British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
54
Women and Nature: Ecofeminist Study of Kamala Markandaya’s Novel “Nectar in a Sieve”
Farkhanda Nazir
Mphil (English Literature)
Research Scholar at Government College University Faisalabad, Pakistan
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
Kamala Markandaya, an Indian writer exposes the issue of women in relation to nature in her
exceptional work Nectar in a Sieve. She elaborates how; women are marginalized and devalued on a large
scale in male chauvinistic societies. Similarly another oppressed non human body, the environment has
also been degraded, devalued and mistreated by the local domination of masculine regimes. In these
villages women and nature are regarded as equal and same due to their nurturing and reproductive
qualities and all the lower traits are assigned to them by the male members of these societies. Hence, both
women and nature are abused, underestimated, exploited and dishonored by the agents of patriarchal
domination. This degradation of land and the environment has become an important issue within agrarian,
rural South- Asian societies, particularly among women, who took stance in favour of establishing
reverence for women and nature. This paper examines and explores the subtle and sublime relationship
of women and nature within the critique of selected text, and also explores Markandaya‟s creation of
women and environment as two parallel but independent entities even in a complex environmental
perspective; and on the other hand women‟s struggle to establish not only their own worth but also to give
value to nature, environment and even animals.
Keywords: Ecofeminism, patriarchal domination, Exploitation, Nature
1- INTRODUCTION
Kamala Markandaya deals with the imbalance, plight and predicament of women, especially of
working class women and another oppressed entity: the environment. She portrays; how a society‟s
women are totally degraded due to poverty, women‟s strong ties with nature and nature‟s exploitation by
patriarchal zamindari and industrialists. Kamala Markandaya portrays Rukmani, the protagonist, Ira and
environment as oppressed beings. Rukmani‟s work in the garden and total dependence on this resource
through her hard labour depicts her deep rooted link with nature. She gets pleasure when she sees growth
of her field. It becomes clear when she says, “our freedom to work in the forest and to farm is very
important” (Markandaya, K. 2010, p. 241). It is also important and tragic to note that her reproductive
labour and her domestic duties are not given any value in this rural male chauvinistic society.
The linear chronological narrative of this text Nectar in a Sieve, describes the narrator Rukmani, the
protagonist‟s stages of self discovery, a twelve year old young girl, a married woman, then a mother, with
her own life and different relationships. Like her identity as a child bride, a young woman wife and then a
mother echoes ecofeminism‟s claim that her closeness to the land is thoroughly connected to her body
and spirituality.
Ecofeminism recognizes the oppressed entities: the environment and the women as two different and
independent entities. As a combination of ecology or environmentalism and feminism it suggests a unique
mixture of literary and cultural perspectives that provides literary and cultural critics a specific lens
through which they can investigate the ways nature is represented in literature and linked with
representations of race, gender, class and sexuality ( Legler, G. 1997). Ecofeminism is the name given to
a variety of positions that have roots in different feminist practices and philosophies. These different
perspectives reflect not only different feminist perspectives; they also reflect different understandings of
nature and solution to pressing environmental problems (Warren, 1993). Ecofeminists believe that
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
55
patriarchal society is built on four interlocking pillars: sexism, racism, class exploitation and
environmental destruction. This ecofeminists analysis projects that not only women but oppressed races
and oppressed social classes are also closely tied with nature. They argue that there is close relationship
between women and nature that comes from their shared history of oppression by male domination. They
also argue that conventional and customary male centered approaches are echoed in male centered
practices and discourse with respect to the environment. Ecofeminism literary criticism is similarly
concerned with the depiction of nature; it emphasized how traditional representations often see the land as
innocent, female and ripe for exploitation. This term/ word has its origin in Francoise d‟Eabonne book
Feminisme ou la Mort ( Feminism or Death) published in 1974 and translated into English in 1989
(Wagner,2008). Moreover Ecofeminism (a combination and connection of environment and women) is a
value system, a social movement, an interdisciplinary approach and now a practice also, which offers a
political investigation, that explores the link between androcentrism (men as centre of power and
authority), and environmental mistreatment and exploitation (Birkland, 1993). Ecofeminists also talk
about hierarchical dualism, according to which all high, prestigious and subtle traits are bestowed to
masculinity rather than femininity. At this logic ecofeminists think that domination is the reason of this
logic in a connection of value hierarchical dualistic thinking, which continues and justifies the potency
and dominancy of women as well as nature (Warren, 1990).We can say that ideology is the point of
juncture for ecofeminists and they think it, the role of ideology if women and nature are considered
dominant. Ecofeminists argue that to make this utopia a fact, there is need to promote ideology of
equality, non violence and non hierarchical systems, and there is need to hold nature and all living things,
either non human in the highest regard (Kirk, G. 1997). They further highlight that humans rather men
should not try to control nature but they should do work along, and must try to apart themselves from
power-based acquaintances and dealings. By considering the further fact, “personal is political”, they
argue that sphere of female‟s private life is as important as of male. We are in the dire need to change the
dominant patriarchal nature in the prevalent system of society by snatching control and power from
patriarchy (Gaard, G. Edi. 1993).
Bina Agarwal also finds variables in women‟s historic and social relationship. Women, specifically
from poor village or agrarian societies are both victim of environmental devaluation as well as energetic
beings in the environment protection movements and rejuvenation of the environment. Further she is of
the view that unquestioning acceptance of women- nature connection and the concept that, since women
are the most ruthlessly affected entities by the environmental degradation, they have endurance and
natural stamina towards environmental reconstruction is unacceptable. The increasing disrespect of
natural materials, under qualitative or quantitative manifestation, and decline in community owned
property has been vitally responsible for the growing class- gender impact of environmental contempt and
degradation (Agarwal, 1992).
In this way Nectar in a Sieve is replete with the dominant issues of urbanization, when these villagers are
evicted from rented land, women‟s oppression and exploitation in male dominated society, women‟s
connection with nature and environment‟s degradation, class and gender issues. Indira Gansion writes in
the introduction to the Nectar in a Sieve that [b]y giving voice to the main character Rukmani,
Markandaya gives us a woman who has great affect on us through not only the problems of rural life, but
also the problem that she is a woman (Gansion, 2002).
I argue that South Asian people are ruthless in both gender sensitivity and environment sensitivity.
They don‟t value the human beings, who wake with the dawn, do work in the fields for the whole day,
grow a variety of foods for the rest of the people and get back to their homes in the twilight of the dusk.
We can say that they have such a strong tie with nature as cannot be untied. They have attached their life
activities with the circle of nature to develop a deep connection and to establish value and dignity for
both; for themselves and for land. These agrarian candidates especially women are more prone towards
nature/ environment. They have made themselves masters of nature by an unremitting and permanent
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
56
practice, and if someone tries to alienate them from their natural work they shed tear and sob as it is
wearisome and difficult for anyone and everyone to go beyond the correlated field, particularly from that
field, to which you grant your whole youth. It is not incorrect to say, if we do not consider both these
entities (women and the nature/ environment) as independent, autonomous and neglect even one of them,
we do not fulfill the principles and standards of this theory, but we contravene from it; the theory
establishes them uniformly important and independent instead of their oppression and degradation by
male autonomous bodies.
Woman in Nature (Shiva’s point of View):
Shiva writes that the world is produced and renewed by the dialectical play of creation and obliteration,
cohesion and dissolution. The manifestation of this opposite power, energy is called nature. Nature both
animate and inanimate is thus an expression of power, the feminine and creative principle of cosmos; in
relation with the masculine principle nature creates the world.
Nature is intrinsically active; a powerful productive force in the dialectic of creation, revitalization and
nourishment of all life, while without this power the force of creation and devastation is as powerless as a
corpse. Further, person and nature are a duality in unity. They are inseparable complements of one
another, in nature, women and men. In Cartesian concept
( mind and body are not identical), dualism between man and nature has allowed the subjugation of
nature by man and given rise to a new world view in which nature is inert and passive, uniform and
mechanistic, separated and fragmented within itself, separate and inferior to man and to be dominated and
exploited by man.
The split within nature and between man and nature, and its associated alteration from a life force
that sustains to an exploitable resource characterizes the Cartesian view which has displaced more
ecological world views and created an advance prototype of man subjugating woman and nature creates
maldevelopment (1989).
2- Theoretical Framework
Theoretical framework for my research is Ecofeminism. This as an interdisciplinary approach sets
this theoretical frame as triangular: Ecofeminism, Marxism and Post colonialism. Ecofeminists critic
Karen J. Warren also describes this connection in her book “Environmental Philosophy: From Animal
Rights to Radical Ecology”, in many respects, contemporary environmental ethics reflect the range of
positions in contemporary philosophical ethics. The latter (contemporary philosophical ethics) include
challenges to them by non-traditional (for example, some Feminist, Existentialists, Marxists, Afro-centric,
Western and Non-Western) approaches. But I will be interested to explore ecofeminism, (women in
relation to nature), as it is need of the time to save nature for our better survival without any
discrimination of culture, place or religion. Different theorists like Vandana Shiva, Susan, Bina Agarwal
and some other relevant theorist‟s point of views shall assist me to accomplish the critique of above
mentioned work.
3- Ecofeminist Critique of “Nectar in a Sieve”
3.1- Rukmani as an active agent of Nature:
Rukmani, a poor rural woman, the central character and narrator of the novel, describes her story of hard
life, and shows her bravery inspite of all heavy odds put on her by cruel society as well as by nature. This
protagonist develops her bond with nature from the very beginning of the novel. This association with
nature seems stronger after her marriage with Nathan, a poor tenant farmer. Her strong ties with nature
seem to be superb, brilliant and thought provoking. The text explains Vandana Shiva‟s perspective that
how the development is actually mal (e) development and a cause of environmental demolition and threat
of livelihoods for the poor peasants. Shiva‟s other aspect that peasants, including women and men, are
regarded feminine infact; historically and colonially, is also under consideration in this text. The novel
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
57
also depicts Rosemary Radford Ruether‟s argument that human‟s destruction of nature and women‟s
degradation are perpetuated and legitimized by a social structure based on hierarchy that allows one group
to rule another. It seems due to Rukmani‟s close tie with nature, that her day to day activities and duties
are environmentally driven. A normal person cannot even think about these natural objects which this
young protagonist mentions, when her husband has gone and she is a widow.
“Sometimes at night I think my husband is with me again coming gently through mists, and we
tranquil together (Markandaya. 2010, p. 01).
The single word mist in this reference is a complete depiction of late summer season (autumn), when
nights are drenched, when often rain falls and the meadows and pastures are full of dew drops. This
atmosphere is so amusing and pleasant for the protagonist that it romanticizes her, and she feels peace and
serenity in this climate when she does find herself with her husband; as dew nights are naturally
considered to be calm. Her choice of weather does not seem poor, inspite of her being peasant, whereas
this is the season when there is not much greenery in the fields and on the trees, but she is blissful and
contented. Her connection with nature is surely marvelous and a matter of positive reception. The
protagonist from the night scene goes towards break of day,
“Then morning comes the wavering grey turns to gold” (p.02).
The arrival of dawn and the shining of the sky give the beautiful golden colour to all the objects present in
this world. This description presents Rukmani‟s deep and intensive love for nature, which grows ever and
never comes down. The scenery of dawn is beautiful, which most of the people enjoy by waking with the
arrival of it, but her practice to see things with the colour of dawn aware us that she has more inclination
towards nature, not only to observe and enjoy it, but also to give it worth by telling its affirmative aspects,
reimbursement and benefits to the reader. Rukmani again tells,
“Sleepers awake and he softly departs” (p.03).
The short clause makes obvious the verity that these people go to sleep with the memory of nature (the
coming of moon and stars), and awake with the same memory of arriving the natural object (that is sun,
the dawn). In this way their sleeping and awakening is unswervingly connected with nature. They praise
these objects of nature and consider them blessing and a source of peace and tranquility for themselves.
Not only they, but their own children and the children of whole community come out with morning
sunshine. This sunshine is a kind of new hope and optimism for these village residents. They start their
work with keenness and gusto to find better opportunities for their survival. There is an optimism to find
better fields and overgrown vegetables and grains for their own, their family and for other community‟s
survival. It is not wrong to say that Kamala Markandaya develops her point in the favour of rural woman,
who has been married as a young girl, does all the household work and also does some work in the field,
where her way of connecting rural woman with nature leads us towards ecofeminism (women‟s
connection with nature). My point to mention this connection is not that women‟s working at houses and
in the fields is the mark of degradation, but I suggest that work never degrades a human being; it provides
dignity and self esteem to the worker. My point of departure lies within earth, nature and environment
when they are not given any rate in our societies; our land is abused and degraded, eroded by waste and
chemicals, destroyed by the so called fertilizers, without considering the fact that it provides us
nurturance, the product of our survival in the form of grain and vegetables, in the form of oxygen, and
above all a place to live in. In the same way women are not given certain respect, they are abused and not
valued inspite of their hard struggle for the survival of their family and for the pleasure of their husbands.
All their efforts are meaningless and they are exploited and degraded as the entities of second rank,
particularly in male dominated, feudal and tribal societies, that are very common practice in South- Asian
region. This evil of abusing both the striking and prolific beings (women and nature) is not tolerable by
many activists, ecologists and environmentalists; and they come out to produce literature and to raise their
voices to grant respect to both.
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
58
While going to her husband‟s house, she the devotee of nature gives a stunning account of her minute
observation.
“The air was full of the sounds of bells, and of birds, sparrows and bulbuls mainly” (p.04).
It seems that even before marriage she has deep concerns with surrounding environment. She starts her
journey in a bullock cart and reaches a mud house, and says in a pretty manner,
“It suits me quite well to live here”.(p-06).
It seems her compromise with her fate as well as her love for nature that after leaving a splendorous house
she is ready to reside in a mud house quite contentedly and gleefully. But I argue here that her love for
nature does not mean that she is equal to nature, but we must consider these entities; nature and women as
two independent and different things. This protagonist also wants the same; she by developing her link
with nature wants to give nature an independent and valuable place, and to establish the fact that
ecofeminism‟s preliminary premise is to consider them two different and independent things. Another
central point to ponder upon is that not only women but men also have strong ties with nature; both they
have equal concerns and expectations from nature. It is also significant to note Vandana Shiva‟s point
about historical and colonial reality that all ecological (biological, green) societies and peasant exemplify
feminine principle. So, this peasant family, even men are regarded as feminine in this text, and ironically,
their place of appreciation is the same as that of women. This activist and environmentalist elaborates that
when the societies were colonized the men frequently started to play a part in life destroying,
resettlement, or migration activities, while women started to develop their ties with nature through their
dominant roles as providers for survival of a family. Hence, we must understand that nature, environment
and women are active rather than passive agents for the maintenance of life.
3.2- Rukmani, a Keen Spectator, radiant raconteur and Admirer of Nature:
Peasant family‟s brilliant description of strong ties with nature is vivid here, when she sees the blue sky,
gentle and tender trees and a brook that ran near the paddy field. Rukmani mentions that brook belongs to
the part of my life, but that days of my life have passed. It was a suitable place of washing for me, when I
was a new bride. I found it after an hour‟s walking; there was not only ample water but a sandy beach
also. She calls,
“Water was dear but not swift running”. (p. 07).
She came to that water to wash bundles of clothes. Not only she washes, but when she has finished with
the washing, she carries them towards sandy beach and spread them on the grassy lawn near the bank of
the brook. Just imagine, grassy lawn and the bank of the brook are beautiful sights, and wonderful objects
of nature, where people wish to go and enjoy their evenings. But these people, whom we consider pitiable
peasant creature, using all the natural beauty and resources for the accomplishment of their work, I think,
are far better than those who neglect these resources. Most probably, sun, the hot object of nature is the
prime resource of heat that we can use for the execution of our tasks, but we are chasing mechanical
resources in this modern life and are putting behind the use of natural objects. Poor peasant‟s strapping
correlation with nature must not be regarded to devalue them or to exploit them; but we should appreciate
them for their elongated and entire day‟s work in the company of nature. It is quite right to say that we
have replaced our natural ways of requirement with the modern day mechanics that is considered the
variety of development and modernization in our society‟s false perception; the same point has been
developed by environmental activist Vandana Shiva, when she calls this development, a mal (e)
development.
We come to know in the text that not only Rukmani, but other village women are also prone towards
nature. It can be taken as their own love or their compromise with the village life, but apparently they are
happy with this relation. They are also going towards same brook carrying bundles of cloths on their
heads. They love the brook and sandy beach; not only to wash clothes but to enjoy also. They feel
tranquility and gratification in the camaraderie of these natural sceneries. They seem not only enjoying
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
59
these natural beauty but they take great care to avoid the environment get polluted. Perhaps they are born
for the safety of mother earth. They are the creature truly contributing for the care of nature and
environment. By doing hard struggle they try to establish their worth in their own families and outside the
family (in patriarchal society), by doing all household duties even in the great trouble, but facing all the
hardships for their family and for the safety of nature. They can use chemicals to facilitate themselves, but
they don‟t use because they respect earth, environment and objects of nature, more than men do. Nathan,
poor tenant farmer‟s love for nature is also at the surface when one of the many women tell to Rukmani
that,
“Nathan built your hut with his own hands” (p. 08).
The whole process from the very beginning of the building of hut seems to be very natural and it also
shows Nathan‟s deep tie with nature; making bricks from the mud and to get them dry in the sunlight,
making walls, and the roof of the natural bits and pieces to get ready a dwelling place for his wife, all it
shows his concerns for nature. These people having great care for nature fulfill their needs from natural
resources with the help of hard personal labour and spending least. In this way natural ways, instead of
mechanical ways are the ways of development and of progress for them.
Rukmani seems to be contented and at ease with having the little; she has seen the changing days of her
father, perhaps that is why she says,
“While the sun shines on you and the fields are green and beautiful to the eye, and
your
husband sees beauty in you (p.08)”.
In beautiful rhythm of her narration she links the beauty of nature with that of her own beauty that
her husband saw in her; it depicts her contented and harmonious life. She adds more,
“You have a good store of grain laid away for hard times, a roof over you (P.08).”
Nature is prominent when she mentions „good store of grains‟ and about her dwelling place, made
of mud and with a roof of wood and straws. Each and every object of their use has been got from the
natural resources. It shows their firm belief on nature and the mercy of nature on them. Rukmani
mentions while a woman has all these belongings she must be contented.
3.3- Markandaya’s approach in depicting villagers as land and animal lovers:
Markandaya depicts these villagers having true blood for their land. Their happiness can be estimated
with the fact that they do not want to move towards cities from their rural houses, but they prefer to live
in their poor cottages, even made of mud and straws, but they love them. While reading the text I noted
Markandaya‟s description through her pivotal character, Rukmani that; their interests lie within having
animals, and using them in their fields to augment the fertility of the land. Rukmani again narrates that,
“We kept a milch goat (p.09)”.
These village people love the animals very much. This goat‟s milk was the only source of
nourishment for her younger son. They love each and every object of nature, and give them value and
respect by not considering them inferior beings. They, just like all ecofeminists, give equal and
independent value to plants, animals and all human beings. A particular village food fried in „desi ghee‟ is
common to them. We also come to know that their ways of earning their livelihoods are completely
embedded in land, nature. It is produced from the land whatever, they sell to earn money, and men and
women work equally without any discrimination. As,
“Old Granny lived on what she made by selling peanuts and guavas (p.09)”.
They grow and cultivate both these objects from land and feel relax by selling their own product. She
sells both these things in different time periods of the year. For example, in winter she sells only peanuts
and in summer her routine shifts towards selling guavas. But for the whole year she never goes towards
any mechanical resource in the insatiability of earning more and more.
Rukmani, our protagonist, being the daughter of village headman does not know, how to milk the goat
and how to plant seeds; which she comes to know at her husband‟s house, as she learns,
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
60
“How to churn butter from the milk, and how to mull rice (p.10)”.
These activities bring her close to nature and we find her irresistible in adopting these habits with love
and devotion.
3.4- Rukmani’s Garden, a Symbol of Spirituality and Deep Love for Nature:
Her connection with nature strengthens and she grows a beautiful garden at her house; this garden
becomes very special to her. She compares her life stages with her work in the garden and with the
growth of vegetables, and seems to be spiritually connected with nature, as Sussan gives an account of
nature before enlightenment that it was feared as a wild, puzzling spirit of sexuality but also well
respected as a nurturing mother; it was conceptualized as alive and female, associate with women. This
dualistic approach set a double standard for nature, as a wild force there was a social desire to tame her
unrestrained behavior and power, while as a nurturing mother constrained her abusive exploitation. It is
common practice till now to consider it the spirit and object of sex like women, while to give a little value
to it on its being mother. Here the development of pumpkins can be compared with her pregnancy when
she has Ira in her womb (spiritual ecofeminism), and she grows as the pumpkin has different stages of
growth, and we also come to know that her work in the garden is somehow valued while her reproductive
labour is not given any significance in that rural family. In this way there exists same dualistic condition
as there was before enlightenment, as during reading it was noted that Rukmani‟s growth of a garden
pleased Nathan, especially the growth of pumpkins, which was precious to Nathan because he has never
grown them before, in his own garden. It seemed that Rukmani‟s happiness lied with the happiness of
Nathan as Rukmani got happy when Nathan was zealous on her pumpkin‟s growth. It gave Rukmani
vigour to give more time and more worth to land as she tells us that,
“I planted beans and sweet potatoes, brinjals and chillies and they all grew
well under my hands” (p.10).
Her strong connection with nature provided her family more food and more earning.
Rukmani‟s commitment to the nature never comes down, even in the days of her pregnancy. In those
days she expects from Nathan that he will do work in the paddy field, but he is a work shirker and not
ready to listen even. She recounts that,
“Sowing time was at hand and there was plenty to be done in the field; dams of clay to be built
to ensure proper irrigation of the paddy terraces (p.12)”.
She knows about the field work more than his husband; to built dams of clay is not the woman‟s work,
but when he is not ready to hear even, how will he come towards work?. So, it is the work that Rukmani
has to do. She prepares clay dam so that, her field can get proper irrigation. She does great care of the
land to get better output for her family and to earn livelihood for them.
Once she has sown the seeds, she has not to do much work. So, she sits in her garden and
contemplates over the seed splitting process, and ponders over the vegetable‟s vine growth, because she
has grown all these products for the first time. She narrates,
“And their growth to me was a constant wonder- from the time the seed split and the first green
shoots broke through, to the time when the young buds and fruit began to form (p.13)”.
Rukmani‟s emphasis on the care and nourishment of the plants and vegetables, or her care for their lives
is very much similar to the Ecofeminists‟ writing about the women as „giver‟ and „sustainer‟ of life. She
gets astonished over the constant growth of brinjals, pumpkin and beans, and her curiosity increases until
she sees their full growth. She calls this growth of vegetables a conscious growth, unlike her own
unconscious growth. Splitting of the seed and the growth of the green leaf becomes a constant source of
excitement for Rukmani. Her deep concerns also highlights that Rukmani‟s great care and association
with nature is very much like the care and association with her own child, though the child has not born
yet, but she takes care of land and nature just like a child. Reuther‟s „Woman as Mother’ is a central point
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
61
of her demystification of transcendent dualism and the work is also the same attempt as Rukmani shows
her deep ties with, and care for nature; just like a mother.
We also come to know through reading about the redundancy and idleness of Nathan, as in the delivery
days of her wife he is not ready to irrigate the garden, and the same work is done by Kali, another female
character (perhaps the name has been given after the name of Hindu goddess, the goddess of power).
“She took pains to water the garden, and one morning I saw her tending the pumpkin vine, which was
overladen with flowers (p.15)”.
She does not only water the plants but also praises the richness of the production and love those plants
that are healthy. It shows that the other women of the rural community also show care and concern for
nature but not as much as Rukmani does; her garden yields a good quality pumpkin, which is not
produced in every field. This time of overproduction becomes a time for rural people to praise nature, to
praise its fertility and production. Susan describes that in dualistic approach women are considered the
entity, better to understand the chemistry of land on organic basis and thus they are regarded the best
candidate to do work on land and to take stance in favour of nature, land and environment. Hence,
ecofeminists reject this dualistic approach and try to establish the worth of land as well as of women,
including all humanbeings equally.
3.5- Markandaya’s construction of Rukmani as an ecofeminist character within text:
Rukmani inspite of a poor peasants acts as an active agent to take care of nature, as she does work with
his husband even more than him. As Shiva also writes that the masculine‟s paradigm of food production
involves the disorder of the vital links between forestry, agriculture and animal husbandry, which have
been considered the sustainable model. So, women activist, and ecofeminists reject this masculine model
and prefer to have female production model as sustainable resources. In this text Rukmani provides this
sustainable resource not only to her family but her left community also. She looks after her own planted
garden as well as works in the outside patch of land with her husband. She is a woman who knows about
the duty of land more than her husband. She does care the land not only to earn money from it but also to
give value and to pay rights to the earth. She seems to be an ecofeminist, to take care of nature within
text. Rather it is also right to say that she depicts all those women who give value to earth and try to
eradicate all hurdles in the way of establishing its worth. She tells us,
“Sowing time was at hand, and I was out all day with Nathan planting the paddy in the drained
fields (p.17)”.
She is well informed about the time periods when and how a particular field has to grow. As she again
tells,
“Corn had to be sown too, the land was ready (p.17)”.
When she takes an advance care of land, she also believes in its fertility. She says,
“While I came behind, strewing the seed to either side and sprinkling the earth over, from the basket
at my hips (p.18)”.
During the ploughing she is also doing her duty with Nathan. We should say, she has the main role in the
production and she is the one who is contented and pleased with her work and lot.
When Western environmentalists speak about the company of nature, that company and association is
only for recreation and refreshment as it is a common practice there in western parts of the world, while
Rukmani‟s work and association with nature is not a kind of tonic or refreshment, but it is productive and
creative work needed for their survival. Her work is genuine and non- alienated form of work. It is not
only for Rukmani that her work is creative as her being active agent, but all the women of third world
countries do such kind of work for their survival. The only fact is that they sacrifice themselves
wholeheartedly with a great devotion to get the production from land.
Rukmani has faced a number of hardships and she knows the worth of land, because if there is no land
there is no hope to survive. That‟s why she also thinks about Ira‟s marriage, she does not find kali‟s son
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
62
as a suitable match because they do not own any land. She never wants to indulge her daughter in the
same problems as she herself has suffered. That‟s why when old Granny searches for a match, Rukmani
describes it,
“At last we found one who seemed to fulfill our requirements: he was young and well favoured, the
only son of his father from whom he would one day inherit good portion of land (p.35)”.
Her commitment with nature compelled her to prefer land for her daughter also.
Infact life in the company of nature is cool and contented. She gives a beautiful account, whenever she
finds a company of nature,
“Each time I paused I could hear sparrows twittering and the thin, clear, note of the mynah (p.49)”.
It shows she does not only love land and its production, but also to the environment and animals. She
gives one and the same importance and value to all living, though non-human things. She can be called
ecofeminist within the text, constructed by Kamala Markandaya.
3.6- Markandaya’s creation of women and environment as two parallel but independent entities in
a complex environmental perspective:
She does describe the opposite side of the nature that it demands great concern and affection and a little
negligency leads towards calamity. That is why she says,
“Nature is like a wild animal that you have trained to work for you. So long as you are vigilant and walk
warily with thought and care, so long will it give you its aid; but look away for an instant, be heedless or
forgetful, and it has you by the throat (p.35)”.
It shows that though Rukmani‟s relation with nature is strong and meaningful but it seems ambivalent and
undecided. In the beginning of the novel she does seem entirely dependent on the mercy of nature, as she
is depending on nature for her own endurance and for the nurturance of her family. She seems powerless
without land and nature. But in this passage it seems that she is speaking from a position of power. She
has got endurance to portray the true picture of nature, which she (nature) possesses. Nature does have
mercy as well as embodies demolition. These two aspects of nature give Rukmani hope and fear
respectively, but she does not get angry. We know that in some parts of the novel, particularly in the
beginning and after her marriage, when for the first time she does work in the field she gets good
production that makes her family‟s survival easy. She also earns money that fulfills other necessities of
her family and she does saving also. But in most of the parts of the novel her struggle is greater than
nature‟s output. We come to know, her family suffers a lot, and most of the members of her family are
undernourished.
She depicts the picture of nature‟s destruction in the long monsoon, in the form of flood that flowed
away all the seedlings from the land, the roof construction of the hut, as well as the paddy field, even
coconut trees had been struck.
“An unnatural stillness lay on the land. Vegetables did not show any sign of surviving. The corn field
was lost. Our paddy field lay beneath a placid lake on which the children were already sailing bits of
wood (p.40)”.
When Rukmani and Nathan go to bazaar to buy something for their starving children, they find nothing as
most of the shops are closed, some flood has taken away with, and which are open they do not want to
sell on normal prices. Nature has made the picture of the village gloomy and desolate. Rukmani tells,
“Their faces faded; the two younger ones began crying listlessly from hunger and disappointment. I had
no words to comfort them (p.42)”.
But I would like to mention here that we „ourselves‟ are responsible for these floods. We are cutting trees
ruthlessly and mercilessly for the process of mechanization or to establish so called modernization. We do
not come to the point that as much trees we cut, as much we cause rains to take form of the floods. The
plain lands without greenery and without trees causes‟ destruction. In this way we ourselves are
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
63
destroying nature and call her (nature) disparaging and harsh for us.
On the other hand,
we also come to know that inspite of large scale destruction (that is also manmade) they were able to find
their more economic means of surviving in nature. Hence, it is true to say that even in complex
environmental perspectives these villagers; particularly their women find refuge in the company of
nature. Rukmani also tells us,
“There are some alternate resources in the form of „salted fish‟, „roots of leaves‟, „the fruit of the
prickly pear‟, and „plantains‟ from our tree (p.44).
So they are happy again when there are a large number of fish that are natural source of their survival for
many days. In this new natural resource, her hope and optimism compells her to earn money by sowing
more vegetables,
“I would plant more vegetables (p.45)”.
She does not favour people who take themselves away from nature. When our protagonist goes to the
Muslim houses, she says, those Muslims‟ women are stuck into their houses while she enjoys the real
pleasure of life in the form of open fields, and the sky and the tolerant and free for all sight of the sun. She
praises the cool morning, clean and unsullied air without clamor of the machines, and a variety of notes of
the striking birds.
3.7- Rukmani’s concern with nature to celebrate religious festival:
I also noted Rukmani‟s deep concern with manmade and natural objects during her religious
festival, when she does not want to buy mechanical product but does some work by her own. She takes
part with children to celebrate this festival of Deepvali, but within natural choices. It seems she cannot
keep herself away from nature. She mentions,
“I twisted cotton into wicks, soaked them in oil and placed them in mud saucers ready to be lit to
light (p .54)”.
These village dwellers, especially their women enjoy the acquaintance and bond with nature; the
courtyard, open air, mud huts, and the magnificence of stars. These things make their life a blessing for
them, and the providential creature that spend the whole time in the company of nature. They love these
things because they are the masters of their art and find it straightforward and contented for their life.
Rukmani and her family also have a deep love for nature because they are masters in this field. They do
not want to bow before anyone to learn anything. With this art they are in a position to impart same art to
the coming generation and to other people. Nathan seems to give favour to land when he speaks,
“Look at our land- is it not beautiful? The fields are green and the grain is ripening (p.69)”.
At this she gives beautiful account of land with love and devotion, we sat together on the brown land that
was part of us. Paddy fields were rich and green before us and the air was cool and still (Markandaya,
2010). Now again they are back towards their genuine resources. Their whole love for paddy field is rich
again, to which they say,
“Holding in itself our lives (p. 70)”.
The entire dependence of their lives is on the fields, especially on paddy fields. They give such a value to
land that they have developed reciprocal relationship with land; land cannot survive without their efforts
and they cannot survive without land‟s production. They get not only their survival needs from land but
also get the annual payment of the landlord. That is the reason they get worry, when the production is
least or nil.
3.8- Nature and humanbeings conjectured as an ambivalent characters by the villagers:
It is common to say that nature has ambivalent role in this novel. If nature is ambivalent or cruel, the
same is the community also, the praiser of nature, now curse nature. The beautiful sky is cruel now; the
earth and gods are indifferent. No doubt, another community is responsible to destroy the land and its
fertility, as industries‟ chemicals are continuously being added into the earth to destroy it. When there is
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
64
not enough water on the land to evaporate or make vapours, how the rain would come? And the result is
famine in their village for that time. They face problems in paying the revenue to the landlord, and it is
pitiable when Nathan says that we can give our collection of necessary day to day things, because we can
survive without them but land is very important, because we cannot survive without land. As
“If land is gone our livelihood is gone and we must wander like jackles (p.73)”.
And Rukmani says in this hard time,
“There are the saris left, good ones are hardly worn, and these we must sell (p.73).”
I can mention that land as well as hope is a continuous source of survival for them. Here the particular
villagers are ready to sacrifice everything to achieve the company of land. They are preferring land over
their basic needs. Even they agree to sell seeds but not land to prevent themselves alienated from the
nature. Nathan argues,
“It is better to be without the seed than bereft of the land in which to plant it. Seed is cheap, it can be
brought. I can earn few rupees, or perhaps my sons…. (p.75)”.
Within these hardships lies their prevalent hope, which is evident from Rukmani‟s words,
“Let us only try, I said with the sobs coming fast. Let us keep our hope for a next harvest (p.75)”.
We see that nature is merciful inspite of some villagers‟ and particularly Whiteman‟s bitter treatment of
nature and Rukmani mentions,
“Then we saw the storm clouds gathering and before long rain came lashing down, making up in fury for
the long drought and giving the grateful land as much as it could suck and more (p.77)”.
With the arrival of this rain their future has been secured and their hopes have been fulfilled. But
according to Rukmani fear is the constant companion of the peasant, because they have no other source of
their income and survival. That‟s why fear prevails more than the hope. Otherwise they are lover and
praiser of nature. Even in their dreams they love natural objects. They care for those objects that have
come out of the land as Rukmani describes,
“I would bring out the rice, and measure it, and run the grain through my fingers for sheer love of it
(p.80)”.
When Nathan was unable to sleep at night or even at day, he also did find peace in the company of land.
“I saw him sitting in the paddy fields as he often did when he could not sleep (p.83)”.
On the other hand Rukmani is very much caring to her family. She preserves a lot for her family, so that
she can able to use it at the time of calamity. Here we come to know that humanbeings are also
ambivalent in nature, as Nathan robs the rice to give it Kunthi and Rukmani grumbles at this loss because
she considers the rice the most precious thing for her family. She bemoans at this loss.
“My heart is sick, I said. I have been robbed, and by one of my own children, of rice, which above all
things is most precious (p.84)”.
Paddy fields are real pleasure for these villagers, particularly when the fields are rich in product. They
remain busy with the land to find pleasure as well as product. When the paddy ripens, Rukmani describes
that,
“We watched it as a dog watches a bone, jealousy, lest it be snatched away; or as a mother her child, with
pride and affection (p.93)”.
It should be her, only her, because she loves that field. No doubt fear is constant companion of the
peasants. They are in the clench of same fear as has destroyed their land and paddy field. Though they are
the devotee and caretaker of the nature, yet they have to suffer due to other people‟s mechanical ways to
destroy nature, otherwise it is merciful to them. They are also kind to nature and their association with
nature brings a good output. Only the trouble occurs when other community‟s (industrialists)
mechanization dominates their great effort and the land becomes barren and bleak. They grumble about
this situation. But for this time nature provides them an exceptional output as Rukmani tells us,
“Contrary to our expectations it was a very good harvest. Every husk was filled. Paddy stood firm and
healthy, showing no breaks in their ranks (p.101)”.
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
65
Nature gives them potency and power when it is merciful and productive. Their gratification and delight
are at the top to see the heaps of rice. They are in enthusiastic and exuberant mood to see the much good
fortune. Now they are in a position to pay their debts and to store more and more. Rukmani, by seeing
good production takes immediate decision to get back towards her garden, because she had earned a lot
by growing vegetables in that garden. It was a happy time for her and her family. She has developed
strong ties with nature since then. That‟s why she says,
“I shall need to buy bean seeds and chilli seeds, and perhaps a few young pumpkin vines… sweet
potatoes of course…I have made a lot from my vegetables before (p.102)”.
Their life becomes organized and cultured with the vegetation process, and they have high feelings and
ambitions within their growth, and above all they are satisfied when they have stored a large portion of
grain. We come to know how their aspiration, spirits and satisfaction lie with the nature. With these high
spirits and contentment they go to offer prayers and to thank nature.
Kamala Markandaya compares smooth skinned brinjals and pumpkin to the young woman. Does she
want to establish nature and women as one and the same? Certainly not. She is describing the community
picture or the point of view common in the community, who consider both these things as of one rank and
the same. They have not earth in their blood. They are involved in the land to the extent that they can
survive without it. As Rukmani mentions that her children have no love for the land (p.109).
3.9- Rukmani’s brilliant contrast of village and city life:
She also presents a beautiful contrast of the country and town life, that nature is absent in the town
instead of shifting of seasons that can be seen only outside of the town. She mentions town as crowdy and
filthy, and we forget to perceive and take pleasure of the beauty of the objects of nature. On the contrary
in the beautiful village life, she adds, we live in the green, quiet fields, where nature seems to give us a
silent message that I am blessing, constructive and helpful thing for the whole mankind, give me worth
and heed ( Markandaya, 2010, my emphasis).
In this way she prefers her own village life and the persistent company of nature, not only to enjoy but
also to get material for her survival. In this way, study shows that in every predicament she finds remedy
in the positive aspects of nature.
In the novel, very late, Rukmani comes to the fact that “land is the mistress to man”. Only men can
do work in it, because it demands hard labour. The point goes against ecofeminist point of views, because
they establish land, men and women as independent entities, but we shouldn‟t forget that she has come to
the age when work, particularly the hard labour of the field is impossible for her. Even Nathan in this age
is not able to do work well. The second fact is that they only get enough when the production is rich or
when the “harvest is good”, but they also have their slant times.
Their only source to fulfill needs and hopes and to make them contented is land. That‟s why they
always wish to rent land again to start their life with a new passion and fervor. Ecofeminists, as Giuliano
A. Jackie argues, recognize the manipulation of nature, women in less developed cultures, where women
gather food, water, fuel, fodder and also face the technological devastation, and Rukmani‟s village is the
same society and the same practices are done here; even Rukmani herself is not free from these troubles,
as she also does all this. That‟s why the text suited best to study under this ecofeminist theoretical
approach. We come to know that their departure from land has compelled them to stay in the city temple
on charity. They come to know city life‟s problems also, that if hunger and fear existed in the villages, it
also marred the cities; as they noted that many men and women in the city, on the temple are combating
their way with viciousness to find meal (Markandaya, 2010). Urban people are indifferent and
unresponsive to other people coming from far off places. Villagers or the people shifting from villages to
cities are in a messy and haphazard condition in the crowd of citizens. There is no one to guide to the
poor villagers properly; some even do not bother to listen them. It is pathetic and deplorable to note that
some clever citizens guide them wrongly. Overall it was sturdy and tough for them to find their son‟s
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
66
home in the city. It becomes clear in the text that village dwellers are not only environment friendly but
they are philanthropic too. Rukmani go to the city to live with their son Murugan, there is no one to guide
them rightly in the city premises but a poor child, Puli, and in the same way at Birla‟s house, when she
suggests them that they should go after taking lunch, only the servant and his wife treat them in a cool,
responsive and gracious way.
Tired with the city‟s hostile and unreceptive life they again crave for a piece of land. They miss
greenery, arrival of the birds, grass, fresh air and brown beautiful land. They prefer to starve rather than
dwelling in city or to get bread of charity from city temple (Markandaya, 2010).
3.10- Rukmani’s humanistic stance:
Rukmani‟s continuous gaze over Puli‟s absence of fingers, seeing only stumps shows her concern
for community, which enhances when Puli tells, “I have no mother poor or otherwise (p.169)”. Her
concern and sense for Puli increases at a greater extent, when she thinks, “the disease can creep up
towards other limbs, while there is limit to the achievements of human courage (p.176)”. She does all for
that boy on the way as she can. She buys pancakes and rice cakes for him, after when he does agree to go
with her. She spends a lot of money for the sake of Puli; no doubt she gets uneasy inwardly for the time
being but to soothe herself she says that she is extravagant only for once (Markandaya, 2010). Within her
own poverty stricken condition, she is a silent and minute observer of the left city community. She
observes a group of children there with their begging bowls and depicts a perfect picture of community
dwelling in the city locality. Her account about this particular community is pitiable but marvelous too,
“Those dozen or more looked as if they had never eaten a full meal in their lives, with their ribs thrust out
and bellies full blown out like drums with wind and emptiness: and they were they were extremely dirty
with the dust of the roadside- and the running sores many of them had on their bodies, clogged with mud
where blood or pus had exuded (p.152)”.
Rukmani shows her deep concerns and love for the things that are present in the environment or
community, and this particular community also gives hope to Rukmani and Nathan to earn more by doing
some other hard labour, quarry (stone work) that will give them more than two to four annas.
3.11- Inorganic form of labour as hazardous to Rukmani and Nathan:
It is pitiable to see that the particular labour, which they do at quarry, is not according to their
temperament; they have not done such kind of work in their previous life; that‟s why they, two in number
(wife, husband) produce less stone pieces even than that of an old man. Moreover, this work is again a
direct assault on the environment and nature. It is against that organic form in which they are masters.
This hazardous and painstaking work enables them to get some extra money but they are in a continuous
danger of dynamite blasts also. This work can be considered complete destruction of nature as Rukmani
narrates,
“The air was full of flying dust and stone particles, part of the trouble lay in keeping one‟s eyes open
while striking (p. 171)”.
Hence, it can not only be the destruction of nature and environment, but also of human beings‟ vital
organs. They can suffer from many perilous diseases including fibrosis, asthma, COPD (chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease) due to continuous dust intake, and how these poor people can get treated
with their meager wages. Hence, these diseases become fatal for them and these inorganic forms of work
are not only dangerous for environment and nature, but a grave cause of deaths for this poor community
(Markandaya, 2010, with my emphasis).
It is also noteworthy that continuous fear is with them even in the city too, where they are getting
charity food once in a day. Especially Rukmani gets worried about Nathan‟s medicine and cloth to put on,
which they cannot manage in the city, and can manage in the village otherwise. On the way nature is
merciless and cruel to them once again, as it rains heavily when they are getting back to their village after
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
67
a hard city life. It rains for a long time and Rukmani is with her ailing husband entirely wet on the way.
Her own land and her own earth were able to provide her consolation and comfort at the end and she wept
with happiness.
Conclusion:
Study shows Rukmani‟s deep concern and affection for land, environment and for the community.
There is such a subtle relationship that Rukmani establishes with nature as no one can untie, neither in the
village nor in the city inspite of a great hardships that she confronts with, at both places. At every stage
there is a series of hardships, which she has to face, but her every trouble ends with her company with
nature. She misses nature and organic form of living when she is alienated from her land, finds troubles in
getting charity food and finally gets back to prefer her organic company to get pleasure of life.
Markandaya has portrayed a true picture of village life, where Rukmani and Nathan are not as single
characters but they represent the whole community, where women inspite of their hard labour are
devalued and exploited as entities having meager values. Rukmani‟s efforts seems to be dominant over all
her tragedies that she faces in the whole novel. It can be concluded that ecofeminists‟ stance to establish
value for both women and nature will be regarded some day and both these entities will be given value on
equal bases and as independent living beings.
References:
Agarwal, B. (Spring 1992). The Gender and Environment Debate: Lessons from India, in “Feminist
Studies”. 18(1). Pp.119-158.
Birkland, J. (1993). Ecofeminism: Linking Theory and Practice, in Gaard, G. Edi. Ecofeminism:
Women, Animals and Nature. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Gaard, G. Edi. (1993). Ecofeminism: Women, Animals and Nature. Philadelphia: Temple University
Press.
Ganesan, I. (1982). Introduction to Nectar in a Sieve by Kamala Markandaya. New York: Signet Classic.
Print.
Kirk, G. (1997). Ecofeminism and Envieonmental Justice: Bridges Across Gender, Race and Class. A
Journal of Women Studies, Vol. 18, No. 2. University of Nebraska Press. URL://www. Jstore.org/stable/
3346962.
Legler, T. G. (1997). Ecofeminist Literary Criticism. In Warren. J.K (Edi.). Ecofeminism: Women,
Culture, Nature. United States of America: Indiana University Press. Accessed by
http://www.googlebooks.
Michael E. Zimmerman, J. Baird Callicott, George Sessions, Karen J. Warren & John Clark (Edi.) (1993).
Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology. Englewood Cliffs: NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Markandaya, K. (1954). Nectar in a Sieve. New York: Day.
Shiva, V. (1988). Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India. New Delhi: Indraprastha Press.
Warren, J.K. Introduction in Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology. (1993).
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. P. 253-256.
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268
British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
August 2013, Vol. 9 (2)
68
Wagner, L.B. (March 4, 2008). Ecofeminist action in the 21st century. Accessed from Canadian
Dimension Magzine. http://www. Canadiandimension.com/ article/1758.
Author: Farkhanda Nazir, Mphil (English Literature) Research Scholar at Government College
University
Faisalabad,
Pakistan.
Email
address
[email protected]
OR
[email protected]
© 2013 British Journals ISSN 2048-1268