Assignment 1 : Comparative Study of T. P. Kailasama's 'The Curse or Karna' and Ramdhari Singh Dinkar's 'Rashmirathi' (रश्मिरथी) : 22406 Paper 201 : Indian English Literature - Pre-Independence

• Name : Nirav Lalitbhai Amreliya

• Batch : M.A. Sem. 3 (2021-2023)

• Enrollment N/o. : 4069206420210002

• Roll N/o. : 18

• Subject Code & Paper N/o. : 22406 – Paper 201 : Indian English Literature – Pre-Independence

• Email Address : niramreliyaunofficial@gmail.com

• Submitted to : Smt. S. B. Gardi Department of English – Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University – Bhavnagar – 364001

• Date of Submission : 7th November, 2022

Comparative Study of T. P. Kailasama's 'The Curse or Karna' and Ramdhari Singh Dinkar's 'Rashmirathi' (रश्मिरथी)

Introduction : In this assignment regarding Pre-Independence Indian English Literature, I am going to deal with the two mytho-epic literary works written in two different languages, namely, one is the play titled as ‘The Curse or Karna’ written by T. P. Kailasama and another is an epic poem titled as ‘Rashmirathi’ written by Ramdhari Singh ‘Dinkar’, the first one is written in English language, and the another one in Hindi respectively. So, here it will be an interesting comparative study to see how both the works capture the spirit of Indian Mythology and draw its main plots with the shades of contemporary happenings and modes of thinking. The zeitgeist is also one of the major parts of both the works as one is written in 1946 before India got independence whereas another is in 1952 after India got independence.

The Curse or Karna : As given the fact that much information of the work is not provided on any material source and the very work remains aside from coming into limelight, few information is still there which suffice the basic idea of the play for the reader and beholder. The full title of the play is ‘The Curse or Karna : An Impression of Sophocles in Five Acts’ first published in 1946 and later with Foreword by Pandit Taranath in 1969; by this one get to know about the base of the play upon which it constructs its distinct structure with native mythological tint of ancient Indian epic ‘Mahabharat.’ The way both the authors have used one particular personae to voice their ideas in form of play and poem respectively, can also be seen in the light of Vakrokti Theory propounded by ancient Indian Kashmiri scholar Aacharya Rajanaka Kuntaka in his ‘Vakroktijivitam’ as one of the six types of Vakrata or Figurativeness named as Prabandh Vakrata or Compositional Figurativeness in which writer takes a piece of major incident from the well-known source and with individually thought necessary edition presents to the reader or spectators.

Another crucial aspect of the play is its application of Subaltern Theory, the term ‘Subaltern’ was coined by Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci which according to the ‘Glossary of Literary Terms’ by M. H. Abrams and Geoffrey Galt Harpham means : 'The subaltern has become a standard way to designate the colonial subject that has been constructed by European discourse and internalized by colonial peoples who employ this discourse;'

Moreover, one of the contemporary significant literary theorists and critics, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak deals the Subaltern Theory in her ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’ book published in 2008 wherein she observes : “In subaltern studies, because of the violence of imperialist epistemic, social, and disciplinary inscription, a project understood in essentialist terms must traffic in a radical textual practice of differences. The object of the group’s investigation, in the case not even of the people as such but of the floating buffer zone of the regional elite-subaltern, is a deviation from an ideal - the people or subaltern – which is itself defined as a difference from the elite.”

Rashmirathi (रश्मिरथी) : Unlike the play ‘The Curse or Karna’, ‘Rasmirathi’ is one amongst most celebrated poems in Hindi Sahitya or Literature. Written in 1952 by the Hindi poet Ramdhari Singh ‘Dinkar’, the poem remains as the masterpiece containing the rebel against the casteism, war, and egoism of the rulers. So, the theme of racism is dealt very well in this poem as alike in the play compared to the poem. The meaning of the Hindi word ‘रश्मिरथी’is composed of two words in which 'रश्मि’ means ray of the sun and 'रथी’ means one who is mounted on chariot, here Karna is referred to by this titular name. The poem is an epic written in seven cantos in which brilliant psychological dilemmas of the central figure Karna is delineated as well as its successful attempt to set Karna as a main and worthy protagonist over other major characters of the ‘Mahabharata’ epic is admired by the readers and receivers of this poem.

Comparative Explanation of Similarities in Both the Works : The fact is that any literature of any culture written in whichever era, does reflect the zeitgeist of that respective cultural dynamics. In following points to ponder the significant stanzas from the poem and dialogues from the play will be considered in order to have an understanding of the works as well as its pertinence to the prevalent times. Further more the focus will be laid upon the attempts of both the works in omitting the binaries in society which Jacques Derrida calls as ‘Miniature in Culture’ which is present in most cultures of the world having robs of different structures such as caste, class, religion, race, gender, hierarchy, job, etc. from many till the date exist in modern world cultures.

To begin with the theme of Subaltern Identity, Dinkar comes up with perceptive insight in following stanza :

ऊँच-नीच का भेद न माने, वही श्रेष्ठ ज्ञानी है,

दया-धर्म जिसमें हो, सबसे वही पूज्य प्राणी है।

क्षत्रिय वही, भरी हो जिसमें निर्भयता की आग,

सबसे श्रेष्ठ वही ब्राह्मण है, हो जिसमें तप-त्याग। (प्रथम सर्ग)

(Translation : Only the one who rejects the hierarchal binaries, is the best knowledgeable. Only the one who has compassion and righteous duty, is the most person to be worshipped. Only the one is a warrior in whom the spirit of fearlessness lies, and only the is the best of all priests in whom abstinence and renouncement lie.) (Canto I)

In the abovementioned stanza, the poet seems to favour true moulds of one’s being untainted by birth, but is determined by one’s gunas or qualities. But in the second quatrain, the poet may unconsciously be putting the binary of duty related to one’s subsistence, but here the binary is put for identification, and perhaps not for classification in hierarchal structure which leads to class and caste difference between the communities in culture. The similar racist ideologies – perhaps with good intention – is found in the second scene of the first act of the play in which the incident of Raama or Parshurama's recognizing his most upheld pupil Karna as a Kshatriya by birth but not a Brahmin takes place :

Raama : Blood? Whose blood? Who was it hurt, Karna, and how?

Karna  : ‘Twas I, Gurujee, hurt in my heart that your sleep was disturb'd!

...

(All this while, Raama has been watching Karna's doings with a glowering look)

...

Raama : You are faultless as a pupil, Karna; but you make a poor, poor liar!

Karna  : “Liar”! Why, great one, it was the truth I spake!

Raama : You did truth recount the wherefore of the blood; but I, a brahmin know full well that one of brahmin blood may not endure such agony of flesh without one strike of pain, one shake of limb or trunk! (In an impassioned tone)

Like dullard nurs'd a frozen snake against his bosom for but to court its sting, I've cherished nourish'd thee and parted with my knowledge of the use of arms to lying brat of very race I loathe! A creature that with face and eyes dissembling truth, did lie to me of brahmin birth! (Raising his voice to a threatening pitch) Come now, the truth! Thou art a Kshatriya by blood? Full one and twenty times have I set on and crush'd to dust the pride and power of royal Kshatriyas! And now I find my foremost pupil, brahmin as I thought him, turns out but a spawn of the very race that useth strength and wealth that God doth give for but to slaughter feeble helpless humans and to fatten, batten on the spoils acquir'd of weakling victims! Pshaw!

Karna : Believe me, Gurujee, I am no Kshatriya! I am not twice-born e'en! By sire and dam I am a low born sootha!

Raama : What? You a low-born sootha child! Nay, nay!

Karna : I pray you list, great one! What made me lie to you of brahmin birth – the only path to gain your tutordom – it was an inner, innate call...some inborn hunger for to learn the use of arms denied by my lowly caste! Beyond this, Gurujee, I had no aim!, no greed for power or pelf, mulcted off oppressed victims!

Raama : What you a craven low-born child? ‘Tis a lie!...And for thy dastard lie, list to a Brahmin’s CURSE :

IF EVER YOU SHOULD HENCEFORTH SORELY NEED THE USE OF ARMS YOU’VE LEARNT OF ME THE BAREST TALK, THE MEREST THOUGHT OF THY SUPPOSED SOOTHA BIRTH CROSSING THY MIND WILL SWELL THY HEART TO SEKSE OF SHAME, WILL DULL THINE EYES AND MIND, NUMB AND PARALYSE THY LIMBS BEYOND THEIR POW’R TO HELP THEE MAKE THE SLIGHTEST, SMALLEST USE OF KNOWLEDGE THAT YOU’VE LEARNT OF ME! AVAUNT! AVAUNT!, ERE I INFLICT A FURTHER CURSE ON THEE!

Thus in aforementioned dialogue between Karna and Parshurama, the contemporaneous cultural studies can also be done when the play was being written. The reiteration of casteist and racist words and phrases like “low-born,” “kshatriya,” “sootha,” and “brahmin” are all such references to the thinking patterns of the people living in India. The binaries in social systems are so much strikingly presented by the author and how the superiority of Brahmins over rest successive strata was in vague can be seen. Following the same theme in the poem, Dinkar seems to be providing his own insight as on the matter of how one’s worth should be classified and evaluated in the second canto as follow :

‘ब्राह्मण का है धर्म त्याग, पर, क्या बालक भी त्यागी हों?

जन्म साथ , शिलोञ्छवृत्ति के ही क्या वे अनुरागी हों?

क्या विचित्र रचना समाज की? गिरा ज्ञान ब्राह्मण-घर में,

मोती बरसा वैश्य-वेश्म में, पड़ा खड्ग क्षत्रिय-कर में। (द्वितीय सर्ग)

 

(Translation : Renouncement is the duty of a Brahmin, does it mean a child (a brahmin child) should also be a renouncee? With birth are they cherishing the mode of subsistence by gleaning? What strange structure is of the society? Knowledge entitles to Brahmins, a jewel (trade) entitles to Merchants, and sabers and armoury entitle to Kshatriyas.) (Canto II)

It is indeed a good attempt to see how probing spirit of the poet is being reflected in the aforementioned stanza, the way of putting inquisitive markers is one of striking qualities of the poem. Here the poet – in words of Parshurama in the poem – questions that why such social structure is structured like this wherein one class holds over some specific thing upon which no other class can have hold over. And the liquidity of changing one’s occupation as per one’s psychophysical nature was not found when India was socially dispersed in caste-system when the poem was being written. Thence the contemporaneous words along with its stark resemblance with present times too is the brilliance of narrative technique employed in the poem by Dinkar. Discussed in brevity, this is how the concept of Subaltern Identity is infused in form of dialogues and verses by both the authors in their respective works; undoubtedly there are more references to the Subaltern idea in both the works, but such other like Rejection of Knowledge Provision to the down-trodden people, Marxist ideology, and Derridean concept of “reading absence over presence” especially in the preceding literary works which helps in understanding the past cultures and thus is also an integral part of the Cultural Studies.

Secondly, the theme of Downtrodden Voice is also seen in both the literary works as sometimes implicitly and many times explicitly. Deriving an example to serve the purpose of the taken theme, in his epic poem 'रश्मिरथी,’ Dinkar sets to voice the downtrodden people of Indian culture in the second canto when Karna is praised as being thought of as a Brahmin child by Parshuraama who is his Guru or preceptor, he pensively thinks on his identity which roots in the identity crisis in Karna’s self :

'हाय, कर्ण, तू क्यों जन्मा था? जन्मा तो क्यों वीर हुआ?

कवच और कुण्डल-भूषित भी तेरा अधम शरीर हुआ?

धँस जाये वह देश अतल में, गुण की जहाँ नहीं पहचान?

जाति-गोत्र के बल से ही आदर पाते हैं जहाँ सुजान? (द्वितीय सर्ग)

(Translation : Oh Karna! Why have you born? And if born, why have you been valourous? Despite being gloriously studded with divine armour and Kundalas (earrings worn by male), your body is marred by low-birth? That very nation wherein people are not identified and behaved with on the basis of their quality and deeds but they are revered on the basis of their castes and creeds they are born into, descends into the deepest region of earthly mantle.) (Canto II)

‘नहीं पूछता है कोई तुम व्रती , वीर या दानी हो?

सभी पूछते मात्र यही, तुम किस कुल के अभिमानी हो?

मगर, मनुज क्या करे? जन्म लेना तो उसके हाथ नहीं,

चुनना जाति और कुल अपने बस की तो है बात नहीं। (द्वितीय सर्ग)

(Translation : No one asks you (Karna) whether you are pious, chivalrous, and altruist, but each one asks only that for what descent you take pride. Alas! What a human but can do? As it is not in human-hand to get birth, and to choose caste and creed is not in human-wish.) (Canto II)

'मैं कहता हूँ, अगर विधाता नर को मुठ्ठी में भरकर,

कहीं छींट दें ब्रह्मलोक से ही नीचे भूमण्डल पर,

तो भी विविध जातियों में ही मनुज यहाँ आ सकता है;

नीचे हैं क्यारियाँ बनीं, तो बीज कहाँ जा सकता है? (द्वितीय सर्ग)

(Translation : I (Karna) say, if Vidhata (a Vaidik Goddess of Fate) throws men randomly on the earth from Brahmaloka (celestial abode of Brahma), even though those men can take birth only in various castes, for the flowerbeds are constructed on the earth, then where the thrown seeds can go else?) (Canto II)

'कौन जन्म लेता किस कुल में? आकस्मिक ही है यह बात,

छोटे कुल पर, किन्तु यहाँ होते तब भी कितने आघात!

हाय, जाति छोटी है, तो फिर सभी हमारे गुण छोटे,

जाति बड़ी, तो बड़े बनें, वे, रहें लाख चाहे खोटे।' (द्वितीय सर्ग)

(Translation : Who takes birth in which creed? This is an accidental occurrence, yet low castes encounter innumerable attacks! Oh, if one’s caste is low, then one’s qualities are small, if one’s caste is high, then despite being debauched, one is great.) (Canto II)

In all the three successive stanzas mentioned right above have meticulously stricken over the age-long issue of casteism and its correlated companion which is identity crisis one feels within one’s own self which time and again is reflected in many literary writings in the history of world literature. The similar kind of thematic hue can be found in the dialogues from the play as well, when in the first scene of the second act, Bheema derogates Karna on the grounds of Karna’s low-birth as Sootha and thus mocks at his this loophole which is also a part of the curse fated on Karna by his guru Parashuraama :

Bheema  : (with a coarse leer on his lips and laughing jeeringly) Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! I knew it all the time! Low-born sootha blood was ever low-born sootha blood. Making him king of million Angalands will never, change his sootha blood, peerless archery forsooth! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

(With another coarse guffaw he joins his brothers who all depart the scene)

Gaandhaara  : (Puzzled beyond measure at Anga’s inanity) Come, come Anga! What made thee hold thy hand from slaying yonder human hog? You lost the very surest chance of ending life of our Crowned Prince’s direst foe!?

Anga (Karna)  : (with eyes welling with tears of anger and impotent aginy) It is a curse, my lord of Gaandhaara, that robb’d mine arms and trunk of strength and life: A mighty brahmin’s potent curse that rules: Whensoe’er my lowly birth is flung at me, and made to cross my mind, my brain refuses thought! My heart refuses beat! Mine arms remain inert! Pray pity me, my lord, a helpless, hapless victim of A BRAHMIN’S CURSE! (Collapses into Gaandhaara’s arms. Gaandhaara gathers him in his arms and half carries him out, muttering tearfully) Poor Anga! Poor poor honest Anga!

By going through this aforementioned dialogue amongst Bheema, Karna, and Gaandhaara, one can derive how poorly Karna’s fate is painted by the author. His loophole which was his identity of a lo-born sootha is the only reason of his impotency in the battlefield of Kurukshetra which hinders his might. Here it is also interesting to see Bheema as the “bourgeoise” voice, Karna as “lumpenproletariats”, and Angaa remains just a beholder and soothing voice that of the insubstantial critics who cannot raise their voice against unjust practices and instead rush to condole victims of injustice.

Eugenics as a scientifically erroneous and unproven theory of racial improvement and planned breeding is also reflected in both the poems which displays the collective temperament or as Carl Jung calls it as “collective unconscious” of people living in any given culture, the way people inbred the idea of how certain races have inherited superiority and certain races have inherited inferiority in terms of social structure which also reminds of the four major Victorian Institutions in the history of English Literature which were (1) Household where father being in patriarchal structure rule, (2) Religion where pope and priests being in religious theistic structure and God regarded as “He” being “God the Father” rule, (3) Society where again being patriarchal domination Male rule, and (4) Politics where on the grounds of male being treated superior to women, male politicians and the patriarchal ideology affirmed by them rule.

Conclusion : In winding up part, we can safely affirm the axiom that literature captures within itself the zeitgeist and thus serves as the mirror of society. It provides the utmost critique and as John Dryden in his Prologue in the poem ‘Absalom and Achitophel’ (1681) has rightly put that “the true end of satire is the amendment of vices by correction”, so the satirical conceptualization of both the writers’s respective literary works fulfil the end of the satire and attempt to bring in the consideration of social unjust practices of cultural strata.

Thank you!

Works Cited :

 “The Curse or Karna : T. P. Kailasam : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming.” Internet Archive, ಬಿ. ಎಸ್. ರಾಮ ರಾವ್, 1 Jan. 1970, https://archive.org/details/unset0000unse_h8e3/mode/2up.

 Dinkar, Ramdhari Sinha. Raśmirathī. Kedar Nath Singh, 2004. 

□ (Word Count : 3025)