Next Post
The Hunt
As a result of the decolonization of Indian, the country was no longer pure culture, pure people or pure language. The British rule of India for approximately two hundred years has changed things. It tinted things. From here on out (from independence to present day) India struggles to get back on her feet. She struggles to maintain an authentic Indian identity, an identity that has been diluted by the British. The British has influenced everything from classical Indian movies, music, fashion, language to even caste system. Though the caste system existed before colonial rule, it ended up reinforcing this system by adding on to it. It was now the time for the social class system, the “white caste.” Gayatri Spivak acknowledges this dilution in language, this British influence, and thus this hardship. In her translator’s note in Imaginary Maps by Mahasweta Devi, she states “All words in English in the original have been italicized. This makes the English page difficult to read. The difficulty is a reminder of the intimacy of the colonial encounter.”
Mahasweta Devi is an activist for the almost forgotten tribal societies of India. She is the voice of the oppressed and the sustainer of truth; the truth of the oppressed. Through her experiences with tribal societies, she has been able to incorporate these experiences into her fictional stories. One such story is “The Hunt.” The effects of colonization, corruption, capitalism and gender politics are all portrayed in “The Hunt.” Thus the protagonist, Mary Oraon, is Devi’s fighter, cure and solution to all of these. Mary rises up above many levels of subservience; the oppression of the tribes, feminism and self governance. Mary is smart, independent; makes her own money, a hard worker, trustworthy and a fighter. For Devi, Mary is the solution for “when the system fails in- justice.”
Mary Oraon is India! She is the post colonial India with diluted blood; half native, half white. This synthesis of India that has gained strength through hardships is willing to fight. “At a distance she looks most seductive, but close up you see a strong message of rejection in her glance.” India is rich in a variety of ways, many wants what she has, but none can possess her. Tehsildar represents the colonizer, and according to Devi’s philosophy, only violence can save Mary from this mainstream bad guy. Devi declares, “When the system fails an individual has a right to take violence or any other means to get justice. The individual cannot go on suffering in silence.” Hence India kills the colonizer before he ruins her.
Devi’s story touches on more than one level. She not only writes about post colonial India, but touches on feminism and the power of women. As well as focuses on the tribes of India, how they’re being taken advantage of and giving us an insight to what their society is like. Devi’s “The Hunt” is as powerful and inspiring as it is beautiful. Though I do not believe in violence, I now believe that there is truth to what Devi says. We must at times take a stand to fight, protect and defend all that is important not just to us, but society as well.
S. Lalchan
May 1, 2009 at 2:18 am
I completely agree with your analysis of Mary Oraon as Post-Colonial India. She is mixed– dealing with issues given to her by both of her identities. The savagery that she shows Tehsildar is representative of both the colonized and the colonizer, each group savage and fierce in their own right. But Mary is more than just living both roles, she is taking control of herself. Not only through violence, but in the convictions of her actions. She isn’t allowing herself to sit idly by and be destroyed, but unlike the colonizer she does not destroy everything that comes along– rather, she simply removes the threat.
May 10, 2009 at 12:34 am
I agree as well. It is important to remember how the murder is feminist (this is coming from me, woah). While we must look at Mary as an individual character, it’s also important to remember that she lived in a society, which had its own practices and norms that had to be obeyed. In her society, when men wanted to have sex or get married they were able to do so without any fight from the women they were pursuing. Mary goes against her social norm by sticking up for herself. At the end of the story, Devi explains that the murder was a call for independence to all women. Mary has “killed the biggest beast,” therefore freeing all women to assert their independence (17).
May 18, 2009 at 5:15 pm
I really loved your assertion that Mary’s character is a result of all the hardships she has gone through e.g. not just the supression of the tribals but the suppression of India by white colonists. I was wondering why the author chose to make the character half white when the story/introduction focuses much more ont he plight of the tribes in India. However, I think that is what is troubling her story because when one of the characters remarks that Mary is the way she is because of her white blood, it implies that is what makes her stronger and this seems to reinforce the racial binary of dark skin/inferior to white/superior. However, in light of your interpretation, it is the piling on of oppression that causes the kickback. Perhaps it can also be said that Mary takes some of the ideas of the colonisist and turns them to her advantage. We see this when she shows how aaware of her value is , both economically and socially. Economically, Mary works for free because the Indian system deamnds it but still demands that her worth be acknowledged….this seems to have the flavor of capitalism to me. She knows she cannot be replaced and therefore makes demands because of her short supply. She knows that money can turn things around for her but she doesnt need it ot enjoy her life. She simultaneously stays within the system but is also outside of it. She enjoys competition and rising to the challenge. She crosses the borders of race, of sex, and politics. White blood also makes visible her tribal heritage and vice versa. Against it ,it is easier to see the way in which mainstream India has imitated colonists in the worst way. Mary makes a choice in which blood she chooses to identify whth and highlight the instablity of rigid racial categories when she does so .