70
Chapter-3
Relationships between Siblings
Sibling relationship is one of the longest lasting relationships in most people‟s
lives, and one of the most important ones: “Relationships between brother and sister
have often been called life‟s most influential and longest lasting relationships – lasting
longer than ties to parents, spouses or children.”1 It plays a significant role in one‟s
development as an individual and brings joy, rage, pain, pleasure and frustration in
life. Mary Piper writes, “Siblings are for better or for worse, each other‟s ultimate
fellow travellers. Whether their bonds are comfortable or uncomfortable, or a little
both, they are co-voyagers in a world without many enduring reference points.”2 A
child learns many lessons about sharing and competition from siblings. Through
interaction with brothers and sisters, children learn about intimacy, empathy and love:
“…sibling relationships serve an important function in the emotional and social
development of children. Siblings actively shape one another‟s lives and prepare each
other for later experiences both within and beyond the family.”3
Religious views establish the impression that to be a sibling is an ascribed
rather than an earned role. An individual remains a brother or sister with natural love
and affection for each other regardless of circumstances. Religion also reinforces the
impression that brotherly or sisterly love is a phenomenon that comes forth naturally
by itself. In India, one of the sibling relationships is celebrated twice every year as
Raksha Bandhan and Bhai Dooj. The festival of Raksha Bandhan is an expression of
the deepest and noblest emotions and the abiding and chaste bond of love and
affection between brother and sister.
In Hindu mythology, ideal relationship between/among siblings has been
glorified in the great epic, The Ramayana,4 where we find the brothers of Rama
always amiable and respectful to him. „Ram-Lakhan ki Jodi‟ is a popular saying in
India, signifying an ideal bond between brothers. However, The Ramayana also
depicts this relationship in its variety through the examples of Sugreev and Bali,
71
Ravan and Vibhishan. The Mahabharata,5 another great epic of the Hindus, is based
on the conflicts of step-siblings that resulted in a great war. Tiresome sibling rivalry is
present even in the home of Gods. Shiv Puran6 illustrates the stories of incessant
quarrels of Ganesh and Kartikeya.
The Bible7 also tells the story of Cain‟s jealousy, after God appeared to favour
his brother Able. And the jealousy ultimately leads to the murder of Able at the hands
of his own brother. Thus, it seems that the sibling relationship is very complex and
can be characterized by conflicting feelings, emotions, attitudes and behaviours.
With the advent of psychoanalysis, considerable emphasis has been laid on
sibling rivalry, a type of competition or hostility between siblings. David Levy
introduced the term „Sibling Rivalry‟ in 1941 claiming that for an older sibling,
“…the aggressive response to the new baby is so typical that it is safe to say it is a
common feature of family life.”8 Sibling rivalry is a universal phenomenon. In human
life, sibling rivalry starts with the arrival of second baby with whom the first born has
to share his/her parents‟ love, affection and attention. A small child is not able to
reason well and starts feeling an intense dislike for the new situation and he associates
it with the arrival of the new intruder in the family. Often rivalry in childhood is the
result of a desire for greater attention from parents. Sometimes, siblings try to reduce
the emotional losses of childhood by outdoing one-another in professional and
materialistic possessions. Some people even in their adulthood, remain bound by
childhood sibling rivalry so much that their hostility lasts permanently and they
terminate all contacts, ties and relations with their siblings.
The relationship among family members serves as a central focus in works of
literature too. Many writers have laid emphasis on the dynamics within the sibling
relationships as these relations often present complex and provocative modes of
interaction. We can see the incidents of sibling rivalry in the plays of Shakespeare.
The King in King Lear9 provokes rivalry among his three daughters by asking them to
describe their love for him. In As You Like It,10 there is obvious antagonism between
Oliver and Orlando and also between Duke Senior and Duke Frederick. In John
72
Steinbeck‟s East of Eden,11 Cat and Aron Trask are counterparts of Cain and Able of
the biblical story.
But everything is not nasty or unpleasant in the world of siblings. There is
altruism, love, companionship and loyalty as well. As sibling hostility begun in
childhood may last into adulthood, so can the solidarity among them remain forever.
Toru Dutt‟s poem “Our Casuarina Tree”12 is an emotional piece dealing with the
concern and love of the poet for her siblings which remains fresh in her heart even
after a long period of their death. The tree under which she used to play with her
siblings has a great emotional value for her, as their memories are tagged to it:
But not because of its magnificence
Dear is the casuarina to my soul
Beneath it we played: though years may roll
O Sweet companies, loved with love intense
For your sakes shall the tree be ever dear.
The study of The God of Small Things,13 a booker-prize winner novel by
Arundhati Roy, depicts tremendous emotional complexity in the relationships
between Rahel and Estha, who are not only brother and sister but emotionally
inseparable as well. Among contemporary Indian dramatists, Girish Karnad in his
play The Fire and the Rain14 uses the mythological story of Indra‟s battle with his
step-brother, Vritra.
Thus, the religious and biblical myths, classical literature and numerous details
of childhood have focussed on the effective role of sibling experiences in the
development of the individuals, and the growth of the intricate and varied patterns of
human relationships. The studies show that the dynamics among siblings are so
complex and diverse that they defy any attempt at any simple analysis or assessment.
The vision of Mahesh Dattani concerning sibling relations is not confined to
socio-religious myths only. In his plays, the variability in sibling relationships is
rooted in realism. It is impacted by various factors such as gender, temperament,
parental treatment, marital conflicts and emotional climate of the family. Sibling
73
relations become tense when parental care is emotionally unfulfilling or unavailable.
Intensified bond among siblings can become both injurious as well as helpful.
Dattani‟s plays depict how the social skills children acquire from their brothers and
sisters extend beyond the home and family and affect their social life. Goetting
observes: “Siblings reinforce one another in many ways throughout their lives
including providing companionship and acting as confidants.”15 The traditional
concept of sibling relationships providing stability, solidarity and strength to each
other is well presented in his play, Tara, in which Mahesh Dattani presents a
wonderful relationship between the conjoined twins having a sense of cohesiveness
and emotional closeness. Tara and Chandan share an understanding and warm
relationship. These two exemplify that “...the intimate knowledge that siblings have of
one-another as well as the emotional intensity of the relationship means that siblings
have the potential to significantly impact on one another‟s development and well
being.”16
In the play, Tara and Chandan share a strong bond of love and companionship,
marked by their physical and genetic closeness. Tara says, “…May be we still are….
The way we started in life. Two lives and one body in one comfortable womb. Till we
were forced out… And separated” (p. 325). Tara and Chandan were entwined in such
a way that their separation was impossible. But the advanced medical sciences and the
„amazing‟ Dr. Thakkar could do so. In separation, the siblings lose a lot. Tara
becomes a cripple due to the manipulation during the operation to favour the boy, her
brother. Many complications arise after the operation and ultimately Tara dies after a
prolonged physical, mental and emotional agony, leaving Chandan with a deep sense
of isolation and guilt. He flies to England in search of peace but is unable to forget his
sister: “…To tell you the truth, I had never forgotten I had a twin sister…. May be I
didn‟t forget her. She was lying deep inside…” (p. 324).
The character of Chandan reminds us of Tom Wingfield in The Glass
Menagerie17 by Tennessee Williams, who is greatly concerned about his crippled
sister, Laura, even after he runs away from home. Like Tom, the memories of Tara
keep on haunting and tormenting Chandan. Away from home, he tries to reconstruct
his union with Tara in his memories and recollections. Love between these siblings is
74
so deep that they know instinctively about each other‟s thoughts. Chandan feels the
pain of being one-legged. He wants Tara‟s happiness at any cost and provides her
great emotional support: “All right…You can do whatever you want and… just…
may be… I will help you do whatever you want…” (p. 371). When Bharati is worried
about the future of her crippled daughter, Chandan says, “Mummy, Tara is my sister.
Everything will be fine” (p. 348). Chandan cares a lot for his sister‟s progress. He tells
his father to take Tara to his office as she will make a great progressing career
woman. His intense love for Tara is reflected in his words: “I will always be there if
she needs my help” (p. 349).
The siblings are very close to each other. They share their fears and joys with
each other with fierce protectiveness from a world that rejects them and regards them
as not normal humans. Even their father, Patel, puts his children into the stereotyped
gender-roles to help them fit into the normative society and hurts Tara a lot. He
accuses his wife of not fitting the children into the roles suited to the expectations of
the society. Such gender stereotypes cast negative effects on both the siblings. Tasha
R. Howe‟s observation is significant in this context. She comments: “If parents feel
that children of one gender cannot and should not attempt to do certain things, this can
cause conflict in families and can affect a child‟s sense of self… and the quality of
family relationships on many levels.”18 Tara becomes irritable and starts hating all the
males including Patel and Chandan. Thus, one finds that sibling love is influenced by
a number of factors such as parental treatment and social structures, values and
attitudes. When Tara learns about the truth of her mother‟s role in ruining her life, she
is hit by strong feelings of dejection and depression. We find here that the girl child
may be inferior to the boy for the parents, but for Chandan, Tara is no different to
him:
TARA. I don‟t. It‟s all the same. You. Me. There‟s no difference.
CHANDAN. No difference between you and me?
TARA. No! Why should there be?
CHANDAN. That‟s the nicest thing you‟ve ever said to me. (p. 361)
Chandan‟s love for Tara is very intense. It seems that sibling rivalry is absent
in their relationship. Chandan is ready even to sacrifice his studies for Tara: “I don‟t
75
want to go to college! Not without Tara! If she is going for surgery, I‟ll miss a year
too” (p. 351). Tara and Chandan share their inner feelings and comfort each other in
their loneliness and even try to protect themselves from the rude world around them.
Tara‟s tussle and reply to Roopa is noteworthy in this regard. Roopa comes to meet
Chandan when he is alone and arouses him sexually. When Chandan tries to touch
her, she starts screaming and calls him a „rapist‟ and a „creepy thing‟. Tara angrily
retorts: “Get lost! ...you horrible creature! You are ugly and I don‟t want ugly people
in my house! So get lost!” (p. 369).
How Tara and Chandan comfort and support in their pain is clear from their
dialogue:
CHANDAN. They are not ugly ones. We are. Horrible one-legged creatures.
TARA. Yes, but you don‟t have to say it!
CHANDAN. I‟m sorry. You mustn‟t mind very much. (p. 320)
This aspect of relationship between Chandan and Tara reminds one of Frazier who
observes: “…siblings act as models for the acquisition and development of social
skills, and may protect one another from hostile intra or extra-familial influences.”19
The death of Tara is more than the loss of a sister to Chandan. It is the loss of
his own-self which makes him miserable and a cripple in real psychological sense. He
feels that only after his death, he will be able to unite with his loving sister. If in Tara,
the siblings love each-other greatly and share a very affectionate relationship, the play
Bravely Fought the Queen offers a study in intricate relationship of two brothers Jiten
and Nitin, married to two sisters, Dolly and Alka. It also examines the relationship of
Dolly and Alka with Praful, their brother. The Trivedi brothers, Jiten and Nitin, are in
a stark contrast to each other. Jiten dominates at both the fronts – business and home –
with his cruel, overbearing and egoistical presence. Nitin remains a weak character
and can‟t express anything before Jiten. The reason of Nitin‟s weakness may be traced
in his sexual orientation. In traditional society and families, one of the rankings
among men derived from patriarchal sexual structure is based on the division between
gay and straight men. This division gives straight man privileges of being „real man‟
with power and assigns negative consequences to the gay. Nitin remains subjugated
76
and proves ineffectual in the face of the whimsical decisions of Jiten. Nitin agrees to
whatever Jiten says half-heartedly and seeks refuge in the „powerful arms‟ of his
homosexual partner. Both the brothers lead an indiscrete and immoral life and lack the
sense of right and wrong. It seems that they have inherited no positive human values
from their wily father and half-delirious mother and are incapable of developing any
healthy relationship between themselves and with others in the family. Reasons of
Jiten‟s conflict-ridden relations with others are that he uses those patterns of
behaviour which have got recorded in his mind since childhood. A victim of wrong
parenting, he has acquired destructive psychological traits.
One can see in the play that both the sisters, Dolly and Alka, are also unhappy
because of their husbands‟ insensitivity to their physical and emotional needs. It is
true that relationship between man and his environment is so strong that it does
impact different areas of one‟s life. The home environment of the Trivedi house
radically influences the quality of life Dolly and Alka have to live. Loveless and
tension-ridden atmosphere of the house fills their relationship with bitterness and
charges it with tension and strain. They often find themselves squabbling with each
other over petty things. The feelings of jealousy and competition exacerbate even into
bickerings between the two. Their sense of jealousy and rivalry has been depicted by
the playwright in a very subtle and interesting manner. For example, either of them
tries to pose and pretend that she has a more communicative, caring and loving
partner than the other only to score a point and thus draw an elusive satisfaction of
being a better loved wife. They are both unhappy, but at times each tries to show that
her husband is more communicative to her than the husband of the other and seeks
consolation in claiming that she is happier than the other.
DOLLY. …You were bragging that Nitin talks you about…
ALKA. I wasn‟t bragging. Why should I brag to you?
DOLLY. You‟re always implying… that you have a better deal than me!...
ALKA. … There is no need to imply anything, it‟s a fact! ... You are just
not… an interested party. That‟s why they don‟t take us out more often.
DOLLY. Two years. It‟s not even two years… and you still want me to
believe that you have a better deal? (p. 247)
77
The conversation of the sisters shows that there is a seething discontent in
their marital life and this is reflected in their relations with each other. Jealousy in the
sister‟s relations stands exposed as they wish to be one up on the other. Sometimes,
Alka derives pleasure in talking about Daksha even in front of the strangers: “She
doesn‟t tell anyone that her daughter is training to be a dancer. She is going to be a
famous dancer, isn‟t she?”(p. 259). Alka‟s ironical words irritate Dolly and the sisters
exchange angry and hurtful words. It is common between the siblings to swing back
and forth between detesting and loving one another. The ambivalent feelings of love
and hatred present in the siblings makes this relationship complex and perplexing.
K.C. Nicholson comments: “… Why is the sibling relationship so tumultuous, one
week beneficial and loving, the next full of hatred and jealousy? Why are family ties
so volatile, yet the same time so stronger than any non-kin relationship? Why do we
say that blood is thicker than water?”20
Dolly and Alka also try to fill up the vacuum in their sterile life by laughing
and conversing about their make-up, cosmetics and other stuff in light moments:
“Alka…use my cleansing milk… I will do your make up for you” (p. 248). She also
takes care of Alka like any loving elder sister. She knows that Alka likes rain, so she
asks her to come out and enjoy when it rains outside. Meaningless monotony of the
house and the unbearable claustrophobia drives the sisters to indulge in sexual
fantasies. They pass their idle time in talking about Kanhaiya to comfort each other:
ALKA. Kanhaiyalal, the toothless cook‟s friend‟s grandson. Only twenty
.…Beautiful. Our Dolly‟s beautiful Kanhaiya. Can I call him that?
DOLLY. (Closes her eyes) Just go on. (p. 261)
Thus, the sisters in their moments of depression and disappointment make
useless efforts to drown their sorrows and boredom in fantasies, but in the depths of
their hearts, they suffer alone. Though Dolly‟s pain is open to Alka, but Alka feels
alone and alienated in her suffering. She cannot disclose the secret of her husband‟s
homosexual relations with her own brother to Dolly. This lack of honest
communication is one of the main causes of estrangement in their relationship. As
Dolly is not aware of her brother Praful‟s sexual relations with Nitin, she always takes
sides with Praful and accuses Alka and justifies Praful‟s action of getting Alka
78
married to Nitin: “He did that for your own good. You would never have
been…accepted…anywhere. You should appreciate that” (p. 256).
But for Alka, her brother is a cheat who manipulated her marriage so that he
may continue his gay relations with Nitin. The play also focusses on the element of
violence that manifests itself in Praful‟s relationship with Alka. He behaves like a
bully and even uses physical violence on her. Violence between/among siblings is in
fact a common phenomenon as has been noticed by sociologists and psychologists
alike. Steinmetz, for example, is of the opinion, “Sibling violence is probably not only
the most prevalent and accepted form of family violence, but also the most potent
form of violence.”21 Alka remembers Praful as a patriarchal tyrant who went even to
the extent of thrashing her brutally in the presence of Nitin: “…just dragged me into
the kitchen. He lit the stove and pushed my face in front of it! I thought he was going
to burn my face! He burnt my hair. I can still smell my hair on fire Nitin was right
behind us. Watching! Just … Praful said, Don‟t you ever look at any man ever”(p.
257). Arpa Ghosh comments rightly: “He tortures women as brother, thereby drawing
the net of male oppression even closer, imprinting upon Alka‟s consciousness an
indelible fear of male coercive force that stunts the flowering of her personality.”22
The play suggests that there is always a gap between the ideal and the actual,
the dream and reality, expectations and what one gets in life. This is equally true of
the ideal relationships one desires between brothers and sisters and what actually
happens often on the planes of reality. Everyone would like to think that brothers and
sisters will get along, and even if they had bitter times, they will learn to forgive and
forget. Alka also knows the cunning and cruel ways of Praful, yet she desperately
yearns to prove herself good in his estimation. Even in her fantasy, she is keen to
prove herself pure and pious to her brother. When she imagines herself with Kanahiya
in the kitchen, she withdraws impulsively only to feel and prove in her imagination a
good sister to Praful: “No-o! I can‟t. Praful, your sister is good. She‟s good” (p. 263).
Again when she prepares herself as a queen to participate in the masked ball, she only
thinks about her brother: “…Praful should see me, dressed like a queen. He will be
so… happy” (p. 304).
79
It seems that it is Praful who is responsible for the hellish life of his sisters.
The matters become worse compounded for his sisters when he discloses even the
family secret to Baa that they are the daughters of their father‟s second wife. Praful
emerges not only as a patriarchal brother but also a manipulator who keeps an eye on
Baa‟s property and works patiently to win her trust. By showing extra-ordinary love
and concern for Daksha, he wins her faith and she makes him the trustee of her
property. This manipulative cleverness and cunning is used by him in such an artful
manner that even critics like Pranav Joshipura fail to see through the mask of
goodness which he wears:
He has genuine good qualities. But it is equally likely that he was also very
practical. It seems he patiently worked to win everybody‟s affection with an
eye to Baa‟s property. At the end of the play, he has realized control over it.
This however does not mean that he is selfish at the cost of others. His sisters
would definitely benefit from his trusteeship of Baa‟s property, for he loves
them truly…there is no badness in him.…23
A close scrutiny of his character makes it difficult to accept this interpretation
as convincing. Praful appears to be a selfish person devoid of any sense of genuine
love for his sisters. A moral degenerate, he robs his sisters of happiness. Here, we are
reminded of the protagonist of the play On a Muggy Night in Mumbai, Kamlesh, who
snaps his relations with his gay-partner Prakash/Ed, for the happiness of his sister
Kiran. He behaves completely in contrast to Praful, when he clearly rejects the
suggestion of Prakash of marrying Kiran in order to facilitate their gay-relationship
more freely:
ED. …My marriage with Kiran is a start.
KAMLESH. What do you mean?
ED. Once we are married, I could see you more often without causing any…
suspicion. (p. 104)
Ed expresses his desire to marry Kiran so that in return he can get Kamlesh‟s love:
“… I‟ll take care of Kiran. And you take care of me” (p. 105).
80
This hypocritical manner and suggestion of Ed fills Kamlesh with anger. He
calls Ed a liar and asks his sister not to marry him. Kamlesh and Kiran are very
affectionate to each other. No one can doubt Kamlesh‟s intention and his genuine
concern for his sister. Before falling in love with Ed, Kiran knew nothing about his
brother‟s gay relations with him. She becomes very unhappy and is filled with
remorse when she guesses that his brother‟s unhappiness was due to his separation
from Ed. She says: “…Oh, Kamlesh, please forgive me. I have been so selfish about
myself all time ….Oh, I should have known there was something wrong! I could
sense that. But I never knew…” (p. 87). As Kiran is ready to sacrifice her happiness
for her brother, Kamlesh is also ready to relinquish his much-loved homosexual
partner, whose love is unforgettable for him, as he confesses: “I-I feel I cannot live
without him”(p. 70).
Thus in the times of crisis, the siblings are shown to provide emotional and
psychological support to each other. Kiran and Kamlesh‟s relationship is
characterized by a sense of mutual commitment. They share a strong, loving yet an
uneasy bond as they find themselves trapped in complex circumstances out of their
control.
Sibling relationships in Dattani‟s plays have varied content and appeal.
Whereas some of the siblings share conflicting relationship, there are others who
support each other. Thus, this relationship has been depicted in its complexity and
diversity revealing their feelings of both rivalry and companionship. This aspect of
sibling relationship is also borne out by studies of psychologists like G.H.Brody who
asserts, “…rivalry is one salient characteristic of most sibling relationships, there are
many others, and provide a safe training ground for interactions outside the home.
Conflicts, quarrels and aggression are most prevalent among some sibling pairs,
others are high in intimacy, emotional and social support, yet others involve an
ambivalent combination of the two.”24
Dattani exhibits a remarkable insight into these subtle nuances and intricacies.
His plays offer not only a study in how these various shades and colours reveal
themselves in day-to-day life of his characters, but also provides the reader/audience
81
interesting and illuminating insights into the factors and forces which play a vital role
in determining their patterns of behaviour. This becomes further evident when one
examines the relationship between Sonal and Minal, the two sisters in Where There’s
a Will. It has been clearly evidenced in the play that much of our adult social and
emotional behaviour is largely attributable to the sibling relationships. Many
psychological studies have also shown that sibling relations have a great impact on
the social and psychological life of the individual: “Sibling relationships are important
because the positive and negative affects associated with siblings is likely to be
aroused over and over again in interaction with peers, romantic partners, and
spouses.”25 The emotional bond between siblings is often complicated and it is
influenced by many childhood experiences. It has been shown in the play that Sonal
has always been dominated by her sister, Minal, whose influence permeates the very
core of her existence and personality. She blindly follows her and bows to her
authority: “I am doing my duty and God knows that, Minal knows it too” (p. 474).
She seems to worship her sister. When her husband, Hasmukh, smokes, she feels very
much worried. It is natural for a wife to worry about the health of her husband when
he is sick but here again Sonal behaves in a manner as if she doesn‟t know herself
apart from her sister‟s existence and is much worried about what Minal will think:
SONAL (to Hasmukh). Who do you think the doctors will blame if you get
another heart attack? ... And my sister Minal? Do you know what she told
me when you got your first heart attack? You are not firm with him, she
said… My own sister blaming me for your condition. (p. 467)
She believes that her sister is a great well-wisher of her family as she tells her
husband: “She is concerned about your welfare and mine” (p. 467). She has submitted
her will and mind as an individual so completely to Minal that she seems to have
forfeited the very independence of her own thinking and decision-making powers.
This is exactly what psychologists like Robert C. Carson and James N. Butcher point
out when they underline the effects of over-protection and indulgence of children by
elders asserting that it may prevent “… children from developing the independent,
effective coping techniques required in their adult years.”26
82
Sonal has clung to Minal‟s advice for years in awed admiration. Overprotectiveness of her sister, in a way, has impeded the development of her coping
techniques required in her life. That‟s why, she can‟t grapple with trivial matters of
day-to-day life and rushes for her sister‟s guidance and assistance even if her cook
does not come or her husband doesn‟t listen to her and demands more salt in his food.
Her inability to take decisions and her utter dependence on outside world shows that
she is a victim of dependent personality disorder. People afflicted with this malady,
according to Robert F. Bornstein, become “… emotionally dependent on other
people… tend to display needy, passive and clinging behaviour.”27 They also exhibit
symptoms such as “… inability to make decisions, even everyday decisions like what
to wear, without the advice and reassurance of others….”28 A typical example of this
behaviour, she feels herself inept and always remains a mere shadow of her sister: “…
I have always lived in my sister‟s shadow. It was always Minal who decided what
should I wear, what games to play. She even decided which Maharaj was suitable for
our family. Even at my husband‟s funeral, she sat beside me and told me when to cry”
(p. 511).
It is clear from Sonal‟s words that she has spent her childhood completely
dominated by her sister. Her behaviour even as an adult clearly shows how her
personality has been stunted by her childhood sibling experiences. Sibling relations in
childhood decided the adult relationships. She has such a damaged sense of selfesteem that she has to suffer a lot in her social and family life. Her mental health
improves only in the company of Kiran because it is she who provides her a sense of
solidarity and makes her realize mistakes of depending on others. Now she realizes
that she should also have learnt to be self-confident and self-dependent. When Minal
says „some of the rudest things‟ to Kiran, she shows a new identity full of confidence
and boldness. She rebukes Minal: “Oh did she? Give me the phone. Hello? Yes
Minal, this is Sonal! ... No, I don‟t need another Maharaj, not from you at least! ...I –
just don‟t, that‟s all…well, as far as I‟m concerned you can go jump into a bottomless
pit” (p. 516).
Her strong reaction is certainly an outlet to her deep-rooted and long
suppressed resentment against her sister. Finally, she succeeds in liberating herself
83
from the stranglehold of her sister. Sonal reminds us of Niyati, in Broken Melodies29
by Gajra Kottary, who, after living under the shadow of a protective elder sister,
Nisha, drifts apart and decides not to remain a puppet in her hands anymore.
Dattani in this play underlines the critical significance that childhood plays in
making or marring the personality of an individual, thus shaping one‟s personal,
familial and social life. His characters with all their problems and personality
aberrations tend to come up as so realistically drawn human beings that they look like
the ones from amongst us. This depiction of life as something very strongly
influenced by childhood realities brings this early stage in one‟s growth to the centre
stage of his themes. He, in this way, also succeeds in placing a sharp and critical focus
on many of those experiences of childhood which tend to go unnoticed or are
deliberately and conveniently ignored by society. One of such experiences is that of
sibling incest which he deals with as his central theme in his play, Thirty Days in
September. He suggests that sibling sexual abuse is more prevalent in society than
people would like to believe it. As people don‟t expose it or discuss about it, it is one
of the most accepted and ignored forms of domestic violence. Because of the
relationship of the perpetrator and the victim, it is rarely acknowledged or understood
within the family and often remains hidden. A small girl of six years is abused
sexually by her brother, hence the incest that occurs in the play is the result of
coercion, a way to assert power over a weaker sibling. The play depicts the
incalculable harm done to a sister by her own brother. It condemns her to the margins
of silence and leaves a ruined future for her. The results of the traumatic disorder
symptoms are the results of painful events which Shanta is unable to cope with. Her
whole behaviour is an apt illustration of what Maddock and Larson point out when
they describe the effects of such experiences on the later life of the victims.
According to them, “…children victimized lose a sense of power and control over
their safety… child siblings endure great amounts of perceived losses, including loss
of innocence… loss of self-esteem, loss of normal coping mechanisms, and the loss of
normal sexual development sequences.”30
Almost all of these effects of child-incest have been dramatized movingly,
incisively and thoughtprovokingly by Dattani in this play. He shows all this through
84
the experiences of Shanta, the victim of child abuse by her own brother, Vinay, who
started molesting her when she was six. Sibling abuse seriously hampered the positive
growth of Shanta. The inhibitions of traditional society prevented her from sharing or
complaining the matter to any responsible member of the family. Due to the feelings
of shame, fear and guilt, she suppressed her agony inside and remained a mute victim.
With a highly disturbed state of mind and wrenched-up energy, she is rendered
incapable of leading a normal married life. She cannot form intimate relations with
her husband, and he leaves her for that, blaming her: “I married a frozen woman” (p.
36). Shanta‟s frigidity seems to be the result of sexual abuse suffered by her in her
childhood. Mullen and Anderson, from their studies on child-sex abuse, affirm that
women with a history of child- sex abuse “…found difficulty in forming satisfying,
intimate relationships… thereby damaging their sexual lives.”31 After desertion by her
husband and in a state of utter loneliness, she tried to forget the painful reality through
prayers and submitting herself to Lord Krishna. She feels so helpless that when she
witnesses the same cruelty repeated on her daughter, she can‟t dare to protest against
her molestation. She can only request Deepak to save her daughter: “Please save her. I
didn‟t save her. I did not know how to save her. How could I save her when I could
not save myself?” (p. 55).
Mala cannot bear her mother‟s silence and angrily asks her to shed off her
camouflage of silence and innocence. Her allegations and charges go beyond Shanta‟s
capacity to tolerate and she bursts out with the horrible truth of her own life, and thus
stunning truth comes out: “I was six, Mala. I was six. And he was thirteen.… For ten
years! ... (Pointing to the picture of God.) I looked to Him… He helped me. By taking
away all feeling. No pain, no pleasure, only silence.… But my tongue is cut off.… I
am dumb. Uh, eh, oo, oo, aa, aa... (Gesturing with her hands to say she will not tell
anyone while making sounds) Aaeooo, eee…” (p. 55). The incoherent grunts,
unintelligible sounds made by Shanta are an expression of the long smothered wail of
her lacerated psyche. As the silence is broken, the mother and daughter find each
other on the same plane. Mala is filled with remorse for torturing her mother and
seeks her forgiveness.
85
Thus the play seems to be a strong protest against child- sex abuse which ruins
the lives of victims. Such experiences cause not only physical pain but also
psychological anguish and distortions. It thus questions those of the social traditions
which define woman as a silent receiver of pain, establishing male-hegemony over
female. His plays, infact, tend to offer a panoramic view of human relationships and
focus particularly on issues which remain veiled in traditional patriarchal societies
like ours. Sibling relationships with their multiple shades and nuances have been
portrayed so well that they appear as a very authentic picture of these early
experiences of men and women. He not only gives here and there glimpses of
cherished intimate moments of sibling experiences but also brings out with full force
and insight the sour realities of this formative phase in their life. It is this realistic
portrayal of sibling relationships that makes the behaviour of his characters in the
later stages of their life look so convincing. The psychological insights he provides
into the experiences of the child and how they tend to determine the future course of
life of his men and women make his plays so interesting and illuminating. Even the
shocking aspects of sibling interactions tend to become a powerful subject of art in his
hands. Besides forcing the reader to look critically at life and society around, they also
hint at the necessity of resisting all those facts and forces which have the potential to
throw the life of an individual, family and society out of gears.
86
Notes
1
Stephen P. Bank, and Michael D. Kahn, The Sibling Bond (New York: Harper
Collins, 1997), p.17.
2
ibid., p.18.
3
Pure Fanselow Brown, “Sibling Rivalry,” Christchurch Psychology, 15 July
2012, 08 Aug. 2012.
4
Valmiki, The Ramayana, trans. Manmatha Nath Dutt (Michigan: University
of Michigan Press, 2005).
5
Ved Vyasa, Mahabharata, trans. William Buck (Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass
Pub., 2000).
6
B. K. Chaturvedi, Shiv Purana (New Delhi: Diamond Pocket Books (P) Ltd.,
2004).
7
James L. Kugel, The Bible As It Was (New York: Harvard University Press,
1999).
8
David M. Levy, “The Hostile Act,” Psychological Review 48 (1941): 356-61.
9
William Shakespeare, King Lear (California: Saddleback Pub., 2006).
10
William Shakespeare, As You Like It (New York: Lippincott Pub., 2007).
11
John Steinbeck, East of Eden (New York: Penguin Books, 2002).
12
Toru Dutt, “Our Casuarina Tree,” Indian Poetry in English, ed. Hari Mohan
Prasad (New Delhi: Sterling Pub. Pvt. Ltd., 1992), p.6.
13
Arundhati Roy, The God of Small Things (New Delhi: India Ink, 1997), p.43.
14
Girish Karnad, Collected Plays, Volume 1 (New York: Oxford University
Press, 2005).
15
A. Goetting, “The developmental tasks of siblingship over the life cycle,”
Journal of Marriage and the Family 48 (2012): 703-714.
16
J. Dunn, “Sibling Relationships,” Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Social
Development, ed. P. K. Smith and C. H. Hart (Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 2002),
p.223-237.
17
1945).
Tennessee Williams, The Glass Menagerie (New York: New Directions,
87
18
Tasha R. Howe, Marriages and families in the 21st century: A Bio-ecological
Approach (West Sussex (UK): Blackwell Publications, 2012), p.75.
19
Billie H. Frazier, and Kathleen C. Hayes, Special Resources on Sibling
Abuse: An Annotated Bibliography for Researchers, Educators, and Consumers
(Beltsville (U.S.A): National Agricultural Library, 1994), p.198
20
K. C. Nicholson,“The Genetics of Sibling Rivalry,” Theme 4 (2005), n.date,
20 Sept. 2007.
21
S. K. Steinmetz, “A cross-cultural comparison of sibling violence,”
International Journal of Family Psychiatry 2 (1981): 347-351.
22
Arpa Ghosh, “A Study of Dattani‟s Plays,” The Indian Family in Transition:
Reading Literary and Cultural Texts, ed. Sanjukta Das Gupta and Malashri Lal (New
Delhi: Sage Pub., 2007), p.196.
23
Pranav Joshipura, A Critical Study of Mahesh Dattani’s Plays (New Delhi:
Sarup Books Pvt Ltd, 2009), p.86.
24
Gene H. Brody, “Sibling Relationship Quality:
consequences,” Annual Review of Psychology 49 (1998): pp.1-24.
Its
causes
and
25
Robert A. Baron, et al., Social Psychology (New Delhi: Pearson Education,
2009), p.329.
26
Robert C. Carson, and James N. Butcher, Abnormal Psychology and Modern
Life, Nineth Edition (New York: Harper Collins Pub., 1992), p.220.
27
Robert F. Bornstein, The Dependent Personality (New York: The Guilford
Press, 1993), pp.121-125.
28
ibid.
29
Gajra Kottary, Broken Melodies (Noida: Harper Collins, 2011).
30
J. Maddock, and N. Larson, Incestuous Families: An ecological approach to
understanding (New York: W. W Norton and Co., 1995), p.89.
31
P.E. Mullen, et al., “The long-term impact of the physical, emotional, and
sexual abuse of children: A community study,” Child Abuse and Neglect 20 (1996): 711.