Reception and Reconstruction of the Mahabharata in Modern Mythic Fiction
Abstract:
Indian culture is the amalgamation of various rituals, languages, traditions, beliefs and mythology. Indian mythology has a profound impact on the Indian readers and authors. The recent era marks the emergence of the mythic fiction genre in Indian English literature where the Mahabharata remains the prime source. It has aptly influenced the current wave of mythic fiction which reinterprets or reconstructs the frame narration of the epic in novel forms. Reception theory is an apt medium to study these reconstructions of the Mahabharata as Hans Robert Jauss rightly observes that a text has no final meaning or value but a variety of objectively describable features. The meanings change according to the changing horizons of reader’s expectations. Thus, there is a continuing dialogue between a text and the altering readers. The Mahabharata is an immense mine of multiple meanings which has generated several responses from the readers and authors across generations and still continues to influence the present readers. This reception and reconstruction of the Mahabharata is not limited to fiction but also extends to various other forms of expression such as movies, television series, cartoon series, paintings, graphic novels, animated movies, movies, short films, documentaries, etc. Even the fictional reconstructions have been done using modern technological mediums such as blog writing and twitter. Thus, it would be an interesting investigation to understand how the age-old epic and its multiple stories and characters are received by the modern readers in modern avatars. The present paper is an attempt to understand the reception of the Mahabharata in Indian English literature focusing on its reconstructions in modern mythic fictions.
Key Words: Mahabharata, Reception, mythic fiction, reconstruction, Indian English Literature, mythology, Hans Robert Jauss
Introduction:
Myths are interspersed with human life. They are the imaginative stories narrated in a symbolic manner. Especially, in a country like India, myths are an integral part. Myths are inclusive of chronicles, folklores, legends and traditions. They are more often fused with stories to serve the purpose of literature. The modern readers are also very much enthusiastic in receiving these myths as one can see the surge in books related to myth and mythology in Indian publishing industry. More often, these mythical stories are told using new narrative techniques or presented with modern touch which attracts and connects the present audience with their past. Indian writers have inherited myths and have used it as a background to reconstruct the present stories. The thematic richness of Indian English literature is endowed with the stories from Vedas, Upanishad, Ramayana and Mahabharata. Indian culture has its own unique place because of its mythical richness. The stories from the mythology are often passed by as a word of mouth and not only Indian English literature but also the regional literature of India is fused with the rich mythology of our culture.
The best – selling author and speaker, Devdutt Pattanaik defines myth as a “truth which is subjective, intuitive, cultural and grounded in faith.” (Pattanaik xv) Chris Baldick defines myth as “a kind of story or rudimentary narrative sequence… through which a given culture ratifies its social customs, or accounts for the origins of human and natural phenomena, usually in supernatural or boldly imaginative terms.” (217) The term ‘mythic’ is often used to denote the cosmic understanding in the fictional stories containing deeper truths and people’s collective attitude towards the fundamental matters of life, death, divinity and existence. (Baldick 218) The complex myths are used in the modern-day literary works as a backdrop to portray the present-day issues of society. They are allegorically used. Among all the stories, the epic story of the world’s greatest epic The Mahabharata remains the prime source of the rich mine of mythical stories from generation to generation both in regional as well as Indian English literature. The writers have told and retold the stories from the epic time and again. The characters from the Mahabharata are varied and the scope of the story is vast as the ocean which provides many themes for the retelling. There are a number of characters representing every possible human condition. This vastness and variety make it possible for rendering it in modern day perspectives which has aptly influenced the flow of mythic fiction in the present. One can see the surge in the mythological fiction in the present-day scenario, the most commonly used backdrop of which is the epic Mahabharata. The present paper is an attempt to understand the influence and importance of the Mahabharata in the modern-day surge of mythic fiction in Indian English literature.
Reception Theory:
The role of the reader or audience of a literary work or performance has been recognized essential since classical times. Around the 1970s, a number of critics at the University of Constance in Germany began to formulate a systematic reader – response or reception theory. The major influence of Russian Formalism, Prague Structuralism, the phenomenology of Roman Ingarden, Hans – George Gadamar’s hermeneutics and the sociology of literature paved the way for what became known as ‘Reception theory’. The theory was proposed by Hans Robert Jauss in Literary History as Challenge to Literary Theory where the reader’s varying responses, interpretive and evaluative of the general reading public over the progression of time is at the prime focus. According to Jauss’s proposition the text has no ‘objective meaning’ but contains a variety of objectively describable features. The response of the reader is the product of the reader’s own “horizons of expectations'' and the confrontations, refutations, disappointments and reformulations of these expectations when they are challenged by the features of the text itself. Following the concepts proposed by Hans George Gadamar, Jauss represents this tradition as a continuing ‘dialectic’ or ‘dialogue’ between a text and the ever-altering horizons of successive readers; in itself, a literary text possesses no fixed or final meaning or value. In short, what Jauss proposes is the study of literary work in terms of the impressions it makes on its contemporary audience.
Reception and Reconstruction of the Mahabharata in Modern Mythic Fiction
The past plays an important role in defining the present as various myths and legends are circulated in the present in the form of tales, poems, TV serials, cartoon strips, advertisements, movies and animated movies which becomes a convenient device to ascertain the present needs. The fictional reconstructions also have a similar function. The present paper tries to understand the circulation of the Mahabharata in Indian English literature by examining it as an inter – text received in a syncretic context by the generations of readers. The paper also tries to closely understand some of the fictional readings of the Mahabharata in present – day Indian English literature to understand the relation between the multiplicative framework of the epic and its reception. The Mahabharata is no longer a verse – epic compiled at a particular time by a particular poet or a group of poets as one cannot read or understand it in isolation as there are various alternative traditions of the myths and tales based on the Mahabharata developed in different parts of the world in its diversity.
V S Sukhthankar mentions Herman Oldenberg that, “The Mahabharata began its existence as a simple epic narrative. It became, in course of centuries, the most monstrous chaos.” (Sukhthankar 1) V. S. Sukhthankar observes that “our poem, though commonly called the Great Epic of India, does not fulfill very completely Matthew Arnold’s postulate that “the subject of the epic poem must be some one great complex action”. There are indeed noticeable, winding in and out of the capacious and multitudinous folds of this prodigious and remarkable tapestry, unmistakable traces of some great and complex action. But on account of the mass of legends and disquisitions in which the main theme lies embedded, it is difficult to make out even the main outlines of the story underlying the action.” (Sukhthankar 2) Mahabharata should be treated as an ‘inter – text’ rather than a text to understand this multiplicity of its meaning. The present day, Indian readers, reads the English versions of the Mahabharata, in a mediated way as all the reconstructions of the epic in the form of TV serials, Cartoon series, songs, films, children stories and parables add to its popular reception. There are certain canonical versions of the epic’s reception in Indian English which includes Romesh C. Dutt’s The Ramayana and The Mahabharata condensed into English Verse(published between 1848 to 1909) which is the translation of the selected verses from both the epics focusing upon the main plot; Kisari Mohan Ganguli’s full length translation of The Mahabharata of Krishna Dwaipayan Vyas in English which was published between 1883 to 1896 and it is the only full length edition available in public domain till date; C. Rajagopalachari’s abridged retelling of the Mahabharata in English published in 1951 is in a simple and lucid language covering all the basic aspects of the whole epic. Most recently, Bibek Debroy has also authored the ten – volume unabridged translation of the Mahabharata published between 2010 to 2014. Devdutt Pattanaik has also authored Jaya: An Illustrated Retelling of the Mahabharata which was published in 2010 – in which he mentions that, “this book is yet another retelling of the great epic. Inspired by both Sanskrit classic as well as its regional and folk variants … shaped by my own prejudices as well as the demands of the modern reader, restructured for the sake of coherence and brevity.” (Pattanaik xv)
There are several novelists who have attempted the reinterpretation of the Mahabharata from fresh perspectives by presenting it in novel form. Three of them have a quality which needs to be given special attention: Trisha Das who wrote the novel Ms Draupadi Kuru: After the Pandavas, Chindu Sreedharan’s Epic Retold and Anand Neelakantan’s Ajaya: Epic of the Kaurava Clan – Book I & II. Trisha Das has presented Draupadi in a revolutionary way while Chindu Sreedharan has retold the epic from Bhima’s point of view using Twitter as a medium – thus condensing the longest epic into the shortest medium of communication; Anand Neelakantan’s attempt is to present the “narrative of the others – the defeated, insulted, trampled upon – who fought without expecting divine intervention; believing in the justice of their cause.” (Ajaya 8) What these writers have done in their individual ways is the change of focus in the way the reality gets translated from the epic world to the contemporary world. The novelists have a particular way of documenting and presenting this reality. The point of concern here is the change of the reality and its circulation from the mythic world to that of novelistic terrain.
The Mahabharata itself is the amalgamation of various interpolations over a long period of time which is now part of received scholarship. Thus, the idea of recovering the monolithic reality from the authentic version of the epic seems somewhat arbitrary and even at the empirical level it is noted that there was an original text called Jaya dealing with a king’s victory over his rival kinsmen; the same text was modified periodically with new stories by later generations which are now a part of the versions we read. There are variations in the Sanskrit version of the text in circulation as well. Even the number of slokas does not reach to the 100,000 couplets as it is generally believed. Bibek Debroy, in his introduction to the unabridged translation mentions that the,
“original version was called Jaya and had 8,800 shlokas. This was expanded to 24,000 shlokas and called Bharata. Finally, it was expanded to 90,000 shlokas and called the Mahabharata… (Even in) BORI’s critical edition…the figure (of shloka) is a little short of 75,000.” (Debroy xx – xxvi)
This fact shows that there is no possibility of retrieving the authentic reality from the epic itself. Treating Mahabharata as literature involves the constitution of the reality in a given social formation as well as across social formations as well as in a given social formation these in return produces the narrated text and that is why there are accretions in the given text. The translations as well as readings of the Mahabharata both should be treated as the symbolic exchanges in a given social formation. Mahabharata has a unique significance in the culture of India and this formation propels one to understand the modern fictional readings of the Mahabharata as the ‘translation’ of the epic. Translation as a ‘trope’ is inclusive of all the interpolations and deviations emerging from this symbolic exchange. The fictions under consideration here are also inclusive of this. Chindu Sreedharan states in his introduction to the Epic Retold that he was widely influenced by M T Vasudevan Nair’s Randamoozham, Prem Panicker’s Bhimsena, S. L. Byrappa’s Parva, Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni’s The Palace of Illusions, Shashi Tharoor’s The Great Indian Novel, versions of the Mahabharata by R. K. Narayan, Ramesh Menon and C. Rajagopalachari and Bhima, as a character, always fascinated him so he has chosen to narrate the story from his point of view (Epic Retold 5-6) whereas Anand Neelakantan states that history is written by the victors and that’s why in all the mainstream narratives Pandavas are presented as victors but Duryodhana’s side is always silenced upon so he has chosen to retell the side of those who did not win – the Ajaya (unconquerable). (Ajaya 8) Trisha Das’ presentation of Draupadi along with other prominent women like Kunti, Amba and Gandhari is radical and sparks the individual talent and needs of each woman; the things which they could not do while they were here before. So, the novelist has given them a chance to relive and fulfill their desires through her narration.
All these novelists found certain points in the epic itself which they thought to give a voice to through their novels. The novelistic genre has its own sense of reality in comparison to the genres before its emergence. The Mahabharata is a rich mine of stories and episodes; some of them are not even related to the central episode – the rivalry between the sons of Pandu and Dhritrashtra – of the story. The stories related to the characters that are not a part of the main story have also become relevant and are presented through the literary works in regional languages as well as Indian English literature which changes the narrators and the focal points of the main story. Even in the epic itself, there are several narrators, in the beginning there is Vyasa who conceived the epic and Ganesha who wrote it, then there is Vaishampayana’s narration to Janmejaya, and Sage Ugrasravas and Saunak and at last there is Sanjaya. Vyasa himself also appears as a character in many sections of the epic. The Mahabharata itself is located in a heterotopia which binds together multiple voices and realities.
The ideology of realism is operating in all three novels and the focus of all the three novelists is on the psychology of its central characters i.e. Draupadi, Bhima and Duryodhana. Trisha Das’ Draupadi in Ms Draupadi Kuru is tired and bored of heaven and so decides to visit the Indraprastha – modern day Delhi – on earth again with Krishna’s permission. In the course of the events, she chooses herself to be acknowledged as ‘Ms Draupadi Kuru’ as she comes to know that married women use ‘Mrs.’ as their salutation while unmarried women use ‘Miss’ as their salutation but all those women who think of themselves as independent use ‘Ms’ as their salutation. Here, the author points out at Draupadi’s own identity and her own uniqueness irrespective of her husband or father. If we look at all the popular narrations of epic, Draupadi is identified either with her husbands or with her father; this idea is totally rejected and she is presented like the women of the present era who live by their own choices and are thoroughly independent. The character of Bhima in Chindu Sreedharan’s Epic Retold is voicing all his ideas openly about the events of the whole epic. Bhima is looked at as the binding force between the Pandavas and Kuravas and it is also presented how victory would not be possible without him. The author has also attempted to present a different reality on the birth of the Pandavas as at the end of the novel Kunti reveals to Bhima that they are not born of divine mantras but with the natural process of intercourse. She also gives names of the Pandavas’ real fathers to him and there Bhima comes to know that he was actually Dhritrashtra’s son and Duryodhana, somewhere in his heart knew this fact and that’s why Dhritrashtra feared him the most as he was the binding force among all the brothers. Anand Neelakantan’s Duryodhana is presented as ‘Suyodhana’ and the inspiration to narrate his story was bestowed upon him when he once visited the Malanada Temple in Poruvazhy village, Kerala which is devoted to Duryodhana. The whole narration is based on this assumption that Duryodhana was “an honest prince, brave and self-willed, willing to fight for what he believed in.” (Ajaya 7) The whole representation is quite radical to all the popular narratives as Duryodhana is no longer the scheming prince. The author has also highlighted Prince Shakuni’s role as the traitor or the first ever invader who plans to destroy India. Thus, all the events of the epic are monologized and presented through the controlling standpoint of the central character. All these protagonists have their own sense of anxiety and anguish in their given conditions. The episodes relating to other characters like Jara, Amba, Gandhari, Shakuni, Balram are also given a space in the narration by inventing or adding to the stories of the epic.
It is true that these writers have tried to remain as faithful as they can to the original epic but in re – telling the stories from it they have also monologized the dialogic nature of the epic. These novels are definitely true to the spirit of the original work but at the same time it is important to pay attention to the inter – textual complexities of the epic itself. The prominent argument here is not about the linguistic peculiarities but about the gist of the Mahabharata which is related to our own past and with which we can make up the sense of our own world at present. It is this inter – textual complex of this ‘history’ which has survived for over more than five thousand years and is still alive in our minds. It can be restored only by reconstructing it in this type of new ways and relating ourselves to it by making sense of it.
Conclusion
Thus, the present resurgence of mythic fiction is not a sudden upsurge but a continuing dialogue of the generations of the readers and the authors with the dialogic text the Mahabharata with its own original inter – textual complexities devised by the original author which has made it possible to be reconstructed in fictional forms without letting it in the oblivion. The Mahabharata has and will always be relevant as it is itself a rich mine of meanings and the present can be understood only by relating ourselves to the past where this epic has an enormous role to play and make sense of our present conditions in terms of our own ‘horizon of expectations’ in relation to its multiple meanings. Thus, the Mahabharata along with other mythic sources of our country, continues to be the source of inspiration to the modern novelists as well and the readers’ responses received by it has led to the recognition of a new genre called the mythic fiction genre. Thus, the ‘text’ of the Mahabharata – when understood as a piece of literature – has no final meaning of its own but a variety of meanings which makes it possible to be retold and reconstructed in myriad ways.
References: