Chapter- 2

Gender and its Spatio-Temporal Configuration in Ragnis

The folkloristic today, especially the feminist-folkloristic study till now is majorly

occupied with the study of myths and legends, which form the core of any oral tale or

qissah, predominantly in the context of time. The focus of studying a folk narrative is

enveloped in its temporal dimensions rather than in the spatio-geographical context.

This is because, as argued by Foucault, “Space [still tends to be] treated as the dead,

the fixed, the undialectical, the mobile. Time, on the contrary is [seen as] richness,

fecundity, life, dialectic” (Soja 10). But the life of being is not only constitutive of its

temporality per se, ‘making of history’ through time, but also affected by the social

construction of human geographies. As Soja puts it, “[the]se ‘life stories’ have a

geography too; they have milieux, immediate locales, provocative emplacements

which affect thought and action. The historical imagination is never completely

spaceless . . .” (14).

The present chapter is premised on the critical understanding of gender, within

the dialectics of space and time, existing in the select four ragnis from the creative

oeuvre of Pandit Lakhmi Chand and his contemporaries. However, in order to delve

deep into the critical understanding of this dialectic, it becomes imperative to

understand the problematics of space which runs parallel with that of time. As Rekha

puts it, “. . . to view every aesthetic-imaginary endeavour by women in terms of

conventional temporal-spatial ‘active-passive hierarchy’ alone is to miss the

complexity or the wholeness of their fictional narratives”. (1). To achieve this

purpose, the chapter will attempt to understand the nuances of spatio-temporal

dialectic, by eclectically making use of the theories and arguments given by Henri

37
Lefebvre, Michel Foucault, and Edward Soja, which give new interpretations to these

simple looking folk ballads and myths.

Understanding the Space

The Cartesian notion of space views it as a tangible, physical, constant and reified,

concept within which materialistic things/objects are placed. It is more often than not

considered as a ‘physical space’ where human activities unfold in their temporal

sequentiality. To quote Paul Carter, Wegner talks about dominant narrative mode,

“which reduces space to a stage, that pays attention to events unfolding in time alone .

. . [r]ather than focus on the intentional world of historical individuals, the world of

active, spatial choices, empirical history of this kind has as its focus facts which, in a

sense, come after the event” (emphasis original) (Wegner 180). Reading a narrative in

an essentially temporal domain makes space appear as only a stage, a concrete place

or mere locale setting which is fixed and unmoved which does not, in any way,

influence and affect the social life. The characters are merely seen ‘located’ in certain

locales which ‘change’ or ‘evolve’ through time/history.

But the emerging preoccupation of many thinkers since last two decades have

led to some serious insights into the problematics of ‘space’, ‘place’ and ‘socio-

cultural geography’. Space has now come to be seen as ‘value-filled’ entity rather

than what it was earlier seen as a neutral entity. Lefebvre, the French social theorist,

who’s major work—The Production of Space—serves as a groundbreaking theory

which impacted many disciplines including cultural studies and feminism among

others. Lefebvre, in his theory of spatiality, rejects the older notion of space as “a pre-

existing void, endowed with formal properties alone” and maintains that “To criticize

and reject absolute space is simply to refuse a particular representation, that of a

container waiting to be filled by a content—i.e. matter, or bodies” (170). He rather

38
puts up an argument that, “(Social) space is a (social) product”—i.e. it is socially

produced through human actions and interventions. He further stresses on the

autonomous power which this ‘socially produced’ space achieves when he claims

space to be “a reality of its own, a reality clearly distinct from, yet much like, . . .

space thus produced also serves as a tool of thought and of action; that in addition to

being a means of production it is also a means of control, and hence of domination, of

power . . .” (26).

Lefebvre makes alive the space, so long reified, and makes possible for it to

exercise power on humans and influence their actions. Lefebvre gives three

dialectically interconnected dimensions through which (social) space is produced: the

triad of “spatial practice”, “representation of spaces”, and “representational spaces”,

which on the other hand refers to “perceived”, “conceived” and “lived” spaces. The

three terms can further be broken down to physical, mental and social aspect of space.

When we seek to understand female body through this triad, we see that a female

body or embodiment of woman oscillates within them.

Women in their day to day life carry out certain tasks which involve the use of

their body. In other words, their body acts as space where certain actions and

activities takes place which acts as the realm of perceived. But in carrying out these

social practices their body gets represented, designated or influenced by certain

dominant ideology, or social milieu in which they are placed and the relationships that

are produced in there. This makes them conceived bodies. The lived experiences of

body are more complex structures because one finds the interference of culture and its

norms and traditions here. For example, in rural or semi-urban places we often find

men freely socialising in public spaces but women on the other hand, are seen

accessing these ‘male zones’ very sparingly or with apprehensions. The spatial

39
practice of having access to public spaces more often by men than women is based on

the conceived idea of public places marked majorly for the use of men. And if any

woman accesses these male spaces with certain familiarity, it should be with male

consent. But the lived spaces completely deny the official representation of spaces or

as they are perceived in spatial practices. In their lived experiences of space, women

are often seen negotiating public spaces.

In Haryana, for example, we often see women labouring in fields more than

men. The field, a male arena, a male property, is often seen accessed by women which

gives them some power to exert their freedom, if not much. The body is thus situated

within the interplay of this triad of perceived (seen), conceived (thought), and lived

(carried out). Therefore through this triad of perceived, conceived and lived, female

bodies ‘re-present’ the socio-cultural space as seen in the myths and reiterated through

folk tales. Philip E. Wegner calls the production of social space, as conceptualised by

this triad, as “the space of the embodied individual’s cultural experiences and the

signs, images, forms and symbols that constitute it . . .” (182).

While Lefebvre’s work focuses on space as a social construction influenced

by, and in turn influencing human action and intervention; Michel Foucault,

especially in his seminal work, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, claims

space to be the site of power praxis and control. Foucault puts his focus upon the body

and analyse it keeping in view the spatial order in which a society is organised.

According to him, the body is regulated through the mechanism of discipline and this

discipline is achieved through the organisation of space, time and peoples’ activities

and behaviours. The system of surveillance comes to aide to enforce this discipline

among people. But this system of surveillance is not the sole property of the state or

the government rather power is present at the most micro levels and in every social

40
relation and it is our body through which we exercise power. If we look at the

patriarchal society of Haryana, we find men exercising power over women in their

day to day activities. But this power is not the power exercised through coercion,

rather, it is the power exerted through surveillance and disciplinary actions. The

women have, over the time, inherited or internalised the norms which are associated

to their sex. Their bodies are engaged in spatial practices that are carried out in

accordance to male regulated norms and customs. For example, women avoid going

out of the home after it gets dark because ideologically it is considered ‘unsafe’ for

them to venture out in a ‘public space’ at that hour. Gramsci calls it hegemony, which

is exercised over institutions, ideas and society as a whole. The ruling/dominant class

(the men) seek to maintain hegemony over the subordinate class (the women) by all

available means—knowledge, discourse, culture, rituals, social relations etc., and

space as an active agent, is used by hegemony to create a system of hierarchy. Thus

space becomes a power-filled entity. But wherever power exists, there exists an equal

resistance to that power and this resistance to every single oppression occurs in a

given time and space. The woman’s body as space, acts out resistance through certain

‘bodily practices’ and creates a space of her own which we shall see in the ragnis

under consideration.

In this chapter an attempt will be made to understand the concept of

spatialising the gender, or say, the genderisation of space under patriarchy in order to

run cultural normativity. For the purpose analysis in this chapter would focus on the

chosen four mythical and legendary women: Heer, Meneka, Loona and Savitri. The

four female characters are the protagonists of the ragnis selected for the present study.

The idea is to explore how these women are gendered in ragni as a mythical space

and the way they negotiate these spaces through their body. The present chapter does

41
not solely focus on the geographical aspect of space rather it extends its scope to other

dimension of space i.e. social space which contains the lived body of women. The

chapter seeks to explore the geographical as well as social space in a patriarchal

society with which women negotiate everyday. The above argument is contested

through the assumption that the gendered spaces do not pre-exist but socially

constructed and conceptualised by power dynamics and prevalent ideology operating

between the sexes. For conceptualising the above assumption, the study would

eclectically make use of theories propounded by Edward W. Soja, Henry Lefebvre

and Michael Foucault along with the arguments given by later commentators like,

Seemanthini Niranjana. The purpose is to understand the dynamics of gendered

spaces operating in the given folk narratives that are a part of an individual’s life.

Since ages women have been striving hard to seek space for themselves in a

male dominated society. They are muted through cultural norms and ideals that are

incorporated into myths and legends which are considered the keepers of patriarchal

values. The mythical stories being told from generations establish and legitimise the

inferior status of women except that of mothers and goddesses. The folk tales are

replete with ideals of woman as a chaste wife, a devoted mother, an obedient

daughter, and so on and so forth. Any attempt on their part to liberate themselves

from these stereotypes leads to their downfall from a virtuous woman to that of an

evil witch. The folktales in fact justify the inferiority of women to that of men by

projecting them as vulnerable and therefore to be protected at any cost. They are seen

as ‘space invaders’ and are made to realise their ‘ever present conventional

subordination’. In the tradition of sangs, ragnis and other folklores, women are seen

through the eyes of men which objectifies them and this objectification makes them

feel their ‘place/space’ in society. This gendering of space and place effects the ways

42
in which we understand and construct the gender biases in the societies in which we

live. Those who comply with the given male dominance are idolised where as those

who do not are shunned. They are regarded as keepers of the culture. The women

keep on negotiating to claim a space for themselves where they can claim their

freedom. But even this space is supervised and controlled by men and regulated from

time to time in order to make sure the smooth running of male normativity.

Body as Geography, Space as Physical Entity:

(Crossing the Threshold: Psychological and Physical):

When we talk about spatialisation of gender, the first and foremost is the

physical space where women negotiate each day through rules of physical movement

and female morality. Her body becomes a tool through which she is sexualised in her

movement in that physical space. A woman’s body is seen in ways similar to how we

see space- empty, reified, lacking solidity and in oppositional stance to male. Thus we

create dichotomies like- time/space, mind/body, culture/nature, public/private,

superior/inferior, fixed/dynamic and so on and so forth. The physical space or the

geographical site where a woman carries out spatial practices is not solely a dead or

fixed entity but in fact, a site, a place where cultural ideas and practices are carried

out. The physical space of women is socially constructed through various parameters

like, social behaviour, daily chores, caste, hierarchy within a family etc. Her space is

regulated through the binaries of inside-outside or olage-horage as Seemanthini

Niranjana calls it where she says,

These spatial ideas, strongly embedded in the perceptual schemes of people,

emerge as the principles orienting their daily practices, the axes along which

the world is ordered into one’s own or other, female and male, familiar and

strange, proper and improper, and so on. Yet these lines are neither rigidly nor

43
 essentially defined, since the parameters of what is inside (olage) and what is

outside (horage) itself keep shifting” (48).

The spatial boundaries between women and men are divided into these very

concentric boundries of ‘inside’ and ‘outside’ respectively where inside refers to

home, private space, a female territory and outside to field, public space, a male

territory. Observing closely, one finds a woman’s movement inside the household

being regulated by certain rules laid down regarding the use of space. She is

commonly seen occupied with the task of fulfilling the needs of her family. Her main

preoccupation is to provide her family with food and other taking care of day to day

needs. In course of fulfilling these needs, she has to make use of the space inside the

household like kitchen, courtyard, and inner chambers etc. which are primarily female

domains. But her responsibilities sometimes require her to access the outer spaces as

well. For example, she needs to go to fields to collect wood for fire, fodder for the

cattle, to fetch water from the wells, and also help her male counterpart on the fields

etc.

But the spaces thus accessed by her, whether inside or outside, are

conventionally rubricated by men. The concept of ‘threshold’ comes into play here

which is not measured in terms of geographical boundaries but it has deeper symbolic

implications.

It denotes a strong sense of that which is ‘inside’ and that which is ‘out there’.

The threshold is a real as well as a symbolic bar marking a critical transition.

Men have, traditionally; passed over the threshold unchallenged and partaken

of both worlds . . . women have been expected to inhabit only the one world

contained by the boundaries of home. For women, a step over the bar is an act

of transgression. Having committed that act, they may never re-enter their

44
 designated first world . . . making the other world their permanent space. The

law therefore allows multiple existences for men, a single for women

(Malashri Lal 12).

The ‘inside’ is also constantly interfered by male dominance and regulations.

For example, the kitchen though being a female territory, the choice of food to be

prepared lies with the male; the use of courtyard by women is only for the time when

the male members go out to work while during their presence the women recede to

inner chambers. The use of outer space too is restricted and governed by men, for

example, women can only be seen on fields during the presence of a male accomplice.

The wells too are located at the centre of the village where women are clearly visible

to men and thus avoiding any kind of ‘misdemeanour’ from them. They can not

venture out too deep into the woods to collect fuel and that too at odd hours. And

most of all, they must go to ‘relieve’ themselves outside before sunrise and after

sunset and that too in small groups and on familiar paths.

But threshold is not only seen in the terms of geographical location, but it is

also a psychologically contested site where women find themselves trapped in the

dichotomies of ‘an alluring and safe inside’ on the one hand, and on the other hand,

‘an outside with the possibilities of freedom and individual identity’. The ragnis into

question bring out this dichotomy of inside and outside where women are either seen

as giving in to the allurements of a safe inside or else, they are seen resisting the

inside and taking a leap in the outside world. For example, in “Hoor Meneka”, the

protagonist Meneka is seen regretting her position outside to which she sees as a site

of dishonour, wrath, risk and death. The allurements of a ‘secure and safe’ inside

space/place are clearly seen through her discourse which shows her accepting of

herself as a ‘dependent body’. She says:

45
 Indralok mein mze kru thi, kit mrityulok mein agyi

..........................................

Bina soche samjhe tyar hui mein, bhool mein dhokha kha gyi

..................................................

Oonch-neech ho gyi te fer rehti jaat jamat nhi se

How happy I was there in Indralok

Why have I come here in mrityulok?

I have done a terrible mistake to have come down to earth

Loss of honour will cost me my social status and respect. (PLC 234).

Meneka takes for granted her inferior position as a reified entity and conforms

to her position/place inside the threshold. She submits to the ever present male

supremacy of Indra inside the home (Indralok) where she accepts his sexual authority

over her to which she considers far better than being under the control of Vishwamitra

who, as per her, can throw her out whenever he wants, in which case, she can least

expect to come back to regain her ‘social standing’ (if any) in the court of Indra—a

pseudo home. She says:

Apna matlab pura karke, kade tadke tah de

...................................

Oddey leke khavan-peevan ki kade chori sir la de

Banya banaya mahal prem ka, kade aage si dah de

Kade iss ban mein chhor digarjya, jib tera peta sara bharjya

Who knows if you chuck me out any day?

Or blame me for stealing petty things?

Or allure me with your love and later reject

And leave me in this dark forest once you are done with me (238).

46
 Heer on the other hand is well aware of her reified position ‘inside’ and is

ready to challenge it and cross over the threshold. She is determined to face the male

favouring environment outside and knows the threats posited out there. For example,

in “Heer Ranjha”, the movement of Heer outside the home late in the evening

becomes an act of suspicion by her sister-in-law who questions her:

Heer nanad chali kade sir pe aadhi raat

Karan ke sai jaan ka manne btade baat

Adhi raat andheri mein kit kaam jaan ka tera

Jana kade jaroori se tu peta bhar de mera

Bahan aur beti rehya kre se apne kayde dhang mein

……………………………………………………..

Ek baat ka bhed pta na tu rangi hui kis rang mein

Heer, my sister-in-law! Where are you going now at midnight?

What is the reason for your departure now?

What is the urgency to go out at midnight?

Why is it so important to go now?

The daughters must adhere to the values laid for them

I fail to understand what is it that makes you do so (316).

Heer is being questioned by her sister-in-law for crossing the threshold at ‘odd hours’

and going outside. In other words, she is being questioned because of her ‘audacity’ to

cross the boundaries laid down for her and entering into male zone—outside the

home. She is put to trial because of breaking the norms set for her by men and

regulated with the help of other senior female members of her family. But Heer

contends and challenges the ‘inside’ and is fully aware of the consequences out there

in the male zone. She is adamant to cross the threshold and face the challenges that

47
the male world outside has to offer her. She is fully aware of the unidirectional

journey that she is going to take when she says:

Aga matna gheriye, hatja bhawaj door

Mein hargij mannu nhi, mane jana pde jaroor

Aage te hatjya bhabhi, ibb manne chokas jana se

Sacchi pak mohobbat ka mane paran nibhana se

Do not obstruct me sister-in-law

I am adamant and I have to go at any cost

I am sure that I have to go now sister-in-law

And fulfil the promise to prove my true love (317).

And women like Heer are also aware of the hegemonised female bodies like her

sister-in-law who is in position of authority to make sure the smooth running of the

household which her husband expects her to do. But the psychological threshold

which Heer has already crossed in her decision to quit home separates her from these

kinds of women. Her sister-in-law, who passively assumes her subordinate role under

patriarchy, warns Heer against the consequences of ruining her brother’s caste and

repute.

Peehar ke mah khasam paal liya ke Patmal ke jaat nhi se

Sab kuch tere hath nhi se, ya kudhali kaar kre

How can you ruin your brother’s (Patmal) reputation by indulging in an affair?

You are not on your own to involve yourself in such mean acts (MR 331-32).

So the inside is not always a female domain rather it is as very much a male domain

as the outside is, the only difference is that it gives a momentary relief to women till

men are away. And even during that time, the domestic space is being controlled by

48
women at the top of hierarchy in that household and women at the lowest levels keep

on negotiating with this prevalent injustice.

The separating of the inside from outside is thus a way of clearly marking of

the territories of women and men where men can enter and interfere with the ‘inside’

but women can only do so with due permission. The outside is an ‘unknown’ territory

for women and risking oneself for the unknown is not an acceptable behaviour for

them. Any women using the outside space all by her then otherwise permitted is

supposed to put a blot on the whole caste and community to which she belongs.

Meneka’s ‘helplessly’ venturing out in the woods all by her is taken as an excuse by

Vishwamitra and he decides to immediately take charge of her. As Malashri Lal puts

it, “According to patriarchal tradition she is ‘protected’ from the outer energy of

action . . . the woman is said to be incapable to guarding her body, exercising her

intellect. . .” (13). Vishwamitra questions her about her benefactor and the negation of

which makes him ‘take’ her as his property. In one of the excerpt he asks her:

Kaun desh te aave chali, aage kit ja sai

Khoti ho sai tuk izzat ki,kade na naav doobjya sat ki

………………………………………………………

Pandrah solah saal ki mad ki umar jawan

Ibb aage jagi kade aaliya tera sthan

From which place have you come and where are you going ahead?

(A woman’s) honour is a delicate thing like a boat which can be drowned

You are an enchanting beauty of 15-16 years

You have reached your destination so go no further (PLC 236-37).

The space outside is thus a male domain which Meneka is unable to negotiate and she

has no other alternative but to submit to his dominance. As soon as she accepts it as

49
her fate, the saint, a male in charge here, domesticates her and again starts to draw

boundaries of inside-outside for her. He defines the kuti (hut) as her space whereas

outside the hut (where she was till now roaming freely) becomes no more accessible

for her. He even assigns her duties like cooking and other household chores which

defines the woman’s place/space inside the threshold. He says:

Jo mere dhore rehgi te pura kaam hojyaga

Dono bakhat manne bhojan ka aram ho jyaga

………………………………………………

Ek kadam na bahar kuti te hoor kade jaiye

……………………………………………

Manne chod ke jagi te dukh bhogegi bhari

……………………………………………

Nahi dat ti te shrap tane du fire mari-mari

You would feel complete if you stay with me

I would timely get food with your stay

You must never go out of the hut

If you do so you would suffer a lot

I will curse you if you dare to go away (238-39).

Thus projecting of inner spaces as safe and outer spaces as unsafe is another way of

controlling and regulating the sexuality of women. It is another way to put patriarchal

control over women and their behaviour. But ironically, when a woman makes an

attempt to access the male territory, the outside, with the permission of male, it is

never regarded as immoral on her part. For example, in “Satyavan Savitri”, Savitri’s

father king Asvapati after failing to find a suitable husband for his daughter, asks her

50
to find one for herself. She is granted permission to go out and look for a suitable

match that she wishes for:

Bohot sa dravya diya boodha mantri sang buddhiman vali

Fer pita ko sheesh jhuka sharam ke rath mein baith chali

Anjane marg se chal di jaha rishi karein tap jaap

………………………………………………….

Savitri kre fikar pati ibb kit tohna chahiye

With a lot of money and an old minister named Vali

Bowing to her father in gratitude she sat on the chariot

She took the unknown path where rishis practiced penance

Savitri was worried to find a suitable husband (504).

Savitri being a stereotype of ideal woman is given the liberty to choose a husband for

herself. She steps out of her threshold and enters into male realm to seek a partner of

her choice. For a moment it seems she becomes successful in claiming her sexuality

and deciding for herself but the folk bard does not give complete freedom to Savitri

as well. On a closer reading we see that she was sent ‘outside’ but not all alone. It is

the old and faithful minister, Vali, who is assigned the task to accompany her in her

search for a husband. The minister is like a father-figure to her, ‘wise’ and ‘old’

enough to be in charge of her during her expedition. It seems that neither the poet nor

the patriarchal society of Haryana could let a woman go out and choose a husband for

herself all alone. So, it is clearly evident that no matter whether it is Meneka, Heer, or

Savitri, the women in a rigidly patriarchal society of Haryana are not freed of the

male regulated and male dominated spaces that they are confined with. They keep on

negotiating with these socio-spatial boundaries but nothing much has changed and all

51
these spatial boundaries set for them are being reinforced through the discourse of

ragnis.

Body as Space

(Spatialization of Bodies):

In her book, Living the Body: Embodiment, Womanhood and Identity in

Contemporary India, Meenkashi Thapan contends that, “We are embodied socially

through our location in a socio-cultural and political space. In this sense, we are

located in time and space, race, ethnicity and gender, and history and culture which

shape and limit us in different. Our embodiment is therefore experienced in our

everyday lives as lived and communicative bodies. . . . we use our bodily senses to

both perceive and give voice to our experience” (2-3).

The physical space or say, geographical space does not completely constitute

the concept of space, but rather is achieved through socio-cultural practices where a

woman’s lived body contests for its place in a male dominated society everyday. Her

body becomes a site of contestation where culturally constructed beliefs and practices

operate themselves each day. A woman’s behaviour, code of conduct, and

mannerisms are specified by a cultural group and are carried out by her day to day

bodily practices. The female body is also viewed as personification of nature

(Prakriti), which is in itself a space. The way nature is cultivated by man to exploit its

reproductivity, similarly, the female body also becomes an embodiment of land

(Shetra) which is cultivated, tamed, and domesticated to suit the physical and sexual

needs of man. The female bodies in action in the given ragnis are not only reified

spaces where men execute their violence and control but they are also sites of

contestation, resistance, transformation and negotiations. The women characters in

question are not only mythical bodies being relived in time but they represent the

52
embodiments of women being controlled and regulated in certain spatio-temporal

settings. Where Heer and Loona represent ‘resisting’ and ‘deviant’ bodies; Savitri and

Meneka represent ‘regulated’, ‘constrained’ and ‘disciplined’ bodies. Patriarchy,

under the excuse of ‘norms’ and ‘cultural values’ makes sure to discipline and control

the ‘overflowing’ and ‘dangerous’ female sexuality.

The idea is well expressed and reinforced in the folk tradition of Haryana. In

“Pooranmal”, the poet codifies the sexuality of Loona with ripe fruits to be partaken

by Pooranmal. In one of the excerpts, Loona invites Pooranmal for the sexual alliance

by saying that:

Jee chahve jib ajmale, aja do baji chopad ki la le

Suan ban ke khale yo bag samay pe phal aya hai, pake hue seb, santre, akhrot

You can put me to test as you please

Come let’s play Chopad

Partake my youth,

Which is ripe like an Apple, Orange, and Walnut. (PLC 458).

The poet’s compares the sexuality of Loona with ripe fruits like Apple (symbolic of

forbidden fruit), Orange (juicy fruit), and Walnut (a kind of dry fruit scarcely

available) hints towards the commodification of a woman’s body. On the other side,

Pooranmal’s comparison to suan (“a big needle”) again hints towards his sexuality

which will overtake and empower the fecund Loona.

A female body is viewed in binaries of pure and impure. Her sexuality is

either seen as dangerous or docile. In many rituals and customs it is often seen that a

menstruating woman is considered as an ‘impure’ and ‘leaking body’. She is barred

from participating in any kind of religious activities during that physical condition. In

“Hoor Meneka”, we find similar instance where Meneka is considered as an impure

53
and deviant body when she leaves her just born child and disappears into the deep

forest. Vishwamitra says,

Nau mahine tak bojh mari aur pet pad ke jayi

Lahu ki boond ger di ban mein sharam talak na ayi

Nyari paat chali beti te karli man ki chahi

Pata chla na issi dayan ka gayi kaun si rahi

She took pains till nine months before delivering the child

And shamelessly left for the woods while menstruating

She left the wailing infant to fulfil her heart’s desire

God knows which way has this witch gone! (244).

The poet is here reinforcing the dominant ideology where a pregnant woman must not

venture out of the house. He has already voiced this opinion in the same ragni where

Vishwamitra asks Meneka to not to go out during her pregnancy. He says, “Ashaband

lugai ka kite jana theek nhi/ ‘An expecting mother should not go anywhere except

home’” (240). The condition remains similar for any woman who has just delivered a

baby. As she menstruates post-partum, she is considered an impure body, hence it is

required for her to remain ‘indoors’. An ‘obedient’ and ‘docile’ woman would comply

to these norms, but here, Meneka who is projected as promiscuous and sexually

dangerous, the poet, instead of taking the original myth (where Meneka goes back to

heaven), leaves her ‘leaking-impure body’ to roam about in the forest. She becomes a

‘fallen body’, one who has attained ‘motherhood out of wedlock’, hence, displaced

from heaven to earth with no chance of going back. Janet Chawla rightfully argues in

this regard where she says, “Brahmanic pollution ideology devalues and de-sacralises

the female bodily processes of menstruation and childbirth while simultaneously

glorifying the patriarchally constructed institution of ‘motherhood’” (2819). Her

54
body becomes a space where man can control, play with, and later discard her as a

plaything.

Similarly, the body of Loona in “Pooranmal”, too becomes a battle ground for

men like Pooranmal and his father who fight for their rights over a woman’s

sexuality. Though Pooranmal is not the one claiming any right over Loona but his

father’s insecurity for her ruins the life of not only his son but also Loona. Loona tries

to assert her sexual desire and fulfil them by expecting an alliance with her step-son

Pooranmal. Though she is unable to materialise her desire but Pooranmal is sentenced

to death by his father on the basis of false accusations laid by her. (Though he is later

saved of death row but made handicapped by cutting his limbs and thrown into a

well.) Loona is also, like Meneka, viewed as deviant sexuality because she becomes

the reason behind a man’s (Pooranmal) death. But if we look at the re-telling of the

present myth as narrated by Shiv Kumar Batalavi in his book titled, Loona, it becomes

clear that the Haryanvi folk bards did not do justice to her as a woman who later

repents for her deed. The Loona in Haryanvi folklore disappears as soon as

Pooranmal’s limbs are chopped off and he is thrown into the well. The ragni abruptly

ends at this turn of the story. In fact the very title of this Haryanvi folklore is named

after the male protagonist that signals to the patriarchal ideology that it is the male

body which emerges out as all victorious and truthful from the clutches of a

destructive force like Loona. But the reality is that it is Loona who is not given space

in the folk narrative to justify or even repent for her actions. Loona’s body is given

agency to exercise her will but she is not given chance to defend herself. Her body is

also a ‘silent body’ just like Meneka. Both, Meneka and Loona are silenced at the end

of the sangs because they are considered to be archetype of destruction and

55
impending death. Both are of an inferior position because they bring destruction and

misfortune into their men’s life.

Unlike Meneka and Loona, who are viewed as ‘destructive bodies’, Savitri on

the other hand is viewed as ‘reproductive body’. Savitri is at the pinnacle of an ideal

woman. She is projected as the role model to all other women. The poets reinforce

this belief through their ragnis. The body of Savitri is projected as to have access to

places beyond geographical space i.e. her physical movement between heaven and

earth. Where Meneka and Loona are seen as female bodies bent on destroying

Vishwamitra and Pooranmal, respectively. Savitri is projected as one who has the

‘abilities to resurrect’ her husband back to life. She is the woman who, unlike

Meneka, can shuffle between heaven and earth to save her husband’s life. She

therefore enjoys a superior position than the other two. She is the one who conquers

death who came in the form of Yamraj (a male again).

De diya vardaan yo ho nishkalank putra mere

Yam hath malte reh gye aur de chale vardan ko

Aa ri Saraswati hirde baso mayi kaat Yam ke fand tu

You have blessed me with unblemished sons

A helpless Yamraj departed after granting her the boon

O Saraswati! Goddess of truth! Come to me and conquer death (Yama) (PLC

524).

Savitri is here projected as no less than goddess Saraswati who is regarded as an

embodiment of truth and virtue. Savitri becomes the mouthpiece of poet here when

she invokes her (Saraswati) to gain strength and courage to conquer death. It is also a

way of glorifying the prevalent image of a chaste woman who is only capable of

achieving strength above a powerful male, rest other are futile and lowly.

56
 Her body gets maximum space in the re-telling of the popular myth because

she is the ‘pure body’. Her sexuality is not dangerous like Meneka and Loona rather it

is ‘in service’ to a man and that too her husband as sanctioned by society. Savitri

overpowers, or say, is able to convince Yamraj to give back Satyavan’s life because

of her being a ‘pativrata’. She is an archetype of normativity i.e. an ideal wife and an

obedient daughter. Meneka and Loona are ‘muted’ at the closing of the sangs but

Savitri is clearly seen voicing out her opinion and reasonably arguing with Yamraj to

convince him. Finally, she asks for a last and normatively logical boon which even

Yamraj couldn’t refuse to grant. She asks for motherhood i.e. one hundred sons from

Satyavan which was not possible without his resurrection. She does not claim for

anything that relates to her individuality rather she seeks a boon which makes her

body available for her husband’s progeny which is viewed as a greater good. She is

accepted and reinforced as an ideal woman who upholds motherhood than any kind of

bodily desires. Her heroism is seen as emanating from her desire to attain

motherhood. Motherhood is seen as natural to femininity. A woman’s desire to be a

mother arises from the fact that she has subsumed her role as ‘a womb carrying her

man’s progeny’. Meneka too attains motherhood but of the fact that she has no choice.

She is not given the agency to challenge her right over child bearing. Besides her

motherhood is not normative and culturally acceptable as she is unable to give the

parentage to her child. Loona’s body on the other hand is seen as a “vacant/free

womb ready to be filled1” (110). For instance, she says,

Meri umar se athara saal ki tu sai meri jodi ka

……………………………………………….

Budhe te thi bhali kunwari dukh hua jawani pan mein

Mein palla pasaru bheekh ghal de mein bhikshuk tu data

57
 I am of eighteen years and you are my best match

It was better to be single than to marry an old man

I beg of you to give me your companionship and love (PLC 459).

And, in another one she says,

Baje ram pati ka manne var de, jholi meri suhag ki bhar de

Pooran kar de man ki chahi, badi mushkil te samo hai thyai

Let me be rightfully married, bless me with boon of husband

O Pooran! Fulfil my wish, this time will not come again (BB 241).

But Loona is expecting that womb to be filled not out of wedlock but from an ‘other

man’. Thus her vacant womb becomes the “deviant womb” because of her desire to

exert her right over her sexuality which is regarded as “inappropriate femininity”

(Ahall 112).

Thus, a female body that by choice does not assume maternity challenges

traditional ideas about the capacities of, and expectations for, female bodies; it

challenges the boundary of ‘natural’ femininity. Because gendered bodies are

homogenized and because of the ‘natural’ link between femininity and sexual

reproduction child-less women who deny their definitional gendered ‘essence’

are deemed deviant, other’ and denied adult status (112).

It is because of these paradoxes of motherhood that Meneka and Loona are labelled as

‘deviant body’ and Savitri as ‘domestic body’.

Other than marking the heroine’s body as battleground for pure and impure, it

is also viewed as site of male gaze, eroticism and love. The way the folk bards

introduce all four mythical and legendary women, is in itself commodification of

female. The way the poet(s) describes the beauty, charms and gestures of Meneka,

Loona and Heer is worth attention here:

58
Meneka:

Satrah-athara saal ki thi mad joban mein rhi thi tool

Roop issa khilta aawe jani rut pe keshar kyari

……………………………………………….

Naina ke ishare isse admi ke lade jhada

Kele kaise gobh hili pandrah ser ka tol issa

Kalje ne choot raha mitha mitha bol issa

Chhum-chhum chananan chaal issi janu jal ke mein murgai

She was of 17-18 years and enchanted in her own youth

Her beauty was no less than a plot of saffron in full bloom

Her eyes roved in a way which could possess a man

Her waist was as curvaceous as a banana

Every word she uttered was sweet enough to pierce a heart

She walked with a gait of a swan in the lake (PLC 232-33).

Loona:

Pade auli-sauli jhol teri kad mein . . .

Mata kar bete ki gaur badle kyu tote barga tyor

Janu nache mor saman ke jhad mein kisne karna nach sikhave sai

…………………………………………………………………….

Chale lambe-lambe saans tere dhad mein, kyu tirchchi nazar lakhawe sai

You move your waist alluringly

O mother! Look I am your son! Why you look at me like a parrot?

You dance as if a Peacock dances in the rain

59
 Your heavy breathing shows in your bosom, why you look at me coquettishly

(455).

Heer:

Doodh ka bela le liya hath millan pali te Heer chali

Sadi adha banali apni til thodi pe khila hua

Lehenga banya hua Gujrat audh ke dakkhani cheer chali

…………………………………………………………..

Kar de ashiq ne havalat bandh ke va ishq zanjeer chali

With a saucer full of milk in her hand, Heer left to meet Ranjha

She wore a sweet disposition with a mole placed on her chin

Her skirt was from Gujrat and hair with a southern parting

She carried a love-chain that could imprison any lover (DP 371).

In the above descriptions of Meneka, Loona and Heer, one can see the use of sexual

innuendos by the poet(s) to bring forth the sensual beauty of each woman.

Comparison of the heroine’s beauty with a dancing peacock, swan, and parrot and her

way of looking at the hero coquettishly, are all metaphors used in nakh-shikh

tradition. But the poet also peppers his narrative by certain cultural metaphors and

similes that make her more than the traditional/mythical heroine. He calls her “keshar

kyari” (Plot of saffron) and “Kela” (banana) which are symbolic of items meant for

consumption, thereby, commodifying her in the process. And, the way poet hints

towards the heroine’s immorality and lack of virtue is seen because of the choice of

phrases he use, for example, “tirchchi nazar” , “naina ke ishare” and “dakkhani

cheer” which are not regarded as ‘proper behavioural attributes’ for a good woman.

60
 On the other hand, if we look at the way Savitri is introduced and described by

the poet, we find an alarmingly different detailing. Let us look at the following

excerpt from “Satyavan Savitri”:

Savitri ne samay pe aake sir choti snana kiya

Parvat ke upar jake apne isht dev ka dhyan kiya

Mala isht dev ki paa ke, apne pita ki jad mein ja ke

Lajjit si baith gyi asan la ke, much se nhi byan kiya

……………………………………………………..

Lakhmi Chand dhang jawani kaisa, dusra nhi tha iss shaani kaisa

Sunder roop bhvani kaisa, tanne triloki bhagwan kiya

Savitri, born in auspicious hours, took a holy bath

Went to the mountains and invoked her god

Received blessings from Him and sat beside her father

She sat down with eyes cast down and uttered not even a single word

Says Lakhmi Chand, no other young woman is more graceful than her (PLC

500).

Savitri, an archetype of ideal woman, is described with metaphors like “sunder roop

Bhvani kaisa” where the poet compares her to goddess Bhvani which is another name

for goddess Parvati. Bhvani is also regarded as the internal power of Lord Shiva who

gives moksha to those who worship her. Savitri is thus believed to be an incarnation

of the same. The poet deifies Savitri’s stature by giving a hint towards her unearthly

birth. She is described to be born as a young woman from the blessings of Goddess

Savitri, after which she was named. Savitri’s nakh-shikh shows her to be a woman of

virtue and shame. It can be understood with the way she sat beside her father with

‘her eyes cast down’ which is otherwise not the case with either of the three- Meneka,

61
Loona and Heer. Their demeanour is lacking in that virtue and shame that the

patriarchal society of Haryana expects from a woman. But whether it is Meneka,

Loona, Heer or Savitri, the attributes of good and bad attached to a woman are after

all the doings of society, largely of men. It is the male voyeurism that sneaks its way

through the bodily description of a mythical woman by adding a pinch of certain

rustic and culturally given metaphors to it. By doing so, a male gives vent to his

hidden sexual desires for women at large. Whether a woman is assumed ‘good’ (like

Savitri) or ‘bad’ (like Meneka, Loona and Heer), they can not escape the ‘male gaze’

which secularises them into common woman emasculating under patriarchy. Their

body becomes the site of ‘seductive’ and ‘ever penetrating’ male gaze.

Resisting Bodies

Ragni might be a text narrating stories about mythical and legendary women but it is

not more than a way of legitimising, appropriating and reinforcing the normative

boundaries and binaries of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ for common women folk. These mythical

women, the very subject of folk songs and stories for centuries, never get liberated

from their mythical space. They continue to be ‘fixed’ and ‘freeze’ in that time. For

example, in Mahaswetadevi’s Draupadi, the writer has tried to subvert the myth of

Draupadi from Mahabharata who is saved by Krishna from being disrobed by

Kauravas. But Mahasweta Devi’s Dopdi refuses to be robed by her oppressors. She

devalues the patriarchal notions of ‘shame’ and ‘honour’ attached with women and

fight against the system. As Monika Dhillon puts it, “Dopdi is truly the face of

postcolonial feminist assertion as she uses her wholeness of mind and body to fight

against exploitation” (74). But there is not even a single ragni where we find the

poets subverting the myth of either Meneka as a victim of male sexual desire, and

Loona and Heer as women exercising their free will. The folk bards instead, through

62
their discourse embedded in ragnis, reinforce, legitimise, appropriate, and disseminate

the established myth as normative cultural archetypes. The mythical/religious space

gets converted into secular space by setting up archetype of Savitri as ideal woman

which help in smooth running of patriarchy.

In short, the folk bards delimit the women and lay down rules for them by

positioning the given mythical women in a certain socio-spatial context. The shift in

place/space of each of the protagonist directly corresponds to the patriarchal

normativity. Their adjustments to customs or lack of it directly make them either ideal

or deviant bodies. These women become the carriers of cultural values and ideals

which then become the prototypes to be followed by the rest. Their life is

circumscribed by the socio-spatial rule of threshold which is not only physically

marked but is also psychologically imbibed into their psyche which they follow with

self-restrain.

But it is also true that women constantly show resistance through these

geographical and bodily spaces. “Resistance in fact is a double edged sword in

women’s lives, one with which they constantly articulate and exhibit their struggle but

one which does not always enable complete success. Resistance, nonetheless, remains

central to their lives whether or not it achieves social transformation” (Thapan 15).

Perplexed by Loona’s audacious behaviour to reject her older husband’s right over

her, and demanding love and sexual satisfaction by her step-son, Pooranmal dubs her

as “dayan” (a witch), and says:

Tu nyu keh ri Pooranmal mere laal nhi se

Doob gyi janni izzat ka khyaal nhi se

Junsi chale va rajghara ki chal nhi se

You are expecting a son from me

63
 But you are a shameless woman

Your actions reveal your lowly background (PLC 462).

Loona has through her unashamed conduct has threatened the very concept of marital

and bodily shame which is ‘a must’ for every woman. In fact her very act of doing

purdah (veil) from Pooranmal itself becomes symbolic of her desire to see herself as

his wife:

Tere Pooranmal poot khadya jad mein,

kisne ghoonghat taan dikhave se

Ek be beta keh ke bol kyun tan kar liya damadol

.......................................

Mata kar bête ki gor badle kyu tote barga tyor

It is your son, Pooranmal standing beside you

Why have you observed a veil?

Why do you feel restless?

Why don’t you call me your son?

Why do you look at me coquettishly? (455).

The veil shows the sexual desire of the female body which it contains. Her clothing

and her coquettish female gaze makes explicit her sexual desires which even Loona

does not try to hide. Her sexual desires are counter-attacked by Pooranmal’s moral

ethics stating:

Meri tu sunle baat gyan ki, trishna chale tere dhyan ki

Pita saleman ki paag rlavey kyun aaj gard mein

It is my advice to you to give up your unruly desires

Why are you hell bent on ruining my father’s repute? (457).

64
But Loona revels in her bodily desires and celebrates her sexuality unhesitatingly. She

compares her body and its desires with sexual innuendos like ‘rose’ and ‘bottle of

wine’ which hints towards her resistance against conventional images attached to

Savitri like “sati” or “divya-rupi”/ ‘divine-beauty’.

Tu bhora ban ke khale khushboyi rut pe phool gulab se

.............................................

Mein saki tu pivan alaa botal beech shraab se

Revel in my beauty like

A bumble-bee partake the essence of rose

I offer you my youth no less than wine (463).

In offering her youth and sexuality to Pooranmal, Loona somewhere rejects the

normative compulsions of marital life and also exposes the hypocrisy of society in

‘marrying of’ a young girl with an (already married) old man:

Vridh pati ne dekh pran mere so-so kosan bhage

Uss baire te na jaut mile hum sasur bahu se lage

I cannot tolerate an elderly husband anymore

He is not a match and looks like my father-in-law (455).

Loona’s audacious and unapologetic discourse and her choice of explicit sexual

innuendos regarding her body and its desires itself hint towards her resisting against

patriarchy. She comfortably brings out her sexual desires out in the public and

celebrates them. Her continuously pushing Pooranmal for a sexual union brings out

her unfulfilled sexuality and her frankness in demanding for it. Though she is unable

to convince Pooranmal to make a sexual union with her, but in trying to do so, she

has, for a while, dismantled the patriarchy and its control over women’s sexual

desires. Unlike Meneka, who stakes her sexuality as bait against Indra’s throne, and

65
Savitri, who finds a match in accordance with her father’s wishes and social standing,

Loona, is in a better position when it comes to her wishes and desires.

Meneka’s body on the other hand is already branded as ‘morally loose’ by all

the four folk bards because of her being an apsara. She is ‘bad’ because she uses her

sexuality against other men to bring favours to Indra. But that very same society,

insensitive to her plight, forgets that whatever she does, it is done at the command and

wish of Indra and not her own. All the men, whether Narad Muni, Indra, Vishwamitra

or the folk bards and the audience target her physically as well as psychologically.

They displace her first, from her physical space—heaven to earth and second, from

her psychological space—from being a ‘resisting body’ to a ‘submissive body’ who

gives up to her misfortune at last and instead of choosing over her desire, she

succumbs to suffocating patriarchy and drifts deep into the forest.

Endnotes

1
The concepts of vacant/free womb and deviant womb are well argued and explained by Linda Ahall
in her paper “Motherhood, Myth and Gendered Agency in political violence”.

66
 Works Cited

Ahall, Linda. “Motherhood myth and gendered agency in political violence”.

International Feminist Journal of Politics. 14.1, (2012): 103-20.

Chand, Pandit Lakhmi. Pandit Lakhmi Chand Granthavali. Ed. Pooran Chand

Sharma. Panchkula: Haryana Sahitya Akademi, 1992.

Chawla, Janet. “Mythic Origins of Menstrual Taboo in Rig Veda”. Economic and

Political Weekly. 29.43, (1994): 2817-27.

Dhillon, Monika. Postcolonialism and Feminist Assertion in Mahashweta Devi’s

“Draupadi”. Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies. 1.4, (2013): 72-77.

Web. <www.ajms.co.in>.

Lal, Malashri. The Law of the Threshold. IIAS: Shimla, 2000.

Lefebvre, Henri. The Production of Space. Trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith. Oxford:

Blackwell Publishing, 1991.

Niranjana, Seemanthini. Gender and Space. Sage: New Delhi, 2001.

Rekha. “Renegotiating Gendered Space: A Reading of Krishna Sobti's Fiction”.

Indian Literature. 53.3, (2009): 163-191. Web. 20 Mar 2015. <

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23340331>.

Soja, Edward W. Postmodern Geographies. London: Verso, 1989.

Thapan, Meenakshi. Living the Body: Embodiment, Womanhood and Identity in

Contemporary India. New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2009.

67
Wegner, Philip E., “Spatial Criticism”. Introducing Criticism at the 21st Century. Ed.

Julian Wolfrays. Jaipur: Rawat Publications, 2007.

68