkey and many around him snickered”

(ATV 393). Another soldier commented, “He should have

finished her off then. Now, imagine the shame of having a

queen dragged by her hair and stripped naked by a monkey.

Who knows what else he would have done to her. There were

more sniggers and whistles” (ATV 394). At this point,

Mandodiri, the woman is viewed just as an object. That is

why the soldiers make these types of bad and shameful

comments. If they consider her as a human being, they would

have given her a supporting hand. The strong and evil face

of patriarchy grins here too. Value of a woman is determined

by her body’s purity, despite the situations.

It was for her country Mandodiri had gone through such

a tragedy, but many are not willing to see the situation in

that perspective, which is the truth and thereby important.

It is because she is a woman; she is being harassed, both

physically and mentally. Patriarchal notions demand the

killing or abandoning of a raped woman, and a woman is

forced to bear this embarrassment along with the torture of

being raped. Most often the fact that it is the same men who

hold the supreme power of patriarchy, torture the women in

various ways like rape. After regaining consciousness and

realizing that she has been violated, her thought itself

proves that she is a subaltern. Neelakantan describes the

scene as follows:

Slowly she opened her eyes. She looked at the

crowd gawking at her for a moment, without

comprehension. Then her nudity, her shame, the

violation, dawned on her. She let out an animal

cry and tried to cover herself in my (Bhadra’s

shawl by which he covered her) stinking shawl. She

Scrambled up and tried to run. She repeatedly said

that she did not wish to continue living with this

shame. Angada and his boors had violated her. She

did not want to remain Ravana’s wife anymore; she

wanted to die. (ATV 393)

Mandodiri is not reacting against or resisting the

injustice done to her. She accepts the brutality as it is

and tries to escape from it through death, proving that she

is weak and powerless and cannot do anything against the

violence establishing her subalternity. Mandodiri knows the

social condition and she is aware of how a molested woman is

treated by the society and that is why she wants to end her

life, since she does not want to live a shameful life. She

does not think about the cruelty done to her, she does not

think of her innocence, she does not think that she has to

live because she has not done anything wrong, she does not

think that it is her personality and her behaviour

determines who she is, not the physical body. The society

has trained her to think only in one way, that if she is

molested, then she does not have the right to live. This is

where her subalternity lies. She behaves in an expected

manner, advocated by the stereotypical notions of the

society even when she faces meanness and rough treatment

from the society. It is clear that to a large extent and

also most often the identity and courage of a woman is

determined by the patriarchal society and it also

establishes the fact that woman are subalterns because they

are supposed to live the way men determine for them,

whatever be the situation.

A conversation between Ravana and Mandodiri when the

war was continuing between Rama and Ravana is also note

worthy. Mandodiri says to Ravana,

I have remained silent and suffered your arrogance

and ego. I remained silent when you raped my maid

and made her pregnant. I remained silent when I

heard that you were fooling around with that

Brahmin woman. I suffered silently when you

mourned her death. I was silent when I heard you

muttering Vedavathi’s name in your sleep. I have

lived in silence when doing the same cruel things

that you people accuse the Devas of, running long

campaigns in far-away lands. I, like other women,

have been silent while you foolish men painted the

earth red with the blood. (ATV 413)

It is nothing, but their silence which makes Mandodiri

and other women subalterns. Ravana as a husband had done

injustices to her in several ways. But Mandodiri, being

aware of all the unfairness remains silent rather than

voicing her distresses and her feeling of embarrassment as a

wife to Ravana. It is not the single case of Mandodiri; it

applies to other Asura women too. During attacks, both Deva

men and Asura men molest women. Men often view women as

objects and as of pleasure and revenge and women without any

other choice, is forced to remain suppressed, since they do

not have a voice and even if they start to speak, they are

silenced by the patriarchal society.

Adrienne Rich defines patriarchy as “the power of

the fathers”: a familial, social, ideological,

political system in which men by force, direct

pressure or through ritual, tradition, law and

language, customs, etiquettes, education and the

division of labour determine what part women shall

or not play and in which the female is everywhere

subsumed under the male. French psychologist Lucy

Irigaray too opines that since ancient times men

have been considered “subjects” and women as “the

other” of these subjects. Only one form of

subjectivity exists and it’s a ‘male’. As a result

women are coerced to undergo different kinds of

oppressions in every sphere of life (qtd. In Ram

Sharma 67).

The plight of Asura women, establishes beyond doubt

that they are subalterns. They too are powerless and weak,

and cannot resist even their family when they behave

brutally to them. Thus, they are doubly suppressed. It is

time to bring a halt to the imposition of repression on the

women by men and society. Therefore it is important to

reinforce the determination to liberate the self from all

types of internment, both physical and psychological. Shashi

Deshpande once said, “Assert yourself. Don’t suppress it.

Let it grow and flourish, never mind how many things it

destroys in the bargain” (Deshpande 115).

Freire in his Pedagogy of the Oppressed opines that “self -

depreciation is another characteristic of the oppressed,

which derives from their internalization of the opinion the

oppressors hold of them” (45). The superior caste people

always say that, the lower caste people are uneducated,

inferior, non-creative, ignorant, and good for nothing and

so on. The British had the same opinion about India when

they were the colonisers. Even now the western countries

look lowly at the third world people. When the superior race

tries to establish this fact, slowly the lower caste people

internalize their opinion and agree with them. This can be

seen in the novel too. Devas considered Asuras as inferior

and untouchables and when they won the battle over Asuras,

they had destroyed their books on art and architecture and

their educational institutions saying that they were

inferior and their thoughts are not modern and Devas

established their own school of art and architecture and the

irony is that the Vishwakarma school established by Devas

paled in comparison to Asura schools, and also Devas took

ideas liberally from the Asura books. But Devas won to a

great extent in making the Asuras internalize their opinion.

It is not because they were ignorant, but Asuras were too

weak to resist Devas, and when they resisted they tasted

failure and this forced Asuras to internalize Devas’ opinion

that they are good for nothing fellows.

Even Ravana and other authorial figures had the same

opinion about lower Asura civilians. Ravana once describes

Bhadra as an ugly farmer, uneducated villager, a sly

serpent, a lowly being, and an untouchable even though he

was the one who helped Ravana to conquer Lanka and he was

the one who helped him in various ways in various other

instances. The descriptions that Ravana had made about

Bhadra is internalized in Bhadra’s mind and this is clear

from Bhadra’s self assertion that “ however in the deepest

corner of my mind, I knew we were the lesser children of

Gods, perhaps we had been born with the wrong skin colour”

(ATV 345). Bhadra has also said that, the common Asura

civilians are for use and throw. When the authorities need

some dirty people to do their dirty jobs, they call people

like Asuras.

Many a times the truth is that the dirty common Asura

civilians are more intelligent, hardworking and even more

patriotic than the authorities. But their subalternity,

their inability to oppose against the injustices made about

them forces them to be self-depreciate.

More than any of the factors discussed here, an

important element of subalternity that is discussed in the

novel irrespective of Devas or Asuras is the aspect of

violence portrayed in the novel. At the time of the war

between Rama and Ravana many people died from both sides.

Bhadra says in the novel,

The world was indifferent to the trivial pursuits

of men. It was indifferent whether Rama or Ravana

won. The earth was wet with the blood of men, of

beasts of anything that breathed. Every moment,

someone, something, was being killed somewhere-

perhaps by the enemy on a battlefield or a killer

who had broken into a house in search of victims

or a hungry tiger; accident on the road; or as a

sacrifice to quench the bloodlust of the Gods.

Violence alone ruled the world. Everything else

was a brief interlude, a pause before violence

struck with more vivaciousness. Strangely, it did

not matter. All that talk about honour and pride,

of race and skin colour, of morals and traditions,

of triumphs and failures, it was irrelevant in the

greater order of things (ATV 357).

Violence subjugates people irrespective of race, caste,

colour and so on. Most of the people, who fight for their

own kings, are ignorant of the cause of war. They cannot

resist the war and the consequences that follow it. People

are being made victims for the selfish reasons of Rama and

Ravana, thus making them subalterns. People were not allowed

to say that they are unwilling to fight for the king’s

selfish reasons. They were not allowed to say that their

life is precious and they want to live happily with their

family rather than sacrificing their lives for the sake of

revenge between Rama and Ravana.

In Amitav Ghosh’s Sea of Poppies, people who are

marginalized in the society are forced to migrate from their

place to a strange land in a ship. “The ship, with these

assorted people, becomes a metaphor of floating margins”

(qtd. In B. Sharma 34). They have no other choice than to

migrate. Similarly in the novel Asura Tale of the Vanquished, due

to the implementation of caste system and poverty life

became miserable for the Asura race.

Gripping poverty cast a pall of doom over the

dispirited Asura populace. A terrible famine

occurred this time. Trade came to be a standstill

as the Brahmins decried that crossing the black

waters of the ocean would result in losing one’s

caste. The merchant class fearing of losing their

newly-found privileges, refused to go to sea and

soon the Chinese and yellow haired barbarians,

took over the trade of spices and fine thing. Soon

there was nothing to eat. But Vibhishana’s tax

collectors showed no mercy in extracting the last

morsel due to the government (ATV 464).

In such a situation the untouchables have no other

choice than to bear these injustices. They were not allowed

to raise their voice, and if anyone tried, he had to know

the power of Vibhishana’s sword. So many poor people started

to migrate, when they came to know that Varuna, another

wealthy and powerful Asura has been illegally transporting

people to the countries of Far East. Since the poor do not

have any other choice, they sold all they had and gave the

money to Varuna’s agents in order to migrate. They had to

feed the greedy agents too. Bhadra, Shiva and other

untouchable Asuras decided to migrate and they entered into

the ship. Inside the ship too, caste system played its cruel

role. Even after taking the money from the poor, the agents

asked the untouchables to be out from the ship because of

their lower caste. When Bhadra tried to fall at the agent’s

feet, agent shouted at him; “Hey you, he kicked Bhadra with

his free leg. How dare you touch and pollute me? Get out you

old rascal” (ATV 467).

Bhadra or any other untouchable is not allowed to raise

their voice against these discriminations turning them

subalterns. Instead of resisting, in his pitiable voice he

pleaded not to send them back and bribed him with the

necklace of Mala, Shiva’s wife. When the agent got the

necklace, he forgot all about impurity and took hold of the

treasure with enthusiasm. “I stood up and crossed my hands

over my chest, tucked my palms under my armpit and bowed by

back in supplication. My companions took their cue from me

and stood with all humility they could muster” (ATV 468).

This humility is their subalternity. They have to bend

themselves amidst these inequality and unfair treatment

without any resistance. They have to follow even the posture

of a slave. These people almost break their backs working in

the ship, constantly cleaning utensils, scrubbing floors,

washing linen, and emptying the toilet cans into the sea.

They barely see sunlight and the constant rolling and

heaving of the massive wooden ship made them sick. Yet,

they are unable to speak out their anger and frustration

making them subalterns. Thus the ship becomes a metaphor of

floating subalterns.

They reach the city and live there for some years and

after some years, caste system and oppression make life

impossible there too and people again start to migrate,

since it becomes unbearable for the lower caste to live in

the city. Bhadra continues to migrate for years and at last

he comes to his native place, where once he lived peacefully

and with pride. But now, there too caste system rules and he

is not even allowed to sit at the bank of river Poorna, as

it pollutes the river and its premises. This was where once

he used to play, which he loved as his own home. In the

native place itself, he becomes a subaltern, as he is forced

to leave when ordered, but unable to speak against it, and

even if spoken, no one seemed to hear it.

CHAPTER IV

Devas as Subalterns- Breaking the Stereotype

Marginality is not constant. Subalternity is relative

in nature. “Subalterns can be found even among the educated

wealthy upper classes” (Gaijan 240). In God of Small Things,

Chacko, the educated, wealthy, upper class man becomes a

subaltern when he goes to Oxford for his higher studies.

Subalternity changes according to different conditions and

contexts. Just like the backward classes and untouchables as

in Asura civilians, the Devas, the people who are higher up

in power structure, can also be made subalterns in certain

situations of social hierarchy.

Paulo Freire in his Pedagogy of the Oppressed says:

Indeed the interest of the oppressors lie in

changing the consciousness of the oppressed, not

the situation which oppresses them; for the more

the oppressed can be led to adapt to that

situation, the more easily they can be dominated.

To achieve this, the oppressors use the banking

concept of education in conjunction with a

paternalistic social action apparatus, within

which the oppressed receive the euphemistic title

of “welfare recipients” (50).

In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire, speaks about the

‘banking’ concept of education. He tells that education is

suffering from a disease called narration sickness, where

teachers fill the students with the “contents of his

narration- contents which are detached from reality,

disconnected from the totality that engendered them and

could give them significance” (53). Education is like an act

of depositing, in which depositories are students and

depositor is teacher. “Instead of communicating, the teacher

issues communiqués and makes deposits which the students

patiently receive, memorize, and repeat” (Freire 53). This

is what is called as the banking concept of education. Here

students’ action will be limited to receiving, filing and

storing the deposits without questioning anything.

Invention, reinvention, experiments, questioning, and so on

are necessary for the emergence of knowledge.

In the banking concept of education, teachers give the

false image that they are the ultimate source of knowledge

and all others are ignorant. “Projecting an absolute

ignorance onto others, a characteristic of the ideology of

the oppression, negates education and knowledge as processes

of inquiry” (Freire 53). When the deposits entrusted to them

are given more importance and the student’s concentration

becomes limited only to this procedure, critical

consciousness, which is a very important quality for a

student, will not develop in them. Critical consciousness

results from the intervention of students in the world as

transformers of that world. When the students become just

the Depositories, they become passive and they will simply

adapt to the world as shown by the teachers and what is

deposited in them is the fragmented view of reality. The

teachers who supports banking concept of education do not

care for the world to be revealed nor do they want to see it

transformed.

This banking concept of education, which is used as a

tool for oppression, can be seen in the work Asura Tale of the

Vanquished by Anand Neelakantan. For instances, depiction of

Agni Pariksha of Sita is very famous and is in almost all

versions of Ramayana. Similarly Rama’s love for Sita is

known to all. Often couples are compared to Rama and Sita.

The famous Ramayana war was fought in order to save Sita

from the clutches of Ravana, the demon. According to

Neelakantan’s Asura Tale of the Vanquished, Sita is the daughter of

Ravana. So, whether to call Ravana a demon is another

question, when we analyse Asura Tale of the Vanquished. In the

novel, Rama fights with Ravana, and the war between them

leads to the death of thousands of Deva soldiers and Asura

soldiers, to save Sita.

After Rama had won the battle to save Sita, a meeting

was held and a dais had been erected for the great men, who

had won the battle to address the Asura civilians. After

Rama and Vibhishana had delivered their speeches, a few

Brahmins arrived on the stage and Rama, Vibhishana,

Lakshmana and Sita stood up in respect. Rama, Lakshmana and

Vibhishana received their blessings by falling at their

feet.

But when Sita tried to receive their blessings by

touching their feet, they “jumped back in revulsion” (ATV

453). The Brahmins said something to Rama and Rama talked to

Lakshmana and she was pulled down from the dais. Then it was

said that she had lost her purity by staying a captive in

Lanka for so many days and she is supposed to prove her

purity by Agni Pariksha. At this situation, Vibhishana said

that even Rama is not beyond the law. The very statement

makes it clear that Rama is a subaltern towards the laws

created by the so called learned Brahmin pundits. Vibhishana

says, “we should be proud of the way the learned pundits

have applied their laws to all equally. In their wisdom they

have ruled that Sita Devi will have to prove her purity and

chastity in the time-honoured way of the Devas” (ATV 454).

By hearing this Sita looked at her husband but he “looked

away unable to face her. His hands trembled; he was trying

hard to contain his emotions. He sat there not like a

warrior who had vanquished the most powerful king in the

world, but like a man stricken by fate” (ATV 454). When the

Agni Pariksha has announced, many heads turned towards Rama.

“He was looking down and he was visibly shaken and

distressed. Yet he did not stand up and say, ‘Enough! I

trust my wife’” (ATV 454). Before jumping into the fire, she

again looked at her husband piteously. Then “he averted his

eyes and looked straight ahead, beyond her, beyond his

soldiers to some distant point on the horizon. Tears welled

in his eyes. Beside him fat Brahmin priests chanted in

Sanskrit, drowning the excited voices of the crowd” (ATV

460).

During this incident, Bhadra said to his neighbours,

how can fire determine purity of Sita? Then someone

answered, “So you, an ignorant peasant, knows all about

fire. This is what the learned Brahmins have said. Who are

we to question them?” (ATV 461).

Once Bhadra had got drunk he said that, he was not Rama

or Ravana to accept a soiled wife as he did not “belong to

the high class who swapped wives” (ATV 487). By hearing this

The Brahmin Pundits again told that Sita is impure, and she

has to prove her chastity again. So the Brahmins advised

Rama “to get rid of this blot from his stainless life and he

decided to send his pregnant wife into the forest” (ATV

487).

When Rama conducted Aswamedha, he found Sita again. But

again Rama’s advisors declared Sita to be impure and they

demanded Sita to prove her chastity again by conducting

another Agni Pariksha. When Bhadra came to know about this

trial, he raised certain questions like, “Why did the king

go into exile for fourteen years at the whim of his step-

mother when the whole city wanted him to stay? Was he not

aware of his subjects then? What was the justification for

sending his pregnant wife away when she had committed no

wrong? Why was he pushing her again and again into the

fire?” (ATV 489).

The answers to his questions lead to the fact of

subalternity of Rama. Rama does all these things because of

his subaltern nature under the laws of society. In all these

instances it is possible to see how in a way he exists as

subaltern among the powerful Brahmin Gurus. Rama is the

King, and he is powerful. But the Brahmin pundits are

considered as gurus and they are supposed to have the

ultimate knowledge. Here banking concept of education is

applicable to a great extent. Whatever told by the Brahmin

gurus are received without any questioning. He assumes that

they are the sources of knowledge and there will not be any

mistakes in acting by what they taught. In terms of

education and thus in terms of power, Brahmin pundits are

dominant and comparatively Rama is weak and powerless. He

cannot question them since a king is not supposed to

question the Brahmin gurus. He knows that Sita is pure and

he is also sure that Sita will not do anything wrong

forgetting him. Waiting for him in Lanka for so many days,

it serves as the evidence of her chastity. But although he

knows that what he is doing to Sita is not right, he is

helpless. He cannot even support for his wife. He is

oppressed here. His voice is silenced and marginalized. Thus

he is controlled by the oppressive and unnatural laws of the

Brahmin Gurus, who are the so called advisors of king and

the kingdom. Rama is not able to resist the evil laws of

Brahmin Pundits who describe their activities are pure as

snow. Rama as a king, is supposed to protect women and as a

husband, he must be a shield for his wife, but he is not

able to do his duty as he is a subaltern under the laws

created by “learned Brahmin pundits”. Rama tells that it is

his dharma as a king to be a model for the citizens by

following the rules and regulations laid by the so called

Brahmin Gurus’ interpretations of Vedas. The same dharma

that he boasts when he gives silent approval to the unfair

treatment against Sita, applies in the law of protection of

women, because protecting women citizens and his own wife is

also his Dharma, but becomes weak and thus subaltern under

the powerful Brahmin pundits.

Here the Brahmin gurus who are the teachers ‘deposit’

many laws and rules into the minds of Rama who can be called

as a student. Here, Brahmin pundits consider themselves as

Knowledgeable and Rama as ignorant in certain laws and rules

in Vedic texts. Whatever narrated or deposited by the gurus

are received by Rama without any critical questioning or

critical consciousness. Here he is trained to obey whatever

the Brahmin pundits or gurus say. Knowingly or unknowingly

the Brahmin pundits or gurus act as oppressors.

The killing of Shambuka is yet another incident showing

the subaltern nature of Rama. When Shambuka questioned

Brahmin Pundits regarding the evil caste system and other

rituals conducted by them, Rama kills Shambuka. But the

situation that forced Rama to perform such a crime is

noteworthy.

When Shambuka was encountered by the Brahmin priests,

who did not want the lower castes to pollute their way,

there arose a dispute between the two. Rama arrived while

the dispute was continuing between Brahmin pundits and

Shambuka regarding the evils of caste system and other

rituals carried out by them. When Rama had stepped down from

the chariot, priests ran into him and murmured something

into his ears. Becoming uneasy, “he looked as if he was

pleading with his priests, but the head priest angrily

demanded something of the king” (ATV 480). Rama walked to

Shambuka and asked certain questions regarding his caste.

When Rama asked the question who granted the permission to

him to learn Vedas being a shudra, he replied: “Do the birds

need permission to fly? Do the fish swim on someone’s

authority? Learning, for humans, is like swimming for fish

or flying for birds” (ATV 481). Then the head priest shouted

at Shambuka:

You arrogant fool! Do you know the punishment

meted out in our kingdom who are arrogant enough

to break their caste dharma? As a response, Rama

looked at priests, pleading. He had the same look

on his face when his wife’s purity was tested by

Fire. He knew what the boy said was true, and his

eyes betrayed infinite compassion for the small

boy whose soul-stirring song rose above the

murmurs of the crowd. (ATV 482)

When Shambuka sang a song from Upanishad to clarify his

arguments, the priests became angry and accused Shambuka,

for attempting to learn Vedas and Upanishads being a shudra

and an untouchable and demanded death for the crime that the

boy had committed. Since a king is supposed to obey

whatever the Brahmin priests preach, since they are the

ultimate sources of knowledge, Rama killed Shambuka.

When Arasi, Shambuka’s mother questioned Rama for

killing his child, he replied that being a shudra her child

was not supposed to learn Vedas. Then Arasi questioned him

of his dharma, and in response Rama stood speechless. Rama

knew that what Shambuka told was right. But the Brahmins had

already created a picture of Dharma that was in favour of

them and they had advocated that as a king and a protector

of his kingdom Rama must follow the rules. Even being a

king, he is helpless and weak to resist certain things.

The same happens when Rama was forced to order the

execution of Lakshmana, his favourite brother. The younger

prince, Lakshmana started to question many of the evil and

meaningless rituals practiced by Brahmin priests. He found

out that many of the rituals caused sufferings to the

people, especially for the lower caste people and

untouchables. He resisted the Brahmins, and hence, they

waited for an opportunity to get rid of Lakshmana.

One day a group of holy men had a meeting with Rama. So

Rama had instructed Lakshmana to not to allow anyone inside

till the meeting is over. But while the meeting was on,

Maharishi came in between and insisted to meet Rama. At

those times, the Maharishis’ used to curse others if

something happens that is disliked by them. In order to save

his brother and his kingdom, he took the risk of allowing

the Maharishi inside the meeting hall to meet Rama and hence

angered the other group. The Brahmin priests explained

various quotes from the Vedas and justified the grave crime

done by Lakshmana and asked Rama to execute him. Without any

other choice, Rama gave the order to execute Lakshmana.

In all these instances, the image of Rama as subaltern

is clear. Rama is a king and ideally he is powerful and he

is the one who takes decision for the whole kingdom. But in

the instances that are mentioned above, Rama’s picture as a

subaltern in issues related to caste system, Vedas and

Upanishads is evident. In a sense, it can be said that

Brahmin priests are oppressing him. Rama knew that what the

priests told in the case of Sita, Lakshmana, and Shambuka

are wrong. But priests are gurus and whatever they say must

be obeyed. Education is power. As Freire talks in Pedagogy

of the Oppressed, education can be used as a tool of

oppression. In that time it is believed that Brahmin priests

are the scholars of Vedas and Upanishads and they are the

only ones who know the correct interpretation of these

texts. As a Brahmin, Rama is encouraged to follow Vedas and

Upanishads. Rama wanted to resist many of the ideas told by

priests because he knows that they are doing injustices, but

he cannot, because he thinks that Brahmin priests are the

one that give right guidance. As a king he is supposed to

seek the guidance of the gurus in the court regarding

various issues. Regarding the instance of Sita, Rama is the

one who is supposed to tell whether she is pure or not. Sita

eagerly waited for her husband’s verdict. Here the Brahmin

priests are even oppressing Rama’s position as a husband. A

husband is supposed to protect the wife, but the Brahmin

priests are not allowing him to do justice to his wife.

Although Rama is well aware of what is happening around him,

he is passive and he is not allowed to resist hence turning

him into a subaltern.

The subalternity of Rama is described effectively by the

author. The author describes Rama’s meeting with Shambuka.

The pathetic plight while realizing that he has

become a mere tool in the conspiracy designed by

the Brahmins of Ayodhya only to spoil him from

becoming superior to them, hurts him badly. At the

same time … his hands, involuntarily get ready to

reach out to bend the bow to aim and shoot the

arrows. Hey Sambuka! Your arguments are

justifiable! Still… the moral codes of conduct for

this yuga have already been stipulated. Whoever

crosses the limits … he deserves to be punished!”

(ATV 490)

Rama understands that he has become a mere tool in the

hands of Brahmin priests. Also he is very well aware that

what he is doing to Shambuka is wrong. But he is prisoned

under the cages of caste hierarchies and the narrow mindsets

of Brahmin pundits. And he is forced to do the wrong things,

as a slave obeys the master. A slave is supposed to obey

whatever the master says without any resistance and such a

slave is called a subaltern by the theorists of subaltern

studies. Rama knows that caste system is evil but even as a

king he is not able to resist his voice against it making

him a subaltern.

In Dalit Visions, Gail Omvedt brings in conversation between

Rama and Sita, which brings out Rama’s invisibility to have

his own agency. In the Valmiki version of Ramayana, Sita

rebukes Rama for the sake of the Asuras.

You are alarmingly close to that sinful state to

which the ignorant are prone.... that is killing a

creature who has not committed any offence.... O

hero, my prayer is that when armed with the bow,

you are engaged in waging war against the

rakshasa, who have this forest for their home, you

may never allow yourself to slay indiscriminately

those who are not to blame.

But Rama in reply makes it clear that his killing

of rakshasas, including rakshasa queen Tataka, is

out of vow made to the Brahmins of the Dandakarnya

forest, and thus as part of a protection of caste

hierarchy (99)

Though Rama does not want to kill the rakshasas, in

order to fulfil the desire of Brahmins to practice caste

hierarchy, he kills Tataka and other rakshasas. Sita too

warns Rama of the injustice that he does to the rakshasas.

Since he cannot speak against Brahmin gurus he does

injustice to the rakshasas. He is not able to act to his

will and desire. In other words he lacks agency. When a

person lacks agency, he is included in the category of

subalterns, thus involving Rama too in this Category.

According to Freire, “dialogue is the encounter in

which the united reflection and action of the dialoguers are

addressed to the world which is to be transformed and

humanised, this dialogue cannot be reduced to the act of one

person’s “depositing” ideas in another nor can it become a

simple exchange of ideas to be “consumed” by the

discussants” (70)

In both Shambuka’s and Sita’s case, Rama lacked agency.

He remained silent in both the instances involving Shambuka

and Sita. His words were the deposited words of Brahmin

gurus and he just consumed those words without even having a

reflection over it. Thus he is dehumanized and is

dehumanising both Shambuka and Sita by his act. Thus Rama

itself becomes a subaltern and through his act of silence

towards Sita’s punishment and killing of Shambuka, makes

them both subalterns.

Friere in his Pedagogy of the oppressed describes about the

concept of “necrophily” as,

When life is characterized by growth in a

structured, functional manner, the necrophilous

person loves all that does not grow, all that is

mechanical. The necrophilous person is driven by

the desire to transform the organic into

inorganic, to approach life mechanically, as if

all living persons were things. He loves control

and in the act of controlling he kills life.

Oppression – overwhelming control is necrophilic;

the banking concept of education , which serves

the interests of oppression is also necrophilic

(58).

In the novel Asura, the attitude of necrophily can be

seen in the behaviour of Brahmin priests in many instances.

Most importantly, this necrophilic attitude of Brahmin

priests made powerful Rama and Lakshmana subalterns. The

instance of killing of Shambuka is already mentioned above.

Here Brahmin priests possessed education and they were the

ones who decided on the issue of right to education. They

considered lower castes as untouchables and polluting agents

and priests do not allow untouchables to be educated.

Brahmin priests do not consider these lower caste people as

living beings or organic beings. They are treated as

machines. Brahmin priests do not care that the lower caste

people also have wishes and desires to be educated and to

become true knowledge seekers. God created the whole

universe and he created knowledge for all the people he had

created and not for a chosen few. But Brahmin priests in

their selfishness acts blind to the needs of these lower

caste people. This is what happened in the case of Shambuka.

Shambuka did a great crime by getting educated and

trying to voice his resistance against the sufferings of his

people. Forgetting that he actually has the right to become

educated, priests persuaded Rama to kill Shambuka for the

severe crime that had been done by him. It was because they

were afraid of losing their power to control. As it is said

earlier, Brahmin priests even had the power to control the

king. It is certain that if lower caste people had the

access to education, youngsters like Shambuka would question

the evil practices and rituals done by them. These

questionings will affect their power to control the state.

As said earlier, necrophilic Brahmin priests consider the

state of losing of power as their death itself. Here

Brahmin priests turn Rama mechanical. Rama had concern

towards people and he treated all human being as living

beings. But through their necrophilic nature, priests

convert him into a puppet dancing to their tunes, thus

making Rama a subaltern. Although he wanted to resist many

things done by the priests, he cannot raise his voice, since

he is supposed to be a king of Dharma by obeying the

priests.

Sita is yet another Deva individual who becomes

subaltern in various instances. In the novel Sita is

portrayed both as an Asura woman and as a Deva woman, since

she is portrayed as the daughter of Ravana and as the

adopted daughter of Janakan, king of Mithila. Agnipariksha

of Sita is a clear evidence of the fact that Sita is treated

as a subaltern. After escaping from Ravana, when Sita tried

to get the blessings from Brahmin priests, she got rejected.

After taking advice from the Brahmins Lakshmana grabbed and

pulled her down from the dais to a corner, “where she stood

burning with shame, indignation, and embarrassment” (ATV

453).

Again she was asked to prove her chastity and purity in

front of all gathered there. An Indian woman values her

chastity the most. It is an utmost humiliation for a woman

like Sita, who thinks only about her husband and who lives

only for her husband. She is asked to prove her chastity in

front of the public. At this situation, even at the moment

of utmost humiliation, she remains silent, apart from

looking at her God, her husband, Rama. Her glances are

pregnant with heavy meaning. Here Sita is doubly suppressed,

as a woman and as a Deva wife. As a woman she is supposed to

obey the society, especially the learned Brahmin priests,

who decorate the position of gurus of her kingdom. As the

wife of a Deva, she is supposed to obey whatever her husband

says since it is the Indian tradition. At the moments of

humiliation, especially when the person involved is

innocent, he/ she want to resist or raise his/ her voice

against the aggressions. Sita is mentally and physically

harassed and she does not raise her voice as she is a

subaltern as a woman and as a wife.

Bhadra when he was quarrelling with his wife commented

against Rama’s and Ravana’s decision against protecting

their impure wives. Hearing this statement from a common man

in his drunken state, “the pundits had decided that Sita is

impure and that whatever test and penance that she had

undergone to prove her chastity in Lanka was not valid in

Ayodhya. They advised Rama to get rid of this blot from his

stainless life and he decided to send his pregnant wife into

the forest” (ATV 488). And as a result a distraught Sita was

carried off to the forest. Again Sita is humiliated for the

same reason and now because some drunkard said something

against the purity of Sita. Being innocent, Sita suffers the

same humiliation again without any resistance. But she does

not have any other choice other than suffering the

humiliation, since she, as a wife, has to obey her husband

till her death. In this instance too, subalternity of Sita

is clear, because even when she is humiliated, she is not

allowed to raise her voice against this unfair treatment and

that is what Spivak says about subalterns in her work “Can

the subaltern speak?”

The same humiliation is repeated once again, when Rama

found Sita in the forest. After being banished from the

kingdom she was living in the hermitage of the poet-saint

Valmiki. But what should have been the happy reunion of the

royal family turned into a tragic tale by the advices of the

so called learned Brahmin pundits. They said that Sita was

having some wrong relationship with Valmiki. But it is known

that Valmiki is a saint-like person and it is also sure that

Valmiki treated Sita as his own daughter. But as there was

no questioning about the learned men’s logic, “another fire

was lit on a cliff overlooking Sarayu river and people

flocked to witness Sita proving her chastity again by

entering the flames” (ATV 485).

But this time she committed suicide by jumping into the

river. When a woman is harassed mentally over the issue the

she is impure, when she leads a pure life by living a

faithful life to her husband, she faces utmost humiliation.

Then the condition of a woman, who is humiliated over and

over again, is horrible. And the condition is worse when she

is not able to raise her voice against the unkindness. She

is again a subaltern since she is not able to react against

the humiliation. And it is because of her subalternity she

committed suicide. Nobody is there to support her, and most

importantly, she is doubted about her relationship with her

father like figure, Valmiki. Because she is a woman who is

supposed to obey the society, and a Deva wife, who is

supposed to sacrifice her life for her husband, she

literally sacrifices her life as a mode of her resistance,

unable to bear the humiliation.

The upper caste women usually contribute to the

subalternity among the women by becoming quiet by defending

their own subjugation, be it willingly or unwillingly.

Salman Rushdie in his novel Shame narrates about women who

are restrained within the narrow walls of domesticity and

trapped in the manacles of shame. He also says that, while

they are been constrained like this, it results in the

sterility of mind and imagination. Virginia Woolf once said

that the women turn out to be forceless, devoid of any

identity, since the present-day rules and customs restricted

women to dwell at home. Similar picture is portrayed by

Neelakantan while discussing Deva widows.

Deva women’s subalternity is clear from the instance of

Sita’s case. But it becomes more evident with the

conversation between Ravana and Vedavathi. Vedavathi, a Deva

widow tells in detail about the sufferings of a Deva woman

which makes them subaltern. When Ravana tried to rape her

and failed, she had a strong dialogue with him.

“Do you know how a Deva widow lives?” She asked in

a whimper. I remained silent. “Do you know the

choices a Deva widow has…? How should you know?

You are the conqueror. Why should a few lives

bother you…? We can live a slave’s life in the

house of our in laws… with our heads shaven….

Hands and throats unadorned… purposefully made

unattractive… a living corpse… no bindis for us…

no bangles… no coloured saris… only coarse white…

no life… an unpaid servant… a living corpse…”

“You are a mighty king …ha… you know how I could

jump into my husband’s funeral pyre and become a

goddess… the virtuous sati… then the same people

who would have treated me no better than an animal

in life… would erect temples and worship me.(ATV

320)

Subalternity of Deva widows is clear from the above

lines. Their right to live a peaceful and happy life is

being taken away by the patriarchal society. They are being

oppressed in various ways. Here a woman’s life depends on

her husband’s life. A husband is important for wife but

after the death of the husband, if a woman’s way of living

is taken away from her without her consent, its oppression.

Their agency is being taken away, by not providing them any

choices on their life. Vedavathi told that Deva widows are

living a slave’s life. Spivak and other subaltern theorists

call slaves subalterns. In that angle, Deva widows are

subalterns because society is forcing them to do various

things and they are compelled to follow their orders without

any resistance.

Every person has the right of personal freedom in which

she can decide on what to wear, how to wear, how to live and

so on. But the condition of Deva widows is entirely

different and pathetic. Often women want to look beautiful,

and for that they desire to have beautiful bangles, coloured

saris and so on. But Deva widows are constrained to wearing

only white saris. Vedavathi tells that they have to be like

a living corpse, i.e. a life without a life. Apart from all

this, sati practice also exists. Spivak in her essay can the

subaltern speak, talks about women and the oppression and

suppression they have to face which make them subalterns.

Without giving proper representation, women’s voice is

being suppressed. Even in this book, when the plights of

Asuras are discussed, the women’s voice cannot be heard to

that extent. Here and there women’s voice can be heard and

it is not the same when representing Asura race as Asura

men. In Spivak’s narration about Bhubaneshwari Bhaduri in

Can the subaltern speak?, she discusses how a middle class woman

becomes a subaltern. Although she was a middle class woman,

she was not able to raise her voice that could have been

heard by the patriarchal society. Similarly, Vedavathi and

other Deva women are not subaltern by nature, but when they

become widows, their voices are not supposed to come outside

the kitchen or their mourning room.

CHAPTER V

Summing Up

“Power will remain the guarded possession of the

highborn, striving to ensure that an outcaste remains a

lowly outcaste. Paralyzed by the system, the outcaste will

never dare to question it” (Jadav 3). Marginalization of

people still continues to hold a prominent place in the

society, even after independence. How much ever subalterns

struggle to speak, they are unable to ‘have transactions

between the speakers and listeners’. Asura tale of the Vanquished,

is an alternate version of Ramayana written by the Indian

author Anand Neelakantan. The novel in one word can be

described as Ravanayana. Neelakantan tells the tale of

Ramayana from Ravana’s and Asuras perspective. As it is said

in the blurb of his work,

Asura is the epic tale of the vanquished Asura

people, a story that has been cherished by the

oppressed out castes of India for 3000 years. The

ancient Asura empire lay shattered into many

warring petty kingdoms reeling under the heel of

the Devas. In desperation, the Asuras look up to a

young saviour – Ravana. Believing that a better

world awaits them under Ravana, common men like

Bhadra decide to follow the young leader. With a

will of iron and a fiery ambition to succeed,

Ravana leads his people from victory to victory

and carves out a vast empire from the Devas. But

even when Ravana succeeds spectacularly, the poor

Asuras find that nothing much has changed for

them. It is when that Ravana, by one action,

changes the history of the world. He brings back

his daughter Sita and that leads to the famous

Ramayana War.

The work also narrates how caste system becomes more

rigid under the rule of Devas, following the death of

Ravana. It deals in detail the plight of Asuras and their

hardships to overcome that. The novel ends with a new hope

for a new beginning, which is devoid of caste system,

inequalities and injustices.

The Oppression in a society can be looked upon from a

threefold point of view: racial, economic, and sexual. When

human beings cannot raise their voice against these

different types of exploitations or oppressions, they turn

out to be subalterns. The present study aimed to prove that

a subaltern and oriental reading of Asura tale of the vanquished is

possible and the research makes use of concepts of Gayatri

Spivak, from the essay, “Can the Subaltern speak”, Edward

Said from Orientalism and Paulo Freire from Pedagogy of the

oppressed.

One of the major concerns of this study is subalternity

among Asuras. Racial oppression can be seen throughout the

novel even from the division of people into Devas, the

Brahmins belonging to higher race and Asuras, people

belonging to lower race. Just as whites portrayed blacks as

underdeveloped and inferior, Devas picturised Asuras as weak

and the other. Devas by conquering the kingdom of Asuras,

forced their culture on Asuras. In other words, there

existed cultural hegemony. Asuras were forced to follow the

traditions and culture of Devas, making them subaltern

Even among Asuras, power hierarchy existed, dividing

Asuras into higher caste, that included Asura authorities

and lower caste, which included the layman Asuras. By

properly analyzing factors like mixed race, Asura race,

Asura civilians and so on, with the help of the concepts of

Spivak, Said, and Freire, the concept of subalternity is

proved in the study. Thus it is established that, a

subaltern and an oriental reading of the novel is possible

with reference to racial oppression.

Economic oppression can be seen when the Asuras

authority oppresses common Asuras, which can also be read as

political oppression, which is an important component of

economic oppression. When Ravana got power, the common

Asuras had a hope that he will raise them to the status of

human beings. But it remained only as hope, and did not

become practical. The powerful and rich authorities

exploited the poor and powerless Asuras, and common Asuras

were forced to obey the powerful which in turn made them

subalterns, since the common Asuras lacked agency.

Sexual oppression is yet another method by which people

are suppressed and oppressed in the society. In the novel

sublaternity of women can be clearly traced out in the

descriptions of the women. Patriarchal power is clear from

the men’s behavior. Women are treated as just an object for

clearing men’s emotional imbalances. When the novel is read

from the view point of Spivak’s “Can the subaltern speak”,

oppression of women is traced out in the novel and thus it

is proved that Asura women in the novel are subalterns

Another major finding of this study is the subalternity

of Asuras due to the prominence of caste system. Nirzari

Pandit comments, “The accident of being born an untouchable,

handicaps a person in all spheres of life. In spite of

having good mental and physical abilities, he has no rights

to live a normal life” (qtd. in Gaijan 244). The caste

system condemns people to carry on an existence of

invisibility and inconsequence though their contribution to

society cannot be called inconsequential. This idea gets

proved in the novel. The evil caste system that exists in

the society in the novel makes Devas erase the living space

of Asuras and their very existence, since the Devas do not

even want to look upon Asuras as human beings. They want

Brahmins to be prominent everywhere and Asuras, who are the

lower castes to be invisible in the society. The novel

describes the Asuras as the ones who are denied social

visibility. Since Asuras do not even have a proper

existence, they are undoubtedly subalterns.

The caste system within Asuras is even worse. Although

the common Asuras have helped in making the Asura kingdom,

they were not properly appreciated. Thus the caste system

makes the whole Asuras oppressed and consequently,

subalterns. “How the Touchables always ill treat their

binary opposites of Untouchables and try to keep them away

from centre in every aspect of human life” (Patel 96) is

presented in detail in the novel.

The present study also makes use of the concept of

Pramod K Nayar that lack of agency serving as a cause for

subalternity. Lack of agency makes people oppressed and

hence subalterns. The study has also looked upon the fact

that the conquering of Asuras by the Devas has made the

Asuras subaltern.

All the victims of subalternity do not belong to the

same class or caste. All the subalterns are not lower caste

people. Even the higher caste people can at times become

subaltern. Characters of Rama, Sita, and Deva widows are

also proved as subalterns while having a close reading of

the novel with the help of the theory of ‘Banking concept of

education’ by Freire. Rama is not able to raise his voice

against the injustices that have been done to the common

people in the name of class and caste by the Brahmin gurus

and he is also being forced to obey the cruel laws laid by

the Brahmin gurus. Rama lacks agency here, thereby becomes a

subaltern. When a person is compelled to do injustices to

other people, he is turning into a subaltern since he is not

allowed to raise his voice against the unfair treatments.

Sita, another Deva personality, too is made a subaltern when

she is forced to undergo the unfair punishments for no fault

of hers, when analyzed from Spivak’s point of view.

The themes of caste domination, exploitation, and

patriarchy come together, and Shambuk, Sita,

Ravana, Bhadra and other Asuras are united in

their victimization by the brahmanic Hindu system,

and their rebellion against it. It is no longer

possible to raise the image of Rama and other

Devas without confronting the totality of the

story, and the debate is no longer being carried

on simply by an upper-caste educated elite. The

themes of victimization and subalternity are

themes that remain linked with the material life

of people, of peasants, women and tribals, and for

that reason, threaten to burst forward even when

the hindutva attempt to hegemonize and crystallize

Ramayana as a symbol of hindu orthodoxy seems

closest to success (Omvedt 101)

While discussing about the novel, it is important to

talk about the language and style of the work. Asura, a

distinctive take on epic Ramayana, narrates the story of

Ravana and his people, or in other words, narrates the great

epic of Ramayana, from the victim’s perspective. It is

written in simple language such that even a layman can read

and understand the storyline. Asura combines history,

mythology and religion. The author humanizes all the

characters of Ramayana. He criticizes as well as praises

each character which proves that he deals with all the

characters impartially and he is not biased towards any of

the characters. Through his work he makes general

observations about the society especially about caste

system, poverty, the poor and the rich, wars, morals, ethics

and so on are real gems to be reflected upon. Introduction

of the character of Bhadra is also a good idea since it

breaks the monotony of the narrative, and also presents the

common man`s perspective of the legend. Writing such a

controversial topic is also appreciative.

The first person narrative that Neelakantan has used

throughout the novel is also interesting. By bringing forth

a person’s views and his contrasting actions, the author has

excelled in his writing style. Ravana is in no way made the

‘hero’ of the story. He is portrayed as he is, an ambition

man with an urge to win, who was lucky most of the times. As

it is said in the review by goodreads, “it is Bhadra, a

fictional character, who is the eyes and voice of Asura, who

steals the show. He is the string, the forgotten voice that

ties the whole story together”. By viewing the contrast

between these two characters and how they see the same

situations differently, it is easier to reflect that, there

is no truth or fact in stories rather it is the matter of

just perception. These parallel narrations with their names

in each chapter interest the readers further and fashions

the reading easier. It also helps the reader be in touch

with the story in an intriguing way. Introduction of the

character of Bhadra to tell the story of the nameless

without introducing too many unnecessary characters is an

excellent device used by the author. Hailing from a

forbidden community, Ravana’s urge to achieve something is

invincible that he never hesitates to seek the help of the

lowly Bhadra. Bhadra, torn and tarnished often by Ravana and

his people, resolves to help his master in all possible ways

and remains loyal and his urge to become something is

suppressed. Thus it is possible to feel for the character,

generation and race all at the same time.

Rama is portrayed as a prince of a small state and the

author generates questions that, just because someone is

considered god, can all his dealings be acceptable.

Neelakantan makes the story fast paced and still interesting

by managing to stay away from Rama's journey. Narrating the

pain, horror, misery and the multitude of emotions the

common man had to go through over the centuries, allows

several degrees of freedom to the author. There is a very

special portrayal of a normal human being's patriotism at

different stages of his age. The depth of author’s

imagination of author is appreciable as he attempts to

combine together already known scripture stories, with his

remarkable narrative. But in some places the plot is slowed

down by too much detailing of events, particularly in the

beginning and ending sections.

The book also uses the flash back technique, which

makes the book more interesting. Shifting narration is used

in which past and present are constantly shifted. The

readers should view the book as a story rather than history.

Author has used sarcasm as well as an authoritative tone to

narrate his tale. Author also hints at the ecological

consciousness through characters and description of the

settings like the sea, the woods.

This novel has been chosen for the present study since

caste system serves a very important role even in modern

India. Other types of oppressions that are mentioned in the

novel still predominates the present society. India is a

land where hundreds of minor communities are living indeed

(Naik 45). Also the novel is a bit controversial since it

gives a human portrayal of Rama and a heroic portrayal of

Ravana and his people. The author, with the help of mythical

story tries to bring out the social evils that are present

in the society. “Myth strengthens fictionality of fiction”

(Rao 2). When facts are told with the help of mythology, it

gets firm hold in people’s mind.

“The subaltern voice is being misinterpreted by the

authorities as they have no power. So the act of

communication doesn’t take place between the speaker and the

listener as the message is being distorted by the other

elements. The subaltern is destined to remain in silence,

even when they try to articulate it to the authorities”

(Gaijan 242). This quote is proved through the discussion of

Shambuka, Bhadra and other Asura civilians. The present

study is limited to an oriental and a subaltern reading of

the novel with the support of a few theorists like Gayatri

Spivak, Edward Said, and Paulo Freire. The novel can be

further studied with the help of other theorists like Homi

Bhaba and his theory of otherness, Antonio Gramsci and his

concept of cultural hegemony and so on and so forth. Further

research can be done on character analysis of different

characters present in the novel and narrative techniques

used in the novel. Even cover picture analysis can be taken

as a topic for research. It can be studied in comparison

with other Dalit novels.

The present study helps further researchers to explore

other angles of the book like Identity crisis, in the novel

‘Asura Tale of the Vanquished’. This research will lead them

to think about the novel with a new insight. This will help

them to place subalternity in other major pieces of Indian

mythological literature.

Epics and myths like Ramayana and Mahabharata allow an

open reading rather than a closed reading. They can no

longer exist as just old texts written in an old context.

They still have high contemporary relevance. Demythification

of Ramayana and other epics change the stereotypical

concepts like the villainous character of Ravana.

Demythification of old epics and myths is necessary, since

it provides new understanding of the mythical characters and

there by the contemporary world too.

WORKS CITED

Primary Source

Neelakantan, Anand. Asura Tale of the Vanquished; The Story of Ravana and

His People. Mumbai: Lead Start, 2012. Print.

Secondary Sources

Books

Abrams, M.H, and Geoffrey Galt Harpham. A Glossary of Literary

Terms.10th ed.Delhi: Cengage Learning, 2012. Print.

Baldick, Chris. Oxford dictionary of Literary Terms. 3rd ed.New York:

Oxford U P, 2008. Print.

Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory; An Introduction to Literary and Cultural

Theory. 3rd ed. New Delhi : Viva Books, 2014. Print.

Beauvoir, Simone De. The Second Sex. London: Vintage, 2009.

Print.

Deshpande, Shashi. Roots and Shadows. Hyderabad: Orient Longman,

1983. Print.

Dube, Saurabh, Ed. Post colonial Passages; Contemporary History- writing

on India. New Delhi: Oxford U P, 2005. Print.

Dubey, Meenu. Myths, Legends and Reality in the Novels of Mulk Raj Anand,

R.K. Narayan and Raja Rao: A Critical Study. New Delhi: Sarup,

2010. Print.

Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin Books,

1996. Print.

Gaijan, M.B and Amar Nath Prasa d. Dalit Literature: A Critical

Exploration. New Delhi: Sarup and Sons, 2007. Print.

Gandhi, Leela. Post colonial Theory: A Critical Introduction. New York:

Columbia U P, 1998. Print.

Ghanshyam , G. A. and Prasanta Chakraborty. The Voice of the

Other; Post Independence Indian English Fiction. Jaipur:Yking Books,

2013. Print.

Jadav, Narendra. Untouchables; My family’s triumphant escape from Indian

caste system. London: U of California P, 2007. Print.

Naik, N. Shantha, Ed. Dalit Literature; Our Response. New Delhi :

Sarup, 2102. Print.

Nayar, Pramaod K. An Introduction to Cultural Studies. New

Delhi: Viva Books, 2008. Print.

---. Contemporary literary and cultural theory: From Structuralism to

Ecocriticisim. New Delhi; Dorling Kindersley, 2010. Print.

Omvedt, Gail. Dalit Visions. Hyderabad: Orient Longman, 2008.

Print.

Pai, Anant. Valmiki’s Ramayana. New Delhi: Amar Chitra Kadha,

1978. Print.

Patel, M.F, ed. Critical Studies on Indian English Literature. 3 vols.

Jaipur: Pointer, 2010. Print.

Rao, A.S. Myth and History in Contemporary Indian Novel in English. New

Delhi: Atlantic, 2000. Print.

Ray, Mohit K. Studies in Literature in English. New Delhi: Atlantic,

2012. Print.

Richman, Paula, ed. Many Rāmāyaṇas: The Diversity of a

Narrative Tradition in South Asia. California: U of

California P, 1991. Print.

Roy, Arundhati. The God of Small Things. New York: Random House,

1997. Print.

Rushdie, Salman. Shame. London: Vintage Books, 1995. Print.

Satchidānandan, K, ed. Myth in Contemporary Indian Literature. New

Delhi: Sahitya Akademi, 2010. Print.

Sharma, B.K. The Fiction of Amitav Ghosh; A Post colonial Perspective. New

Delhi : Sarup, 2011. Print.

Sharma, Rama. Recent Indian English Literature. Delhi: Mangalam, 2012.

Print.

Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty and Morris Rosalind C. Can the

Subaltern Speak?; Reflections on the History of an Idea. New York :

Columbia UP, 2010. Print.

Wakchaure, Suresh D. Postmodernism & Contemporary Indian English Novel

; Study Of Gv Desani & I Allan Sealy. Bloomberg: Bhaskar, 2009.

Print.

Journals

Altern, Hannah. Subaltern Studies : FROM WRITING WITH

( SOCIALIST ) PASSION TO FOLLOWING THE (POSTMODERN)

FASHION. History in the Making 1.2 (n.d.): 58-64. Web. 30

Mar. 2015.

<https://historyitm.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/altern.

pdf>.

Bhattachan, Krishna B., Tej B. Sunar, and Yasso Kanti

Bhattachan. Caste-based

Discrimination in Nepal. Indian Institute of Dalit

Studies 3.8 (2009): n. pag. Web. 15 Dec. 2014.

<http://www.dalitstudies.org.in/wp/0908.pdf>.

Biswas, Amrita. Research Note on Subaltern Studies. Journal of

Literature, Culture and Media Studies 1.2 (2009): 200-05. Winter

2009. Web. 1 Dec. 2014.

<http://www.inflibnet.ac.in/ojs/index.php/JLCMS/article

/viewFile/44/42>.

Internet Sources

Doyle, Bernard. Hindu Mythology. Encyclopaedia Mythica. n.d. Web.

21 Mar.2015.

http://www.pantheon.org/areas/mythology/asia/hindu/

hindu_mythology.html.Web.

Hinduism. Moynihan Institute of Global Affairs: South Asia Center. Maxwell

School, n.d. Web. 30 Jan. 2015.

<http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/moynihan/sac/Hinduism/>.

Hughes, Nancy Scheper. Mixed Feelings: The Recovery of Spoiled Identities

in the New South Africa.  National Humanities Center, n.d.

Web. 9 Apr. 2015.

<http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/publications/hongk

ong/scheper.htm>.

Key Terms in Post-Colonial Theory. PostcolDefs. N.p., n.d. Web. 30

Mar. 2015. <http%3A%2F%2Fwww3.dbu.edu%2Fmitchell

%2Fpostcold.html>.

Khalid, Haroon. An Introduction to Edward Said’s Orientalism.

Renaissance.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Jan. 2015. <http%3A%2F

%2Fwww.renaissance.com.pk%2Ffebbore2y6.html>.

Konitari, Ugich. Review of Asura : Tale of the Vanquished. Gappa, 20

Oct. 2013. Web. 21 Mar. 2015.

<http://kaimhanta.blogspot.in/2013/10/review-of-asura-

tale-of-vnaquished.html>.

Mohanka, Niraj. HISTORICAL BASIS OF RAMAYANA. Ramayana Research.

Ramayana Trail Executive Commitee, 2008. Web. 12 Dec.

2014.

<http://www.Ramayanaresearch.com/articles/historical_ba

sis.html>.

Neelakantan, Anand. Interview by Anusha Parthasarathy. Myths

for Modern times. The Hindu, 28 Aug. 2013. Web. 25 Nov.

2014. <http://www.thehindu.com/books/myths-for-modern-

times/article5067888.ece>

---. Interview by Jigar Gondalia. Everything Becomes A Myth One

Day, Says Anand Neelakantan. Infibeam, 11 April 2014. Web.

25 Nov.2014. http://blog.infibeam.com/2014/04/anand-

neelkantan-author-interview.html

Rajan, Rajeswari Sunder, and Robert J.C. Young. Concepts in Post

colonial Theory: Hybridity and Otherness. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Apr.

2015. <http://draper.fas.nyu.edu/docs/IO/4398/Post

colonial.Theory.pdf>.

Review of Asura Tale of the Vanquished. Books and a Lot More. Word

Press, 29 Dec. 2013. Web. 7 Apr. 2015. <http%3A%2F

%2Fwww.booksandalotmore.com%2F2013%2F12%2F29%2Fbook-

review-asura-tale-of-the-vanquished-by-anand-

neelakantan%2F>.

Review of Asura Tale of the Vanquished. Goodreads. n.d.: n. pag. 

Web. 07 Apr. 2015.

<http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13563459-

asura#other_reviews>.

Rizzoch, Lorie Anne, Nicole Yorgensen, Heather Scarselli,

and Bernadette Van Riper. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. By Paulo

Freire. Educatorsthinkspace. Wikispaces, n.d. Web. 25 Nov.

2014.

<https://educatorsthinkspace.wikispaces.com/Pedagogy+of

+the+Oppressed.+By+Paulo+Freire>.

Singh, Reena. Best Selling Myths. Speaking Tree.In. N.p., 7 Sept.

2012. Web. 21 Mar. 2015.

<http://www.speakingtree.in/spiritual-articles/epics/be

stselling-myths>.

Storey, Thomas. A New Literary Generation: Five Contemporary Indian

Writers. The Culture Trip. The New York Times, n.d. Web. 25

Jan. 2015. <http%3A%2F%2Ftheculturetrip.com%2Fasia

%2Findia%2Farticles%2Fa-new-literary-generation-five-

contemporary-indian-writers%2F>.

The Myth Makers. Journalism of Courage Archive. The Indian Express Group, 24

Mar. 2013. Web. <http%3A%2F%2Farchive.indianexpress.com

%2Fnews%2Fthe-myth-makers%2F1092418%2F>.

Wanchoo, Mihir. Rev. of Govinda by Krishna Udayasankar. Web blog

post. Fantasy Book Critic. N.p., 3 Oct. 2012. Web. 14

Apr. 2015.

<http://fantasybookcritic.blogspot.in/2012/10/govinda-

by-krishna-udayasankar-reviewed.html>.

Endnote