Shikhandi and other transgenders

 

Book Review

Title: Shikhandi

Author: Devdutt Pattanaik

Publisher: Zubaan and Penguin India, 2014

Pages: 179, Rs 299

Gender is a social construct unlike sex which is a biological status. Until recently, the human world was divided neatly into the male and female. Every child born was assigned one of these genders on the basis of its genitals. The child might grow up to be something else eventually. We have lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgenders. These were all considered as aberrations. And, obviously, unwanted. Why these, even female children were not quite wanted in many families.

But the Indian mythology has far too many characters who apparently question the validity of the traditional male-female duality. Devdutt Pattanaik’s book presents these ‘queer’ characters. They are queer in both senses: (1) transcending the male-female duality; and (2) strange or odd. Those who are familiar with Indian mythology will also be familiar with most of these characters and the stories associated with them. But they are likely to learn something more, something new even, from Pattanaik’s book because he gives his own interpretations to their stories. He also adds further information about them from various sources. These interpretations and additions make the book an interesting read.

The book is divided into 2 parts. The first part, just over 30 pages, approaches the theme of queerness from a theoretical point of view based on “Hindu mythology.” The author states explicitly that Hindu mythology is not an advocate of patriarchy and the superiority of men over women. He cites the Mahabharata as an example of a time “when there was no concept of marriage. Men and women were free to go to anyone…” He also asserts that feminism is found in Hinduism where “the scriptures point to the difference between the soul and the flesh. The soul has no gender. Gender comes from the flesh. The unenlightened value the flesh, hence gender, over the soul.”

Hinduism celebrates ‘queerness.’ This is what the author is striving to prove in this book. The second part presents all the queer characters from Shikhandi to Ratnavali, Mandhata to Urvashi, Samba, Alli, Pramila, and a whole lot of others who were queer part-time or full-time.

It is certainly worthwhile to take another look at these mythological characters which is what its author helps us do. But were they really meant to teach anyone about the need to accept the divergent genders? Was Hinduism indeed celebrating ‘queerness’ through them? Or were they just serving certain fictional purposes in the stories to which they belonged as characters?

For example, does Amba becoming Shikhandi convince us about the broadminded acceptance of eunuchs by Hinduism? Or did s/he become a eunuch to fulfil her determination to wreak vengeance upon her bête noire, Bhishma?

The problem with Pattanaik’s book is that it seeks to show that Hinduism was exceptionally broadminded towards gender issues but it lacks the intellectual resources to convince a critical reader of these stories many of which sound rather bizarre if not perverse.

PS. I received a copy of this book as a compliment from The Blogchatter.