Patriarchal Ideology in Select Victorian British Canonical Literature, Tamil Cinema and Popular Tamil Fiction: an Analysis of Typologies of Woman
Patriarchal Ideology in Select Victorian British Canonical Literature, Tamil Cinema and Popular Tamil Fiction: An Analysis of Typologies of Woman
Thesis submitted to the Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN ENGLISH
By A. NARAYANAN, M.A., M.Phil., (Ref.No:33083/PhD2/English/PT/January 2007)
Research Advisor Dr. R. ROOPKUMAR BALASINGH, M.A., B.Ed., M.Phil., Ph.D., Former Head & Associate Professor, Co-ordinator, PG & Research Department of English, Bishop Heber College
PG & RESEARCH DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH BISHOP HEBER COLLEGE (Autonomous) (Nationally Reaccredited at the “A+” Level by NAAC) (Recognized by the UGC as “College with Potential for Excellence”) TIRUCHIRAPPALLI - 620 017, INDIA.
JUNE - 2014 DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH BISHOP HEBER COLLEGE (Autonomous) (Reaccredited at the A+ Level by NAAC) College with Potential for Excellence TIRUCHIRAPPALLI – 620 017, TAMILNADU
Dr. R. Roopkumar Balasingh, Cell : 94437 05190 M.A., B.Ed., M.Phil., Ph.D., Ph : 0431-2770136/2770345 Former Head & Associate Professor Fax : 0431 2770005 Email : roopkumar @yahoo.com, [email protected]
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled Patriarchal Ideology in Select
Victorian British Canonical Literature, Tamil Cinema and Popular Tamil
Fiction: An Analysis of Typologies of Woman submitted by A. Narayanan for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English to Bharathidasan University,
Tiruchirappalli, is a bonafide record of original research work carried out under my guidance and, to my knowledge, the work reported here does not form part of any other thesis or dissertation for the award of any other degree or diploma.
Place: Tiruchirappalli Dr. R. Roopkumar Balasingh Date : Research Advisor
DECLARATION
I do hereby declare that the thesis entitled Patriarchal Ideology in Select
Victorian British Canonical Literature, Tamil Cinema and Popular Tamil Fiction:
An Analysis of Typologies of Woman is a record of bonafide research work done by me under the guidance of Dr. Roopkumar Balasingh , Former Head & Associate
Professor, Department of English, Bishop Heber College, Tiruchirapalli-620 017 and it has not formed the basis of the award of any degree, diploma, fellowship or other similar title of any University.
Place : Tiruchirapalli A. Narayanan Date : Research Scholar ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I thank wholeheartedly my teacher, guide, and father figure in my life,
Dr. M. Nagarajan , for his unstinting support and encouragement to start this research work and his continued moral support till I completed my research work.
I pay my obeisance to the departed soul, Dr. Kaladharan who was my first guide, for his support and motivation to carry out this research work. I place on record my sincere respect and tribute to the departed soul.
I thank from the depths of my heart my Research Supervisor, Dr. Roopkumar
Balasingh , for his valuable guidance and immense help in bringing the present research work to a scientific and an acceptable shape.
I thank Dr. D. Paul Dhayabaran , Principal of Bishop Heber College,
Tiruchirappalli for permitting me to continue my research project as a part-time scholar attached to the Department of English.
I thank the Management and the former Principals of Saranathan College of
Engineering, Tiruchirappalli, Dr. Y. Venakataramani , Dr. V. Gopalakrishnan and the present Principal, Dr. Revathy for supporting me in my Ph.D. work.
I am indeed thankful to my friend and colleague Mr. C. Gnanadesikan for his constant support and help rendered to me.
I am thankful to my wife N. Bhuvaneshwari for her continued moral support in my Ph.D. work.
I extend my heartfelt thanks to M/s. Golden Net Computers , Tiruchirappalli for bringing my thesis in a good shape.
A. NARAYANAN
CONTENTS
Chapter Title Page
Abstract
A Note on Documentation
I Introduction 1
II Assessing Characters against Male Ideologies in Wuthering Heights 31 and Jane Eyre
III Typology through Intertextual Readings of Novels Chosen for 87 Study
IV Analyzing Characters against Typologies in Tamil Novels 118 Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal , Oru Nadigai Naadagam
Paarkkiral , Thiyaga Boomi and Moha Mul
V Conclusion 181
Works Cited 202
ABSTRACT
The notion of typology of characters has time and again been discussed by critics. Is it possible to bring all humans into a limited number of typologies? This is not a simple question that can be answered with a ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. While exploring answers to this question, one has to bear in mind that patriarchal ideology has succeeded to a great extent by imposing typologies on woman. At the same time, there have been attempts, quite significantly in recent times, to break this grid of typologies of woman. This research project seeks to critically examine the notion of typologies of woman with characters drawn from the fictional world of Emily Bronte and Charlotte Bronte. Alongside, select Tamil novels have also been taken for the analysis. A few Tamil movies have also been chosen for analysing the typological and non-typological characters of man and woman. A few advertisement texts in the media have also been taken for further analysis of the typologies of both man and woman. The critical examination has surprisingly shown that many male characters of these novels evolve into ‘typologies’ while most of the women characters move in a significantly opposite direction to evolve into individuals. These mutually exclusive moves --- from an individual to a typology and a typology to an individual contribute to the taut organisation and the resulting tension in the fictional world.
A Note on Documentation
All Textual quotations are from the Primary Sources mentioned below
Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice . New Delhi: Maple Press, 2010. Print.
Austen, Jane. Sense and Sensibility . New Delhi: Maple Press, 2010. Print.
Austen, Jane. Emma . New Delhi: Rupa Publications India Pvt. Ltd, 1999. Print.
Bronte, Charlotte. Jane Eyre . Delhi: Surjeet Publications, 2009. Print.
Bronte, Emily. Wuthering Heights . Delhi: A.I.T.B.S Publishers, 2010. Print.
Jayakanthan. Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral. Meenakshi Puthaka Nilayam, 2009.
Print.
..... Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal. Meenakshi Puthaka Nilayam, 2011. Print.
Janakiraman. T. Moha Mul , Ainthinai Publications, 1994. Print .
Kalki. Thiyaga Boomi. Chennai: Pavai Publications, 2007. Print.
Karuthamma. Dir. Bharathiraja. Perf. Raja, Periyar Dasan, Rajshri Nair, Maheswari,
Saranya and Ponvannan, 1994. Tamil Film.
Marupadiyum . Dir. Balu Mahendra. Perf. Nizhalgal Ravi, Revathi, Rohini and
Arivind Swamy. 1993. Tamil Film.
Penmani Aval Kanmani. Dir. Visu. Perf. Visu, Seetha, Prathap, Delhi Ganesh, Dhilip,
Kamala Kamesh, Manorama, 1988. Tamil Film. Introduction
The concern of margins in societies across the world and the movements, both
Marxist and feminist, that sprung as a consequence of fighting for and establishing one’s rights in a capitalist and patriarchal tradition of life has been popular topics of discussion and research under the socialistic, postcolonial and gender umbrellas.
Though Marxism, which took root in the early decades of the eighteenth century, had found a leeway in establishing its presence felt in nations across the world there still are regions and nations where capitalism has taken firm roots and still a power to reckon with, especially in this post modern globalized world of ours. In the same way feminism and feminists have been vigorously attempting, and sometimes succeeding, in bringing together women empowerment, which began with Mary Wollstonecraft in
England, for the past two centuries and have made steady progress against a stubborn and relentless patriarchal system that continues to defy and deny such establishments.
The reason for the slow progress in feminist ideologies to thrive, even in this postmodern world are many; of which religion and patriarchal traditions are notable deterrents. In India, like most other countries, these two ethical institutions play a vital role in resisting women empowerment as well as influencing women themselves to uphold male monopoly. Even amidst the mushrooming of women writers in India and abroad, seldom do we come across writers who aver themselves to be feminists; on the contrary they safely catalogue themselves as feminist critiques. In such a socio-religious political scenario where really is women’s empowerment?
The aim of this research project is to study the stereotyping of women in the dominant patriarchal society of the 19 th and 20 th centuries choosing two popular 2 women novelists of the Victorian period and three male novelists from the Indian
(Tamil) context. This research examines why and how women have been docketed into certain types that will fit into male texted marginal roles. Though history speaks of women leaders fighting the colonial power woman in general has been portrayed as a good daughter, a good wife or a good mother and in the Indian joint family system, a good daughter-in-law / mother-in-law; in fact, the Angel of the House. Even
Indian women fictionists portray their heroines as burning with self righteous anger within but seldom expressing it without. It is rare to see a woman protagonist with a raging protest against the evils of society in any form of literature. Shakespeare has produced women characters like Lady Macbeth and Cleopatra who have broken the stereotyping trend and emerged as rebellious and assertive models of women. If
Caesar uses his power, it is eulogized as his valour; on the contrary, when Cleopatra employs her feminine charms, she is branded a strumpet. Many discussions have been held on tragic heroes but there has hardly been on any tragic heroine, let alone any discussion on them. The history of attack on woman starts with Eve. Eve took the forbidden fruit following the persuasive temptation of Satan whose gender is masculine. So, the first offender is a male not a female as it is being argued.
Patriarchy is a system which positions man as head of the family controlling the transactions of life of the other members of the family, especially of women. It also refers to a system of government by males, and the well structured domination of men in social or cultural systems. Patriarchy is often deemed as a term to explain men's prejudices and behaviour toward women (Anju, 2012). For example, the behaviour and attitude of a boss towards a worker is not the intrinsic problem of capitalism but rather an expression of it, so also gender relations are some of the
3 symptoms of the cultural, economic, social and ideological system of oppression, exploitation and power; the power of Patriarchy. Patriarchy dictates norms according to which, material and symbolic resources are unequally distributed to men and women. These norms are put into practice through social institutions like family, economic status, culture and language and literature. Hence, it has a phenomenal impact on the collective psyche of the society.
The patterns of society are subject to change and they are susceptible to the regressive transformations which pave the way for the protest and negotiations of gender bias and class oppression. Men create ideologies and these ideologies are biased to women and they create certain “moulds” into which women have to confine themselves. It is disheartening that the social constructs created by the dominant ideology make women more vulnerable than the other sex and these social constructs are deeply rooted in the age-old myths of the human society. The stereotyped roles of woman are further perpetuated by their blind adherence to the norms of the society.
They, due to lack of awareness, hesitate to transgress the norms of the society as they are made to feel that their cultural departure is a sin from the religious and societal purview. Ultimately, these patriarchal power structures classify women as child bearing machines who must remain chaste and obedient. Due to these restrictions and pressures on women, they are not able to think individually and act as seen right to them. As Dusinberre believes, “the struggle for women is to be human in a world which declares them only female” (Juliet, 1997). Women have been seen as the custodians of the cultural values as fixed by men. Their individuality has never been allowed to break these stereotyped roles. Rather, many women have invigorated their assigned roles by glorifying them instead of transcending them. They have also been
4 taught to be religious and offer poojas and prayers for the well being of their family members, especially of their men (Raj, 44).
Patriarchal ideology is also based on power relations that are hierarchical and unequal. Men oppress women in all strata of society and remain the centre of cultural hegemony. They control women’s roles in society and their sexuality. They control and limit their access to employment and outside world exposure. Women are considered suitable only for lower ranked positions in government and private sectors.
In countries like India and the Middle East, one can find many male managers and comparatively fewer female managers. Even in building construction work, one can hardly find a woman supervisor. They are used only for menial jobs like shifting materials from one place to another place where men carry out construction work and are paid trivially. Their potential managerial skills are mainly used to take care of the household responsibilities. Traditional custom and practice have made women happily carry out their domestic responsibilities and expect their men to appreciate their domestic chores which they normally do not get it from their men. “If gentlemen wanted domestic wives, women sought appreciation for domestic values from their potential husbands” (Kaplan, 18). Regarding domestic work, a woman plays a major role but her labour is seldom recognized. In this aspect, men are thought to be more productive than women from the society’s purview. Hence, men gain power and edge over women.
Men have developed a self-styled belief that they are major players in society.
Society allows more men to reign in politics than women. It is no accident that the
Indian Parliament has not been able to pass a bill reserving 33% of seats for women in elections at all levels whereas the actual population of women is equal to that of men.
5
This is a step to perpetuate gender inequality. Men place themselves in all positions of power, imposing themselves on women as superiors and women are allowed only private spheres at home. This divide has been the traditional notion of society, a patriarchal society. Mulkraj Anand said: “In my opinion, one cardinal cause of suffering of woman in all ages, except the first Aryan phase, has been the dominant patriarchy, sanctioned in the Smritis ” (qtd in Kamini, 1994). This gender-based discrimination and suppression are pervasive throughout the world and the socio- culturally defined characteristics, attitudes, aptitudes and desires are shaped up accordingly and the behavioural patterns of men and women also cause social inequality and hierarchies in society. The intensity of the patriarchal ideology varies from society to society as socio-cultural changes and awareness are not identical in all societies. Patriarchy is prevalent in many ways in advanced capitalist society. The
Radical Feminist movement strongly condemns and challenges the social constructs of women like child bearing, child rearing, domestic burden and domestic confinement.
The status of women’s in developing nations differs from what it is in developed nations. In developed countries like America and England, women appear to enjoy equal status, equal job opportunities, and equal rights in all spheres. But in countries like India, added to its hoary patriarchal history and the influence of the
British rule for more than two centuries, women still struggle for their equal status and self-expression. This control over women is perpetuated by the recirculation of ideology through language, literature and other manifestations of male culture.
According to Marxist Feminists, man tries to supersede woman in all spheres:
6
The man took command in the home also; the woman was degraded
and reduced to servitude; she became the slave of his lust and a mere
instrument for the production of children. The first class opposition
that appears in history coincides with the development of the
antagonism between man and woman in monogamous marriage, and
the first class oppression coincides with that of the female sex by the
male (Engels, 2004).
As he has himself declared that man is the cultural hegemony, the certain identities he has created for woman will not change unless man changes his attitude.
He may change his attitude if there is a compulsion -- as the law of inertia would put it ‘things remain in a state of rest or uniform motion unless otherwise disturbed’
(Newton’s Law). Keeping this in mind, it is affirmed that woman should break the man-made grid of stereotypes. Of course, there are quite a number of women organizations across the world functioning cutting across race, culture and language.
It is worth mentioning that right thinking men too support and voice for these organizations.
Though a number of feminist movements have come to surface and fight the male hegemony, women still remain comfortably within the patriarchal shelter and lead the mediocre existence in many societies in the world. In the beginning, education was provided to girls just to prepare them for doing domestic chores later in their life. But later in the middle of nineteenth century, women movements advocated that only educated, physically strong and capable mothers alone would give birth to promising progeny for the healthy society. Further, the Indian National Movement roped in women for strengthening its nationwide protest against the British rule and
7 they used this opportunity to come out of their “zananas” and joined with men in the fight for the freedom of the nation. This reality is well captured in Kalki’s Tamil novel Thiyaga Boomi .
Feminism plays a substantial role in countering and destabilizing the patriarchal ideology. Feminism is a movement to spread awareness about the detrimental influence of patriarchal ideology on human society. Many feminist writers raise their voices against male supremacy over women and their exploitation in the family, at the work place and society in general. It has been a long struggle for them to achieve equality, dignity, equal pay for the same work and recognition and identity in society. This researcher has taken a position to show that in the struggle against patriarchal ideology women have to work together in a true competitive spirit. The goal is empowering woman as a dignified equal to man. This research proposes to engage a few main feministic theories for application in this thesis.
Liberal feminists champion the cause of legal and political rights of women on par with men. The psychological basis of Liberal feminists lies in the principle of individualism. They believe that women can achieve equal status through political means. In some countries, women still struggle to gain access into politics. They blame the patriarchal world for confining women into their domestic sphere and their lack of education perpetuates their confinement. It is understood that the societal or legal subjugation of women is wrong and it needs to be countered to maintain the equal status for both sexes in the society.
Marxist feminists take a different stand in their approach towards women’s issues. Marxist theory is the proto type of feminist theory which focuses on eliminating hegemony, monopoly and capitalism. The dismantling of capitalism, they
8 believe, is the only way for liberating women. Frederick Engel’s “The Origin of the
Family, Private property and the State ” is the foundation for Marxist feminist theory along with Julia Kristeva’s Desire in Language - A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art (1980) and Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak’s Can the Subaltern Speak . Engel claims that women’s subordination is not due to the biological dispositions but due to social relations, that is, the institution of family is a complicated system in which men are empowered to command women’s services. Marxist feminists see gender oppression as class oppression and the relationship between man and woman in society as similar to the relations between the proletariat and the bourgeois. Women's subordination is seen as a form of class oppression, which is maintained (like racism) because it serves the interests of the capitalist and Ruling class. Marxist feminists have extended traditional Marxist analysis by looking at domestic labour as well as wage work. Regarding domestic work, woman plays a major role but her labour does not get recognized. Engel argues why woman should be subjected only to domestic chores. It will keep her in the dark about the external world and she will not be able to realize her true worth. After marriage, she becomes only the executor of the commands of her husband and shoulders the responsibility of rearing her offspring.
She does not have any say in any kind of property investment for the sake of the family which, for centuries has been taken care of by husbands (Engel, 2004).
Materialist feminists underlie the importance of the emergence of a social reality with its accent on new socio political practice devoid of the current evils of world capitalism and patriarchy. The main traits of this theory are rooted in the dominant pluralist principle of considering woman a generic entity as expressed in feminist theories as well as the authoritative inequalities that exploit woman and
9 oppress her. Materialist feminism cuts across the barrier of nation and focuses its attention on multinational capitalism, the international division of labour over determined economic, political, and cultural practices.
Post- Marxist feminists reject historical materialism and analyze their theory on the basis of cultural, ideological and political practices. In reality, the struggles of women are due to capitalist tendencies. It is important to note here that the women’s issues are not viewed from the capitalist material issues. Reclaiming their status in the frame work of anti capitalist feminist theory would result in focusing the struggles of women within the cultural boundary. Cultural boundary is the only area of social production and it is wrong to cast their struggles in that area alone.
Socialist Feminism is a branch of feminism which fights both the economic and cultural differences between man and woman. Socialist feminists focus on the public and private realms of life of women also. They are of the view that cultural and economic sources cause women’s oppression. According to them, capitalism plays a vital role in women’s suppression which is the foremost idea of Marxist feminists. They have worked hard to separate gender oppression from class oppression. They are striving to weed out the gender differences to achieve total liberation of women folk. The socialist feminists believe that Gender oppression and patriarchal ideology are the main issues to be fought against to achieve equal status for woman. Barbara Ehrenreich avers that human societies have been known for inequality between sexes for centuries together.
The subordination of women, pay differences for the same work and the psychological imprisoning of women are some of the ways by which women have been marginalized.
10
Radical feminists believe that patriarchal monopoly is the root cause of sexual oppression. They question the notion of femininity and masculinity. They assert that the society forces woman to be a mother, wife, sister and so on. The ideology of motherhood is strengthened by the society. She is subjugated to be a mother and her motherhood restricts her mobility and invigorates male superiority. It is interesting to note here that when there was a Supreme Court case in the USA on abortion;
Mrs. Hillary Clinton made a public statement that a woman has the fundamental rights to terminate her unwanted pregnancy (Hillary, 2008). This is a strong position against the typology of fixing a woman as a child-bearer. Radical feminists opine that the biologically determined characters of women are the barriers for them to achieve equal status. Simone de Beauvoir observes ( The Second Sex 1949) that gender differences are imposed by society and these differences create typologies of women.
It is clear that both man and woman have been operating on separate roles fixed by society. These separate roles for man and woman perpetuate patriarchal hegemony and reinforce women’s subordinating status in the society.
Classical liberal feminism stresses that the interaction of citizens should be controlled by states to such an extent to safeguard the right of the citizens against coercive interference. In the area of business, enterprise, the scope of giving fewer wages to woman and creating an unfriendly atmosphere for women to work are the negative factors responsible for the coercive interference. Even in the field of education, such a tendency in offering them inferior education on account of their sex is still practiced. Because of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Educational Amendments
Act of 1973, now women get equal pay for equal work with men and same education offered in schools and colleges for both men and women.
11
In a nutshell, the Classical liberal feminists’ views as reflected in Literature project the idea of them as a consequentiality which means providing women with more of what is good for them in the society with suitable laws like making women safer and setting up free markets like the SHE (Self-Help Group) factor as it is existing in Tamilnadu in South India.
Human knowledge depends on recognition and identification. Shakespeare said: “Nothing is good or bad; thinking makes it so”. Our male indoctrinated world of knowledge has predetermined roles for men and women in society and our traditions and religions reiterate this indoctrination. If one can slot people into certain pre-determined modes, it becomes easier to negotiate with the world. It is not just the
Victorian Age but every age that puts men and women of every kind into certain types in line with this patriarchal indoctrination.
Are there Typologies of Women?
Human knowledge is the epistemological storehouse built by layers of observation. More often than not, these layers of observation are based on subjective perceptions and untenable propositions. Down the ages, men have suppressed women and have created self-styled, linguistic, mythological, and religious supports for this suppression. This process of suppression is continuously strengthened by creating moulds or types of woman.
Typology in general, is a systematic classification of types that have characteristics or traits in common. Typology of woman is the practice of putting them in certain moulds in both the literary and the real world. This stereotyping of woman is created and perpetuated by the practitioners of patriarchal ideology.
12
Patriarchal ideology literally means the overpowering rule of a father in a male-dominated family. It is a social and ideological construct which determines roles and functions of women. This researcher is of the view that this status of women is determined by the behavioural patterns of both men and women. The patriarchal ideology draws its argument and strength from the biological condition of women.
Sigmund Freud says, “Women’s anatomy is their destiny”, their biological weakness accounts for their submissive roles in the society. This is a male point of view which is being sharply criticised by feminists. ‘The female is a female by virtue of a certain lack of qualities,’ says Aristotle; ‘we should regard the female nature as afflicted with a natural defectiveness’. And St. Thomas for his part pronounces woman to be an
‘imperfect man’, an ‘incidental’ being. This is symbolised in Genesis where Eve is depicted as made from what Bossuet called ‘a supernumerary bone’ of Adam
(Beauvoir, 1948).
This research does not propose to merely present the various theories on the issue of gender. Rather, he seeks to critically examine various theoretical positions on the issue of gender to answer Yes / No, and the Why and How to the topic of discussion . This chapter will precisely make this critical examination and highlight the research gap which is sought to be filled by this research project. In the perception of this research, typologies of woman do exist in society and they need to be deconstructed after destabilizing it to reconstruct the empowered woman who constitutes half of the population of the world. That most part of this half suffers the suppression of men is a shameful fact of human society and patriarchal ideology. Kate
Millet avers:
13
If one takes patriarchal government to be the institution whereby that
half of the populace which is female is controlled by that half which is
male, the principles of patriarchy appear to be twofold: male shall
dominate female, elder male shall dominate younger. However, just as
with any human institution, there is frequently a distance between the
real and the ideal; contradictions and exceptions do exist within the
system. kate/sexual-politics.htm> The project of empowerment of woman can be successfully implemented only through the instruments of greater education and economic independence. Educating a man is just educating an individual whereas educating a woman is educating the next generation. Educating a woman will empower her to evolve as a competent competitor with her fellow men to gain economic independence. But this economic independence needs to be supported by the epistemological reconstruction of woman as an equal partner of man in constructing a society free of gender bias. This research is focused on the equality of man and woman and this researcher strongly believes that in the struggle against patriarchal ideology man and woman should work together as comrades to eliminate patriarchy. Dorothy Parker writes saying, “I cannot be just to books which treat woman as woman... My idea is that all of us, men as well as women, should be regarded as human beings” (qtd in Beauvoir, 1949). Hence, this research reiterates that there is no gender difference between man and woman and they should be equally treated as human beings. If this understanding comes to surface, gender bias will be eliminated. 14 Thanks to the rising globalized market economy and the mushrooming if IT industries, educated women face fewer problems than the rural uneducated ones. All over the world, and especially in India, women have been facing threats of survival due to the male-dominant ideology practiced in the society. A girl child is subjected to pre-determined foeticide if her parents are not educated or rich enough to allow her to be born. After birth, she must be physically and mentally healthy to attain puberty at the right age. She must look beautiful to her bridegroom only then will she be vendible in the marriage market. She must know cooking to be able to cook delicious food for her husband and in-laws in addition to her reasonably acceptable educational qualification and employment. This gender oppression has to be seriously viewed to destabilise the inequality to the overall growth of society. Two gender violence problems can be attributed to this menace. First, female infanticide is largely in practice. Even though it has been declared a punishable offence, it continues to be in practice in many villages in India. People, out of fear of having to give dowry for their daughters, prefer male children. As a result, they don’t mind practising female foeticide or female infanticide. This practice has been in vogue in many rural areas of Tamilnadu. This reality was captured in a Tamil feature film Karuthamma by Mr. Bharathiraja. In this film, the father at the young age regrets getting a second girl child. His regret is reflected in the following translation of Tamil dialogue in English. “Instead of begetting this second female child, I should have wisely purchased a lamb, so that it could earn me money in future. But this girl child, after growing up to marriage, will strip me of all my wealth in the name of dowry” (This researcher’s translation into English). 15 Dowry death is otherwise called ‘bride burning’. It is reported that the cases of dowry related torture mostly result in death. But most of the dowry deaths go unreported, due to lack of evidence and the relatives’ apprehension over the ruin of the family’s image. In Indian societies, women are also held responsible for the bride burning and dowry deaths. The mother-in-law forces the daughter-in-law to bring more dowries. In such cases, if the girl shows any resistance, her husband subjects her to any kind of physical harassment or even murders her using her vulnerability and hapless situation. The mother-in-law may be directly accountable for this or she may be behind the scene. Here, this researcher is bound to cite an example from another Tamil movie Penmani Aval Kanmani by Mr. Visu who is also a part of the cast. In a situation where the daughter-in-law is subjected to physical harassment on the ground of dowry, he delivers a dialogue citing a news from a newspaper that a daughter-in-law died out of the burst of gas stove, “the gas stove bursts only when the daughter-in-law lights it, but it does not when it is lighted by the mother-in-law”. (This researcher’s translation from Tamil) Marxist feminists opine that gender oppression is class oppression and the relationship between man and woman in society is similar to the relations between proletariat and bourgeoisie. Both kinds of oppression are interrelated and they are the worst obstacles for the wellbeing of the human society (Engels, 2004). What is reasonably acceptable qualification has both class and caste norms which are variables across time — diachronic variables, to use a technical term of Frederic Jameson, though in a different context. A woman is destined to be gentle and male-dependent for her survival, protection and social security and status. Thus, a woman can only be a daughter 16 (Miss...) or wife (Mrs). The protests of feminists brought about the linguistic item Ms which gives a self-identity to a woman. Though she is seen to be a feeble person, she is expected to grow strong enough to act as the backbone of the man or the family without a male member. She cannot have her own choice in any sphere of life. In Tamil society, mother-in-law, though older than her son-in-law, as a mark of respect will not sit even on the floor in his presence. However old might she be, she has been groomed by the patriarchal society in such a way that in the presence of her father, husband and son-in-law, she is not supposed to be seated anywhere in the vicinity. After marriage, she has to adopt the family of her husband and serve them as a servant maid without pay. As per the norms of the male centred society, she must live up to the expectations of her husband and her in-laws. According to Manu: A virtuous wife should constantly serve her husband like a god, even if he behaves badly, freely indulges his lust, and is devoid of any good qualities—it is because a wife obeys her husband that she is exalted in heaven. (Doniger and Smith, 115) Tryambakayajvan, a Brahmin scholar, gives a clear description of norms to be followed by the ideal upper-caste Hindu women. One of the most important norms to be strictly followed by women is loyalty and faithfulness to their husbands. Women should never deviate from the norms for the well-being of the society. Her blind obedience and being faithful to her husband would elevate her to the level of divine status called Dharmapathini in Tamil (a chaste and obedient wife) (Leslie, 1989). Men take liberty to overlook the norms of culture which he imposes on women to be strictly adhered to: 17 Men have, traditionally, the privilege to cross the threshold unhindered and enjoy both the worlds, whereas women have been expected to inhabit only the one world contained by the boundaries of home. For women, a step over the bar is an act of transgression. (Anju, 2012) The patriarchal idea of women that prevailed in the nineteenth century and even in the present era has the root in the ancient Vedic compositions like Manusmirithi. The Manusmirithi attributed only negative qualities to women. “The bed and the seat, jewellery, lust and anger, crookedness, a malicious nature, and bad conduct are what Manu assigned to women”. (Ibid) She must refrain from performing the religious rites of her parents and start following those of her husband’s family. If it happens to be a marriage across religions, she has to proselytize and embrace the religion and culture of her husband. In the human society especially in Indian society, the male child is preferred to the female child. So, a woman is expected to give birth to a male baby in time. She must also be ready to forgive her husband if he is found to be drunk or guilty of debauchery. She must be ready to live with him amicably in spite of his violence and misconduct. She begins as a good daughter of someone, moves on to be a faithful wife of someone and slowly evolves into an affectionate mother of someone. These are the various roles of woman fixed by the society. (Ibid) In terms of equal status, men are more equal than women. Simon de Beauvoir vehemently records her protest saying, The terms masculine and feminine are used symmetrically only as a matter of form, as on legal papers. In actuality the relation of the two sexes is not quite like that of two electrical poles, for man represents 18 both the positive and the neutral, as is indicated by the common use of man to designate human beings in general; whereas woman represents only the negative, defined by limiting criteria, without reciprocity. In the midst of an abstract discussion it is vexing to hear a man say; ‘you think thus and so because you are a woman. (Beauvoir, 1949) In the early twentieth century, woman after becoming a widow had to forgo all her earthly pleasures including her conjugal happiness. She had to tonsure her head and be clad in white or sandal colour saree. She had to confine herself within the four walls and to refrain from attending any function or being in front during any happy occasion. The same society viewed her as a bad omen and never invited her for any happy occasion. After the mid twentieth century when the democratic women’s movements blossomed and geared into action, she mustered strength to break all these norms and to live her life the way she wished to. Now, that pathetic plight of women has been changed and they have started to come out of their shell due to their awareness through formal and informal education. The late twentieth century has seen great progressive changes in woman’s life due to the mushrooming of women organizations fighting the patriarchal ideology. Of course, many men nowadays do realize that women are the equals of men and they prove to be equally competitive to man. Simon de Beauvoir observes, So it is that many men will affirm as if in good faith that women are the equals of man and that they have nothing to clamour for, while at the same time they will say that women can never be the equals of man and their demands are in vain. It is, in point of fact, a difficult matter for man to realise the extreme importance of social discriminations 19 which seem outwardly insignificant but which produce in woman moral and intellectual effects so profound that they appear to spring from her original nature. (Ibid) She affirms that men have insensible fear over the intellectual growth and materialistic independence of women since they can no longer exercise their male hegemony on women. This kind of oppressive attitude of men over women has been traced out even from the Indian epic literature Bagavath Geetha . It is affirmed that that patriarchy is reflected and perpetuated by literature which is mainly supposed to be the products out of male-dominated perspective of the society (2007). Seetha in Ramayana, who is goddess Lakshmi in human form, is ordered by her husband Rama, God Vishnu in human form to prove her chastity after her rescue from her imprisonment in Ravana’s garden, Ashokavanam. Even a goddess has to take the fire test to prove her chastity, if ordered by the husband. The miseries of Seetha do not end even after her fire test unhurt, being protected by the shield of chastity! Years later, Rama, overhearing a conversation of one of his citizens with his wife questioning the chastity of Seetha, expels Seetha, a pregnant woman bearing Ram’s twins, from the palace and dispatches her to a wild forest. Rama is an avatar of Lord Vishnu, one of the Trinities of Hinduism whose role is to protect the universe. Even the god of protection denies protection to his own pregnant wife when it comes to patriarchal ideology. Religion proves to be a strong weapon in the hands of patriarchal ideologues through myths! It is argued that Ramayana is not a literary epic but a faith system of the Hindus, a holy book. This faith was instilled in the society and perpetuated by the patriarchal ideology. This researcher is of the view that this dominant ideology got invigorated with the religion. It is against this background of 20 understanding that this researcher seeks to critically examine the characters of the chosen British and Tamil novels. Let us critically examine the Indian Parasuram myth. Parasuram’s mother Renukha Devi used to bring water from a nearby river in a pot made by her from the riverside sand (a message to women that strict obedience to husband and remaining chaste will empower woman to make a pot even with riverside sand, which is an impossible task). One day, as she was making the pot for the day, celestial lovers passed by on the sky which diverted her attention for a few minutes. She could not make the pot as the sand did not hold together. Upset and worried, she went home empty-handed. Saint Jamadhakini, her husband saw what had happened in his power of vision and grew furious that his wife got distracted by the love couple. He expelled her from his home. Being unable to control his fury, he called his sons one after the other and ordered them to behead her. The first three sons refused to kill their mother which cost them their lives. The fourth son, Parasuram obeyed the father’s command and beheaded his mother, Renukha Devi (Suresh, 376). We are not going beyond this point into the myth. Suffice it to record here that a woman getting distracted from duties to her husband, even by a few seconds will cost a wife her life. Even the son will kill a mother on orders from the patriarchal head of the family, the father. The institution of marriage is used still in many places by patriarchal societies as a chance to control women and their sexuality. S.D. Sharma observes that, The primary function of marriage in such a case seems to be total submission of female to male sexual and social sexuality where there is no scope for communication and love... A wife is still made to play a second fiddle to her husband and a consistent effort is made to destabilise the freedom of her emotional world . (Sharma, 1998) 21 Thus, women have been coerced to accept ‘marriage’ as the only way to secure their life. They have never been allowed to think about their potential and to act according to their choices. They have further been made to believe that they can find solutions to all their problems only by offering their humble and devoted service to their husbands. This kind of pitiable plight of women has been attributed to the dominating ideology- based society. Rama Mehta says: With the exception of marriage, (woman) was denied the right to participate in religious ceremonies in which Vedic texts were used. There was no period set aside for her intellectual growth as in the case of boys who were symbolically initiated into studentship by the sacred thread ceremony. For girls, marriage assumed the same importance as the sacred thread ceremony for the boys as it was also a rebirth into a new life. (Rama, 1970) Further, most brides do not have a say in their choice of life partners. Parents are keen to hand her to a wealthy or good salaried man without being concerned about their child’s feelings and expectations. But now the situation has slightly changed due to the spread of education and media exposure. But bride kidnapping and forced marriages are still in practice. Kidnapping is an expression of male power. He feels that he is entitled to marry any woman he likes, regardless of her interests. Kyrgyzstan is the country with the highest prevalence of bride kidnapping. Up to one-third of all ethnic Kyrgyz women in Kyrgyzstan are kidnapped brides. It is reported that more than eighty percent of women were abducted and married to their men out of compulsion. Out of 806 case studies, 65% of bride kidnapping cases are reported to have occurred after 1992. The perpetrators involved in the kidnapping are 22 only men, but at the same time, women also have a large role to play. After the bride is kidnapped, she is surrounded by a group of women belonging to the bridegroom’s family. They will convincingly speak to her and make her consent to marriage. They will divulge to her that they were also kidnapped and forced to marry their husbands. By this way, it is accepted as a part of their cultural behaviour. Another great challenge women face is the female infanticide. It is important to record here that the Government of Tamilnadu (India) introduced the Government Cradle System of keeping cradles at government hospitals, for people to deposit their unwanted female infants. It is no accident that the scheme was introduced by a woman chief minister in 1992. India’s female sex ratio has been quickly dwindling, ever since 2001. In a study of five of the districts with some of the most skewed ratios, (Punjab, Rajasthan, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and Madya Pradesh) four out of five had worsened. Compared to 2001 census data, in Punjab’s Fatehgarh Sahib District, the population ratio of both sexes was reported to be only 300 girls for every 1000 boys (Lewis, 2008). The sex-selective abortion is simply the modern alternative, and even families with the lowest income prefer to go for a sex-determining test. Besides, they believe 23 that a sex test and abortion will deprive them much less than raising dowry for their prospective daughters. It is important to note here that the identification of the gender of the foetus has been banned in India (Pre conception and Pre Natal Diagnostic Tests Act in 2001). This practice is in vogue in Bangladesh and Pakistan. But, it is not directly linked to dowry, as there is a low presence of dowry practice in the Muslim tradition, and yet male-foetus is preferred. Victims most often enter into arranged marriages to avoid the cultural embarrassment of remaining unmarried. So, there is a psychological pressure on women to get married and stay dependent on her spouse and his family. They are viewed as a burden in many cases, either economically or simply in gender terms, and are not given equal autonomy or status in their household. When they seek support from their natal home or community, they are counselled not to complain of any problem but to adjust with everyone in the family. In some cases, in spite of the women being tortured and harassed by her husband or her in-laws, they are advised to stay in the marriage even if it is bitter and proves harmful. There are prejudices against girl children in the families which have been under the influence of patriarchal ideology. Women are used to being under the grid of typological roles framed by men. This is reflected in Rama Mehta’s Inside the Haveli . It is noted in the novel when the lady cook Khayali makes an angry remark when Geetha proposes to send the daughter of her servant maid to school: Does Binniji think just because we are servants she can do as she pleases with our children? Let her try and send a daughter of mine to school and see. Yes, you can do what you like with boys but to expose a girl to the world! Never! (Rama, 126) 24 All the women of Haveli vehemently protest the idea of sending their daughters to school in fear of shortage of servant maids in future. This shows that women who are used to living in the male dominated society are themselves opposed to any move taken against the dominant ideology due to their lack of awareness and education. Many women, though educated, still conform to the patriarchal norms of the society and feel warmth in sheltering in the male domain. In Jaishree Mishra’s novel Ancient Promises, the mother of the protagonist, Mani is the traditional bound woman though she has received a formal education. She expects her daughter to be also like her depending on her husband and conforming to the societal norms which are dictated by men. She tells her daughter Janaki strongly, “All girls have to get married someday. You’re a lucky girl. The Maraars are an old and gracious family, half the families in Kerala would have died for an alliance like this”. (Jaishree Mishra, 66) In this context, the mother perpetuates the patriarchal norms by forcing her daughter to get married to a man and remain dependent on him. Jaishree believes that the society has to be entirely deconstructed to make the women realise their pathetic plight and empower them in the neutral, unbiased and just society. They should fight for their rights and identity through assertion. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime minister of Independent India observed, I should like to remind the women... that no group, no community, no country, has ever got rid of its disabilities by the generosity of the oppressor... the women of India will not attain their full rights by the mere generosity of the men of India. They will have to fight for them and force their will on the men folk before they can succeed. (qtd. Kumari Jayawardene, 73) 25 Contrary to the women characters in Inside the Haveli , the protagonist Akhila, Margaret, Sarasa Iyer in Anita Nair’s Ladies’ Coupe break the shackles of the patriarchal society and evolve themselves as unconventional and sensible rather than sensitive beings. Akhila, the eldest daughter of the family shoulders the responsibility of the family after the death of her father. When she realises that she is exploited by her ungrateful family, she starts looking for her own space. A lone spinster of forty-five is almost deserted by her siblings after they are settled in their marital lives. She becomes desperate when she finds her mother still moaning over the death of her husband and not being worried about her daughter’s unmarried status. She literally wakes up from her slumber and decides to empower herself through education. “On her thirty-fifth birthday... [Akhila] decided to get herself an education enrolling in an open university for a degree of Bachelor of Arts”. (Nair, 85) Akhila breaks the grid of typology and evolves as a non-typological woman. This should be an eye opener for the women who wish to get out of their suppression and seek self actualization. Margaret is treated by her husband Ebenezer Paulraj a woman of no significance. If she were a conventional woman, she would keep quiet bearing all the insults meted out to her. But she proves to be unconventional by hatching a plan to undo her husband’s male pride by overfeeding him and destroying his athletic looks and thus avenges his ruthlessness and conceited nature. These women characters of Anita Nair put up a stiff resistance to patriarchal superiority and thus make attempts to destabilise the established cultural norms of the male society. Man ignores a woman’s needs and that creates ripples in the family. Moreover, women undergo psychological problems due to their uncared and confined status in their house. This kind of plight of women is depicted in the novel Mango-Coloured-Fish by Kavery Nambisan. Subhash Chandra speaking on this says: 26 The conspicuous reversal of the polar positions between woman and man forms part of the conscious attempt on the part of the women writers to displace the male from the unquestionable dominant position he has occupied by virtue of the male supremacy, established by the patriarchal system in which a woman is considered ‘forward’ or lacking in womanly grace, if she desires a male, as a male does a female. (Chandra, 1995) Women need to have space to negotiate with hurdles and challenges of life. Under the aegis of patriarchy, they struggle to face the economic, cultural and political issues. Virginia Woolf says that women have to have their own space to bring out their potential contribution to the society. Space does not mean only the spatial freedom and free access to all fields, but also it deals with emotional, mental, social and psychological aspects. It is a social construct which is constituted by human relations and associations. Niranjana says, “space acquires meaning not in (and of) itself, but only in oppositional relation to adjoining and constituting entities”. It can be perceived only in relation to opposite entities. Spaces include gendered spaces also. The space of the household is thought to be the sole responsibility of women. Other productive chores are dominated by men (Niranjana, 2001). Thus, society has been ruled by the undemocratic patriarchs and women have been the worst victims of this ideology almost in all spheres of life. However, education has empowered women to a great extent which enables them to counter their suppression and emerge as equals to men. But still the marginalized women types do exist in society where the male types remain dominant. This adverse situation for women, though it has drastically reduced, has to be strongly dealt with and equanimity should prevail between both sexes for the well-being of the society. 27 Though the topic of research centres on selected works of Victorian British literature, it is deemed necessary to involve popular Tamil fictions with the same intent for a greater critical examination. The choice of texts under each will be decided by their potential to influence the readers, an Indian, especially a Tamil audience knowledgeable of British and Indian fictions. With this understanding, this researcher has also chosen a few Tamil novels of Jayakanthan, Kalki and T. Jankiraman who are prominent literary personalities in Tamil literature to strengthen the topical argument that dominant patriarchal ideologies beget female typologies in society and literature worldwide and through the expositions of female typologies, male typologies are also brought to light. To invigorate the argument further, this researcher has cited a few Tamil movies to discuss the influence of patriarchal ideology on the Tamil society. An attempt to analyze and categorize from the chosen English and Tamil novels both typological and non-typological characters and also identify a third type of women who are neither types or non-types, or those who seemingly shift from types to non types, but exhibit a sense of humaneness to fellow women against the patriarchal order that subjugates them. Following the arguments of cultural materialism, this thesis will discuss canonical and non-canonical / popular texts. The non-canonical texts are chosen from Tamil while the canonical texts are from Victorian English. The thesis is based on the hypothesis that the ignorance, lack of support from fellow women, lack of education and continuous indoctrination from birth assist and strengthen the hands of patriarchal ideology. Education is the instrument of change in any society. Besides, women need to have informal education like exposure to external world. They need to be worldly wise to understand their position in the 28 society and work towards equal status with men in all spheres of life. Along with this, the epistemological reality of woman in a society, created and re-circulated by language as a symbolic order, needs to be reconstructed after deconstructing and thus destabilizing the dominant typologies. Literature as a metonymic construct of social reality is also a site for this cultural politics and hence this research project. In this ideological struggle, men and women should learn to work together and share and care for each other. This researcher takes this ideological and theoretical position to fill the research gap in the stream of theoretical developments. The first chapter presents arguments to justify the present research work. The chapter discusses the impact of patriarchal ideology in human societies across the world. Consequently, the chapter elaborates on the ensuing typologies of women in different forms created by the dominant ideology. Literature plays a vital role in perpetuating the typologies of woman. With this understanding, this chapter discusses the subjugation of woman as expressed in the fictional world based on a few relevant feminist notions. To strengthen this argument further, a few Tamil movies have also been cited. The second chapter entitled “Assessing Characters against Male Ideologies in Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre ” with reference to the novels of Emily Bronte and Charlotte Bronte deals with the analysis of characters. The analysis will discuss some women characters of these novels to point out the out-of-the-norm features of some of these characters which show them as characters that do not fit very well into types. Of course there will always be individual differences among humans and one can counter argue that typologies are not tenable. But what the researcher discusses here is the kind of moulds that patriarchal ideology imposes on woman which is accepted innocently by women thus assisting the dominant ideology innocuously. 29 The third chapter entitled “Typology through Intertextual Readings of Novels Chosen for Study” justifies that the Victorian society witnessed the impact of the patriarchal ideology in human societies through analysis of the characters of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice , Emma and Sense and Sensibility and denotes how they, like those of Emily Bronte and Charlotte Bronte, evolve into the moulds or types and later, break the grid of typology from their personal experiences of life. Comparison is also made between the characters of Jane Austen, Emily Bronte, Charlotte Bronte and those of Tamil novels. The fourth chapter entitled “Analyzing Characters against Typologies in Tamil Novels” discusses the impact of dominant patriarchal ideology in Tamil society in order to relate the role of its women against the Victorian British canons. This chapter will critically examine some women characters of well-known Tamil novelists whose fictional writings had a great impact on the society. Kalki’s Thiyaga Boomi, Jayakanthan’s Sila Nerangalil Sila Manidhargal and Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral among others and T. Janakiraman’s Moha Mul among others. In fact the 1980s witnessed many non-typological women characters in Tamil cinema, too. Savithri (heroine of Kalki’s Thiyaga Boomi ) cuts neatly into the type of South Indian Brahmin wife of the 1930s-40s in the beginning. Her sufferings liberate her from this typology and her economic stability makes her a liberated bold woman in the second half of the novel. The mother of Jayakanthan’s Agnipravesam , though a Brahmin widow, is very progressive and a non-typological woman. Ganga’s mother in Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal is the reversal and opposite of the mother of Agnipravesam , very typological and conservative. Ganga evolves as a non-typological woman through the course of the novel. Yamuna of T. Janakiraman’s Moha Mul is an 30 outcast in the society and evolves as a non-typological woman. She is a resolute woman and firm in her stand till she agrees to marry Babu towards the end of the novel. Unlike Thangammal, who becomes a victim of poverty and falls into a mismatched marriage, Yamuna even after becoming a bankrupt settles in a menial job with the help of Babu (the one yearning for the reciprocation of his love from her and younger than her by ten years) and disengages herself from her mother, the only support for her. The concluding chapter sums up the arguments and explores the possibilities of future research. The agenda of canonical literature is politically marked and ideologically driven. It is this understanding that has guided the present researcher through this project. This project proposes that the epistemological reality of woman needs to be deconstructed to destabilize the present types of woman and then reconstructed to empower woman through education. Through education, she can become economically independent. Chapter- II Assessing Characters against Male Ideologies in Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre Literature not only reflects life or society but also in many ways guides it. It is a product of culture that has evolved in the praxis of collective existence in a society. All human societies are plagued by classist, racist and sexist biases. Language and literature play ideological roles in perpetuating these biases (Louis, 1998). Hence, it is needless to point out that canonical literatures perform the ideological function of assisting the dominant ideology. In order to assess the gender bias implied in the stereotyping of woman in canonical literatures, the Victorian age offers the greatest possible social canvas. Stereotyping of woman is quite common in all forms of literature. Since fiction emerged as a major form of literature in the Victorian era, reaching out to more readers, the present choice has been made. In the fictional world of Emily Bronte, the power of the patriarchal, ideological indoctrination on women stands out against the background of typologies that one finds in Victorian fiction. Gilbert and Gubar view that women writers of the nineteenth century resorted to creating women characters of two extremes, that is the “angel” or the “monster”. But they argued that women writers should work towards defining women beyond this dichotomy as their options are limited by the patriarchal ideology. (Gilbert and Gubar, 2000) Wuthering Heights From the Marxist point of view the novel as a genre and Wuthering Heights especially, speaks about the politico-social life of England in 1847. The story is not 32 concerned with love alone but with property ownership, attraction of social comfort, the arrangement of marriages, importance of education, the validity of religion, the relations of rich and poor. In this context, Arnold Kettle examines how Heathcliff rebels against the capitalist temperaments of the bourgeois family, like those of Lintons and Earnshaws. He emerges as an evil element due to the cruel treatment meted out to him by Hindley and Edgar Linton, the members of the high born society. (Kettle, 1951) From this point of view, Catherine, though born in the background of the wild nature of the moors symbolically represents idyllic heaven only to finally delve deep into a conjugal hell without any redemption. Isabella, born in the refined cultural background of Thrushcross Grange, a place of nature symbolically representing idyllic heaven, does not realize the value of the place and inadvertently falls into the romantic wild world of Heathcliff, which also results in loss of total conjugal happiness. Heathcliff, the wild outcast is fortunate enough to gain the company of Catherine who shows him a kind of human understanding and goodwill. She joins him in his rebellion against the hegemony and tyranny of Hindley and Frances, an upper class people. Catherine senior is a complex character exhibiting both typological and non- typological features. She is wild and passionate. She is first known as Catherine Earnshaw and then, Catherine Linton. She is torn between her emotional bond with Heathcliff and her social consciousness. She, like every Victorian woman, is particular about enhancing her social and economic status. As a result, she immediately reciprocates Edgar’s offer of love. Here, Catherine cuts neatly into the typological mould by opting to marry Edgar for the elevation of her status. But, she also believes that Heathcliff is a part of her soul. She knows that the marriage is a 33 mismatch and admits so to Nelly: “I am Heathcliff! He is always in my mind; not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being” (Bronte, Emily 100). Even though she marries Edgar, she keeps her memories of Heathcliff afresh. Before her marriage to Edgar, she vows that she and Heathcliff will never be separated: “Every Linton on the face of the earth might melt into nothing, before I consent to forsake Heathcliff”. (Bronte, Emily 98). At the same time, she does not step out of her matrimonial life with Edgar even after Heathcliff reappears. Hence, it is important to record here that Catherine senior, a member of the Victorian society, becomes fascinated by the material prosperity of Edgar Linton and chooses to marry him in spite of her deep love for Heathcliff. Her craving for material and social prospects causes disaster to Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange. The materialist feminists vehemently oppose this materialistic consciousness of people as it attributes mainly to the oppression of women. Emily Bronte appears keen to bring out the complexities of Catherine through whom the wild nature and violent feelings of a mentally repressed girl are revealed. Whenever she becomes delirious, her behaviour becomes unpredictable. Her violent behaviour with Edgar Linton, her outburst over the tussle between her husband and Heathcliff and her insistence on Edgar to accept Heathcliff as his friend clearly testify to her delirious nature during the later part of her life. When she realizes that she cannot have Heathcliff as part of her life, she becomes mentally agitated and physically violent. She condemns the men with whom she is associated, because they do not fit into the pattern of life she craves for. Throughout their relationship she uses Edgar Linton quite ruthlessly. At the same time, with the help of Edgar, she plans to aid Heathcliff to elevate his social status. Thus, she seems to believe that Heathcliff 34 will be relieved completely from the cruel treatment of her brother, Hindley. She does not feel ashamed of her double standard marital motive which is unacceptable in the Victorian society. In this situation, she breaks the grid of Victorian typology and evolves as a non-typological character. She is at a loss to realize that after becoming a wife of a man, she could not be entitled to divide her loyalties. She tells Nelly: ... Nelly, I see now, you think me a selfish wretch; but did it never strike you that if Heathcliff and I married, we should be beggars? Whereas, if I marry Linton, I can aid Heathcliff to rise, and place him out of my brother’s power. (Bronte, Emily 99) In Bronte’s Wuthering Heights , the stereotyping of women has taken a different dimension bordering on love-hate relationship. It is the story of two families and an outsider (Nelly Dean). The two families are the Earnshaw family living at a place called Wuthering Heights and the other Linton family living at Thrushcross Grange. Mr. Earnshaw, a resident of Wuthering Heights is on a visit to Liverpool, brings back a stranger called Heathcliff. He is dark in complexion and has in him all signs of a slave. He appears to have been born to be ill-treated. The reason for bringing this boy home is not well substantiated in the novel. But Heathcliff’s entry into Earnshaw’s home creates ripples in the family. He is considered to be dirt by Mrs. Earnshaw and Hindley Earnshaw. Mrs. Earnshaw covertly admonishes him while Hindley treats him overtly brutally whereas Catherine, the only member in the family, shows some concern on him. Persons living in the Linton family are Mr. and Mrs. Linton. They have a son by name Edgar Linton and a daughter by name Isabella Linton. They lead a life of harmony without any extraordinary tastes. Emily portrays the characters living in the 35 two abodes-Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange by the moors and hills in a distinctive manner. As nature on the top of the hill is robustly strong with all capricious blend of elements of ferocity of all seasons, persons living in that area also have in them the capricious blends of moods and temperaments. Mr. Earnshaw has got the strength enough to walk sixty miles up and down to Liverpool from Wuthering Heights, a significant factor of his patriarchal authority and strength. In the portrayal of Catherine Earnshaw, Emily Bronte clearly focuses her attention on the eerie type of a girl initially and grows up as a wild woman. Right from her birth, her nature is wild and untenable. She is subjected to the vicissitudes of moods if her mental balance gets disturbed. She goes to the extent of awfully shaking her brother’s little baby Hareton, assaulting Nelly with violent pinches and giving a blow to her husband Edgar. This kind of violent behaviour exhibited by Catherine would hardly be seen in a normal well-bred woman. By this way, she evolves as a non-typological girl and emerges stronger than other male characters. Thus, Catherine grows like a wild flower in the wild moor. She bears all the ruggedness of the surrounding mountainous rock. Her parental care does not influence her to fall on the feminine charms of modesty, tenderness, humility, decency and decorum. Further, she loses her mother at her young age. In the case of many girls, mothers are role-models at least in their formative years of growth. She is deprived of this role-model. Born in a love lacking family surrounded by wild moors and rugged rocks, in the midst of strange servants, having a father ever after his private choice taste and an elder brother with scant respect for his upcoming, Catherine has to grow like a wild bush in the garden without anyone to trim her. As she is a wild being, the sudden entrance of Heathcliff into the family prevails on her an immediate attraction. 36 She senses that he is her alter-ego; she is smitten with extreme exhilaration that she has found an at-par companion, identical in attitude, conduct and taste. Her nature is untameable, so too Heathcliff’s. Thus, the basic instinct of them has identical polarities. That is why Catherine soars high on her personal canopy of joy to have pastures like to move on the tough terra firma of Wuthering Heights. Thus in her, the element of love is found expressed in a natural manner without any restraint. Heathcliff is treated badly by Hindley, her brother after her father Earnshaw’s death. But due to her primordial instinct of love, she sympathises with him and anoints his injured emotions out of the bestial treatment of her brother. Her closeness with Heathcliff later becomes a pet adventure for both of them. Here in the novel, Emily wants to project her rejection of the conventional, moral and the power of patriarchy by inverting Heathcliff and Catherine as transgressors of the Victorian norms. Her love and care for Edgar goes down when Heathcliff makes his reappearance. After Heathcliff’’s return, she insists on entertaining him at the Grange despite her husband's jealous displeasure. She chooses Edgar as her life partner but she expects him to be an unquestioning servant serving her physical comforts and also a caretaker tolerating her emotional ties with Heathcliff. She expects Edgar to be stoic in his physical and emotional services for her welfare and at the same time complains his stoic nature that he is a saint not fit enough to interpret the role of a husband. When there is an open quarrel between Edgar and Heathcliff, Cathy unhesitatingly sides with Heathcliff to taunt Edgar. Further, she transgresses the conventional practice of a woman being bound to her husband. She challenges his valour before her soul mate Heathcliff. She loses the reader’s sympathy by exposing her weak husband to his powerful rival, and by apparently threatening to exploit her own frenzy to 37 torment both her men. She tells Nelly, “Well, if I cannot keep Heathcliff for my friend—if Edgar will be mean and jealous, I’ll try to break their hearts by breaking my own” (37). As Cathy’s wild nature does not experience any formidable opposing force, she grows mentally as well as physically wild obstructing the approach of others for their understanding of her character. Contrary to her wild nature, Catherine exhibits her natural motherly instinct in warding off Isabella from not getting trapped into the evil designs of Heathcliff. In this sense, she inadvertently reveals the typological features of a positive woman in showing concern for her family member. In this attempt, one can estimate her as a woman trying to stall another rival courting the same lover by slinging mud at his character and calling him an ‘unreclaimed creature’. This also clearly upholds the typological feature of a ladylove who faces a rival in her courtship. Heathcliff knows pretty well that the soul of Catherine after death would long remain with the soul of him. The platonic concept of merging souls of love affair after death is found in the relationship between Heathcliff and Catherine. These characters are really superficial and known for oddities of senses. Catherine’s attempt in getting some relief for Heathcliff through her marriage with Edgar becomes abortive because it is the union of bodies and not of souls. She bears a child out of this union and gets it deserted out of her death after having given it a birth. Actually, her early death does not mean her disappearance from the novel. Her spirit continues to wander through the Wuthering Heights and over the moors, taunting Heathcliff in death, just as she does in life. Throughout the novel, Catherine's rebelliousness and passion make her an undeniably interesting character and typically non-typical. This metaphysical tendency has elevated her to the level of a non-typological heroine for which she is 38 not groomed on the social, cultural and religious anvil. Hence, she is enigmatic that one cannot cast her into any mould or type of woman like humble, obedient and loyal being. She is the rare specimen, untutored, uncultured, untamed, and unrealistic woman of flesh, heart and mind in English literature. Nelly Dean is more than a house maid fully attached and involved into the Earnshaw family which keeps her above the level of typology. Nelly never really has had a life of her own because she dedicates her whole life to the families of Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange. She narrates the story of Wuthering Heights and Grange to the stranger, Mr. Lockwood. She knows the story well because she has been at the Heights and the Grange all through her life. She grows up with Catherine, Hindley, and Heathcliff. Therefore, she is not less than a part of the family and treats them more as family than bosses. She acts as a caretaker of the family and takes rights to advise them whenever they break the social norms. Readers do not get the full details of the events since Nelly’s narration is suspected to cover up her own fallacies. However, her pragmatic approach towards wild and passionate characteristics of Catherine and Heathcliff shows her typical womanhood of Victorian England. No doubt, she indulges in gossiping through her narration to Lockwood, a stranger. But she is the only person in the novel who is principled with moral characters and personality. She tries to mend the ways of Heathcliff and Catherine but in vain. She dissuades Catherine from entertaining Heathcliff after the latter’s reappearance. She performs her duty in a motherly fashion. She acts as a foster mother to the motherless children like Hareton and Catherine junior. Since she is excommunicated from the Wuthering Heights, Hareton misses the motherly care and affection from her. Otherwise, he would have been taught some 39 education and become refined. Since Catherine junior is thrown to the custody of Nelly after the death of her mother Catherine senior, she is raised well enough to be a morally good girl. Nelly never fails to have her influence on people like Catherine senior and Heathcliff who go immoral and unprincipled. However, Nelly takes undue advantage to influence the members of the family of Earnshaw and Linton with her moral guidance and so, she evolves into a non-typological woman. When Catherine expresses her desire to marry Edgar, Nelly being a practical and conservative woman, strongly opposes to her proposal to marry him. She questions Catherine’s love for Edgar since she cannot digest the dubious standard of Catherine. So, she musters her courage to persuade Cathy to drop the idea of marrying Edgar while she is in love with Heathcliff. Nelly believes that love should result in marriage. Her stand is justified when we come across the mental agony and torture undergone by Catherine due to her longing for Heathcliff. Nelly is critical about the dubious stand of Catherine senior and Heathcliff’s quest for revenge. When Catherine senior expresses her desire to marry Edgar Linton, Nelly responds to Catherine in a stern voice If I can make any sense of your nonsense, Miss, I said, it only goes to convince me that you are ignorant of the duties you undertake in marrying, or else that you are a wicked, unprincipled girl. But trouble me no more with your secrets; I’ll not promise to keep them. (100) Even though she detests people for their irresponsible and socially unacceptable behaviour, she never goes unconcerned about them, instead she will try to keep them in a good stead. Nelly Dean is the most important woman character in this novel, who serves as an observer-narrator. Thanks to her service ventured at both 40 the families of Wuthering Heights and Thrsushcross Grange, she is fully aware of all incidents and happenings that are faced by almost all members of both the families. Thereby, her account about them serves as a first hand source of information to the readers. It is through her estimate of Catherine and Heathcliff, readers know about the complex personalities of both of them who are the pivotal characters in the novel. Next, her account about the other three characters, Hindley, Isabella and Hareton (Hindley’s son) attract our attention and we, as readers, form our ideas about their traits and temperaments, likes and dislikes, attitudes and approaches. It is because all the characters move very closely with Nelly and she has the rare chance of knowing the innermost recess of the minds of these characters. For instance, Hindley, son of Earnshaw in Wuthering Heights happens to be her classmate as she grows in Earnshaw family as a third child. This has given her a chance to move freely and look deeply into all intricacies of Catherine at close quarters right from her early age. Even as a teenager, Nelly has the benefit of associating herself with Edgar and Isabella. Her proximity with Hareton has its dawn right from his birth till his attainment of his fifth year. Her intimacy with Linton is so deep and sincere. On account of all these factors, Nelly’s relative merit and position among them give her scope to vividly narrate many incidents and occurrences and in doing so, it gives chance to comment on their personal whims and fancies, good or bad of them. In fact, the most vital incidents and crises in the novel occur within the gamut of Nelly’s knowledge. The most important aspects in the novel, a. close relationship between Catherine and Heathcliff b. the sudden mysterious disappearance of Heathcliff 41 c. the marriage of Catherine and Edgar d. the emotionally charged scene of the meeting of Heathcliff and Catherine a few hours before her death occurs under the very nose of Nelly. e. Further, it is through Nelly and her story alone, the reader gets to form a clear perception on the matter of marriage between younger Catherine and Heathcliff’s son Linton under Heathcliff’s pressure. Further, it is through Nelly the reader comes to know about the death of Linton as well as the blossoming of love between Catherine and Hareton. Nelly’s comments on the death of Heathcliff are worth to be remembered. Except one or two occurrences in the novel such as the clandestine meeting of Heathcliff and Isabella in the plantation for a couple of hours, almost all scenes of action take place before her very eyes and her detailed account about them are really authentic and trustworthy. Steeping in the conventional notions of socially accepted norms of friendship, love, marriage and family ties, Nelly is from one perspective a typical typological woman cast in the traditional mould. She believes that any lapse or departure from social norms bordering on religious moral values shall bring doom and disaster for the individual as well as to the member with whom he or she is associated. Her judgement about men and matters often changes according to the dictates of situations. In this context, she is at a loss to judge her own estimate about others out of her experience and exposure to conventional standards on a fixed factor and is subjected to change from place to place, person to person and situation to situation. But at the same time, when she takes liberty to intrude into the personal matters of the members of the family, she evolves into a non-typological mould. For example, in the early part of the 42 novel, she endorses Mrs. Earnshaw’s views about her hatred for the boy Heathcliff. But she does not see any reason to hate a boy just because he is dark, a symbol of evil. Had that boy contained in him an element of evil out of his dark disposition, Catherine too would have nourished hatred against him and treated him hatefully. But she cuddles him for his pitiable plight. Thus, Nelly realises the fact that the mere complexion of a boy would not comply with his trimmings of being good or bad. Such a conventional belief is nonsensical. That is why through Catherine, she realises that the nature of the boy has to be estimated out of his conduct and not out of his skin colour. From the next day onwards, her approach with Heathcliff summarily changes and she lavishly consoles him while washing him. She tells him that there need not be any qualms in his mind about his colour since there would be every possibility that he could have been born to a Chinese emperor or his mother an Indian queen. Since Nelly has such a sensibility and is different from others’ view about Heathcliff and consoles and comforts him, she emerges as a non-typological woman breaking the conventional attitude of demeaning the downtrodden dark skinned people. Thus, she is opposed to racial discrimination of the upper class people. Such a transformation in her attitude clearly shows that she is a type of woman ready to experiment, observe and infer men and matters and tries to remove all the early conventional understandings from her mental makeup. That is why her observation about Hindley’s brutal ill treatment of Heathcliff that “even a saint would become a beast” is very apt and exact. Nelly views that Heathcliff by nature is a revengeful person ever ready to pounce on person responsible for the cause of revenge. Early in the story, Nelly makes a fine observation of Heathcliff to a bleak, hilly, coal country and Edgar by contrast to a beautiful valley. When Heathcliff 43 returns and causes a tumult in the relationship of Catherine and Edgar, Nelly’s estimate of him and her premonition about him proves to be correct. It is Heathcliff’s intrusion into Catherine’s fold that has caused her emotional disturbance leading to her death. Nelly’s estimate of Edgar as a trustful and honourable man is also very correct because till his end he remains faithful and devoted to his wife. But Catherine wrongly exploits his devotion. Thus, this unconventional selfish and cynical nature of Catherine is not approved of by Nelly initially. But Nelly herself becomes a party to pave the way for the secret visits of Heathclifff into the household of Edgar. When she allows the meeting to take place between Heathcliff and Catherine, Nelly is in a delirious state. She succumbs to Heathcliff’s persuasion in passing on a secret letter to Catherine that brings doom to her. In this context, Nelly overreaches her limit and violates the instructions given by Edgar that Heathcliff should not be allowed into Grange at any cost. But she arranges a clandestine meeting for them which is considered as Nelly’s lapses as a servant maid. In another instance, though she knows the fact that Catherine is dying, she keeps it to herself hidden. She does not think that it is her duty to inform Edgar about his wife’s (Catherine) deteriorating health condition. Nelly might wish Catherine to die fast as she considers her moral lapse of entertaining Heathclif even after her marriage with Edgar as a serious threat to the image of the Earnshaw family. This is due to her attachment to the family of Earnshaw since she has been in Wuthering Heights from her childhood. Catherine understands evil in Nelly and tells her. I see in you Nelly, an aged woman: you have grey hair and bent shoulders. This bed is the fairy cave under Penistone Crag and you are gathering elf-bolts to hurt our heifers; pretending, while i am near that 44 they are only locks of wool. That’s what you’ll come to fifty years hence: I know you are not so now... Shake your head as you will, Nelly, you have helped to unsettle me... Ah, Nelly has played traitor... Nelly is my hidden enemy. You witch! So you do seek elf-bolts to hurt us! (151). Her seemingly disobedience and dishonesty (from Catherine’s purview, treason) are greatly responsible for Cathy’s death. Some readers even feel that Nelly’s conduct at this time borders on villainy. She is even subjected to mental vacillation ‘was it right or wrong?, and her consciousness itself declares it ‘wrong’. Her betraying Edgar’s trust can be equated with Eve’s transgression of God’s command, out of immense surprise at seeing an animal talk like a man after tasting the forbidden fruit. Nelly plunges into overstepping actions hoping that they would bring good. But she proves false. She, out of her fickle mindedness has invited disaster to her master’s family through her deeds. Thus, Nelly feels for her moral compunction in allowing Heathcliff to meet Catherine that hastens her death, thereby leaving Edgar to wallow in his own miseries. But in reality, what Nelly has done is a relief to Catherine whose suffering would be greater than that of Edgar. Catherine becomes delirious due to Isabella’s marriage with Heathcliff which causes her early entry into her pet grave. Here, Living instinct of Isabella and death instinct of Catherine are complementary to each other that it brings disaster to Isabella but it brings total happiness to Catherine. Later, Nelly’s attempts to prevent younger Catherine from visiting Linton Heathcliff also become abortive. She further violates her master’s strict instruction not to take his daughter Catherine junior to Wuthering Heights. In this connection, it is understood that Nelly’s disposition is susceptible to her nature in paying heed to the 45 requests of her fellow characters like senior Catherine and Heathcliff. Nelly is totally responsible for the evil design of Heathcliff to set a trap for Catherine junior by making her stay compulsorily in Wuthering Heights. In that attempt, Nelly too becomes a prisoner in Wuthering Heights along with Catherine junior. During this occasion, Nelly speaks loudly and bravely to Heathcliff in a challenging manner and exerts her strength to stall the forcible marriage of Catherine junior with Linton. But her attempts in this connection too, become abortive. She is the cynosure of all who repose infinite faith and confidence in sharing their inner most recess of their minds. Hence, it is clear that Nelly is not an ordinary Victorian servant maid who will normally be bossed over by her mistresses but a prominent maid who is taken to confidence by the inmates of both the houses. This status of Nelly Dean exposes her non-typological features throughout the novel. Another character who has taken her to confidence is Isabella. It is only to her, Isabella has written a lengthy letter detailing her despicable life with Heathcliff. After sometime, her desertion of Heathcliff compels her to stay for sometime at Grange where Nelly alone treats her wounds and helps her get coach to London. It is in this incident Isabella confirms her view on Heathcliff with Nelly that he is not a human but a monster. Further, even for the devil Heathcliff, Nelly alone is the best person with whom he confides his deadly plans. Nelly can be described as dependable, faithful, honest, upright, devoted, compassionate, and an attached housemaid that can be seen only in the pages of literature. Through Nelly, Emily Bronte shows how a model servant maid ought to conduct herself in her relation with her masters in utmost wholesome manner and leaves an image that is none second to Nelly in interpreting the role of a servant maid 46 like her. These traits can never be seen in any housemaid in Victorian society. Hence, this researcher is of the view that Emily Bronte makes such women characters like Nelly evolve into non-typological characters to expose the typologies of both male and female characters in the novel. Isabella, the only sister of Edgar Linton, is a pampered and privileged girl in the Linton’s family. She lands in the world of miseries when she falls in love with the foxy Heathcliff. It is quite natural for any girl to be attracted to a robust man. She gets tempted to agree to elope with him. Like a fool, she yearns to be with Heathcliff and confesses to Catherine, “I love him more than ever you love Edgar: and he might love me, if you would let him!” (125). Like a rudderless ship cast on the turbulent sea, she falls for Heathcliff without knowing his character and nature. It is not a calf love. What Isabella sees in him is his ruggedness suitable to a person belonging to such a rocky area. She misconstrues this ruggedness as a masculine solidity. She has not got any chance to move freely with him in order to assess his inner self. All these things show how Isabella has intimidated herself without paying heed to Catherine senior’s advice. At that age, any one like her would never listen to any reasonable advice. As she is blindly in love, she sets aside Catherine by means of saying “You are a dog in the manger, Cathy and desire no one to be loved by yourself!” (125). Isabella’s parental influence of love, care and concern, that she had seen and experienced in her father Mr. Linton are found to be missing in Heathcliff and that may be one of the main reasons why she has got attracted towards him. At the same time, she ought to have vicariously experienced the negative influence of patriarchal authority on family members and others. In her case, the fight for a young dog with her brother Edgar would have steered her up to estimate the authority of men 47 as gender. She notices a semblance of authority of Edgar over a small matter of possessing a dog on Heathcliff. She develops an interest unconsciously to possess the authoritative Heathcliff as her choice mate and experience how much the influence of authority would be on her. She attempts to control his authority by her tool of love but it does not materialise. Neither does she listen to the assessment of Heathcliff’s authority totally negative, nor does she have sufficient worldly experience to assess his dubious character. This is her fate that she is destined to travel. In her case, her brother Edgar also has failed to put her on the right track because of his preoccupation with his wife’s adventure. In her case, her brother’s desertion causes her to lead a life of dissatisfaction, dissention, and degradation. She pays dearly for this misalliance as she is disowned by Edgar. She firmly stands her family disownment. But she cannot stand the ill-treatment and harassment meted out to her by her husband. In her first letter to Nelly, Isabella writes, “Is Mr. Heathcliff a man? If so, is he mad? And if he is not, is he a devil?” (168). She does not fully describe her sufferings which she has received from Heathcliff. But certainly she is house-arrested, jeopardised and is further subjected to physical and verbal assault. She is a typological character as long as she puts up with her cruel and vengeful husband. However, later she realises the need to protect herself for the well being of her child. Hence, she gathers mental strength to break the marriage and abandon Heathcliff. Is it an unwritten rule that woman has to adjust with her man’s ill-treatment and cruelties? She breaks this clutches of typology by running away from her husband and is determined to live the rest of her life for her child. Isabella who appears to be a timid upper-class girl in the beginning evolves into a steel-hearted, strong-willed woman later. She rises as a non-typological woman when 48 she leaves her husband and decides to live alone. She prefers to be a single mother ruling out the idea of seeking shelter from her brother Edgar or filing a suit to retrieve a share of property which she legally deserves: “I won’t come suing for his assistance; nor will I bring him into more trouble” (211). She becomes self-dependent. This would have been a very difficult situation for a woman in the Victorian England. She emerges as a character that deserves respect. Here she evolves into a non-typological character challenging the traditional concepts of the values of marriage. Despite sufferings and humiliations at the hands of Heathcliff, she refuses to help Hindley in his conspiracy to kill her husband, Heathcliff. She demonstrates wisdom (perhaps instilled in her moral upbringing), saying that “treachery and violence are spears pointed at both ends: they wound those who resort to them, worse than their enemies”. (216) Her moral and religious upbringing prevents her from acting revengefully against her husband when Hindley threatens his life. But she never forgives him. Thus Isabella’s life, like a glow-worm is short-lived. Isabella, by nature is kind and gentle as she has been brought up in an independent atmosphere. She has not got her liberated temperament from her parents or from education. It is her biological nature inherent within her that as a girl born in a cultured background, she expects refinement for refinement, love for love, concern for concern, affection for affection from her better-half, Heathcliff. She has even waited for sometime after marriage, a positive reciprocity from him of her devotion but Heathcliff never realises this nicety of Isabella and treats her with contempt. He conceives a plan to grab her property. Isabella’s approach is humanistic, whereas Heathcliff’s approach is devilish, opportunistic, market-minded gain and loss approach (Kettle, 1951). For her, he is an embodiment of love, to be shared between 49 them for which she has no ulterior motive. For him, she is an embodiment of commodity with a price tag — her property and how to win it for his side. By choosing him as her life-partner, there is no scope for her to get any co-operation either from her relatives or from community. Catherine junior is the daughter of Edgar and Catherine senior and the wife of Linton Heathcliff and later, Hareton Earnshaw. She is a young, beautiful and warm- hearted girl. She has the combination of gumption and passion of her mother, and calm and blonde beauty of her father. She is angelic almost in all aspects when compared to her mother, Catherine senior. Even though she suffers a forced marriage with Linton Heathcliff, she does not lose hope in life. But on the contrary, after the death of Frances, Hindley becomes an alcoholic and useless man in life. Even after she becomes a widow, she is worldly wise enough to turn her attention to a poor, motherless and almost a slave of Heathcliff’s son Hareton. Earlier, she brushes aside all his efforts to win her love, but later she begins to help him with some education which earns him confidence in life. When love blossoms between them, life becomes smooth and joyful for them. This researcher is of the view that the young Catherine takes the credit of redeeming the families of both Thrushcross Grange and Wuthering Heights with a good second marriage. By this way, she comes out of the typological mould and emerges as a non-typological character. After the death of her mother, she has been brought up by her father and Nelly. She is deeply attached to her father. She has a high spirit of adventure that resembles her mother’s nature. But it is not rough and rugged like her mother’s but laced with sensitive affection. She is soft and mild with a gentle voice and pensive expression. Joyce Carol Oates avers that Young Catherine does not inherit the 50 negative traits of her mother for the good. She is, unlike her mother, quite shrewd and knowledgeable enough to negotiate the complexities of life. Though she exhibits her emotional lapses of her mother by provoking two men to fight over her, she can suddenly realize her folly and use her cleverness to prevent any unprecedented incident from happening. She is mature enough to accommodate Hareton whose love for her changes her mind. She is really a competitive girl to settle problems and conflicts amicably. She is a non-typological woman character who resisted the diabolic nature of Heathcliff and finally overcame her ill fated predicament. Though Catherine junior does not bask under parental care and affection, she has in her the genuine motherly instinct. Because of her motherly instinct, she shows sympathy on the suffering young Linton. This sympathy further grows into immense love for him coupled with compassion. But Heathcliff who has had no positive human passions like sympathy and compassion always immerses himself in his own diabolic way of getting them united out of marriage bond. His hypocritical schemes and tendencies are wasted on this score because of Catherine junior’s nature of love, sympathy, and compassion. Though Catherine has not experienced any tender care, warmth affection and concern from her mother, she has in her all those elements as she was born in the valley, Thrushcross Grange. The spatio-temporal element also contributes to her grooming into a nice, soft and mild like a dove. This bird is usually found only in a valley and not in a rugged rock. It is a symbol of peace, amity and amelioration. Catherine junior has all these qualities, so that she finds no qualms whenever she is in the midst of hostile circumstances, such as the one while she is trapped in the house of Heathcliff. The hostility of Heathcliff has to surrender before the peace of Catherine. Within her there is peace and wherever she goes, she makes peace. 51 She has laid down only one condition that she has to be allowed to meet her dying father after her marriage. This temperament of her shows how much her positive typological feminine qualities get reflected in her benign gestures. This is further protracted in the case of Linton too who did not live long after marriage. Her initial sympathy for him blossoms into altruistic sacrifice after his death. For many days, she has locked herself up and mourned for the loss of her husband like a cloistered nun. Her love for Linton is so deep that she has violated her father’s instruction several times. It is because of her that Edgar has to relax all his conditions and finally allows her to marry him. It is really ironic how such an adoring daughter can act against her father’s wish. She does not want to do anything to vex him. She says to Nelly: “I love him better than myself “and then to Linton “I love papa better than you” (Bronte, Emily 175). She is also courageous. When she is detained as a prisoner by Heathcliff, she demands the keys for her release. She goes to the extent of attacking him and is severely beaten. She puts reasons into his mind in the following manner. I will marry him (Linton) within this honour, if I may go to Thrushcross Grange afterwards. Mr. Heathcliff, you’re not a friend; and you won’t from mere malice, destroy irrevocably all my happiness. If papa thought I had left him on purpose, and if he died before I returned, could I bear to live? (Bronte, Emily 267) In the entire novel, Catherine junior is the only character who views things in a reasonable manner. Her assessment of Heathcliff is exact: Mr. Heathcliff, you have nobody to love you; and however miserable you make us, We shall still have the revenge of thinking that your 52 cruelty arises from your greater misery. You are miserable, are you not? Lonely, like the devil, and envious, like him! Nobody loves you! Nobody will cry for you when you die. (277-278) Catherine Junior emerges wise among other characters on account of her balance of mind, discriminations, a sense of withdrawal, all groomed into the positive potentialities of motherhood of service with duty and love. Though she is thrown from the culture of heaven of Thrushcross Grange into the hell of Heathcliff’s Wuthering Heights, she does not embrace failure but maintains as the exact bridge of purgatory between hell and heaven. Now, this research also focuses on a few male characters from the fictional world of Emily Bronte to determine that these characters are exposed as more typological in Wuthering Heights . That patriarchal ideology has never allowed fixing typologies of man is the motivation for the following critical examination. Lockwood is our primary narrator and a foil to Heathcliff. But on close examination, one sees that he is equally intruding and dominating in his own sophisticated way. Even though he has no reason to enter the privacy of the inhabitants of Wuthering Heights, he reads Catherine’s journal entries. He betrays himself as no less violent like Heathcliff, though in a different way. One prominent example for his violent nature is his response to Catherine's persistent ghost at the window during his eerie night in the oak-paneled bed: Terror made me cruel; and, finding it useless to attempt shaking the creature off, I pulled its wrist on to the broken pane, and rubbed it to and fro till the blood ran down and soaked the bedclothes: still it wailed... (29) 53 His prying and inquisitiveness to gather information about other families and fancying a chance of romance with Catherine junior reveal him to be the male stereotype but only masked in the suave sophistication of the “cultured man”. It is important to note here that patriarchal ideology brands women as gossip mongers and treacherous types, but this critical examination exposes Lockwood’s to be no better; in fact, he is more unauthentic and deceptive than Heathcliff. Mr. Earnshaw is a man of kindness and charitable in nature. Even though he is very strict with everyone in the household, he is kind and caring in the words of Nelly Dean. Particularly he is genial to his servants. He shows equal concern to Nelly also. When he sets out to Liverpool, he promises Nelly that he will buy her a bag of apples. Nelly says, “He did not forget me; for he had a kind heart, though he was rather severe sometimes. He promised to bring me a pocketful of apples and pears”. (42) Although Nelly is just a servant in their house, Mr. Earnshaw remembers her as he says goodbye to his children. Hence, he is portrayed as a kind man not only to his family but also to those who work under him as servants. Though Mr. Earnshaw is kind, he becomes very serious and disciplined towards his last days. He wants his children, especially Catherine and Heathcliff, to be safe in future. He realizes that he has to do whatever he can to ensure the welfare of his family especially Catherine and Heathcliff. Sometimes, he reprimands Catherine for her adamant behaviour. He tells Cathy, “I cannot love thee; thou'rt worse than thy brother. Go, say thy prayers, child, and ask God's pardon. I doubt thy mother and I must rue that we ever reared thee!” (Bronte, Emily 50). But he brings Heathcliff into his house without consulting any member of his family including his wife. This shows that he is an undemocratic patriarchal head of Wuthering Heights. He seems to expect everyone in the family to 54 accept whatever he says and does. He even goes to the extent of pampering Heathcliff over his children which sows the seed of hatred in the Wuthering Heights. Even Mrs. Earnshaw does not like Heathcliff’s intrusion into her family. Ellen Nelly says: I wondered often what my master saw to admire so much in the sullen boy; who never, to my recollection, repaid his indulgence by any sign of gratitude. He was not insolent to his benefactor, he was simply insensible; though knowing perfectly the hold he had on his heart, and conscious he had only to speak and all the house would be obliged to bend to his wishes. (45-46) Hindley Earnshaw, the only son of Mr. Earnshaw has been rude and cruel to Heathcliff right from the time Earnshaw has brought him into his family. He has aversion for Heathcliff because he appears to be gipsy - like and does not belong to the family. He receives more concern and care from Earnshaw than he and his sibling Catherine do. This irritates him and makes him treat Heathcliff like a slave. It's hard not to see a lot of Heathcliff's flaws as the direct result of Hindley's abuse. As a child, he calls Heathcliff an "imp of Satan" and hopes a pony will kick [Heathcliff's] brains out” (65). After the death of Earnshaw, Hindley reduces him to a labourer and denies him basic education. Hindley exercises his authority over Heathcliff and harasses him. Further, he figures out as a specimen of man’s nature when he devises a plan to unite the Earnshaws and the Lintons through the marriage of Catherine with Edgar Linton for the enhancement of social status. Even though Hindley is blessed with college education and a huge inheritance, he lacks refinement and confidence in life. He is generally cruel to his servants. As Nelly Dean recounts: 55 For himself, he grew desperate; his sorrow was of that kind that will not lament. He neither wept, nor prayed – he cursed and defied – execrated God and man, and gave himself up to reckless dissipation. The servants could not bear his tyrannical and evil conduct long. Joseph and I were the only two that would stay. (78) After the death of his wife Frances, Hindley begins to waste his life living like an animal. A comparison between Hindley and Catherine Junior will show how much of a waste Hindley is as a human being. He lapses into alcoholism and dissipation. Heathcliff who has been grudging the cruel treatment meted out to him by Hindley begins to exploit these weaknesses in order to gain control of the Wuthering Heights. Finally, he plots to kill Heathcliff out of wrath which is foiled by Isabella. This unsuccessful attempt makes him further drunkard and finally leads him to a fatal stupor. But unlike Hindley, Catherine Junior does not lose hope in life. Even though she suffers a forced marriage with a sick person and becomes a widow at a very young age, she sustains herself and reaffirms the positive character of life and shows willingness to go forward with her love with Hareton. Thus Hindley comes into the mould of type which is obviously exposed in the novel where as Catherine junior emerges out of typological mould and remains a non-typological woman till the end. Heathcliff often falls back on violence as a means of expression, both of love and hate. He receives warmth and kindness from Mr. Earnshaw alongside harshness from Hindley. But the kindness of Mr. Earnshaw has no impression on him. On the contrary, the harshness of Hindley has a great impact on him. He grows to be revengeful as a result of cruel and inhuman treatment meted out to him by Hindley. His rage is tied to the revenge he so passionately seeks, but he also exhibits his violent 56 nature while hanging Isabella Linton's dog. Whether he is capable of sympathy from anyone is highly questionable. As Nelly recounts, He seized, and thrust her from the room; and returned muttering - ‘I have no pity! I have no pity! The more the worms writhe, the more I yearn to crush out their entrails! It is a moral teething; and I grind with greater energy in proportion to the increase of pain’. (188) Though Heathcliff expresses and often enacts violence against everyone in the two houses, he would never hurt Catherine. However, his love for her is violent in the sense that it is extremely passionate and stirs a brutal defensiveness. Importantly, by the end of the novel Heathcliff admits to Nelly that he no longer has any interest in violence. As he tells her: It is a poor conclusion, is it not ... An absurd termination to my violent exertions? I get levers and mattocks to demolish the two houses, and train myself to be capable of working like Hercules, and when everything is ready, and in my power, I find the will to lift a slate off either roof has vanished! My old enemies have not beaten me; now would be the precise time to revenge myself on their representatives: I could do it; and none could hinder me. But where is the use? I don't care for striking. I can't take the trouble to raise my hand! (398) In Wuthering Heights, Hindley’s ill-treatment of Heathcliff initially leads him to nourish rancour against Earnshaw’s family, especially Hindley. He is lucky to avail himself of the situation on his favour after the death of Hindley’s wife, Frances. After the death of his wife, Hindely loses his sense of balance, and also loses his control over his property. Heathcliff with his spirit of vengeance grabs the property out of 57 making Hindley a victim of drinks and his son Hareton the brute. The ill-treatment meted out to him by Edgar at Thrushcross Grange during his frequent visits to meet Cathy once again aggravates his spirit of vengeance. On this occasion, Isabella comes handy to execute his revenge which Isabella has been ignorant of. By making her a victim to his revenge game, Heathcliff marries her by showing on her pseudo love and affection. Isabella is an innocent person with regard to men and matters at that time. She believes Heathcliff’s hoax love as real. He divulges to Catherine: And I like her too ill to attempt it [...] except in a very ghoulish fashion. You'd hear of odd things if I lived alone with that mawkish, waxen face: the most ordinary would be painting on its white the colours of the rainbow, and turning the blue eyes black, every day or two: they detestably resemble Linton’s. (121) Eagleton describes how Heathcliff is disastrous to the established order since he is uncomfortable and enjoys no equal status. His analysis turns on the issue of liberty and oppression. The choice of freedom and opportunity for refinement are denied to the socially oppressed due to the attitude of bourgeois society. When Heathcliff understands that culture is a way to oppression, he uses it as a weapon to eliminate the established capitalists and emerge as a destructive force to capitalism. Heathcliff mocks the capitalist nature but he himself becomes a victim and an active carrier of it. He, on the contrary, becomes embodiment of capitalism after destabilizing it in his territory in the Victorian society (Eagleton, 1975). This revengeful nature of Heathcliff casts him into a male typological mould. The purpose of education is to provide reason to steer the course of turbulent life. But both Heathcliff and Catherine senior do not possess the reason on account of 58 their being not exposed to education, a grave fault on the part of parents. As a result, they grow as beings of wild imagination without any room for radical reasoning power. In the case of Catherine senior, she has, at least a home of comfort, a father to look after her, a brother to share emotions with, and servants to tend on her. But Heathcliff has no element of human touch of warmth right from his birth. For some time, he is basking under the warmth of Earnshaw who has taken pity on him out of his beggarly state. But this is deprived even before he fully realizes the essence of human warmth on account of the sudden death of Earnshaw. The rest of the family members are products of culture and not products of reason oriented education. Their exposure to religion is only skin deep. Of course, Mrs. Earnshaw’s hatred for Heathcliff is not elaborated in the novel as she too died early. But in the case of Hindley, the hatred is deep rooted and it is his driving force to derive maximum delight out of injuring and inflicting Heathcliff physically, mentally and emotionally. Therefore, Heathcliff’s growth has become truncated without any room for evolving into a person of positive values bordering on love, affection, and culture. Society and culture here seem responsible in moulding people into types and non types. Heathcliff gets demoralised when he finds out that Catherine has become the wife of Edgar. On the other hand, Catherine never sees her marriage with Edgar as a separation from Heathcliff. His obsession with her increases after her death. This is evident when he presses the sexton to dig up her grave to have a last glimpse of her. They are separated by marriage and the motives are different. She resolves to marry Edgar to upkeep her social status and help Heathcliff become financially independent so that he could stay out of control of his cruel master Hindley. On the contrary, Heathcliff marries Isabella not out of love but because of his animosity on those who 59 have humiliated him both physically and mentally. Heathcliff is bent on stripping Edgar Linton of all his wealth as part of his revenge ploy. He lays trap for Isabella, Edgar’s sister with his pseudo love and secretly marries her hoping to grab her share of property from her brother, Edgar. To carry out his revenge plan, he uses Isabella as a trump card. The same patriarchal attitude of Heathcliff is reflected in a Tamil feature film, Kizhakku Seemaile in which the husband, as part of his revenge game on his brother-in-law, threatens to send his sister back home if he refuses to give away a lion share of property. To avenge his brother-in-law through this means, he uses his wife as a trump card. However, life becomes meaningless for Heathcliff after the death of Catherine. Since he is overcome by the memories of Catherine, he yearns to be haunted by the illusions of her ghost. His belief on ghosts walking on the earth which do not find peace for them in the grave is totally superstitious because of his lack of formal education with scientific temper. This is partly because of his being an orphan and partly because of his fated living in a sinister place inviting all rooms of nightmarish dreams and hallucination. Heathcliff’s traditional gender roles are the typical examples of male typological features as he is keen to take revenge on those who have subjected him to untold humiliations and sufferings as a detestable being. He attempts to take possession of his beloved Catherine and establish control over those who prevent him from advancing his venture. In this context, he conforms to stereotype by handling violence with violence. Thus, his vindictive attitude puts him neatly into the typological mould. Edgar is basically a decent and faithful man, who is not very impressive. He is well-dressed, well-behaved, and rich. Living a pampered life at Thrushcross Grange, 60 Edgar really does not have much to worry about. The first time we see him weeping over a puppy, in a clash with his sister Isabella. Edgar is financially sound, socially well placed and behaviourally polished. He appears to Catherine as a man of affluence who can elevate her social status. Further, he seems to have a masochistic streak, since he falls incurably in love with Catherine after she acts like a huge brat to the servants and hits him. From Nelly, we learn that the henpecked Edgar fears Catherine, and always tries to please her. Though he has a higher social status, he worships her beauty and throws himself to her disposal. Even after their marriage, in order to please Catherine, Edgar reluctantly allows the despicable Heathcliff to make his presence at Thrushcross Grange. As Nelly puts it, “he possessed the power to depart, as much as a cat possesses the power to leave a mouse half killed, or a bird half eaten”. (Bronte, Emily 87) As Edgar knows well about the evil design of Heathcliff, he wonders at his wife encouraging him still as her friend and entertaining him as a welcome guest in their home. Here, Edgar exhibits a typical man’s nature of exasperating at his wife’s entertaining Heathcliff as her friend. According to Nelly, Edgar displays “a deep- rooted fear of ruffling her [Catherine’s] humour”. (111) At the same time, he does not show his contempt at his beloved wife in this matter. Hence, he cuts neatly into a typological mould as he gives in to the pressure of his wife Catherine whom he loves wholeheartedly. But, Edgar has no expertise to tackle both the women—Isabella and Catherine. His concern for his sister is not deep rooted. But his concern for his wife is deep rooted. His concern on both these diverse women takes a wrong dimension and direction that finally ends up in grave tragedy. In her own typical fashion, Catherine tests his patience several times. Catherine accepts him as her husband but she cannot erase the memories of Heathcliff from her mind. She boldly persuades him to accept 61 Heathcliff as his friend. But Edgar being a henpecked husband cannot mend her waywardness. He is sympathetic and passionate but a little gullible. Disowning his sister for her elopement with a man whom he detests, he proves to be a typical representative of the patriarchal society. Hareton is the son of Hindley Earnshaw and Frances Earnshaw. Soon after he was born, his mother died which drove his father Hindley to despair. He becomes busy drinking and gambling and does not take care of his son Hareton. This facilitates Heathcliff to bring both father and son into his custody. Hareton has been raised by Heathcliff as an uneducated and incapable fool. Since he is not given a proper care, he does not grow to be a matured man. He grows up to be as wild as Heathcliff wants him to be and he is denied the education and dignity he deserves. Hence, he could not capture the attention of Catherine junior who at first ignores him as a worthless man. Of course, at the end he wins the heart of Catherine junior which concludes the novel on a happy note. Hareton, unlike his father does not lose hope in life despite the mistreatment and humiliation meted out to him by his foster father Heathcliff. He manages to overcome his vulnerable position and evolve from a wild illiterate brute to a refined and compassionate companion to Cathy. Lockwood feels that Catherine junior has plunged into a miserable marital alliance with Hareton while there are many better individuals like him waiting for her. On seeing Hareton being treated like a brute, her motherly instinct that remained frozen due to the death of Linton now slowly is melting showing signs of love and care for Hareton. This is expressed in her gesture by teaching him how to read books. This paves the way for their coming together. Love-ridden Hareton and love-long Catherine junior come close on the mutual plane of their hopeless condition. 62 Hareton may also be assessed in the light of storm and calm. His appearance and rudeness make him seem a child of storm in the beginning (fitting the Wuthering Heights environment) but turns out to be a child of calm with his cousin Catherine. This researcher is of the view that a good-natured woman can mend the ill-mannered man easily. This is very much evident in the case of Hareton. Here it is important to note here that Hareton proves to be a man of type as he becomes worldly-wise and gets refined after basking in the warmth and affection of his sweet heart, Catherine Junior. Linton Heathcliff was born to the eloped couple Heathcliff and Isabella. He was born sick and weak. He also does not receive his father’s care and love as a boy. After Isabella’s death, Heathcliff takes him to his house. There, he receives good treatment as he carries out his father’s plans. Heathcliff desires him to marry Catherine junior so that Thrushcross Grange will also become his heritance. Here, Linton is being used as a tool by his father to take revenge on Edgar Linton. Catherine junior and Linton are purposefully made to meet together by Heathcliff. Thus, this critical examination of the characters of women and men in the fictional world of Wuthering Heights helps problematize the notion of typology of woman, as imposed by patriarchal ideology. The foregoing analysis exposes men as more typological as an undemocratic patriarchal head of the family (Mr. Earnshaw), gossip-monger (Mr. Lockwood) a human waste (Hindley), a cruel and diabolical man (Heathcliff), a hen-pecked husband (Edgar Linton) and a mentally and physically sick peevish man (Linton Heathcliff). Only Hareton shows some signs of evolution from a human waste to a better human being. On the contrary, women in this fictional world evolve into individuals breaking the typological moulds. Wuthering Heights thus 63 destabilizes and problematizes the notion of typology of woman by projecting the typology of men which is a typical feminist protest though it is not declared as such. Jane Eyre Emily Bronte, Charlotte Bronte and Jane Austen were the pioneers of the feminist movements in England. Jane Eyre has been acclaimed to be the major feminist novel of the Victorian period though there is no direct attack on patriarchy and nor supporting element for the equal rights of men and women. But Charlotte Bronte has to be appreciated to reflect women’s yearning for liberation and individuality from male domination. This spirit is very well captured in Jane through her dialogue with Rochester when he proposes to marry her (Martin, 1966). Do you think I am an automaton? A machine without feelings?...Do you think, because I am poor, obscure, plain, and little, I am soulless and heartless? You think wrong — I have as much soul as you, — and full as much heart...I am not talking to you now through the medium of custom, conventionalities, nor even of mortal flesh; — it is my spirit that addresses your spirit; just as if both had passed through the grave, and we stood at God's feet, equal, — as we are. (Bronte, Charlotte 252) Jane is a pious and moralistic girl. So, she does not immediately accept the offer of marriage from Rochester who is well above her in financial and social status. Her consciousness of class oppression and her craving for individuality are the causes for her strong refusal of his offer first. As an orphaned child, Jane’s initial formative period of life at her uncle’s house is accountable for her neglected upbringing without any signs of love from her own kith and kin. As a result, she becomes a wild girl. Had she been shown proper love and moral education, Jane would have blossomed into a 64 decent girl according to the estimate of Mrs. Reed, her aunt. Ironically, the society of Mrs. Reed, out of its exposure to moral education, learns the values of deceit of fooling each one with a false sentiment of love. Jane lacks this technique of a hoax love. She learns from this dichotomy of deceit which she abhors to practice. She conducts herself in a manner to show love to those who love her and hate those who hate her. She tells Helen, one of her inmates at Lowood school, But I feel this, Helen: I must dislike those who, whatever I do to please them, persist in disliking me; I must resist those who punish me unjustly. It is as natural as that I should love those who show me affection, or submit to punishment when I feel it is deserved. (61) Jane Eyre, just because she was born poor without anyone except her aunt Reed to look after her is compelled to lead a cloistered existence without having freedom. She is the daughter of Mr. Reed’s sister who is married to a poor clergy. This marriage is not accepted in the family of Mrs. Eyre, because of her husband’s financial condition which is very low and meagre. Love between them is not encouraged. Still, she marries her man and comes out of the family. Within a short period of time after giving birth to Jane, both die of a dreadful disease. Mr. Reed, Jane’s maternal uncle takes pity on the little child and brings her up. This kind act of his is not approved of by his wife Mrs. Reed. They have three children already- Eliza, John and Georgiana. Further, Mrs. Reed knows well the difficulties in rearing up a female child. Though they have enough to protect them from not falling into the ditch of poverty, they do not have more money to show generosity of grace on one more child. Mr. Reed does not pay heed to his wife’s instructions and brings up Jane well. As ill luck would have it, he too died leaving Jane in the hands of merciless Reed. She makes use of her son John as a tool in punishing Jane. As there are no male persons in 65 the family, Mrs. Reed pampers her son to exercise his male authority on all and especially on Jane very stringently. On one of her days of loneliness with a book in her hand, John confronts her in the following manner: You have no business to take our books; you are dependent, mamma says; you have no money; your father left you none; you ought to beg, and not to live here with gentlemen’s children like us, and eat the same meals we do, and wear clothes at our mamma’s expense. Now I’ll teach you to rummage my book shelves; for, they are mine; all the house belongs to me, or will do in a few years. Go and stand by the door, out of the way of the mirror and the windows. (5) Mr. Reed’s act of bringing Jane into his house can be compared to Mr. Earnshaw’s act of bringing Heathcliff into his house in the novel Wuthering Heights . Both commit this blunder without consulting the members of their family. These two patriarchal heads exercise their authority over others, especially their wives. After the death of Mr. Reed, Jane is seen as a burden and drain on the family resources. As a result, she is both mentally and physically tortured and harassed. Being a bold and sensitive girl, she cannot put up with the ill treatment meted out to her. She raises her objection and confronts everyone who subjects her to mental agony and physical assault. When she is attacked by John Reed, she gives him back by flying at him like a “mad cat” (24). Jane is described as “a mad cat” for her inability to suppress her outburst which testifies the notion of Victorian society which dictated that women should exercise maximum tolerance for their survival. For her reaction, she is locked up in the red room. But being a bold girl, during an intense dispute with her aunt Mrs. Reed, Jane states, “I am glad you are no relation of mine… You think 66 I have no feelings, and that I can do without one bit of love or kindness; but I cannot live so”. (45) When Jane exposes her aunt Mrs. Reed’s real nature, she becomes crestfallen. Mrs. Reed wants to know more about her assessment from her judgement. She queries, “What more have you to say?” (36). Jane answers: I am glad you are no relation of mine. I will never call you aunt again as long as I live. I will never come to see you when i am grown up; and if anyone asks me how I liked you, and how you treated me, I will say the very thought of you makes me sick, and that you treated me with miserable cruelty. (36) For this, her aunt thus retaliates. “How dare you affirm that, Jane Eyre?” (36). Jane replies, “How dare I, Mrs. Reed? How dare I?...” I shall remember how you thrust me back—roughly and violently thrust me back — into the red-room, and locked me up there, to my dying day, though I was in agony, though I cried out, while suffocating with distress, ‘Have mercy! Have mercy, Aunt Reed!’ And that punishment you made me suffer because your wicked boy struck me— knocked me down for nothing. I will tell anybody who asks me questions this exact tale. People think you a good woman, but you are bad, hardhearted. You are deceitful. (36) Jane’s reaction shows how honest and upright her character is even in the adverse circumstances. She has the guts to rise against humiliations. She has this spirit that continues throughout the novel. When Jane informs Dr. Lloyd of all the humiliations she is subjected to by the family of her aunt, Mrs. Reed, he tries to 67 comfort her telling that only at her aunt’s place she could get food, clothing and shelter without any difficulty. But Jane does not want to continue at Gateshead where she is treated inhumanly. At the same time, she does not want to take her asylum in any one of her poor relations. She considers ‘poverty synonymous with degradation’ (22). What she wants is a true liberty. This is where she emerges as a non-typological character. She grows strong in her beliefs and becomes morally spirited. She can be perceived as a feminist role model as she challenges the generally accepted Victorian roles of the nineteenth-century woman. Steelye says, Jane Eyre was “aimed at young female readers in which an adolescent woman attempts to gain maturity and ascendency over the terms of her world” (Steelye, 13). Jane Eyre does not carry her feminist ideals with her publicly but she expresses her views of women’s equal status through her actions and words. She faces suppression and is confined into a red room, when she shows her reaction against humiliation. Likewise, Bertha Mason, the wife of Rochester is also subjected to harassment and imprisonment when she shows stiff resistance to the domination of her husband. The only difference between them (Jane and Bertha) is that Jane immediately learns the fact that she is left with no option but to operate within the patriarchal world in order to lead a worthy and successful life but Bertha Mason, wife of Rochester does not care for the norms of the patriarchal society and continues to protest the patriarchal hegemony. Hence, Bertha is totally a non- typological character. She, through her wild behaviour, foreshadows what will happen to Jane if she marries Rochester. She indicates this by throwing Jane’s veil over her head and later hurls it on to the floor (Green and Jill, 167). 68 Jane Eyre’s passion for education has its genesis right from her early days. By reading the classics of Victorian England like Pamela , Gullivers Travels and Marmion , she desires for an actual existence that means to lead a life of freedom. Further, her skill in the art of painting sharpens her aspiration for a liberated life without any shackles of slavery. That is why, from her early days, she conducts herself as a rebel slave ever opposing the forces like Mrs. Reed’s unfair accusations, Rochester’s attempt to make her his mistress and St. John’s desire to transform her into a missionary wife. She is dead against the then Victorian traditional views of women based on gender values by relegating the status of women next or inferior to men. At the same time, she is typically a true representative of the Victorian society possessing typological features of being frank, sincere, and lacking in personal vanity. Charlotte Bronte throws light on class system followed in the Victorian society and its impact on people especially women belonging to middle and lower class. Jane Eyre does not belong to one fixed class as an orphan and keeps moving from one place to another with different positions. Though she is brought up in Mr. Reed’s family, she is not treated as a member of the family. She is ill treated since she was born into the working class. This becomes clear when John Reed addresses Jane: “you are a dependant, mamma says; you have no money; your father left you none; you ought to beg, and not live with gentlemen’s children like us” (Bronte, Charlotte 7). After leaving Mrs. Reed’s family, she joins Lowood School for orphans and later becomes a governess at Thornfield. But Jane Eyre is not influenced by the traditional class system of the Victorian society. She has grown mature enough to judge people on their characters not on their class. 69 It is through this novel that Charlotte Bronte brings out the status of a governess. Many Marxist feminists uphold the view that through Jane Eyre’s depiction as a governess, Bronte portrays the strict hierarchical class system in England (Terry, 1975). In this system of carefully circumscribing the class position, the relevant status of the governess is found to be kept in a dubious status, that is, if she is to be treated as upper class woman because of her education or if she is to be treated as lower-class woman because of her servant-status. In Thornfield, the same class distinction continues to exist though Fairfax, the housekeeper of Rochester who considers her status superior to other servants in the house. She takes Jane as her equal since she enjoys the status of governess that does not belong to the upper class or to lower class. Hence, she shows her respect and treats her on an equal footing. But Rochester treats her initially as a good servant. That is why she calls him ‘master’. There is a general assumption and vision of the upper class people that they will not commit any folly. But that assumption is thwarted by showing the hidden passions boiling under the veneer of genteel tranquillity. The so-called upper class Blanch Ingram is ever haughty and superficial. Elisa Reed is debauched and inhumanly cold. Even Rochester is a typical example of debauchery. Thus, all these upper class characters stand examples for family class status in particular and for the class system existed in the Victorian England in general. Further, the woman character like Blanch Ingram represents people who overlook the boundaries of Victorian cultural norms and emerge as non-typological characters. A woman of that period would be judged on the basis of financial status and family name. She would not be judged by her academic accomplishments. But through this novel, Charlotte 70 Bronte brings out the fact that women like Jane belonging to lower and middle class with their freshness and purity upholding the moral values and stringent work ethic of the middle classes alone would deserve to enjoy equal status on par with upper class people. Jane, though she revolts physical abuse and biased treatment at the beginning, slowly mellows down to conform to the existing norms of the Victorian society. She is seen to evolve from a non-typological to typological character. Because, she becomes cognizant of what the patriarchal Victorian society expects of her to survive. She is not so much aggressive as she was in Gateshead and Lowood. But she keeps her typical traits under her control by maintaining her self-esteem. On the contrary, Bertha Mason too has been subjected to harassment like enslavement and imprisonment right from the beginning. But she stands the humiliation and boldly challenges the influence of patriarchal society. By being unchaste (in a patriarchal sense) and domineering, Bertha proves to be non-typological while Jane is virginal and temperate. In comparison, Bertha, due to her delirious and animalistic behaviour seems to be a ‘savage counterpart’ to the ‘domesticated Jane’. As a result, she is punished by her husband Mr. Rochester by imprisoning her at his home. Her imprisonment causes her mental turmoil and finally her break downs which are described as signs of insanity. Bertha’s miserable condition is a signal of warning to those who disobey and protest the patriarchal rules of the Victorian society (Green and Jill, 1996). When Bertha is punished for her non-compliance to the social norms, Jane is, later blessed by the society for her adherence to the norms of the Victorian society. Of course, Jane is also treated as an outcast when she is rebellious and defies the patriarchal rules. But when Jane is subjected to harassments, she gets angry but is 71 mentally strong enough to look out for the solutions to escape. Jane feels the pang of confinement of Bertha as she has also been a victim of this kind of punishment at Gateshead. She directly reprimands and accuses Rochester of aggravating the germs of insanity of Bertha. She tells him, “inexorable for that unfortunate lady: you speak of her with hate, with vindictive antipathy. It is cruel, she cannot help being mad” (Bronte, Charlotte 301). In each stage of the novel, Jane faces stiff opposition from the people around her mainly due to her poor economic status. This socio-economic status consciousness is the typical Victorian temperament. Understanding this, Jane strives hard to earn her livelihood without depending on others. This reflects her craving for independence. That is why, even though being a governess is considered a low-ranked job, she hesitates not a second to accept the position to teach the adopted daughter of Rochester. Until she gains economic independence, she refrains from accepting the offer of marriage from Rochester and St. John. The novelist underscores the importance of economic independence as the primary condition to break the grid of patriarchal ideologies. Moglene says, “Jane lived in a world that measured the likelihood of her success by the degree of her marriageability” which includes her familial connections, economic status and beauty (Moglene, 484). Her goal rests not only on marrying Rochester but also on her overall development to earn economic independence. Of course, she becomes desperate when she comes to know about Rochester’s deception but she gains confidence enough to leave him and survive on her own without depending on others. Moreover, she has a moral reason to turn down the marriage proposal of Rochester, because she discovers that he is already married and his wife Bertha is still alive. She has a strong footing in her principle and never deviates from it. Here, she 72 evolves into a non- typological mould. She turns down the offer of marriage from St. John, because he does not love her but he thinks she fits in his missionary job. St. John, being a member of the patriarchal society, expects her to act to fulfil his requirement which is the reflection of the dominant ideology. But she rejects him on the ground that marriage without love is meaningless. Because of her clarity of thought and her urge for economic independence, she can stand the tension and pressures imposed on her by the patriarchal society. Thus, Jane reconstructs her epistemological reality by destabilizing the expectations of two patriarchal lords, Rochester and St. John. There are two instances in which Jane proves to be a stronger woman. First, she feels annoyed when Rochester offers to adorn her with the expensive jewels and garments for marriage. She expresses her unwillingness by saying, “the more he bought me, the more my cheek burned with a sense of annoyance and degradation” (Bronte, Charlotte 236). Her feeling of annoyance towards the objectification is obvious to the fact that she is a woman of self-esteem. She does not relish being confined into the world of material comfort and remaining a mere pleasure pot to her would-be husband Rochester. Next, when she decides to leave Rochester on discovering that he is already married, she proves to be a courageous girl. She does not agree to be his mistress rather she prefers to lead a life of saint with moral courage and self-dignity. She raises above all the other women characters by not yielding to her emotional and physical demands which otherwise would have tarnished her image. With the same courage, she stands by Rochester as his helpmate serving him as his eyes managing the affairs as his administrator, encouraging him to restore partially his eyesight and being with him as a true vision for ten long years. Jane, in 73 spite of her consciousness about self-esteem and principled life, finally reunites with Rochester only after he has lost his wife, Bertha and his eyesight. Taking these characteristic features of Jane into account, it is affirmed that she certainly challenges the norms of the male-centric Victorian society and emerges as a non-typological woman. By restricting his wife’s freedom in his house for fear of his honour getting damaged out of her wild taste, Rochester locks her up in a room and appoints a maidservant to look after her. Bertha’s confinement into an isolated room on the third floor raises the eyebrows of the readers and the male authoritative behaviour of Rochester over his wife earns him the name of a cruel and inhuman husband. However, Bertha’s emotional outburst helps to turn on a new page of Jane’s life (Rosemarie Putnam Tong, 1998). In a male dominated society, women like Bertha, however wrongly disposed she might be, would be branded as a hysterical and get locked up in a room. Rochester could not control the over indulging sexual behaviour of his wife Bertha Mason. As a result, he starts madly looking for a suitable partner. This kind of male madness is generally associated with legal offences. Jane is also found to be slightly insane at her aunt’s house when she is counter acting her nephew. But this kind of female insanity is generally associated with moral abnormality and transgression of feminine qualities. But they choose different paths to recover from their maladies. Jane takes a therapeutic treatment to regain her will power at the Moor house while Rochester undergoes a psychological treatment to overcome his physical impotence and emotional dependence. Jane makes an effort to strengthen her mind through discipline and seeks to expand her knowledge, while Rochester becomes isolated from the world (Small, 1996). 74 Thus, the outer moral values of Jane and her inner spiritual strength of intuition save her from all onslaughts of her life. As a Christian, Jane is an embodiment of love. On seeing Jane, he is much disturbed by her ‘thoughtful look’ (Bronte, Charlotte 361). And “there was something glad in your (her) glance and genial in your (her) manner ------with a social heart” (361). In spite of all these fervent appeals, Jane does not want to marry him since she believes that both are passing through tough times. Thereby, each has to forget the other for the benefit of each other. Rochester cries for her association with him. He goes to the extent of asking her “who in the world cares you? Or who will be injured by what you do?” (364). Here, Rochester aspires to marry Jane for his pleasure and abandons his insane wife Bertha. He proves himself a typical patriarchal head by seeking pleasure out of his marriage with Jane and continuing to keep his first wife Bertha locked in the same room. Here, Bertha becomes a “woman in the attic”. His male chauvinism is further more expounded in a party thrown by him where he flirts with many women. He flirts with Ms. Ingram before the very eyes of Jane Eyre in order to make her jealous. This researcher is of the view that Rochester alone is responsible for the pitiable plight of Bertha and establishes himself as an undemocratic patriarchal member of the Victorian society. Marriage is a means of bridging societal status in the Victorian society and therefore, Jane does not bother about this match. Though she feels hurt, she does not lose balance. She accepts adversity as a part of life. This lesson she learns from Helen and practices it in her life. But after marrying Rochester, Jane would continue to remain financially independent. Since Rochester becomes blind, she feels both have become equals and moreover, he would have to depend on her for guidance to swim across the life. In Chapter 12, Jane articulates her view which reflects a radical feminist philosophy. 75 Women are supposed to be very calm generally: but women feel just as men feel; they need exercise for their faculties, and a field for their efforts as much as their brothers do; they suffer from too rigid a restraint, too absolute a stagnation, precisely as men would suffer; and it is narrow-minded in their more privileged fellow-creatures to say that they ought to confine themselves to making puddings and knitting stockings, to playing on the piano and embroidering bags. It is thoughtless to condemn them, or laugh at them, if they seek to do more or learn more than custom has pronounced necessary for their sex. (Bronte, Charlotte 123) Though Rochester appears to be harsh, he does not treat her cruelly. Further Jane develops a new interest in him. She considers all his temperamental changes, his harshness, and his amoral adventures as a resultant product of his miserable life of the past. She identified in his character certain bright patches like a man of better taste, noble principles and pure tendencies. At first, she rescues him from falling from the horse and second time she awakens him from sleep when his room is set ablaze. Jane acts as a saviour of Rochester, the typical patriarchal head. At Lowood, Brocklehurst is the master of the school and clergyman of the church. Though the pupils are reared and educated in his institution, he treats them cruelly and subjugates them using religion as an instrument. He hypocritically instructs Jane to pray to God “... to take away your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh” (33). When she becomes a student at Lowood, her dogma—love those who love, hate those who hate continues because of the harsh treatment meted out to her by Mr. Brocklhurst. Fortunately, she gets the association of two positive characters, 76 Miss. Helen Burns and Miss. Temple. When Brocklehurst declares Jane as a spoilt child, Miss. Temple takes pity on her. From Miss. Temple, Jane learns the values of administration that helps her in later years as a perfect teacher. Her association with Helen is very providential. From her, she learns the true Christian values, love all, and endure all sufferings because all are born to suffer. Jane also learns to endure the sufferings caused to her by others but does not show hatred on them. Jane practises this principle and becomes a transcendental being out of her experience of passionate love of Rochester. During her stormy stay at Rochester’s place, these two dogmas save her from being swept away by passionate winds of Rochester and his passionate life. Brocklehurst has a fashionable wife and daughters who always appear with their hair curled. But he could not tolerate such curly haired girls in his school and so forces them to cut off their ‘top knots’. In fact, such girls have curly hair in a natural manner. They would never apply make up for keeping their curls. But in his family, both his wife and daughters appear curly after spending hours on makeup. This proves how deceitful Brocklehurst is. Like Mrs Reed, he too happens to be devilish in disposition. Jane realises the dark side of life from them. It is because of his cruel nature, many girls died of typhus infection. Being stonehearted, he blames his children for not following the Child’s guide. When aunt Reed asks him to mend Jane’s character, he says “Humility is a Christian grace, and one peculiarly appropriate to the pupils of Lowood; I, therefore, direct that special care shall be bestowed on its cultivation amongst them...” (33). If we compare this statement of his and his real nature described above, one would clearly come to a conclusion how deceitful and hypocrite he is. As a Christian, he expects humility from his wards. But 77 he is not humble before his benefactor God. He conducts the school in the name of charity but expects profit. He is a mercenary in the Christian garb. Charlotte exposes the real nature of him who creeps, climbs and intrudes into the Christian fold. In the name of religion, he is a looter. In the name of religion, he is a devil to children. As he is deceitful, he quickly recognizes Mrs. Reed’s deceit and pays heed to her request of getting Jane admitted into his school. In the name of educating orphans, he gets a huge sum from a large number of benefactors but spends only paltry. His market-minded consciousness aims for profit out of exploiting the public and innocent school children. Because of his deceitful nature, he evolves into a typological mould with a typical market-minded consciousness. There are a few minnow characters like Bessie who offer great consolation and comfort to Jane who becomes a victim in her fight against the male dominance. Bessie, the servant maid of her aunt alone knows her real nature. She usually comforts Jane not to lose her heart. She keeps her relaxed by telling her stories. It is her stories, songs and ballads that keep Jane from getting trapped into her agony and make her live alive. In reality, she is her succour of Jane’s relief from distress. In the desert-ridden relationship at Gateshead, Jane has found in Bessie an oasis. Miss Temple is a kind and compassionate superintendent of Lowood. She appears to be a typical Victorian mother who easily enters the typological web. She takes totally a different stand from her husband in negotiating people from the outside world. Miss Temple shows, in particular a special concern to Jane and Helen by taking their pitiable plight into consideration. At the same time, she is under the control of her husband and she cannot act independently in the administration of the school. By showing compassion and attention to the needy, she stands as a great 78 contrast to her husband Brocklehurst who is by nature far from being kind till the end. Jane draws a great inspiration from Miss. Temple. It is no surprise that Temple’s motherly nature inspires Jane to a great extent. After getting to know more about the school, the treasurer, Mr. Brocklehurst and Miss Temple, the superintendent, Jane has the chance of talking freely with Helen. The history and grammar teacher at Lowood, Miss Scatcherd is generally unkind to her students, but she is particularly cruel and abusive to the thirteen year old Helen. She could not tolerate Helen’s careless attitude in not keeping her things neat, orderly, and tidy. She would admonish her in the presence of all and give punishment in the middle of the hall for her act of callousness. Jane too is given such a punishment and she feels very bad. She is psychologically disturbed for undergoing such a punishment of standing on a stool in the presence of all as if she alone is the only person embodiment of all sins and follies. She becomes emotionally disturbed and could not have the guts to meet her schoolmates after this incident. When compared to her angry temperament, she watches Helen patiently bear the punishment meted out to her by her teacher. Jane learns this power of endurance from Helen Burns. Further, when she expresses her philosophy of eye for eye or tooth for tooth, Helen answers her in a negative manner that Christ in New Testament had clearly said, “Love your enemies; bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you and despitefully use you” (Bronte, Charlotte 61). This Christian moral is unknown and unheard of for Jane. Her ideology is “when we are struck at without reason, we should strike back again very hard” (61). For this, Helen thus says “Life appears to me too short to be spent in nursing animosity or registering wrongs” (62). She is highly submissive and acts 79 subservient. By this way, she comes into the mould or type by living up to the expectations of the Victorian norms. Jane’s philosophy of retaliation dies a slow death at her Lowood school. Her stay at Lowood trims her nature, character and disposition. She gets perfected in her attitudes. Though Helen’s death hits her below the belt, the comfort shown by Miss Temple gathers her spirits. She attends on her duties well. Jane too wants to grow materially and enhance her knowledge. Jane has a longing to visit “a new place, amongst new faces, under new circumstances” (95). She comes across an advertisement for the post of governess at Thornfield to educate Mr. Rochester’s daughter. She becomes excited to take up that position. In a private conversation with Jane, Rochester reveals a secret to her that Celine Varens disappointed him in her love affair with him. She chose another partner and told him a complicated a story that Adele was his daughter. She abandoned the child and Rochester took the child to his custody with a view to protecting his family and ‘self’ image. Jane makes him realize the fact that Adele needs parental care for her well being. It is at this stage, she realizes the status of Adele which is none other than an orphaned one. She identifies her own woeful tale with hers and starts showing more affection. Here, through Jane, Charlotte Bronte gives her voice against the stereotyped traits of women imposed on them by patriarchal ideology though the feministic awareness is not reflected in the whole of the novel. While compared with Jane, the pairs of Eliza and Georgiana Reed, Mary and Blanche Ingram, Diana and Mary River have their own choices, likes and dislikes, tastes and temperaments, attitudes and adjustments. Eliza, her cousin, right from the beginning of the novel has chosen her path to lead a lonely life. She takes great care in trimming her virtues and finally 80 becomes a nun. Georgiana falls in love with a rich boy and is about to elope with him but her mother Mrs. Reed aborts her attempt. She has become a depressed person. She does not get trained to stand on her own legs. At the end, after the death of Mrs. Reed, her life becomes pathetic. The housekeeper at Thornfield, Mrs. Fairfax treats Jane affectionately and she is another woman respected by Jane. She tells in detail about Rochester and how he has become the sole owner of Thornfield. It is she who tells her an important aspect of Rochester’s character who is very liberal with his tenants. She knows well the whimsicalities of her master. Though she knows about the secret of the madwoman at the attic, she does not divulge it to Jane. Miss Fairfax does not want to scare Jane. Thus, Miss Fairfax is another positive character that helps Jane to know her environment and evolve. Endurance of Jane continues to stay with her on her way to reach the Moor house. She withstands bravely the adverse climate, the loss of her belongings and her being reduced to the level of a destitute. As Jane has such an immense faith in endurance providentially, she gets an asylum at the house of Rivers. Maria Rivers and Dorothy Rivers through their genteel touch save her from her starvation. Their brother, Sir John gets her a decent appointment as a teacher in his parish. She finds immense delight in teaching rustics. It is in this true service, Jane tastes the sweetness of divinity. It is here she gets a huge share of her father’s brother’s property to the tune of twenty thousand pounds. She wants to divide her fortune into four and give each of her cousins five thousand pounds. It also shows how Jane is generous in her temperament. It is her aim in her early days to reciprocate love for love, respect for respect. 81 Thus Jane has the experience and opportunity of leading her life in the midst of negative characters like Mrs. Reed, Brocklehurst, Bertha and Miss Ingram on one side and also the positive characters like Bessie, Miss Temple, Fairfax, Mary and Diana Rovers and Helen Burns that shape her character to bear all odds in life. Everybody is born in order to get salvation for all miseries. In the midst of these flat characters, Jane alone derives the benefit of becoming round because of her interaction with them. St. John Rivers has saintly qualities in him. He happens to be a zealous Christian steeped in religious conviction. He is intelligent and well educated. He is taken care of well by his sisters. He looks after them well. There is a streak of male chauvinism in him which insists on Jane’s taking up missionary life in India. He goes to the extent of persuading Jane to stop German studies. Instead, he exhorts her to take up Hindustani. He does not realize the taste of Jane who is ready to go with him as a fellow missionary. But he is adamant in insisting on her to get married to him. Though an austere character, he does not understand others’ feelings. He imposes his aspirations on others and forces them to agree to follow. He is no doubt a typical male type of the Victorian society. After knowing Rochester’s loss of eyesight and the death of Bertha due to fire accident, Jane Eyre goes to save Rochester from his doom. She thus expresses her wish in the following manner. “Mr. Rochester, if ever I did a good deed in my life --- if ever I thought a good thought --- if ever I prayed a sincere and blameless prayer --- if ever I wished a righteous wish --- I am rewarded now. To be your wife is, for me, to be as happy as I can be on earth”. (Bronte, Charlotte 515) 82 As she thus expresses her desire, Rochester makes a remark ‘because you delight in sacrifice’ -- (515). For this, she suitably answers, “Sacrifice!’ what do I sacrifice? Famine for food, expectation for content. To be privileged to put my arms round what I value—to press my lips to what I love --- to repose on what I trust: is that to make sacrifice? If so, then certainly I delight in sacrifice”. (515) The patriarchal society remains a challenge to Jane to achieve equal rights and status. John Reed, Brocklehurst, Rochester and St. John are the main male characters of the novel who are the representatives of the early Victorian patriarchal system. Charlotte Bronte challenges the patriarchal system through this novel. The Personalities and lives of those male figures are symptomatic of the societal changes that are soon to happen. These men keep her in an inferior position when she comes to them seeking employment. She is unable to express her feelings and voice her views in such a submissive position given to her by the patriarchal society. Due to her quest for independence and freedom of expression, Jane decides to elude Brocklehurst, to reject St. John and finally to agree to marry Rochester only after attaining equal financial status. In her fight against class oppression and gender bias, she struggles hard to establish her identity without losing balance on her moral standards and policies. Bertha Rochester is the other most important female character in the novel, because she alone resists the dominating temperament of the patriarchal society. She happens to be a neurotic patient. She is the mad woman in the attic. She is a violent tropic beauty and ever vengeful and violent. Edward Rochester is fascinated by her brilliant appearance, rich disposition and fashionable dressing. Born to a mad mother, she is believed to have inherited the mental aberrations from her mother. She is 83 uneducated, harsh and ever vociferous in temper. She is neither chaste nor sweet tempered. She tries to abort her husband’s prospects of marriage and then the prospects of peaceful life with another woman. Due to her eccentric dramatic movements she tries to set fire the marriage dress as a sign of her hatred for her husband’s union with another woman. Finally, she chars the dwellings of Rochester because of her burning animosity against her husband’s peaceful existence with a marriage union. She hates to the core Rochester who hates her to the core. Hatred begets only hatred, resulting in her doom. Her character appears to be dubious. She bears an implicit jealousy on Jane as she happens to be her rival partner to her husband. She hates her husband for an obvious reason that he locks her up in the attic, restricting her free movement. Bertha Rochester is called ‘insane’ because of her abnormal behaviour and lapses of morality (in a patriarchal sense). But the root cause of her insanity is uncertain. According to Rochester, it is an inherent malady and he complains of her immoral behaviour which also attributes to her madness. Bertha hails from a Creole background in West Indies. She has the family history of madness because her mother also suffers from mental illness and promiscuity which is cited as a reason by Rochester for the plight of Bertha (Green and Jill, 1996). The researcher is of the view that her solitary confinement and the imposition of Victorian cultural restrictions on her behaviour cause her to become a pitiable being. She is the victim of gender bias. Green and Jill further observe that the ‘Cultural Otherness’ of Bertha is an important factor. “Bertha Mason represents not only the eruption of the Imaginary into the Symbolic, the Otherness of femininity, but she also functions as a metonym for cultural Otherness, too” (Ibid). 84 Bertha’s behaviour, at the end, proves to be revengeful on her husband Rochester. She burns his bed and finally sets ablaze the entire house causing him to lose his eye sight and one arm. Since it can be taken as the consequence of her vengeance, it may be construed as her strong counter attack against the biased male- centric ideology. It is argued that Bertha Mason is originally considered to be subjected to repression. Carolyn G. Heilbrun also regarded Bertha as an epitome of repression, but she shifted the focus of attention from sexual desire to mere anger and rebellion. As she contends, “Bertha now represents not sexual desire but anger, not the repressed element in the respectable woman, but the suppressed element in the un-emancipated woman” (qtd in Lerner, 275). As a contrast to Jane, Bertha loses her virginity before marriage. Her deviation from social norms, in the patriarchal sense, poses a challenge to the societal norms framed by men. It is clear that Bertha’s non-compliance to the norms of the patriarchal society proves to be fatal to her. However, Rochester is also found to transgress the moral values of Victorian culture by opting to marry Jane when Bertha is alive, but he is not victimized by the same dominant ideology. Analyzing the pitiable plights of these women characters, this researcher believes that the perpetuation of this ideology even through literature is unhealthy and it stabilizes the gender-bias strongly worldwide. Of course, literature reflects the society and is a powerful instrument for recirculation and perpetuation of this ideology. Bertha Mason is totally a non-typological woman with all her individualized and womanly assertive characteristics that have unfortunately earned her the name of a ‘mad woman’. Showalter believes the key reason for the mental illness of women is their reproductive system. Their discharging of abnormal quantity and quality of blood, 85 doctors opine, could cause damage to brain which attributes to unusual behaviour finally resulting in madness (Elaine, 1985). Keeping this view in mind, it can be perceived that women at this condition need to be given a soothing treatment and pleasing environment. They also need to be left in good company of people and should not be left in isolation. But Rochester fails to give her that comfort and so, he can be declared a true cause for her mental agony. Both Bertha and Jane are found guilty of not adhering to the traditional roles women are expected to play as per the dictates of the patriarchal world. When they both refuse to abide by the norms, they face the same kind of punishment. Mrs. Reed does not like the way Jane behaves at Gateshead and Rochester is averse to Bertha’s unrestricted and flirtatious way of life. Both Rochester and Mrs. Reed represent Victorian ideals of social morality. The domineering practices of the male aristocrats have become moribund because of its scant disregard for people belonging to economically downtrodden section of the society. Correspondingly, men like Brocklehurst use their wealth and position for exercising their power for the purpose of suppression. The patriarchal society adopts a strategy to keep the women’s progress under check. Nevertheless, the Victorian world also shows how the middle-classes have slowly advanced to the extent of fighting male chauvinistic dominance. It is testified by the replacement of Brocklehurst by a committee in an attempt to break the existing practices and the timely caution Jane received from Mr. Lloyd and Mr. Biggs to escape the illegal marriage with Rochester. Patriarchal society dictates the norms and behaviour of women, any deviation from the adherence to this dominant ideology will land women in trouble. But the same Victorian society prescribed certain norms for men also. According to the 86 Victorian norms, men should have certain characteristics like loyalty, honesty, prudence, and morality. Only men possessing these traits would be chosen by women for a secured marriage life. The same ideology was reflected in fictions also. On the contrary, the male characters in Charlotte Bronte’s works do not conform to these expectations of the societies. Charlotte Bronte was a rebellious by nature and her rebellious nature was reflected through her portrayal of male characters. She created male characters that seemingly had these characteristics but they would fail to meet the high standards. It is a known fact that Charlotte was against woman suppression and gender inequality. Hence, it is believed that she registered her protest against the women’s suppression by creating male characters wanting in moral values and turning diabolic, anti cultural and anti social. By this way, women characters could emerge and supplant the male characters. From Master John, Brocklehurst, Rochester and St. John in Jane Eyre to Dr. John Graham and Paul Emmanuel in Villette , we have male characters that are either greedy, prone to jealousy, dishonest, hypocritical, or some horrible combination of the above. These characteristics not only expose their typologies but also break with the Victorian ideal and give us more realistic heroes. This is how Charlotte Bronte tried to expose the cruel patriarchal ideology and destabilise it through her literature. Thus, Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre highlights the impact of the dominant ideology on women in the Victorian society. In order to overcome this situation, women need to empower themselves through education and through exercising self-esteem and self-will to stand on their own feet and be economically independent. Moreover, the epistemological reality of woman has also to be reconstructed after deconstructing and stabilizing it against male monopoly. Chapter - III Typology through Intertextual Readings of Novels Chosen for Study Between the latter part of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth century, there existed confused ideas with regard to the relative status of men and women. It was believed during that period that it was man and man alone destined to steer the course of domestic and social life of women. Women were thought to be subservient to them. Their world was their home and their job was to look after husband and children. This ideology found in the society of Jane Austen triggered her to fight for women’s rights through her writing (Colin and Brian, 1983). Jane Austen tries to portray through her novels that women have to take strong initiatives to establish equal status with men in society. Many feminist writers support this view. Austen views that a woman’s sense of superiority will be based on her material prosperity. In Sense and Sensibility , women characters obviously make other characters listen to them. They get their wishes fulfilled by following different tactics. “In Sense and Sensibility , women try to bend others to their will and often succeed. From Fanny Dashwood’s manipulation of John to Lucy Steele’s seduction of Robert Ferrars, we see women exerting power sometimes directly and sometimes covertly” (Wallace, 9). Austen creates an inner world of women for the reader, which is totally different from the world of knowledge of male society. Women in the novel enjoy a space by closely maintaining a social network with other women. In the novel, Sense 88 and Sensibility , the author achieves this balance out of the portrayal of two different kinds of female characters having two different temperaments. Elinor Dashwood and Marianne Dashwood are sisters. Elinor is a symbol of sensibility. Her power of possessing the strength of understanding and her cool judgement by virtue makes her act as a counsellor to her mother at the age of nineteen. She keeps her mother under control. Rachel Lerman says, Elinor Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility reflects Jane Austen’s straight forward attitude and her attachment to the members of her family. Elinor takes charge of the family after the death of her father and thinks of the problems in a practical manner. When her sister Marianne is dejected due to the deception of Willoughby, Elinor comforts her and discovers the facts behind the melodrama (Moreland, 1988). Elinor is intelligent and resourceful and is not devoid of emotions. She loves Edward but her love is not passionate. She is a seemingly typological character with all attendant positive values. She loves her brother John Dashwood though he exploits them all. She loves her sister, Marianne. Her love for her mother is exemplary. Her love for her neighbours is equally worth noting. She never does anything untoward to any person. She respects all and remains a true friend to every friend of hers. Her friends could easily confide in her. Lucy likes her as her companion and shares her love affair with Edward for four years. Though it is a rude shock, she never makes an ugly scene. It is she who gets an employment for Edward in the County of Colonel Brandon. Austen creates Marianne who plays the role of a passionate spinster indulging in love making with Willoughby. The same kind of experience Jane Austen is said to have had in her young age. Her indulgence in flirting with a stranger is considered to 89 be more than an accepted behaviour of the Victorian society. Jane Austen is said to have cherished the sweet memories of the incident till her death. But, she exercises a great control over her emotions in the rest of her life (Tomalin, 114). Here, it is important to record that Austen deliberately transgresses the norms of the Victorian society dictated by the patriarchal ideology. From the conversation between Elinor and Marianne, Austen wants to impart to the readers that good senses of self-control will make one overcome all difficulties in life. Having lost her father at an early age, a brother acting according to the dictates of his wife, a mother so crossed in her attempts to find a bridegroom for her, a sister fallen down from the heights of romantic love, a lover so carried away in his promise to his first love, Elinor is saved out of all these stormy interactions due to her sense of self-control. She does not get it out of education but a certain self-will and experience. It is not taught to her by her parents or by society. It is her inherent natural disposition. It is this anchor that has saved her and her family ship. It is this trait of self-control, a typical quality in Elinor — a saving grace for all associated with her. It is because of Elinor’s nature, she knows how to control her emotion and feelings and govern them in a methodical manner, whereas her mother and her sister do not know it. Marianne too has all positive virtues identical to those of Elinor. But her feelings of joy and sorrows do not know any moderation. In a word, Elinor with the help of sense, exercises restrain upon her feelings. She has the virtue of prudence. She remains unflinching in the face of disappointment or failure. But Marianne lacks in self-will and self-restraint. She does not know how to keep her emotions under control. Thus, Elinor appears to be a non-typological character and the author apparently wants to portray through her characters that women should know how to 90 control their emotions and judge things in a rational manner. When her lover Edward is committed to Mary Lucy just because she is financially rich and her sister Mrs. John Dashwood and her mother Mrs. Ferrar support this match, Elinor does not lose her heart. She does not become emotional. She is aware of the fact that in this material world, everybody has only market minded consciousness. She weighs her lover’s value on social scale and not on personal scale. Even when her sister finds fault with her distancing and detached attitude, Elinor reasons out. But she becomes typological when she tells herself that as a woman, she has to endure it stoically. To her sister, she explains clearly that disappointment and frustrations are sufferings only when they are experienced in such a manner. Only after realizing that sufferings are part of life that have to be endured without lamenting over it, can one remain calm, equipoise and balanced. This temperament of Elinor appears to be in a positive non-typological mould. If this attitude is practiced or developed, then in one’s life, there will not be pain out of suffering. With the strength of this state of mind, Elinor gets her lover Edward as her husband. A similar temperament can be seen in Jayakanthan’s Kalyani in his Tamil novel Oru Nadigai Naadagam Parkkiral. She remains stoic when her husband Renga leaves her due to his misconception of her character. She stoically bears the physical pain of her sickness. She boldly bears her husband’s separation. She valiantly supports her troupe for their financial betterment. She, out of her human heart accepts her niece Pattu who suffers from a kind of malady. Kalyani happens to be a symbol of sense—that is self-restraint and self-command like Elinor in Sense and Sensibility . Marianne lacks this stoic temperament. She is wanting in strength to bear the frustration caused in love. The emotional Elinor does not know how to bear it calmly 91 like her sister. She is greatly attracted towards Willoughby. But he is a kind of protégé of Mrs. Smith whose property he is expected to inherit. When his benefactor comes to know of his affair with Marianne, she sends him to London. Thereby, his attitude towards Marianne changes. Between love and wealth as his choice, he chooses money. He exhibits a typical man’s nature in preferring money to love. He cuts neatly into typological mould. He forsakes her and as a result, she falls ill. Thus, her sentimentality bordering on her sensibility gets her a painful reward. In this context, Marianne appears to be a typological character ever running after her pet pleasure. In such pleasure pursuits, she does not care for others’ advice. Nor has she any judgement to weigh the fate of her pleasure. As a result, her love affair with Willoughby becomes abortive. Jane Austen’s forte is projecting the message of bringing harmony in one’s life out of one’s practice of sense and not sensibilities. She portrays how women are subjected to untold miseries if they fail to use their senses. In this context, Marianne’s pleasure pursuits could be compared to those of Catherine senior and Isabella in Wuthering Heights . Catherine senior and Isabella are beings of sensibilities without sense like Marianne. Both choose their husbands according to their sensibilities and both perish. Their lives become tragic. Catherine senior is living with her husband, Edgar but dreaming of her lover, Heathcliff. This kind of double standard in her marital life gets her into a nervous state that has caused her to lead a separate life from her husband ultimately. Isabella too falls a victim of cruelty at the hands of her husband, the diabolic Heathcliff. Catherine senior has no sense to distinguish between her real married situation and her romantic affair with Heathcliff. Isabella too has no sense to stop her marriage with Heathcliff even after getting to know his temperament through Catherine senior. Both act on their 92 sensibilities of preferring the wrong choice of their mental taste that ultimately result in tragedy. But Marianne in Sense and Sensibility is not totally senseless. After her love affair with Willoughby fails, she chooses Colonel Brandon as her husband and leads a happy life. This researcher is of the view that if women fail to be rationally sensible in their choice of spouse, they will become ill fated. But if man makes a wrong choice or causes miseries to woman, he will be exempted from the cruelty of fate. Willoughby, however escapes unpunished though he caused a great harm to Marianne. His disloyalty is unquestioned. Hence, we understand Willoughby is just one of the representatives of the patriarchal society in the Victorian England. Thus, Emily Bronte and Jane Austen, though contemporaries, had diverse views with regard to marriage. Jane Austen’s feministic view brought out the ideal domestic life of a woman, however educated or uneducated, rich or poor, a breadwinner of family or not, she should not leave safe home. For this, she had to practice the sense of love to be shown to all and make them fall into her line. This gesture of showing love would bring other positive virtues like sacrifice, compassion, understanding and togetherness. Her feministic approach aimed at domestic bondage and not a domestic breakage. Women like Elinor had this element by nature. Certain women like Marianne learnt it out of their experience. This was what Jane Austen meant as education. Real education for women was not formal school education but getting oneself educated at home out of their associations with others. She wanted women to get educated out of their experience in society and the domestic front. In her other novels, Emma and Pride and Prejudice too, this aspect was fully exploited. As a result, though her female characters appeared to conduct themselves wrongly out of their misguided sensibilities, they turned positive out of their rational realizations 93 later. This researcher is of the view that these women characters are purposefully created to expose male typologies that existed in the world. Jane Austen calls women who strictly adhere to Victorian norms as fakes, liars, snobs and idiots and have no identity of their own. Marriage, according to her, is one-sided process into which women are coerced by the societal norms. She feels that due to women’s strict adherence to the standards and norms set by the patriarchal society, they lose their free will. As a result, her main women characters are depicted as independent and rebels fighting the gender biased societal norms and ideologies. The unique aspect of the fictional writing of Jane Austen is her focus on commonest incidents and characters as one meets within the ordinary walks of life. Themes of marriage, common sense, disillusionment, nobility of heroines and self- realization are all treated with common sense bordering on comic irony and irony of situations. Unlike other women characters of this period, Jane Austen focused her attention on upper-middle-class women. The only man who has a home in Austen’s world is Mr. Woodhouse, father of Emma, whereas the range of women live by the gentry in rural England is given a pen portrait in all different slants and angles. Some of them like Mrs. Bennet, Mrs. Bates. Mrs. Norris, etc, though flat characters, are extremely entertaining and aid in assessing the typological against non-typological characters. According to Somerset Maugham, Pride and Prejudice is a ‘charming book’. He also observes that this is a well constructed book with a beginning, middle and an end (Maugham, 1949). With a stroke of a globally appealing aphorism, this novel opens “it is truth, universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a large fortune, must be in want of a wife” (Austen, 3). This strikes the keynote of the novel. 94 Like Shakespeare’s opening scene, the first sentence in the novel unravels all the other attendant domestic relations of father-mother, husband-wife, father-daughter, mother-daughter family-society, domestic tastes-social attachments, etc. The main purpose of a man or a woman’s life is to find a suitable life partner to steer through the course of one’s existence in this world. All the characters in this novel move around this pivotal phase of finding a partner to get married. In Longbourn, there live Mr. and Mrs Bennet with their five daughters — Jane, Elizabeth, Mary, Catherine and Lydia. Mr Bennet is a typical father with all his sarcastic humour, studious reader and indolent by nature. According to the law of the land, his property including an estate of two thousand pounds a year is entailed in default of male heirs, on a distant relation, and their mother’s fortune, though ample for her situation life, could but it would supply the deficiency of his. Her (Mrs. Bennet’s) father had been an attorney in Meryton and had her four thousand pounds. She had a sister married to a Mr. Phillips, who had been a clerk to their father and succeeded him in the business and a brother settled in London in a respectable line of trade. This account given by Miss Austen clearly brings out the problems of getting suitable bridegroom for Mrs. Bennet’s daughters. In the portrayal of Mrs. Bennet, Miss Austen portrays the typological tendency of mother whose sole purpose in her life is to find a life partner for her daughters. With the limited resources of her husband’s fortunes and hand to mouth existence out of her own personal income, she is compelled to find a decent bridegroom for her daughters. Among the five daughters of Mr and Mrs. Bennet, Jane is very beautiful. The next daughter Elizabeth is cultured, quick minded, perfect in understanding with sharp wisdom. She never talks silly and avoids irrelevant talking. She is much liked by her father. The third daughter 95 is Mary who is fond of reading. The fourth and fifth daughters Catherine and Lydia always flirt around young men. These two daughters move with three officers and get information about eligible bachelors. They report this matter to their mother. From such news, she gears up her husband to search for suitable partners for her daughter. On such a scheme, she perturbs her husband to get acquainted with Bingley. That’s why, when she hears the news about the arrival of a person called Bingley with sufficient fortune, she forces Mr. Bennet to go to Netherfiled and find out the status of Bingley. From this opening chapter, it is very explicit that Mrs. Bennet is anxious to have one of her daughters married to Bingley who is eligible from the prevailing Victorian social point of view. He is sufficiently rich with no financial burden. Such a man free from economic encumbrances is much sought after by parents like Sir William and a Lady Lucar having daughters. Further, such a gentleman like Bingley cares only for beauty on the part of his future partner. Mrs.Bennet feels satisfied that one of her beautiful daughters would become definitely his future wife. Her one aim in her life is “the business of her life was to get her daughters married, its solace was visiting and news” (Austen, 46). The two principal characters, Lydia and Darcy portray the necessary defects— pride and prejudice but desirable merits ----- self-respect and intelligence. If Darcy’s pride leads to Lizzy’s prejudice, then this prejudice of her stems from a pride in her own perception. It is from the letter of Darcy, as detailed above, Lydia is half in her mind in her commitment to Darcy. It is at this stage, she behaves like an educated girl totally giving room to reason to elicit answers about the problems created in love with Darcy. Right from the beginning, she dislikes him for his air of superiority. But she does not hate him. She sides the view of her friend in this context. Slowly, she is 96 made to encounter and interact with men and matters that slowly and steadily unravel her good nature. Had she hated him, she would have discarded him totally. But she only dislikes his qualities and his repulsive thought that rich alone are superior in all aspects of life. True happiness after love marriage can be got only by mutual gratitude. Both Darcy and Lizzy experience this happiness out of these factors, the solid foundation of everlasting domestic bliss. It is at this context, one has to remember that marriage becomes a product of harmony only by getting humbled out of mutual respect, esteem and gratitude. Lizzy’s prejudice gives her power to analyse her perception of the pride of her adversary. For this, she is brought up with exposure to self study, domestic peace, congenial surroundings, lovable sisters and agreeable compassions. These factors alone contribute to her staying power as a typological woman of domestic peace and harmony in the novel for causing her drift into the negative traits of pride. Miss. Austen is so artistic in her portrayal that the negative traits of prejudice of Lizzy interacting with negative traits of Darcy’s pride giving rise to positive typological mould of happy young people valuing each other’s positive traits. Characters like Mr. Collin, Lady Catherine de Bough and Mr. Bennet and Mr. Collins are in the mould of typology caring only for his status as a clergy. He coolly remains calm when his love tokens sent to Lizzy are rejected. He believes in the Christian dictum “if one door closes, another shall be opened”. Without any rancour, he marries Charlotte. He believes and breathes because of his benefactor Lady Catherine de Bough. Every other word he speaks, it is about her veneration. He appears in this novel as a comic character. He does not suffer from any psychological or material loss or gain. He remains as he is from beginning to end. At the same time, his respect and esteem for his relative, Bennet does not abate. He is a congenial 97 character taking pride of his profession. Lady Catherine de Bough is the typical representative of wealthy class. Her tastes and temperaments resemble his superior status consciousness. She expects her wards to praise her to skies. Mr. Collin does it perfectly well. By nature, she is arrogant, impudent and bad mannered. She has become a woman of conceited. She likes to flaunt her riches and exhibit her luxury. At the same time, she is courteous to poor people by inviting them to dinner. She hates Lizzy’s love for Darcy. She tries her best to abort the marriage of Lizzy and Darcy. All her efforts prove in vain. Her contention with regard to Lizzy’s marriage with Darcy would not materialise because of her consciousness about higher rank and status. Thus, she is a flat typological woman of wealth ever sitting on the highest pedestal of her high rank cum status merits. Mr. Bennet is an indolent father. His place of occupation is his reading room. He never takes any active step in the course of the novel. He is serious in the love matter of his last daughter Lydia. He is forceful in his expression that he will never allow her into her house as she has caused disgrace to the family. He is knowledgeable to become materially great. He prefers to remain idle and is satisfied with his two thousand pounds a year. He exhibits his unusual trait of getting amused by seeing the follies of the members of his family. The follies he has read in books look to be parading before him. His wife’s constant worry about marriage, his elder daughter Jane’s distancing attitude, his third daughter Marg’s habit of studious reading, his last two daughters’ constant visits to nearby military camp and thereby gaining taste for flirting, his neighbour’s vainglories, snobbery, vanity, pride etc. In this sense, as a father, he gets amused but never takes any active step to find a partner for his ward. It is only in Lizzy, he sees reason and intelligence. He respects her and abides by her 98 dictates. Mr. Bennet remains inactive watching his wife and daughters. This is one of the typological traits of man. Hence, he plunges into the mould of type. George Wickham is an anti-hero. He is handsome, persuasive, calculative and dishonourable. He is brought up in the household of Darcy. His father showers love on him. George will inherit property from his father. His loose morals have sucked away his wealth. He becomes a habitual borrower. In a word, he is an embodiment of all typological features of a man. For him, the only aim is to make money and to be merry. His external sweet appearance and disposition gains him to win the hearts of many young women. Lydia is attracted towards him. While his stay in the military camp near Meryton, he elopes with Lydia. This has caused disgrace to Bennets’ family. It is Darcy who, with the help of his friends, could locate their whereabouts. He gives them sentence and makes them lead an honest life. Wickham is a product of irrationality and nonsensicality. He is a serpent under a flower. His passion rules him to become a wicked being. Lydia, on account of her flirtations becomes a prey in his hands. Her blind love for Wickham can be compared to that of Isabella for Heathcliff in Wuthering Heights . Isabella too gets fascinated towards Heathcliff without knowing his diabolic motive. She does not pay heed to the warnings of Catherine senior and the advice of Nelly Dean. Lydia, left with no education and proper discipline, she is groomed as a wild flower running after passions. She too never listens to elders’ advice. She never learns any good virtues. She becomes a woman of passion. The badness in her gets compensated with the badness of Wickham. Their bondage is cemented because of Darcy’s foreign agent trying his best to unite them. Lydia, out of her age related passion for romance gets into the mould of typology. 99 What Darcy has done to prove his worth to Lydia Bennet in finding a solution to them, becomes a remedy for them. He satisfies Wickham with money. He saves the honour of Lydia. Even here the typological features of Lydia and Wickham surface into a peaceful and mutual marriage due to Darcy’s transformation of his typological rich conceit into a non-typological self of getting humbled before true love. Material longing and passionate union of Wickham and Lydia out of marriage become concrete fruition due to Darcy’s submission of his pride at the altar of true love of mutual respect, esteem and gratitude. Thus in one man’s humble other’s prosperity lies. This is artistically shown by Austen in this novel. Further, almost all her female characters are pro-woman and pro- women’s rights. In the novel Pride and Prejudice , she started the novel with the line, It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife. However little known the feelings or views of such a man may be on his first entering the neighbourhood, this truth is so well fixed in the minds of the surrounding families that he is considered as the rightful property of someone or other of their daughters. (Austen, 5) Through this statement, she brought the view of the Victorian society that a woman had to be married or else she would have no social standing. That is why, in these three novels, Sense and Sensibility , Pride and Prejudice and Emma , all the cardinal characters care more for marriage than anything else. This is the realistic aspect of these novels, because most mothers in those days in England, and even in our times, and everywhere, are preoccupied with the matrimonial future of their daughters. But in the present day context, western mothers, to a certain extent, Indian 100 mothers too allow their daughters to select their choice due to their advancement in their lives. In the past, British mothers felt very solicitous about the marriage of their daughters. Mrs. Bennet in Pride and Prejudice , Ms. Henry in Sense and Sensibility and Mrs. Woodhouse in Emma are all mothers who are interested in finding nice partners for their daughters. In fact, the matrimonial market in Jane Austen’s days was brought out of seeing its rich portrayal in these novels of her. This matrimonial tension prevailed in the Victorian society due to patriarchal ideology. Anita Diamant avers that Jane Austen did not give strong feminist voice against patriarchal ideology which was in vigorous practice in England. But she made an indirect insistence that women should also be treated in tandem with men. She says, “there are no heavy-handed lectures about women’s rights. More powerful is the fact that Jane Austen takes it for granted that women are human beings, no more and no less than their male counterparts”. Elizabeth Bennet is also one of the characters in Pride and Prejudice who mirrors Jane Austen’s life. “Jane Austen ... was stirred to portray men and women only in relation to [her] family and friends and social acquaintances. ... She never strays from the world she herself had lived in. ... Her characters all come from her own class” (Cecil 144-45). Jane Austen in Pride and prejudice depicts Elizabeth Bennet as a woman of perfection possessing the unconventional characteristics like intelligence, impertinence, ingenuousness and dedication. Some authors of the late eighteenth century averred that women of Victorian society had to realise the fact that their 101 minds had limited reasoning capacity and they should not tax their minds with serious and intellectual education. In this period, Jane Austen introduced such an intelligent, compassionate and rebellious woman character in her novel Pride and Prejudice . Through the character, Elizabeth Bennet, Jane Austen registers her protest against the deep-rooted patriarchal ideology. In her novel Pride and Prejudice , she clearly focuses on this aspect of matrimonial market out of describing the moving of Mr. Bingley, a rich man to the neighbourhood as it causes such an emotional disturbance among persons like Mrs. Bennet, mother of Elizabeth and her sisters. Elizabeth and her sisters are at marriageable age and the expectation of their parents especially their mother are to strike a marriage with that rich gentleman at least with one of her daughters. Further, there is a complication in their aspiration to get married to a rich and safe husband. After the death of their father Mr. Bennet, according to a strange will, the entire estate would be inherited by their pompous cousins Mr. Collins. It is the background of this story. The principal female protagonist, Elizabeth by virtue of senses is able to bring in her judgement quite true to characters and situations. For example, when Miss. Bingley informs her sister Jane about the prospect of her marriage with Darcy, she tells that it will not take place. She knows well the pompous nature of their cousin Mr. Collins. She estimates his character as a tool from his first letter. Similarly, her estimate of Lady Catherine de Borough is astounding perfect. Thus, her sense of discernment makes her feel proud. This sense of discernment makes her realise the folly of her sister Lydia who has committed elopement well before the actual happening. She has even warned her father about her but Mr. Bennet never pays much heed to it. In this aspect, Elizabeth is cast into a typological mould of character of sense. But this 102 positive aspect of discernment fails at time in assessing complex characters like Darcy. Accidently, Darcy appears to be a person at the beginning of the novel as a haughty person. He has a taste for refinement in culture and disposition. He refused to dance with Elizabeth in the ball. He even slights her disposition in the presence of all. It is his callous attitude. As a typical male character of authority and ruggedness, he moves freely with her father Mr. Bennet who is his friend. On seeing his arrogant nature, Elizabeth gets prejudiced with him. This further worsens her estimate on him. She has succumbed to the charm of handsome Wickham. It is really ironic how such a woman of discernment committed the blunder of prejudice. Her cup of prejudice is full when circumstances develop that Darcy himself proposes to her. Even in this context, he criticises her inferiority complex, her unsuitability to be his partner, because of her low connections. She feels very bad about his conduct. Further, it is he who is responsible in separating her sister Jane from Bingley. All these things heighten her prejudice against him. But out of writing a letter to her, Darcy reveals his change. In the first attempt, she rejects him out of his arrogant nature. Darcy is much changed that is found in his letter. He accepts the separation of Jane and Bingley caused by him because Jane has no deeper interest in him. It is he who helps Wickham by paying three thousand pounds for surrendering a claim to the living promised to him by his father. He also exposes Wickham’s loose morals through that letter as he attempts an elopement with her another sister Lydia. It is her experience at Pemberley that openes her eyes. All the servants of Darcy speak of him with respect and admirations. After meeting Mr and Mrs. Gardiner, she meets Darcy who has thoroughly changed himself. This time, he is courteous and polite not only towards her but also towards her kith and kin who were 103 all once thought to be ‘low’ by him. When he plays an instrumental role in compelling Wickham to free his hold on Lydia, Elizabeth’s prejudice wanes out. She realizes that he does everything to preserve her family honour. When he proposes for the second time, she gladly accepts him. The perfect portrayal of woman by Jane Austen in Pride and Prejudice aims at the perspective of a man wanting a wife but the woman is not in a place to turn him down. In that society, a man appears to be a rare commodity and woman has to struggle desperately to hold him permanently with her. In this novel, the pride of Elizabeth would have discarded Darcy, the man of men of the period. But there is a total change in him that has brought the match into the threshold of marriage. In this novel, Jane Austen brings in the elements of feminist ideals of love, sacrifice, understanding, and compromise out of Elizabeth’s realization of Darcy’s bright patches. Further, Elizabeth, in the midst of a British society ever dependent on families and husbands declares openly not to get herself married to her arrogant cousin Mr. Collins. She is an atypical woman who challenges the oppression of the society. She is bent on maintaining her independence which places her in a non-typological mould. She is not meek and subordinate. When Mr. Collins, a rich man offers to marry her, she analyses all the pros and cons of the offer of marriage with him and finally turns down the offer after finding it unsuitable for her. Her independent and smart decision to reject the marriage proposal of a rich man is mostly unheard of in the Victorian middle class society. She chooses a humorous way of turning down the offer. She told him, “You could not make me happy, and I am convinced I am the last woman in the world who would make you so” (Austen, 102). Her boldness and 104 independent nature place her in the non-typological mould who never submits herself to the dominating ideology . Here, Elizabeth Bennet reminds us of Jane Eyre who non-chalantly stops the marriage with Rochester when she comes to know that he was already married. In another instance when she is engaged in a talk with Lady Catherine, she confidently professes her views about her independence. She affirms that she never gives room to others to influence her freedom of decision and thinking. She says, “I am only resolved to act in that manner, which will, in my own opinion, constitute my happiness without reference to you, or to any person so wholly unconnected with me” (Austen, 222). Similarly, she turns down Darcy for his haughty nature. She has such a will of her own. She is successful in her endeavours because she is such an accomplished person of fine sense of discernment. She is the true feminist who rules the roost of its core within the narrow confinement of her domesticity. Jane Bennet too has such traits. But she lacks Elizabeth’s cleverness. In her another sister Lydia, Elizabeth’s firmness and strength are found missing. Lydia is frivolous and headstrong which are her sensibilities. Her other two sisters Mary and Kitty lack Elizabeth’s power of understanding human character. She happens to be the only female character whose intelligence, bravery, independence and feminist views hold her above all the other female characters of her period. In this connection, Kaplan says the practice of creating separate spheres for man and woman was put into practice by the dominant ideology which paved way for gender bias and the male authority. The division, that is, domestic spheres for women and public and political spheres for men, has become social construct. (Kaplan, 4) 105 Jane Eyre of Charlotte Bronte has such similar traits. But circumstances do not offer her a cosy and comfortable homely life. Elizabeth Bennet becomes a perfect lady not only by her nature but also by her grooming in a big family with a mother, a father and five sisters. Her house becomes a centre of attraction of all social activities. She meets people of all traits and gets herself well educated in discerning their worth. But Jane Eyre has no such scope if at all she learns the positive traits, it is because of her exposure to Lowood School where her friend Helen Burns and the superintendent Miss Temple make her realize the true worth of love and show love even to enemies. This tendency helps her conduct herself well with all other characters whom she meets with. Thus, Elizabeth and Jane Eyre have non-typological features of a perfect rational woman. Jane becomes a competent woman after having terrible experiences. Elizabeth’s boldness, independent attitude, and assertion against the societal pressures are non-typological features of a perfect rational woman and circumstances allow this bud of perfection to become a fully blossomed flower with the passage of time. In this novel, Austen tries her best to forge and polarise the independence and naturalness of Elizabeth with Darcy’s conservatism and conventionality. Similar aspect is also found in between Jane’s independent nature but subservient disposition with Rochester’s dogmatic authoritarianism and aristocratic snobbery. Both the writers bring in the element of marriage as a cementing bond for a social realism and also focus on the merging of the bourgeoisie and aristocracy during the era of the Napoleonic wars and the beginning of the industrial revolution. The economic and social power that Darcy in Pride and Prejudice and Rochester in Jane Eyre enjoyed make them to toe their lines in securing a marriage with their loving mates to achieve a pragmatic idea of 106 happiness and harmony. In the case of Darcy, he achieves peace out of his marriage with his pet Elizabeth by changing his superior air of patriarchal ideology. In the case of Rochester, he achieves the peace out of his marriage with his pet Jane Eyre only when he becomes physically disabled due to his lapse of ethical and moral aspects out of trying to commit the folly of bigamy, much against the Christian values. Darcy’s folly is his arrogance that could be excused. But Rochester’s folly is disastrous that is why he is punished. Darcy’s folly is pardonable. Rochester’s folly is also pardoned but only after punishment. Jane Austen’s concern is domestic happiness without caring for psychological concern whereas Elizabeth’s concern is not aiming at surface relation but delving deep into the psychological aspects of men and matters. As a typological woman, Elizabeth with her natural instinct and sense of independence get her a reward in securing marriage with her pet Darcy. In that attempt, her prejudice against him gets changed out of seeing his help in saving the family honour. Jane feels bad for transgressing the limitation of Christian value of bigamy. She gives more importance to moral and ethical aspects than her romantic involvement. Rochester’s fault in Jane Eyre is a grave departure from moral aspect and she does not want to be a party to it in spite of her romantic attachment. Jane Eyre has a sense restricting herself for a larger moral and ethical value essential for a woman to uphold. That is why she too is a typological character in this aspect. She deserts Rochester not because she hates him but for the fact that he has failed to reveal his first marriage. Because, she is averse to violating the Christian moral values. She has never remained as a woman of irrational and emotional sensibilities. Similarly in Tamil novel, Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal by Jayakanthan, Ganga decides to violate the moral norms by choosing to remain at least a concubine for Prabhu. She tries to have her own identity. She has suffered insurmountably on 107 that score. Still, she has the courage and independence to lead such a life. It is Prabhu’s intervention that confuses her. It is also her uncle’s challenge thrown at her to locate her molester for her safe existence that triggers her efforts to find him out. After finding him, circumstances develop in such a manner that she could not marry him. He has become a refined man persuading her to find another man as her partner. He also assures her of his full support. But Ganga wants to defeat the challenge of her uncle for which she wants Prabhu alone as her partner. If he does not accept her proposal, she wants him to take her as a concubine. By this act, she could save herself from her uncle’s lusty approach. She fails in this attempt. The male dominated society foils all her attempts to be united with her molester, Prabhu. As a result, she becomes a wild woman by cutting her hair, drinking alcohol, moving freely with men ---- all these gaits of her are signs to prove to her uncle, Venkatarama Ayyar, the patriarchal head that she no longer is the old innocent girl quite vulnerable to be molested by anyone if he applies his physical force. She prevails on her sense that her individual safety out of her independent existence would be assured only out of her change in her behaviour. Her erotic sensibility becomes a sense — a discerning factor to ward off the lewd advances of her uncle. In the case of Elizabeth or Jane, there are no scopes to become a non- typological woman like Ganga to keep safe from the onslaught of men. Thus independence enjoyed by Elizabeth and Jane get them the much avowed social realism of their marriage though the culture is occidental. In the case of Ganga, she does not get the social security which is realism out of marriage. But it is not possible in the hoary traditional culture oriented soil. This was highlighted by Jayakanthan. In both the cultures, women are held in high esteem for their chastity. In the case of 108 Ganga, she has lost her virginity and thereby her chastity becomes an objectionable social anathema for which the only solution is to lead a life of sensibility letting loose one’s feelings and emotions. Ganga chooses the latter and that gives her safe independence. Similarly, Kalyani out of her resignation in Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral , Savithri in Thiyaga Boomi , Yamuna in Moha Mul on the plane of independence within the framework of social realism out of their distinctly different personal traits appear to be typological but turned non-typological. In the novel Emma , Jane Austen portrays a character by name, Emma as a motherless girl. She, being brought up by her father Mr. Woodhouse, an indulgent father, grows up domineering, wilful, snobbish and unfeeling. She is at the beginning a non-typological being with all irrational sensibilities overlooking the social restrictions. The novel is about her who changes these negative sensibilities into her positive senses. In the process, she becomes much educated and learns her lessons out of mistakes. But there is a bright patch in her character. She is a caring and lovable being. She is introduced to us as a lady who thinks too high of herself. This pompous nature of her is a threat to her own personal advancement as well as others’ welfare. The researcher is of the view that the male dominated society never allows a woman to live with her own personality traits and it forces her to change her traits suitable to live in this male oriented society. All the characters in the novel have a great admiration for her right perspectives. As a result, she becomes a woman of vanity. This leads her to fall into the trap of her self-love which gets her into many problems. It is only her husband Mr. Knightley who tries his best to set her on the right track. In the society of Hughbury, all characters in Emma interact with one another belonging to the different class. Some of them like Woodhouse are landowners. Some of them like Martin and his family are tenant farmers, some of them are traders. All of 109 them are rooted in Hughbury. They are bound by social norms. They are conscious of their social ranks. They are stable at their places. Their stability becomes disrupted out of the visits of Frank and Jane from outside world. It is through the portrayal of Emma, Jane Austen brought in the element of education that at every step of her fanciful judgement, she learns a lesson out of the fault. As a self-conceited woman of snobbery, she thinks she can be successful in manipulating the social realism of marriage and its resultant success. She becomes successful in her attempt of cultivating the marriage of her governess Miss. Taylor with Mr. Weston, a native of Hughbury from a respectable bourgeois family. On account of this success, she tries her manipulation in her friend Harriet’s case. She makes her fall in love with Mr. Elton. Though Harriet has enough money, she belongs to the trading community. Elton cares for money and communal status. He loves her half heartedly but gets married to a rich lady of high social rank called Augusta Hawkins. This has brought her first blow. She realises that men would care more for money than for love. It is true that man will prefer social status and money to the love of a woman. Elton prefers to marry a woman equal to him by status. Thus, he proves to be a typical man and he is a typological character representing the patriarchal society. Here, this researcher is of the view that the material and status consciousness were in vogue in the Victorian society and mostly, men were more materialistic and keen to rank people due to their material prospects. This attitude of men alone leads to class struggle, gender bias and the huge gap between the rich and poor even in the present society. Emma happens to be the only heroine about whom Jane Austen herself makes a comment “I am going to take a heroine whom no one but myself will much like” (Austen, 30). Among other female characters, Emma alone appears to her to be true to life. Devoid of selfishness, she falls short because of her folly of fancy. Jane Austen’s 110 preoccupation in all three novels illustrates the singular idea of love, courtship and marriage. In her novel, Pride and Prejudice , Elizabeth’s prejudice of Darcy is overcome after coming to know the real self of Darcy. Kalyani in Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral learns the value of life out of her practice of allowing her husband to lead a life of his choice. She believes separation will bring union. In addition to physical separation, she develops a sickness for which she needs the moral support of Ranga. Both Ranga and Knightly care for the welfare of their wives. Ranga expects her to be a stereotype romantic wife. Knightly does not expect anything from his spouse but he conducts himself as a tutor in setting right her wrongs. Both are sympathetic over their wives. They believe in compromise and togetherness. Hence, in this aspect, both Ranga and Knightly evolve into non- typological characters. Though Kalyani appears to be non-typological in matters of allowing her husband to lead a life of his choice becomes a positive factor on account of Ranga’s commitment to be with her during the days of her woes. Similarly, Elizabeth’s non-typological temperament of snobbery and fanciful judgement does not land her in trouble owing to her husband’s positive temperament of understanding and supporting her thereby making her appear poised and balanced. Elizabeth’s prejudice due to her lack of good sense is found missing in Elinor in Sense and Sensibility . Her good sense alone saves her and gains her a husband having identical taste of character. On the contrary her sister’s passionate outburst of passion as the driving desire of her sensibility makes her choose a wrong person and hence suffers a series of serious setbacks. Here in Emma too, the same match making process gets repeated. This time, it was fancy. In Pride and Prejudice , it is Elizabeth’s mistaken pride, in S ense and Sensibility , it is the wrong sensibility of Marianne, in 111 Emma , it is her fancy --- Pride, sensibility and fancy are negative factors responsible for these characters to fall into the trap of misappropriation, misconception and mistaken follies of wrong understanding of others. Jane Austen’s intention with regard to the treatment of the fall is not tragic but charmingly humorous and enchantingly comic in its outcome. In this sense, unlike Bronte sisters, Austen looks at the bright side of life. All the female characters of Austen are well educated, well brought up, socially well mannered, well groomed in all domesticities, well moved in a society, well known in their printing, cultured taste in music, printing, reading poetry and classics, well conducted in their interaction with others, well spoken with their choice expressions revealing their own status. All of them belong to the rich class or the upper middle class. Such a society with balls and parties are found missing in the novels of Bronte sisters which portrays the gloomy dark side of characters and their worlds whereas Austen focussed her light on the bright patches of life. The Bronte sisters delved deep into the mental aberrations of their female characters and showed how such characters interact with others in such wild fashion and passion. However, Miss Austen’s heroines do not show any wild temper even in the midst of their personal loss on crisis. In general, the lapses of the characters of Bronte sisters happen to be an onslaught of their typological tendencies based on their cultural departure, lack of meaningful living and care, and a lonely atmosphere with weird surroundings, lack of human love, warmth, affection, attention and concern. But Miss Austen cared for all these positive qualities. She never showed the darkness of night or weirdness of nature out of snow fall or rainfall. Nature’s fancy is found to be harmonized as a matter of seasonal variations. Similarly, nature of man and woman too are humanized. 112 Their faults and foibles, their weaknesses and wants are all inbuilt in them for efficient tinkering, moulding, whetting out of their interaction with others having in them all positive elements. Savithri in Thiyaga Boomi, appears to be a non-typological woman with her positive ascent at the end. Suffering a lot due to her husband and in-laws, she deserts her husband and plunges into the Freedom Movement. Her course of life is replete with suffering and her husband is neither like Ranga nor Knightly. Sridharan, her husband is a typical being of male authority expecting his wife to be a source of happiness or pleasure. He does not realise that in the family life, happiness is mutual for which both would share and sacrifice many common things to achieve their goal of peace. That is why, Savithri’s choice of independence is sensible in finding happiness out of extricating herself from her marriage and participating in the freedom struggle. She knows the worth of freedom and that is why she plunges into the freedom struggle. Her freedom, stemmed out of sacrifice is a beacon to all imbibing the same spirit of sacrifice in order to achieve the general happiness of freedom for all. Freedom of Ganga, Kalyani, Emma and Jane Eyre mean to be their liberation from the social oppressions. In the case of Savithri, it is for the country. If everybody gets liberated, she too will be liberated. The main concern of Jane Austen is to take into account the social culture and patriarchal tendencies as found in her contemporary world. These two aspects of her period give much importance to marriage. That is why, in her writings, within the tendencies found expressed in her world, marriage becomes a dominant theme. In such a portrayal of all her heroines marrying off at the end of her novels, she reflects the dominant idea of a woman’s survival of her world is none other than marriage. The other attendant aspect attached to the riders of the marriage is to educate women 113 for a life of domesticity. Such an education may make women powerless. Austen considers such an education enfeebling women to depend on the authority of men. She touches on this gender inequality in a feminine way. Jane Austen’s identity can be traced as a feminist writer from her writings within the patriarchal order of the society. Characters like Elinor Dashwood and Elizabeth have been given power to act within the boundaries of the authority of men. But modern feminist writings insist on women’s action to overcome the parameters of patriarchal authority. Modern feminists aspire for women to transcend the power relation in society and compete with men in the male dominated economic and political areas. Some of them even argue that for women, marriage becomes a barrier in their achieving equal status with men. Motherhood responsibilities hamper the growth of women to become equal to men. Therefore, they want marriage as a social system or custom to be abolished for liberating women to find her inner potentials and fight for an equal footing with men. For this self-empowerment, they advocate the principle of eradication of gender roles (Jessie, 1972). Austen’s concern is to present woman of the eighteenth century with their identities mainly to find fulfilment as wives and mothers. In such a presentation, she does not stereotype women characters. But she presents as models of women’s identity of her period. Her job is to present women characters of her period and makes them act on their gender roles in which they become perfect models. It is not her concern to create them as women challenging the gender roles and find solutions for their own self-development. Emily Bronte and Charlotte Bronte do not consider this aspect of marriage alone as the essential matter for a woman’s secured life in the male dominated world 114 of the later eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Cathy in Wuthering Heights cultivates her marriage for the purpose of continuing her affair with Heathcliff. In her marriage, her personal liberal attitude is more pronouncedly expressed than the social value of marriage. In the case of Jane Eyre, marriage with Rochester has taken place after so many tragedies. Before marriage, she has to overcome many difficulties. After her marriage, she is compelled to sacrifice many things to derive the fruits of the same marriage. In the portrayal of marriage as a social commitment, Charlotte Bronte elevated it to a mystical level. To derive happiness out of the union of marriage, she makes her heroine to scale the moral, the social, and the economic importance of her period. Similarly, the same novel, Jane Eyre , through the portrayal of Bertha, advocates the most moral aspect of marriage. As a married woman, Bertha Mason gets all rights to share her happiness with her husband Rochester. Rochester fails to give her wife status. He fails to recognize her merits. He suppresses her feelings and emotions. He expects her to move like a modern lady of his own society. He fails to recognize her previous relation with her parents, their tastes, their manners and their temperaments. He fails to see that her parents’ way of life would have had lasting impression on her. Instead of patiently trimming her to his own tastes and manners he, with his male authoritative power suppresses her, imprisons her, treats her like a criminal. It is because of this male violence, she loses her mental balance. When she comes to know that her husband is prepared for a remarriage, her heart breaks completely and further it leads to her total lunacy. The figurative fire within her is projected in the literal flame she sets to her husband’s house and to herself. In this context, she acts as a foil to Miss. Havisham of Great Expectations . As a non-typological 115 woman, she revolts against the conventional norms of domestic wife. Here, Rochester emerges as a typical member of the patriarchal society. In Tamil literature, Ilangoadigal’s Silappathikaram speaks about the fury of Kannagi on the Pandiya king’s wrong done to her husband Kovalan where she, with the power of her fiery righteousness burned the city of Madurai. In Jane Eyre , Bertha brought destruction to her husband’s belongings and his physical well being through fire. In the former case, it is injustice meted out to an innocent citizen. In the latter’s case, it is injustice done to an innocent wife. Injustice is injustice -- whether it be a citizen or a wife, the punishment is heavy. For the citizen, the punishment is setting her husband’s abode to flames. In this context, Bertha, though having the traits of non-typological aspects, elevates to epic dimension out of her conduct of punishing her wronged husband. In the process, she also gets killed. According the Victorian moral code, Rochester’s social lapse and his cruel confinement of his wife, Bertha, should bring him a fatal punishment with fire. But Charlotte Bronte, having had the influence of the dominant ideology prevalent in the Victorian society, spares Rochester with not so severe a punishment but finally blesses him with a woman like Jane Eyre. But what happens to Bertha is fatal. Charlotte Bronte gives her such a cruel ending since she is also one of the members of the Victorian society which operates on the whims and fancies of patriarchal ideology. The non-typological attitude of Yamuna ( Moha Mul ) in not allowing herself to become a wife of any suitors becomes meaningful when she is worshipped as Sakthi by Babu. For ‘Sakthi’, there is no social restriction. Sakthi is power and not to be enclosed with ‘social barrier’. That is, she likes Babu and is ready to provide him with energy. In the case of Yamuna, her spiritual realization of Sakthi or power gets her this harmonious togetherness of marriage with Babu, though in her case, the choice of 116 getting married to a much younger person may be a cultural departure. Still, they both see oneness in each other. Yamuna and Babu are two identical parts that get united through marriage. Thus the harmony and disharmony of togetherness in marriage is well portrayed in Jane Austen’s Emma , Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility . But Emily Bronte’s portrayal of such a harmonious togetherness of marriage in Wuthering Heights is found missing not because of circumstances but because of the individual female characters’ wrong understanding. Cathy’s attempt to have Heathcliff as her desired male even after marriage is not only obnoxious but also a moral abnegation. Similarly, Isabella’s marriage with Heathcliff without realizing his nature is due to her rash temperament and wrong perception. In their cases, marriage fails to bring them harmony and peace. Their departure from socio cultural morals and acting on their own impulses alone cost their lives. They possess these character traits which place them in non-typological moulds. Cathy’s preparedness to challenge the social and cultural norms and Isabella’s self-directed approach towards her choice of life partner ignoring the advice of her well-wishers show their revolutionary attitudes. But they could not survive for long because any deviation of a woman’s character from the stereotyped cultural and societal norms would be strongly counteracted by the male world. In the case of Ganga in Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal , marriage becomes a far-off matter. There by, she remains a stoic within and a stunted figure outside. There is no harmony for her within or without. Kalyani, in Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral and Savithri in Thiyaga Boomi out of their sacrifice give meaning to marriage. For them, it is a matter for a harmonious togetherness. In the case of Kalyani, her physical element and the realisation of her malady by Ranga bring harmony in the marriage. 117 They get together well with marriage ties. In the case of Savithri, her intellectual zeal to get herself liberated from domesticities along with her husband by participating in the larger context of national movement earns her existence a meaningful significance. Literature reflects society. Hence, these fictions have reflected all human interactions and socio-cultural transactions in their lives. Mainly through literature, we come to know of the maladies persisting in the society. One of the major maladies of the society is the still strong dominance of patriarchal ideology. Women have been the victims of this dominant ideology across the world. Some women writers woke up to the cause of equality of woman in the society much before feminist movements started operating all over the world. The novels of the Bronte sisters and Jane Austen depict how women are oppressed and denied their equal rights. Further, they establish that they are deprived of their individuality. This research has taken British canonical fiction, especially from the much controversial Victorian period and argues on this line of thought analyzing Tamil novels from and Indian point of view in which certain women’s issues are depicted solely from the more patriarchal Indian milieu. It is important to record here that the influence of patriarchal ideology is pervasive and has been the major impediment for women empowerment across the world. Hence, this researcher is of the view that in order to surpass cultural patriarchal impediments and come up on equal footing with men, women have to educate themselves into being self-confident, self-willed and self actualized through formal education and through converting experience gained from the male world of monopoly to achieve their place and space in society. Chapter - IV Analyzing Characters against Typologies in Tamil Novels Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal , Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral, Thiyaga Boomi and Moha Mul Mr. D. Jayakanthan, is a significant writer of novel and short story in Tamil and has won the hearts of multitudes in the literary circle. He is the recipient of the Sahitya Academy award in 1972, the Rajaraman Award of Tamil Nadu University in 1986 and the prestigious Jnanapith award for his creditable contribution to Tamil literature. He is well known for his controversial and revolutionary ideas on various issues related to the individual and the society and in the marginalization of women in a patriarchal Tamil society. First, he began his career as a short story writer and then, he became a successful writer of novels. His novels have reached all sections of people belonging to different layers of the society. The variety of his themes and the unique style of his presentation have earned him a place among the most eminent literary figures in Tamil Literature. Almost all his writings reflect the existing reality of society gathered through his experiences in life and therefore his characters come from all walks of life. The researcher has chosen Jayakanthan’s, Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal (People at Times ) and Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral (An Actress Watches a Play ) in order to view patriarchal ideologies from an Indian point of view for a better understanding of the male and female typologies in British canonical fictions of the Victorian period and also make this research meaningful in an Indian context. In these novels, he portrays two women protagonists who are the victims of patriarchal ideology and shows how they break away the clutches of ideological barriers and 119 emerge as non-typological characters. They dominate the entire story posing a foil to typological women characters of the British fictions chosen for study. Ganga in Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal remains as a typological character till she is seduced by a stranger (Prabhu). Then, she evolves as a revolutionary woman questioning the male superiority and women’s oppression in the society. Jayakanthan has always effectively portrayed the self and consciousness in women through his characters like Ganga in Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal and Kalyani in Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral . Jayakanthan strongly believes that the function of literature is to throw light on the greatness of change and progress in society. In one of his interviews, Jayakanthan comments “I am a part of society and through my writings and works, I attempt to refine myself first and then the society” (Jayakanthan 2006: 14); this is taken as the key note of this research topic and forms the foundation for analyzing the shifts in character attitudes that go to form canonical and liberal human types. For, unless change for the better comes from within an individual person no progressive change can be expected in society at large. Story of Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal in brief (People at Times) Ganga, a college student from an 'orthodox' Tamil Brahmin family, lends herself to an “accidental” sexual encounter with a stranger who offers her a lift in his car on a rainy day. Ganga is confused about her participation in the event. She, overcome by guilt and self-loathing, later construes the event as rape. Her disillusioned face forces out a ‘confession’ to her mother about what happened to her. Overhearing this, Ganga's brother, who is the ‘bread’ winner of the family, disowns her and evicts her from the house. She then moves to her uncle’s house in Madras, who assures full 120 support in continuing her education but tries to use her destitute condition to his carnal advantage. After successful graduation, she gets employed in a private firm and grows to take up a top managerial position. Ganga, until then, lives a single life resisting the pressure to lie about the ‘incident’ (which, presumably, would ruin her life with another man). Her assumed status as a 'spoilt' woman also implicitly encourages her lecherous uncle to make sexual advances. During this time, she chances upon the ‘stranger’, Prabhu. She musters courage to introduce her as who ‘she really is’ and gets Prabhu to discuss ‘that’ fateful evening. She then realizes that she probably showed as much interest in the sex as did Prabhu. The revelation brings Ganga closer to Prabhu as friends. They find their characteristics agreeable and the friendship matures into love. But unable to transcend the society’s norms, Prabhu advises her to get married to someone else. But she appeals to him to give her at least a concubine status but he strongly rejects her appeal. As a result, she is forced to part ways with him. Due to dejection out of Prabhu’s denial of accepting her as his companion, she takes to drinks and smoking. She chooses to live her life as per her wish. But she is to be appreciated for her purity and her genuine wish to have a self- induced monogamous relationship with Prabhu. Ganga, the protagonist of the novel is a complex formation of both typological and non-typological features. When she is discovered to have been “raped” by a stranger, the society including her mother denounces her and is treated as an outcast. Instead of timidly deciding to end her life as most typological Indian women do, she rather resolves to empower herself through education and set right her wrongs. She manages to erase out the memory of her seducer and lives a composed life. Her life is hassle free until her uncle begins to visit her frequently and starts abusing her in the 121 guise of protective old age. Her life takes a turn for the worse as the old man continually rebukes her and sometimes advises her and many times asks her embarrassing questions about the incident which has derailed her life. Though she is gutsy enough to stop his nasty behaviour, her debt of gratitude somewhat deters her. She till now is a typological character as she lives her life as a suppressed woman in the male dominating society. One day in a conversation her uncle Venku Ayyar preaches Ganga that she cannot marry anyone as it is a sin, but she can be a concubine to someone. He tells her, You can be a concubine to someone; but not a wife to anyone, appadi odhungikitta, nee kettalum namba sasthirangalaiyum dharmangalaium kedukkadha punniyam unakku varum. ( Sila Nerangalil 68) [English translation: If you opt out of marriage with any man and accept to be a concubine to someone, you will be saved from the curse out of committing a grave sin of causing blasphemy to the canons of our religion] This coercive statement of Venku Ayyar is the reflection of the attitude of the patriarchal head. He dictates her to lead her life as per the norms of the male-centred society. The same dominant society does not allow a ‘spoilt woman’ (in a patriarchal sense) to decide on her life. He points out to religion and customs to justify his stand: “namba saasthirangalum, namba vazhkkaiyoda dharmangalum pen makkaludaiya ozhukkathaiye adippadaiyagakkondathu” (64). [English translation: The longevity of such rites and canons of Hinduism is solely based on morality and disciplines of woman.] 122 He also preaches to her that morality of life and Hindu rituals will become extinct if a woman fails to conform to them, and her non-compliance will earn her a heap of sins that will affect her progeny also. But, Venku Ayyar indirectly prompts Ganga to trace Prabu. After locating him, she learns that he is married and is the father of two children. Prabu meets her with a sexual interest but she brushes him aside. Even though the society cannot question her if she cohabits with him, she does not want to lose her self-esteem and dignity. She respects the social norms at one point of time, at the same time she appears to be keen to fight for herself against the biased dominant ideology. Ganga’s struggle continues as she is being oppressed by the male-centric society for her plight but the same society leaves the perpetrator (Prabhu) unpunished. This kind of gender differences are vehemently opposed by radical feminists. Radical feminism promotes the basis for many of the ideas of feminism. They opine that society must be restructured from the grass root level in order to eliminate patriarchy. They view that the oppression of women is still pervasive across the world. They fight against the rigid gender roles which the society has imposed upon both man and woman. They completely reject these roles, all aspects of patriarchy, and in some cases, they reject men as well. (Daly, 1990) Her mother, Kanagam and her uncle Venku Ayyar do not desire her to be friendly with Prabu. Prabu’s visit to Ganga’s house angers her mother. Ganga justifies her stand on her behaviour. She grieves why even her mother has no remorse for her pitiable plight and never realizes that her daughter being a young lady, needs a male companion to enjoy worldly pleasures. Kanagam, having a strong influence of the patriarchal premise, cannot agree with any means of overlooking it. 123 Ganga happens to read a short story called Agni Pravesam (Leap into Fire) in a magazine written by Mr. R.K.V, her college peon. All the incidents narrated in the story bear resemblance to her life. Agni Pravesam is an embedded story in Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal . A young college girl is waiting for a bus. Before the bus arrives, a car stops near her. She is offered a lift by the man in the car. Having never travelled by a car, she is overwhelmed and accepts the offer since it is raining. The man seduces her. But the man is a rapist and has seduced many girls. On returning home, she divulges it to her mother. Her mother does the most unexpected thing. She asks her to take a symbolic shower to become wholesome again and takes her back home. What is to be noted here is that the author, a peon in Ganga’s college and a man, who might have been party to the knowledge about her past, has rewritten her story in an entirely non-typological mode. Ganga draws a great inspiration from the story Agni pravesam in which a sensible and worldly wise mother protects her daughter who has been seduced by a stranger. The mother, unlike Ganga’s mother, keeps it a secret. So, the girl’s life is safe due to the sensible and rational approach of her mother. Then the girl gets married and is settled in life happily. Ganga gives the story to her mother asking her to read it with a view to making her realize her grave mistake. Kanagam seems to realize her mistake, but the patriarch Venku Ayyar misguides her saying that if she had behaved like the mother in the story, she would have committed a big sin and caused disrepute to the rites and dharma of the Hindu religion. The writer shows how the patriarchal society has been subjugating women for centuries in the name of religion and rites. 124 Unlike Ganga’s impetuous and emotional mother who in Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal makes her daughter’s life a big question mark, this rational mother being fully aware of the impact of a male society, hides it from others. This is contrary to what happens in Ramayana , the great Indian epic written by the male poet saint Valmeegi. In Ramayana , Ram asks his wife Seetha, though he knows that she is chaste, to step into fire to prove her chastity to the patriarchal world. But, this rational mother gives her daughter a water wash in all belief that her body will be sanctified. She counters and falsifies the existing mythological belief and acts as a challenge to the patriarchal norms of society. Here in this story, Jayakanthan deconstructs the myth-based patriarchal ideology and produces the mother character as a non- typological character. This researcher is of the view that women have to draw inspiration from such a mother character to emerge rational and powerful to destabilize this dominant ideology to restructure all the layers of the society. The characters involved in the short story do not have names. The innocent adolescent girl, the rapist man and a revolutionary mother represent any girl, any man and any mother respectively. Hence, the understanding is that all the personal experiences in this story are generalized. Ganga accuses the society of its dubious stand on woman’s life and behaviour as compared to men. As long as Ganga leads an ascetic life, the society remains unconcerned about her, but when she seeks companionship with a man, she is denounced. Ganga bemoans: ... ponna pirantha oruthiyoda vazhkkai ippadi irukkalama? ennai yen oru pennaagave iva madhikka maattengiral? ivar (Prabu) en future paththi evvalavu kavalaipadurar.ennai pethavalukku yen anthak kavalaiye illai? nan saamiyar vazhkkai nadathinappo athu ivalukku 125 sowgariyamagavum santhoshamagavum irunthathu. ippa mattum ennavam?... niyayamagap parthal nan ivaroda ‘kaankubine’! enakku ithu niyayam... (Sila Nerangalil 259). [English Translation: (Will a life of a girl be ill-fated like this? Why don’t they all ever treat me as a woman? He (Prabhu) is very much concerned about my future, whereas my mother never bothers to think about it. They all feel happy and comfortable till I have been leading an ascetic life so far. Then, where is the necessity for me to prove to the members of my family that there is “nothing”...nothing bad or unacceptable in my present conduct? My problem is my vacuum existence. In the name of true justice, I am a concubine to him. For me, it is justifiable. I am not asking the members of my family to accept my stand]. Here Ganga registers her protest against the gender biased society by expressing her willingness to live as a concubine of her seducer Prabhu, which shows her as a rebel. Further, when she is introduced to the reader, she is a woman of a strong radical feminist notion. She condemns the behaviour of co-male passengers and male conductor who take delight in teasing women out of taking advantage of a crowded bus as well as rainy days. She could not tolerate their vulgar behaviour. She tries to channelize her mute anger in the creative direction of putting an end to the audacity of males and their vulgar taste of teasing women in public. She writes a letter to the columns of “Letters to the Editor” in a newspaper with her plea of plying separate buses for women. It is here Ganga toes the line of typical feminine women who want exclusion from the male world rather than fight for their rights for equality 126 and dignity along with men. She goes to the extent of calling them worse and cheaper than a man trying to force a woman in the street to satisfy his carnal pleasure. It is important to note that these male passengers in buses try to exploit the weakness of women passengers who remain dumb out of fear that their name and modesty would get spoiled in public. In that connection, she also remembers her brother Ganesan’s temperament. After seeing her rise in social status from her despicable fall of seduction, Ganesan sees her as his arch enemy. Bent on stigmatizing her character, he along with his wife spreads vulgar gossip about her that she is a cheap woman without any virtue. It is important to record here that most times, the Woman herself acts as a custodian of this dominant ideology by speaking ill of other women. At the same time, Ganesan’s male typology on the line of patriarchal society is the cause for Ganga to break her type and evolve as a non-typological character. Ganga has to fight not only the outer world but also her own family to establish her stand. She struggles to have a space for herself against a culture that taught her to be timid and passive and obedient. Her culture taught her to accept that men are born to dominate and women to remain ever subservient. Kanagam does not weigh the matter from a mother’s point of view but acts like the patriarchal guardian of social norms. She should have understood her daughter for her irrational moral departure (in a patriarchal sense); Mother becomes the father to the fatherless Ganga and takes on the mantel of a patriarch. Discussing sex was a taboo in Indian homes in the mid 1970s. Her orthodox community considered going to cinema a moral lapse. Ill informed and illiterate, Ganga becomes a victim of chance and circumstance. Further, her growing up as a timid child with a 127 temperament to easily give in to male imposition could be the other factor for her silent nature. It is recorded that as Kanagam, Ganga’s mother was brought up in a male-centered society she also thinks like a patriarch. As a result, she feels miserable that her daughter has broken the male code of chastity levelled on women. Hence, Kanagam falls into the typological mould of women supporting and strengthening the male dominant ideology. When Ganga throws on her a copy of a magazine in which the story written by R.K.V appeared, Kanagam comes to realize, after reading the story, how much she has betrayed her daughter and how much her daughter hates her as a mother. She also knows well how her daughter has cut herself off society spending her time locked up in her room either reading or writing. She does not spend time standing at the entrance or before a window. She never gossips but looks at people straight and steadfast. She minds her own business and never brings home anyone as friend. She always appears with empty forehead, without any religious marks. Kanagam’s misery comes a full circle when her daughter-in-law passes severe remarks on her and Ganga. It is in this context, Jayakanthan puts across his views against the blind practice of such cultural norms without giving credence to the facts based on such practices. Venku Ayyar engages in serious discussion with Kanagam about the story as appeared in the magazine. His callously conservative mind coupled with male chauvinistic tendency triggers his anger to such an extent that he wants to prosecute the writer. He finds fault with the story having no moral scruples. He is seriously adverse to the fact of the writer’s point of view of cleansing the ‘spoilt girl’ (from the perspective of patriarchal society) by pouring water on her head. He equates this view with prostitutes taking head bath in the morning with a view to cleansing their mind and body after entertaining their customers. The immoral Venku Ayyar 128 advocating on women morality is a typical irony of the male world. Morality is both for men and women alike. Venku Ayyar supports Kanagam for her stand of making everyone know about her daughter’s moral lapse. He equates her conduct to that of ostracizing a child suffering from a contagious disease from the rest of “healthy humanity”. The loud mouthed expressions of her uncle reflect his male authority and domination he always practices at home. Ganga knows that he keeps his wife Pankajam as a subservient being who would not be allowed to talk even with male servants. Kanagam calls her a living serpent in Venku Ayyar’s house. As a woman born in such a noble heritage and culture, Kanagam finds no scruples to call a devoted wife like Pankajam as a living serpent who is always beaten up by Venku Ayyar. This clearly shows the typical temperament of a conservative minded woman ever picking holes in another woman’s character. It may be out of jealousy or her clannish practice of slighting the character of Pankajam. She also remains like a snake at her daughter’s house, watching her daughter’s conduct and assessing it with her jaundiced views. Ganga, on many occasions realizes the real banal nature of her uncle. Pankajam is so tolerant that she bears all these beatings; she is such a timid creature who considers marriage a divine bond uniting her and her husband. For her, Venku Ayyar is her destiny, way and provider of all. She has to remain honest, sincere, devoted, and ever obedient to him. She has to beget children for him for giving her a status as his wife. She fails to protect his family honour as she does not beget a male child. She feels it is her grievous fault, so that she unresistingly puts up with his “belt beating”. She is undoubtedly a typical conservative woman who cuts neatly into typological mould. The researcher is of the view that women like Pankajam 129 strengthen the male-centered ideology and perpetuate it further by patiently accepting their underdog existence. Venku Ayyar gloats in carnality and intentionally goads Ganga to dramatize the fateful incident that occurred in her life: Venku Ayyar: hm... sollu. unakkum piditchuthane irunthathu? En tholai piditchu kulukkirar. Ganga: ille... pidikkale. Vengu uncle: poi sollathe... unakku pidikkalaina appadi nadanthu irukkathu... (Sila Nerangalil , 63). [English translation: Venku Ayyar: “Tell me if you liked that”? He started shaking my shoulder. Ganga: “No, no, I didn’t like it.” Venku Ayyar: “Don’t tell lies. How could it happen without your liking?”] All Ganga can do is curse her uncle in her heart of hearts that if an elderly person like him possesses such carnality within, then there will be no great aberration in a young man like Prabu. Even in this context, she is forced to think that the rapist would be preferable to this lecherous uncle. Venku Ayyar firmly believes that the man’s choice of remaining monogamous or polygamous rests with him. But in the case of choice of woman, she must be a monogamous, once wedded, ever loyal, faithful and devoted to her husband. While talking about the celibacy of woman, Venku Ayyar advocates persons like Ganga to imbibe the essence and not the incident narrated in the epic like The Mahabharatha . Dhrowbathi being a wife of five men and Kundhidevi giving birth to three celestial sons with the efficacy of the sage Durvasa’s “manthra” are all 130 contextual matters related to perpetuating their progeny. From his way of argument, he always stands as a symbol of male authority and ever supports the view that man’s law is totally different from the woman’s. “aanukku oru neethi, pennukku oru neethingrathu romba niyayamnu vaatham pannuvar” ( Sila Nerangalil 66). [Translation: That there is a different law for both man and woman is his tall claim.] All these arguments of Venku Ayyar go in the direction of persuading Ganga to remain a concubine. With his power of argument, he tries his best in belittling her status as a woman and stigmatizing her character. He weighs her in his judicious balance and gauges her as a woman fit enough to remain only as a concubine. On one occasion, he causally quotes Gandhiji who emphasised that a woman could become a murderess when a man tried to molest her. After saying this, he casually remarked that no male could exercise violence on Ganga, because she was ever ready for sex: avar sonnathu unmaithan. aanal avar sonnathai avare nambalai... athanal than intha nimisham varaikkum avar ennai palaathkaram seyyamal irukkar.appadi avar senjaa, Mahatma Gandhi sonna mathiri nan kolaium seiya matten; tharkolaiyum senjukka matten. etho oru nerathile, etho oru payathile, etho oru yosanaile antha varthaigalukku adiyile—poiyai- nan kilicha sigappu kodugal than ivvalavu kaalamaga ennai kappathindu irukku ( Sila Nerangalil 70). [English Translation: What he (Gandhiji) had said was true. But he did not believe in what he had said. That is why he did not violate my modesty till this moment. Had he done so, I would not have murdered him as stated by Gandhiji. Nor would I have committed suicide. My red pencil underlined on some stray thought, really falsehood, protected me till this second]. 131 Further, Venku Ayyar argues with Kanagam that her intention to find a bridegroom is beyond the means of cultural adherence. Remarriage of a girl who is yet to attain puberty would be allowed if the husband died. This had happened in the case of young bride aged eight who did not attain puberty. According to sastras (canons of religion), once a woman who, out of marriage lost her virginity should not get remarried on account of the death of her husband. In Ganga’s case, her virginity has been lost and the rapist has absconded. So, her status could be equated with that of a widow. Widow’s remarriage is a departure from the cultural vedantic concept. Thereby, the only solution for Ganga is that she has to search for her molester and make him as her legitimate partner. These are the views of Venku Ayyar who is the typical patriarchal head. But, unwittingly this pervert patriarch gives Ganga a salient advice. He says that Ganga has no other option but to search for her molester and marry him. This triggers her into action. From that moment, she becomes independent and assertive; a woman with a goal to set her wrongs right. She muses that her case is similar to that of Shakuntala’s story. As Shakuntala searched for Dushyanta in the jungle, she runs searching for her molester in the city crowd. Prabhu would have taken many girl friends in his car. Out of such women, many would have been married. Many would have extended to him marriage invitation. For many marriages, he would have attended with gifts and blessed them. That is the way of the male world which takes things easy ( Sila Nerangalil 144). When Ganga meets him for the second time after twelve years, she chastises him for that ill-fated evening that wasted her from which existence she has never revived. She has no idea of finding out another companion as her life partner and once again she 132 does not have strength to face molestation. It is recorded here that Ganga is forced to look for a relationship with her molester, Prabhu due to the societal pressure. Ganga herself feels guilty about her loss of “purity”. Though Prabhu insists on her getting married to lead a happy life, Ganga, as a typical Indian woman steeped in culture, does not agree to engage in conjugal relationship with another man. She further pointedly tells him that she has lost her marital status after that incident. If at all, she needs a partner, then she can claim him only as her legal companion. In the following statement, she clearly expresses her feminine status. naan athai kalyanamnu solli ungakitte urimai kondada varale, I mean legally vera innorutharukku manaiviya irukkira thaguthiyai nan izhanthuttaval (I can be only a concubine to someone; yes, not a wife anymore). nan yarukkavathu asai nayagiyaga irukkalamozhiya manaiviya irukkamudiayathu. nan yarukko appadi irukkiratha per edukkirathukooda ennai poruthavaraikkum ennai nane avamathitchukkiratha irukku. athukkakathan nan ungalai thedinen. manaiviya irukkirathukku illa; asai nayagiyagak kooda illa. unga asainayagingra perai enakku tharanum . (Sila Nerangalil 156). [Translation: I am not here to argue with you that what happened between us should be considered as marriage. I mean I have legally lost the qualification of being a wife of someone (I can only be a concubine to someone, yes, not a wife anymore). Even to be a concubine to someone, as far as I am concerned, is a disgrace to me. Hence, I have been searching for you only for the status of a woman who can’t marry another man, not to claim my rights as a wife. Even 133 I don’t expect you to accept me as your concubine but I entreat you to provide me the title of being your concubine. That will help me a lot]. Her claim to remain a concubine to her ravisher proves the fact that she is still holding the old conventional cultural views with regard to woman. The husband is husband, whatever he may be, whether he is a stone or grass. This old proverbial saying holds well in Ganga’s case. She considers Prabhu her husband. As per the norms of patriarchal society, Ganga seeks to remain true to him as any wife. After a lapse of twelve long years now after spotting and identifying him, Ganga’s patriarchal cultural self pleads with him to grant her at least a concubine status without any cultural paraphernalia of wearing thali (nuptial thread). Ganga could have coerced him to take her as his legal partner. Left to his weak temperament, Prabhu would have taken her as his legal wife. But Ganga, out of her instinct does not want to spoil the harmony of his domestic life. It is this sacrifice of Ganga which gets her elevated as a woman born in a cultural family. Her cultural temperament is against marrying another man since she is already “spoilt”. It is in this element of sacrifice Ganga joins with legions of many mythological and historical characters of Indian womanhood. It is in this sacrifice she exults Sita of The Ramayana . Through this sacrifice, she comes very near to Draupadi in The Mahabaratha . It is in this sacrifice, she is far better than Nalayani who was ready to take her sick husband to the homes of concubines. Now everyone denigrates her that Prabhu keeps her as his concubine and she feels this scandal will be much better and more secured. But in reality, that is not so. Both have grown and matured not to condescend to the level of blasphemous behaviour. Ganga’s education has given her a critical outlook. Her education provides her with a job. Her education shapes her to look at things in the real perspective. Jayakandan rightly pointed out in the 20 th century that only education is the positive 134 value for liberating women from their meagre status. With education, women can get jobs and become economically independent. This independence is essential for a woman to plan her life, share her feelings, move freely with all, lead an uninhibited life, and to become a beacon for other suppressed women. While on his next visit, Venku Ayyar interrogates her about her recent development with Prabhu. On coming to know of Ganga’s renewed tie with Prabhu, he is happy. He justifies Ganga’s friendship with her molester, Prabhu quoting dharma and the canons of the Hindu religion. This time, like a talented lawyer he puts forth his views favouring her side. He begins in a manner that none could question her behaviour, because she is no longer a child. She could, at her will, do things. Still, she is a woman giving respect to justice, under status of honour and dharma. According to him, she could choose only Prabhu as her companion or partner. This is the cultural and society’s dictates on woman which is rooted in the patriarchal ideology. Then in his usual male authoritative manner, he starts harassing her by squeezing her body and making an ugly comment on her. Then, he lowers his voice and asks her if she has taken any precautions. She could not bear such an insult and she feels like spitting on his face. In all this behaviour and approaches, Venku Ayyar clearly interprets the role of a typical hypocritical male. Manju, Prabhu’s daughter is a college going girl who is strict about her father’s drinking habit. Prabhu obliges to his daughter’s restrictions out of his love for her. When she complains of a boy chasing her with a love motive, her mother, Padhma wants to stop her from going to college. Prabhu could not interfere because of his wife’s intervention by upholding the value of motherhood. Prabhu, due to his inability to manage the household, leaves all the responsibilities to his spouse, 135 Padhma. Here, Prabhu, a weak man could not exercise authority over his family because of his irresponsible behaviours in his life. He meekly accepts his wife’s domination and his daughter’s restrictions not to drink more. Here, he remains a typological character and more or less he takes semblance to that of Hindley in ruining himself in Wuthering Heights . From Prabhu, Ganga learns that he had missed motherly care, love and affection at a very early age. His father, out of fear that his second wife would neglect his son, did not marry at all. Such was his affection for him. As a doting father, he made him tie to his apron strings and spoilt him irretrievably. It was because of his upbringing that he could not bear any responsibility of his own deeds. He openly confesses his inability to Ganga. His father did not correct him in his formative years. He was liberal in giving him pocket money. His liberality had made him an extravagant being. In his early years, with money he bought all pleasures. Later, he finds fault with his father whom he thinks is alone responsible for his becoming a mentally weak being. It is understood that Prabhu’s father exhibited the temperament of a typical man who would excessively dote on his children in absence of his wife. Prabhu also took advantage of his father’s leniency and liberality and so he became a human waste. Jayakanthan clearly alludes that a rich and caring tradition is necessary for the weaning of a child into a socially responsible adult. Here, in a way he seems to toe the line of a patriarchal Indian system of family, but all the same his focus is on the maternal care that is essential for a child’s holistic development into a caring adult. Prabhu attempts to move into the non-typological male character. His wish to get her rehabilitated into a new life shows his social concern while feeling guilty of not accepting Ganga as his wife. Though he never takes any responsibility of his 136 deeds on others, in the case of Ganga, his gesture of offering his shoulder to bear her burden elevates him to a near non-typological male. Ganga’s offer to be Prabhu’s concubine may also be seen as her wit to test Prabhu’s integrity. The non-typological elements of Ganga in offering herself as his concubine and Prabhu’s evolution from a typological patriarchal head to a non-typological man are evenly balanced in the case of the relationship between Ganga and Prabhu. They mutually respect each other and cherish each other’s values. Prabhu has transformed into a refined human being due to his association with Ganga. It is Ganga who has made him realize that there are women like her in the society craving for true love and understanding. Both search for love in different ways. In the case of Ganga, none has shown her real love. Her mother is selfish in showing her love more for her son than for her daughter. Her uncle’s vulgar taste of teasing her as a vicarious pleasure earns her an experience of estimating such men of honour to be too cheap. Her brother too keeps her at bay for her lapses. Prabhu is sympathized with her and honours her as a woman of high calibre. Then he resolves to stand by her side as a friend ever protective and caring. The noteworthy aspect of Ganga’s character is that she has come to shift her perspective to a female phase where she becomes unbending in nature, seeks no support, and has least concern for male social norms. She does not care about her “family honour”. Ganga, emerges as a non-typological woman, but unlike the western concept of female liberation she still holds the Indian traditional outlook of one man one woman and hence sees Prabhu as her spiritual husband though the Indian society will not accept it. 137 When she fails in her attempt to convince him into accepting her as his companion, she decides to lead her life like a man indulging in smoking and drinking. By this way, she tries to be equal to man in all spheres. Radical feminists believe that man and woman are equals irrespective of the biological differences. They view that woman can do all that man can do. This type of feminist highlights the importance of individual feelings, experiences and relationships of woman with other members of the society (Daly, 1990). Her adherence to these habits which are normally men’s, challenges the patriarchal ideology if only to challenge. She tells the world that she is now very happy. This researcher is of the view that Ganga gains this liberation through her education and well-paid job. Hence, women’s empowerment through education is a weapon to combat the patriarchal ideology to achieve equal status and earn respect for them. Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral (An Actress Watches a Play) Kalyani, the protagonist of the novel is an actor. She is a spinster for whom drama is the only meaningful career. She develops a liking for Ranga, a theatre critic. She does not expect anything from him. Ranga is a widower with a girl baby which is under the care of his sister-in-law. When Ranga proposes to marry her, Kalyani readily accepts his proposal. Ranga, being a man expects her to exhibit her love for him by sacrificing her carrier as a drama artist and settling with him as a homemaker. But Kalyani, a practical woman, refuses to live up to his expectations. Though she fulfils all his needs as his partner, she does not wish to change her course of life for his sake. Therefore, the conflict arises which makes him decide to break the marriage. They consult a lawyer to know the proceedings for divorce. As the law requires them 138 to live in separation for one year and a half, Ranga goes back to his house. But Kalyani suffers from paralysis and becomes immobile. On hearing this, Ranga hurries to her house and takes her in his arms deciding not to leave her ever. Finally, they both are united once again in marital life. The very title of the novel Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral (An Actress Watches a Play) is ironic for Kalyani is the character and the audience of her own enacted life. Kalyani is a non-typological woman in a sense that she does not care for wealth or any personal aggrandizement. She takes up the artistic profession for providing happiness to the audience with her chiselled action interpreted through many roles. She lives through many characters with one aim, one business, and one desire of providing happiness through entertainment. Her aim to provide happiness to others does not give her a scope to get married. She emotively cares for the general happiness of the drama troupe that makes her forget her individual happiness of marriage. Ranga is an unbending critic who dissects the realities and politics of make- believe art, that too drama. The clash between the patriarchal supremacy of Ranga and the motherly sacrifice of Kalyani develops into multi-dimensional levels as man- woman, husband-wife, and critic-artist. This is elaborately discussed in this chapter to assess the role of Kalyani as performer and the performance itself. Jayakanthan’s Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkiral is about the relationship between a critic and a stage artist, between a man and a woman, between authority and submission, between two sections of community --- one ever dominating and the other ever subservient, between beauty and utility, between imperialistic tendencies and democratic functions, between dogmatic principles and adjustable altruism, between romantic ideals and pragmatic norms, between disorderly conduct and 139 orderly disposition, between a fanatic and an accommodative being, between stormy person and cool breezy being. Ranga stands for the former illustrations and Kalyani stands for the latter. In the Preface of the novel, Jayakanthan briefly comments that many people are leading their lives with an aim. But Ranga and Kalyani do not have a common aim about a life of love. Both have their own aims and distinctive deeds to do. They have love in their lives but at the same time, both of them have their own independent lives to lead. Jayakanthan says in an interview, “the Friction of Love is in the cupboard of every home and Jealousy is the other side of Love; the development of Love is Possession, carefulness, vigilance and protection”. http://www.languageinindia.com/jan2009/jayakanthanhenryjames.html It is in this context, one has to analyze Ranga and Kalyani by looking into their distinctive features enumerated in the first paragraph of this thesis. Kalyani is a self abnegated woman. She belongs to a community called “Dhasi kulam”. In this “kulam” (community), women are wedded to the gods first and then, they are looked after by a wealthy landlord or zamindar. They remain true to them. They wear the holy thread Thali around their neck. But socially their status is not on the respectable plane of other women of honour. Their main aim is to keep their “protectors” happy. They serve them by singing and dancing devotedly and zealously offering only joy and happiness to their custodians. Simply saying, they are vessels of pleasure to relieve tension and repose and ease comfort on their men. Except in providing pleasure, they cannot claim any superiority. To a great extent, they may weep within but show joy without. Women born in the dhasi community become past masters in showing the mixed feelings of diverse nature and creating an aura of pleasure for others looking at them. Born in that kulam (community), Kalyani has learnt this art 140 very well. She has selected a profession of her choice that gives room for her to interpret all roles providing her audience only pleasure and not pain. Even matters of sadness and sorrow become a part of her pseudo acting out of which she derives pleasure from the onlookers’ applause for her talented acting. Kalyani practices in her life not only self-abnegation but also the altruistic tendency of loving all in a detached way. Kalyani practices what Lord Krishna pronounced in The Gita , that is, “love all without attachment”. This is her true positive typology that elevates her stature above all the other characters in this novel. Though she, as an artist, interprets roles of all types of characters, she is made to look at others off the stage and appreciate them for their perfection and imperfection. This tendency of appreciation, as a staying power in Kalyani has never failed her to lose her grip with happiness. Even matters of sorrow for others are her matters of joy. Her drama troupe is really blessed to have her. No one in the troupe experiences dejection, despair and despondency. They all consider the drama company as a family. Kalyani cares for them like a mother. Thus, Kalyani has the characteristics of a typological woman, steeped in all-embracing love, a beneficent provider, a benign protector with concern, affection, and understanding to all under her care. This is the typical nature of the Indian woman involved in domestic life to protect the members of her family and keep them united. That is why the joint family system is still in vogue sporadically in many Indian societies. Though it has become out of practice in western countries, the relations are well connected mainly due to women’s efforts to integrate and establish the relation circles. Hence, possessing the same typical trait of the average Indian woman, Kalyani feels satisfied and contented with the unity of the members of the drama troupe. As a result, she does not aspire to 141 become a cine actress. For many aspirants, the stage is a stepping stone into cinema. But to Kalyani, drama is her haven of peace, comfort, harmony and her “mother’s lap” of comfort. She is really a typical woman who thinks that she has to bring cheer to everyone who works with her. It becomes obvious in her waiting for Ranga, a renowned art critic. On one of his visits, Kalyani sees him through the curtain hole. This hole plays a dominant role in stage craft. The curtain hole serves the artists to watch the reaction of the audience. It is this hole which helps them assess the quality of the play and to know whether it is going to be a success or immediate failure. It is through this hole Kalyani watches him. Ranga, as a journalist enjoys a great social recognition. He has a stubborn intellectual arrogance in his conviction on matters like politics, society and arts. He shines in his profession as his critical views are very well appreciated. On account of his sharp critical acumen, he is much respected by fellow reporters. As he is against corruption, a few political heads have used their power and authority to transfer him from the field of politics to arts. But he boldly encounters all the challenges in his profession and withstands the oppositions. Such a strong willed, dogmatic, heavily puffed up, but extraordinarily talented journalist Ranga remains incorrupt and serves his profession with integrity. This typical manly nature of him, that is, facing the challenges and rivalry without compromising his convictions, puts him in the typological mould. He has scant respect for arts and artists. He considers stage as the ladder for actors to get themselves lifted to cinema. Annasamy, Kalyani’s benefactor cum manager has a strong reason to denounce Renga, as a drama critic. In the name of fair criticism, he brings the merits and demerits of drama to the public’s knowledge, but 142 Annasamay believes that Ranga destroys the lives of poor artists who know only this profession for eking out their existence. They both have indulged in severe altercation on the issue of his attitude as a severe critic that has raged the stage for a while. At the same time, he accepts that there are certain dramas that bring about social awareness. But such socially relevant dramas are few in numbers and all other dramas are trash on his critical scale. Such a self-conscious, self-confident and self-dependent individual gets tilted in his mental balance after receiving an anonymous post card inviting him for a get- together one evening and discovers it to have been sent by Kalyani. She is all praise for his critical power. Renga selects her for his interview for a purpose. Actor and actresses of star value in the interview show vanity and snobbery. But Kalyani is a second rate artist according to his estimate. According to his belief, an actress is an open book. ...oru nadigai enbaval samoogathin thirantha puthaham. avalukku oru antharangam iruppathaka ninaippathuve oru pavanai; appadi pavanai seithukuvathu or suetchaiyana manamayakkam. avalukku irukkum antharangamellam velipattapin illatha antharangangalal avalathu sontha vazhkkaiku sambanthamillatha piraral entha alavukku karpanai seithu valarkkapadukirutho antha alavukku aval pughal valarnthruppathaaga aval nambavendum enbathellam Rangavukkum therium ( Oru Nadigai 48). [Translation: (An actress is an open book to the society. That there is privacy in an actor’s life is really a humbug. This humbug is one’s own self-delusion. Exposing the artist’s most of her personal life assumptions 143 not connected with her life but presumed to be her matters of privacy thereby offering scope for others to imagine and gloat upon were factors of her progress and such factors of progress should make her believe in these things. Ranga knows well that these things have to be incorporated in the interview]. Ranga’s preconceived notions about actresses and their conduct are blasted into pieces after seeing Kalyani’s simplicity. She does not appear gorgeously but as any other simple family woman. She sits on the floor while being interviewed forthright in her answers. She constantly wears a smile on her face while answering even adverse questions. All these things show that she is a composed woman of fine taste and refinement. While answering the question on why she does not take any steps to enter into the world of cinema, her reply is very sharp: she does not like her privacy being disturbed by unwanted persons’ interventions. Similarly, she has no inhibition to hide her age. It surprises him when she says: enakku ennai romba pidikkunga. naan romba azhagunnu kooda sila samayam thonunga. en udambu, en kural, en manasu ellame enakku rombavum pidikkuthu. Ippavum manikanakka kannaadi munne ukkanthukitu ennai nane azhagu parthukkirathu enakku oru pozhudu pokku...... (56-57) [English Translation: I like myself very much. I feel at times, I am very beautiful. I love my body, my voice, my mind very much. It is my habit till date spending hours before mirror appreciating my beauty]. Kalyani registers here her self-appreciation and confidence. In one of her moody contemplations, Kalyani ponders on the scope of getting married. She has a strong conviction that she could not imprison herself in marriage. She believes she has 144 no such features that men usually expect in women other than youth and beauty. As expected of a woman, she possesses only a little knowledge about things, that is, know how to practice naivety, be timid and exhibit obedience overtly and a master in the art of beautification. All these five factors as indicated by Mary Wollstonecraft in her article titled as “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman ”, are found to be missing in Kalyani. But she would remain calm and cool during a crisis. That is why she doubts if anyone would select her as his life partner especially taking into consideration her “community”. Jayakanthan chiefly deals with the institution of marriage and emphasizes on the dire need to spiritually sanctify it. In some of his works, he portrays the marriage in negative light just to set right the derailed institution in the Indian society. Ranga’s wish to marry a stage actress is questioned by society. For them, all actresses are an embodiment of vulgarity and immorality. One of his distant relatives called Thota advises him to keep her as his concubine and not to marry her. This attitude of men towards female actors is the impact of “self-styled moral patriarchal ideology” strongly rooted in the society. The same attitude of men belittling women is reflected by the patriarch, Venku Ayyar in Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal , who instructs Ganga that she can only be a concubine to somebody, but not a wife of any man. This discriminatory attitude of men towards women exposes their typological temperament and casts them in the mould of type. Kalyani, on her part as a wife, never fails to render her wifely duties to Ranga even when she is busy discussing a story or doing a rehearsal. As a critic, he analyzes as follows: 145 Naallukku nal than avalidam kadan pattu varuvathu mathiri avan sumaiyutran,avalo, thanakku kidaitha oru pokkisham pol avanaip poshithal. Ivan muzhukkavum thannidam illamal adikkadi ingo oru thani vasathukkup poi vidugirargalo enra kuraithan avalukku irunthathu Aval verondraiyum ivanidamirunthu ethirparkkavillai... avalukku avanthan pirathaanamaga irunthane ozhiya ---- avanukkum thanakkum ulla uravin peril ottik kollugira peir kurithu, ithaipatri pirar enna pesugirargal enbathu kurithu, intha uravin nirantharam allathu nirantharaminmai kurithellam enthavithamana kuzhappamum avalukku illai.aval than vazhkkail intha aru mathangalaga miguntha mana niraivodum, santhosamagavum irukkiral. (108) [Translation in English: Day by day, he felt he was being indebted to her. That burdened him. But she looked after him well as he was her treasure. She was rather sad that he used to leave for his own tenant without living with her permanently. She did not expect anything from him. On the day of her invitation to a feast, she offered her body and heart to him without any second thought. All that she possessed was surrendered to him by her. She did not think that there would be any loss out of this total surrender. Even had he stopped visiting her from the next day onwards, she would not have felt any pinch of loss. In fact, she had a temperament not to consider any loss seriously. This character of her total surrender stunned him.] It is Annasamy who brings sense into her status of unmarried existence with Ranga. Life is not alone limited to body and mind. It borders on law, society and economy. Thereby, he advises her for a legal status and to get it registered. But to 146 Kalyani, this legal bondage does not mean anything as she has a detached love for Renga and is not obsessed with him. Ranga, a typical member of the male society, feels dishonoured to live in his wife’s abode. He has his qualms about his family accepting such a “wayward” thing. Kalyani realizes his manly independence. What matters for Kalyani is happiness - whether in domestic or stage life or life with relatives. As a provider of happiness, she does not find fault with his suggestion. He wants her to let her house and leave to live in a rented house with him. Kalayani does not object to his conditions. At the same time, she fails to realize that like any other man, he too is a typical member of the patriarchal society. He wants his desire to be fulfilled. He expects her to be a typical woman of this society and act according to his whims and fancies as he is her husband. He asks her if she is ready to quit her acting and drama troupe for his sake: ... nan kekkaren... nee un nadippu,nadaga kampany ellathukkum muzhukkup pottuttu antha Athikesavelu Naikkar theru veettile enakku manaivia kudumbam nadatha ennoda varuvia? Enakkaka,antha vazhkkaikkaga nee ethaiyavathu thiyagam pannamudiuma? (195) [English Translation: I want you to disband your drama troupe and quit acting. Then, come to live with me as my wife in a rented house at Athikesavelu Naikkar Street. I expect you to do this sacrifice to live with me, will you?] But she never yields to the patriarchal expectations and dictation of terms of Ranga, instead, she loves him gullibly without any expectations from him. This is where Kalyani stands as an ideal woman and evolves as a non-typological character. She challenges the male-centric ideology by not agreeing to Ranga’s insistence on quitting her profession to settle with him as a home maker. She makes her stand very 147 clear to him that she gives her heart and soul to him but she cannot abandon her ‘self’. Her ‘self-hood’ is as important to her as her love for him, ‘the other’. It becomes clear that his demand on her to give up her individuality is just a reflection of his ego (Ranga). Ranga, being one of the patriarchs, fails to understand the good qualities of Kalyani. She never confronts Ranga, instead, she goes along with him to keep him at ease. She shows soulful compassion on him. Woman, by nature is tender-hearted and Kalyani is never an exception in showing great concern and giving warm treatment to Ranga. But she is never ready to lose her individuality as other married women are prepared to do for their husbands. Betty Friedan avers that the main view of liberal feminists is that all people are created equal by God and deserve equal rights. These types of feminists believe that oppression exists because of the way in which men and women are socialized, which supports patriarchy and keeps men in power positions. They believe that women have the same mental capacity as their male counterparts and should be given the same opportunities in political, economic and social spheres. Women should have the right to choose, not have their life chosen for them because of their sex. Essentially, women must be like men (Friedan, 1963). In this connection, Ranga puts a mild pressure on Kalyani to give up her individuality and become his own possession which has been the cultural and social practice followed by men for many centuries. Liberal feminists still continue to fight against this kind of hegemonic attitude of men in the society. Kalyani detests the barter system like sacrificing something in exchange for getting something in life. She acts for the sake of acting. She derives pleasure out of this. She would never quit drama on account of her marital life. Annasamy feels proud of her after hearing her determination in not leaving the stage on the pretext of her 148 conjugal life. Further, when Ranga enquires about her liking for children, she replies that matter of begetting children is not a matter of concern or of significance at the time of marriage. She has such a mental makeup that she would think about children only when they are truly ready. Ranga wonders at times how Kalyani has got this temperament of level headedness. He makes this comment on her habit of growing roses after marriage: poochedi valarkkirathai oru jambathukkaha seiravanga irukkalam; nan illanneu sollalle... athu unmaiyile evvalavu aananthamana kariyamnu oru pullaiyavathu valarthu parthal than puriyum, kathirikkai chediyum vaikkathan venum. anal kathirikkayaivida roja azhagu illaiya?... nan solrene. ippa enakku ivvalavu athigamana alavile chedi valarkka mudiyuthu. athukkana vasathiyana soolnilai irukku. seiyaren. ithuve pothathu. Innum ethanaio vagaigal vetchukka venumnu asaipadaren.. ana athu vasathi irukkirathanale erpadara dambam illa. ungaloda oru china olaikkudisaile irunthu kool kudikkira vazhkkai enakku erpattirunthalum ange oru china thottyle thagara dappavileyavathu oru poochedi vetchu valrkkirathile nan santhosapaduven. athu ovvoru nalum oru ilai vidarathum, mokku vidarathum arumbavathum,arumbu malarugirathum... ithu vrayamna vazhkkaiye virayamthan. manusa vazhkkaiye virayamthan... kasu panamnu kanakku pottakkooda ithileyuma periya viyabaram nadakkuthu. pona masam namma veetile mattum nooru roopaikku poo vithurukka pattamma --- “enru avanathu thavarana abiprayathai matrugira 149 vithamaga than pathil sollivitta magiltchile avan kai niraiya roja malargalaip parithu thanthal kalyani. (136) [English translation: There may be people growing roses out of vanity. I don’t say no...... Still only after growing a tiny grass, one will realise the truth of such a happy act. True, one has to grow brinjal. Still, will brinjal be more beautiful than rose? Let me explain... I am now having the facility to grow plants—I have now comfortable surroundings. That is why I do - I feel this is not enough. I aspire to grow more and more different varieties of flower plants. But it is not an outcome of my vanity. I shall be happy to grow a rose plant in a single pot if I am fated to lead my life with you in a small tiny hut. See the beauty of the plant giving out a leaf, then a bud, then its blossom, ... all these things are not products of waste. If this is waste, life itself is waste. Brinjal too is waste. Human life is waste. If you look at this hobby a business, then, it involves a big profit. Pattamma sold hundred rupees worth of flowers last week.] All these explanations hold that even in artistic creations, there is a room for utility. But these explanations do not bring in him any desired change. He believes that such hobbies are products of snobbery. Differences of opinion come to stay with them on this rose issue. She does not feel sad for his attitude on this issue. Whenever she looks at roses, she is reminded of Ranga’s remark. In the love affair of Pattammal, Kalyani alone believes that her threat of committing suicide, if not married to her lover Damu, is unreal. She considers this affair a melodrama. Persons of Pattammal’s age would experience love but none would commit suicide; nor is such death for love 150 intelligent. Ranga differs from her view. He approaches this matter from a male point of view. Ranga’s views about love and leading a life of togetherness do not tend to Kalyani’s views. To Kalyani, in life truth, discipline, honesty, and compassion are the essentials: Idhuthan romba avasiyam..... nan ungalukku sinciera—unmaiyaa irukken.... ennaikkum aadharava iruppen. Adhemathiri unga atharavum enakku irukku..Kadhalna athukku ovvoruthar ovvor artham vetchukittu irukkanga. Athanalathan solren...vaanga sappidalam.... vaanga saappiduvom. (166-168) [English Translation: I am sincere, truthful to you... I will be ever supportive... I also have your support. Each has each definition about love. These are the essential things for life. That is why I say... such a kind of love may be essential for stories and dramas. But life is a serious matter. This is not drama... I remember you have said this when I don’t know... we are not teenagers. You are not the first man I have met, nor am I the first woman you have met. Let us lead an honest, sincere and compassionate life. If this life is not based on love then, let such a love remain on its lofty level. No harm. Come let us eat together...] But to Ranga, marriage need not only be sincerity; one of the main factors is unconditional love of wife for her husband. He is of the view that marriage binds them together and the wife should be ready to sacrifice anything for her conjugal life with her husband. This kind of patriarchal attitude of Ranga causes a ripple in their 151 married life. Further, he feels that Kalyani’s intellectuality about love and life are insignificant to a real life. He argues that only those who take marriage as a way for intellectual companionship would leave the area of marriage and lead a life of saint. If a person is to live alone, then consuming food alone is essential. But will food alone be enough? Even within food, there are various tastes like sour taste, hot taste and sweet taste. For a married life too, various factors like love, sacrifice, service, etc. are essential, it is meant to be a life of two becoming one out of togetherness. Ranga ruminates that in such a life, will love not play a vital role? In that case, as observed by Bernard Shaw, “marriage is a recognized prostitution” (Shaw, 40). Kalyani has received applause for expressing her talents of romance on stage but she does not want to exhibit those acting in real life. Ranga, being romantic expects her to exhibit the same romantic aspect to him which he misconstrues as a gesture of love. Kalyani wants to remain as a true and loving wife. She does not want to enact the role of a wife as she performs on the stage. Here, Kalyani again maintains her individuality and keeps it intact. Ranga’s illusions and Kalyani’s realities on the romantic element of married life come into conflict. Ranga will never settle for anything less than a total surrender of a woman. But he fails to realize the fact that Kalyani never fancies a marriage with him or forces him. The patriarchal influence drives him to break the marriage, but Kalyani remains cool and undisturbed. She even tries to ease him and is ready to do whatever he desires, except losing her individuality. Her love for him is true and genuine which is non-aggressive, whereas Ranga looks to destroy her identity. She further argues that love is perceived by different people from different perspectives. When he gives her a news item that a two lovers had committed suicide since they 152 could not join in wedlock, her face shows disgust. When he talks about the glory of the love affair ending in their suicide, Kalyani condemns them as cowardly psychos unwilling to face the challenges of life in this world. When Ranga marvels at the spirit of the couple in dying for the love for each other, Kalyani ridicules him for his way of looking at them. She tells him, neenga enna rendu perum saagarathile poik kadhaloda perumaiyai parkkaringa? ounga rendu perum saagama onna vazhnthiruntha ounga vazhra vithathilethan anthak kadhaloda perumaiyai ennal unaramudium. (155) [English Translation: Kalyani to Ranga: You perceive the glory of love on the death of a loving couple for their inability to mature their love into marriage. But I will see the glory of love only on their togetherness in the marital life. True love does not end in death but starts in life.] Contrary to Kalyani, Ranga remains oscillated in his views but is adamant in changing her attitude and principles of life. A line can easily be drawn between Ranga, a typical member of the patriarchal society and Kalyani, a non-typological woman strongly protesting the ideology throughout the novel. Ranga asks her if she really loves him and if she has loved any man in the past. Though these two questions really hurt her, she does not show it outwardly. After realizing that his words have hurt her, he immediately apologizes, but she responds that she believes those who hurt her alone will give her happiness. Her response to his apology follows, 153 varuthamillamal irukkuma? illannu poi sollratha?.... varuthappattal enna?.... varutham tharavanga than santhosam tharuvanga. (159) [English translation: How could I be unhurt by these questions? But I strongly feel that those who hurt me alone can give me happiness.] On Ranga’s decision they agree to live separately and to lead a friendly life for one year. Law of divorce insists on their completion of their marriage period for three years. Life is different for different people. It depends on their mental resonance. For those having identical mental outlook, no problem would surface. Ranga’s life with his wife Devaki went on well because of her total surrender of her individuality to him. Ranga stresses his point that if love and sacrifice do not find a place in life, and then it will be like a business agreement as there is neither meaning nor respect in it. But the sacrifice he asks is of the ‘other’ and not ‘his’. Kalyani never breaks down due to the break of their marriage. She firmly argues that sacrifice and dedication are to be exhibited by both in a married life, otherwise it would be deception. She argues that sacrifice is not a trade; if she goes to live with him after quitting her career as an artist that would also amount to committing a wrong to someone. As a result, there would be an element of satisfaction for him and an element of dissatisfaction for her. She asserts that if he truly loves her, he should not be dissatisfied. Further, she elaborates that if he visits her out of compulsion, the result will be disastrous. She pleads with him that she loves to live with him; but not at the expense of her self-esteem. According to Ranga, Kalyani is a self-centred woman. He does not want her to maintain her individuality. He fears that her individuality may resist his superiority in domestic life. He believes that wife has to be only a caring woman of her husband and 154 should not engage in social network. But Kalyani affirms that she can be balanced both in taking care of him and her career. Ranga further strengthens his argument that he is romantic and she has to be a loving wife. She has to sacrifice more than what she has already done. She has to prove it. There is no point in guarding herself against such a binding. This precaution is of no use for a devoted family. She understands his points of justification. She feels sad for him. She knows if she gives more and more room for his selfish wishes, there will be no end to it. She thinks of Sumathi, Ranga’s sister-in-law who is looking after his child. She argues that sacrifice is a noble act which is done out of one’s willingness and devotion. Marrying Sumathi will both be his sacrifice and her redemption. “Why do you refuse to accept this sacrifice as an element of love?”. Ranga, is stunned at her sensible argument and later realizes that his marriage with Kalyani is a hasty decision. When Ranga proposes to break the marriage, Kalyani does not raise any objection. Instead, she co-operates with him in seeking legal clarification and parting with each other for one year and a half as the law demands. After Ranga stops visiting her as per the agreement, Kalyani falls ill and becomes paralyzed. When Ranga sees her immobile and bedridden, he becomes broken-hearted. Though she is in a pathetic condition, she does not need his compassion and companionship. Hence, she gives him an idea that now it is legally easier for him to get divorce from her citing her health condition. This proves that Kalyani is a woman of self-esteem and self-reliance. Further, she establishes that an intellectual is not merely an educated person but a good thinker. By thinking, she remains a steady woman and keeps her ‘self’ intact. The writer himself feels sad that he has to paralyze Kalyani to make Ranga realize her supreme and noble qualities. The writer further makes the readers feel the pain of 155 Kalyani’s paralysis which, in turn, destabilizes the dominant ideology of patriarchal supremacy. It needs to be recorded here that Ranga is more humanistic than a mere sample of the patriarchal world. His arguments questioning the logic of divorce laws are founded very strongly on the ground of humanism. Thiyaga Boomi (Land of Sacrifice) R. Krishnamoorthy, who was writing in the pen name of Kalki was a praiseworthy Tamil novelist, a freedom fighter, social crusader, short story writer, journalist, humorist, satirist, travel writer, script-writer, poet, and film & music critic. His writings include over 120 short stories, 10 novelettes, five novels, three historical romances, editorial and political writings and hundreds of film and music reviews. His novel, Thiyaga Boomi was written in 1938 and at that time, it was considered a revolutionary novel ever written in Tamil. Story in brief The story began in 1918 in Neelangarai, a remote hamlet on the banks of Kudamuruti in Thanjavur district. It is a place where the low caste people were treated as untouchables. Sambu Sastrigal was a Brahmin priest who sheltered Harijans (people who are socially and economically underprivileged) as they had become homeless due to cyclone. Sambu Ayyar was a landlord and lost his first wife. Savithri was born to his first wife. In order to look after the four year old child, he married Mangalam. She had a mother and a deaf brother Moorthy. Mangalam and her mother Sornammal had nourished deep aspirations about the prospects of enjoying Sambu Ayer’s property after his death. As Sornammal’s financial status was very low, she was left with no option but to make her daughter become second wife to a middle 156 aged man. In the context, poverty played a dominant role. But Sornammal failed to sharpen her daughter’s cunningness in bringing Sambu Sastrigal to their hold. Sambusastri was a karmayogi. He had infinite faith in Lordess Parasakthi. He had no taste for carnal pleasure. He married Mangalam as a substitute mother to Savithri. He needed servants at home to look after domestic scores. He had no time to share his time with Mangalam for he was an ascetic. When Sambu Ayyar looked for a suitable bridegroom for his daughter, he faced a lot of problems in the name of dowry. He was required to pay huge money to get his daughter married to a man. Because of his kindness shown to the underprivileged people, Sambu Sasthri was eventually excommunicated from the orthodox Hindu society. Being desolate, he moves to Madras (now Chennai). The focus then shifts to Sambu Sastri's daughter Savithri who was ill treated by her “westernized” husband Sridharan and was eventually driven out of his palatial house in Calcutta. Since, Sambu Sastri had offered his ancestral home to Sridharan as dowry Savithri found herself homeless when she arrived at her native village. She gave birth to a baby girl Saru in a hospital and left her to the care of her father and continued on her wanderings. Sambu Sastri, meanwhile, along with the Harijan Nallan, embarked on the Gandhian social uplift programmes including picketing liquor shops. At the end of the novel, Savithri emerged as a wealthy woman under the pseudonym Uma Rani and devoted herself to charitable activities. She eventually rejected the overtures of her husband Sridharan who wished to return to her. Finally, both of them joined the Freedom Movement to fight for the independence of India. In this novel, Kalki projected the social living conditions of the upper caste Brahmin family before India’s independence. Sambu Sastrigal, a zealous Brahmin, is a typical member of the patriarchal society who often exhibits his human heart by 157 practising the religious Vedanthic concept of sharing his wealth for alleviating the suffering of the socially suppressed low caste people. Because of his humaneness, he is antagonized by his own clan preaching the same ideals of Vedanta for his unbiased and benign nature and benevolent disposition towards the downtrodden and low caste people. His best friend Dikshithar plays a double role with a malicious motive by writing an anonymous letter to Thangammal detailing his sister, Meenakshi’s mysterious disappearance. Other men of the same village sling mud at him by twisting the incidence in different ways. His Sampanthi Raguramma Ayyar and his wife Thangammal become disturbed by this letter. This is how those men spoil the image of Sambu’s family and make Thangammal raise questions about the integrity of his family. These men out of their grudge towards Sambu Sastrigal, indulge in cheap gossiping and reflect their vengeance attitude. His humanitarian act is viewed as anti-social, anti-religious and even anti-God. They talk Dharma but practice mean mindedness. This researcher is of the view that by portraying the attitude of these male characters, Kalki throws light on the typologies of men to expound the non-typological features of the other man, Sambu Sastrigal. In this novel, the traditional suffering of woman as an underdog has been fully expounded through the portrayal of Savithri. Born in such a hoary family of all positive virtues, she suffers greatly in the hands of her stepmother Mangalam. She is born in such a remote village that she does not get a chance to learn the manners of modern education. Her father has failed to rear her to the expectations of a modern bridegroom. Here, her sufferings and humiliations, because of being a motherless girl, can be equated to those of Jane Eyre in Jane Eyre who also face humiliation and physical assault at the hands of her aunt, Mrs. Reed. Despite their troubled childhood, 158 they become refined women in the later part of their lives. On the other hand, Heathcliff in Wuthering Heights , though he too is humiliated and tortured by Hindley, does not become refined later, instead he becomes vengeful on those who have humiliated and insulted him during his childhood. This researcher is of the view that it is a typical nature of a man to nourish a grudge on those who ill treated him earlier. Heathcliff expresses the same temperament and cuts neatly into the mould of type, whereas, Savithri and Jane Eyre do not indulge in retaliation rather, they seek amelioration with all to maintain composure in life. They evolve from the mould of type into non type, on the contrary, Heathcliff, right from the beginning has been into the mould of a typical male type who has never deviated from it. Savithri believes the marriage will bring her heaven. Ironically, she is subjected to harassment and untold miseries by her mother-in-law on the grounds of dowry, which establishes the fact that woman has also been playing active role to perpetuate the patriarchal ideology. This reality is well captured in a Tamil movie, Penmani Aval Kanmani in which, the mother-in-law both mentally and physically tortures her daughter-in-law and humiliates her parents pointing out their inability to keep their promise to pay the dowries. Further, Savithri discovers the illegal relationship of her husband with Susee. Here, like the typical Indian woman of the time, Savithri does not question her husband for his extramarital relationship but rather patiently endures all with a hope to mend her husband. This high level of tolerance of woman actually perpetuates the patriarchal hegemony and worsens their life conditions. For Thangammal, Savithri’s credibility to get more and more money has started dwindling. For Sridharan, the credibility of keeping her as his wife is a matter of sacrifice about which he has no positive idea. Being depressed, Savithri 159 decides to leave the area of marriage. Her decision to quit her marital life and live alone for the sake of her child is similar to that of Isabella in Wuthering Heights , who, because of her husband, Heathcliff’s ill treatment, escapes the area of marriage and resolves to live for her child. These two women characters really deserve a special mention as they evolve from the mould of type to non type and emerge as a rebel against the male authority of their counterparts. Savithri’s miseries in her husband’s house, especially at the hands of her mother-in-law evoke sympathy in readers. Treated like a slave at the hands of her mother-in-law Thangammal, she has none to share her feeling with. Ignored by her husband on the pretext of her not being fashionable, she moves like a robot in her mother-in-law’s place. It is important to record here that in the patriarchal Indian society, women also attribute to the suppression of fellow women, especially in the family structure, thereby, invigorating the dominant ideology. Initially, Savithri starts her life as a typological woman ready to sacrifice everything for other’s happiness, and then she is seen evolving into the non- typological mould for the want of love and recognition. Because of the lack of human warmth and concern, she goes to the extent of leaving her child Saru to her father and boarding the train to Calcutta. Fortune favours her after reaching Kolkatta. There, by chance, she joins her wealthy aunt Meenakshi and before her death, Meenakshi makes Savithri her legal heir. This move is the turning point of her life that transforms her status. When women choose to decide for themselves and establish their right they can find their way to progress, though in Savithri’s case it is her predicament that has changed her. Despair- ridden Savithri now becomes a domineering woman wielding her influence to the extent of offering five lakhs to the hospital at Chennai where she delivers her 160 daughter, Saru. Money and status gives Savithri the power and recognition she deserves and helps her extricate legally from her marriage tie. The news about her spending a lot on matters of munificence raises the eyebrows of many. Generally rich men are known to have the tendency of giving liberally and donating freely. When they come across a woman doing so, it becomes a talk of the town. The society has seldom heard of a woman offering such a huge amount of donation. It is partly because woman would not have the scope of amassing wealth. During those times, woman would not be entitled to inherit a share of property from her father in case she had brothers. Society would consider them meek and financially dependent on men and have no moral or physical or mental courage for liberalization. Liberty for liberalization is a matter for men and labouring at home meekly is for women. Thus, her life from innocence to experience spans through India’s freedom struggle where in the seeds of sacrifice at the domestic life alone would blossom the much cherished freedom of India. Freedom of woman is freedom of the mother land. For any woman born as a mother, sister, friend and wife, the real emancipation of her is the freedom at all levels especially in all spheres of life and elevation of socio, political and economic fields. Kalki has sown this seed of emancipation of woman in this novel and Savithri is the symbol of such emancipation. Though Sambu Sastrigal is a man of good interpersonal relations with his members of the society and his servants, he has a flaw in his character. He fails in his duties to fulfil the conjugal desire of his young wife Mangalam. He believes that his wife and Nallan are the two female and male servants caring for his welfare. But Nallan is absolutely a male servant with probably a consciousness of expecting some material gains. But Mangalam is different. She is his wife and her expectation is more 161 than that of a servant. In a sense, Sambu is no different from Sridharan in exploiting his fiancee’s poverty and chooses her as his partner without noticing the most important conjugal happiness of marriage. By nature, he cares more for spiritual life and the poor destitute. On account of his negligence in not providing his wife happiness out of marriage, he could be seen as a symbol of male authority expecting his wife to serve him and his daughter as a servant. This frustration of Mangalam leads to emotional tantrums disturbing the harmony of the whole family. Kalki posits here that a husband should never mete out to his wife this kind of inhuman treatment. Mangalam’s existence as a wife and as a mother in Sambu Sastri’s house is moulded into a tyrannical woman. She sees Savithri as a stumbling block in getting substantial property from her husband’s will. Conjugally and legally her plight is pathetic that has resulted in nourishing hatred in her heart against Savithri. Any woman of her status would lose balance but Mangalam does not deviate from her domestic duties. Though she extracts more work from Savithri, she does not openly grumble and complain to Sambu Sastri about her existence as a wife in his dwelling. Her mother often tries her best to ignite her passionate outburst but Mangalam remains patient. She wants her husband to realize her moral and legal reliance of existence at his pace to keep her happy. This researcher avers that woman like Mangalam exercises too much of tolerance especially in the domestic fold, which actually perpetuates the self-centred and authoritative attitude of man in the society. Mangalam’s deaf brother, Vaithi nourishes an extravagant hope that his uncle Sambu would make Savithri his wife. Here, it is important to note that Vaithi develops a liking for Savithri and fancies to marry her in spite of his joblessness and dependency on others. Everyone wants it to happen though he is not in a position to 162 marry any girl. But the society upholds the dominant ideology that a man irrespective of his status would be eligible to marry a girl. However, it is drawn blank due to sensible decision of Sambu Sastrigal. Some in the village make fun of him on this score. Vaithi is much after the wealth of Sastrigal. This is also a typical nature of a man wanting to bring the wealth of others to his fold by marrying a girl of the family. To them, marriage is a trade. Vaithi also proves to be a typical member of the male - centred society. Savithri alias Uma Rani’s humanistic approach of saving her husband, Sridharan who is facing a likely imprisonment due to his misappropriation of money in a bank is comparable to Isabella’s ( Wuthering Heights ) act of protecting her husband, Heathcliff by refusing to aid Hindley to murder him, though she has been subjected to harassment and ill-treatment by him. Both women exhibit their religious bent of mind and typological feature of safeguarding their husbands who don’t deserve this benign approach. Sridharan, after identifying Savithri invites her to live with him. But her outright rejection of his wish drives him to seek a legal help by filing a suit against her for the restitution of conjugal rights. Sridharan, instead of showing gratefulness acts on the patriarchal principle of getting his wife under his control. Male typology very much surfaces through Sridharan who claims for the restitution of conjugal rights on Savithri whom he detested and abandoned once. The society supports his cause and affirms that a woman could not or should not live without her husband discarding conjugal relationship. Even the judiciary system is based on patriarchal ideology and the men have framed the laws. Though Savithri (Uma Rani) is docile by nature, meek in disposition, and humble in conduct she has become hard hearted now. She would have softened to a 163 certain extent, had she received any semblance of warmth from Sridharan. Savithri could have tarnished the image of her husband and his mother but her culture has taught her to remain a dutiful and devoted wife. She remains a resolute in being a self-dependent, thereby, she could seek her identity. She recollects the advice given by her father at the time of leaving for Kolkatta with her mother-in-law. kulanthai! nee evvalavu padithirukkirai; kettirukkirai. pudhithaga unakku nan onrum solla vendam. inimel un purushan thanamma unakku maatha, pitha, guru, theivam ellaam. antha nalile namathu thesathilerunthu Seethai, Thamayanthi, Savitri mudaliya pathiviratha rathnangalai pol neeyum purushan manam konamal nadanthu kolla vendum. un maamanar maamiyaridathilum payapakthiyudan nadanthu kondu nalla per vanga vendum. manushyargal enru irunthal kutrang kuraigal evvalavo irukkum. athaiyellam porutpaduthakkoodathu. kutram parkil sutram illai enru Avvaiyar solliyirukkirar. Unnal,pirantha idathukkum puguntha idathukkum perumai vara vendum amma. (Thiyaga Boomi 92) [Translation follows: Sambu Sastri thus spoke.... child! You have studied a lot. You should have heard a lot. No need for me to tell about them at length. Hereafter, your husband is your father, mother, teacher and God. You too have to lead a pious life like the hoary cultural figures Savitri, Seetha and Damayandhi..... who all follow the footprints of their husbands. You have to conduct yourself in such a way that you fulfil your husband’s wishes. You have to get good name out of serving your in-laws well. You should not take much account 164 about their defects as human beings. They may have flaws. Don’t you know the sayings of the poetess Avvaiyar that there is no relation if one sees in them only defects? You have to bring only honour to your family and the family you are going to serve as daughter-in-law.] The father’s words clearly reflect how the culture and the society had been corrupt with gender bias. This researcher is of the view that the epics like The Ramayana and The Mahabharata were written by male poets. Hence, the women protagonists of these epics are glorified because of their insensible obedience and unconditioned love for their husbands. Thus, Savithri breaks away from the religious myth and wages a legal war against her husband, all due to the lack of humaneness in man even after the woman tries to extend a friendly hand. This researcher deems it fit to cite a Tamil movie, Marupadium , directed by late Mr. Balumahendra, a famous film maker in both Tamil and Malayalam. The heroine refuses to pardon her erratic and debauched husband though he repents for his wrongs and seeks to unite with her again in marital life. She, being stubborn and straightforward out rightly rejects his appeal and makes him realise how much she has been wounded because of his overindulging behaviour. Her temperament of self-dignity and sense of righteousness can be compared to those of Savithri in this Tamil novel, Thiyaga Boomi a traditional Brahmin girl- turned a rich woman known as Uma Rani who objects to the court verdict which advises her to live with her husband, Sridharan who packed her back home when she was pregnant. Rather, she shows her readiness to pay alimony to her husband as she does not like to revive her conjugal relationship with him. In this context, Savithri is not a product of the hoary cultural epic character Savithri who was fighting for her husband’s life from the God of Death, Yama. This 165 new woman is a metamorphosed Savithri who wants to teach her husband a lesson. She turns to the judge and makes this speech: ... Mr.Narayanan marupadi kettar, “sari, neenga sonnathellam nijamendre ninaitchukkuvom. purushan veetile neenga romba romba kastapattadhagave vatchukkuvom. aana, neengathan avarai avvalavu thooram theivamaga paavitchundirunthennu sonnele?” ippo, avar, ponathaiyellam maranthudalaam; purushan manaiviyaga thaampathiyam nadathalaam enru solgirapothu, ean athai marukkireergal. Uma appothu aaveshathodu pathil sonnal. “amaam. Oru kalathil ivarai theivamaga ninaithen. vasthavamthan. appothu ennai ivarukku pidikkavillai. Ennai parpatharkkum kasappai irunthathu. nan irukkirenaa, seththenaa enru koodak kavanikkavillai. ippothu vanthu koodi vazhalamenru solgirar. etharkaga? en peril ivarukku thidirenru piriyam vanthuvittatha? illai! ennidam irukkum panathukku asaipattukkondu solgirar... .... Uma turns to Sridharan and says, amam; marupadiyum solren. ennidamulla panathukku asai pattukkondu than ippothu kirukasthasiramam nadatha vanthirukkirar”. (270-271) [English translation: (Mr.Narayanan started asking a question, ok, we take what all you have said is true and we take it for granted that you were subjected to untold sufferings at your husband’s place. But, you alone have said so far, you consider him as your God...! Now he says, “let us forget all about the past. Let us start afresh!” Why do you 166 refuse? For this Uma furiously answered... Yes... I worshipped him like a God. It was true. At that time, he hated me. He felt bitter even to look at me. He did not even care whether I was dead or alive. Now he invites me to live together. Why? How does he like me now all of a sudden? No... No... He likes to live with me because he is attracted towards my money.] In spite of her argument, the court finally exhorts her to start a new life with her husband mentioning that a woman cannot live her life unwed or separated from her husband in this society. Then she turns to the judge and says: idhu niyayama? idhu dharmama? neengale sollungal.oru pennai aval peril ishtam illatha purushanudan vazhumbadi nirppandappaduthuvathu neethiya? deivathukkuthan adukkuma? ulagamellam ‘sudhanthiram,sudhanthiram’ yenru muzhngikondirukkum innalil oru pen pedhaiai sattathin peral ithagaia kodumaikku alakkalama? manaiviai purushan thalli vaithal, manaivi korakudia pathiyathai yenna jevanamsam thane. anthamathiri nanum ivarukku jevanamsam thara thayaraiirukkiren.anal ivarudan sernthu vazghuvatharkku mattum sammathikka maatten! oru nalum maatten! (271). [Translation follows: Is it really a justice to compel a woman to live with her husband who does not have any love for her? Will God allow it? In the name of law, how can law force an unwilling woman to live with her husband when the entire world clamours for liberty and freedom? Suppose a husband wants to get separated from his wife, he is legally bound to give his wife monetary settlement. In the similar 167 manner, I want to get myself separated from him by means of giving him monetary settlement. But I shall never agree to live with him as his wife. That is impossible. I will never be ready to live with him even if law forces me.] Betty Friedan avers that Liberal feminists create and support acts of legislation that remove the barriers for women. These acts of legislation demand equal opportunities and rights for women, including equal access to jobs, equal pay and unbiased legal systems. Liberal feminists believe that removing these barriers directly challenges the ideologies of patriarchy, as well as liberates women (Friedan, 1963). The judge ought to give his judgement according to the limits of legal arguments. He accepts how women are ill-treated by their in-laws and husbands. But in Savithri’s case, her allegations do not bear any proof. Based on the Hindu law a woman after marriage has to live with him willy-nilly. Thereby, the verdict is given that Savithri has to live with Sridharan and her claim to get herself separated is not granted. Here, it is important to record that the man- made legal system is obviously biased to woman. The liberal feminists are known to register their protest that the societal or legal subjugation of women is wrong and it needs to be destabilized to maintain the equal status for both sexes in the society. She takes on the patriarchal stance of joining the freedom movement. No one, not even the law could force or persuade her to live with Sridharan. She gets the satisfaction which she once longed for, out of her commitment to the cause of the nation. Savithri alias Uma Rani emerges as a strong woman challenging the patriarchal ideology by showing her readiness to pay alimony to her husband as she does not want to live with him. She has grown strong enough to argue in the court and 168 establish her stand in not yielding to the pressure of her husband, and the court. She elevates as a non-typological woman and poses a serious threat to the dominant ideology. Social and religious tradition and culture do not teach them the value of sacrifice essential to lead a happy married life. Ironically, the national movement for the country’s freedom make them realize the worth of a common cause. Moha Mul (Thorn of Lust) T. Janakiraman, also known as Thi. Janakiraman or “Thi Jaa”, was a renowned author from Tamil Nadu who is regarded, like Kalki, as one of the most significant Tamil writers of the 20 th century. His literary works have greatly helped in the development of Tamil fiction and the significant laying of the foundations for the empowerment of women. T. Janakiraman was born on 28 February 1921 in a Tamil Brahmin family, in the Madras Presidency. Janakiraman’s composition style was very basic and narrative. Some of his most popular Tamil novels include Amma Vandal, Sembaruthi and Moha Mul . All these novels written by T. Janakiraman have both feminine and feminist thoughts incorporated in the themes. The author provides a spontaneous and flawless narration and the plots are usually crafted around delicate human emotions and feelings. Some of the short stories written by T. Janakiraman in Tamil language like Langadevi and Mulmudi were also written in the same composition and narrative style. T. Janakiraman was honoured with the Sahitya Academy Award for Tamil for his short story collection Sakthi Vaidhiyam . The story starts with the introduction of Babu and his friend Rajam. The author introduces Yamuna, the heroine of this story. Babu falls in love with her 169 without her knowledge. But she ignores his love citing the age difference between them. Meanwhile Babu learns music from Ranganna. After the death of Yamuna's father, Babu's love for Yamuna grows further. He leaves for Chennai and gets acquainted with Ramu, a carnatic vocalist. At last Yamuna comes to Chennai in search of Babu to get his help. Finally, they unite in marriage and Babu leaves for Maharashtra to learn music. The highlight of the story is the younger man falling in love with a woman older by ten years. At that time, it was a novel occurrence not only due to age difference between man and woman but also as an inter caste marriage. The culture of Tanjore delta region during pre-independence period is fully exploited in this novel. English education saw its signs of growth during this period. Many orthodox Brahmin boys took up their higher education in the famous Govt. Arts College, Kumbakonam, otherwise called the Cambridge of Tamilnadu. Boys attended the class in their conventional dress, wearing dhoti with their mouths munching tobacco. Chewing betel nut with tobacco happened to be the popular culture of Tanjore delta region. Listening to Carnatic music was another important cultural practice of people. The protagonist of this novel Babu had a fine voice and his aspiration was to become a great exponent in vocal music. His father Vaithi too was well recognized for his musical talent. He happened to be a landlord with a small piece of land. He had a daughter who became a widow at an early age. She, out of this marriage had a daughter who too succumbed to death at the age of twelve. The double tragedy, loss of her husband and the loss of her daughter have brought grief into her life. Her husband is a forest officer who has left his property under the care of his sister’s husband, Dhandapani. He is a typical male character whose cunningness has grabbed the wealth of his sister’s husband. He does not care 170 for the world. He cares to grow rich by false and foul means. He is the Shylock of the village. Born in a cultured family, his taste for money has earned him a very bad name among his fellow men. He has nine children and all of them have a defect beyond redemption. He is not aware that his inhuman brutal behaviour is the root cause of his wards’ sufferings. Babu’s sister goes to court to get back her husband’s property but in vain. Dhandapani’s crookedness wins the case in his favour. The loss of material prosperity of Babu’s sister does not bring her any shadow of grief. But the loss of her husband and her daughter tell upon her mental equilibrium for some time. After a short time, she could bounce back to her normal condition and start moving cheerfully with all as if nothing has happened to her. Such a confident woman, who remains balanced after the loss of her family, really deserves a special mention but she confines herself into a mould of typology by remaining conservative in all spheres of her life. Parvathi, the mother of the protagonist, Yamuna, falls in love with Subramanian Ayyar and both of them get married. Yamuna is born through their marriage. But Parvathi is not aware of the fact that her husband is already a married man with a few children. That marriage is a grave departure from the social angle. The first wife, Balammal is a typical traditional Brahmin woman who dedicates her life for her husband’s happiness and welfare. She does not show even an iota of anger for her husband’s second marriage with a Marathi girl. She takes this matter in a very casual manner. In those days, the society would not question a man when he indulged in extramarital affair or bigamy. But if a woman indulged in bigamy or extramarital affair, it would be considered as a departure from the culture and the society would denounce her (Manjushree, 1997). 171 Balammal and Parvathi do not nurse any grudge towards each other. Subramanian finds the relationship between his wives very harmonious that does not disturb his personal peace. However, he receives objection from his own clan and they mainly cast aspersions at his wife, Parvathi. As a result, he shifts his second wife Parvathi’s family to Kumbakonam. Parvathi and her only daughter Yamuna lead a very happy life at Kumbakonam, thanks to Subramanian’s affectionate care and kind temperament. He pays his visit to them regularly. The family does not feel any pinch of his separation. Further, his legitimate wife Balammal and her sons also visit Parvathi’s house periodically. Bondage of love, care and attention between the families is well cemented due to Subramanian’s upright character. Of course, the divided attention and care to two families is never acceptable from the society’s view. Further, the society would not encourage bigamy. If anyone of the families gets caught up on the wrong track, then Subramanian and his other family will be thrown out of gear. His ability to maintain two families of diverse culture in the patriarchal society is phenomenal. This is possible because he is a typical member of the patriarchal society. Vaithy, Babu’s father is a typical middle class Brahmin. He performs pujas regularly at home. He is a loving father to his son and daughter. He shows love to his wife and does not treat her as a slave on all matters except during the hours of his pet pooja. He expects his family to show their obeisance when he shows camphor to gods. He wants them to kneel down as their sign of devotion to gods. His face would grow red if he saw any defect in churning sandal and keeping beetle nut. He wound reprimand his wife if she did these pooja duties in a careless manner “tell me if you don’t have any faith. Let me do these things on my own. Why do you do it in a 172 mechanical manner?” But his wife serves him with a smile. Worshipping in a proper manner is his top priority. It is only at that time, he believes all the individual prayers of his family member would be answered. This might appear to be unscientific. But this faith of Vaithi has the seeds of discipline, order and concentration. These three elements have shaped him lead a peaceful life. He is respected by others because he strictly follows in his life all these three elements. He has made his son Babu to follow these three principles in his life. Here, it needs to be recorded that Vaithi proves to be a typical follower of the man-centred ideology as he forces his wife and offspring to strictly adhere to religious activities as he does. He never asks them if they are willing to do it or not, but he expects them to do as he desires. Babu, from his younger days has a fascination for Yamuna. In fact, the novel bears the title ‘ Thorn of Lust ’ has its own ambiguity in the treatment of the character, Yamuna. A boon to Parvathi and Subramani Ayyar, she has the characteristics of both. Like her father, she is ever jovial and takes life easily and like her mother, she is ever dutiful. Like them, she has no deep interest in prayers, bajans and poojas or no special religious zeal. She is good at embroidery work and adorns her house with all queer artistic embellishments, all created, designed and modelled by her. Janakiraman depicts her as the replica of goddess Sakthi in human form. Babu in his early days visualises Yamuna as his pet goddess. Ironically, there appears another Sakthi who intervenes into Babu’s life of celibacy. Thangammal, a poor young girl has been sold to an aged head clerk in the name of marriage. The society exploits her parents’ beggarly status and forces her to marry an old man disregarding her wish. It is argued that if a man were in the same beggarly status, would he accept to marry a rich but old woman? A woman is denied her basic right to choose her 173 partner due to the poverty of her family. Of course, the story of the novel reflects the reality and characters like Thangammal still exist in the society. It is understood that this patriarchal society has been favouring man and operating against woman till now. As she is a woman with chiselled beauty, her husband locks her up in her room whenever he is away on official work. One day, she is bitten by a scorpion and since there is no one to help her, she requests Babu for help. Scorpion bite has turned sex bite. She could not control the demands of her flesh. Thangammal is not educated and becomes a victim to ruling passion. The affair with Babu for the first time and his rejection of her later turns her to commit suicide. Through this character of Thangammal, it is learnt how lack of education and lack of economic independence drive a woman like her to end her life pathetically as the only solace for her existence. Babu, thus expresses his view to his friend Rajan, naam sudhandiram ketkirathile arthamillai. nam sondha vazhkkaileye sudhandramna ennannu namakku theriyamal nam sudhandiram vanthu enna pannaporom? pommanattigal irainju pesina namakku pidikka maattengrathu. thaniya pona pidikkamattengirathu. namma sutri naalu pakkamum perisu perisa suvarai kattikkindu nam sundhandirathukku aasaipadarom. (Moha Mul 125-126) [English Translation: There is no point in asking for independence. We do not know what freedom means in our life. If that is the case, what is the use of getting freedom? We do not like women talking louder. We do not like them moving alone. We build four walls on all sides but desire for freedom.] 174 Alison Jaggar avers that Socialist feminists challenge the ideologies of capitalism and patriarchy. They believe that although women are divided by class, race, ethnicity, and religion, they all experience the same oppression simply for being a woman. Socialist feminist believe that the way to end this oppression is to put an end to class and gender. Both man and woman should be treated on equal footing to bring the class and gender oppression to an end (Jaggar, 1983). Due to the class oppression, Thangammal has been forcibly married to a rich old man. She is also subjected to gender oppression as she is locked up in the house by her old husband. Here, the old man’s act of locking up his wife in the house can be compared to Rochester’s act of locking up his wife, Bertha Mason (Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre ) in a separate room. These two men’s patriarchal authority on their women is a strong evidence to show the world that women have been experiencing suppression for ages together which is reflected in literature across the world. Babu’s rage is an eye opener towards the male text of this world: ivvalavu azhagai vaithukkondu oru kizhavanai kalyaanam seithukondu! Irummugirathai ketpathai thavira, enna sugam kaana mudiyumo theriyavillai! appavum ammavum parama ezhaihalam! ezhai ezhaiyenru sollikondu, inthak kizhavanukku kodukkirome enru azhuthukkondu veru koduthiruppargal! azhuvathai thavira veru ennathan seiya mudium inthak kabothigalukku? ival seidhathu unmaiyaga oru thiyagama? Intha thiyagathirkku ethavathu artham undaa? (127-128) [English rendering: Thangammal with her prime beauty got married to an old man. What conjugal happiness could she have got except 175 hearing his cough? Due to poverty, her parents got her married to this old man with a heavy heart. What benefits would they have got? Is there any meaning for this kind of sacrifice?] Such a pathetic character, Thangammal neatly cuts into a typological mould due to her inability to break the shackles of societal barriers and to break the marriage with a useless old man. She has no place to extinguish the flames of her passions but to drown herself in the Mahamaha pond. Though Thangammal is ready to elope with Babu, he does not want to commit the folly. The affair with Thangammal makes him realize that women too like men have their pent up passions that would get surfaced at the opportune moment. But this cannot be considered as a sensible reason for her to decide to end her life. She has acted emotionally and taken a hasty decision. She does not realize that there would be other social demands waiting after her conjugal pleasure with Babu. This is because of her lack of education, lack of parental care, lack of friendly association and lack of her aged husband’s care and love. However, this researcher argues that the society alone is held responsible for the pathetic life and unprecedented death of Thangammal. At the same time, she has the courage to violate the social norms when she is aware that this society has been unjust to her. As a result, she emerges as a non-typological woman since she challenges all social and marital limits by showing her readiness to elope with Babu. Babu is conscious of his social sin. From his view, he has turned unfaithful to Yamuna since he loves her. Thangammal aspires for freedom with Babu. But she fails to realize that in life, emotion alone could not bear fruits. Intelligence and waiting are other key factors to achieve the desired goal. On the contrary, Yamuna, Parvathy’s daughter has these two aspects in her right from the beginning. She has been waiting 176 for a husband. This waiting itself is a sacred waiting. In Vaithi too, (Babu’s father) this element of waiting plays its role. During the occasion of chanting mantra, Vaithi too appears to remain in a dazed state as if he is ready to be taken at that contemplative moment by divine grace. Even Babu’s Carnatic Guru Ranganna appears to remain in trance whenever he is alone hoping to transact with the divine factor with his music. All these three persons appear to derive some ecstasy out of their state of nothing. They know the value of solitude. They know how they feel elated in such a sequestered state. They find peace as their thoughts get sublimated with the Divine. Yamuna is known for her deviation from the conventionalities. She does not wish to get married soon as she is not satisfied with any bridegroom and rejects all the proposals of men. Her rejection of marriage proposals of men can be equated to Jane Eyre’s rejection of Rochester after knowing his marital status and St. John’s wish to transform her into his missionary wife. Here, these women assert their individualities and seek their identities resisting the societal pressure. Further, she knows that Babu has a liking for her but she does not take it seriously on the pretext of age difference. Babu knows well that his love could not materialize on two levels. Yamuna is senior to him by age. She belongs to a diverse cultural community. His marriage with Yamuna could not materialize for age, culture and his individual status stand in the way. Still, he has a fascination for her. He shares his feelings of love for Yamuna with his best friend Rajan. But Rajan has no interest in love or sex. He considers these aspects as a biological urge that a man has to overcome to achieve his best in life. He has other goals to achieve and for him such matter of love or sex is to be discarded. Hence, Rajan can be considered to be a non-typological man due to his career ambition and his strong will power not to fall prey to the age related romantic feelings. 177 Yamuna never allows any external storms to toss her life out of gear. She is not shaken by the death of her father and the consequences. She finds in Babu all merits of a truly devoted man in a family as he stands by her like a pillar of strength at all adverse circumstances. To her, he alone has been the sole redeemer, rescuer, and liberator. He cares for Yamuna’s welfare. He moves to Chennai in pursuit of employment in one of the insurance companies as an assistant. As Yamuna has developed friction with her mother, she also moves to Chennai with a hope to see Babu and get his help to find an employment as an aayah (babysitter) in an orphanage. Born in an aristocratic family, Yamuna is reduced to a level of a servant. It is because of her lack of education. If she had some minimum educational qualification, she definitely would have a better position. All these help rendered by Babu brings her close to Babu and she freely expresses her readiness to marry him. Her dependency on Babu might make her develop a feeling for him, avers this researcher. It is to be recorded that as long as a woman is self-dependent, she can take individual decision and lead her life at her own liberty. But when she becomes dependent on a man in the name of marriage or any other relationship, her individuality will perish. Babu again displays his typical male sentiments: keli than. muppathettu varudam manithan naadaatha, naada mudiyatha pirathesathil valarnthu ninra chedikku artham enna? latchiam enna? kadaisivarail yarum nadamal iruppathuthan. yar kannilum padamal iruppathuthan. athu than vetri. ongi nirpathu than vetri. ippothu yen valainthu koduthai nee ennaip parthu ippadi sirikkava? sirippin oliyil puruiyatha onrai enakku kattava? (752) 178 English translation: [Funny.... What is the meaning of a plant grown at a uninhabited region for thirty eight years? What is its aim? .... Neither can one reach it and nor see it. That is the victory, victory of remaining tall. Why do you now become flexible? Is it just to laugh at me...? or is it just to show me something out of the light of that smile?....] From this contemplative mood of Babu, Yamuna’s typical character gets surfaced. Yamuna’s solitary plant like existence in a rocky area of her innermost mind responds to the gentle breeze of Babu’s benevolent grace and shakes her thorny growth leaving a safe place for Babu to touch her tender heart, delicate disposition, feminine charm, astute mind and independent charm of growth. Babu shows only love and sacrifice. In that attempt, he does not get exhausted. But Yamuna has remained a strong woman till she accepts Babu after recognizing his true love. In this context, both care for each other’s happiness. Both sacrifice for each other’s welfare. They aspire for peace and become one in their aim, business and desire aspiring to lead a life of togetherness. That is why, Yamuna allows him to enlarge his horizon of Carnatic music out of his departure to Maharashtra where he has a Guru ready to shape, carve and mould his voice into perfection. Their affair is made known to Babu’s father, Vaithi by Yamuna. He is a man with worldly wisdom. Hence, he could value the essence of marriage and not the social norms. He does not mind an elder girl Yamuna getting married to his son. He cares for the union of mind rather than physical union. He hopes that they will make an ideal couple since they can become one with their identical mind and thought. It is affirmed that he evolves into a non-typological man as he never objects to the cross cultural marriage of his son with Yamuna. 179 Thus, Yamuna and Babu, out of their fascination for each other get united out of their proper mental makeup and in that life there would be no scope for a thorn to cause disruption and destruction. Age difference is not a proper criterion for a marriage. Proper identical mental makeup alone would bring harmony between the couples. Babu’s love for an elder woman and Yamuna’s response to her younger lover appears to be unconventional from the social slant. Considering marriage a factor to be experimented and experienced by the two genders - male - female, there is no harm in violating this Indian social attitude of elder girls not to be wedded to younger boys which has to be thrown overboard. Marriage should bring harmony between couples. If that is achieved, then the social rule that elder girls not to be wedded to younger boys would become meaningless. This novel has brought out this theme perfectly well. In this novel, both Yamuna and Thangammal are typological characters who shift to the non-typological mould breaking the patriarchal norms of the society. Yamuna does not want to surrender to any man in the name of marriage, rather she prefers to be independent. In the case of Thangammal, she is a typological girl while accepting to marry an old man due to her poverty. But later, she has accidentally transgressed the cultural boundary and got into the arms of Babu, her neighbour. Thangammal’s transgression of marital norms by engaging in a sexual encounter with Babu is similar to the flirtatious nature of Bertha Mason (Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre ). These women brave the biased ideologies of society and emerge as non-typological women characters. The author brings to light the social issues across culture, caste and religion. Even in those days, inter-caste marriage was in practice. The patriarchal ideology 180 dominates the society and decides the fate of women’s lives. Hence, this researcher’s argument is that the dominant ideology perpetuates the typologies of women and at the same time, the same ideology is being broken into pieces by a few women characters that sustain and stand the pressures of the male - hegemony and emerge as non-typological characters. Conclusion Though feminist movements have done their spade work in the empowerment of women in the distant past till the late 20 th century, and this millennium has moved into a post feminist age, women all over the world are not truly emancipated and the male ideologies have continued to suppress and subjugate women under the banner of a strict and imposing religion, an unrelenting patriarchal tradition and a canonical culture. Tradition and religion continue to be hurdles to women in a world of male constructs. This research bases its hypothesis on the fact that typologies of woman do continue to exist and thereby the patriarchal ideology continues to be invigorated. Especially in the Indian context Feminism has been a movement for discussion and seldom construction and empowerment. Saying so, one should not forget that women’s organization in India have done a great deal to bring about greater and more radical changes for the better in the lives of women who are voiceless out of fear or because of religious and traditional instructions. It has already been found that in order to destabilize and overthrow the well grounded male-centric ideology, a woman has to empower herself with education and become economically independent. Her awareness about her oppression and economic independence alone will liberate her from the grid of gender bias rooted from patriarchal ideology and the ability to stand on her own feet will empower and actualize her identity in the male world. This research strives to examine the types of characters and their progressive deviants in selected literary texts (both occidental British canonical and oriental Indian) with the view to identifying patriarchal stereotypes of women and their subservience to society and those who through their experience and learning from the male order of life shift 182 to the liberated or nearly liberated non typological ones. It also examines the relevant male and female characters to study the cause effect relationship of dominance and exploitation in society. Women have been marginalized and suppressed for centuries by humanly indelible patriarchal ideologies. It has been identified that women’s plight in a male dominated world is mostly due to lack of education which brings in awareness of self and surrounding. In most societies, women have been denied education due to which they have been economically dependent on men till now. By forcing women to follow the patriarchal norms, the subservient status of women gets perpetuated. The advent of feminist movements and voices across the world raised went unheard at the beginning because of their different approaches in fighting the socio-politically strongly rooted patriarchal ideologies. But their mission has been unanimous. But now their voices have started drawing attention to their plight and seek redressal and remediation. For centuries, women across the world have silently followed the patriarchal norms and maintained the stability of the society’s cultural institutions and the consistencies of its ethos sacrificing their inner happiness of an existential life. In this context, women have been seen only as the custodians of societal norms and their roles in the society have been stereotyped. They have been living their lives as obedient daughters, duty bound wives and loving and caring mothers. They have never been allowed to break these man- made roles. However, in many cultures women themselves have accepted their roles and glorified them. According to them, these roles have to be played by them to claim social respect and identity even though these roles are great barriers towards self-actualization. They believe that they have 183 been fated to play these roles. “The angel of the house” is expected and known to sacrifice anything, including her personal aspirations, for the well being of her family, especially her husband and children. Though we see a few women in managerial positions and in political power in India, one woman president, the lower strata of Indian society has not seen the light of day in female emancipation. The numerous incidents of violence against women in busses, trains, in isolated parts of the country and the delay in justice or on the other hand the negation of justice is an indication of the current status of women in an apparently empowered world. The Tamil media has projected its social consciousness through highlighting oppression of women in movies. Female foeticide is not uncommon. This kind of female infanticide has been effectively presented in the Tamil movie, Karuthamma . This film was directed by Bharathiraja who also shot another film Kizhakku Seemaile in which a woman is being used as a trump card by her husband to take revenge on his brother-in-law. She is subjected to harassment by her husband to recover the lands of his brother-in-law threatening him that his sister will be sent back to his home. In another Tamil movie, Penmani Aval Kanmani , directed by Visu, the heroine is subjected to dowry harassment by her mother-in-law. Here, it is to be recorded that the woman (especially of the older generation) also contributes to perpetuate the patriarchal ideology by subjecting other woman to harassment and subordination. This is because many generations of women have been indoctrinated with the male ideology. Since cinema is an important reflecting medium of the society, these movies are taken by the researcher to strengthen his views on the impact of the dominant ideology on women. 184 Thanks to TV channels which have now valiantly influenced women to come out with their domestic and social problems through Talk Shows and Panel Discussions, women’s sufferings have found an outlet and legal remediation. For example “Solvathellam Unmai”, a TV show specifically telecast by Zee TV for revealing to the world various harassments faced by women, and Vijay TV’s “Neeya Naana?” have been a great leap for social justice for both men and women. The media, like literary fictions, has now become a popular platform for spreading social awareness. Literature and media reflect society. This research is based on two British novels and four Tamil novels to establish how certain female characters are non-typological and very few characters are typological. At the same time it is examined how they shift from the typological mould into non-typological mould and vice versa due to the domestic and socio-political circumstances. In the second chapter, the characters of Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre have been analysed with a view to discovering the moulds into which they are cast. Catherine senior in Wuthering Heights is a complex character shifting from the typological mould to non-typological mould. The shift of her roles is determined by her association and interaction with the other characters, especially with Heathcliff, Edgar Linton and Nelly Dean. Her dubious stand in her marital life exposes her immoral behaviour and rebel attitude against the well-grounded norms of the Victorian society. Clearly speaking, though she has become Catherine Linton, she fancies a chance of being Catherine Heathcliff. In another perspective she, like most Victorian women, is particular about enhancing her social and economic status and she believes that she can achieve this by marrying Edgar Linton though she loves Heathcliff. Ironically, materialist feminists vehemently oppose this materialistic 185 consciousness of people as it attributes mainly to the oppression of women. Throughout the novel, Catherine's rebelliousness and passion make her typically non-typical for which she is not groomed on the social, cultural and religious anvil. She cannot be cast here into any mould or type of woman like humble, obedient and loyal being. Isabella, being a typical Victorian girl falling in love with the vengeful Heathcliff resents her grave mistake later. She evolves into a non-typological woman by breaking the marital tie with Heathcliff and leaves his house with her child. This shift of type into non type is caused by her rebellious outburst against the patriarchal society. At the same time, though she has a grudge on her husband over his ill treatment and harassment, her refusal to aid Hindley’s plan to kill her husband exposes her religious bent of mind and her typological feature. In Bronte’s Wuthering Heights , the stereotyping of women takes a different dimension bordering on love- hate relationship. Catherine junior acts as a foil to her mother only masked in the suave sophistication of the “cultured man”. The rest of the family members are products of culture and not products of reason oriented education. Their exposure to religion is only skin deep. Society and culture here seem responsible in moulding people into types and non types. Nelly Dean, a servant maid, is a typical Victorian woman who evolves into the pattern of non type by being interested in the welfare of the Earnshaw’s family. She enjoys the respect and regards of the members of the Earnshaw family and they confide in her and seek her advice for their woes. This would be mostly unheard of in the Victorian society. Nelly, like every Victorian woman indulges in gossiping. She narrates all the events which happened in both houses to Mr. Lockwood, a stranger who is on the lookout for a house for rent. Here, she reverts to typological mould as she exhibits the typical nature of the Victorian woman, which is gossiping. 186 The researcher is of the view that male typologies too exist in societies which is reflected in literature. Patriarchal ideology has kept the typologies of men unexposed. Hence, this researcher has made an attempt to bring a few male characters from Bronte’s Wuthering Heights to light and analyze how they fit into certain typological moulds. Mr. Lockwood is the primary narrator. But, on close examination, he is discovered to be a gossip monger. His absurd presumptions about romantic possibilities with Cathy and his inquisitiveness to gather information about other families reveal common male typological features. Nelly narrates the story of the two homes, Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange, only to one person, Lockwood. But he “publicizes” this story to the whole world. Thus, he reveals himself to be a man interested in the so far female assumptive world of gossip mongering. Mr. Earnshaw demonstrates that he is an autocratic patriarchal head of Wuthering Heights. He even goes to the extent of pampering Heathcliff over his children which sows the seed of hatred in the Wuthering Heights. Thus, Mr. Earnshaw, as a typical patriarchal head of a family, imposes a sense of dominance and partiality into the family which becomes the root-cause of all the miseries of the family for two generations. His son Hindley Earnshaw cannot tolerate Heathcliff being pampered by his father Earnshaw. Here, Hindley, like every man loving his wife, becomes dejected and a human waste by overindulging in drinking and gambling after his wife’s death, Frances. Thus, Hindley comes into the mould of a type of man and becomes a human waste. In contrast, Catherine junior who has been victimized by a forced marriage with the sickly Linton Heathcliff, becomes a widow at a very young age but not a human waste like Hindley. Hindley is the negative side of a family tragedy while Catherine junior is a life affirming positive side of a much worse family tragedy. 187 Heathcliff nurses a grudge towards Hindley and Edgar Linton for treating him like an animal. He achieves it by taking advantage of the sorry state of Hindley. He deprives Hindley of all his wealth through gambling and makes him bankrupt. By trapping Edgar’s sister Isabella by his deceptive romantic advances, he marries her and thereby, he separates her from her brother Edgar. This researcher is of the view that it is man’s typical nature to take revenge on those who had harassed him earlier. So, Heathcliff becomes the major typological mould of a “man spurned” while on the other hand, there is a deeper bond of selfless love for Catherine. Right through the novel, he never transgresses the typological boundary of man. He is weakened by his love for Cahterine as he yearns to be haunted by the illusions of her ghost. Edgar Linton is the henpecked husband who loves his wife Catherine to a great extent. He worships her beauty and surrenders himself at her feet. On account of his henpecked nature, he tolerates the presence of the despicable Heathcliff in front of Catherine. He cannot instruct his wife Catherine to not entertain Heathcliff. This henpecked nature is also one of the typological features of man which is very well exposed in the novel. Edgar disowns his sister Isabella soon after he hears of her elopement with Heathcliff. By this act, Edgar displays his patriarchal temperament and remains a typological character. It is learnt that in the Victorian society also, the eldest male member of the family would hold the property right and the immediate heir to the property would be only a male member of the family. It is evident as Edgar disowns Isabella and denies her share of property. Linton Heathcliff inherits the vengeful and diabolical nature of his father Heathcliff. When Catherine junior is house arrested and tortured by Heathcliff, he does not show any displeasure rather he enjoys it. Linton Heathcliff, like his father, 188 cuts neatly into the vicarious male typological mould. Only Hareton shows some signs of evolution from a human waste to a better human being. Because of his refinement, he finally wins the heart of Catherine junior and delves into a mould of type. Patriarchal society dictates the norms and behaviour of women, any deviation from the adherence to this dominant ideology will land women in trouble. But the same Victorian society prescribed certain norms for men also. According to the Victorian norms, men should have certain characteristics like loyalty, honesty, prudence, and morality. Only men possessing these traits would be chosen by women for a secured marriage life. The same ideology was reflected in fictions also. On the contrary, the male characters in Charlotte Bronte’s works do not conform to these expectations of the societies. Charlotte Bronte was a rebellious by nature and her rebellious nature was reflected through her portrayal of male characters. She created male characters that seemingly had these characteristics but they would fail to meet the high standards. It is a known fact that Charlotte was against woman suppression and gender inequality. Hence, it is believed that she registered her protest against the women’s suppression by creating male characters wanting in moral values and turning diabolic, anti cultural and anti social. By this way, women characters could emerge and supplant the male characters. From Master John, Brocklehurst, Rochester and St. John in Jane Eyre to Dr. John Graham and Paul Emmanuel in Villette , we have male characters that are either greedy, prone to jealousy, dishonest, hypocritical, or some horrible combination of the above. These characteristics not only expose their typologies but also break with the Victorian ideal and give us more realistic heroes. This is how Charlotte Bronte tried to expose the cruel patriarchal ideology and destabilize it through her literature. 189 Jane Eyre oscillates from typological mould to non-typological mould and vice versa. During her childhood, she retaliates to those who physically and mentally humiliate her. She boldly demands her rights and raises questions in her aunt Ms. Reed’s house. She grows strong in her beliefs and becomes morally spirited. This is where she begins as a non-typological character not worrying about her uncertain future. She is never ready to compromise on her independence so that she rejects the offer of marriage from both Mr. Rochester and St. John. She gains this confidence through education. Her non-typological features land her in a much esteemed position later. Even Rochester, a great landlord surrenders before her grace and dignified character. On the contrary, Helen Burns is submissive by nature and she readily gives in to others. She, like any Victorian woman, is traditional and culture bound and submits herself to the cause of religion. She never questions nor objects the slavish treatment meted out to her by her superiors. In this way, she falls into the mould of the woman groomed under the male typology. However, Bertha Mason, being the worst victim of the patriarchal ideology, proves to be a great threat to the undemocratic patriarchs like Rochester. Her infidelity (in a patriarchal sense) poses a challenge to male ideology. But Jane Eyre, as she grows to be a matured woman slowly enters into a typological mould and lives as per the norms of the Victorian society. She becomes aware that she has to cope with her society to survive; as a result, she falls into the mould of a typological girl. When Bertha is punished for her non-compliance to the social norms, Jane is portrayed as protected by the society for her conformity to the norms of the Victorian society. Bertha Mason is totally a non-typological woman with all her individualized and womanly assertive characteristics that have unfortunately earned her the name of 190 a ‘mad woman’ while Jane shifts from type to non type and vice versa as per the requirement of the situations. Mr. Rochester is a typical member of the patriarchal society. When he discovers his wife Bertha Mason’s overindulgent behaviour with men, he does not take any corrective measures, rather he imprisons her. The patriarchal society permits him to humiliate and punish her for her lapses. At the same time, he takes the advantage of the male- centred Victorian society to propose to marry Jane Eyre when Bertha is alive. He neatly cuts into the typological mould as he exhibits his hegemony over the two women, Jane Eyre and Bertha Mason. Jane Austen tried to portray through her novels that women are accountable for their status of striking a moral equality with man. In this sense, both men and women are on equal footing in all aspects. Austen seems to view that a woman’s superiority would be only because of her material prosperity. In addition to taking care of the household and getting material gain, which she shares with her husband’s material prosperity, she should remain in her love forte and share it with other members of the family. That is why her feminism borders on sense and sensibility in achieving the balance between matter and spirit. Jane Austen in Sense and Sensibility creates the inner world for the reader which is different from the patriarchal world. In this novel, women characters occupy and hold their spaces and socialize with other women to expand their network of relationship. Having a wide social network, women can move along without trepidation in a male dominated society and break man-made stereotypes. Further, their economic independence plays a significant role in achieving a permanent and equal space with men. This idea is strongly supported by the fact that in the Victorian society, women’s social status would be determined by their financial position. 191 In the novel , Sense and Sensibility , Austen achieves this balance through the portrayal of two different kinds of female characters having two different temperaments. Elinor Dashwood possesses a great control over her emotions and she has the ability to judge people and solve the complex situations. Her sensibility alone makes her a successful woman. This is what Austen tries to project in her novel. She believes that women need to be sensible in every moment of life to avoid subjugation. Hence, Elinor imbibes the norms of the Victorian society and lives by it. Her likely love failure with Mr. Edward does not affect her. Her awareness about market consciousness of people helps her take such a loss easily. She could read and analyze the society with her composed state of mind. Jane Austen avers that women should have awareness about the society and the ability to control their emotions to avoid male oppression. She directs them to be sensible to live a comfortable and happy life. Elinor emerges as a non-typological woman who does not bother about her desertion by her lover and goes ahead along with the passage of time to seek her own life. Marianne Dashwood has no control over her feelings. She lacks both in self-confidence and self-restraint. She does not know how to keep her emotions under control. She is portrayed as a typical Victorian woman who is sensitive rather than sensible to issues and thus faces the consequences. At this point, Marianne cuts neatly into typological mould since she is emotion bound and not competent enough to face her troubling situations. Jane Austen In her novel Pride and Prejudice , clearly depicts that the mothers aspire to get their daughters married to financially prosperous men. The Victorian women are conscious about material prosperity. This is well reflected in the novel when Mrs. Bennet tries to fix Mr. Bingley to her daughter, Elizabeth owing to his rich 192 economical status. This material consciousness of Mrs. Bennet puts her into a typological mould. Darcy, the other male character at first is a man of loose morals and his being responsible for the separation of her sister Jane from Mr. Bingley. Later, when he criticizes her for being an unassuming character, her prejudice against him doubles. On top of it, his attempted elopement with her sister Lydia also earns him a very low esteem from Elizabeth. He is a typical male character of authority and ruggedness which puts him on the mould of extreme male typology. Emma, being a motherless girl, is non-typological in her transactions with all the other characters. All her match making attempts between men and women get aborted, including the love affair between Mr. Elton and Harriet. Mr. Knightly gives her enough opportunities for improving herself from her lapses and to correct herself due to his love for Emma. Finally, he proves to be a sensible husband with his non-typological temperament of allowing his wife to see what is good for her as a woman. On the contrary, Rochester in Jane Eyre , fails to understand the needs of his wife, Bertha Mason, thus proving to be a typical patriarchal head. Austen’s concern is to present woman of the eighteenth century with their identities mainly to find fulfilment as wives and mothers. In such a presentation, she does not stereotype women characters. But she presents as models of women’s identity of her period. Her job is to present women characters of her period and makes them act on their gender roles in which they become perfect models. It is not her concern to create them as women challenging the gender roles and find solutions for their own self-development. In the portrayal of marriage as a social commitment, Charlotte Bronte elevated it to a mystical level. That change should come from the individual for the betterment of society wherever the social norms and legal rights are against women appears to be the key note of both the Victorian novelists chosen for study. 193 Likewise, in one of his interviews, Jayakanthan comments “I am a part of society and through my writings and works, I attempt to refine myself first and then the society” (Jayakanthan 2006: 14); this is taken as the key note of this research topic and forms the foundation for analyzing the shifts in character attitudes that go to form canonical and liberal human types. For, unless change for the better comes from within an individual person no progressive change can be expected in society at large. Ganga, though condemned by her family and the society, remains stuck to her education and career which is a positive retaliation to her abusers. She almost becomes an outcast and the male world does not allow her to lead a normal life. She is forced to safeguard herself from men such as her uncle Venku Ayyar. He is a man with typological features of a man’s attitude to exploit a woman’s vulnerable position. But overcoming all these filial and social pressures, Ganga, like the sacred and perennial spiritual river after which she is named, emerges a powerful individual woman only through her determination to educate and employ herself with self-confidence and self actualization. Here, Ganga moves from the typological to the non-typological mould of woman. On the contrary, the same society does not punish or abuse her molester, Prabhu. He is blessed with a happy family. Prabhu firmly endorses himself into the average male stereotype. But, Ganga wants to have a long lasting relationship with him only because she finds Prabhu to be authentic and a good human in a society of hypocrites. She has been taught to believe that it will be impossible for a woman to lead a safe and solitary life in the society. She is evidently seeking a safe shelter under Prabhu. First, she can be put into a typological mould since she is in the pursuit of male support for her safety. Independence of women through education is possible for her to lead a financially 194 free existence. In other social factors, she needs the support of man. In this sense, Ganga behaves like a typological woman ready to surrender before her molester Prabhu. At the same time, she behaves like a woman demeaning her status to the level of a concubine. Here, she evolves from typological character to negative non- typological character. Women who have imbibed the patriarchal norms press their children also to follow the same. As a result, women too contribute to perpetuating the dominant ideology. If Kanagam did not publicize the ill-fated incident that occurred to her daughter Ganga, she would be happily married with dignity in society but it is doubtful if she could lead a dignified life and keep up her individuality after marriage in this male-centred society. What Jayakanthan the author, with a social gender concern, could not solve directly in giving Ganga her individualized space as a Tamil woman, he indirectly advocates as a creative writer through the story within the story technique in Agni Pravesam (Leap into Fire). Kalyani shows love and concern to those associated with her without expecting anything in return. This is her true positive typology that elevates her stature above all the other characters in this novel. Though she, as an artist, interprets roles of all types of characters, she is made to look at others off the stage and appreciate them for their perfection and imperfection. This is where Kalyani stands as a different woman who evolves into a non-typological character. She breaks the barriers of patriarchal ideology by not agreeing to quit her profession to settle with him as a home maker; to be imprisoned into the Zanana Factor. She makes her stand very clear to him that she gives her heart and soul to him but she cannot abandon her ‘self’. Her ‘self-hood’ is as important to her as her love for him, ’the other’. All 195 people are created equal by God and deserve equal rights. Both man and woman ought to be considered equal in all spheres. Since woman is not considered as equal to man, gender bias arises against woman. The society gets imbalanced. To avert this, both man and woman have to be given equal opportunities in all the fields. Ranga is a typical member of the patriarchal society. He expects Kalyani to be like an ideal wife showing her passionate love on him all time. Though she knows how to interpret the passionate love on stage as an actress, she does not want to act in real life. She does not show any extra sign or movement of love bordering on romanticism. But Ranga cannot tolerate her being composed and refraining from the togetherness with him. Here, Ranga evolves as a typological man but Kalyani proves to be a different woman. So, she always emerges as a non-typological woman posing a great challenge to the patriarchal ideology. Though she is not educated as Ranga is, she is clearer and firmer in her principles. Her real success is due to her uncompromising principles in life. Ranga may be a successful journalist as a professional, but when it comes to his real life with Kalyani, he is less matured than her. Thus, Ranga’s adamant nature and patriarchal pride are broken into pieces by Kalyani’s tenacity of steadfastness never showing her emotions in real life. Freedom of Ganga, Kalyani, Emma and Jane Eyre means to be their liberation from the social oppressions. In the case of Savithri, it is for the country. If everybody gets liberated, she too will be liberated. Savithri from Thiyaga Boomi hails from a cultured Brahmin family but receives no education since her father thinks that education is not essential for her to survive in her husband’s house. This causes Savithri to suffer miseries at the hands of her well educated but uncaring modern husband, Sridharan. Pregnant and sent away 196 from home she is resolved not to go back to her husband but overcome her hurdles and live for her child. Here, Savithri elevates to the level of a revolutionary girl challenging the patriarchal hegemony of her husband. Her determination to survive the challenges ahead reveals a non-typological woman within her. She has grown strong enough to argue in the court and establish her stand in not yielding to the pressure of her husband, and the court. She elevates into the “new woman” that Subramanya Bharathi dreamed of and into as a non-typological woman who is deliberately created to combat and destabilize the dominant ideology. In the same patriarchal society, women like Thangammal contribute to strengthen the patriarchal ideology by making other women victims of the patriarchal norms. Thangammal being avaricious for money forces her son Sridharan to marry Savithri with a hope to extract all the properties from Sambu Sastrigal in the name of dowry. Men have conceived the system of dowry for their welfare and it has been vigorously practiced by women. This researcher is of the view that women also to a certain extent, out of ignorance, have kept the patriarchal ideology strongly rooted in the society. Mangalam, Sambu Sastrigal’s second wife is fed up with her marital life with her husband. He does not spare time for his wife. In this context, he fails in his duty as a husband. This negligence of Sambu Sastrigal in not providing happiness to his wife out of marriage shows him as a symbol of male authority expecting his wife to serve him as servant. But he never realizes that she too has expectations of love and care from her husband. Yamuna, in Janakiraman’s Moha Mul, is the product of wit and wisdom. She stings her gentleman callers for their humbug, unnatural and artificial traits shown in the boy meeting girl ceremony. She is a thorn to meaningless and corrupt customs. 197 She loves those who love and respect her and is bitter to those who bring bitterness. Pain for pain, happiness for happiness is her nature. All these traits are hardly seen in typological women. In this perspective, she breaks away from the typologies imposed and becomes a new type of woman who transcends male typologies. On the contrary, Thangammal, due to her poverty condition, yields to her parental pressure to marry an aged man compromising her worldly and carnal pleasures. The society allows the mismatched marriage for the comfort of a man. She loses her identity which Yamuna keeps intact till the end. But, at the same time, Yamuna disapproves of the marriage proposal with Babu who happens to be ten years younger to her. Here, she goes by the patriarchal norms that woman should be younger than man if they propose to marry. In this aspect, she cuts into the typological mould. But later, she becomes conscious of the unreasonable restrictions of the society on women and strengthens her intimacy with Babu. So, the societal norms become secondary to her. Here, she re-emerges as a non-typological character challenging the social norms. Hence, it is understood that she is a non-typological woman without any signs of feminine timidity and fear. Similarly, Thangammal also shifts from type to non type by having carnal pleasure with Babu and wishing to elope with him though she is already married. Though bigamy is not allowed socially and legally for a Hindu, Subramanya Ayyar commits this deed boldly due to the moral and friendly support extended by his family especially by his first wife. Thus, the typological character of Subramanya Ayyar selecting a second wife as his necessary patriarchal right and the typological character of his first wife in allowing him are case in points of the hoary traditional values of man as born to exercise his authority and woman as born to remain humble before his authority. The legendary mythical Savithri carried her husband on her head 198 to the house of his pet whore; Damayanti went along with Nala to forest and shared untold miseries of her husband; Sita left for the forest with Rama to face all challenges without any qualms; Draupadi went to the forest with her “husbands” to take part and share in their common plight of grief. Similarly, Subramanya Ayyar’s wife too bears all personal pains silently for it is the traditional and religious woman’s role to keep her husband happy at all cost. Realizing her predicament, she swallows all bitterness with a sense of remorse and only shows external signs of happiness. She goes even one step further to be prepared to part with her wealth and property for maintaining her relationship with her husband. She is ready to stoop in order to maintain her status as Subramanya Ayyar’s wife and thereby, she protects her family and its honour. This patriarchal society dictates terms on women to live to fulfil the desires and aspirations of their husbands and this is what is reflected in this novel. Women have suffered subjugation and other related issues, as discussed in the thesis, owing to lack of education, lack of awareness and the male text indoctrination mooted by tradition and a patriarchal religion. The researcher is of the view that these typologies are by-products of the patriarchal ideology. Of course, there have been a lot of changes and female typologies have been destabilized to a great extent due to educational awareness and employment opportunities for women. Shashi Deshpande in her critical essay “Writing from the Margins” expresses what she terms “The Zanana Factor”. Drawn from the Mogul era of regal harems, it restricts while giving the observer a private peep into the outside world however limited. It is ironic to note that this became true to Sha Jahan when imprisoned by his son Aurengazeb and permitted to see his wife’s symbolic monument of love, the 199 Taj Mahal from a distance. This “small world” is ascribed to women by men mostly; but men too sometimes become victims of oppression, though rare (Deshpande, 2003). When fictional characters are cast into types and non-types, there are certain other characters entering into the third type which reflect the humane values. Among the fictional characters, a few resist opposition, or neither get into the mould of type nor go out of the mould but remain neutral. These characters do not possess non- typological traits and act as carriers of human values like being compassionate, and considerate to fellow women. Surprisingly, these characters do not come to light in the realm of critical study. Catherine junior in Wuthering Heights has neither the complexities of her mother (Catherine senior) nor the innocent and cowardice nature of her father (Edgar Linton). She exhibits her balanced mind and adopts sensible approach in all her deeds. Her sympathy for Linton Heathcliff and great care shown to Hareton are good examples of her human heart. Even though she suffers a forced marriage with Linton Heathcliff, she does not lose hope in life. The young Catherine takes the credit of redeeming the families of both Thrushcross Grange and Wuthering Heights with a second marriage with Hareton. Ms. Temple in Jane Eyre , maintains her calm state of mind and shows genuine care and affection to the deprived Jane and Helen. Though her husband, Mr. Brocklehurst is avaricious for money and unkind to the students, she proves to be a sensible, affectionate and responsible caretaker of these children. Prabhu, the chief male character in Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal , remaining the patriarchal head, finally evolves into a good human being showing a great concern to the safe and meaningful life of Ganga, who was once the victim of 200 his lust. Apart from this, he mends his ways and becomes a refined man after he establishes a healthy relationship with Ganga. Ranga from Oru Nadigai Naadagam Paarkkiral another patriarchal head, finally transforms into a kind and non-egoist man and accepts his wife, Kalyani after she has become paralysed. Though he has been a man of type representing the patriarchal society, his wife’s paralysis condition evokes sympathy in him and makes him a man of human values. Sambu Sastrigal in Thiyaga Boomi also remains out of the mould or type and lives with all the human qualities surpassing all the hurdles in life. Though he is chided and isolated by his own clan for his human gesture shown to the slummy and deprived people, he never reacts to his critics, instead, he forgives and forgets them. Babu in Moha Mul is also out of the typological mould. Though he loves Yamuna, he cherishes it within him while concentrating on his career. He helps her in all aspects and gets her a job in Madras. After realizing his good heart, she agrees to marry him. Until then, he has been waiting to get her reciprocation. Thus, this researcher is of the view that these characters, as they appear in fictions, help discover the non-typological and typological traits of all the other characters. Typologies of both genders are found to be exposed in the literary texts which are taken by this researcher for analysis. The women writers, Emily Bronte, Charlotte Bronte and Jane Austen from British literature and Jayakanthan, Kalki and T. Janakiraman from Tamil literature purposefully created certain women characters that do not fit into the mould of typologies created by the undemocratic patriarchal heads. For example, the characters like Catherine in Wuthering Height , Jane Eyre and Bertha 201 Mason in Jane Eyre , Ganga in Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal , Savithri in Thiyaga Boomi and Yamuna and Thangammal in Moha Mul evolve as revolutionary and progressive in their approaches against the male dominance and take control of their positions in their transactions of life. The researcher is of the view that these women characters were created as non-typological in order to expose the male typologies through their novels. It can very well be agreed upon that the typical attitude of man to keep woman oppressed is reflected in almost all the novels of these writers. In an attempt to problematize the notion of typologies, the writers chose to create certain male characters with their typical qualities and the typological features of these male characters come to light only when certain female characters emerge out of their typological mould and evolve as non-typological characters. Education is an instrument to bring out changes in the society. Every woman has to seek education and achieve economic independence to realize the deconstruction of the typology into which they are sought to be fixed by the dominant ideology. The analysis presented in this thesis show how the writers help their women characters evolve as non-typological in their roles in life. That is, the ‘artistic intent’ of these fictional works is destabilizing and deconstructing of typologies of women as dictated by the dominant ideology. This researcher avers that language has to be reconstructed after deconstructing it. So, the present typologies can be destabilized and consequently women will enjoy equal status along with men in all spheres. In this ideological struggle, both men and women have to work in unison to eliminate typologies, thereby putting an end to gender bias and inequality. Works Cited Althusser, Louis, Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses, in Literary Theory: An Anthology Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1998. Print. Beauvoir, Simone de. The Second Sex . Trans & Ed., H. M Parshley, New York: Penguin, 1972. Print. Bernard, Jessie. The Future of Marriage . New York: Bantam Books, 1972. Print. Cecil, David. A Portrait of Jane Austen . New York: Hill, 1978. Print. Chakravarthy, Uma and Kumkum Roy. “In Search of Our Past,” Economic and Political Weekly , Vol.23, No 10, April 30, 1998. Chandra, Subhash, “The New Woman in Namita Gokhale’s Gods, Graves and Grandmothers’ . Indian Women Novelists. Set III: Vol. 6, ed. R.K. Dhawan (New Delhi: Prestige, 1995). Chandra, Suresh. Encyclopedia of Hindu Gods & Goddesses . New Delhi: Sarup & Sons, 1998. Print. Daly, Mary. Gyn/Ecology, the Metaethics of Radical Feminism . Boston: Beacon Press, 1990. Print. Deshpande, Shashi. Writing from the Margin and Other Critical Essays . Penguine Books, India. 2003. Dinesh, Kamini . Between Spaces of Silence, Women Creative Writers. New Delhi: Sterling, 1994. Print. Doniger, Wendy and Brian K. Smith. trans, The Laws of Manu . New Delhi: Penguin, 1991. Print. 203 Dusinberre, Juliet. Woman Reader or Common Reader . London: University of Lowa press, 1997. Eagleton, Terry. Myths of Power : A Marxist Study of the Brontes. London: Macmillan, 1975. Print. Engels, Frederick. The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State . Australia: Resistance Books, 2004. Print. Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. New York: W.W. Norton and Co, 1963. Print. Ford, Colin and Brian Harrison. A Hundred Years Ago: Britain in the 1880s in Words and Photograph s. Cambridge: Harvard Univ., 1983.Print. Geetha, V. Patriarchy . Calcutta: Stree, 2007. Print. Gilbert, Sandra, and Susan Gubar. The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination, 2nd ed. London: Yale University Press, 2000. Print. Green & Jill. Critical Theory and Practice . London: Routledge, 1996. Print. Jaggar. M. Alison, Feminist Politics and Human Nature. Brighton: Harvester Press, 1983. Print. Jagpal, Anju, Female Identity - A Study of Seven Indian Women Novelists , New Delhi: Prestige Books, 2012. Print. Jayewardene, Kumari. Feminism and Nationalism in the Third World . New Delhi: Kali for Women, 1986. John E. Jordan. “The Ironic Vision of Emily Bronte, Nineteenth-Century Fiction”, Vol. 20, No. 1. (June, 1965), pp. 1-18. Print. 204 Kaplan, Deborah. Jane Austen among Women . The Johns Hopkins University press. 1992. Print. Kettle, Arnold. An Introduction to the English Novel . Hutchinson, 1951. Print. Kristeva, Julia. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art . Columbia University Press April 1982. Print. Lerner, Laurence. Bertha and the Critics . Nineteenth-Century Literature, Vol. 44, No. 3 (December 1989): 273-300. Print. Leslie, Julia. The Perfect Wife : The Orthodox Hindu Woman according to the Stridharmapaddhati of Tryambakayajvan . Delhi: OUP, 1989. Print. Lewis, Anjalee, “A Nation without Women”, 2008. Web. 10 Aug, 2011. Manjushree. The Position of Women in the Yajnavalkyasmriti . New Delhi: Prachi, 1997. Print. Martin, Robert B. Charlotte Bronte's Novels: The Accents of Persuasion . New York: Norton, 1966. Print. Maugham.W. Somerset Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice . Winston, Philadelphia, 1949. Print. Mehta, Rama . Inside the Haveli . New Delhi: Penguin, 1977. Print. Mehta, Rama. The Western Educated Hindu Woman . Bombay: Asia, 1970. Print. Misra, Jaishree . Ancient Promises . New Delhi: Penguin, 2000. Print. Moglen, Helene. “Jane Eyre: The Creation of a Feminist Myth”. Charlotte Bronte: The Self Conceived. London: University of Wisconsin Press. Print. Nair, Anita, Ladies Coupe . New Delhi: Penguin, 2001. Print. 205 Niranjana, Seemanthini. Gender and Space, Femininity, Sexualisation and the Female Body. New Delhi and London: Sage, 2001. Print. Perkins, Moreland. Reshaping the Sexes in Sense and Sensibility. The University Press of Virginia: 1998. Print. Prabha, Raj. “The Rajput Ethic and Value Transmission in the Family, Gender, History and culture”, Inside the Haveli . Ed. Supriya Agarwal and Urmil Talwar. New Delhi: Rawat, 2009. Print. Sharma, S.D. Ed. Recent Indian English Fiction . Karnal: Natraj, 1998. Print. Shaw, George Bernard. Mrs. Warren’s Profession . Broadview Press, Peterborough: 2005. Print. Shiva, Vandana. Staying Alive Women, Ecology and Survival in Indaia. New Delhi: Indraprasath Press, 1988. Print. Showalter, Elaine. The female malady: women, madness, and English culture, 1830– 1980 . New York: Pantheon Books, 1985. Print. Small, Helen. The Hyena’s Laughter: Lucretia and Jane Eyre. Love’s Madness : Medicine, the Novel, and Female Insanity . Oxford University Press, 1996. 1800-1865. Print. Steelye, John. Jane Eyre's American Daughters: From The Wide World to Anne of Green Gables, A Study of Marginalized Maidens and What They Mean. New York: University of Delaware Press, 2005. Tomalin, Claire. Jane Austen: A Life. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 1997. Print. Tong, Rosemarie Putnam. Feminist Thought: A More Comprehensive Introduction . West View Press, 1998. Print. 206 Wallace, Tara Goshal. “Sense and Sensibility and the Problem of Feminine Authority”, Eighteenth Century Fiction: 4.2.4. (1992): Web 30 Jan 2013. Wollstonecraft, Mary. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman . Ed. D. L. Macdonald and Kathleen Scherf. Ontario: Broadview Press, 1997. Web. 20 June 2013. Web Sources http://cognoscenti.wbur.org/2013/01/18/jane-austen-anita-diamant http://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/millett-kate/sexual-politics.htm. http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/bronte/cbronte/hesse1.html http://www.eco-action.org/dod/no8/burn.html. http://www.hrw.org/news/2006/09/26/kyrgyzstan-bride-kidnapping-domestic-abuse- rampant http://www.languageinindia.com/jan2009/jayakanthanhenryjames.html http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/02/groom-kidnappings-blot-india- bihar-2014218115419409842.html