Gender and Power Relations: A Critical Study of Utpal Dutt’s
Hunting the Sun
Dr. Anshu Shekhawat
Assistant Professor
National Defence Academy
Khadakwasla
Pune
India
Abstract
The issue of gender and power relations has been wonderfully projected by Utpal Dutt
in his powerful play Hunting The Sun, where the portrayal of his female protagonist, Indrani
is such as to reflect his own political convictions, his liberal humanism as well as his gender
sensitivity. The play is set in the historical background of Gupta dynasty but it is not a
historical play. It is merely set in a historical era the context of which has a universal and
timeless quality as it deals with the class politics and the gender issues related with it which is
as relevant in today‟s world as it was in the fourth century A.D. Thematically most of Utpal
Dutt‟s plays including Hunting The Sun deal with political issues, their purpose being
spreading the „message‟ as he strongly felt that besides being entertainment, another
important aim of drama is to „teach and raise‟ the people to higher ideological and cultural
levels.
Keywords: Gender and Power relations, Gender politics, Patriarchal power system.
Gender is invariably linked with class and race. The implications regarding class and
privilege are obvious. Caste tensions and class contradictions dominate the Indian political
scene. Plays like Hunting the Sun by Utpal Dutt
offers a view of politics, which is both
moving and disturbing. Therefore in this paper an attempt has bene made to examine gender
and power relations in the public and political space. The division of society into classes or
stratas which form a hierarchy of prestige and power is almost a universal feature of social
structure in all human societies from the most primitive to the most modern. This division
leads to social inequality, which in Indian context is invariably rigid and irreversible. It is
www.ijellh.com
89
known as “Varna” system or “Caste” system, which is unique among systems of social
stratification.
The English word caste is probably derived from the Portuguese word casta, which
means race. It is especially used by Europeans to denote the different classes into which the
Hindus are divided. Varna, colour, and Jati, race, are Indian names. Chaturvarnya, the
country of the four colours, is an ancient distinguishing epithet of India.1 According to this
Chaturvarnya doctrine, the Hindu society was divided into four main varnas namely: the
Brahmins, the Kshatriyas, the Vaishyas and the Shudras. The first three castes were known as
„Dwijas’ or twice born and comprised the higher varnas. Whereas the shudras also known as
„Ekajas’ consisted of the lower castes who were meant to serve the „Dwijas‟, thus occupying
the lowest position in the social hierarchy.
The uniqueness of the caste system lies in the fact that as opposed to other systems of
stratification the status of an individual in this is wholly determined by his birth and not by
his accomplishments. It is a closed group, the membership of which is unchangeable. Even
no amount of power and prestige can change the position of man as has been pointed out by
Maciver and Page, “when status is wholly predetermined so that men are born to their lot
without any hope of changing it, then the class takes the extreme form of caste.”2 As the
shudras were ascribed lower status so in turn they did not enjoy any rights or power
whatsoever. In fact from Rig-Vedic to later Vedic ages their position deteriorated further
from that of domestic servants to the position of slaves who were to “be supported, to be fed,
to be clothed with the remnants and castaways of food and raiment by the higher three
varnas. They were restricted to listen to the recitation of Veda and even not allowed to
perform a penance. In this context the law-givers have reprimanded that a shudra trying to
hear the recitation of Vedic texts shall have his ears filled with molten tin or lac, if he recites
the Veda his tongue shall be cut off, and if he remembers it, he shall be dismembered.”3
In this way the shudras were forced to lead a life of sub-human conditions or even a
life equal to animals. In such an oppressive caste-ridden social structure women had only a
subordinate role to play and if she belonged to a lower caste, her condition was miserable as
has been poignantly brought out by Utpal Dutt in his play Hunting the Sun, which, is a story
of a lower caste woman, Indrani and of her mentor Acharya Kalhan who together put up a
brave fight against the oppression, violence and injustice meted out to the people of lower
castes whose position was no better than that of slaves. In fact they were treated as beasts
which gets evident in the very opening scene of the play when a lower caste woman named
www.ijellh.com
90
Madhukarika is brought to the market place along with her ten year old son Veerak to be sold
as slaves. The scene is set in almost fourth century A.D. when Gupta rulers precisely
Samudra Gupta ruled India. Their age is known as the golden period of Indian history and
therein lies the irony that even in the so called Golden Era of this nation, slavery was
prevalent and brutal almost inhuman treatment was meted out to the slaves. Their fault being
that they were born as low-caste shudras meant to serve the other three superior varnas.
They were unfortunate low-born individuals who were entirely without rights and
whom law and custom regarded as the property or commodity which could be bought, sold
and used according to the wishes of the high-born dwijas. This is exactly what Suryavarma
does who while offering his slaves for sale treats them as animals and whips them
continuously without any provocation or need. Treating the female slave Madhukarika as a
cattle he says:
Surya: Proficient in all household duties. Look at her teeth and you willrealize how
young she really is.
Haya : That‟s the way you tell a horse‟s youth.
Surya: Also a slave‟s. Slave and beast are similar animals.
Basu: What is your name?
Madhukarika: Madhukarika.
Basu: Who sired this child?
Madhu: I do not know.
Basu: What do you mean?
Surya: She cannot tell because all males in my house have slept with her one time or
another. And yet her body is still young. Behold. (he displays her arms and legs)
Basu: How much do you want for her?
Surya: Thousand dinars.
Basu: Too much.
Surya: You get two for the same price, damn it. What a bargain! You get mother and
child!
Basu: But a thousand dinars? You can get a slave in the market these days cheaper
than a dog.The wars go on, and the markets fill with prisoners and the prices are
falling.
www.ijellh.com
91
Surya: These are not common market slaves.This Madhukarika is an expert at bath
and massage. She is going for a song. I would not have sold her but for a debt I have
to pay.
Basu : But a thousand dinars is a lot of money. I must satisfy myself about my
buyfirst.Woman, take off your clothes. (Madhukarika draws
back)
Surya: How now, slave? Why do you play the coy woman? You aren‟t even human.
Take off your clothes. The lord will look at you.4
This clearly indicates the callous attitude of higher caste males according to which a
low-born female slave cannot keep even her honour intact. Therefore they humiliate her by
forcibly undressing her in public and that too in front of her child Veerak. Moreover they
justify it by proclaiming that it was a mere financial assessment to know for how many years
she could be put to hard labour. They firmly believed that resistance to it was downright silly
as, “A slave has no honour and therefore cannot be dishonoured” (HS 588).Another
agonizing fact is that she is dishonoured in front of the general, Hayagreeva, who was meant
to protect the rights and honour of the citizens. In fact instead of protecting her, he himself
becomes a party to this grave injustice meted out to Madhukarika. Thus a helpless female
slave is left entirely on the mercy of her buyers knowing fully that now she would be
exploited as a cheap labour and would be made to work under conditions of strict supervision
and physical abuse.
Revealing that caste and gender are invariably linked with each other Utpal Dutt
portrays the low-born females as „always and already victims‟ whether in the form of slaves
or in the form of prostitutes like Mahasweta. A society where a woman has to earn her living
by selling her body for sexual purposes, reveals a situation as is most deplorable and
reprehensible especially in a society which claimed to be ruled by Vedic codes. According to
the Vedas, woman was “ the embodiment of spiritual power, of light and love or pure bliss.
So, the deity was imaged primarily as feminine the Great Mother. She was not an object of
enjoyment like worldly objects, but the image of beatific self-realization, not a bhogyavisaya
but the essence of the spiritual self.”5 Hence theoretically according to the Brahmanical codes
prostitution was a stigma on the social health of the society. Therefore as a social problem it
was highly condemned but at the same time its practice was traditionally accepted as is
revealed by the conversation between the Nagarkotala Shishumar and Mahasweta where he
asks her to obtain a license for this degraded profession as he says:
www.ijellh.com
92
Shishu:I shall hold no further discourse with you. My guards will call on you in the
evening and arrest you. Hear ye! Hear ye! By order –
Maha: How odd! If it is a clean city you want, why do you not arrest Malavika of
Senakunj? Why pick on me?
Shishu: Malavika has obtained a licence with the Emperor‟s seal. You haven‟t done
so. Go away. Hear ye! Hear ye! (HS 583).
This expresses the hypocrisy of the Vedic society where women especially of the
lower strata were exploited openly. But this does not lead to the inference that higher-class
women were spared from exploitation and oppression. Though it is true that, “Violent
practices against women reveal definite variations by caste; while upper caste were subjected
to control and violence within the family, it is the absence of such control that made lower
caste women vulnerable to rape, sexual harrasment and the threat of public violence.”6 In that
highly traditionalized society women of higher class even Queen Urmila herself was no better
than a slave. As Dardura, the Jester says, “You see, the queen is also a variety of slave.
Jewelled variety.” To this the queen sadly exclaims, “I am a prisoner in this palace. And
Indrani has taken Hayagreeva away from me” (HS 643).
Undoubtedly she was a prisoner who was chained by traditions and royal customs.
And though she donned royal robes and was privileged to enjoy the luxuries of life she, in
reality, had no power, no authority, no will of her own. She was merely a puppet in the hands
of the Emperor Samudragupta who made her obey all his commands even against her wishes
like a slave. This is poignantly brought out during the trial of Acharya Kalhan when
Samudragupta compels her to smile much against her wishes and says, “You will, you will.
You are merely an instrument of statecraft, and a womb to bear heirs to the throne, nothing
else. You have no will of your own. We need a smile from you to please our children out
there. So smile” (HS 647). Thus clearly against the old Vedic concept of woman as the other
half of man exposing the harsh truth that in all the spheres whether religious, economic or
political the roles of men and women were largely discriminated.
Utpal Dutt is essentially a political playwright and writes about politics and people in
politics as in the play Hunting the Sun where the story of the drama is set in the historical era
of the Gupta dynasty. But although this play is based on a historical legend his characters are
creations of socio-political forces which knew no barriers of time and place such as the
Queen, the Emperor and his whole cabinet comprising of the so called higher varnas through
whom he exposes the decadence and degeneracy of the class in power. But ironically people
www.ijellh.com
93
who are reputed to be powerful do not necessarily always get their way especially if they
belonged to the so called „weaker sex‟ like the queen who although claims to rule the whole
of India was restricted in all sorts of ways that gave her very little room to exercise her
authority.
Thus this play defines politics in terms of power structures that emerge out of class,
caste and gender divisions in society exhibiting at the same time unequal relations of power
between men and women for instance between helpless empress and all powerful emperor
who always got his own way tactfully by going along with the laws of Vedic society. He was
a shrewd person who always imposed his will on others. Moreover he had an official right in
fact a „divine right‟ to do this as the king was considered a God incarnate. However this
notion is bravely challenged by Acharya Kalhan in the play which gets evident in this
conversation:
Kalhan: Who among you is the Emperor?
Shishukumar: Do you not recognise him?
Kalhan:How can I, my son? I have never seen him before.
Dardura:Isn‟t there a halo round his head?
Kalhan:The Emperor is but a man. How can he have a halo?
Samudra: It is a crime to call the Emperor a man.
Kalhan: What is he?
Virup: He is the living God. He is God on earth.
Kalhan: Are you not insulting your God? If you call a man God, are you not dragging
God down to the level of man? (HS 606).
But this notion was so skillfully implanted in the minds of the people especially in the
low-caste shudras that they did not even dare to raise their voice against their unjust and
inhuman oppression making the emperor all powerful. This is the reason why Acharya
Kalhan tried his level best to make lower caste people aware and enlightened so that together
they could fight against the injustice heaped upon them. He also wanted to correct their false
superstitition that the king was God so that they could muster up the courage and raise their
voice against their inhuman oppression and exploitation :
Kalhan: In Ayodhya alone they have kept in chains a hundred thousand slaves. Let
those slaves shatter their chains stand up, and bring down this State erected on sin. This is the
only way.
www.ijellh.com
94
Gohil:Do you preach rebellion against the king? Sanyasin, are you mad? Have you
lost your senses in your grief for your daughter? The king is God himself?
Kalhan: That‟s superstition.
Gohil: The king is God . . . That‟s what I have known from my childhood days . . .
My father told me . . . My
grandfather had told my father . . . The king is God.
Kalhan:It‟s only a false superstition. Even Sri Ramchandra could not become a king
without the people‟s consent. Nananagaravastavyanprithagjana padanapi, sammaninaya
medinyah pradhanaprithvipatih. This is waht the Ayodhyakanda of the Ramayan has to say
on the matter. Don‟t you feel ashamed to acknowledge a small creature like Samudragupta as
omnipotent even while you stand on the soil of the same Ayodhya?
Gohil: The king . . . The king is God . . . That‟s what I have
believed so long.
Kalhan:In this Bharatbhumi the king was elected by the people, and controlled by a
collective of the people: that‟s the principle in the Atharva Veda and the Rig Veda. In the
Mahavamsha the king is called the Mahasamata that is one elected with the consent of the
people. Only the other day King Vimbisara called a conference of eighty thousand
representatives of the people to determine royal policies. And how can you place today a
Samudragupta in the seat of God (HS 624).
In this way Acharya Kalhan vehemently resisted against this extreme over bearing
exercise of power, which had compelled a large section of society to live a degraded life just
because they were born in lower castes. Kalhan was an enlightened scientist and though a
Brahmin, he had embraced Buddhism mainly because it had opposed the rigid caste system
based on inequality. He was a follower of Lord Buddha, “the founder of Buddhism who is
supposed, to have lived about the sixth century B.C. He was a Kshatriya and freely admitted
all castes into his priesthood. In the Dhamma Pada, “Footsteps of Religion”, he thus
describes the true Brahman, “A man does not become a Brahman by his platted hair, by his
family, or of by birth: in whom there is truth and righteousness he is blessed, he is a
Brahmana.”7
In this way Buddha emphasised on virtues and good karmas, which were essential in
order to make a man a true Brahman like Kalhan who in turn like a true follower of Buddha
propagated science based on reason against blind faith and dogmas. In the play he criticizes
all sorts of inequalities based either on caste or class even gender inequality. This is the
reason why he admitted Indrani into his fold and educated her although it was forbidden
www.ijellh.com
95
during that time not only because she was a woman but also because she was a shudra. This
shows his courage and commitment to the annihilation of caste and up gradation of women.
Indrani in the play is portrayed as an intense individual with a forceful personality of
her own. Though a shudra she is amazingly self-willed. This reflects the gender perception of
Utpal Dutt, which is indeed radical as instead of glorifying or idealizing his female
characters, he portrays them realistically. For instance she is horrified at the news from
Madhukarika that she has been awarded death sentence and that too in the most brutal
manner. She was to be thrown under the feet of mad elephant Jambuka that would then crush
her for speaking the truth that whatever Brahmanya religion claimed regarding Earth, Moon
and Gods were all false. This was indeed dangerous as that would have shaken the very
foundation of Brahmanya religion, the structure of blind ignorance. It would have also
unleashed a slave revolt and in turn would have destroyed the Gupta Empire. Therefore the
emperor uses his power and puts an end to her life. But what makes Dutt‟s portrayal of
Indrani unique is in her depiction as a strong thinking intellectual although a „shudra,‟ placing
her in sharp contrast to the other important female characters especially in regard to the
empress Urmila who has been portrayed as a weak, lustful, jealous and hardhearted queen.
This is revealed by the emperor himself as he says:
Samudra: Did you think the Emperor of India is blind? I have watched and known for
a long time that, like cheap sensation-hungry courtesan, you have pursued Hayagreeva in a
display of desire unworthy of your position in the state. You will now go to your room, and
because you are the Empress, you will take care that no outsider ever finds out that you are
really a whore.
Urmila: I cannot go through with this ceremony. Not after what I have seen out there
today. I shall not be able to palate the mistress of your household any longer.
Samudra: You have forfeited all right to my household. But you will continue to don
royal robes as and when we order you and pretend you are a happy and benevolent consort to
the Emperor. . Now go (HS 642-643).
Whereas Indrani was in sharp contrast to the queen as she was sensible, full of love
and compassion for the weak and downtrodden and immensely courageous. The way she
challenges Suryavarma and sets the slave Gohil free is amazing. The most remarkable thing
about her is that she is able to completely transform general Hayagreeva, the ruthless general
who was a stone-hearted womaniser. This is clearly revealed when Basubandhu puts this
question before him, “To you therefore a woman is merely flesh that you enjoy for a night?”
www.ijellh.com
96
And he replies, “Naturally. Every night I suck the life out of a fresh body and the following
morning toss the dry flesh on the dung-heap and they have one more applicant for the cathouse” (HS 585). Such a barbarian who displayed such immense contempt and scorn for
woman is so impressed by her dauntless courage, virtues and knowledge that he calls her, „a
ten armed goddess who rides a lion.‟ With the power of her intellect Indrani is able to make
him realise that even he could be a shudra a low born who was not conceived in the stem of a
tree but “in the womb of a slave or a shudra woman and your father invented the tale to cover
a scandal” (HS 592).
This makes her earn not only Hayagreeva‟s respect and admiration but also his love
and feelings. In fact he is metamorphosed to such an extent that ultimately he sacrifices his
life on the altar of love and willingly embraces death with Indrani. But before that when
Indrani exclaims, “Hayagreeva, pardon me, I have given you nothing but suffering,” He
replies, “Suffering? No. You have made me taste immortality,” (HS 641) revealing his true
and intense love for her, which was powerful enough to change even a bloodthirsty monster
into a loving human being.
The most admirable quality of Indrani is that she makes use of her power of
knowledge not to earn any reward or favour but to enlighten the masses, the poor and the
downtrodden. Here too, she stands in sharp contrast to the power-hungry emperor to whom
she successfully proves that the “Vedas themselves defend a shudra‟s right to read the
Vedas.” To this, the emperor expresses great astonishment and says:
Samudragupta: But the Ramayana tells us how the incarnation Rama killed Shambuka
for reading the Vedas.
Indrani(boldly): Which Ramayana is this ?Thestoryof Shambuka is not to be found in
the original Ramayana. It is an interpolation ordered by the state, and written into the
Ramayana as recently as ten years back. It is part of the current campaign against
shudras, a contingency Valmiki could not have foreseen (HS 615-616).
This greatly terrorizes the emperor as he knew for sure that Indrani‟s power of
knowledge could ruin his power and authority over the state. Therefore he employs the
cunning strategy of bribing Mahasweta, the prostitute, to prove Indrani and her Acharya
Kalhan as liars, sinners and atheists. Ultimately Indrani dies fighting against the forces of
oppression and exploitation but her death does not invoke pity and fear. Rather it evokes hope
for the toiling multitudes she fights for. Moreover, unlike the traditional image of woman,
which used to represent the ideology of inaction and mute acceptance, Dutt‟s Indrani is
www.ijellh.com
97
essentially political as an agency of change who staunchly professes the abolishment of
inequalities produced by caste and gender discrimination. Therefore, though Indrani, the
female protagonist of the play dies in the end, still she emerges victorious as she has been
successful in enlightening and awakening the poor suffering low caste people with the power
of her knowledge.
In this way Utpal Dutt presents her female characters not as victims alone but as
powerful sources of love, compassion, self-respect and sensitivity which remains intact even
during social and political turmoil indicating at the same time that there is victimization and
subjugation of both the sexes in such hard times but women undoubtedly suffer more on
account of their gender and class politics. Thus caste and class politics is invariably linked
with gender and the way Utpal Dutt has dealt with this sensitive issue in his plays is indeed
remarkable as it gives an insight into this problem, revealing his radical gender perception at
the same time.
Interestingly though this play is situated in historical era that is in a different spatiotemporal matrix as compared to the contemporary times still it clearly exhibits power-politics
inherent in the social fabric. Highlighting gender politics as well as women's victimization
which has been the aim of the present paper that is to critically examine the complex reality
of asymmetrical gender relations within the social, economic and political matrix like
patriarchal values, caste contradictions, poverty, hegemonic power relations, political
movements etc., at the same time comparing and appreciating aesthetically the dramatic style,
language, narrative technique, spatial and time constructs employed by the writer selected for
the paper
.
www.ijellh.com
98
Works Cited:



J. Murdoch, Review of Caste in India (Jaipur: Rawat Publications, 1977) 1.
C.N. Shankar Rao, Sociology (New Delhi: S. Chand & Company, 1995) 364.
R.P. Mohanty, Dalit Development and Change: An
Empirical Study (New Delhi:
Discovery Publishing House, 2003) 3.

Utpal Dutt, Hunting the Sun, trans. Utpal Dutt, Modern Indian Drama: An Anthology ed.,
G.P. Deshpande (New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi, 2000) 587-588. Subsequent references to this
play will be cited as „HS‟ followed by page number.

G.C. Pande, “The Image of Woman in the Indian Tradition: Some Reflections,” Women
Images eds., Pratibha Jain and Rajan Mahan (New Delhi: Rawat Publications, 1996) 44.

Sharmila Rege, “Caste and Gender: The Violence Against Women in India,” Dalit
Women in India: Issues and Perspectives ed., P.G. Jogdand (Delhi: Gyan Publishing House,
1995) 19.

Murdoch, 33.
www.ijellh.com
99