Gendered Experiences in Indian and American Family As Portrayed in Anita Desai’S Fasting, Feasting

GENDERED EXPERIENCES IN INDIAN AND AMERICAN FAMILY AS PORTRAYED IN ANITA DESAI’S FASTING, FEASTING

AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra in English Letters

ARFIANA KHAIRUNNISA

Student Number: 044214039

ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2009

iii LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS

Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:

Nama : ARFIANA KHAIRUNNISA

Nomor Mahasiswa : 044214039

Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:

GENDERED EXPERIENCES IN INDIAN AND AMERICAN FAMILY AS PORTRAYED IN ANITA DESAI’S FASTING, FEASTING beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, me- ngalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di Internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun mem-berikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.

Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya.

Dibuat di Yogyakarta

Pada tanggal : 31 Januari 2009

Yang menyatakan

(ARFIANA KHAIRUNNISA)

PERNYATAAN KEASLIAN KARYA

Saya menyatakan dengan sesungguhnya bahwa skripsi yang saya tulis ini tidak memuat karya atau bagian yang lain kecuali yang telah disebutkan dalam kutipan dan daftar pustaka sebagai layaknya karya ilmiah.

Yogyakarta, 31 Januari 2009

Arfiana Khairunnisa

v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank and express my greatest gratitude to Allah for blessing and giving me opportunity in completing this thesis. I would like to give my deepest gratitude to my mother Sumarti, my father Arifin, and my only sister

Bella. Their love gave me the strength to finish this work immediately.

My special thank to my advisor, Ni Luh Putu Rosiandani, S.S., M.Hum., for her smile, advice, discussion, patience, and guidance in working in this thesis.

I thank my co-advisor Harris H. Setiajid, S.S., M.Hum., for so many inputs regarding my writing content. I thank my examiner, Dewi Widyastuti, S.Pd.,

M.Hum., for the funny defense. Thanks to all the lecturers and all staffs of

English Letters Department, especially to my class advisor, Gabriel Fajar

Sasmita Aji, S.S., M.Hum. Mbak Ninik, despite of all the confusion that I gave her in regards to my schedule every semester, I thank to you.

Thanks to my friends Shanti, Acid, Toni ‘Item’, Rani, Lisis, Deva, Ison,

Lutfi, Oos for the fun time in class and all my friends in English Letters who I have not mentioned yet. Easynet crews, Putri, Om Sulis, Rini, Dodi, Hari,

Bayu and Nylla, I thank for filling my shifts when I have to write this thesis. I thank to Destila and Chietra for the strong ties of friendship. My special thank to

Letyzia for borrowing me her books, Eka for the discussion and grammar lessons, Ibu Noeri and Bennet for making me feel at home in Nagan house. The last, I greatly thank Anugerah Wicaksono for guiding me to the better life ☺

Arfiana Khairunnisa

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE...... i APPROVAL PAGE ...... ii ACCEPTANCE PAGE ...... iii LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS ...... iv PERNYATAAN KEASLIAN KARYA...... v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... vii ABSTRACT ...... ix ABSTRAK ...... x

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ...... 1 A. Background of the Study ...... 1 B. Problem Formulation ...... 5 C. Objectives of the Study ...... 5 D. Definition of Terms ...... 5

CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL REVIEW ...... 7 A. Review of Related Studies...... 7 B. Review of Related Theories...... 8 1. Theory of Characterization ………..…………...... 8 2. Theory of Gender………..……...……………………………. 11 a. Gender Differences………...... 11 b. Gender Inequalities…...... 13 c. Gendered Experiences ………….…..……………………. 15 3. Review on the Family ………………………..…………....… 16 a. Review on the Indian Family……………………….... 16 b. Review on the American Family………………………… 19 C. Theoretical Framework ………………………………………… 22

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ……………………………………. 23 A. Object of the Study...... 23 B. Approach of the Study...... 24 C. Method of the Study ...... 25

CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS ……………………………………………. 27 A. Character and Characterization…...... 27 1. Female Characters .………………….……………………… 28 a. Uma ……………………………………………………… 28 b. Aruna…… ………..………..……………………………. 31 c. Mama………..……………………………………………. 33 d. Anamika……… ….……………….……………………... 35 e. Mrs. Patton……… ……………………..………………... 37

vii f. Melanie Patton………..…………………………………... 39 2. Male Characters………………...……………………….…… 41 a. Arun ………….……….………….……………………… 41 b. Papa.…… ……….………………………………………. 44 c. Ramu………..………..…………..………………………. 46 d. Mr. Patton…… …………..……….……………………... 48 e. Rod Patton………..…..………..…..……………………... 50 B. Gendered Experiences in Indian and American Family………. 51 1. Gendered Experiences in Indian Family…..………………… 52 a. Domestic Life..…………………………………………… 52 b. Relationship between Men and Women…………………. 58 c. Education and Career………….…………………………. 62 2. Gendered Experiences in American Family.………………… 66 a. Domestic Life..…………………………………………… 66 b. Relationship between Men and Women…………………. 69 c. Education and Career………….…………………………. 73 C. Women’s and Men’s Position in Indian and American Family 74 1. Women’s and Men’s Position in Indian Family…..…….…… 75 2. Women’s and Men’s Position in American Family.……….… 80

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION …...... 86

BIBLIOGRAPHY …...... 89

viii ABSTRACT

ARFIANA KHAIRUNNISA. Gendered Experiences in Indian and American Family as Portrayed in Anita Desai’s Fasting, Feasting. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma, 2009.

The novel Fasting, Feasting by Anita Desai depicts the life journey of a middle-class Indian family throughout the years. The plot alternates between the present and flashbacks to various moments in the past. The novel itself is divided into two parts; India and America. The plot reveals through the perceptions of Uma, in India, and of Arun, in America. Both of them are entrapped, irrespective of the culture and enveloping situation, by oppressive bonds exercised by their own parents, MamaPapa, who are prototypical parents that can be found in middle-class family in India. There are some objectives that the writer wants to achieve through this thesis. The first is to analyze the male and female characters in Fasting, Feasting in order to understand the characters deeply. The second is to classify the gendered experiences that are experienced by the characters in the novel. The last objective is to see the women’s position and men’s position in the family as reflected in both families in the novel. In order to analyze the problem, the writer is employing gender study as an approach. Gender study is considered appropriate to be applied to this topic because the discussion in this work is about men and women and their experiences in gendered experience, how they experienced it, and the result of those experiences. In this study, the approach only focuses to discuss the male and female characters and their problems of the novel. The study has found that each character in the novel experienced different gendered experiences. The female characters are obliged to do things that are regarded as ‘feminine’. They responsible for all domestic chores, take care of children, etc. In opposite, the male characters are obliged to do things that are regarded as ‘masculine’. They work outside home, get good education and career, etc. Those kinds of activities give more advantages to men than women. The gendered experiences always make women in subordinate position. As the result, both Indian and American families are male-centered family system. Moreover, as shown in the characters in Fasting, Feasting, culture has demand differently over sex. Culture determines what should be achieved by men and women. Different background culture of India and America constructs different gendered experiences. However, the form and degree of inequality in Indian family differs from the ones in American family.

ix ABSTRAK

Novel Anita Desai yang berjudul Fasting, Feasting menggambarkan perjalanan hidup sebuah keluarga kelas menengah India dari tahun ke tahun. Alur ceritanya bergantian dari masa kini ke masa lalu. Novel ini dibagi menjadi dua bagian, India dan Amerika. Alurnya dideskripsikan melalui persepsi Uma di India dan Arun di Amerika. Keduanya tertekan dan terjebak dalam budaya dan situasi oleh orangtua mereka sendiri, MamaPapa, orang tua konvensional yang biasa ditemui di keluarga kelas menengah India. Ada beberapa tujuan yang ingin dicapai penulis dalam menyusun karya tulis ini. Yang pertama adalah menganalisa karakter perempuan dan laki-laki di Fasting, Feasting untuk lebih mengerti karakter-karakter tersebut lebih jauh. Yang kedua adalah mengklasifikasikan pengalaman gender yang dialami oleh para karakter dalam novel. Yang terakhir adalah untuk melihat posisi perempuan dan laki-laki yang tergambar di kedua keluarga dalam novel. Untuk menganalisa masalah, penulis menggunakan pendekatan studi gender. Studi gender dirasa tepat untuk diaplikasikan dalam topik ini karena bahasan dalam karya ini tentang laki-laki dan perempuan dan pengalaman gender mereka, bagaimana mereka mengalaminya, dan hasil dari pengalaman ini. Di dalam karya tulis ini, pendekatan difokuskan hanya pada karakter laki-laki dan perempuan juga masalah mereka yang ada pada novel. Penelitian ini merumuskan bahwa setiap karakter mengalami pengalaman gender yang berbeda. Karakter perempuan berkewajiban melakukan hal-hal yang dianggap sebagai ‘feminin’. Mereka bertanggung jawab atas rumah, mengasuh anak, dll. Sebaliknya, karakter laki-laki berkewajiban melakukan hal-hal yang dianggap sebagai ‘maskulin’. Mereka bekerja, mendapat edukasi dan karir yang bagus, dll. Aktivitas semacam itu memberikan lebih banyak keuntungan pada pihak laki-laki daripada perempuan. Pengalaman gender selalu membuat posisi perempuan berada di bawah. Lebih jauh, yang terlihat pada karakter-karakter di Fasting, Feasting, budaya memiliki tuntutan yang berbeda pada jenis kelamin. Budaya menentukan apa yang harus dicapai oleh laki-laki dan perempuan. Perbedaan budaya India dan Amerika menghasilkan perbedaan pengalaman gender. Tetapi, bentuk dan level pada keluarga India lain dengan bentuk dalam keluarga Amerika.

x CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

The word gender in the academic community has become a proper synonym for the study of women. Gender, however, does not refer simply to the study of women, but to the manner in which male and female differences are socially constructed. According to Pilcher and Whelehan in their book Fifty Keys

Concepts in Gender Studies, the concept of gender, as we now use it came into common parlance during the early 1970s. It was used as an analytical category to draw a line of demarcation between biological sex differences and the way these are used to inform behaviors and competencies, which are then assigned as either

‘masculine’ or ‘feminine’ (2004: 56). Goodman adds in her book Approaching

Literature: Literature and Gender that gender studies are concerned with the representation, rights, and status of women and men (1996: xi).

This novel, Anita Desai’s Fasting, Feasting, could be seen in many point of views. In this thesis, the writer takes the view that gender is an important area of study, and one which adds to the study of literature. This novel is written by a female and Indian writer. So, it lines a woman point of view through the sex differences and gendered experiences. Desai also wrote her works in English.

Pilcher and Whelehan in her book Fifty Keys Concepts in Gender Studies wrote

“disciplines such as English Literature, women had begun to the contest the hegemony of a ‘canon’ of great works of literature, which practically excluded women writers altogether and had nothing to say about the material and social

1 2

conditions that prohibited the emergence of ‘great’ women in this arena (2004: x)”. So, the writer thinks that Desai is one of the good writers in literature arena.

This thesis leads to the study of literature written by a woman. However, the writer does not discuss the author or her biography, the writer will discuss gendered experiences which emerge in the novel. Something is gendered when it is, in and of itself, actively engaged in social processes that produce and reproduce distinctions between women and men. ‘Gendering’ and ‘gendered’ are concepts which signify outcomes that are socially constructed and gives males advantages over females (Pilcher, 2004: 59).

Even, colors are gendered, it can be masculine or feminine. For example, pink and black, pink regarded as ‘feminine’ and black regarded as ‘masculine’.

Another example is in the job area, the carpenter is regarded as ‘masculine’ and the nurse is regarded as ‘feminine’. This social construction controls all of our behavior. We cannot avoid that we live in this society, where the men have more authority than women. However, this tradition makes limitation to the women.

We can look at the past, when Indonesian women had no education. They had to stay in the house all the time doing the domestic duties, such as cooking, giving a birth, dressing up, and doing all domestic duties. Only men could work outside, and education for women was really useless because they could not work outside the house. It means that domestic area is regarded as ‘feminine’ area and outside area is regarded as ‘masculine’ area.

Anita Desai’s Fasting, Feasting is a novel that contrast between two cultures, the Indian culture, the country of religious and venerable customs, symbolizing ‘fasting’, and the American culture, the country of magnificence and 3

luxury, symbolizing ‘feasting’. In fact, India and America are different in both culture and family system. It evokes the writer to do comparative study of two system of family over the gendered experiences that appear in the domestic life, marriage, relationship between men and women, education and career.

The thesis focuses on the role of the family in India and America and how the family affects men and women members, especially women members. The private sphere of the family is an area to which legislators and women’s groups have very little access and where any improvement in the status of women does not happen as easily as in a more public setting.

Parsons as cited in Anshen describes the modern American family was characterized by three important features: (i) its ‘openness’, that is, the absence of rules of preferential marriage resulting in the ‘infinite dispersal of lines of descent’; (ii) the centrality of the conjugal family of parents and children; and (iii) multilinearity, with no exclusive preference for either the male or the female lines

(1959: 242-46). In India, the family is the most important institution that has survived through the ages. India, like most other less industrialized, traditional, eastern societies is a collectivist society that emphasizes family integrity, family loyalty, and family unity. C. Harry Hui and Harry C. Triandis in their study

“Individualism- Collectivism: A Study of Cross-Cultural Researchers” define collectivism, which is the opposite of individualism as, "a sense of harmony, interdependence and concern for others". More specifically, collectivism is reflected in greater readiness to cooperate with family members and extended kin on decisions affecting most aspects of life, including career choice, mate selection, and marriage (1986: 244). 4

It is seen that the Indian and American families are very contrast. The

American family is more tolerance the women, but the duties in the home are still gendered. For example, although Mrs. Patton does not cook for the family, she is still under her husband’s ideal women. “Keeping freezer full”, like Mrs. Patton does is considered as domestic sphere which relates to women (or “feminine”).

There are so many roles which limit women’s action, for example in the family and parents-authority. Men and women should follow the tradition that is constructed by the society. The women do not have to get high education, they do not really need a career, and they do not have to leave home for a long time.

However, men should do that.

The novel shows not only women who are entrapped in the patriarchal system in Indian and American family. Arun, as the son, is entrapped by the roles in his male-centered family. As a man, he needs high education. Rod, as a man, also entraps with the ideal of a man in America. That is a man must look masculine and have strong body. Patriarchal culture creates the gendered practices experienced by most of the characters in the novel. Not only experienced by the women, but also the men. In this thesis, the writer wants to explore the gendered experiences which are found in the novel. Besides, by analyzing the gendered experiences in different cultures the writer can see the differences and similarities of the family system in constructing gendered experiences performed by men and women.

B. Problem Formulation

Throughout this study, the writer will be concerned with several major topics, which can be formulated into the following questions:

1. How are male and female characters characterized in Anita Desai’s

Fasting, Feasting?

2. What kinds of gendered experiences are found in Indian and American

family in the novel?

3. What are women’s position and men’s position as reflected in both

families in the novel?

C. Objective of the Study

The aim of this study is to answer the problems that have been formulated.

There are three objectives of the study. The first objective is to know the characterization of the characters in the novel. The second objective is to show the gendered experiences in the society of the novel. The last objective is to know the women’s and men’s position in the Indian and American family.

D. Definition of Term

To avoid misinterpretation and misunderstanding, it is necessary to give definition of terms used in this study.

The first is ‘gender’. Jane Pilcher and Imelda Whelehan in their book Fifty

Keys Concepts in Gender Studies explain that gender was used as an analytical category to draw a line of demarcation between biological sex differences and the 6

way these are used to inform behaviours and competencies, which are then assigned as either ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’. The purpose of affirming a sex/gender distinction was to argue that the actual physical or mental effects of biological difference had been exaggerated to maintain a patriarchal system of power and to create a consciousness among women that they were naturally better suited to ‘domestic’ roles (2004: 56).

The second is ‘gendered’. ‘Gendered’, though, is also used as a verb and therefore gives expression to action, or ‘the doing of’ gender. Davies (1996), as cited in Pilcher (2004: 59), states that the shift to using gender as a verb (‘to gender’, ‘gendered’, ‘gendering’, ‘engender’) is a reflection of changed understanding of gender as an active ongoing process, rather than something that is ready made and fixed.

The third is ‘gendered experiences’. It is the specific experiences based on gender distinction in particular society. Men and women perform an activity that regarded as ‘masculine’ for men and ‘feminine’ for women. Brannon adds in her book Gender: Psychological Perspective, these gender-related behaviors thus become part of a pattern accepted as masculine or feminine, not because of any innate reason for these differences but because they are associated with men and women’ (1996: 168).

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL REVIEW

A. Reviewed of Related Studies

The criticism to Anita Desai’s Fasting, Feasting are difficult to find because the novel itself is categorized as new novel. Most of the criticisms only summarize the content of the novel but do not analyze it critically. Nevertheless, the reviews to the book are very useful although it is not in deep analysis.

Lakshmi Chandra in her article “Interpreting Fasting, Feasting Through

Feminism” asks question, “Is Desai trying to tell readers that happiness is illusory, regardless of culture or the place in which one lives?” Then she explains that woman authors write under pressure of various kinds, the main one being the need for an audience. They cannot say anything that may antagonize male readers. At the same time, they must address issues that will appeal to their female readers.

The female writers' search for the self, for their creativity, is a struggle for self- definition. Virginia Woolf has advised woman writers to "kill the angel in the house" (the angel being the drudge who cooks, cleans and looks after all family members' needs) before they start writing. But is it always possible? Desai has not done this. Her female protagonists, at least the Indian ones, function within the parameters laid out for them by society; Mama and Uma kill all their needs to look after Papa and Arun. While her American female protagonists, though they seem to have broken out of the traditional format, do not seem happy.

7 8

Gender is one of the terms that often appear when women and men are being discussed. Putra, in his thesis, discussed gender issue as seen in the characters of Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway and Cunningham’s The Hours. He strengthens the idea of gender issue the authors reveal from the characters both male and female. The authors use their characters to portray and criticize the idea of gender issue which are shown in man and woman relationship, gender role issues, and homosexual inclination.

However, this thesis is different from the thesis done by Putra. The differences can be found in the topic of analysis and the source of literary work itself. The first difference is that the writer will specify on the application on the male and female character in Indian and American family. The second is in the source. The writer here uses the literary work by Anita Desai story Fasting,

Feasting as the corpus of the research. It differs from others because the different use of source will produce different result of analysis.

B. Review of Related Theories

1. Theory of Characterization A character in literary works is usually defined as the creation of imaginary persons that seem life-like and the characterization is the whole things that are related to the character. Stanton on An Introduction to Fiction defined character as the individuals that appear in the story that bring their human personalities such as interests, desires, emotions, moral principles, etcetera. Still according Stanton, a central character is the one who is relevant to every event in the story; usually the events cause some change either in him or in our attitude 9

toward him (1965: 17). In addition, Abrams says that characters become an extended verbal representation of human beings in a dramatic or narrative work, who are interpreted by the reader as having moral, dispositional, and emotional qualities that are expressed in what they say (the dialogue) and what they do (the action). A character may remain essentially stable, or unchanged in outlook and disposition, from beginning to end of a work. This kind of character is called a flat character. But one may undergo a radical change, either through a gradual process of motivation and development, or as the result of a crisis. This called a round character (1985: 23).

According to MJ Murphy, in his book Understanding Unseen An

Introduction to English Poetry and the English Novel for Overseas Students states that “Let us look now at some examples of a few of the ways in which an author attempts to make his characters understandable to, and come alive for, his readers

(1972: 160-173). They are:

1. Personal description

The author of the story helps the readers understand the character by describing the personal appearance of the character. It can be the description of their face, body, and even their clothes.

2. Character as seen by another

The author describes characters through the eyes and opinion of other characters. The author provides the impressions of others such as the impressions of shape and cleanliness.

3. Speech

The author gives the readers an insight into the characters in the story through what the persons say.

4. Past Lives

By letting the readers learn something about a character’s past life, the author can give the clue to events that have helped shape a person’s character. The author guides the reader to know more about past life of the person in order to get some ideas about the person’s thought, behavior, and action.

4. Conversation of others

The author can give the readers clue to a person’s character through the conversation between other people and what they say about her or him. it means what other people say in the novel will also give good basic idea in analyzing the character.

5. Reaction

The author can give the reader a clue to a person’s character by letting the readers know how that person reacts to various situations and events. Many events in the story can also give views to the reader to understand the characters.

6. Direct Comment

The author can directly describe or comment on a person’s character.

Sometimes the author gives brief and clear direct explanation on the character.

7. Thought

The author can give the readers direct knowledge of what a person is thinking about. The author guides the readers to know what the person thinks, and 11

what the person feels. Sometimes, he can also tell the readers about the mind of different characters in the story.

8. Mannerism

The author can describe a person mannerisms or habits, which may also tell the readers about specific character of different person. The habits or behaviors that a person has here are the clue in examining the character closely.

2. Theory of Gender a. Gender Differences

Gender differences are different from sex difference. Sex differentiates men and women biologically and physically, whereas gender differences are often as the result of sex differences. Linda Brannon says that “humans (and most other animals) are sexually dimorphic; that is, they have two different physical versions

– female and male” (1996: 44). Difference is “a necessary polarity between women and men and between women. The primary meaning is that women have different voice, a different psychology, and a different experience of love, works, and the family from men. Difference also means a negative category, which includes the exclusion and subordination of women” (Humm, 1990: 5-52).

Judith Butler, as cited in Leitch (2001: 2485-91), argues about sex and gender in her book Gender Trouble that the sex/gender distinction and the category of sex itself appear to presuppose a generalization of “the body” that preexist the acquisition of its sexed significance. This “body” often appears to be a passive medium that is signified by an inscription from a cultural source figured 12

as “external” to that body. Feminists have sometimes distinguished between “sex” as the anatomical difference between male and female bodies and “gender” as the meanings attached to those bodily differences in various culture.

Rubin, as cited in Glover and Kaplan (2005: xxiv), insists about the social division between the sexes, the basis upon which men and women are placed into

‘mutually exclusive categories’:

Men and women are, of course, different. But they are not as different as day and night, earth and sky, yin and yang, life and death. In fact, from the standpoint of nature, men and women are close to each other than either is to anything else – for instance, mountains, kangaroos, or coconut palms. The idea that men and women are more different from one another than either is from anything else must come from somewhere other than nature… Far from being an expression of natural differences, exclusive gender identity is the suppression of natural similarities. It requires repression: in men, of whatever is the local version of ‘feminine’ traits; in women, of the local definition of ‘masculine’ traits. The division of the sexes has the effect of repressing some of the personality characteristics of virtually everyone, men and women (1975: 179-80).

Scott as cited in Glover and Kaplan, said that ‘gender’, is simply ‘a social category imposed on a sexed body’. Locating gender within the many-sided realm of culture became the primary means of challenging the supposed inevitability of women’s subordination, part of what the historian Joan Scott, looking back over more that decade of feminist research, has called ‘a genuine historicization and deconstruction’ of masculinity and femininity that sought to minimize or reduce human biology’s capacity to underpin the spuriously ‘fixed and permanent quality’ of these terms (2005:xxiii).

b. Gender Inequalities

Rubin’s essay in Glover and Kaplan remains one of the most remarkable attempts to think through the causes of gender inequalities, constructing a systematic theoretical framework that links work, kinship and politics. Drawing upon insights from Marxist economics, psychoanalytic accounts of identity and anthropological studies of marriage and the family, Rubin shows how men typically ‘have certain rights in their female kin’, whereas ‘women do not have the same rights either to themselves or to their male kin’ and may be used as bridewealth, trophies, gifts and even ‘traded, bought, and sold’ (2005: xxv).

Michelle Rosaldo, as cited in Humm, defines inequality as ‘a state where women are universally subordinate to men, where men are dominant due to their participation in public life and their regulation of women to domestic sphere. The differential participation of men and women in public life gives rise not only to universal male authority over women but to higher valuation of male over females roles’ (1990: 103).

The inequality of the male and female can be a result of gender differences. Gender differences often create gender stereotypes about male and female. According to Miriam Lewin (1984c), as cited in Brannon’s Gender, ‘the current gender stereotypes, especially those about women, reflect beliefs that appeared during the 19th century, the Victorian era. She discussed how the

Industrial Revolution changed the lives of a majority of people in Europe, the

United States, and Canada by moving men outside the home to earn money and leaving women at home to manage households and children. This separation was 14

unprecedented in history, forcing men and women to adapt by creating new behavior patterns. As men coped with the harsh business and industrial world, women were left in the relatively unvarying and sheltered environments of their homes’ (1996: 169).

Baron and Byrne give the example on the positive and negative traits of male and female. Positive traits that are part of the masculine gender stereotype included daring, forceful, logical, confident; negative traits included aggressive, arrogant, dominant, reckless. Positive traits on the feminine gender stereotype included understanding, sociable, spontaneous, warm, gentle; negative traits included dependent, dreamy, changeable, affected (1994: 251).

However, Deaux and Lewis as cited in Baron and Byrne (1994: 249), explain stereotypes about females are more negative in content than those about males. For example, in many cultures male are assumed to possess such desirable traits as decisiveness, forcefulness, confidence, ambition and rational. In contrast, the corresponding assumption about females includes less-desirable traits such as passivity, submissiveness, emotional, and dependence. Some positive characteristics, too, are included, such as warm, nurturance, sensitivity, and understanding. Overall, however, the traits assigned to females are less desirable and less suited for many valued roles (e.g. leadership, authority) than the traits assigned to males.

Baron and Byrne continue about gender stereotypes that the effects of women stereotypes are visible in many areas of life, but perhaps they are most unsettling with respect to jobs and the world of work. In the high level jobs, it 15

appears ones closer to the content of male gender stereotypes than to the content of female gender stereotypes. Leaders, most people believe, should be bold, assertive, tough, and decisive-all traits traditionally viewed as masculine in nature.

In contrast, few persons want to expect leaders to be kind, sensitive, emotional, and nurturant (1994: 251).

Instead of being a leader, women occupy a relatively disadvantages position in most societies in certain respect. ‘They are concentrated in low paying, low-status job, and their average salary remains lower than that for males’ (Baron and Byrne, 1994: 253). Based on that, gender stereotype makes women marginalized from the society, even from assumption based on a system of knowledge. The marginalized of women not only in the public sphere, but also in domestic sphere.

c. Gendered Experiences

Pilcher & Whelehan in their book Fifty Keys Concepts in Gender Studies give some examples that describe the gendered character of the culture, institution and organization of contemporary Western societies. For example, Pilcher draws together a range of British research evidence that shows the gendered character of education and training paid work, household work and caring, love and sexuality, body-related technologies, popular media culture, crime and criminal justice, and politics. Lisa Adkins’ study is an example of an approach that focuses more on the processes of practices which make an institution recognizably ‘gendered’ in its 16

character. Adkins describes her research as concerned with the ‘gendering’ of the contemporary labour market (2004: 60).

Pilcher continues the move from thinking about gender as a noun, to focus on the way distinctions between men and women are actively reproduced through

‘gendering’ processes and ‘gendered’ practices has usefully encouraged the sort of analyses represented by Adkins’ work. However, more remains to be done on gendering, including variations by sexuality, social class, and ‘race’. While the concepts of ‘gendering’ and ‘engender(ed)’ give a clear emphasis to the ongoing, processual quality of gender relations, a more cautious use of ‘gendered’ might be advisable (Pilcher & Whelehan, 2004: 60-61).

Linda Brannon in her book Gender: Psychological Perspectives adds about gendered activities that ‘in many cultures men perform some activities more often than women, and women perform some activities more than men. Activities such as repairing clothing are associated predominantly with men and women, respectively. These gender-related behaviors thus become part of a pattern accepted as masculine or feminine, not because of any innate reason for these differences but because they are associated with men and women’ (1996: 168).

3. Review on the Family a. Review on the Indian Family

The family is the most basic and fundamental form of organisation and structuring of social life. Minna Saavala in her book Fertility and Familial Power 17

Relations: Procreation in South India wrote about the system of the family of

India :

In India the extended or joint family, a multigenerational family system in which parents and their children’s families live under the same roof, has been the norm for a long time. The tradition of taking care of the older in the family, and 18 lack of a functioning social security net to some extent explain the acceptance of the joint family norm in Indian society. The joint family as an institution is more than anything a collective way of working together in an efficient way, and little attention to family members as separate individuals is noted. Moreover, a joint family draws on the economic advantages of a collective undertaking. The benefits are in the form of cost efficiency from a collective ownership and use of necessities. The joint family aims to the better for the whole unit, many times at the expense of women due to the patriarchal structures (2001: 139).

In traditional societies the family is extended and multifunctional, and is involved in most of the decisions concerning a family member. Indian society is fundamentally patriarchal in that sense that women are inferior to men by tradition, examples of this are so-called patrilinear structures, which mean that lineage, and heritage takes place through the male line. Following the same pattern is the patrilocal system which automatically place married couples to live in the household of the husband’s family (Saavala, 2001: 104). Accordingly, in this patriarchal structure, the senior male heads the family. All decisions run through the patriarch. Decisions concern aspects such as distribution of money, household shores, work, education, mobility, etc. Furthermore, the public sphere is reserved for men only, thus the private sphere including domestic life is kept for women (Saavala, 2001: 134).

Most of Indian family system always place women in subordinate position below men. Bidyut Mohanty in his study “Women and Family in India and

China” said that the family and society at large consider women as second class 18

citizens. The rituals relating to birth and marriage reflect a son-preference. A related phenomenon of son-preference in the modern context is the amniocentesis test to abort the female feolus. This unfortunately is more prevalent in urban India.

The sex selective test has increased the male-female ratio between 1981 and 1991 in a significant manner (Murthi, Guio & Dreze, 1997). Saavala adds ‘everywhere in India families strive to have at least one son, in some cases families will try to maximise the number of sons and minimizing the number of daughters. Most

Indians would agree upon the “need” of daughter in a family but that a son is crucial for the family’s survival and honour. Generally speaking, the birth of a son is celebrated more than the birth of a baby girl, sons are granted higher prestige and thus preferred to daughters (2001: 168)’.

Additionally, subordinate position of women in Indian family is the dowry system. Still in Bidyut Mohanty, ‘the prevalence of dowry has increased a great deal and has spread to the low caste groups which earlier practised bride price. So much so that the ideal Kerala practice of husbands staying in wives houses has changed to demanding dowry. This phenomenon of taking dowry has increased considerably after the young men started going to Gulf countries and needed a lot of money to buy tickets and other things. Another important point with regard to marriage practices is that the majority of the marriages are arranged by parents.

Love marriages are not encouraged even in urban areas though acute violence against women in recent years compel the parents not to consider arranged marriages particularly in the metropolitan cities like Delhi and Bombay etc. The assumption that the urban populations are more modern in outlook and hence the 19

traditional bias would get reduced there is proved wrong’ (essay of “Women and

Family in India and China” accesed on April, 4 2008). Chandra Talpade Mohanty adds, ‘dowry is an example of this as it symbolises male dominance in a sense that men are the ultimate decision makers and overall responsible for economic routines concerning marriage in combination with the fact that women are seen as a commodity on which a price can be set’ (2004: 28).

b. Review on the American Family

America has different family system by the Indian family. Parsons, as cited in Anshen, argues about American family, that ‘the contemporary American family is not simply the natural way to live but constitutes a highly exceptional mode of the patterning of relationships in this area’ (1959: 241-42). As Parsons describes it, the modern American family was characterized by three important features: (i) its ‘openness’, that is, the absence of rules of preferential marriage resulting in the ‘infinite dispersal of lines of descent’; (ii) the centrality of the conjugal family of parents and children; and (iii) multilinearity, with no exclusive preference for either the male or the female lines (1959: 242-46).

Coontz and Ofstedal in their essay “United States-Childbearing” wrote

‘the first family system in America was that of the native peoples. This was actually a kinship system rather than a family system, for despite the wide variety of marital, sexual, and genealogical customs found in several hundred different cultures, most early Native-American groups subsumed the nuclear family and even the lineage in a much larger network of kin and marital alliances. Kinship 20

rules regulated an individual's place in the overall production and distribution of goods, services, knowledge, and justice. Exogamy, the requirement that a person marry out of his or her natal group into a different clan or section, made each individual a member of intersecting kin groups, with special obligations and rights toward each category of relatives (Essay of ‘United States-Childbearing’ accesed on September 22, 2008)’.

By the late nineteenth century, both external and internal challenges to the domestic family and the concept of separate spheres had appeared. Victorian sexual mores clashed with the growing use of birth control and abortion, as well as with the opportunities for nonmarital sex associated with increased urbanization and changing work patterns for youths. Prostitution, once a safety valve for Victorian marriage, became a highly visible big business. A women's rights movement combined campaigns for seemingly conventional goals such as social purity and temperance with attacks on the double standard and demands for expanded legal rights for women. Debates and conflicts over sexuality became increasingly public (Essay of ‘United States-Childbearing’ accesed on September

22, 2008).

Women in America seem like they want to do more outside the house. The resulting stereotype that "a woman's place is in the home" has largely determined the ways in which women have expressed themselves. Coontz and Ofstedal in their essay “United States-Childbearing” wrote about women, family, and work,

‘the gradual separation of home and work, market production, and household 21

reproduction in the early nineteenth century, along with the emergence of newly specialized occupations, paved the way for a changing relationship between family activities and economic production, a growing distinction between private and public life, and a new conception of male and female roles that stressed their complementary but sharply divided responsibilities and capacities. This has become known as the doctrine of separate spheres’ (Essay of ‘United States-

Childbearing’ accesed on September 22, 2008). Women in this century wanted to have a family and a career, but it became other problems to women. Coontz and

Ofstedal add, ‘By the late nineteenth century, both external and internal challenges to the domestic family and the concept of separate spheres had appeared’ (Essay of ‘United States-Childbearing’ accesed on September 22,

2008).

The nineteenth-century American woman was expected to find her strength and meaning of self in her submissive state and in her dedication to home and family. However, as a result of modernization, industrialization, and the accompanying changes in society, women became increasingly, though gradually, more independent--they asserted themselves in the expanding industrial sector; they were drawn into social, political, religious, and literary activities, speaking out on relevant issues of the day. Consequently, American women became a more visible segment of society, no longer considered merely as an adornment for males or solely relegated to kitchens and parlors of their homes (essay of “The

American Woman of the Early Nineteenth Century” accessed on April, 4 2008).

C. Theoretical Framework

The writer tries to apply the theories above to answer the problem that are formulated in problem formulation. First, the writer wants to know all the male and female characters deeper so that the writer can see the personality of the each character by using the theories of characterization. By analyzing each character the writer hopes to find characters in their gendered experiences of the society in the novel.

The theories of gender are essential theories to answer the second and the third question in the problem formulation. The writer uses the theory to know the gendered experiences, gender differences and gender inequalities in the society of the novel and the action of the characters in each family, Indian and American family. In answering the second problem, to know the kind of gendered experiences in Indian and American family, the writer applies the gendered experiences theory that analyze the experiences of each person which is caused by gender differences.

In analyzing the third problem to show men’s and women’s position in

Indian and American family, the writer uses the theory of gender inequalities and gender differences. In writer opinions, those theories are reliable to answer the third problem. By using this theory, the writer will be able to explore what men’s and women’s position is.

The writer also uses the statements and sentences in the novel to convey the description of all the characters in the novel, to know about the aspects of gendered experiences through the male and female characters in the novel. CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

A. Object of the Study

The object of the study in this thesis is Fasting, Feasting, a novel written by Anita Desai in 1999. This novel is one of Anita Desai’s famous works.

Fasting, Feasting is Desai’s eleventh novel. The first edition of this novel was published in England in 1999 by Quality Paperbacks Direct and it consists of 240 pages. This study uses the first edition of the book.

Desai’s Fasting, Feasting is a novel which presents a cultural comparison of two cultures and two siblings. The story of the novel is presented by a third point of view narrator. The narrator described the events that happened in the families in the novel.

In this study, the writer analyzes the gendered experience of the characters in Indian and American family. Fasting, Feasting tells about the daily life of

Uma’s family and the Pattons. Since Uma was a child, she had already got unfair treatments from MamaPapa (refers to the word ‘parents’). As the older daughter and also a woman, she is not allowed going to school. After Mama gave a male baby, Uma had to look for him. Mama always repeats the threateningly to the baby as ‘proper attention’.

As a son, Arun has responsibility for the shake of his family. In his family, mlae-centered family system, a man must be educated. A man is considered to work outside the home, to earn money. The home or domestic sphere is only for women. So, MamaPapa send him to America to study. In America, he lives with

23 24

the Pattons. He observes that his family and the Pattons are very different. The women in Pattons family have right to do anything. They do not entrap like in

Arun’s family.

Fasting, Feasting is merely comparison of cultures, India and America, and also sexes, male and female. In this novel, Desai tries to show that male and female are very different, even in the magnificent country like America where the women more visible in the public area since the women’s movement. There is a gap between men and women. It cannot be separated from the context of patriarchal society in the novel.

B. Approach of the Study

In this study, the writer analyzes the novel using gender study as an approach. Goodman’s Approaching Literature and Gender wrote that gender as an approach is a thematic approach. A few themes which can be studied using gender approach are motherhood, domestic responsibility, conflicts in women’s lives, power relationship between the sexes, and conflicts between private and public roles and responsibility (1996: xiii). In addition, this approach questions the whole way we make appeals to identity. The concept of gender as performance suggests a level of free play with gender categories that we enter into socially. The result is that individuals have the potential to create ‘gender trouble’ and challenge the way discourse establishes and reinforce certain meanings and

‘institutions’, such as that of ‘compulsory heterosexuality’ (Pilcher & Whelehan,

2004: 58).

The writer thinks that gender study is the most suitable approach to use.

Gender approach is applied because this study focuses on the gendered experiences of the characters in the novel. Gender is not only talk about women, but also men. Men and Women have problems when facing the patriarchal world because of their sexuality. Women are regarded as domestic sphere and men are regarded as public sphere. However, in some countries, women can also perform in public sphere. By analyzing the gendered experiences with gender approach we will know the gendered experiences that make women are in different position with the men.

C. Method of the Study

In this study, library study is carried out as the method of the study. In order to conduct the research, there were two kinds of sources, namely primary source and secondary sources. The primary source was taken from the novel itself,

Fasting, Feasting written by Anita Desai. The secondary sources were taken from the biography of the author, criticism of the novel, some review of the novel, and many other sources related to the study. In other words, those secondary sources were the observations of authorities in the library field. The secondary sources were used to help strengthen this thesis.

There were three major steps that the writer has done in analyzing the study. The first step, the writer collected the supporting data which described about the novel both in library and internet. The data consist of books and articles.

Second step was reading the data. The purpose of this step was to classify the data

which supported the analysis of the novel. The final step was writing the analysis using the gender point of view. In this step the writer wrote the analysis that the writer had done in analyzing the work.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS

The aim of this chapter is to answer the problems formulated previously, by referring to the approach and using the theories. For that purpose, firstly the writer tries to analyze the characters and characterizations. Secondly, the writer tries to give the evidences of gendered experiences that have experienced by the characters. The last, the writer tries to find the novel’s attitude toward women’s position in Indian and American society.

The characters are divided into female and male characters in order to help the readers getting better understanding with the main problem discussed in this study, which is analyzed in the next part that is characters with their gendered experiences. The characteristics of the characters are analyzed from their thought, their behavior, their action and the way the other characters describe them. It is believed that all of the characteristics of the characters are carefully presented and described to present the criticism of gendered experienced.

A. Character and Characterization

This part discusses the characters involved in the novel Fasting, Feasting.

The discussion of characters and characterization is divided into two parts, female and male characters, to make it easier to discuss the next part, namely the discussion on the characters’ gendered experiences. Since the writer analyzes the family, all these characters are important, because family has members and each

27 28

member has their own gendered experiences that contribute to their position in the family. Their activities as seen in their behavior, speech, reaction, thought, and mannerism, support the gendering processes to gendered practices. To analyze the characters the writer uses the theory of character and characterization that has been discussed in the theoretical review.

1. Female Characters a. Uma

Uma is the central character of the story since, in accordance with Stanton’s definition of central character, she is the character who is relevant to almost every event in the story, and the events in the story cause some changes in her (1965:

17-18). She appears as the central character in the first part (the first thirteen chapters) of the story.

Uma is characterized as a person who is inferior both physically and mentally. Physically, she is plain and not attractive, with “her gray hair frazzled” and “myopic eyes” (Desai, 1999: 5), so she hardly gets a husband, which upsets and embarrasses her parents. She suffers from eyes problem despite her thick glasses. However, her family hardly cares about it and blames her instead.

‘Your eyes are paining – after just writing one letter? Oof,’ Papa lets her know what he thinks of such weakness. Uma is indignant. All the indignation of the morning has mounted and now reaches its climax. ‘I have told you many times my eyes hurt,’ she cries (Desai, 1999: 127).

Although her optician has already suggested that Uma have her eyes examined by a specialist in Bombay, and although her sister Aruna lives in Bombay, nobody in

Uma’s family is willing to take Uma to get treatment for her eyes problem. 29

‘A specialist – in Bombay!’ Aruna gave a shriek. ‘Do you know what that would cost? She seemed so horrified by the idea that Uma felt bound to reassure her and say she was sure Dr Tandon was really good enough. ‘Of course he is!’ Aruna exclaimed (Desai, 1999: 110).

Uma is not intelligent, either. She loves going to the convent school, but she always fails every subject.

The nuns clucked and shook their heads and sent for Mama, wrote notes to Papa, and every year, after the exams, said sorrowfully that they would have to hold her back – she had managed to fail every single test: in English, Hindi, history, geography, arithmetic, drawing and even domestic science! (Desai, 1999: 21).

Her poor grades give her parents a reason to take her out of school to look after her newborn brother, Arun. Outside the academic field, she is slow as well. It takes a long time for her to process an information, understand an instruction, or respond to an enquiry, so people often get impatient with her. For example, when writing a letter to Arun dictated by her father, she ends up getting scolded by both her father and mother for being slow:

‘Wait, wait,’ cries Uma, frantically trying to get the pen to catch up with the words. ‘Oof, you are so slow,’ he complains. ‘She is slow,’ Mama agrees, quite unnecessarily (Desai, 1999: 124-125).

It is hard enough for her to follow a dictation, even harder for her to articulate her thought, so she cannot get her point across.

Psychologically, Uma is very problematic. Firstly, she is awkward, clumsy, and nervous. For instance, when she is meeting the prospective husband and his mother, she acts very awkwardly and nervously.

All through that painful afternoon, she sat trying to tear it off her finger. When her mother threw her a warning look from behind the tea tray, she stopped for a few minutes, then started again, desperately (Desai, 1999: 76).

Uma is an impulsive person. When she becomes obsessed with an idea, she decides something spontaneously without thinking of the consequences. She does not think about the aspects that support her school, such as economic and her parents. For example, after the birth of her brother Arun, her parents take her out of school so she can take care of him. Uma desperately wants to continue going to school, so she runs away from home, goes to her convent school and tries begging her headmaster to let her stay (Desai, 1999: 29).

On the other hand, she is also easily dominated and scared. She is not only afraid of strangers, but also of her parents. When her parents manage to intimidate her, she gives up all her wishes, although she will get very upset. For example, when she is already mature, she loves reading poetry and finds peace of mind when reading poetry. Her mother scolds her angrily because she reads poetry, then her mother tells her to serve coffee and biscuits for Papa. Actually, it is her mother’s demand that is unreasonable, but Uma is too intimidated to answer back or defend herself. She quits reading, then serves coffee, but she mutters bits of the poetry angrily, feeling depressed.

She sloshes some milk into the coffee. ‘Rosebuds. Wild waltz. Passionately,’ she screams at them silently. She tosses in sugar. ‘Madly. Vows. Fulfil,’ her silence roars at them. She clatters a spoon around the cup, spilling some into the saucer, and thrusts it at Papa. ‘Here,’ her eyes flash through her spectacles, ‘this, this is what I know. And you, you don’t’ (Desai, 1999: 137).

Later, when she is already an adult, Dr. Dutt, the local doctor, offers her a job as a nurse. Her parents forbid her to take the job, but Uma desperately wants the job. Uma cannot do anything, except her parents ask her. She always fails to achieve her desire. 31

b. Aruna

Aruna is Uma’s sister, who is three years younger than Uma (Desai, 1999:

36). Although she is younger than Uma, she is far more superior than Uma both physically and intellectually. She is beautiful and attractive, even at the age of thirteen.

… There was already something about the way she tossed her head when she saw a man looking at her, with a sidelong look of both scorn and laughter, and the way her foot tapped and her legs changed position, that might have alerted the family to what it could expect (Desai, 1999: 79).

Furthermore, she loves dressing up and is good at enhancing her beauty with clothing, jewelry, haircut, and so on. She “fluttered about in flowered silk” wearing “little shiny plastic clips and clasps and flowers that she picked from the dusty shrubs and hedges” (Desai, 1999: 80). She starts going to the cinema with girl friends from school as well as a group of teenage boys.

Aruna is intelligent, both in the academic and practical field. At school, she always gets good grades. After Uma shows her report card and their parents get angry for her bad grades, Aruna aptly chooses the right moment to show her report card and collect her parents’ praise (Desai, 1999: 87). With her intelligence and her physical attractiveness, she knows how to attract men and she is good at such strategies, even when she is still in her early teens. While Uma remains unable to find a husband, Aruna already receives so many marriage proposals.

Here was Aruna visibly ripening on the branch, asking to be plucked: no one had to teach her how to make samosas or help her to dress for an occasion. Instinctively, she knew. The pale, pale pink sari, the slender chain of seed pearls, the fresh flowers, the demure downcast turn of the eyes, the little foot in the red slipper thrusting out suddenly like a tongue, and the laughter low and sly (Desai, 1999: 85).

Another strategy of her attractiveness, Aruna beautifies herself. She puts make-up on her face carefully. When Uma walks into her room, she finds Aruna sitting in front of the mirror and applying her make-up. Then, Aruna shows her how to apply the make-up (Desai, 1999: 104).

Aruna is also characterized as a person with a strong determination. She is described as having a “steely determination”:

Aruna was pretty too, and in her case it was also evident quite early that her future would be bright, but there was a sharp edge to her prettiness, a harsh edge given to it by a kind of steely determination, a dogged ambitiousness, that seemed to be born of a desperation (Desai, 1999: 67).

When she wants something, she will get the best and get it exactly the way she wants it. For example, when she is getting married, she has a good strategy and manages to find the best choice from all the prospective husbands.

As was to be expected, she took her time, showed a reluctance to decide, played choosy, but soon enough made the wisest, most expedient choice – the handsomest, the richest, the most exciting of the suitors who presented themselves (Desai, 1999: 100).

She gets the “fantastic” life that she wanted, living in Bombay, in a flat facing the beach, which she says is “like a dream” (Desai, 1999: 103). She has two chidren,

Aisha and Dinesh. She likes dressing up her daughter, “curling her hair and designing her frocks” so that Aisha “look[s] like a doll” (Desai, 1999: 105).

However, her determination is very strong to the point of perfectionism.

Related to her perfectionism, she always manages to find flaws in people, for example when Uma is looking for a husband. When they are looking at the many photographs of prospective husbands, Aruna always manages to find something wrong in each man. 33

It is her perfectionism that ends up making her stressed, because she cannot tolerate fault, however small it is. Despite her supposedly happy life, she complains about her husband’s clothes, the tablecloth and paint in her parents’ house, Mama’s activity of washing her hair in the morning, the cooking, Arun’s sloppy appearance, the driver’s uniform, to name just a few. Even small things can drive her to tears.

Seeing Aruna vexed to the point of tears because the cook’s pudding had sunk and spread instead of remaining upright and solid, or because Arvind had come to dinner in his bedroom slippers, or Papa was wearing a t-shirt with a hole under one arm, Uma felt pity for her: was this the realm of ease and comfort for which Aruna had always pined and that some might say she had attained? Certainly it brought her no pleasure: there was always a crease of discontent between her eyebrows and an agitation that made her eyelids flutter, disturbing Uma who noticed it (Desai, 1999: 109).

Not only Uma, but Mama also notices Aruna’s stress due to her own perfectionism. However, since her criticisms are directed to everyone, including her own husband, Mama tolerates her behavior (Desai, 1999: 109). c. Mama

Mama is Uma, Aruna, and Arun’s mother. She comes from a merchant family and gets married at the age of sixteen (Desai, 1999: 5). She is uneducated; she is never going to school (Desai, 1999: 18). She only socializes with the neighbors and relatives, viewing foreigners like Mrs. O’Henry with suspicion, as can be seen in her speech:

‘These Christian missionaries – they really know how to entice simple people, and you don’t understand they want something from you in return’ (Desai, 1999: 114).

She never reads books or watches movies, either (Desai, 1999: 31). Her favorite pastime is gossiping; she “enjoyed visitors, especially relatives with whom she 34

could gossip about all the branches of the family and who put her in touch with them…” (Desai, 1999: 39). With little education, limited friends and media intake, no wonder that her scope of knowledge is limited.

Mama is very conventional both in her behavior and in her way of thinking, which is shown through her speech, past life, reaction, and mannerism. She is prejudiced and cannot accept new idea. For example, upon hearing the rumors about Anamika being abused by her mother-in-law, she said that it would be better to endure the violence rather than go back home, for fear of what people would say or think. When Uma and Aruna suggest the opposite, she scolds her children for having “modern ideas”:

‘Don’t talk like that,’ Mama scolded them. ‘I don’t want to hear all these modern ideas. Is it what you learnt from the nuns at the convent?’ She glared at Uma (Desai, 1999: 71).

When gossiping about “love marriage”, or marriage based on love instead of through parental arrangement, with her neighbors, she “lifted her upper lip a bit, to convey her scorn” (Desai, 1999: 31). Since she is uneducated herself, she places very low priority on education. She thinks that going to school is useless and it is better for her daughters to marry than study.

‘All this convent education – what good does it do? Better to marry you off than let you go to that place’ (Desai, 1999: 71).

Mama herself practices whatever is expected from someone in her position without questioning. As a housewife, she is responsible for all domestic chores, from laundry to cooking. Her day is spent for looking after her husband, packing his tennis kit and sending it to his office (Desai, 1999: 8), organizing meals and teas with the cook, accompanying Papa in social occasions. 35

As a wife, she considers it her duty to bear and raise children, especially a son. She is really concerned to her son, Arun. She gives him the best food. She does not let the servants take care of him. She feels proud because she has fulfilled her duty, that is to give her husband a son.

More than ever now, she was Papa’s helpmeet, his consort. He had not only made her his wife, he had made her the mother of his son. What honour, what status. Mama’s chin lifted a little into the air, she looked around her to make sure everyone saw and noticed. She might have been wearing a medal (Desai, 1999: 31).

Mama is also afraid of Papa. When she wants to play a game of cards with the neighbors in the morning, she has to do it in secret because Papa disapproves of gambling (Desai, 1999: 6-7). Mama is so afraid to confront Papa with the truth that she is gambling. In her mind, Papa will be angry with her because she does not obey her husband’s rule.

As a parent, she tries with all her might to find a husband for Uma, her eldest child. She sends letters everywhere, asks relatives and neighbors, and invites prospective families. She would do anything in order to find a husband for

Uma, even tricking the prospective husband’s family. She tells Uma to claim to have cooked the dishes she has actually cooked herself (Desai, 1999: 75). d. Anamika

Anamika is Uma, Aruna and Arun’s cousin from their father’s side. She is two years older than Uma. She is characterized as a model of perfection in every way. Her perfection is shown through personal description by the author, other characters’ comments, past life experience, and reaction to various events. She is frequently described as “the blessed one” (Desai, 1999: 66). No wonder that she 36

becomes “the first fruit to be picked” (Desai, 1999: 66) or in other words, becomes the first one to get married among her cousins of the same age.

Physically, she is very beautiful and attractive, as shown in the author’s description of her as “a lotus, with her deep, creamy, still beauty” or “a pearl, smooth and luminous” (Desai, 1999: 68), and other characters’ conversation about her:

Even the adults looked on Anamika’s glossy head, her thick dark braids and her big dreamy eyes, and smiled, sometimes sadly as if thinking how their own daughters and daughters-in-law could never measure up to this blessed one (Desai, 1999: 68).

However, as described directly by the author, it is not “just a matter of her beauty” (Desai, 1999: 67); people consider that her mannerism and attitude make her being perfect. She is obedient to her parents and displays characteristics appreciated by her society, as described by the author.

She was simply lovely as a flower is lovely, soft, petal-skinned, bumblebee- eyed, pink-lipped, always on the verge of bubbling dove-like laughter, loving smiles, and with a good nature like a radiance about her (Desai, 1999: 67).

Her good attitude is also shown through her mannerism. She becomes the role model for her cousins, who are of the same age as her.

Always it was Anamika who prevented them from going too far, not by words or a look, but simply by her example which was cool, poised, mannerly and graceful. Wherever Anamika was, there was moderation, good sense and calm (Desai, 1999: 68).

Lastly, her humble attitude is shown through her reaction. As a child, when she was brought for a family visit, there would be “fierce competition between Uma and Aruna … for Anamika’s attention” (Desai, 1999: 67). Uma would try to take 37

Anamika to one direction, and Aruna would try to take Anamika to another direction. Anamika manages to stay humble and passive.

Somehow Anamika managed to please them both, smile at all their suggestions, accept them with an equal readiness (Desai, 1999: 67).

She is also very intelligent, as shown through her past life. She does very well in her study and even wins a scholarship to Oxford, but her family do not allow her to go, since she is at the age of marriage (Desai, 1999: 68).

Later, when she is already married and lives in her husband’s family’s house, she never complains of her husband’s family’s cruel treatment of her.

Anamika had been beaten, Anamika was beaten regularly by her mother-in- law while her husband stood by and approved – or, at least, did not object. Anamika spent her entire time in the kitchen, cooking for his family which was large so that meals were eaten in shifts – first the men, then the children, finally the women. … When Anamika was not scrubbing or cooking, she was in her mother-in-law’s room, either massaging that lady’s feet or folding and tidying her clothes (Desai, 1999: 70-71).

If she complains or left her husband’s home, she will create a scandal, which is unacceptable in her society. She accepts the cruel treatment until her death, which is either a suicide or a murder by her mother-in-law. Her mother-in-law claims that it is suicide, but there is also a rumor saying it is murder. e. Mrs. Patton

Mrs. Patton is the sister of Mrs. O’Henry, the wife of the local Baptist missionary, who was also Vice-Principal of the school that Arun attended. She lives in the suburb of Massachusetts, near the library which Arun works during the summer holiday. Through Mr. and Mrs. O’Henry’s recommendation via

Arun’s family, Arun stays at the Pattons’ house during the summer holiday because the university dormitory cannot be used. 38

Mrs. Patton is married with two adolescent children, Rod and Melanie. As a mother and wife, she only cares about her family to a limited degree, which is shown through her own speech, mannerism, and reactions. For instance, she no longer cooks meals for her family all the time. When her husband or children are hungry, they just take some food from the freezer or make their own sandwich

(Desai, 1999: 197). She often does not know what her children are doing. She is not aware that her daughter Melanie is suffering from bulimia.

However, she is still under the influence of her family, especially her husband. She has always wanted to be a vegetarian, she thinks that being vegetarian is wonderful (Desai, 1999: 179). However, she could never do it because of her husband. After admitting to her husband that she is a vegetarian, her husband ignores her and ridicules vegetarianism as a stupid thing. Mrs. Patton only “coos consolingly,” saying “Yes, dear” (Desai, 1999: 167), to soothe him.

She is a bit naive, which is shown through her speech and mannerism. For one thing, she easily gets very excited about new things, from vegetarianism, shopping, sunbathing, to traditional medicine. When she is excited about something, she often becomes self-centered; she only cares about whatever is in her mind without paying attention to people around her. For instance, she shows a lot of enthusiasm about Arun’s culture, without realizing that Arun himself is not enthusiastic at all.

My sister’s written and told me how different your food is from ours. She’s lived there – oh, twenty years or more, and writes me these amazing letters. My, I’m amazed by what she tells me, I am. India – gee! (Desai, 1999: 177).

When she is interested in sunbathing, she invites the others to do sunbathing.

However, those interests come and go quickly. When she has lost interest, she will totally abandon that interest.

Mrs. Patton no longer lies in the yard, sunbathing. The days are warm and still, with a silvery sheen, but she seems to have taken an aversion to the light, even to the outdoors. She no longer spends much time in the kitchen either. She has never offered to take Arun shopping, although the kitchen is drastically depleted, only remains left at the bottoms of jars and bottles (Desai, 1999: 227).

Sometimes she can become sensitive due to her physical appearance. For example when the clerk at the supermarket assumes that she is pregnant. She says it does not matter, but she starts to wonder about her physical appearance and becomes upset.

Mrs. Patton is driving too fast. The car is veering in and out of the traffic dangerously. ‘I mean, do I look pregnant?’ her voice rises in anxiety. ‘I’m not fat, am I, Ahroon?’ (Desai, 1999: 210).

She vents her anger by driving fast until she nearly crashes into the bumper of a pick-up van and Arun reminds her to slow down. f. Melanie Patton

Melanie is the only daughter of the Pattons. She is still a teenager. Her age is not mentioned, but Mrs. Patton describes her two children as “two youngsters – just about [Arun’s] age” (Desai, 1999: 175).

Melanie has a bad lifestyle, which is described through her mannerism or habits. She only eats snacks like candies, chocolates, and peanuts, and never does anything except watching television, “sturdily eating her way through it during a commercial break” (Desai, 1999: 187). She also suffers from bulimia, a psychological condition in which she frequently makes herself vomit on purpose. 40

Melanie kneels there at the toilet bowl, in white pajamas that are printed all over with lipstick marks in the shape of lips, and she is retching heartily into it (Desai, 1999: 189).

Because of her lifestyle, she is physically unhealthy, which can be seen in the personal description of her by the author, such as:

Her face is beaded with perspiration, and white as the flesh of a fish fillet in the supermarket. The dark rings under her eyes make her resemble the raccoon at the garbage can – but frighteningly, not comically (Desai, 1999: 189).

Melanie’s face across the table looks like blotting paper that has soaked up as much water as it can hold: it is blotchy and discoloured; it sags (Desai, 1999: 206).

Her bad physical state is also described by other characters, namely her parents.

‘Daddy thinks you ought to go outdoors and play games, Melanie,’ Mrs Patton says as she cooks eggs. ‘You have such a bad colour. You’re not sick, are you, dear?’ (Desai, 1999: 206).

Melanie has a rude and unfriendly attitude, which is shown through her mannerism, such as when Arun passes by her while she is watching television:

She turns her pale face towards him and even in the darkness he can read its expression: Get out, it says, and he does (Desai, 1999: 188).

Besides her behavior, Melanie’s rudeness can also be seen in her speech. When she realizes that Arun sees her vomiting in the toilet, she tells Arun to “go away” and “get lost” (Desai, 1999: 189). When Arun is cooking Indian food, she exclaims “yuck!” (Desai, 1999: 194) and talks about the food rudely, even using the rude word “shit”.

‘Eeeuuuh, you call that food?’ Melanie asks furiously, as if outraged by the very idea. ‘I call that shit!’ She slams her book bag onto a chair and walks out (Desai, 1999: 194).

When Arun talks to her, she responds in an unfriendly way, blaming Arun for cooking Indian food so that she has to eat candy. Again, she uses rude language.

She opens her mouth wide so he can see the sticky brown stuff of the candy adhering to her square teeth and stretching webs across her tongue. ‘I’m so hungry I’ve got to eat this shitty candy,’ she hisses. ‘I can’t eat that goo you and Mom cook down there’ (Desai, 1999: 195).

In fact, both her mother and her brother know that Melanie has been eating snacks only even before Arun comes. Mrs. Patton says, “Cookies and candy bars and peanuts is all you ever will eat” (Desai, 1999: 194), while her brother Rod says:

‘That kid,’ he grunts at last, ‘just poisons herself. All that candy she eats. Won’t eat a thing but candy. Anybody’d be sick.’ He gives a snort that is both derisive and amused. ‘Wants to turn herself into a slim chick. Ha!’ (Desai, 1999: 204).

Actually, Melanie tries to get attention from people around her by behaving rudely, which can be seen through her speech and mannerism discussed above.

2. Male characters a. Arun

While Uma is the central character of this story, Arun can be considered as the second central character, since the second part of the story revolves around

Arun’s life in the United States.

Arun is the youngest child in the family, and the only son. He has two elder sisters, Uma and Aruna. He is the son that his parents have been waiting for years, so his parents have really high hopes on him. Since he was born, he has been treated with special attention, almost spoiled. As a baby, he was looked after by 42

Mama herself instead of ayah (the babysitter), although his sisters Uma and Aruna were looked after by ayah as babies.

‘You know we can’t leave the baby to the servant,’ she said severely. ‘He needs proper attention.’ When Uma pointed out that ayah had looked after her and Aruna as babies, Mama’s expression made it clear it was quite a different matter now, and she repeated threateningly: ‘Proper attention’ (Desai, 1999: 30).

Arun is intelligent, he receives good and intensive education. Because he is the only boy in the family, his father is highly concerned about his education.

According to Uma’s impression, Arun’s childhood can be summed up in one word, “education” (Desai, 1999: 118).

If there was one thing Papa insisted on in the realm of home and family, then it was education for his son: the best, the most, the highest (Desai, 1999: 118).

Not only does he go to good schools, but he also studies for hours after school, under the guidance of private tutors called to his home.

Tutors came in a regular sequence, an hour allotted to each, for tuition in maths, in physics, in chemistry, in Hindi, in English composition – in practically every subject he had already dealt with during the hours at school (Desai, 1999: 118).

He is made to study so hard everyday until he becomes so tired.

Arun would rise creakily to his feet, scrabble together his books and notes in a great pile, and shuffle off to his room with the gait of a broken old man. Throwing them down in a series of dull thuds, he would himself collapse onto his bed, limply put out a hand to lift a comic book from a stack of Supermans and Captain Marvels, and disappear under it (Desai, 1999: 119).

His efforts are not in vain, though. After high school, he won a scholarship to a university in the United States. 43

In physical activities, Arun differs from his family in two ways. Unlike his father and uncle, Arun does not like sports. After his tutorial session everyday, his father tells him to play cricket or badminton, but Arun never does it.

Papa would shout, ‘Son! Bring your badminton racquet out – or your cricket bat. You must have come exercise – healthy mind, healthy body –’ but Arun would not stir, and Mama would make a little clucking sound of sympathy and prevent Papa from dragging him out bodily (Desai, 1999: 119).

Even after he lives in the United States as a university student, he still does not like sport. When Rod Patton, the son of the family with whom he lives during the summer holiday, asks him to go jogging together, he refuses because he feels he could not “compete with or even keep up with this gladiatorial species of northern power” (Desai, 1999: 191). Indeed, since he was a child, Arun is physically weak and often sick. As a child, he has suffered from “mumps, measles, chicken pox, bronchitis, malaria, flu, asthma, nosebleeds, and more” (Desai, 1999: 33).

Since a young age, Arun tends to be quiet and introverted. Unlike most other children, his favorite activity as a child was reading comic books alone in his room. When there are problems in the household, such as the problem of

Uma’s marriage, Arun goes to his room and reads alone, “hiding in his room under a blanket of comic books” (Desai, 1999: 95).

His shyness remains and he grows to be a very individualistic person. In university, he closes himself from any friendship. He does not want to be friends with strangers; he does not want to be friends with other students in the dormitory; he does not even want to form any friendship with fellow Indian students. When 44

the group of Indian students, who often gather to cook Indian food or watch

Indian movies, invite him to their activities, he refuses their invitation. b. Papa

Papa is Uma, Aruna, and Arun’s father and the head of the family. Papa is the son of a tax inspector. According to his own words, his childhood life is not particularly nice.

‘We did not have electricity when we were children. If we wanted to study, we were sent out to sit under the streetlight without books. During the examination, there would be a circle of students sitting and reciting their lessons aloud’ (Desai, 1999: 6).

However, his father gave him “the best education available” (Desai, 1999: 5); he had good achievement at school as well as at sports, and later he has a successful career in law.

Papa is a calculating man. He considers the advantages and disadvantages thoroughly in all matters, including in marriage. Upon realizing Aruna’s attractiveness, he is not proud of her daughter or worried about her safety; instead, he is happy because it means Aruna has a bright prospect for a good marriage, financially and socially.

…Papa humped and hawed and scowled but Uma could see it was a façade and concealed a pleasure he would not allow himself to express. Sometimes there was something in his look that he did not quite control and gave him away … (Desai, 1999: 85).

Similarly, after their family are tricked into marrying Uma with a married man for the dowry, Papa is only concerned about the financial loss and not concerned about Uma’s condition. Uma has gone through the marriage ceremony and brought to the groom’s family’s house through hours of journey, and has stayed 45

with the groom’s family for days, only to find herself tricked. Papa does not even show any sympathy to her when he takes her back. He keeps talking angrily about the financial loss, humiliating Uma in front of all the train passengers, until Uma

“kept her head wrapped up in her sari in an effort to screen her shame” (Desai,

1999: 94).

Papa is also a very resolute man. When he insists on something, nobody can change his decision. He never listens to other people. Although he can afford a car, a driver, several servants, he refuses to buy their own house and leave their rented house, although Mama wants to own a property (Desai, 1999: 81).

He is actually conventional in his way of thinking. He strongly opposes the idea of women having a career. When Dr. Dutt offers Uma a job, he gets angry.

He was locking his face up into a frown of great degree. The frown was filled with everything he thought of working women, of women who dared presume to step into the world he occupied (Desai, 1999: 143).

However, he can pretend to have a modern way of thinking in front of the public, whenever necessary. For example, despite his opposition to working women, he can tolerate Dr. Dutt because she comes from an important family.

He did not say anything – Dr. Dutt’s father had been the Chief Justice at one time, it was a distinguished family, and if the daughter was still still unmarried at fifty, and a working woman as well, it was an aberration he had to tolerate (Desai, 1999: 140).

He tolerates Dr. Dutt not only because of her social position, but also to keep up his image as an educated, modern man.

In fact, Papa was quite capable of putting on a progressive, Westernised front when called upon to do so – in public, in society, not within his family of course – and now he showed his liberal, educated ways by rising to his feet when Dr. Dutt dismounted from her bicycle … (Desai, 1999: 141).

Indeed, he cares very much about his image, as shown in the conversation of other character, namely Ramu: “I suppose [Papa] couldn’t travel by bus and tonga – he’d lose face” (Desai, 1999: 63). When he has to travel to a place that cannot be reached by train, Papa prefers sending someone else to do the job rather than traveling by bus and tonga, a traditional vehicle. c. Ramu

Ramu is the cousin of Uma, Arun and Aruna from their father’s side. As a contrast to his sister Anamika, he is regarded as a good-for-nothing, the black sheep of the family by people around him: his own parents (Papa’s brother Bakul

Uncle and his wife, Lila Aunty), Mama and Papa, and other relatives. He is “not considered fit for society any more” (Desai, 1999: 102), while “many observed how Ramu seemed to have drawn all misfortune upon himself” (Desai, 1999: 68).

Furthermore, he is rumored to have problems with substance abuse. “All through her childhood she has heard whispered gossip about Bakul Uncle’s son: some thought it was drink, others drugs” (Desai, 1999: 48). Then his parents bought a farm for him in order to plan keep him from drink – or drugs (Desai, 1999: 89).

Ramu is described as a character who is physically unattractive. He was described directly by the author as a “misshapen, deformed, dark misfortune of a brother … with his club foot, his hunched back, his nearly sightless eyes – a son, a child who had gone wrong, missed all the graces and gifts that were accorded instead to his sister” (Desai, 1999: 67).

His attitude does not conform to the society’s norms. This characteristic is shown through personal description by the author, other characters’ comments, his 47

speech, past life, reaction, and mannerism. To begin with, he has very bad manners. He visits Mama and Papa without telling first, looking very dirty and disheveled, talking noisily in a lighthearted, cheerful way – which really outrage

Mama and Papa, who value politeness and good image above anything.

Mama and Papa are looking, but with such pinched expressions, such tight- lipped disapproval, that it is clear they do not share Uma’s delight in seeing the black sheep of the family who has the bad manners to turn up without notice (Desai, 1999: 47).

He really outrages Mama and Papa with his attitude, such as using up all the hot waters, asking for food that are unavailable, and telling them “ribald stories about respected aunts and uncles that neither Mama or Papa want to hear” (Desai, 1999:

48).

Ramu is also characterized as a kind and good-natured person, which can be seen in his mannerism and speech. He is one of the few people who treat Uma kindly and can make her happy, by telling her jokes and stories. While hardly anybody else cares about Uma, he takes Uma out to dinner in a luxurious restaurant without any special occasion. Despite her parents’ protest, he insists on taking Uma out.

‘No, no, we must eat out. I insist. I will take Uma out to dinner. The best dinner we can get in this city. Isn’t there a hotel, with a bar?’ (Desai, 1999: 49).

Although her hair is already grey, that is the first time Uma ever goes to a restaurant. Ramu gives her some drink and dances with her. Although he travels in third-class train (Desai, 1999: 47), which shows that he does not have much money, he pays for the dinner. He does not demand anything from Uma; he just wants her to enjoy herself. 48

‘Don’t cry, Uma,’ Ramu breaks off to say in concern. ‘You remember I looked after you when you ran away, I fetched you home that time? I want you to enjoy yourself. Have another drink’ (Desai, 1999: 51).

Unlike most other people, Ramu appreciates Uma not as a child or a stupid person, but as a normal adult, who deserves to relax and have fun. Thus, despite his negative characteristics, Ramu also has a positive characteristic. d. Mr. Patton

Mr. Patton is Mrs. Patton’s husband, the head of the family where Arun stays during the summer holiday, and the father of two teenaged children, Rod and Melanie. He works as an employee. He is described as the breadwinner of the family; in the end of the story, when Melanie undergoes treatment for her bulimia, he has to take night job to pay the bills (Desai, 1999: 226).

Mr. Patton is characterized as a person who is intolerant and does not care about other people’s perspective, which can be seen in his speech, reaction, and mannerism. When he is told that Arun is a vegetarian, he no longer forces Arun to eat meat due to the norm of politeness, but he gives a scornful reaction.

Mrs. Patton rushes in hurriedly, but too late. ‘Ahroon’s a vegetarian, dear –’ and then her voice drops to a whisper ‘—like me.’ Mr Patton either does not hear the whisper, or does but ignores it. He responds only to the first half of the statement. ‘Okay, now I remember,’ he says at last. ‘Yeah, you told me once. Just can’t see how anyone would refuse a good piece of meat, that’s all. It’s not natural. And it costs --’ (Desai, 1999: 166).

When Mrs. Patton explains about cow being a holy animal in Hinduism, Mr.

Patton says,

“Yeah, how they let them out on the streets because they can’t kill ‘em and don’t know what to do with ‘em. I could show ‘em. A cow is a cow, and good red meat as far as I’m concerned’ (Desai, 1999: 166).

He also shows his reluctance to tolerate other belief through his speech above. 49

While he reluctantly acknowledges Arun’s vegetarianism for the sake of politeness, considering Arun comes from a different culture, he is unwilling to acknowledge his wife’s vegetarianism at all. He completely ignores her wife’s statement that she is a vegetarian (Desai, 1999: 166); he keeps buying meat and filling the refrigerator full of meat products despite his wife’s protest.

If Mr. Patton ever noticed or watched this arrangement between his wife and the Indian boy they were giving shelter to that summer, he never referred to it or acknowledged it. He stopped on his way back from work to shop for steak, hamburger, ribs and chops. ‘Thought you might not have enough,’ he told Mrs Patton as he marched out onto the patio to broil and grill, fry and roast, and Mrs Patton looked suitably apologetic and deceitful (Desai, 1999: 185).

He also reacts scornfully when his wife takes up a new interest in traditional medicines.

Once Arun heard Mr. Patton growl, ‘Here’s another batch of catalogues come for you. What in God’s name is numerology? Or gemology? Karmic lessons! What’s that? Hell, what’s this you’re getting into?’ (Desai, 1999: 227).

His speech clearly shows that he does not appreciate his wife’s interest.

As a father, he cares to a limited extent about his children. It is shown through his activity, such as preparing meal (grilling some steak), but he complains when his children cannot get there on time to eat.

‘Don’t they know I came home early to cook their dinner?’ Mr. Patton sounds petulant, a minister who cannot see why his congregation dwindles. … ‘Got my work done, got into the car, and drove home half an hour early so’s to marinate the steaks – and then they can’t even get here on time to eat’ (Desai, 1999: 165-166).

Sometimes he complains about the children, such as about Rod doing sports all the time without doing his chore mowing the lawn, but some other times he does activity together or enquires about his children. He watches baseball on television 50

together with Rod, and he says that Melanie should “go outdoors and play games”

(Desai, 1999: 206). e. Rod Patton

Rod is the teen-aged son of the Pattons. He is characterized as a boy who is fond of sports, which can be seen in his personal description by the author as well as his mannerism and habits. The author describes that there is a baseball team

(Boston Red Sox) pennant on his door. He plays baseball and football. As a habit, he goes jogging every morning and does other exercise:

He is bicycling his legs vigorously around in a giddily whirling motion that is however perfectly steady and rhythmic. His hands support his back and his face is contorted and inflamed (Desai, 1999: 204).

In the end of the story, the author describes that he wins a football scholarship

(Desai, 1999: 227). Other than as a sports lover, Rod is also characterized as a typical teenage boy, which can be seen in his habits, such as watching baseball game with his father while drinking cans of beer (Desai, 1999: 191).

Attitude-wise, he is quite good-natured, which is shown in his speech when he asks Arun, a stranger who stays temporarily at his family’s house, to go jogging together.

Rod has stopped, for Arun. ‘Hey,’ he says, panting, the sweat pouring from under his headband down his rufous face. ‘Come jogging?’ he pants (Desai, 1999: 191).

He has a healthy appetite for food, which is shown in his mother’s comment about him:

Dad likes his meat, and Rod – well, Rod needs all the proteins he can get, for all that weight-lifting and jogging that he does (Desai, 1999: 179).

However, he becomes malicious in his speech and reaction when Arun talks to him about his sister’s bulimia.

‘Man, she’s nuts, that kid, she’s nuts,’ he mutters. ‘That’s all these girls are good are for, y’know. Not like guys. Too lazy to get off their butts and go jogging or play a good hard ball game. So they’ve got to sick it up.’ He straightens himself and sticks a finger into his mouth and wiggles it graphically. ‘Can you beat that? Who’d want to be sick?’ (Desai, 1999: 204).

The quote above shows how Rod, who places so much importance on physical fitness, views girls who make themselves vomit on purpose contemptuously.

B. Gendered Experiences in Indian and American Family

In many fields in life, men and women have different role in the society.

Men are certainly more important than women in the society. They have different experiences and activities, for example men must work outside the home and women must work inside the home. These are known as gendered experiences, or the specific experiences based on gender distinction in a particular society. In accordance with Butler’s theory of “sex” as the anatomical difference and

“gender” as the sociocultural meanings attached to the anatomical differences (in

Leitch, 2001: 2485-91), these gendered experiences are not primarily caused by any innate physical differences, but rather, because every society has different values, perspectives, and practices for men and women. This part will discuss the gendered experiences undergone by the characters in Indian and American family in this novel.

1. Gendered Experiences in Indian Family a. Domestic Life

Gendered experiences in the Indian family can be found in the domestic life. Women have totally different experiences from men at home. All women, mother and daughters, are responsible of doing all the chores, from cleaning, cooking to sewing. They do not receive any form of acknowledgment because it is taken for granted that domestic life is the main responsibility of women, as demonstrated in Mama, Uma, Aruna and Anamika’s experiences.

Mama is responsible for all the chores at home and always does them without complaining. Since she was a child, she has been taught to give priority to the men at home.

‘In my day, girls in the family were not given sweets, nuts, good things to eat. If something special had been bought in the market, like sweets, or nuts, it was given to the boys in the family’ (Desai, 1999: 6).

Uma, as the eldest daughter in the family, is used to being asked to do so many things at home, just like a servant without payment. Papa spends his retirement

“finding ways to keep Uma occupied” (Desai, 1999: 23). Other than serving fruits, tea, coffee or biscuits to Papa, spreading Papa’s winter woollens in the sun and keeping moths off them, she has to do many other things, such as:

She has to write a letter to Arun, to find out if he has received the parcel containing the tea and the shawl they sent him through Justice Dutt's son. In between she has to drive off the urchins who are after the ripe mulberries on the tree by the gate, and see if the cook has bought the green mangoes for pickling and has all the ingredients and necessary spices - but no extra that might be pilfered (Desai, 1999: 23).

She even has to sacrifice her personal interests to do her duties at home. For example, despite her protests, she was made to drop out of school to care for her baby brother.

‘You know you failed your exams again. You're not being moved up. What's the use of going back to school? Stay at home and look after your baby brother. …’You will be happier at home. You won't need to do any lessons. You are a big girl now. We are trying to arrange a marriage for you. Not now,’ she added, seeing the panic on Uma’s face. ‘But soon. Till then, you can help me look after Arun. And learn to run the house’ (Desai, 1999: 21-22).

Whatever she is doing at the moment, she has to put off her activity whenever

Mama or Papa asks her to do any chore. When she is reading, Mama commands her to serve coffee for Papa:

Mama bats it away like a fly after a quick, short-sighted glance. ‘Reading, reading – didn’t you say your eyes were hurting? So now why are you reading? Put it away and fetch a cup of coffee for Papa. It is time for Papa’s coffee and biscuits,’ she adds very loudly as if afraid Uma will refuse (Desai, 1999: 136).

The second daughter, Aruna, becomes perfectionist after she marries with

Arvind. She always complains about her husband’s clothes, the tablecloth and paint in her parents’ house, Mama’s activity of washing her hair in the morning, the cooking, Arun’s sloppy appearance, the driver’s uniform, to name just a few

(Desai, 1999: 109). What Aruna’s complaint is only for the activities that women should care about. She never complains about the job outside the house, and she never complains about the education.

When she has a daughter, she is taking care of her daughter. She also beautifies her daughter looks like a doll (Desai, 1999: 105). It shows that the area of women is only domestic area. 54

Related to the view that women are the person who is responsible for chores inside the house, the house is considered as the only sphere of life for women in Indian family, as shown in Mama, Uma, and Anamika’s experiences.

Since all their responsibilities and duties are inside the house, women in Indian family rarely go outside the house. When they do, it is not for their own interest, but most commonly to accompany their husband. Mama “rarely went anywhere without Papa, and then it was only to social events” (Desai, 1999: 129). Mama's social life consists of “accompany[ing] Papa to the club, to dinner parties and weddings” (Desai, 1999: 31). The word “accompany” implies that Mama never goes to the events she wants or needs to attend, but only to the events that Papa wants or needs to attend. Uma is forbidden to even attend a tea party held by an elderly lady, Mrs. O’Henry. Instead, Mama tells her to stay at home and work:

‘It is not good to go running around. Stay home and do your work - that is best,’ Mama opines with an air of piety. 'I do my work all the time, every day,’ Uma cries tearfully. ‘Why can't I go out sometimes? I never go anywhere. I want to go to Mrs O'Henry's party’ (Desai, 1999: 114).

Anamika has the same fate at home with her husband’s family. She can hardly leave the house, let alone go on her own, and she spends all her time working in the house.

When Anamika was not scrubbing or cooking, she was in her mother-in- law's room, either massaging that lady's feet or folding and tidying her clothes. She never went out of the house except to the temple with other women (Desai, 1999: 71).

It shows that a woman’s main duty is to serve her husband, children, and even the husband’s family at home. 55

The view that domestic life comprises women’s sphere of life and chief responsibility extends even to extreme circumstances, such as the one experienced by Anamika. After her marriage, Anamika lives with her husband’s family, who abuse her violently and force her to work in an inhumane condition.

Anamika had been beaten, Anamika was beaten regularly by her mother- in-law while her husband stood by and approved - or, at least, did not object. Anamika spent her entire time in the kitchen, cooking for his family which was large so that meals were eaten in shifts - first the men, then the children, finally the women. She herself ate the remains in the pots before scouring them (or did Uma and Aruna imagine this last detail?). (Desai, 1999: 70).

As an obedient woman who follows the society’s values, Anamika does not rebel against her in-laws and still does the chores, however inhumane, because those are indeed her responsibility.

Another responsibility of women at home is to give children to the family, especially male children, as reflected through Mama’s pride and joy upon finally giving birth to a baby boy:

More than ever now, she was Papa’s helpmeet, his consort. He had not only made her his wife, he had made her the mother of his son. What honour, what status (Desai, 1999: 31).

Taking care of her male baby properly becomes such an important thing, so that she exerts extra efforts that she did not do to her female babies previously.

'You know we can't leave him to the servant,' she said severely. 'He needs proper attention.' When Uma pointed out that ayah had looked after her and Aruna as babies, Mama's expression made it clear it was quite a different matter now, and she repeated threateningly: 'Proper attention' (Desai, 1999: 30).

When Anamika has a miscarriage, although it is not her fault, she is regarded as

“damaged goods”: 56

She had had a miscarriage at home, it was said, after a beating. It was said she could not bear more children. Now Anamika was flawed, she was damaged goods. She was no longer perfect (Desai, 1999: 71).

When Uma says that she hopes that Anamika will be sent back to her family,

Mama replies by calling Uma “silly,” asking: “How can she be happy if she is sent home? What will people say? What will they think?” (Desai, 1999: 71). In other words, it is still better for Anamika to endure violent abuses than leave her place as a wife.

On the contrary, men have few responsibility and many privileges in the domestic life. They do not have to do anything, but they get first priority at home, as shown in Papa and Arun’s experiences. Both men are so used to getting served by the women in the family.

Papa is always attended by Mama and Uma for all his needs, even small things that he could actually do himself, such as packing his tennis kits and sending them to the office (Desai, 1999: 8). The novel contains many scenes of

Papa having tea, served by Mama or Uma. Once, Uma was reading poetry when it was time for Papa to have tea. Uma was scolded, forced to stop reading and serve tea for Papa right at that moment (Desai, 1999: 36). Another instance, when it is time for Papa to eat fruits, he is served with the utmost care by the women of the family, especially Uma. When Uma “picks up the fruit bowl with both hands and puts it down with a thump before her father” (Desai, 1999: 22), Mama quickly corrects her:

Mama knows what is wrong. She taps Uma on the elbow. 'Orange,' she instructs her. Uma can no longer pretend to be ignorant of Papa's needs, Papa's ways. After all, she has been serving them for some twenty years. She picks out the largest orange in the bowl and hands it to Mama who 57

peels it in strips, then divides it into separate segments. Each segment is then peeled and freed of pips and threads till only the perfect globules of juice are left, and then passed, one by one, to the edge of Papa's plate (Desai, 1999: 22).

When Papa needs to wipe his fingers, the women are ready to serve him by placing the finger bowl and the napkin before him.

'Where is Papa's finger bowl?' she asks loudly. The finger bowl is placed before Papa. He dips his fingertips in and wipes them on the napkin. He is the only one in the family who is given a napkin and a finger bowl; they are emblems of his status (Desai, 1999: 23).

Similarly, until he grows to be an adult, Arun never even enters the kitchen, so he does not know the ingredients of Indian foods that he likes, let alone how to cook them. Arun has “never seen his mother cook” (Desai, 1999:

193); all his life, he only has to sit at the dining table and Mama or the cook always serves his favorite foods. When he is asked to cook Indian food when staying with the Pattons in America, the food tastes so bad because it is “his first effort” (Desai, 1999: 195).

Such experiences can also be found in other households. For example,

Anamika’s household contains so many people that they have to eat in shifts, and the men get the first priority: “first the men, then the children, finally the women”

(Desai, 1999: 70). Therefore, despite living in the same household with the same tradition, men and women have completely different experiences, based on their gender.

b. Relationship between Men and Women

The men and women relationship in the Indian family seems to be more complex. This novel has implied several gendered experiences between men and women in Indian family over the marriage system and family relationship. In

India, marriage is arranged by the parents, whereas “love marriage” is scorned, as shown in Mama and her neighbor’s attitude to it (Desai, 1999: 31). As dictated by the Indian tradition, dowry system is used. Dowry is the money paid by the bride’s family to the groom’s family before the marriage. The amount depends on the desirability of the bride (the woman) from the point of view of the groom (the man)’s family, as well as the status of the groom. The family of a highly- educated, young man, for instance, will demand a large dowry; similarly, a higher dowry will be demanded from the family of an inattractive or old woman.

Basically, this system is equivalent to a business transaction, where the bride’s family have to buy the groom’s family’s consent to realize the marriage.

As a result of such practice, women are seen merely as an asset; according to the society, the sole function and aim of women is to marry. Since their birth, women have been getting the pressure to bring a good marriage – marriage to a socially and financially desirable man, with as low dowry as possible. Women who are beautiful and attractive, such as Aruna and Anamika, are regarded positively, or in other words regarded as a good asset. Aruna’s attractiveness gives

Papa “a pleasure he would not allow himself to express” (Desai, 1999: 85), because she will get a husband easily. In order to marry good man with high level easily, she beautifies herself: 59

Aruna slammed her make-up kit shut. “Yes, this is what women in Bombay use. They don’t walk around looking like washerwomen unless they are washerwomen,” she told Uma (Desai, 1999: 104).

Anamika is described as “the first fruit to be picked” for marriage (Desai,

1999: 66) and Mama “envied Lila Aunty for having a daughter like Anamika, a model of perfection like Anamika” (Desai, 1999: 76). To Anamika’s family, her beauty, nice demeanor, and intelligence merely serve as “qualifications” to offer when searching for a husband:

The scholarship was one of the qualifications they were able to offer when they started searching for a husband for her, and it was what won her a husband who was considered an equal to this prize of the family (Desai, 1999: 69).

On the other hand, inattractive and awkward women like Uma, who cannot bring any marriage, is blamed and regarded as a big shame. Because of that, parents will do everything to make sure their daughters are attractive enough to get a husband. While Papa sends letters to relatives (Desai, 1999: 74), Mama puts her hardest efforts to find a husband for Uma.

Mama worked hard at trying to dispose of Uma, sent her photograph around to everyone who advertised in the matrimonial columns of the Sunday papers, but it was always returned with the comment 'We are looking for someone taller/fairer/more educated, for Sanju/Pinku/Dimpu', even though the photograph had been carefully touched up by the local photographer... (Desai, 1999: 86-87).

When about to meet the prospective groom and his mother, Mama lends her saris, puts make-up on Uma’s face, and forces Uma to claim that she made the dishes and tea which she did not make: ‘Now if Mrs. Syal asks if you made the samosas, you must say yes’ (Desai, 1999: 75). Despite Uma’s confusion, Mama “threatened her with a fierce look” (Desai, 1999: 76) and makes Uma to say that she made the 60

barfi and samosas. Mama also forces Uma to wear a ring which hurt her finger because it was too small (Desai, 1999: 78). As Uma grows older and remains unmarried, her unmarried state “was not only an embarrassment but an obstruction” (Desai, 1999: 85), and later makes Uma growing depressed because of her family’s reaction:

Uma's ears were already filled to saturation with Mama's laments, and Aruna's little yelps of laughter were additional barbs (Desai, 1999: 86).

When the marriage fails for some reason, it is the woman who faces embarrassment as well as blame from her parents, especially her father as the breadwinner, because the dowry money is spent in vain and her parents still have to pay another dowry for another husband. This experience happens to Uma twice.

She and her family are tricked by families who are only after the dowry money.

First, the groom’s family appears as a rich family; marriage is agreed upon, the dowry is paid. After the dowry has been paid, the groom’s father asks for “the engagement to be indefinitely postponed” while the prospective groom disappears

“for higher education” (Desai, 1999: 82). That family is later found out to have played similar tricks before. Second, Uma gets married to a man named Harish and taken to his family’s house for several days, until Uma’s family find out that

Harish is already married and has four children.

Papa had learnt that they had been duped. Harish was married already, had a wife and four children in Meerut where he ran an ailing phamaceutical factory to save which he had needed another dowry which had led him to marry again (Desai, 1999: 93).

Papa is so angry that he “moaned aloud about the dowry and the wedding expenses” (Desai, 1999: 94) to everyone in the train, while Uma “kept her head 61

wrapped up in her sari in an effort to screen her shame” (Desai, 1999: 94). As their neighbor Mrs. Joshi says, any mistake or trickery will indeed end up disadvantaging the woman, not the man.

If parents will not take the time to make proper enquiries, what terrible fates their daughters may have! Be grateful that Uma was not married into a family that could have burnt her to death in order to procure another dowry! (Desai, 1999: 83).

Although those two failures are not Uma’s fault, Uma is “considered ill-fated by all” for “having cost her parents two dowries, without a marriage to show in return” (Desai, 1999: 96).

Meanwhile, men in Indian family do not think much about marriage.

Marriage is arranged by their parents, and there is no pressure for them to make themselves more attractive or desirable in front of the future bride, because it is seen more as the woman’s need to get a husband. That is why, men or their families can easily play tricks like the ones discussed above, even several times

(Desai, 1999: 82-83). Often, the groom is much older than the bride, like in Uma’s case as well as Anamika’s (Desai, 1999: 69). Only when they have become the head of the family, they have to spend some money for the dowry. Even then, they usually put pressure on the daughters to be attractive and blame them when something goes wrong. For example, when Uma and her family are tricked by

Harish, Papa becomes very angrily in Harish family’s house, in the train, and at home (Desai, 1999: 93-95).

As a result, families prefer sons to daughters, because daughters cause the family a lot of trouble looking for husbands and paying the dowry. Male babies are more wanted and appreciated, and get better treatment than daughters. Papa 62

and Mama have been waiting for a son for years until Mama finally gave birth to a son, Arun. Mama gives him the best food herself and does not let the servants take care of him, saying repeatedly that “He needs proper attention” (Desai, 1999: 30).

In brief, Arun receives special treatment that has never been given to his two elder sisters.

Thus, it can be seen that men and women have different experience in marriage, which depends on their gender. c. Education and Career

Other gendered experiences in the Indian family can be found in the field of education and career, where men and women have contrasting experiences.

Education is not seen as a priority for women; in fact, education is considered unimportant for women, since their sole objective is to marry. As a result, the female characters such as Uma, Mama, Aruna and Anamika have many gendered experiences related to education. Men in Indian families are encouraged to achieve professional success, they are given good education so they can have a good career, and if they manage to get a good career, they will be proud of it. In other words, they gain approval based on society’s values.

As a young girl, Mama hardly got any education: “Mama had never taken seriously the need to do any schoolwork, not having gone to school herself”

(Desai, 1999: 18). Consequently, she never appreciates the importance of education for girls. She even blames Uma for going to school instead of spending all her time in the kitchen learning to cook (Desai, 1999: 76). In another time, she also says: 63

‘All this convent education – what good does it do? Better to marry you off than let you go to that place’ (Desai, 1999: 71). I always said don't send them to a convent school. Keep them at home, I said - but who listened? And now -! (Desai, 1999: 29).

Uma is taken out of her convent school to look after her newly-born brother, although she really loves going to school and wants to continue her education.

'You know you failed your exams again. You're not being moved up. What's the use of going back to school? Stay at home and look after your baby brother' (Desai, 1999: 21).

She runs away from home and begs her old convent school headmaster, Mother

Agnes, to take her back, but she is unsuccessful. Mother Agnes frequently contacts Uma’s family to let her go back to school, but her family would not let her. Uma was even blamed for her interest in school, because according to Mama, it does not teach her the ways to get a husband. Years later, Uma is even blamed for any academic-related activities, such as reading poetry. She was seriously scolded for reading poetry and told to serve tea for Papa instead.

Through clenched teeth, she hisses, ‘Reading – this!’ Mama bats it away like a fly after a quick, short-sighted glance. ‘Reading, reading – didn’t you say your eyes were hurting? So now why are you reading? Put it away and fetch a cup of coffee for Papa. It is time for Papa’s coffee and biscuits,’ she adds very loudly as if afraid Uma will refuse (Desai, 1999: 136).

Anamika is very intelligent and wins a prestigious scholarship to Oxford, but her family forbid her to take it.

In fact, she did so brilliantly in her final school exams, that she won a scholarship to Oxford, where only the most favoured and privileged sons could ever hope to go! Naturally her parents would not countenance her actually going abroad to study – just when she was of an age to marry – everyone understood that, and agreed, and so the letter of acceptance from Oxford was locked in a steel cupboard in their flat on Marine Drive in Bombay… (Desai, 1999: 68-69).

The quote above shows that such a prestigious educational institution as Oxford is supposed to be only for “sons”, while a girl like Anamika is supposed to get married. Thus, Anamika has no other choice but to obey.

On the other hand, education is seen as the foremost priority and very important for men, considering they will be the breadwinner of the family. No wonder boys are given the best education possible, as well as all the facilities and opportunities to get their best achievement, as experienced by Papa and his brother when they were young, and Arun.

Education became a source of pride for Papa and his brother; they were given the best education their parents could afford and became successful because of their good education.

If there was one thing Papa insisted on in the realm of home and family, then it was education for his son: the best, the most, the highest. Was this not what his father had endeavoured to provide for him and his brother Bakul, and had it not been the making of them? (Desai, 1999: 118).

Papa does the same with Arun. Since he was young, Arun has been given the best and the most extensive education. He is sent to the best schools, given tutors to study for hours after school, and finally he gets a university scholarship to the United States.

Tutors came in a regular sequence, an hour allotted to each, for tuition in maths, in physics, in chemistry, in Hindi, in English composition - in practically every subject he had already dealt with during the hours at school. Uma and Aruna were warned to keep away, not to provide the faintest distraction... (Desai, 1999: 118-119).

The quote above shows that in Indian family, only boys are given the opportunity for education, whereas girls do not have the same experience. Even Aruna, who always get good grades at school, cannot join the tuition. 65

Career is demonstrated in the experiences of Papa, his brother (Bakul

Uncle), and Arun. Both Papa and his brother Bakul Uncle are successful financially; Papa works in law office in a small city, while Bakul Uncle practices in Bombay (Desai, 1999: 67). Even a troublemaker like Ramu, who is despised by his own family and relatives, are given the opportunity to earn his own livelihood.

His family buy a farm for him, so he can live independently and away from drink or drugs (Desai, 1999: 89).

On the contrary, women are strongly forbidden to work professionally, meaning having a paid job outside her own house. Women are not supposed to live independently or have any income. Working women are looked upon with contempt and mockery, as can be seen in the experiences of Uma as well as minor characters such as Dr. Dutt, Moyna Joshi, and ayah’s daughter. When Uma is offered a job as a nurse, her family are angry and completely forbid Uma to take the job.

‘Our daughter does not need to go out to work, Dr. Dutt,’ she said. ‘As long as we are here to provide for her, she will never need to go to work.’ ‘But she works all the time!’ Dr. Dutt exclaimed on a rather sharp note. ‘At home. Now you must give her a chance to work outside--’ ‘There is no need,’ Papa supported Mama’s view. In double strength, it grew formidable. ‘Where is the need?’ (Desai, 1999: 143).

If Uma were a man, it would be the opposite; her family would support Uma to get the job. But as a woman, her right place is inside the house.

Dr. Dutt is a woman, but she is not married and has a career as a doctor.

Both Papa and Mama view her with contempt; Papa tries to conceal his strong disapproval, while Mama teases her subtly. They do not oppose her directly because Dr. Dutt comes from an influential family. 66

‘Isn’t it difficult to cycle in a sari?’ she asked with a little laugh, and looked pointedly at the frayed and oily hem of Dr. Dutt’s sari (Desai, 1999: 144).

Moyna Joshi is the daughter of Mrs. Joshi, Mama and Papa’s neighbor.

When Moyna wants to have a career, her family were all “surprised, a little amused”; they “indulged her little whim … and they laughed, waiting for her to return” (Desai, 1999: 131). It is clear that they regard Moyna’s wish as something funny and inappropriate. The daughter of Uma’s ayah (“nanny” in Indian culture) leaves her husband and goes to find a work, and ayah speaks about it disapprovingly, too.

‘As if having a job means becoming the daughter of the house.’ Ayah sighs sadly. ‘I have told her beatings are what she will get--’ (Desai, 1999: 37).

From the discussion above, it can be seen that different genders result in totally different treatment and thus different experiences for men and women in the Indian family.

2. Gendered Experiences in American Family a. Domestic Life

The first gendered experiences in the American family can be found in the domestic life. Men and women also have different experiences in the domestic life in America, although the difference is not as great as the gendered experiences in

India. 67

As a woman, Mrs Patton admits she does not cook for the family all the time now (Desai, 1999: 197), but she still considers taking care of the whole family as her duty: she goes shopping frequently for the whole family and makes sure they have something to eat. As she says to Arun, “Keeping the freezer full – that’s my job, Ahroon’ (Desai, 1999: 197).

It shows that women are still expected to be responsible for her household and do domestic duties such as cleaning, cooking, providing food, and going shopping. When Mr. Patton arrives home carrying some chops, Mrs. Patton

"begins hurriedly to put away the chops" (Desai, 1999: 203). She still cooks and prepares food for her daughter Melanie (Desai, 1999: 206) and is seen "working at the kitchen table" (Desai, 1999: 219), and cleaning:

Mrs. Patton is washing bean sprouts in a colander at the kitchen sink; they spill over and scatter across the draining board (Desai, 1999: 192).

Mrs. Patton tells Arun about how she used to buy a lot of groceries while taking care of baby Melanie when the children were small.

Arun has seen mothers of young children do precisely that - lift their babies onto the collapsible shelf where they sit above hills of cereal and cat food and diapers, usually sucking the candy they have been given in return for allowing their mothers to get on with the shopping (Desai, 1999: 196).

Until her children are grown up and do not eat as much food, she is still so fond of shopping, buying too many food items that nobody will eat:

Arun, handing her the packages one by one - butter, yoghurt, milk to go in here, jam and cookies and cereal there- worried that they would never make their way through so much food but this did not seem to be the object of her purchases. Once it was all stored away in the gleaming white caves where ice secretly whispered to itself, she was content (Desai, 1999: 184).

Her frequency of shopping and cooking shows that she still regards it as her responsibility to provide food for the family. In the American family, it is relatively common for men to do household duties like cleaning and cooking, but they do not do it frequently, as seen in Mr. Patton and Rod’s experiences.

As children, both Rod and Melanie are expected to do chores at home, as shown in Mr. Patton’s remark: "Doesn't anyone in this house do any work? That lawn could do with some cutting. Where's Rod?" (Desai, 1999: 202). Later, Mr.

Patton also asks: "Where are the kids? Are they going to be in for dinner tonight?

What have they been doing all day? Are they doing any work around here?"

(Desai, 1999: 203). However, none of the children do their chores, so Mrs. Patton still has to do the chores.

Mr. Patton sometimes shops and cooks. However, he does it not as an obligation, but rather because it is for his personal interest. He only buys meat when he goes shopping (Desai, 1999: 202) and he only cooks barbecue, because it is his favourite food.

He stopped on his way back from work to shop for steak, hamburger, ribs and chops. 'Thought you might not have enough,' he told Mrs. Patton as he marched out onto the patio to broil and grill, fry and roast, and Mrs Patton looked suitably apologetic and deceitful (Desai, 1999: 185).

Even then, Mr. Patton makes a lot of fuss about it: he shows off in detail about how he goes shopping and cooks, and complains when nobody comes to eat the barbecue.

As for household duties, Mr. Patton only tells the children to help with the duties, but as for himself, as soon as he gets home from work, he is “getting a can of beer out of the refrigerator” (Desai, 1999: 203).

Finally, in the general public, men who do activities like cooking and cleaning, although occasionally, is still regarded as “awesome”, as shown in the conversation below:

"Settlin' in for the weekend?' asks the check-out girl who wears a jaunty jacket of red and white stripes and a red bow tie around her white collar. ... "Nah. My girl friend's bringing her parents to dinner. I'm gonna cook for them," he explains. "I've been cleaning the apartment and now I'm going to go home to cook the dinner." "Gee," she says tonelessly, "that's awesome" (Desai, 1999: 209).

The check-out girl’s reaction shows that doing household duties such as cooking and cleaning is still regarded a rather unusual experience for men. b. Relationship between Men and Women

The men and women relationship in American family seems not really complex. This novel has implied several gendered experiences between men and women in the American family over the body image, social and family relationship. The Pattons family are influenced by the media and consequently view their own body based on media’s image. Women are expected and even pressured to have good and attractive physical appearance, chiefly by being slim, and consequently they often have negative image of themselves because they feel they are not as slim as the examples in the media. Both Melanie and Mrs. Patton have undergone such experience. 70

Melanie suffers from eating disorder of bulimia. She only eats peanuts, chocolate, and similar snacks and refuses to eat anything else. As Mrs. Patton says, “Cookies and candy bars and peanuts is all you ever will eat” (Desai, 1999:

194). Then she will vomit on purpose.

Melanie kneels there at the toilet bowl, in white pyjamas that are printed all over with lipstick marks in the shape of lips, and she is retching heartily into it (Desai, 1999: 189).

According to her brother, Rod, she does it because she ‘wants to turn herself into a slim chick’ (Desai, 1999: 204). Rod further hypothesizes that all girls are like that:

‘That’s all these girls are good are for, y’know. Not like guys. Too lazy to get off their butts and go jogging or play a good hard ball game. So they’ve got to sick it up’ (Desai, 1999: 204).

The quote shows that suffering from eating disorder in order to stay slim is a way of women to attract men. American men expect slim and proportional women.

This is also kind of a gendered experience of women.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Patton becomes upset and emotional when a clerk in the supermarket assumes that she is pregnant. The clerk thinks Mrs. Patton is pregnant because of her cheerfulness (due to her enthusiasm in being a vegetarian), but Mrs. Patton only worries about her body. In her mind, the clerk’s assumption implies that she is overweight. In the journey back home, she repeatedly and anxiously asks about her weight and appearance.

She becomes so absorbed that she almost crashes into another car, “swerving suddenly to avoid the bumper of a loaded pick-up van she has ignored till the last possible second” (Desai, 1999: 210-211), until Arun reminds her to slow down.

While women are expected to be slim, men are expected to be healthy and strong, as shown in Rod’s experience. Rod spends a lot of time doing physical exercises and playing sports. He plays baseball, football, goes jogging, and even exercises in his bedroom. He exercises so much that his father remarks:

"Jogging, huh? Jogging. That boy spends so much time getting into shape he hasn't time left over to do anything with it” (Desai, 1999: 202).

When Arun talks to him about his sister’s eating disorder, Rod only comments lightly and then continues his exercise that instant; he “rises to his feet, straddles his legs and begins to swing his arms as rapidly as he had done with his legs”

(Desai, 1999: 204). He seems so keen on staying fit that Arun remarks: "One can't tell what is more dangerous in this country, the pursuit of health or of sickness"

(Desai, 1999: 204-205).

However, the expectation for men to be strong is not as big as the expectation for women to be slim. Rod, for instance, never gets upset because of the obligation to be strong. In the first place, he does enjoy the exercises he does.

Also, when he does not want to do physical exercise, he can easily enjoy other activities, such as watching baseball games while drinking beer with his father

(Desai, 1999: 191).

Besides, women have the experience of being subordinate to men at body image, Mr. Patton and Mrs. Patton have a different opinion in diet; Mr. Patton likes meat, while Mrs. Patton wants to be a vegetarian. It is Mrs. Patton who 72

obeys and follows Mr. Patton’s preference. She wants to be a vegetarian but she could not due to her family, until Arun stays with them.

I’ve always hated eating meat – oh, that red, raw stuff, the smell of it! I’ve always, always disliked it – but never could – never knew how – you know, my family wouldn’t have liked it’ (Desai, 1999: 179).

When Mr. Patton mocks vegetarianism and insists that meat is good, Mrs. Patton only “coos consolingly” and says “yes, dear” (Desai, 1999: 167), just to pacify him. When Mr. Patton insists on buying a lot of meat and cooking it in front of her, she “looked suitably apologetic and deceitful” (Desai, 1999: 185). It shows that Mrs. Patton tries to follow Mr. Patton’s wishes, although Mr. Patton never tries to follow her wishes.

Mr. Patton always performs ignoring Mrs. Patton. He prefers a can of beer and sits in front of TV rather than perceives what Mrs. Patton said about her duty at home.

‘Oh dear,’ she says, ‘the freezer is full to the top with chops. I don’t know that I want anymore.’ Mr Patton ignores her. He is getting a can of beer out of the refrigerator. (Desai, 1999: 203)

When Mrs. Patton is sunbathing and calling out Arun to join her, Mr. Patton who just back home from work clearly disapproves too, “Mr Patton goes indoors, get himself a can of beer from the refrigerator, and slumps onto the sofa in front of the television” (Desai, 1999: 215). Like Arun, Mr. Patton does not want to see his wife body that scarred and wrinkled, shrunk or sagging with age (Desai, 1999:

215).

Additionally, Mr. Patton asks Rod to go out with him in Saturday. He does not ask the whole family in his leisure time to go sailing on Lake Wyola, he only 73

asks Rod. Then Mrs. Patton asks Melanie to go swimming with her. The gendered experiences emerge in the relationship between father and his children. As Mr.

Patton demonstrated, he prefers his son rather than his daughter. c. Education and Career

Gendered experiences in American family can also be found in education and career. As the father in the family, Mr. Patton uses the authority in the family to determine the career that Rod has to achieve. Rod is training for the football team, Chuck, as Mrs. Patton said to Mr. Patton “It’s what you wanted him to do yourself –“ (Desai, 1999: 203). However, Mr. Patton seems do not have any obligation to determine his daughter career, he does not care about his daughter skill. He also does not give the idea to Melanie, “and Melanie? What’s she up to?

What’s she in training for, huh?” (Desai, 1999: 23).

Besides, Mr. Patton does not concern about his daughter’s bulimia. He only sees Melanie that she ought to go outside and play games (Desai, 1999: 206), so it will make her fresh. Eventually, Melanie takes to the rehabilitation for adolescent girl with bulimia, anorexia, depression, and other psychological disorder. While, Rod has won a football scholarship (Desai, 1999: 227).

Mr. Patton is also not supportive, when Mrs. Patton is interested in learning about traditional medicine. Rather, he complains about her new interests.

Once Arun heard Mr. Patton growl, ‘Here’s another batch of catalogues come for you. What in God’s name is numerology? or gemology? Karmic lessons! What’s that? Hell, what’s this you’re getting into?’ (Desai, 1999: 227).

Mr. Patton thinks that it is unsuitable for a housewife to take new interests in new things that are not related to her sphere of life at home. When Melanie goes into 74

rehabilitation, Mr. Patton has to take a night job to pay the bills (Desai, 1999:

226), while Mrs. Patton still does not work. It shows that the matter of career and livelihood is regarded as men’s responsibility.

Just like in Indian family, different genders result in different expectations, and thus different experiences, for men and women in the American family. Rod has a chance to build his career in football, and Mr. Patton does not care about

Melanie career. It is because Rod is a man and Melanie is a woman. Those are kind of gendered experiences in education and career of American family.

Diversity of family and culture construct different gendered experience.

America has its own criteria of men and women, as shown by the Pattons family.

Therefore, India also has its own criteria of men and women, as shown by Uma’s family.

C. Women’s and Men’s Position in Indian and American Family

Based on the discussion on the male and female characters, their characterization, and the gendered experiences they undergo related to their respective gender and society, this part will analyze the position of men and women in Indian and American family as depicted in the novel. This part is divided into two parts: firstly to discuss further men’s and women’s position in

Indian family, and secondly to discuss further men’s and women’s position in

American family.

1. Women’s and Men’s Position in Indian Family

According to the review of system in Indian family and society consider women as second class citizens. The rituals relating to birth and marriage reflect a son-preference. A related phenomenon of son-preference, Bidyut Mohanty in his study “Women and Family in India and China” said that the family and society at large consider women as second class citizens. The rituals relating to birth and marriage reflect a son-preference. A related phenomenon of son-preference in the modern context is the amniocentesis test to abort the female feolus. This unfortunately is more prevalent in urban India. The sex selective test has increased the male-female ratio between 1981 and 1991 in a significant manner

(Murthi, Guio & Dreze, 1997).

In Indian family, a son is more expected than a daughter. Having a daughter means more trouble in the family. The family has to pay the dowry when their daughter would marry. Moreover if the daughter is uneducated and not pretty, the family will pay more for the dowry. The treatment between son and daughter also different, son gets better treatment than daughter. In the novel, since Arun was born, he has been treated with “proper attention” (Desai, 1999: 30). The family is highly concerned to him. Mama gives him the best food herself and does not let the servants take care of him.

In education, men are given the best education and are encouraged to get the best accomplishment in their study, whereas women are only given little education and discouraged from any accomplishment in their study. Further, women are conditioned by people around them, both male and female, to regard 76

education as something unimportant and irrelevant to their life. Naturally, an educated person has a better position than an uneducated person because firstly, an educated person has wider knowledge and better critical thinking ability, and secondly, an educated person has higher social status and is free to earn his or her own living, while an uneducated person has none of those privileges. For instance, although Arun himself feels pressured by the high and strict education given to him, in the end he still has a better fate than his sisters: he is able to get away from his family by studying abroad, a thing that all his siblings have yearned to do but only he can achieve. With his education, later he can easily find an excuse to work and live away from his parents. Thus, men are in the superior position while women are in subordinate position.

Women’s subordinate position in education is related to their subordinate position in career and livelihood. It is desirable for men to get high education so that they can have a good career later. However, women are expected to get married, so they are not expected to get high education and even forbidden to have a career. Men work as the sole breadwinner of the family; they are encouraged to achieve success in their career. On the other hand, women are restricted and forbidden to have any paid work outside the house and earn their livelihood. Since women are not able to earn any money, they have to depend on men in order to live. Thus, once again, men have the superior position as the ones who provides livelihood, while women have the subordinate, dependent position.

According to Rosaldo’s theory, men’s dominance is “due to their participation in public life and their regulation of women to domestic sphere” (in 77

Humm, 1990:103). Men’s superior position in their participation in public life inevitably forces women to the domestic sphere under male dominance, which can be seen in the domestic life and in marriage.

In the domestic life, at a glance women are indeed in control. Women are in charge to do all domestic tasks and have full responsibility. However, on closer examination, women must do all those tasks and responsibilities without any privilege in return. On the other hand, men are given top priority and are always served by women at home; men have all the privileges without any task or responsibility. It shows that even in domestic life, women are placed in a subordinate position below man.

Moreover, due to such circumstances, women are made very busy and occupied with their roles in the subordinate position. Women cannot fight back, can barely better themselves or do anything that may improve their position. For example, Mama never goes to school. So she cannot see the importance of education and believes that women exist only to get married and do her responsibilities at home, just like herself. She is busy doing her tasks at home; she never reads, goes out or talks with other people except to accompany Papa or to gossip with the neighbor, so she would not be able to discover that women also have the rights for education, career, and so on. She would not have the opportunity to change her point of view. This is the line with Rosaldo’s theory about inequality of men and women:

A state where women are universally subordinate to men, where men are dominant due to their participation in public life and their regulation of women to domestic sphere. The differential participation of men and women 78

in public life gives rise not only to universal male authority over women but to higher valuation of male over females roles’ (1990: 103).

Related to the domestic sphere is the matter of marriage, which is truly complicated and has wide implications in the Indian family, especially social and economic implications. Women face the obligation to get married, while men do not face as much obligation. At the same time, it is the woman’s family that has to pay dowry to the groom’s family. As a result, women have less bargaining power.

They are easily taken advantaged of or even tricked; they are prone to become victims. If there is any trick or bad intention from the husband’s side, it is the woman who faces the biggest risk and takes the blame. Within her own family, a woman faces tremendous pressure to be attractive and well-mannered, so she can easily get married to a man from good social class with a small dowry. In addition to the dowry, arranged marriage system brings even more disadvantage to women, if related with the domestic life in Indian family. A woman must submit to and serve her husband, even if she does not even know or love him, or the man treats her badly. In many cases, a wife lives with the husband’s extended family and thus must submit to and serve her in-laws as well.

Men, on the other hand, do not have to experience any of the disadvantages or risks above. This example is in accordance with Rubin’s idea about how men typically ‘have certain rights in their female kin’, whereas ‘women do not have the same rights either to themselves or to their male kin’ and may be used as bridewealth, trophies, gifts and even ‘traded, bought, and sold’ (2005: xxv). The marriage system using dowry has become like a form of business, where women are regarded merely as assets or properties. On the other hand, women have no 79

such rights on their male kin. Thus, as in the other matters, in marriage, women are placed in subordinate position below men.

In Indian family, male roles, namely studying and working to earn money, are also given higher value than female roles, namely working at home to serve the family. When Arun is studying, his sisters Uma and Aruna are “warned to keep away, not to provide the faintest distraction” (Desai, 1999: 119). Their parents make sure that Arun will not be disturbed when studying. However, when

Uma is doing one of her tasks at home, tying the parcel for Arun, Papa disturbs her by giving her another order to instruct the cook about sweets for tea “at once”

(Desai, 1999: 4), which ends up confusing Uma. It shows that the parents do not appreciate Uma’s activity as much as Arun’s. Although Uma spends all her time working at home, the value of her work is not considered at all, as shown in

Papa’s words below:

‘Costs money! Costs money!’ he kept shouting long after. ‘Never earned anything in her life, made me spend and spend, on her dowry and her wedding’ (Desai, 1999: 146).

It implies that Papa has done a lot for Uma, while Uma never does anything for

Papa, which is of course not true. Mama’s role of feeding Arun is also not appreciated enough by Papa, who easily judges her success of failure, although he might not be able to do it himself.

Mama developed a nervous fear on the subject of Arun’s feeding: the exercise always left her spent, and after it she still had to face Papa’s interrogation regarding its success or failure (Desai, 1999: 32).

As the last example, being made as a wife and a mother of a son is considered as an “honour”, which implies that husband’s role is higher than a wife’s role. It is 80

shown in this quote about Mama and Papa: “He had not only made her his wife, he had made her the mother of his son. What honour, what status” (Desai, 1999:

31).

Based on Brannon’s theory, that in many cultures men perform some activities more often than women, and women perform some activities more than men (1996: 168), in Indian family, men’s activities such as work outside the house, get education, get good career, have authority in family; and women’s activities such as do all domestic and cannot go outside the house even go to school, pay the dowry, shelter, and other needs. Brannon claims that ‘these gender-related behaviors thus become part of a pattern accepted as masculine or feminine, not because of any innate reason for these differences but because they are associated with men and women’ (1996: 168). However, those kinds of activities give more advantages to men than women. Men have considerably higher position than women in Indian family, as reflected through the gendered experiences of the male and female Indian characters in the novel.

2. Women’s and Men’s Position in American Family

From the review of American family by Coontz and Ofstedal in their essay

“United States-Childbearing” wrote about women, family, and work, ‘the gradual separation of home and work, market production, and household reproduction in the early nineteenth century, along with the emergence of newly specialized occupations, paved the way for a changing relationship between family activities and economic production, a growing distinction between private and public life, 81

and a new conception of male and female roles that stressed their complementary but sharply divided responsibilities and capacities. This has become known as the doctrine of separate spheres’ (Essay of ‘United States-Childbearing’ accesed on

September 22, 2008). However, the separate spheres construct the inequality of men and women in American family in Fasting, Feasting.

According to Rosaldo’s theory, men’s dominance results from their participation in public life and their regulation of women to domestic sphere (in

Humm, 1990: 103). One of the elements in public life is the media, which also reflects the values embraced by the general public. Based on the image popularized in the media, the ideal image of women entails slim and beautiful women, while the ideal image of men entails strong and masculine. Since the media has become one of the chief products consumed in the American family, which is inseparable from the life of American family, ordinary people in the

American family are influenced by the media and consequently view their own body based on the media’s image.

Since the public life is dominated by men, the matter of body image is related with inequality between men’s and women’s position as well. As depicted in this novel, women in American family have considerably more body image problems than men. Women are expected to have good appearance regardless of their age, in order to be attractive to the opposite sex. Meanwhile, although men are also expected to be physically strong, the demand is not so high. As demonstrated in the novel, both Rod and Melanie have problems related to body image: Rod always tries to keep his body fit and in a good shape, while Melanie 82

tries to keep slim by only eating snacks and vomiting on purpose, which is not only detriment to her health and psychology, but also does not work effectively.

With much higher demand to be attractive, Melanie takes more desperate acts to keep her body slim and cannot think logically anymore. In fact, not only Melanie, but Mrs. Patton also has similar experience despite her mature age. When the clerk at the supermarket asks if she is pregnant, she gets upset and her first thought is that she looks fat.

‘I mean, do I look pregnant?’ her voice rises in anxiety. ‘I’m not fat, am I, Ahroon?’ (Desai, 1999: 210).

Her husband also ignores her when she was sunbathing. He prefers a can of beer and sits in front of television rather than sees his wife body that scarred and wrinkled, shrunk or sagging with age (Desai, 1999: 215).

Meanwhile, Rod can still think and analyze the situation logically. He does make serious efforts to stay in shape, but through healthy ways such as exercise.

When it is time to relax, he can still drink beer and eat snacks. Mr. Patton as a middle-aged man is not even concerned about his body, and enjoys his favourite food all the time.

This condition is exacerbated by the existing gender stereotypes about men such as logical and confident, and stereotypes about women such as spontaneous, changeable, and affected, especially considering stereotypes about women are more negative in content than about men (Baron and Byrne, 1994: 251). When a woman has a bad image about her body and practices unsuitable efforts to be attractive, the society justifies the action due to her gender, which acts like a subtle encouragement to other women to do the same. For instance, when Arun 83

tells Rod about Melanie’s bulimia, Rod’s answer implies that girls are indeed like that, and even further makes generalization and blames girls for their obsession on body image.

‘That’s all these girls are good are for, y’know. Not like guys. Too lazy to get off their butts and go jogging or play a good hard ball game. So they’ve got to sick it up.’ He straightens himself and sticks a finger into his mouth and wiggles it graphically. ‘Can you beat that? Who’d want to be sick?’ (Desai, 1999: 204).

The difference between body image demand for men and for women in American family reflects how men are in the superior position, while women are in subordinate position.

Based on Rosaldo’s theory on gender inequality, men’s superior position is also signified by the regulation of women to the domestic sphere (in Humm,

1990: 103). In the domestic life, women in American family do not have as many tasks and responsibilities as women in Indian family. On the contrary, men may also do some tasks and responsibilities inside the house. However, domestic tasks such as cooking and cleaning are still unconsciously seen as women’s obligation, which is proven by people’s reaction: if women do those tasks, it will be regarded as an ordinary thing, but if men do those tasks, it will be regarded as an extraordinary thing. For example, when Mr. Patton cooks, he makes such a big deal out of it, repeating the fact several times.

Then, when the clerk learns that the man in the supermarket is cleaning and cooking, she describes it as “awesome” (Desai, 1999: 209).

Gendered stereotypes play an important role in the subordination of women in domestic life. As discussed by Baron and Byrne, men are stereotypically associated with positive traits such as forcefulness, confidence, ambition and rationality, while women are associated with less desirable traits such as passivity, submissiveness and dependence (1994: 249). Women in American family are not as busy with household tasks as women in Indian family. Also, there are no specific restrictions for women, such as restrictions from leaving the house alone for personal interests or to have a paid work. However, as a matter of fact, women are often still confined in domestic sphere, such as Mrs. Patton. When she goes shopping on her own free will, she still thinks about her family and regards her family’s interests in her own way, namely by filling the refrigerator full of food.

She regards it as “[her] job” (Desai, 1999: 197). She does not have to serve her husband in everyday physical activities, such as by peeling fruit for him, but deep inside her mind, her mentality is still constructed to serve her husband. She serves her husband by indulging his ego and needs for superiority, such as by deliberately “look[ing] suitably apologetic and deceitful” (Desai, 1999: 185) whenever they have contrasting opinions, and agreeing to his opinions. The restrictions and obligations in American family are not direct physical ones, with the penalty of society’s reaction; rather, the restrictions and obligations work indirectly through gendered stereotypes instilled inside every person’s mind. 85

Thus, in domestic life, although in a more subtle way, women are still in a subordinate position below man.

In American family there is inequality of men’s and women’s position, in which men are placed in a higher position and women are in subordinate position.

However, the form and degree of inequality in Indian family differs from the ones in American family. Through the stereotypes of men and women in America, men get more opportunity than women in public sphere. So, women are still trapped in their mentality that perpetuates their subordinate position. CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION

The analysis of characters in Fasting, Feasting reveals the gendered experiences in different perspectives. The gendered experiences which are conveyed by the author reveal the domestic life of the family, marriage, relationship between men and women in the family, education and career. In

Indian family, men and women have different obligation to achieve. Men are not allowed to see women work in the kitchen, moreover to be in the kitchen. They receive good service from women. They have to work outside, get high education and good career. The different picture is described in American family, not only women, but also men are allowed to cook. However, it implies that woman who cooks regarded as an ordinary thing, and man who cooks regarded as an extraordinary thing.

The female characters in Fasting, Feasting are giving up to pursuit their dream. Their struggle to achieve their desire is fail. The social construction in the family does not give any chance to them to achieve what they want. Uma’s characteristic, which is not beautiful, awkward, clumsy, nervous and impulsive, show how she cannot refuse all the things that her parents have arranged for her.

Aruna, her younger sister, is in the opposite: very attractive, sharp, and very ambitious. She marries a good man from good social status, but she suffers because of her perfectionism. Anamika, who is beautiful and intelligent, also

86 87

marries a good man from high social status. However, her in laws treat her bad, which lead to her death.

The description of Mama, who is uneducated, conventional, very obedient to her husband, shows that Indian wife does not involve in family decision, because the husband is an absolute decision maker in the family. She does everything requested by her husband. Women in American family are represented by Mrs. Patton and Melanie. They are obsessed with appearance. Women have to look after their body shape and do more exercises than men. It can be seen on how

Melanie suffers bulimia eating disorder. She only eats candies and snacks, and regularly vomits in order to stay slim and to get attention. Later, she receives treatment for her bulimia in rehabilitation.

The male characters in Fasting, Feasting strengthen the idea of male domination. Papa and Mr. Patton, who are intolerant and do not care about other’s people opinion, shows that men tend to dominate the family. They decide everything as if they know how to run a perfect family life. They determine what their children must do. Arun, who is introvert, has to achieve high education because his father told him so. Rod receives a football scholarship like what Mr.

Patton wants him to do. Education is seen as the foremost priority and very important for men, considering they will be the breadwinner of the family. That is why boys are given the best education, as well as facilities and opportunities to get their best achievement. Even a troublemaker like Ramu, who is despised by his own family and relatives, are given the opportunity to earn his own livelihood.

The importance of analyzing characters in Fasting, Feasting is to see each character experience of gendered experiences in their life. Something is gendered when it is, in and of itself, actively engaged in social processes that produced and reproduce distinctions between women and men (Pilcher, 2004: 59). The female characters are obliged to do things that are regarded as ‘feminine’. They are responsible for all domestic chores, take care of children, cooking, shopping, etc.

In opposite, the male characters are obliged to do things that are regarded as

‘masculine’. They work outside home, get good education to get good career, get an opportunity in public area. Thus, those kinds of activities give more advantages to men than women.

Indian family and American family in Fasting, Feasting have several differences and similarities of thematic relation in conveying the gendered experiences. The similarity is both families are male-centered family system.

Moreover, as shown in the characters and the gendered experiences that experienced by the character in Fasting, Feasting, culture has demand differently over sex. Culture determines what should be achieved by men and women.

Different background culture of India and America constructs different gendered experiences. America has its own criteria of men and women, as shown by the

Pattons family. Therefore, India also has its own criteria of men and women, as shown by Uma’s family. Indian and American families consider that man is more valuable, so they get different treatment with different demand. It makes women always in subordinate position below men. Thus, the form and degree of inequality in Indian family differs from the ones in American family.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abrams, M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. 4th ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 1985.

Anshen, Ruth Nanda. The Family: Its Function and Destiny. New York: Harper & Bros, 1959.

Baron, Robert A. and Donn Byrne. Social Psychology: Understanding Human Interaction. 7th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1994.

Brannon, Linda. Gender: Psychological Perspective. Boston: Simon and Schuster Company, 1996.

Desai, Anita. Fasting, Feasting. London: Quality Paperbacks Direct, 1999.

Glover, David and Cora Kaplan. Genders. London and New York: Routledge, 2005.

Goodman, Lizbeth. Approaching Literature: Literature and Gender. London: Routledge in association with the Open University, 1996.

Hui, C. H., and Triandis, H. C. "Individualism- Collectivism: A Study of Cross- Cultural Researchers." Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 17:22–248, 1986.

Humm, Maggie. The Dictionary of Feminist Theory. 2nd ed. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1990.

Leitch, Vincent B. (ed). The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York & London: WW. Norton & Company Inc., 2001

Marriot, McKim. “Constructing an Indian Ethnosociology.” India through Hindu Categories. New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1990.

Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. Feminism without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practising Solidarity. New York: Duke University Press, 2003.

Murphy, M.J. Understanding Unseen: An Introduction to English Poetry and English Novel for Overseas Students. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd, 1972.

Pilcher, Jane and Imelda Whelehan. Fifty Key Concepts in Gender Studies. London: Sage Publications, 2004.

89 90

Putra, Khristiawan Eka. “Gender Issue as Seen in the Characters of Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway and Cunningham’s The Hours”. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma, 2005.

Saavala, Minna. Fertility and Familial Power Relations: Procreation in South India. Richmond: Curzon Press, 2001.

Stanton, Robert. An Introduction to Fiction. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965.

Triandis, H. C.; Bontempo, R.; Villareal, M. J.; Asai, M.; and Lucca, M. "Individualism and Collectivism: Cross-Cultural Perspective on Self—In Group Relationships." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 16:187–205, 1988.

Online References:

Chandra, Lakshmi. “Interpreting Fasting, Feasting Through Feminism”. (accessed on March 5 2008)

Coontz, Stephanie and Mary Beth Ofstedal. “United States – Childbearing”. (accesed on 22 September 2008)

Mohanty, Bidyut. “Women and Family in India and China”. (accessed on March 4, 2008)

Thomas, William I. 2005. Sex and Society. (accesed on April, 13 2008)

‘The American Woman of the Early Nineteenth Century’ (April 4, 2008)