The Fire and The Rain
The Fire and The Rain
The Fire and The Rain
26 Volume : 3 | ISSUE-8,
VOLUME-6, Issue : 11AUGUST-2017
| November 2014 • ISSN
• ISSN NoNo 2277- -8160
2277 8179
M.A. English. Presently pursuing research under Visva-Bharati with the topic
Arindam Ghosh Ecocriticism and Post-modern British Poetry. - Corresponding Author
ABSTRACT Myths are generally accepted as the outcome of the primitive seasonal rituals, concerned with deities and demi-
gods and consequently justi ed as untrue, ctitious and far removed from reality and history. In the context of
Indian dramatic art myths play an integral and pivotal role for promoting a symbolical truth with higher degree of reality. Girish Karnad,
however, following the Vedic interpretation – pura api navam ('though old, ever new'), holds that the signi cance of myth is universal and
thus can be effectively employed to interpret and express meaning for the contemporary life. As myths represent 'collective consciousness'
of a culture, he thought, can inculcate moral, religious or socio-cultural values; and also that analogically mythical interference can link the
present human condition with the eternal and the universal. In The Fire and the Rain the age-old story of 'Yavakrita' has been used to bring
out the consequences of 'knowledge without wisdom' and of 'power without integrity'. But amid the interplay of powerful passions and
emotions of the mythic characters, the play serves to deconstruct the one dimensional nature of patriarchal domination and casteism
rooted in contemporary Hindu society. If 'Realism' means 'objective experience' and 'social truth' then the play becomes a powerful
weapon for exposing and demolishing social evils and injustices: it radically showers invectives against the vanity of the upper priestly class,
their jealousy and possessiveness in love, treachery and mistrust, revenge and power-politics, their immorality and meaningless offerings
without social concern. In the elaboration of the myth the re sacri ce may connote any devotional activities, like academic studies,
marriage or the pursuit of scienti c knowledge. Furthermore, the deprivation and penance is afterall the reality of a drought-affected land
and the starvation and suffering of a famine-hit area.
KEYWORDS : Myth, mythopoeia, 'Vedic', realism, egocentric, patriarchy, power-politics, castism, 'Yajna', 'Universal
Knowledge', ' re-sacri ce', paradigm, nativistic
Myths embody universal knowledge of human civilization, Our present discussion will be based on The Fire and the Rain which
unspeci ed by time and history; they are generally accepted as the draws upon the myth of Yavakrita from the Mahabharata. M. K. Naik
outcome of the primitive seasonal rituals concerned with deities and S. A. Narayan remark regarding this play – “Karnad gives a
and demi-gods (legends and folk tales) and consequently justi ed contemporary meaning to an old legend which stresses the dangers
as untrue, ctitious and far removed from reality. But many writers of knowledge without wisdom, and power without integrity” (204).
especially the Modernists have taken recourse to 'mythopoeia' or The basic myth is that Yavakrita, an Aryan youth successfully
'myth-making', thereby establishing a cultural connection between undergoes austere penance to acquire all knowledge from Indra;
myth and literature. As a life form myth represents the relation of the but true wisdom remains elusive to him. Consequently he tries to
individual self with the cosmic world and captures the re exion of a molest the daughter-in-law of Raibhya who curses him with death.
whole culture ('collective consciousness') within the paradigms of Yavakrita's father, Bharadwaja in revenge prophesizes that Raibhya
archaic unity. Northrop Frye relying upon the mythic structures tried will die in the hand of his elder son which comes true as is fated. But
to evaluate literary works in respect to a timeless order. Carl Yung Paravasu, the elder son intentionally accuses his younger brother
relates myths and archetypes with the unconscious and nds a Aravasu of patricide and makes him a criminal. However, nally it is
universal source of wisdom in them. Aravasu's prayer to the Sun-god that restores all and the God advises
Yavakrita to pursue knowledge in the right way. Karnad here makes
In the context of Indian dramatic art myths play an integral and certain alternations and an addition of a subplot dealing with
pivotal role for promoting 'a symbolical truth with higher degree of Aravasu's love for Nittilai. Karnad himself admitted that the
reality'. Myths and archetypes have been signi cantly related with structure of the play resembles that of Aeschylus's Oresteia trilogy,
human psychology and society and are enforced to preach the the chief motifs being the protagonist's homecoming after a long
doctrines of theology and philosophy and thereby promote peace absence, human frailty and temptation and crime, the operation of
and morality. The Puranas, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata are the supernatural in human life and divine grace. But in Karnad's case
basically myths depicting the everlasting struggle between good thematic richness encompasses nativistic elements within the
and evil and they consequently inculcate moral and emotional and plethora of myth, that is, The Fire and the Rain intuits us about the
spiritual values. Hence, even without factual base their universal social reality of an indigenous culture of a bygone age. It
mode quali es them to be of contemporary relevance. Girish categorically comments on the relevant issues of castism, unequal
Karnad, however, (well aware of the Vedic interpretation – Pura api attitude to women, the hollowness of patriarchy, the vanity of the
navam – that is, 'though old, ever new') discovers immense priestly class and their power-mongering, jealousy and malice,
possibilities in myths and archetypes and effectively employs them mistrust and betrayal, adultery and power-politics, revenge and
to convey and express meaning for the contemporary life. He holds sacri ce without any social concern. In the elaboration of the myth
that analogically mythical interference can link the present human the play becomes the key site of struggle between the Brahmin and
condition with the eternal and the universal; as D. Maya observes in the lower class, between the God and the demon, between the actor
reference to Karnad's plays: “Issues of the present world nd their and the performer of rites, and aboveall between good and evil. If
parallels in the myths and fables of the past which lend new 'Realism' suggests an objective experience regardless of the
meanings and insights through analogy, reinforcing the theme” individual perception – and re ects social truth above individual
(68). He rigorously follows the dramatic tradition, advocated in experience, then it has turned into a powerful weapon in Karnad's
Bharata's Natyashastra and believed in Abhinavagupta's dictum hands: for we must remember that afterall in The Fire and the Rain
that the purpose of drama is to realize the purusharthas (namely – Karnad's aim was to challenge the monolithic aesthetics of
Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksha). Naturally his plays are mostly rooted Brahminism and to demolish the one dimensional structure of
in myths, folk puranas or in regional classical elements: Naga- egocentric patriarchy and obsessive castism.
Mandala is based on oral tales from Karnataka; Hayavadana takes its
roots from Kathasaritsagara; whereas Yajati and The Fire and the Rain The title of the play brings together two physical elements which are
directly incorporate mythic episodes from the Mahabhrata. normally considered as antithetical. The 'Fire' becomes the symbol
the status of male superiority and in Arvasu's words metaphorically this betrayal in brotherly relationships gets another parallel in Indra-
dies to 'provide the missing sense of our lives' (FR 70). Vritra episode; Karnad deliberately incorporates the episode in
order to incite in Paravasu the pangs of guilty conscience. Karnad
The subjugation and division among men is further aggravated by himself speaks of 'an unusual variant of this Indian obsession with
the pervasive class and caste consciousness. The issue is fatricide' (that is why, he makes Yavakri their cousin). It is no
problematised through the love episode of Nittilai and Arvasu. As coincidence then that Arvasu plays the role of Vritra, the betrayed
they both belong to different social groups, their respective social brother of Indra.
taboos, skepticism towards the other group and disparate
convictions make their conjugal husband-wife relationship The play juxtaposes side by side both romantic love and marital
impossible. Faced with obstacles Arvasu becomes fastidiously relations and the obvious sexuality or lust for physical uni cation.
critical of his own superior caste. Nittilai's father would get her Paravasu's social marriage with Vishakha is a disastrous affair:
married strictly in accordance with the tribal customs; Paravasu having no emotional attachment whatsoever, their loveless
would hardly dream of giving consent to their marriage. The breach marriage has turned into 'an arid contract'. Being abandoned by her
is clear which produces skepticism and hatred, - best expressed in husband she falls easily into her past lover Yavakri's design.
the words of Nittilai's father – “These high-caste men are glad Apparently Yavakri's words seem so convincing that it impresses
enough to bed our women but not to wed them” (FR 10). Arvasu is Vishakha and rekindles ames of love in her. Even we the readers are
determined – “I would rather be an outcaste…. (8), but he fails to almost driven to put con dence in him when he says to Vishakha
appear before the marriage council at the pre xed time. He that he pined for 'the smell of (her) . . . body' (FR 17); or that she is the
expresses regrets and vents out his frustration towards his caste 'presiding deity' of his life; or the more assertive “I love you, Vishakha.
which turns fatal to him. He feels himself intrigued, conspired and I have not looked at another woman in my whole life” (28). But
trapped by the false paradigms of caste hierarchy and for Karnad immediately the author deromanticizes this when Yavakri confesses
naturally he becomes the mouthpiece voicing and consequently his ulterior motive of vengeance and retaliation. However, the
demolishing the curse unleashed on man by this hypocritical caste uncompromising affair between Nittilai and Arvasu salvages
consciousness: Arvasu pokes fun at the Brahmin community – 'No boundless and unsel sh love: Arvasu's response to Andhaka's
hymns to drown out one's voice. No smoke to hide behind' (FR 6); reminder that his brother might object to his affair – “I can't give up
the brave assertion – 'I am not a Brahmin' is indeed unconventional. Nittilai. She is my life. I can't live without her” (FR 8), speaks it all. On
Andhaka, a sudra by caste, however, cannot come out of the the other hand, Nittilai's love for him is beyond apprehension of a
preconceived formations of society and displays a 'manufactured caste-ridden society: it's both romantic and spiritual as well. Neither
consciousness': “The Gods that their (Brahmin) priest seek are far possessed by physical or sexual consideration nor cowered by the
mightier than yours” (12). But it is again Nittilai who questions and constitution of the civilized world, Nittilai voices Platonic idealism
exposes the hollowness and strikes a decisive blow towards the when she banishes any idea of extra-marital affair or remarriage: “I
inhumanity of the so called high Brahmin culture: “Why are the don't mean we have to live together – like lovers or like husband and
Brahmins so secretive about everything?”In the portrayal of Nittilai, wife…. Let's be together – like brother and sister” (FR 49).
Karnad ('like an iconoclast') demolishes the varna system of Hindus.
Amid the rituals and ascetic practices the play illustrates the nature
There are various instances in the play when in the context of of true knowledge. Yavakri does Tapasya in the seclusion of the
ancient Vedic society the superior caste consciousness of forest to obtain 'universal knowledge' of the Vedas directly from the
Brahminism arrogantly dominates over the low-castes. The darker Gods. But Indra advises him to pursue knowledge through
side in manifest in that: the lower castes cannot enter a holy place or experience and through diligent studies under a 'guru'. Indra's
the sacri cial enclosure; rituals are to be performed only by the words are well applicable to any kind of devotional activities, like
Brahmins. Arvasu, however, challenges the very base of caste academic studies, marriage or the pursuit of scienti c knowledge.
discrimination when he shouts out: “All I want is to dance and sing That – “Knowledge is time. It is space.” Yavakri fails to realize and
and act” (FR 9). According to myth Bharata's sons who were the rst consequently his 'Faustian knowledge' ('but probably little wisdom'
actors of the world, lost their caste due to their profession. After that (FR 16)) brings about his fall. His delusions for power and the re of
the Vedic society considers acting as lowly and irreligious activity. vengeance become his hubris which makes him blind to the fact
Hence, Arvasu becomes the potent crusader in defying that rigid that 'Knowledge involves control of passions, serenity, objectivity'
norm. In the “Epilogue” we nd that even the heavenly world of the (FR 27). Paravasu scholastically differentiates between methods for
Gods is not exempted from such demarcations: Indra bars Vritra's acquiring knowledge: one, the emotionally coercive method which
entry to the sacri cial precincts, as Vritra is an offspring of a demon forces the God to ful ll human urges; the other is the 'structured',
mother. But the play's message seems to be clear: during the chaotic 'formal rite' – which makes man 'an equal to god'. However, the
phase the villagers, invading the 'sacri cial pavilion' actually spell veiled attack in the form of the tribal girl, Nittilai contradicts and
the death of hierarchical constructions of society: it's indeed 'The debases all the prevailing concepts formal scholastic and spiritual
doomsday' for the power-maniac Brahmin community. Nand Kumar knowledge. Her frank and intuitive curiosity cannot comprehend
rightly observes – “Through the dramatization of the mythological “what is the point of any knowledge, if you can't save dying children
episode of Arvasu's love for a tribal girl of hunting community, and if you can't predict the moment of death” (FR 11). Mala
Karnad very signi cantly condemns and ridicules the caste system Ranganathan remarks: she raises “fundamental questions
which has been social stigma for ages” (179). concerning the use of knowledge and the goal of human life”
(Mukherjee 268).
Along with these major issues the play also embodies valuable
insights into certain spheres of contemporary society like the Finally, the play while exhorting humanism and aesthetic
complexities of fraternal relationship, love and marriage, nature of experience of salvation also incorporates within its frame some of
true knowledge, views on life, death and immortality, and aboveall it Karnad's own ideas regarding theatre and dramatic art. It explores
also include Karnad's observations on dramatic art. At rst coming the historical roots in order to comment on the birth of drama. The
to the considerations of brotherhood we nd that only jealousy and actor-manager explains – “Brahma . . . extracted the requisite
betrayal rule where true love and affection should have persisted. elements from the four Vedas and combined them into a fth Veda
Arvasu expresses his sincere gratitude and respect for his brother: and thus gave birth to the art of drama” (FR 3). Karnad derives his
“To me he's been a mother, father, brother, nurse, teacher…. I owe ideas from Bharata's Natyashastra which records how through Indra
everything to him” (FR 9). But what he gets in return is treachery and it has been passed over to a human preceptor, Bharata. The book
betrayal – Paravasu's unsympathetic, harsh cruelty towards Arvasu dealing with the origin of the drama espouses the view that initially
who has just performed the last rites of his father when he reaches the aim of dramatic performance was to rejuvenate the morality of a
the sacri cial ground, makes the boy guilty of patricide, 'a demon' society, 'weakened' by 'irrational passions'. Karnad accepts the old
who must be banished from the sacred precincts. In the “Epilogue” ideology but imports to the performance an element of
(Mukherjee 252)
Thus Karnad's The Fire and the Rain along with its considerations of
the social aspects also advocates Karnad's own views about the
reality of the principles and practices of the dramatic art and
perhaps it is best expressed through Arvasu when he asserts: “They
say one shouldn't imitate! One should embody the essence. Only
the essence!” (FR 13).
S. S. Kamble. “Social Reality in Girish Karnad’s The Fire and the Rain”.
Indian Streams Research Journal. http://www.isrj.net/ Publish
Articles/330.aspx. Web. Accessed at 2 pm on 12.03.12
References:
1. Budholia, O. P. “Myth as Symbol: An Interpretation of Girish Karnad's The Fire and the
Rain.
a. Re ections on Indian English Literature. Ed. Verma, M.R. and Agarwal, K.A. New
i. Delhi: Atlantic Pub., 2002. Print.
2. D. Maya. Girish Karnad's The Fire and the Rain, The Quest 14.2: Dec. 2000. Print.
3. Jayalakshmi, P. “Politics of Power: a Study of Gender and Caste in The Fire and the
Rain”.
a. Girish Karnad's Plays: Performance and Critical Perspective. Ed. Mukherjee Tutun.
b. Delhi: Pencraft International, 2006. Print.
4. Kamble, Shivaji S. “Social Reality in Girish Karnad's The Fire and the Rain”. Indian
Streams
a. Research Journal. http://www.isrj.net/PublishArticles/330.aspx. Web. Accessed at 2
pm
b. on 12.03.12
5. Karnad, Girish. The Fire and the Rain. India: Oxford U P, 1998. Print.
6. Mishra, Lalji. “Girish Karnad's The Fire and the Rain – Analysis and Interpretation”.
Studies in
a. Contemporary Literature. Ed. Sharma, R. S., et al. Delhi: Sarup & Sons, 2000. Print.
7. Naik, M. K. & Shyamala A. Narayan. Indian English Literature 1980-2000: A Critical
Survey.
a. Delhi: Pencraft International, 2001. Print.
8. Nand, Kumar. “Myths in the Plays of Girish Karnad”. Indian English Drama: a Study in
Myths.
a. New Delhi: Sarup & Sons, 2003. Print.
9. Vaja, Iros. Myths in Girish Karnad's Plays. Jaipur: Paradise Pub., 2010. Print.
10. Waugh, Patricia. Literary Theory and Criticism. London: Oxford U P, 2006. Print.