The question of representation of women in modern public sphere has naturally been one of the central themes of international feminist scholarship in general and feminist art history in particular. Taking my cue from the works of feminist art historians like Griselda Pollock, I intend to analyze the prominent feminine icons that circulate in Tamil Nadu and the politics of representation involved in them. Tamil modernity consisted of two overlapping imaginations of nationhood. First, the discourses of India with Tamil Nadu as part developed by early activists of Indian national congress to be followed by a sharply distinctive Dravidian/Tamil nationalist imagination sustained by the non-Brahmin movement. In order to counter the cultural elitism and hegemony of Brahmins, the non-Brahmin movement invoked a Tamil past. This past is a coagulation of the anxiety to find and establish a unique cultural identity as Tamil. Both these discourses found it expedient to develop icons of women which desexualize their bodies. My paper will focus on the figures of Avvaiyar and Kannagi as examples of female icons whose de-sexualized images came to occupy a centrality, apart from a brief analysis of Valluvar Kottam, a public monument in which the teeming eroticism of Valluvar?s poetry is eschewed to the give the monument a sacred aura.
“What we construe as being in authority, and acting authoritatively, has depended upon representations of authoritativeness that privilege masculinity – male bodies and masculinised knowledge and practices. The menstruating body, the body-with-a-womb, the birthing fecund body, the lactating body, the menopausal body, the more docile and more specular or to be looked at body – it is difficult to imagine such bodies being in authority” says Katheleen Jones.
The discussions of issue gender and feminism within the context of an art historical discourse generally focus on the re-evaluation of the role and representation of women. I take here the story behind the two women icons of Tamilnadu and a memorial called Valluvar Kottam all of which stand for the idea of Tamil Nationalism. It becomes important to discuss these icons here for Tamil Nationalism is distinct from other nationalisms for in the pious land of temples it had brought in a change. i.e to say it had replaced the god centered sacred notions to that of language centered secular ones that had helped in the emancipation of the non-brahmin community. And hence all these three icons has been derived from the classical Tamil literature.Though there is a transition in the lines of religion the morals do remain the same in case of woman.
The subject for my first icon is Kannagi a folk goddess of the Tamil land who was also known as Pathini in the religious terms. Kannagi burnt the entire city of Madurai avenging to prove her husband’s innocence is the heroine of the Epic Silappathikaram (as I translate the story of the anklet). As the posture of her at the moment she claimed for justice is installed as the statue along the shore of Marina Beach, she adorns the posture of a goddess in the shore of Pumpuhar which is a place for tourism and fun. The complex character of Kannagi is that she is both emancipatory and non-emancipatory at the same time. he becomes emancipatory when she claims the rights and raises questions of ethics as the subject of the land. But on the other hand she becomes non-emancipatory when it comes to the matter of her sexual personage. In popular narration she had never been the object of desire. If she had been the object of desire the she can never be made the icon of a nation or a community. In the recent past when Dalit party MLA Ravikumar asked Karunanidhi having Madhavi’s statue in place of hers, the Chief minister gave a quiet smile. When the courtesancould never be placed as an epic heroine her daughter Manimagalai who is desexualized and asceticised becomes the heroine of the other epic Manimegalai. In the array of statues on the Beach road, Madras which consists of male leaders of the nation there are only these two female figures one is Kannagi and another one Avvaiyar. Kannagi’s posture holding the anklet in her hand with a face that is filled with rage and her hair let loose which un-auspicious for hindu women he body stands among the roaring waves of the angry beach. But then this statue had been a point of conflict between two political parties of the Tamil Nadu Government, the DMK and the ADMK respectively. The removal of a statue of Kannagi by AIADMK government lead by Jayalalitha in December 2002 led to widespread protests. The government said that the statue was removed because its pedestal was damaged by a speeding truck in the small hours of December 6. Although initial reports said that the pedestal was "slightly damaged" and that the statue was intact, the Public Works Department, which maintains the statue, removed it a few days later. It was kept at the PWD headquarters on the Marina and was later taken to the Government Museum. According to a government press release, PWD officials who examined the pedestal found that it was too weak to bear the weight of the 10-foot bronze statue.
The removal of the statue went unnoticed initially. For about a week the platform where the statue stood was covered with bamboo poles and thatches, giving the impression that some renovation work was on. It was only when the platform was demolished and a perfect road was laid in a midnight operation that the newspapers became suspicious and reported the "disappearance" of the statue. There were instant protests.
Then the Former Chief Minister and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) president M. Karunanidhi said on December 16 that the removal of the statue was "a challenge to Tamil pride" and amounted to "a war on Tamil culture and an affront to Tamils' sensibilities". Karunanidhi and leaders of other political parties, Tamil scholars and writers and literary organisations have demanded the reinstallation of the statue at the same spot. As it had not happened until the period of Jayalalitha’s regime the first thing the DMK leader did after returning to power in 2006 is to visit the museum and reinstall the statue.
The original play by "Inquilab", directed by A. Mangai, challenges the image of old age that literary tradition associates with the ancient woman poet. This youthful, sensuous and fearless Avvai threatens the patriarchal view which has marginalized the female voice. Mangai points out that iconic figures are often interpreted in ‘status quo’ terms. Mangai has revisited mythological and historical characters.
Avvai, written by Inquilab and directed by the author. In this revisionist account, the historical/mythic poet Avvai, contrary to the prevalent image of her as an old, wise, celibate woman, is rendered as a young, sensuous, creative, 'free' person, a wandering bard. Through a particular understanding of the Sangam era in Tamil his tory, Avvai's inner world as woman, poet and performer, and her external world of community and of politics are represented in ways that satisfy the requirements of a theatre of feminist resistance.
- Paper presented in the University of Manoa, Hawaii, south asia seminar-2008
No comments:
Post a Comment