CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1- Background and Introduction to the Study

Present work is an Ecofeminists critique of an Indian author Kamala Markandaya’s

novel Nectar in a Sieve. It is important to write about author and her work in the beginning to

ascertain her worth due to her approach to tackle such issues as are very critical even now

after fifty eight year of this novel writing. So, this chapter is going to introduce writer, my

proposed theoretical framework and the text Nectar in a Sieve. Kamala Markandaya (1924-

2004) one of the former woman gifted novelist of Indian origin was born in Brahmin family

in Mysore. She started her career as a novel writer after the partition of the sub-continent and

after India’s independence from British colonial powers in 1947. The historical background

of that time period is characterized by poverty, hunger and famine and the reason was

political upheavals (Bhatanagar, 1995). Thus the author uses fiction as her vehicle and source

to communicate her approach to life during the political unrest of that time when the basic

setting of the novel was done. The said writer, Markandaya won international fame and

recognition with the publication of her very first internationally best seller novel “Nectar in a

Sieve” (1954). She portrayed the problems of changing times and explored the conflicting

values of India’s people. Her novels depict diverse themes that touch upon domestic,

economic, political, social and ethical aspects of life. She deals with the 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 industrialists. She also deals

with East- West conflict, the problem of poverty and unemployment, and the problem of

hunger and starvation. That’s why she was termed as realist in genre by many critics; A.V.

Karishna Rao and Madhavimenon; define social realism as the “awareness of social forces

that surround the individual, their power to influence lives of men and women for better or

for worse- and the overall interaction of the individual and society (1997). These writers aim

to develop consciousness of genuineness and neutrality in their depiction of specific social

environment (Jackson, 2010).

1

Though no one can get away from the history that works upon the people, who draw

breath during the time, and also build the firm basis for the time of life to keep tempo with

time, and aiming at future. Kamala Markandaya is also such a lady. In her girlhood, she was

deeply touched by the depredation and negative effects of Second World War and felt the

enthusiasm and eagerness of freedom fighters during the Quit India Movement of 1942. She

found India awakening, enjoyed the unforgettable moments of freedom of India and

witnessed the mass execution at the outset of partition of the subcontinent into two countries,

India and Pakistan. During the war she worked for the army in India and afterward returned

to journalism. Directly or indirectly she participated and contributed a lot in kindling the fire

of loyalty and patriotism through her career of journalism. She came into enviable reputation

soon after the publication of the present novel in 1954 (Arora, S.K. 2006).

She due to oriental in cultural heritage and religious beliefs and occidental by

dwelling, sums to have a “mixed sensibility”, with which she gives a precise and all-inclusive

account of the clash of the both side values. Her grip to brief this facet is influential and

authoritative due to advance knowledge and consideration; she accounts admirable depiction

of social, personal, political and cultural interactions between the two countries. She has had

inventive personality due to combination of contrary and divergent values and qualities of

two cultures. She gives a bona fide explanation of the interaction and demarcation of two

diverse civilizations (Iyer, S.N. 2004).

John Ruskin’s point of view about Shakespeare, that he has no heroes but only

heroines, is quite true in the case of Kamala Markandaya; we can say that she has no heroes

but only heroines. She has particular interest in analyzing woman characters. In her most of

the novels the narrators are likely to be female, and if not women, the narrative will be

present a woman’s sensitivity in the main. She depicts the value of women of the society

through her works, as she does in the present novel.

In my thesis I intend to do an ecofeminists reading of the selected text Nectar in a

Sieve, a work that recognizes these oppressed entities: the environment and the women.

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 argue that there is close relationship

2

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. It is a thought and awareness that comes forth with the realization that the

mistreatment and destruction of nature is directly linked to the western man’s behavior

towards women, and tribal land. The relationship of women and nature can be taken as

positive medium for personal healing and curing (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. These key insights that hierarchical and dualistic

thoughts are western; imposed by an economic system based on profits rather than needs are

parts of ecofeminists’ perception and consideration (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

3

prevalent system of society by snatching control and power from patriarchy (Gaard, G. Edi.

1993).

The different paradigms and configurations of ecofeminism reveal different ways of

analyzing the relation between women and nature, differences in the nature of women’s

exploitation and tyranny, and ways to solve them, the dominant theory of human nature and

the idea of freedom, epistemology and equality on which different theories of feminism

depend. (Rao, M. 2012).

While as a social movement, ecofeminism includes post colonialism and socialist

materialism/ Marxism in it. It is straightforwardly nature/ culture binary that joins women

naturally to nature.

In a postcolonial perspective, it becomes clear that many of ecofeminists critiques

evolve from western point of view. When we move away from this realm, ecofeminism must

spread out its focus to include non western thoughts and to understand the double binding of

“marginalization” of being female and being colonized. In 1998 Greta Gaard and Patrick

Murphy further argued that ecofeminism is not a single full-fledged theory and its

practitioners have different articulations and thoughts of their social practice. After almost

ten years this statement could not prove to be more true as branches of ecofeminism

continued to expand even away from social practices ( as it was argued by Greta and

Murphy), and now include social, radical, spiritual, Marxist and queer ecofeminism

(Campbell, 2006).

On the contrary, ecofeminists working with socialist/ materialist stream look upon nature

and human nature as a construction of society, rooted in the analysis of class, gender and

race. This class of ecofeminists argues that this framework has more potential to critique the

issue more thoroughly. Going far away from radical feminists, this ecofeminism puts forward

a critical study of dominant patriarchy, having focus on the dialectical relationship between

capitalist’s production, and nature/ environment, women’s reproduction (Merchant, 1992).

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

4

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 the same way, capitalistic development and colonial

intercession disrupted the societies resulting the capitalistic power in the form of industries

and in the hands of men, and women were forced to do domestic labor only. Capitalistic

system made reproduction subordinate to production and the role of nature was also ignored,

While Marx’s motto was to “each according to his abilities to each according to his needs”

simply to satisfy the needs instead of greed. But in the cruel capitalistic system women of

each and every class and race were exploited and marginalized, except some elites. But most

of the capitalists were unable to categorize the women on the basis of caste, class and

ethnicity, and considered all of them as recessive and marginalized class. In this way Marxist

ecofeminists framework has more potential and power to analyze the link between gender

and environment. Sharma also develops his point in the same stream, that the forms of

capitalists mechanical development that are considered dominant have pushed the women

towards margin and devalue their indigenous knowledge and skills, that they have got and

practiced by developing a connection with nature. Further these rural women have not that

familiarity and knowledge mandatory for technologies. With the increasing privatization of

land by the capitalists, and due to degradation of natural resources the women made stuff is

going to decline.

Various international conferences sponsored by the United Nations and International

NGOs have been held in order to give value to the women and the environment. For

example, the United Nation conference on women in Nairobi in 1985 which brought close to

ecofeminists leaders and facilitated them with further opportunities to develop their

connection with International colleagues. Other International conferences that developed

between environmentalism and women’s issues were the “United Nations Environmental

programs’ global assembly on Women and the Environment” and “World Women’s

Congress for Healthy Planet”, both held in Miami in 1991. These ecofeminists gathered to

connect academic voices with activist voices, while there are other ecofeminists who focused

only on activists and justice oriented, and consciously separated themselves from the

5

academic field in general (Oster, H.L, 2002). As ecofeminism continues to shift and grow,

different dimensions will continue to add in it, while other dimensions can deteriorate and

fade away by a more critical connection. Miscellaneous understanding related to nature of the

web of relationships between different spiritual/ religious traditions can keep the

ecofeminism’s internal strife continue. Issues of race, color, class, population growth, dignity

and priority of some humans over others, or of all humans over non human animals will

stimulate the thoughts and actions of ecofeminist on a worldwide scale. Here I would like to

mention warren’s perspective to summarize ecofeminists ideological positions: “ontology

based on dynamic and admittedly partial knowledge as well as awe toward the complexity of

embodied and embedded existence would contribute substantially to the profound social

transformation that is needed”. (Warren, 1997). While Greta Gaard writes that Things will

not just happen---- women must do something (Gaard, G. Edi. 1993).

While introducing the text, 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. Her identity is traced both by her labor and her love for land; this is the

point where ecofeminism intersects with post colonialism and sets my theoretical framework

as interdisciplinary. While on the contrary her connection with the land on a production and

reproduction level sets this work in a materialist facet. This is noted when she is evicted from

the land even rented. She has been depicted as an alienated sufferer, alienated from land and

the place also. It is also worth mentioning that Rukmani as a major character, as axis of the

novel, shows more inclination towards nature, but other women in the novel also have strong

connection with the nature. Even Rukmani’s daughter and sons also are interlinked with the

land. With the advent of mechanization, her two sons want to join tannery for their economic

expansion but finally they also have to leave the country when one is killed by the tannery

officials in a false allegation. At this junction my suggested theoretical framework intersects

with Marxism, where exploitation of the poor is at the height, where work is not according to

abilities and needs. In this way Nectar in a Sieve is replete with the dominant issues of

industrialization (building tannery by the westerns), urbanization, women’s oppression and

6

exploitation in male dominated society, women’s connection with nature and environment’s

degradation, class and gender issues. Further Rukmani’s deep tie with nature and the problem

of tannery can, also be introduced from the very text, as 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,

2002, p. 241). It is also important to note that her reproductive labour and her domestic duties

are not given any value in this rural male chauvinistic society. On the other hand Tannery is

also a big issue for those who have deep ties with nature. “It had taken children’s place and

made bazaar prices too high” (14). It had destroyed environment and nature. “Not a month

went but somebody’s land was swallowed up, another building appeared. Day and night the

tanning went on. A never ending line of carts bought the raw material in.”(47).

In the end Rukmani, her husband did not find what they hoped for from their sons and

from the land. Their desires dashed to the ground as their wishes could not come true from

both sides; there is only Irawaddy in the last to help Rukmani by earning from her illicit

profession, which she considers sacred and above, over so called moralities. Here Rukmani

due to continuous prey of grieves is called “mother of sorrows”. She dislikes changes that are

at the climax in her surroundings. On the other hand Doctor Kenny represents “progressive

enlightenment” and likes constructive programs for rural development and reforms during

post colonial era and promotes social services. Here in the company of English doctor

Kenny, Rukmani refutes the claim that she as a third world country‘s peasant woman is made

for land, and sees problem in her relation with nature. The point of resolution of her identity

crises is considered through her dealings with Kenny.

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).

To establish my own point of view 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

7

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 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. Further, in Pakistan, ecofeminism is a neglected

field, as neither any research has been conducted under this theoretical approach, nor any

such literature has been written by Pakistani or Pakistani expatriate writers, while the land of

this country is being abused and destroyed. This land/ environment have an undeviating link

not only with women, but with all other human beings also, living on this planet. In the same

way it is associated with literary circle also, because it deals with human beings and living

non humans .These overriding issues make this statement worthy of investigation, as it is a

field worth attention and there is dire need for writers to write in this stream, while scholars

have a need to research in this dimension to set a social message as a result. Moreover, my

teachers became a source of inspiration and motivation to carry on my research in this new

ground, and they really mentored me to touch this exceptional field. Hence, I can say bluntly

that women and land both are abused and devalued particularly in masculine regimes, where

their worth is not considered, where people don’t come to the fact that destruction of land

will perish and disappear them from its surface. I argue that we may healthy, if our land/

environment is healthy, and if we value both of our land and ladies by considering them two

independent entities, and don’t intermingle them due to some of their identical (like

reproductive) qualities we will be esteemed and valued in the world (my emphasis).

8

1.2- Statement of the Problem

Women are not given any significance and weightage in male dominated rural societies.

It is considered there, that women are more prone towards nature, and have similar qualities

also, like nurturance and reproduction; due to which these societies and many other societies

view women and nature as the same, inferior, oppressed and subjugated beings. Though, both

these entities are productive, yet they are not given equal importance and are not considered

independent and valuable entities. Both (women and environment) are abused by the agents

of patriarchal domination and by the agents of capitalism. Moreover the process of

industrialization is a source of exploitation and oppression for gender and class.

1.3- Research Questions

Q.1- How does the text create two parallel and independent entities- women and

environment, by means of demonstrating a complex environmental perspective?

Q.2- How does the text establish theory’s triangular relationship (between, gender, class and

environment) by means of developing an intersectional matrix?

1.4- Significance of the Study

Very few researches have been conducted on ecofeminism on ecofeminism. Here in Pakistan

Ecofeminism is a neglected field, both in writing and research, while our women and

environment are facing grave problems of devaluation and degradation and demands

attention. That is why I took this issue to do work on. This research will set a social message

and will set a pathway for coming researchers. This will also enable the readers to understand

the value and dignity of women and nature as two equally important but independent beings;

by highlighting the serious issues of humiliation of women (especially working class women)

and nature. This theory is significant because it allows us to do research in multiple

dimensions and is potentially pertinent and applicable to English studies.

1.5- Rationale of the Study

Objectives of my research are to reveal subtle affiliation between women and nature, and to

find out how text establishes them as two analogous but independent entities even in a

multifaceted environmental perspective. Another objective of this research is to trace that,

how the gender issues in the novel are related to proposed theoretical framework, and

9

ascertain a triangular relationship (between gender, class and environment) by developing an

intersectional medium.

1.6- Theoretical Framework

Theoretical framework for my research is Ecofeminism. This as an interdisciplinary

approach sets my 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. Different theorists like Robert Session, Vandana

Shiva, Karolyn Merchant, Murphy and some other relevant theorist’s point of views shall

assist me to accomplish this research.

1.7- Delimitation

My study of “Nectar in a Sieve” under Ecofeminist approach will be limited only to

analyse ecofeminist references within conjunction of Marxism and Post colonialism. As this

text has multiple points of discussion but I shall approach only those aspects that are focus of

my study under my suggested and approved title.

1.8- Methodology

This research will fall under qualitative paradigm. It will be descriptive and analytical

research. For minute textual analysis, this text will serve as a base material which will be

intensively and critically read to find out related references and comprehensive result.

Though this research is deductive, but some subjective outlook is unavoidable. Regarding

material for my research, text of the novel is primary material, while all the critical/

interpretive books, articles, reviews, journals and research papers shall serve as secondary

material. Different theoretical works will also be read and considered for the thriving

achievement of my work.

10

1.9- Chapter Breakdown

Chapter1- is the introduction, context, rationale and problematic of my study.

Chapter2- presents a detailed literature review.

Chapter3- is a detailed description of the theoretical framework which I am going to use to

analyse selected work.

Chapter4- is in depth analysis and discussion of the selected work under proposed

theoretical framework with the relevant theorist’s approach.

1.10- Working Definitions of key Terms

Ecofeminism

Ecofeminism is a multi dimensional term that has roots in different feminist practices and

philosophies. These different perspectives reflect not only different feminist approaches, but

also mirror different understandings of nature and solution to burning environmental

problems (Warren, 1993). Ecofeminists believe that 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 point out, that there is close relationship

between women and nature that comes from their shared history of subjugation by male

control and domination. They also argue that conventional and customary male centered

approaches are echoed in male centered practices and discourse with respect to the

environment. 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. It is a thought and awareness that comes forth with the realization that the

exploitation and destruction of nature is directly associated to the western man’s behavior

towards women, and tribal land. The relationship of women and nature can be taken as

positive medium for personal remedy and cure (Birkland, 1993).

Post Colonial Ecofeminism

Young, C.J.R defines post colonialism as a state in which a former colony has

ostensible sovereignty because the former master has not left entirely or has taken a new

11

form of domination. The struggle for freedom, thus, continues, not so much by pushing the

foreign away, but in redefining the social structures that continues to promote inequality and

subordination, which colonialism inherited to the new nation.

In a postcolonial perspective, ecofeminists’ critique evolves from western point of view.

When we move away from this territory, ecofeminism must spread out its focus to include

non western thoughts and to understand the double binding of female “marginalization” of

being female and being colonized. All this colonization was for the short time commercial

value of the market place, trying to control nature as just patriarchal societies tried to control

women.

While Val Plumwood, an Australian ecofeminist, in Graham Huggan, and Hellen Tiffin’s

book “Postcolonial Ecocriticism” (2010) describes the very ideology of colonization to

mingle up anthropocentrism and eurocentrism, where anthropocentrism underlies

eurocentrism to justify those forms of European colonialism that consider indigenous

cultures as primitive, less rational, and closer to children , animals and nature.

Socialist Ecofeminism

Socialist ecofeminism, like ecofeminism argues that women are somehow closer to

nature, even if the affiliation is socially constructed. Ecofeminists working with socialist/

materialist stream look upon nature and human nature as a production of society, rooted in

the scrutiny of class, gender and race. This class of ecofeminists argues that this framework

has more potential to evaluate the issue more scrupulously. Going far away from radical

feminists, this ecofeminism puts forward a critical study of overriding and prevailing

patriarchy (patriarchal stereotypes to consider women as merely nurturing and caring beings),

having focus on the dialectical relationship between capitalist’s production, and nature/

environment, women’s reproduction (Merchant, 1992). To focus only on women’s caring

nature leads us towards the notion that women are just intuitive and discourages them from

expanding the human horizons and capacities (Sandilands, C. 1999).

Alienation:

Alienation is the process by which worker is alienated from his/her natural work, from the

community in which s/he lives and even from himself/herself. It is the practice, commonly of

the capitalist or bourgeois class to act as masters of the lower/worker community, to rule

12

them as their subordinates and to let them work according to their own desires and needs by

neglecting their natural capabilities.

Displacement:

As a postcolonial term it is a phenomenon that brings crises of identity. A valid and

active sense of self may have been eroded by dislocation, due to experiencing enslavement,

or voluntary removal for indentured labour. It is not only physical displacement but a sense

of being out of place socially and culturally. Moreover, this displacement brings alienation of

vision and the crises in self image (Ashcroft, B. et al., 2004).

13

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Kamala Markandaya is very much familiar with the southern region, and is identified as

master in the memorable depiction of female characters and nature in her novels.

Doctor Rakesh Ravi (2010) provides a comprehensive and concise evaluation of Kamala

Markandaya’s personality and her works. Her novel under study “Nectar in a Sieve” (1954)

has been discussed as a true picture of rural and urban India by depicting Rukmani as an ill-

fate poor lady later on a widow. Her exalted struggle with imprecise and indefinite destiny

makes her character sublime on one hand and brings to light the miseries and hardships of

Indian farmers on the other. This work is also taken as an account of false display of money,

defective planning of funds; want of education, gender issues, environmental issues, working

class exploitation and corruption. Her some other works like Inner Fury (1956) projects the

eternal clash between passion and patriotism. Further it also gives an account of a love story.

Another celebrated work A Silence of Desire (1960) deals with spiritual realities. It exposes

the traditional and the modern values in the family. Possession (1963) deals with minor

characters, how people help others to get benefit from them in future. They make

conspiracies against them if they go against their choices. Another popular novel A Hand

Full of Rice (1966) brings out the ill effect of large scale industry on rural economy. Two

Virgins (1973) highlights the impact of blind modernism on rural life, in which character

fails to live in traditional places and leave them in order to join big cities.

Dona Seaman (2007) in her article “Another Look At: Kamala Markandaya’s First

Novel Nectar in a Sieve” depicts this novel as a story of a peasant family in rural India and of

the acceptance and creativity with which they met economic changes and natural disasters.

Dignity of character, self confidence, and unselfish love are portrayed with a skill and charm

that alleviate the baser human attributes and the solemn succession of tragedies that

industrialization brought to their village. She also gives value to this work by saying a novel

to read and perhaps reread for full appreciation; and further elaborates her deep affection for

Markandaya’s eye-catching ability into the endless labor of the rural poor and the tyranny

and oppression of women.

Nidhi Bhatt in her article “A Comparative Study of New Woman through the female

protagonist of Kamala Markandaya and Shashi Despande” (2011) views this novel as a work

14

that deals with the life and travails of a peasant woman, protagonist of this novel, Rukmani

who is faced with great odds like famine, death, disloyalty and prostitution amidst a

background of upsetting poverty, brings a constant battle. She appreciates Rukmani’s

revelation of such a world as the literate people are seldom find to examine and values her

description of Rukmani’s starvation as powerful and timeless.

Rosemary Marangoli George in her article, “Where in the World Did Kamala

Markandaya Go (2009) argues that written in London, where Markandaya had lived since

1948, Nectar symbolizes the life of female protagonist Rukmani, whose whole life mapped in

this story appealed the audiences internationally. She also notes this novel as a contrast

between East and West. Further she develops a similar tributary of peasant woman projection

in Mahboob Khan’s worldwide circulated block buster feature film Mother India, Pearl S.

Buck’s The Good Earth and Nectar in a Sieve. In all these texts the pliability and dignity of

the peasant woman is especially celebrated.

Asha Rani and Shasha Bansal (2011) argue that Nectar in a Sieve tells the story of one

woman’s search for something that is her quest for peace, happiness and shelter amidst

hardships, oppression and sufferings. They also argue that the novel narrates the rise and fall

of Rukmani’s family as India grows and changes around her. These writers argue that this

gloomy scenario of Indian village is due to economic, political and social changes that can be

overcome by mutual understandings and by creating harmony among human beings and

social classes.

Bend like the Grass: Ecofeminism in Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve (2011)

is an article by Dona C. Mount, in which she negotiates Nectar in a Sieve as Rukmani’s

attempt to recover and recuperate those elements of her rural life that she feels most deeply

about, namely her sense of community and connection with the land and tradition She further

elaborates Rukmani’s struggle to maintain dignity and control over the life as some of the

complex ways in which rural women of the global south discuss modernity. By considering it

a postcolonial text she takes this novel’s structure very much similar to another early post

colonial novel, Chinua Achebe’s “Things Fall Apart”, where the slow motion and

conventional pattern of rural life is suddenly altered by a commotion brought on by outside

forces. She also explains the reason behind this novel writing as an attempt to purify western

thinking of unbending patriarchal binaries that maintained the oppression of both women and

15

non human nature through the historic associations of women with nature and as therefore

inferior to men. Novel can also be read in the context of post Independence Indian “Hunger

Novel”, and it also becomes a feminist text like the theoretical works of Carol J Adams and

Josephine Donovan, who have worked to make prominent the connections between the

subordination of women and subordination of animals. Further she writes that the analysis of

Rukmani’s character gives her a chance to have a look on ecofeminism, theorizing about the

connection between rural women and the environment. Her nature of working in the text

develops a type of closeness between her and land which is very similar to the early

ecofeminist writings of body and spirituality. On the other hand her complete reliance on the

piece of land for her survival reveals a susceptibility that troubles the celebration of this close

connection. She also highlights that Rukmani favors this direct relationship with nature over

the alienation of city life that was in the form of mechanization. On the other hand, Susheela

Rao in the same article finds Rukmani’s relationship with nature as well as her connection to

the dynamics of season. Rao points to many passages in which Rukmani gives value to the

artistic beauty of the landscape.

Paresh R. Patel (2009) in his article “Woman as a major character in Kamala

Markandaya’s Selected Novels” focuses upon the woman as an eternal universal mother

figure bound by love and fondness to hearth and home. He also highlights that women are

treated as a receiver, who undertakes their journey from parental home to their husband’s

house in order to bear children for their men and experience motherhood.

S.G.Bhanegaonkar in a succinct titled as “Fertility symbol in Kamala Markandaya’s

Nectar in a Sieve” in Amar Nath Prasd’s edited book “Critical Response to Indian Fiction in

English” highlights Markandaya’s focus in “Nectar in a Sieve” on the priorities of rustic

India which include the productivity and yield of nature, and fertility of women. A fairly

large portion of the novel deals with marriages and marital life of dominant characters, with

the major endeavor of focusing on the significance of fertility. He is of the view that

Markandaya dexterously balances women’s fertility with men’s futility. Further he highlights

that in this text Nectar in a Sieve Kamala Markandaya has succeeded in pointing out the

natural supremacy and superiority of nature over man: it is a positive reception and

appreciation of mother Nature’s massive productivity and the grand importance of our human

endeavor, her beautiful descriptions of harvest and her brilliant and gleaming analysis of

16

motherhood, an indispensable and central part of womanhood makes “Nectar in a Sieve” a

productive and rewarding study of fertility. But it is distressing to know that Markandaya’s

love of nature has long gone unacknowledged, her criticism of industrialization and

urbanization, is still a point of debate on micro level, and her somber obsession and

fascination with recurrent element of fertility has remained without a diagnosis. In extension

he argues that many literary critics in India are busy analyzing the work of artists from

feminists point of discussion, therefore turning a blind eye towards the major concerns( like

fertility, role of land, and value to women) of creative writers. Her novels can also be studied

in the modern feminist dimension, but Nectar in a Sieve is a starting exemption in the sense

that it is a novel, Markandaya celebrates very much the disappointment and frustration of our

feminists’ experts, the basic virtues of traditional Indian women- love for husband and

children, a sense of surrender and sacrifice for the betterment of the family, and pleasure in

fertility. These are the traits modern women appear to have little respect for, and the hearts of

such women are away from simple pleasures of life (2001).

Anita Myles observes that women in the novels of Kamala Markandaya are beyond

doubt victims of social and economic pressures and disparities. However, they rise above all

these economic pressures and differences. They rise above all these and traverse the barriers

of discrimination only for an advance concept of universal love and accordance. Indeed their

vitality both physical and emotional is considerable and appreciable. Moreover, she observes

that her female characters are from variety of strata of society; nonetheless the common

approach in all her female characters is their quest to be self autonomous, joined with

nurturance for the family they have, and fellow feelings for the larger community of men and

women, a venture in which the women are confronted with various obstacles arising mainly

from the irregularities in the system of existing society along within the economic hardships.

As the women battle with these emerging forces they develop an established vision of life.

Though the desire for autonomy and nurturance co-exist leading to disenchantment at every

stage, yet the female characters steadfastly refuse to lose either hope or courage; they are

determined to achieve their task with a tireless effort. Perhaps that is the reason Kamala

Markandaya herself terms her novels “Literature of Concern” and through this literature she

is always in quest of seeking e something positive. She has portrayed the gloomy picture of

17

Indian society due to multiple changes in that country, yet she believes that togetherness and

joint consideration can create a momentous and significant existence for mankind (2006).

Another writer Pier Paolo Piciucco observes in her edited book “A Copmanion to

Indian Fiction in English” that Markandaya’s novels revolves round the height of poverty,

social taboos and long-established outlook, and economic dispossession and deprivation.

Underneath yhis broad pattern run the miniature currents of allied problems. There is a

subdued condemnation of some of the social norms- the yearning for sons, the disregard and

disrespect of the girl child, illiteracy and the government’s droopiness and apathy towards the

condition of the poor villagers. Nathan and Rukmani’s poverty is not only due to natural

causes but also due to having a large family. This writer regards that there is much emphasis

on fertility, because this issue leads towards unhappy marriages and family disintegration

even divorces (2004).

Nagendra Kumar Singh in his book, “ Society and Self in the novels of Ruth Parawar

Jhabvala and Kamala Markandaya” (2005) observes that the author has derived inspiration

from Prem Chand’s Godon- and the novel bestowed her great success and considers it one of

the major Indian novels for Indian Literature in English. Shik K. Kumar calls “Nectar in a

Sieve” the

‘magnum opus” of the writer. While another author credits her work by describing that it has

been translated into 17 languages including Russian in 1958. This work got popular because

it gives an authentic picture of Indian society; where people face perpetual deprivation and

hunger, and die of malnourishment. This writer also quotes K.R. Chandrashekharan’s point

of view from his article, “East and West in the novels of Kamala Markandaya” that she has

depicted life of uncertainty lived by peasants of India, who make the major part of

population. It is fate of those peasants to do work on the land, which does not belong to them

and in reward they hardly get a square meal.

Hena Ahmed in her book “Postnational Feminisms: Post colonial Identities and

Cosmopolitanism in the works of Kamala Markandaya explains that it is worth mentioning

that Markandaya charts a literary territory that spans colonial and postcolonial India

establishing her as a first generation post-colonial writer. Exploring the East-West, Indian

British encounter by weaving it into the drapery of the village life, textured her romantic

imagination, she renders it all into moving but strong accusation of the social and economic

18

systems. She draws on India for her characterization and setting, always using these to

explore East- West cultural conflicts in relationships. It is not astonishing therefore that

Markandaya chooses not to rejoice India’s political independence, achieved in 1947. She as a

critic notes writer’s concerns for the poor that inspire her to socialistic enthusiasm over

making their wrongs, right, her diasporic location can allow us to replicate on the view that

transnational, cross cultural hybrid world- views disturb the cultural originary, interrupting

the monologic discourses of modern-day nation-states. Her diasporic locations allow her as

ambassador of India to England, reconciling the manifold locations and subjectivities

deriving from her experience and background of Indian and English cultures. The

complicated ways in which her colonial and Indian backgrounds get interwoven into her

work opens up a question how for the postcolonial migrant or expatriate writer, alienation

from and the craving for home on one hand and assimilation into and the need to belong in a

new culture create an inbetweenness, an emergency in which the postcolonial diasporic

writer is both rooted in the nation and a member of broad and larger world (2010).

Indian American author Shashi Tharoor in an article “Homage to Kamala Markandaya

by Francis C. Assassi (2004) admitted that Markandaya was a pioneer who influenced all of

our Indians writings in English. While in the same article Indo- Canadian poet and academic

Uma Parameswaran is of the opinion that she is a pioneer member of the Indian diaspora, and

her best novel The Nowhere man (1972) have glimpses of many diasporic issues with which

we are anxious today. He also adds that Markandaya’s strength as a novelist comes from her

sensitive and accessible creation of individual characters and situations which are

concurrently representative of a larger collective; her prose style is smooth and controlled.

Another Indian American writer, Indira Ganeson views this book as a predicament of women

of earlier times- India’s struggle with modernity and the unbelievable acts of women for her

family. It was sad and slapped me in the face that this book may explain the many starving

lives in other countries. In the same article another literary analyst Edwin Thumboo says, she

handles character, dialogue and description with skill. All three are integrated, mutually

supportive, so that the fiction is impressive, as it creates warm and vivacious individuals.

However, a literary analyst Meena Shirdwakar has recommended that the value of tyranny

and sufferings are important constituent of Markandaya’s novels because she portrays her

positive women characters as ideal nurturers and pain bearers. Novel appeals to the modern

19

readers for its moving and sensitive portrayal of the strength of a woman struggling with

forces; they can not control. It is taken as the story about pliability of the human spirit and

the importance of values.

Dr. T N Kolekar in his research paper “A Portrayal of Caste, Gender and Society in

Indian English Novel” (2012) suggests, Kamala’s novel “Nectar in a Sieve” and “A Handful

of Rice” as the novels of human suffering, where a number of children are born to the central

characters and how much difficult it becomes to feed the increasing mouths, how prostitution

is taken up to earn a little money etc. are beautifully depicted. Professor Alphonso Karkala

highlights about the women novelists that they tried to show the world the hurdles they had

to face and the disadvantages they suffered in an orthodox world of Hinduism. These women

writers struggled to give shape and form to their autobiographical histories, which attracted

publishers both in India and in the foreign countries. In Hindu philosophy women had no

right to study Vedas (Hindu’s religious book). So, literacy became a farfetched quality in

women. In the pre- Aryan age, women were considered equal to men. It was only in the

Middle Ages down to the present, that male intended moralist society by constructing four

walls for women, to prohibit her from rights and jobs equal to men.

M. Razia in her article Feminine Mystique: Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve

(2009) traces Rukmani, the narrator heroine, through a woman’s journey from self-

sacrificing to self-realization from self- denial to self assertion, and from self- negation to

self affirmation. In her view the heroine emerges a greater and stronger character than her

husband Nathan. While according to Meera Shirvadkar, Rukmani is the silent, oppressed

sufferer who is the daughter of soil, and who has inherited age- old tradition which they do

not question. Their courage lies in docile or at times cheerful ways of bearing catastrophe and

calamity of poverty.

Geetha P in her research abstract named “Images and Archetypes in Kamala

Markandaya’s Novels: A Study in Cultural Ambivalence” (1991) narrates that structurally

her novels echo the state of cultural ambivalence through a conflict pattern, which forms the

basis of her plots- clash between village and city in Nectar in a Sieve, A Handful of Rice and

Two Virgins. While C. Karthykayan and S. Gunaskaran in their article written in 2012 trace

Nectar in a Sieve as a depiction of traditional Indian village life brought before eyes. The

novel revolves around a South Indian village where the people live in accord with nature.

20

N.Sharada Iyer in Mohit K. Ray and Rama Kundu’s edited book “Studies in Women

Writers in English” argues that Kamala Markandaya’s novels echo the more awakened

“feminine sensibility” in modern India than other contemporary female writers. It can also be

compared with “Murugan the Tiller” by Vankatramani because this work also projects the

harsh realities of rural India, as “Nectar in a Sieve” rips open the sores of rural society. He

also highlights it as a grass root novel projecting a dismal reality of the village. Writer also

writes the novel as a realistic document of a village invaded by industrialization. The

infringement of industry causes the destruction of the natural beauty, creates mess in farmers’

economy, specially uproots a tenant farmer, and brings in society’s deprivation and loss of

traditional as well as human values. The approaching of tannery, the so called modernity is

the beginning of continuous problems. He points out in detail, though her fictions are deeply

rooted in Indian soil and culture, yet they are multifaceted having rich texture, i-e her novels

tell a story- a personal story; it is told against vast social background full of sufferings and

tragedies. The hardships and the disintegration and collapse of the family fuse and mingle

with the degeneration and dissolution of the rural pattern of life. In this way Nectar was to be

obtained out of poverty and misery (2004).

Shoshana M. Landow in her article “The Value of Suffering in Kamala

Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve (1989) portrays its positive woman characters as ideal

victims and nurturers; they are from rural sections of society. They are the daughters of soil

and have innate age- old traditions which they do not question. She points out that novel also

shows their courage and cheerful ways of facing poverty or calamity. Same writer in another

article Changing Images of Woman in South Asian Fiction (1989) states that in the last three

decades, women writers have moved away from traditional enduring; self sacrificing women

toward conflicted female characters searching for identity. The interest of women writers

have changed with South Asian society and its relationship with the west. This trend in

writing by South Asian women clearly appears if one compares the images suffering women

in Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve.

Dr. Rochelle Almeida in a tribute to Kamala Markandaya titled as “The Epitome of

Simplicity” (2004) said that Kamala Markandaya chose to live a very secluded existence,

shunning the press or public interest and caring little for scholarly outlook of her work. Given

21

the mystique that surrounded her life, I consider myself deeply privileged to have had the

opportunity to work directly with this eminent and renowned woman.

Janet Goldwasser in a review article writes Nectar in a Sieve, a heroic book written

almost half a century ago, describing events from two decades before that , it is still timely

and worth reading. Despite the tragic story line, this is an absolutely beautiful book and a

testament to human spirit and zeal. She writes Markandaya’s writing reminiscent, lyrical

even as she describes scenes of sorrow. Each of us at the book club said we had been mould

to tears at some point- Markandaya has ability and aptitude to make you love the characters

as much as she must have. While Jai Kumar in his review article “Kamala Markandaya”

(2004) appreciates her as a first generation of Indian novelists to write about the dilemma of

the rural peasantry and the urban middle- class, immigration and interracial relationships. Her

strength as a writer lay in her description of the struggle of the individual in a changing

society. Though she is often grouped with the three stalwarts, Mulk Raj Anand, R K Narayan

and Raja Rao, she created with her limpid and transparent style, a distinctive place for herself

in modern Indo- British fiction. He also describes the most enduring quality of her novels,

her passionate portrayal of Indianness and a thoughtful sympathy for rural peasantry.

Elizebeth Jackson in her review articles titled as “Feminism and Contemporary

Indian Women’s writing” identifies in Kamala Markandaya’s writing East-West encounter as

a major theme as well as racial prejudice, economic oppression and social injustices. Jackson

argues that Markandaya’s early heroines are heroic mainly because of their fostering

qualities. While they submit to masculine authority, some heroin in her later novels questions

this patriarchal chauvinistic attitude.

M.K. Bhatanagar in his essay, “ Kamala Markandaya: The insider-outsider”

observes her first novel Nectar in a Sieve as basic preoccupation of Kamala Markandaya: the

protagonist narrator Rukmani caught in hard peasant life; the vagaries of nature, the attitude

of modern civilization, the forced migration to city and so on, illuminating how work without

hope draws nectar in a sieve. In another book titled “Kamala Markandaya, A Critical

Spectrum” edited by M.K Bhatnagar, Pradnya Vijay Ghorpade’s succinct Rural India in

Kamala Markandaya focuses on the tragic predicament and dilemma of Indian peasants

depicted by Markandaya in a natural realistic way. It focuses effectively on the theme of

hunger, social problems such as poverty, lack of family planning, crime, beggary,

22

unemployment, prostitution, the zamindari system, demoralization and undermining,

industrialization, caste and class conflict, superstitions, dowry system, low status of women,

evil of the marriage system etc are evocatively portrayed by Kamala Markandaya. Further he

mentions that writer gives a graphic picture of the rural life and its hardships. The sufferings

described in the novel have typical rural touch; whether it is social, economic or religious

level, the novel focuses on the Indian villager’s life and its manifestations. S.Z.H Abidi

remarks, “Markandaya’s social realism is very close to the observed condition of life”

(2002).

Kai Nicholson in “Social Problems in the Indo-Anglican and Anglo-Indian Novel”

says, with her flawless and perfect representational realism and innovative description of

Indian arcadia, Markandaya achieves a perfect deportment between the rural reality and the

disciplined urbanity of art. The novelist has made Rukmani, the protagonist; narrate the tale,

in order to show the subtle intensities of the poignant fabric. She has made a woman the

central character because she knows that woman is at the center of the socio-economic

structure of the Indian peasant and rural families. Rukmani is a symbol of an Indian rustic

woman. Her views are reflections of a typical socio-cultural philosophy which is designed to

make an Indian woman tolerant, subservient, innocent and easily satisfied with her lot.

Moreover, she highlights another important point that Markandaya’s portrayal of the Indian

village life and social system has an appeal beyond time limits.

Anil k. Bhatnagar’ in “Kamala Markandaya: a thematic study” is of the view that

Kamala Markandaya brings moral depreciation widespread in our societies in which man

exploits others for selfish purposes and tempt for modernity corrupts man’s moral values.

She also highlights in her fiction; how the violence of nature and rapid industrialization led

her protagonist Rukmani and her family to hunger and deprivation. She depicts the life of

labor and uncertainty lived by leaseholder farmers. Moreover she brings out the fact that

hunger like evil leads the families eventually towards degradation. It is irony of fate that

people condemn a person for his bad acts without considering and analyzing the

circumstances responsible for doing this. He also highlights Markandaya’s evaluation that

poverty, famine and hunger leads to disintegration of family accompanying incalculable

sufferings (1995).

23

Sudhar Kumar Arora in his book “Study of Kamala Markandaya’s Women” argues that

India is the centripetal force in her novels, replete by confusion, violence, economic

discrepancy, raging social and political changes her novels are praised due to social realities.

She presents East and West in her works rather she seems to have undertaken the mission of

interpreting the east to west. She treats the theme of tragic waste, the desolation and despair

of unfulfilled or ruined love, the distress and agony of artistic ambition, the quest for self

realization and truth by the young, all these themes are not only popular among South Asian

countries but also popular with American and European novelists of this time period of

ongoing decades. She comes to fore with firm willpower to carry on her fight for oppressed

and subjugated women in male dominated society. Being a woman she inherits inborn

proclivity to delve on the predicament of women especially rural oriented women. She

perceives their wretchedness and misery from a sociological and psychological standpoint.

She delineates their plight in the form of rootlessness and identity crises; a desire to be

treated not only as mother or sister but also as an independent and liberal subjective being.

He is also of the view that being herself a woman she has chosen woman characters as the

protagonists of her novels. As a woman, consciousness about women and their dilemmas are

central to her world, it is rather natural that the key characters in her fiction should be

women. She has put forward their problems, yearnings and aspirations, failures and foibles of

these female characters are at the hub in her literary texts (2006).

A critic Balaram Gupta in his book “Indian English Literature” projects Rukmani as

a mother figure, who symbolizes the mother earth. She is the virgin soil, the origin, the

source, the life giver, the well mechanized, the nurturer, the sustainer, the helper, and even

more, the last remedy, the consoler, the healer. Her honesty and veracity is never on the

verge of collapse. Further he depicts Nathan as a stereotypical, conventional character, a

passive victim, a poor tenant in every sense (1976).

Another critic M.K.Naik feels that kamala Markandaya’s work “Nectar in a Sieve” is

artificial in that Rukmani’s village exists only in the expatriate’s imagination of her creator,

while some others accuse and claim that she has oversimplified the rural Indian scene of

which she is an absent narrator. She is alleged of overplaying poverty and sufferings with a

conscious effort to make her fiction acceptable among Western literates (1982). While

several others point out novels strong points like how the villagers suffer when village’s land

24

changes from agrarian to industrial and it also focuses on emerging inconsistency between

tradition and modernity. The work also shares significantly the concerns expressed by Leavis

and Thomson’s perception of “the organic community” of course without longing and

melancholy. As they maintain that outward and obvious sign of that loss of the organic

community was the loss of the human naturalness, which can be seen in the building of

industrial era. The rural life has been depicted as a kind of violence by inducing industries

into its roots. So her concerns are very rightly similar to the Leavis and Thomson. C.K.Naik

in his succinct Rural India in Transition: “A Study of Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a

Sieve” writes that Markandaya similar to Lawrence is sensitive to ugliness of the

environment because she has so flamboyant realization and experience of what is vanished to

the village life. He elaborates that Markandaya has given voice to her feelings through her

narrator Rukmani, who then wants to flee from ugly and hideous surrounding (1969).

Niroj Banerji writes that “her novels are as crystal clear as the water of hilly lake. There is,

undoubtedly, a kind of classical lucidity and transparency about them. The novelist does not

get lost in the meanderings of the Joyacean Ulysses; she rather emerges sure and successful

with each successive fictional narrative. This speaks of the continual growth of her mind and

art which alone can ensure her a permanent rank among the major fiction- writers of

commonwealth literature”( in Arora, 2006). Sudhir rightly observes that the wide corpus of

her novels is full of feminine colours; socio-economic, socio-psychological, socio-political,

socio-ecological and socio-religious. These colours encompass multifaceted themes like the

subject matter of tragic waste and grief, of unfulfilled love, of East- West conflict, of

psychological maladjustment and social dissolution. They expose her as novelist of sensitive

and decent, ethical concerns. Markandaya’s magical power and senses take these colours-

socio-economic (earth), socio-psychological (air), socio-political (fire), socio-ecological

(sky), and socio-religious (water)to create her female protagonists and other female

characters. Sudhar also observes that in Nectar in a Sieve, Markandaya has shown the soul-

breaking appeal to the socio-economic (earth) colour. Nature’s antagonism, resentment and

the building of industries is the humiliating and serious blow for rural people already living

in the grave phobia of uncertainties. They are people just like parasites, depending wholly on

nature. She also presents variety of replica of hunger before the readers and makes them feel

of the hardships and afflictions of the villagers as an independent observer. Indira Ganson in

25

introduction to the novel “Nectar in a Sieve” mentions though South-Asian fiction is replete

with child brides and wife burning. These stereotypes and realities seem to be attractive for

the western readers, but Markandaya establishes her point on the issues of daily life. We

come to know through this writing that it means to make a home, have children and have a

propensity towards field; what happens when the home, children and field are lost (2010).

Pravati Misra in a book “Class Consciousness in the novels of Kamala Markandaya”

writes that her early inclination to write fiction coincides with her deep concerns about

poverty and immorality, conflicts and hardships, aspirations and dream of the down- trodden

class. Two of her early novels “Nectar in a Sieve” and “A Handful of Rice” contain symbolic

sketches of the ravenous community, the oppressed working class which struggle to a great

extent for bare continuation and subsistence both in the rural and the urban areas. He further

explains that unlike Chinua Achebe, Woll Soyinka and Caribean writer V.S.Naipaul, who

reflects a deep sense of aggravation and frustration at the scattered old order and at the defeat

of conventional values, Markandaya shows her well-built confidence on the undaunted spirit

of the Indian social order to keep going itself even through the worst of trials and

tribulations. In the same way Uma Paraseswaran observes: it is painless to compress tears of

sympathy for the dilemma of peasant, underfed, oppressed, uneducated and easier still to

provoke anger and disgust for the illogical, superstitious and under progressive masses. They

stand there defenseless; open to every attack, be it indifference, emasculating aid and

donation or disdain. But to evoke esteem even envy, for the simple faith and steadfast

stubbornness they need sympathy and skill which Kamala Markandaya shows in her works.

As Nectar in a Sieve is a lucid and patent record of the afflicted life of villagers and their

social customs and institutions like child marriages, widowhood, ignoring female child,

slavery, landlessness, casteism, homelessness and illiteracy. Pravati Misra also tells us that

the bleak picture of social disparity and unhealthy consequences of urbanization has been

painted in Mulk Raj Anand’s Coolie (1936), Bhabani Bhattacharya’s So Many Hungers

(1947), and He Who Rides a Tiger (1954); Niroj Banerji comments in the same paper about

Markandaya’s realistic study of rural pathetic figures, “ at best, she is a novelist from those

sensitive individuals placed in certain strong situations and of their subsequent actions and

reactions in the given social and cultural context ( in Misra P. 2001) .

26

Markandaya seems to suggest by the resilient humanism of an individual like

Rukmani, whose unrestrained faith looks certainly beyond all physical sufferings and

partakes of that peace that surpasses all understanding. She remains a symbol of Indian

pastoral poor peasant, who has been educated to believe in the virtue of simplicity, of living

with the minimum of needs and desires throughout her life (Kumar, p. 206). On the other

hand John Frederic Muehl in his article Indian Village- Intimate View argues that people at

John Day Company have been awaiting for a book that would do for India what “The Good

Earth”, a book by Pearl Buck has done for china. They wished for a book with a true and

vivid picture of land, particularly agricultural land and its people, and eventually they found

it in Kamala Markandaya’s book “Nectar in a Sieve”. This book has an excellent graphics of

day-to- day life of Indian village and description of the inhabitants living in that village.

Through this spacious review of literature I come to the fact that researches in this

particular facet, which I have chosen are a few. Moreover, ecofeminism theoretical

framework as an interdisciplinary approach has not been used widely. If someone from

Indian origin has touched this issue, then postcolonial dimension is the point which has been

debated with great interest. While other dominant themes like east- west conflict; another

way of exploring post colonialism, the said novel as a poverty and hunger novel, or the novel

as the novel of rural India are the surface issues that has been projected by a large number of

writers. It has been discussed that villagers are suffering under so called modernity;

particularly women are the sufferers in those villages, they have to bear great pains and

hardships for their own and their family’s survival. In this way the detailed features of their

works and their connection/ relation with nature and land has not been remained the

significant and decisive issue among most of the writers. Another important issue that I find

missed by most of the writers is the study of land and environment. We cannot deny the

importance of ecology for our better survival on this planet, but we are degenerating our land

by a variety of processes. So to highlight this grave and momentous issue is also need of the

time. In this way my selected work under planned theoretical framework is well suited for

my research, as it is a novel issue in this field, particularly in Pakistan. So I hope to find my

work respect worthy and worth suited for modern critical and research interests.

27

CHAPTER 3

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This chapter describes:

3.1- Ecofeminism (as a theoretical framework)

3.1.1- Woman in nature (Shiva’s point of view)

3.2- Origin and evolution of ecofeminism

3.3- Intersections of ecofeminism and ecofeminists’ ideas

3.3.1- Alienation

3.1- Ecofeminism

In my thesis I put forward an Ecofeminists way of reading “Nectar in a Sieve”, this theory

recognizes both the oppressed entities that are environment and the women as equally

important and independent. 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 approaches; they also reflect different understandings of nature and

solution to burning environmental problems (Warren, K.1993). Professor Glynis Carr opines,

ecofeminist vary from other environmentalists in their emphasis on the ways that nature has

been envisioned as feminine, the equivalent and mutually reinforcing oppression of women

and nature/ environment, and the ways that environmental troubles and issues specifically,

effect women. Incongruous and conflicting arguments and stances went on to recognize the

position of men and women in relation to nature and to give answer either it is man or

woman in more close relation to nature. Critics like Prentice 1988 feel that women and men’s

gender behaviours are determined biologically and are infact more close to nature as a result

of their reproductive capabilities. Janis Beckland writes that, “I see Ecofeminism as feminism

taken to its logical conclusion, because it theorizes the interrelations among self, societies

and natures”. Third world countries have incredible hardships for women, who are the major

providers of food, fuel and water in developing countries. By documenting the poor quality

of life for women, children, people in the third world, animals and the environment,

ecofeminists are able to demonstrate that sexism, racism, classicism, speciesism and naturism

( the oppression of nature) are mutually reinforcing systems of oppression (Gaard,1989). As

a combination of ecology or environmentalism and feminism, it suggests a unique mixture of

28

literary and philosophical perspectives that provides literary and cultural critics a particular

lens to investigate the ways nature is represented in literature and linked with gender, race,

class and sexuality (Legler, T. G. 1997).

One perspective to recognize Ecofeminism is that, it is a value system, a social

movement, and a practice, that explores the links between androcentric and environmental

destruction. It is an awareness that begins with the realization that the exploitation of nature

is linked to western man’s attitude toward women and tribal cultures. There is hierarchical

dualism in dominant patriarchal cultures, that reality is divided according to gender, and a

higher value is placed on those attributes associated with masculinity. Women are seen closer

to nature in these cultures (due to productivity). The result is the evolution of patriarchal

consciousness and complex morality based on dominance and exploitation in conjunction

with the devaluing of nature and feminine values. Ecofeminists believe that we cannot

eradicate the exploitation of nature without ending human oppression.

Ecofeminism is also taken as a holistic value system as social ecologists believe that

the root cause of all oppression is hierarchy, Ecofeminists tend to believe that hierarchy takes

place as a result of the self/other opposition (Gaard, G. Edi., 1989). A superb definition

comes from Noel Sturgeon’s Ecofeminists Natures that Ecofeminism is a movement that

makes connections between environmentalists and feminism; more precisely it articulates the

theory that the ideologies that authorize injustices based on gender, race and class are related

to the ideologies that sanction the exploitation and degradation of the environment

(Campbell, A. edi., 2008). Crystal Watts (2010) defines ecofeminism as a movement that

applies feminist philosophy and viewpoints to ecological problems. It is a term that projects

the incorporated connection between feminist and environmental perspectives. Further she

writes it is an intellectual basis of feminism and ecology, which focuses on issues like peace,

women’s rights, ecological and environmental justice. She also quotes Desjardins (2006)

point of view that Ecofeminists consider social factors, as cause of ecological crises. They

believe that dreadful conditions and degradation of nature are the derivative of social

behaviours and patterns that support life styles of human hierarchy and supremacy, and social

justice is the primary focus for them. According to Desjardins (2006), societies are the

invention of human creation and the patterns of its creation help to provide and support

human ends. This kind of man made structure reinforces thoughts and lifestyle that

29

encourages oppression and degradation of both natural world as well as human beings.

Ecofeminism seeks to recognize the interconnectedness and battle these injustices; as Greta

Gaard also suggests, more than a theory about feminism and environmentalism, or women

and nature as the name might imply, Ecofeminism approaches the problems of environmental

degradation and social justice from the premise that how we treat nature and how we treat

each other are inseparably linked.

3.1.1- Woman in Nature (Shiva’s point of View):

This chapter also discusses briefly Shiva’s point of view about the woman in nature in

general. She 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, because it makes the colonizing male the

mediator and model of development. Women, the third world and nature become

underdeveloped first by definition, and then through colonization in reality (1989).

3.2- Origin and Evolution of Ecofeminism:

French feminist Francoise d’Eabonne coined the word ecofeminism for the first time in

1974 in her book Feminism or Death to refer to the movement by women urgently and direly

30

needed to save the planet earth. Almost every ecofeminists author referred the movement

towards this origin. Other than the often cited work of d’Eabonne it is hard to pinpoint the

movement where ecofeminism first emerged. But Reuther’s New Woman/ New Earth (1975),

Griffin’s Woman and Nature (1978), Mary Daly’s Gyn/Ecology (1978), and Carolyn

Merchant’s The Death of the Nature (1980) are often considered the first genuinely

ecofeminists texts that analyze the woman/ Nature connection in wake of environmental

crises. Whereas Plumwood writes that the term was first coined in 1975 by Rosemary Ruther,

and by putting it into present-day context she asserts that ecological feminism is in essence a

response to a set of key problems thrown up by the great social currents of the later part of

century- feminism and the environmental movement ( in Sandiland, C.1999). On the other

hand cultural ecofeminism was originated in 1970 claiming that women-nature connection

was developed as an invigorating and empowering expression of women’s abilities to take

care of nature. This women nature relationship holds particular importance for cultural

Ecofeminists, especially when people question; why only women talk about the safety of

nature…. because it is embedded in deep social and psychological structures, revivification

of pre- patriarchal religions, mystic and spiritual practices that deem women’s ways of

knowing and reasoning better matched to solve environmental problems. In male chauvinistic

societies women are thought close to nature while men close to culture. Nancy Hartsock

argues that this dualism is related to power structures, a way of looking at the powerful,

dominant, white, eurocentric ruling bodies, a world that fixes omnipotent center ( men) and

marginalizes Others (women, nature) (Kaur, 2012).

Feminist historian Gerda Lerner and archeomythologist Marija Gimbutas provided

some of the foundations for pre- patriarchal cultures’ analysis. Gimbutas’ theories of Old

Europe are based in her intricate and widely critiqued archeomythological reconstructions.

Her theories advocate that giving value to life, sometimes matriarchal and seldom militaristic

societies existed before Indo- Aryan invaders gradually destroyed these cultures. Lerner’s

historical reconstructions focus on the shift from small Neolithic villages to cities with the

supplementary rise of patriarchal cultural systems. Both these theorist speculate, that in pre-

patriarchal Mediterranean world religious cultures with fertility goddesses and other natural

symbols figured significantly. It was a time when cooperation not competition was given

value. During that time period deities were worshipped and women were regarded central

31

figures in those societies. Gradually, patriarchal, militaristic sky gods replaced earth

goddesses and gods. The mother goddess, whose body often constituted the earth, became the

intention and target of the influential and potent sky gods. The prototype of male deities

killing female or animal deities in an effort to establish a patriarchal order and to control

forces understood to be chaotic and confused which repeats itself consistently. Dramatic

expansion of ecofeminism in academic circles grew during 1980s and 1990s with the

influencing works of Griffin, Daly, Ruether, Merchant and others. Activists’ movements

sometimes having connection with academic file, but often outside of it, also increased in

1980s. Further, Gerda Lerner observes that while men conquered territory and built

institutions which managed and disseminated power, women transmitted culture to the young

and built the social network and infra-structures that provide stability and continuity in

community (in Myles, A. 2006).

It is also said that Ecofeminism has evolved from various branches of feminist inquiry

and activism. Drawing on the insights of ecology, feminism and socialism, Ecofeminists’

basic premise is that the ideology which gives authority to oppressions is of the same agents,

as do not consider and give importance to nature. Ecofeminism describes the framework that

authorizes these forms of oppression as patriarchy; an ideology who’s fundamental self/other

distinction is based on a sense of self that is separate, atomistic(Gaard.G. Edi. 1989).

Michael Zimmerman argues that during the past decade Ecofeminism has become

increasingly sophisticated and self critical. I couldn’t agree more: in the realm of theory

alone, but it has taken diverse strands from feminist spirituality, social ecology, transpersonal

psychology, Foucauldian genealogical criticism, anti racist pedagogy, postcolonial literary

criticism, and gay and lesbian history and have woven from them a vigorous and genuinely

interdisciplinary tapestry of ideas and debates (Sandiland,1999). Karen Warren an

Ecofeminists critic describes eight boundary conditions of feminist ethic. These conditions

include coherence within a given historical and conceptual framework, an effort of feminism

to stop all systems of oppression, a pluralistic structure, an inclusive contextual framework

that emphasizes humans in relationship and provides a guide to action. Ecofeminists theorist

and activists have met in world women’s congress for a healthy planet that took place on

November nine to twelve in 1991. In Miami, Florida a thousand women from all over the

world gathered to create a women’s action agenda for presentation at the 1992 United

32

Nations conference on Environment and development. The dominant, hot and favorite topics

of discussion were population, global economics, third world debt, environmental

destruction, world hunger, reproductive choice, homelessness and political strategies for

creating global change (Gaard, G. 1989). Other movements all over the world that are

dedicated to the prolongation of life on earth, like the Chipko movement in India, movement

against discarding dangerous and hazardous wastes in the US, Green Belt movement of

Kenya and Anti- militarist movement in Europe and America are all labelled as movements

in the wake of ecofeminism. These movements, it is noted that, are attempt to display the

“resistance politics” of women working at small levels of power and points of connection

between nature and women (Rao, M. 2012).

3.3- Intersections of Ecofeminism and Ecofeminists’ ideas:

We come to know by a variety of readings that theory intersects with Post colonialism

and Marxism or socialist/ materialist Ecofeminism. When we talk about postcolonial

Ecofeminism, we understand that it is a concept in circulation for some time but still at a

burgeoning stage; we have need to recognize the double tie of being women and being

colonized. A postcolonial Ecofeminists standpoint brings together the postcolonial

ecocriticism and Ecofeminism into one analytical stream, and there it is necessary to

understand the exploitation of nature, and the victimization of women bound with the

conception of caste, class, race, colonialism and neocolonialism. In this way it also intersects

with Marxism, when women are exploited and doubly marginalized due to low class, and

being female. So in ecofeminism there is intersection of postcolonial, marxist and

environmental matters (Kaur, 2012).

Shiva, an Indian environmentalist and postcolonial critic and activist elaborates

further the women nature relationship, as women are an intimate part of nature both in

imagination and in practice. At one level it is depicted as the feminine to produce life and

provide nourishment. Moreover, women produce and reproduce life not merely

biographically but also through their social role in providing sustenance, and that violation of

nature is linked with the violation and marginalization of women, especially in the Third

World. She describes historical and colonial fact that all ecological societies and peasant

embody the feminine principle. When these societies have been colonized and broken up, the

men have usually started to participate in life destroying or migration activities; the women

33

meanwhile usually continue to be linked to life and nature through their roles as providers to

survive. These women have a privileged admittance to the production principle on the basis

of cultural and historical facts. Women of the third world have been dispossessed of their

base for sustenance, but not of their minds, and in their uncolonised minds are conserved the

oppositional categories that make the sustenance of life possible. For all women embedded in

nature, producing life with nature, are therefore considering about and taking the initiative in

the recovery of nature and the new insight provided by rural women in South- Asia and in

other third world is that women and nature are associated not in passivity but in creativity

and in the maintenance of life (1989). Even she also gives disturbing and pathetic

explanations to describe the current situation of earth, as the earth is rapidly dying, her

forests are dying, her water is dying and her air is dying (1989).

According to Shiva, colonialism is a steady and necessary condition for capitalists, for

the generation of surplus thus involved the reproduction not only of the particular form of

creation of wealth, but also of the associated creation of poverty and dispossession.

Development was not possible without the process of colonization; it became an extension of

the project of wealth creation in modern western patriarchy’s economic vision, based on the

mistreatment and omission of women (of west and east), on exploitation and degradation of

nature and abuse and erosion of other cultures. She argues that this kind of development can

cause demolition for women, nature and subjugated or dominated cultures. That’s why third

world women, peasants and tribes are struggling for liberation from such, so called,

development in the same way as they earlier struggled for emancipation from colonization.

Moreover, she writes that project of modern science are supported by western patriarchy as

well as by their socio-political economic systems, and dominates and exploits nature, women

and the poor (1989).

Further Maria Mies describes women, nature relationship as reciprocal, productive as

both cooperate with their bodies to let grow and to make grow. She concludes that while the

patriarchal paradigm has made the man hunter an exemplar of human productivity, he is

basically a parasite- not a producer. With the exchange of categories, made possible by

focusing on the production of life, the masculinisation of the feminine (one of the gender

based response to the process of domination) is no longer a viable option for emancipation

(1989).

34

Rosemary Radford Ruether a mystic Ecofeminists advocates in her book New

Woman/New Earth that feminist vision of a new society of social justice must have reckon

with the ecological crises. She argues that both the human destruction of nature and women’s

oppression are perpetuated and legitimized by a hierarchical social structure that allows one

group to dominate another. Reuther argues that this hierarchical social structure is rooted in

dualistic ideology which she termed as “transcendental dualism”, which stresses separation,

polarization and detachment between sexes, classes, human and non human beings, and in

this binary opposition the subjugation of inferior is considered legitimate social arrangement.

Woman as mother is a central issue in her demystification of transcendent dualism (Gaard, G.

Edi. 1993). While same critic in another book provides gender analysis in ecological thought

with an interesting nod, that since women in western culture have been traditionally

identified with nature, and nature in turn has been seen as an object of domination by males,

it would seem almost a truism that the mentality that considered the natural environment as

an object of domination of women, sexism and ecological destructiveness are related in the

symbolic patterns of the patriarchal mindset and they take intensive socio-economic form in

modern industrial society . She saw naturalness as an ideology historically imposed on

women and environmental degradation as justified by patriarchy. While Griffin pointed out

in favour of land, that the earth is my sister; I love her daily grace, her silent daring and how

loved I am, to find liberation from patriarchy and ecological devastation. She advises women

to listen their sister (Sandilands, C. 1999).

Another observation is put forwarded by Plumwood in a review essay on Ecofeminists

themes that the problem for both women and nature is their place as dualistic, which have

their origins in classical philosophy and which can be traced through a multifarious history to

the present. The focus of these founding works is the historical polarization of humanity from

nature, men from women, mind from body, and reason from emotion in the philosophical and

religious development of ideals of transcendent humanity. As Reuther writes in this analytic

stream, all the basic dualities- the alienation of the mind from the body; the alienation of the

self from the objective world, the subjective retreat of the individual, alienated from the

social community; the domination or rejection of nature by spirit- all these have its roots in

classical Christianity ( in Sandilands, 1999).

35

Human exploitation of nature is not only based on the ideology of male domination,

Huey- Lily comprehensively enunciates, but also have a profound impacts of gender on

environmental problems, because men’s traits like aggression, competitiveness and

militarism are related to the ecological destruction while women’s traits like nurturing, caring

and compassion are associated with the ecological receptivity. In the same book Vinda Lance

aroused contempt against ecofeminism by saying that, didn’t they recognize their own

oppression realized that environmental degradation has proceeded to a point where everyone

is threatened regardless of race, class or gender and became involved with environmental

struggles. He discovered that environmental action is hopelessly male-oriented with an

emphasis on rights and obligations. While defining ecofeminism he explains it essentially a

conceptual framework that can suggest a number of courses of action. Its other aspect is

analytic methodology. To be an ecofeminist means to be constantly aware of relationships-

between humans and non humans and their pattern of domination. For him the fourth element

of ecofeminism is a process that respects difference and encourages discussion and that

embraces a range of praxis. Diversity of experience and expression, like assortment of life

forms is a necessary goal of ecofeminism. In this way an ecofeminists future requires us to be

visionary and be patient at the same time (Sandilands, C. 1999).

Patrick Murphy expands on his theory that Bakhtinian dialogics can allow for uniting of

multiple concerns: “A triad of perceptions has appeared, which, if integrated, can lead toward

an affirmative praxis: the Bakhtinian dialogical method, ecology, and feminism”. He argues

that feminism and environmentalism have been separated far too long, as have the concept of

theory and practice. Ecofeminism as a theoretical framework necessarily leads to action. The

dialogic method leads to active contact—dialogue between groups and concepts that suffer

due to artificial separation. Murphy bemoans the tension between Marxists and feminists

who argue over, whether issues of class or gender should receive more attention.

“Philosophical linearity” has kept the two groups of theorist apart, Murphy writes, “and the

struggle to end both patriarchy and capitalism needs to be placed in an even larger context:

the relationship of humanity with nature. Gretchen Legler echoes many of Murphy’s

concerns. For example, in her succinct “Ecofeminists Literary Criticism” Legler defines

Ecofeminism as a hybrid criticism that mixes environmental and gender concerns for a very

specific reason. She asserts that the abuse of land continues because Earth has been

36

conceived as feminine. Like Murphy, and other ecofeminist critics she argues that

construction of nature as female is essential to the maintenance of this harmful

environmental ethic and is essential to the maintenance of hierarchical ways of thinking that

justify the oppression of various “others” in patriarchal culture by ranking them “closer to

nature” or by declaring their practices as “natural” or “unnatural”. Ecofeminists suggest that

the reimagining what nature is and what kind of relationship can exist between humans and

nonhuman world is part of the elimination of institutionalized oppression on the basis of

gender, class, race and sexual preferences and part of what may aid in changing abusive

environmental practices (Legler, T.G. 1997).

Marti Kheel elaborates, if the images of women and nature under patriarchal society

have facilitated the exploitation and abuse of both, then new ways of perceiving the world

must be sought. The natural world will be saved not by the sword of ethical theory, but rather

through a transformed consciousness toward all of life. Nature which has been imaged as

female has been depicted as the “other” the raw material out of which culture and masculine

self -identity are formed. In this way, there is need to transform consciousness of the

patriarchal society (1989).

Carolyn Merchant a socialist Ecofeminist has presented a detailed history of western

social practices around nature and described a transition from organic to

inorganic/mechanical one. Where once mother Earth was a source of fright and veneration-

she insisted that the earth was considered female and this gendering worked to the advantage

of women before the scientific revolution. Further she argues that in an earlier Judeo-

Christian doctrine, there already existed domination over nature and women, but the

emergence of scientific rationality was the final twist that released the full destructive

potential of western patriarchal culture. The development of modern science allowed that the

already existing Judeo- Christian desire to recover man’s lost domination over the universe,

materialized specially over nature (Merchant, 1980).

She also puts forward a fundamental question in socialist/ materialist ecofeminism, “what

is at stake for women and nature when production in traditional societies is disrupted by

colonial and capitalist development?” Now the potential of socialist/materialist ecofeminism

when combined with post colonialism comes to the front to offer a more thorough critique of

the matters like gender, class, domination, race and so on. Such questions can easily be

37

answered by uniting these theories into one (Kaur, 2012). It is necessary to remember that

she is the second one after Karen J. Warren to unite three theories for a comprehensive

analysis of a text under the lense of this interdisciplinary approach.

In the context of growing capitalist economic and social relations, Merchant wrote, this

“Death” of nature was devastating for the natural world: because nature was viewed as a

system of dead, inert particles moved by external rather than inherent forces, the mechanical

framework itself could legitimate the exploitation of nature. Moreover, as a conceptual

framework, the mechanical order had associated with it a system of values based on power,

fully compatible with the directions taken by commercial capitalism (Sandilands, 1999).

Merchant maintains a deep-seated logic that all women do or can share an ecofeminist

standpoint, this standpoint is relatively transparent in the daily practices of women especially

those marginalized from the history of patriarchal capitalist social relations and that exposure

rather than construction is essential for inherently ecologically sound consciousness of at

least some women. Even if white women are doing some work to achieve Ecofeminists

identity, the southern women are engaged in that form of the voice from which a non-

alienated nature already speaks. Merchant writes: women in the Third World are working to

maintain their own life support systems through forest and waste conservation, to rebuild soil

productiveness, and to preserve ecological diversity. In doing so, they are assuming

leadership in their own communities and they are slowly achieving the goals of

Ecofeminism- the emancipation of women and nature. Bill Mckibben, an American

environmental journalist suggests in his re- issued book Death of Nature, that hurricane,

thunderstorms and tornados become not acts of God but acts of men (2006). For him the end

of nature is synonymous with scientific methodologies for manipulating nature, with

deliberate choices to bring about lasting changes as it happen in genetic makeup through the

process of biotechnology. Graham calls it misplaced “technocratic optimism” (2002), which

is again the subject matter of Carolyne Merchant, whose influential study The Death of

Nature: Women, Ecology and Scientific Revolution (1980) describes the pre modern images

of the earth as a precariously balanced living organism to a modern ‘mechanical order’ in

which earth is considered exploitable due to its resources. She mentions, scientific revolution

was one cause of the death of nature; the rise of industrial capitalism was another, and the

third was colonial expansion, similar to capitalism by the ideologies of possession, global

38

management of material assets, and the economically motivated conversion of human labour

into natural resource.

Within many cultures, anthropocentrism has long been naturalized, Val Plumwood argues.

The absolute prioritization of one’s own species’ interest over those of the silenced majority

is still regarded as being only natural. She further claims that ironically animals and the

environment are often excluded from the privileged ranks of the human, considering them

available for exploitation, as Cary Wolf explains by citing Derrida: The humanist concept of

subjectivity is inseparable from the discourse and institution of speciesism which relies on

the unstated acceptance and the full transcendence to the human by sacrificing the animals or

animalistic. It makes possible a symbolic economy in which we can engage in a non criminal

putting to death, as Derrida puts it, not only of animals but of humans as well by marking

them as animal. In this way Post colonial/ Ecocritical alliance brings out, the changing

relationship between people, animals and environment- one that requires attention in turn, to

the cultural politics of representation as well as to those more specific processes of

meditation that can be recuperated for anti-colonial critique (in Huggan, G. & Tiffin, H.

2010).

Now a days, problems are being complex by the wide spread perception that modernity is

post natural in the dialectical sense of losing human connection to the natural environment.

One dimension of this dilemma is that presented by Horkheimer and Adorno, whose work

traces the historical process- consolidated by modernity by which after nature, the mimetic

relationship to nature that characterizes what they call the pre- civilized period after nature,

the rational assertion of human beings over and against nature, in what they call historical

phase. Adorno can be called ecological thinker, when he shows how the progress of

rationality turns into opposite, which suggests that the technologies developed and endorsed

by modernity have the power to emancipate, but also to eliminate the world. Horkheimer and

Adorno’s historical phase can also be looked at through the ‘end’ or ‘death’ of nature thesis,

which is generally embedded in terms of the pre dominance of a new, mechanical order over

an earlier, organic one, although- as Horkheimer and Adorno- these two orders are by no

means mutually exclusive, and any understanding of modernity must take account of the

ways in which they are deliberately entangled (Huggan, G. & Tiffin, H. 2010).

39

Michael Zimmerman again argues, during the past decade that ecofeminism has become

increasingly sophisticated and self critical. It is not the theory alone, but it has diverse strands

from feminist spirituality, social ecology, transpersonal psychology, Foucauldian

genealogical criticism, Heideggarian philosophy, anti racist pedagogy, postcolonial literary

criticism, and gay and lesbian history and has woven from them an effervescent and

genuinely inter-disciplinary tapestry of ideas and debates. (Sandiland, C.1999).

Vandana Shiva’s Staying Alive represented an important moment in the unfolding of

Ecofeminists analysis in a response, to include considerations of racism and colonialism. She

argued that development was a project of western patriarchy. She relied heavily on earliest

Ecofeminists analysis of dualism and difference but at the same time added a significant

analysis or development as one of the logics of patriarchy unaddressed by earlier

ecofeminists. Shiva, the third world, Indian activist and environmentalist maintained that not

only could the oppressions of women and nature be linked to oppressive dualistic

constructions of the other, but so too could racism and colonialism. The development was in

fact “mal (e) development”, the domination of feminine principle by the masculine. All

problems of oppression, including the physical demolition of the earth apparent in most

development projects, could be traced to capitalist embedded dualism, women, as the

sustainers of life- mostly in countries of the south- needed to be empowered to give value to

feminine principle against the overvalued patriarchal consciousness of the technological

development and economic growth (Sandiland, C. 1999). Characterization of the standpoint

is another exemplary logic in Shiva’s work to understand the experiences of women and

nature and to locate resistance to the root patriarchal problem as space marginal to patriarchal

practices. Rather than considering the feminist ecological standpoint an achievement of

political intervention, Shiva’s analysis held that such a standpoint could be accessed quite

directly in a daily lives and ecological knowledge of women most marginalized and

subjugated by patriarchal domination (1989).

Within Shiva’s point of view, another important point is the dichotomy of culture/ nature

and the involvement of man with culture and woman with nature have been manifested since

the early stages of western thought. This point of view was highlighted by Sudan J. Hakman.

According to her, Susan J. Hakman highlighted that the dichotomy of culture/nature and the

involvement of man with culture and woman with nature have been manifested since the

40

early stages of western thought. According to her, this association is not an isolated

phenomenon, but closely related the detection of woman as emotional and silly and therefore

barred from the territory of knowledge in general and from the territory of science in

particular (1990). Although nature, in the western convention has been described feminine,

her characterizations have changed along history and more dramatically with the birth of

science. Before the enlightenment, nature was feared as a wild, puzzling spirit of temptress

but also well-regarded as a nurturing mother; it was conceptualized as alive and female,

associate with women. This two sided image generated opposing attitude of respect which

constrained her abusive exploitation, and on the other hand, the image of nature as a wild

force cultivated a social desire to tame her unrestrained behavior, to control her power

(Hekman, 1990).

Similarly, when the master/ slave and self/ other dualism is applied to colonizer/

colonized, the other in this dualism is inferior. The impact of such dualistic thinking where

hierarchies are set up between supremacy and compliance, the inferiorised group must

internalize this inferiorization in its identity and conspire in this low valuation, exalting the

values of the center, which form the leading social values. In this way the categories of

colonizer, culture, men claim to be reasoned, humane and rational, while nature, women and

colonised become heir to the qualities like primitivism, emotional and uncivilized (animal).

This dualism is directly associated with western philosophy of epistemology and ontology,

where women are regarded ontological or life producing beings; they have the ability to

understand the chemistry of land on organic basis and thus they are considered best candidate

to take a stance in favor of nature/ environment/ earth. Moreover, ecofeminism oppose to

divide culture into two dualistic arenas (Kaur, 2012).

Environmental destruction due to the agents of capitalistic patriarchy is another

important issue within ecofeminism. This dimension is explored by Bina Agarwal and Ariel

Salleh; they have put forwarded their point of views about environmental destruction due to

capitalist patriarchy. Agarwal, like socialist/ materialist Ecofeminists views that women

suffer due to capitalist empowerment; not only due to natural relation with the environment

but they have such a position in a society as is the most affected by environmental decline

also and resultantly they are the most interested entities in resisting against environmental

exploitation. Salleh writes that on international scale women undertaking 65 percent of the

41

world’s works for only 5 percent of its pay effectively are the proletariat. With this statistical

ratio she brings eco-socialism and historical materialism together and stresses that since the

women are interested in tough existing productivist structures as a global majority, women as

financially viable underclass are shockingly well placed to bring about the social changes

needed for ecological and environmental revolution (Kaur, 2012).

Robert Session and Dorceta Tailer brought class observation to Ecofeminism by means of

an economic critique of society. According to Session’s judgment when we are given a

choice between saving jobs or saving environments, we at once talk about our jobs; she

mentions this phenomena in his book Ecofeminism and Work: From within the system, we

tend to think of economic values such as cost and benefits, profits and efficiencies, instead of

environmental values such as biodiversity, ecosystem health, homeostasis or the inherent

merit of natural beings. While Dorceta adds the factor of race to Sessions’ important

discussion of class in her book Women of Color, Environmental Justice, and Ecofeminism”.

She points out that environmentalism has traditionally excluded women of color, which is

somewhat ironic since damage to the earth is often most atrocious in minority

neighborhoods. Taylor praises the Environmental Justice Movement, the latest stage of

development of environmentalism, for incorporating a push for justice in Terms of Earth as

well as race, class and gender. Taylor criticizes the field of ecofeminism for not doing as well

as well as the Environmental Justice movement in “capturing the complexity” of the

concerns of women of color. She further revealed through tireless research of justice

movement that pollution affects the health of the women and children inexplicably. The

movement broke new ground when they began arguing that the capitalist manipulation of

resources was connected to the degradation of nature and women (Session, R. & Taylor, D.

in Warren).

Ynesta King, one of the founders of U.S ecofeminism suggests that life on earth is an

interconnected and consistent web, not a hierarchy. There is no natural hierarchy; human

hierarchy is projected on to nature and then used to justify social supremacy. Ecofeminists

theory seeks to show the connections between all forms of domination and reject all

hierarchies, including the nature’s suppression. Their practice is anti-hierarchical (Lori,

1993). The same ecofeminist has called it “the third wave of the women’s movement”

demonstrating her sense, at one time, that this most recent manifestation of feminist activity

42

was large and vital enough to make it equal to the first-wave nineteenth century women’s

movement and the second wave women’s liberation movement of 1960 and 1970s. On the

other hand, Vance elaborates her inner self about nature, I live in a town in New England, but

the forest is my home, because it provides the continuity in my life, the place I return to,

humbly, time and again. But as I view the wild places of my life that way, I am no different

from generations of humans, environmental despoilers and environmentalist alike, who see

the non human world in terms of its value or use for them. I may love it and honor it, but I

slip constantly into the prevailing western view of the forest, and nature, as separate, other, a

place to go to. I hardly take it as a metaphor of property and custody. The forest may be

home (Gaard, G. Edi. 1993).

Following the lead of first wave feminists and later theorist such as Simon de

Beauvoir, 1970s radical feminist analyses focused on women’s differences from men. This

focus was born in part from dissatisfaction with the ability of the other progressive

movements. As exemplified from the text of Red Stocking Manifesto; women are an

oppressed class; our oppression is total, affecting every facet of our lives. We are exploited

as sex objects, breeders, domestic servants and cheap labor--- we identify the agents of our

oppression as men. Male supremacy is the oldest, most basic form of domination. All other

forms of coercion and exploitation are extensions of male supremacy (in Sandilands, C.

1999).

She also highlights that man seeks in woman the other as nature and as his fellow

being. But we know what ambivalent feelings Nature inspires in man. He exploits her, but

she crushes him, he is born of her and dies in her; she is the source of his being and the realm

that he subjugated to his will; Nature is a vein of gross material in which the soul is

imprisoned, and she is the supreme reality; she is contingence and idea, the finite and the

whole, She is what opposes the spirit, and the spirit itself. Woman sums up nature as mother,

wife and idea; these forms now mingle and now conflict and each of them wears a double

visage (in Cuomo, J.C. 2001).

Ecofeminists see both women and nature as inherently feminine and therefore

oppressed and exploited by masculine or phallocratic regimes of meaning and power. These

Ecofeminists have a tendency to response masculinity by upholding femininity as the

43

superior mode of being. Further ecofeminism offers necessary criticism not only of systems

of masculine’s domination and oppression but also of nonfeminist environmentalism, that

take no accounts if the implications and cross pollination of reciprocal relationship is the

social and environmental. Ecofeminists’ philosophies and social movements aim to take

these connections seriously (Cuomo, 1998). Further Ecofeminists do not prefer a single

vector of analysis and make other axes of change into secondary effects, as Marxism

privileges economic forces of production, and radical feminism privileges gender relations,

thus an Ecofeminists’ perspective draws from social and ecological contexts in an effort to

develop open and evolving, rather than over and done with explanations (Lahar, S. 1993).

Karen Warren describes eight boundary conditions of feminist ethic. These conditions

include lucidity within a given conceptual and historical framework, an effort of feminism to

stop all systems of oppression, a pluralistic structure, an inclusive contextual framework that

emphasizes humans in relationship and provide a guide to action (Gaard, G. Edi. 1999). We

are needed to examine the oppression of the natural world and of the women by dominant

patriarchal power practices together or neither can be discussed entirely. Reuther describes in

New Women/ New Earth that women must understand that there is no liberation for them and

no solution to the environmental downfall within a society whose preliminary model of

relationships are power, domination and supremacy. They should unite women’s movement

with that of environmental stir for the basic reshaping of socio- economic relations and the

fundamental values of this modern industrial society (Hogbood- Oster). We can note that

writers are coming towards giving a potent voice to women and nature to speak individually,

as Markandaya gives voice to Rukmani and nature to speak itself, while these voices have

been remained missing frequently in English especially in South Asian literature. Deep

reading highlights and makes aware to the reader that their (women and nature) voices are

pressed under labor; this pressure and absence of voice became the subject matter for

ecofeminists readers and writers.

3.3.1- Alienation:

Alienation is the process by which worker is alienated from his/her natural work, from the

community in which s/he lives and even from himself/herself. It is the practice, commonly of

44

the capitalist or bourgeois class to act as masters of the lower/worker community, to rule

them as their subordinates and to let them work according to their own desires and needs by

neglecting their natural capabilities.

Socialist feminists have observed that human experiences are shaped according to race,

class, gender and sexuality, without this it is neither accurate nor theoretically helpful to refer

to them. From an ecofeminist perspective the human alienation from nature may be

experienced in one way or the other by those who have created, chosen, perpetuated or in

some manner continue to benefit from the alienation and in quite a different way by those

whose alienation from nature is not a chosen condition but a matter of force. Not a chosen

condition but a matter of force is critical point in this term alienation.

About western’s alienation, ecofeminists as Susan Griffin, Raine Eisler, and Australian

Val Plumwood have made the argument that western’s alienation from nature is the product

of a certain ideological shift made by elite class of people. In Woman and Nature, Susan

describes the way that men in authority decided that women were closer to the material world

(productive) of nature and those men were closer to the ideal world of spirit. Hence, the

identity if men was based on difference and on the separation from nature and women.

While discussing alienation from nature, Raine Eisler in “ The Chalice and The blade”

argues that western culture’s alienation from nature dates back towards Christianity and

Greeks, and is a part of dominator model, a model in which male dominant religions replaced

earth based goddess spiritualities, and that the idea of human separateness was forced on the

whole cultures. While, Plumwood’s critiques in what she calls the “master model” identity

which is deep in Western Culture’s alienation from nature. The master model identity is not

only masculine identity, according to her, unlike most cultural ecofeminists, rather it is a

complex cultural identity formed in the context of class, race, species and gender domination.

She also mentions the domination of sexually diverse others. This master identity creates and

depends upon a “dualised structure” of otherness and negation with key elements of

dichotomized pairs as mentioned earlier (Gaard, G. 1997).

Hence, human alienation from nature, according to these theorists is the product of

western culture, where human identity is found out with the help of dichotomized pairs. It

45

reveals that identity is neither static nor unitary. Only the devalued other is alienated from the

nature, which in itself is devalued. The same process of alienation has been travelled to

South-Asian particularly, to rural societies where women (working class) and nature is

considered equal and same due to their nurturing and reproductive qualities.

We can say that ecofeminism highlights hierarchical dualism, self/other opposition,

environmental destruction, social injustices, feminine principles exploited by masculine

regimes, considerations of racism and colonialism, disparaging potential by emerging

scientific rationality and opposing attitudes towards nature and environment and let the

women do work for the emancipation of both entities; environment and women. It is

important to mention that ecofeminists want to give women and nature their personal

identities without any discrimination, and that their emphasis is not to call them equal to

men. In short ecofeminist reading of fiction enables us to understand that women and nature

both exist in literature, regardless of their apparent absence. This reading also enables us to

recognize that both these entities are autonomous, and in the last it also points out that where

in the text women and ecosystem are oppressed and victimized and fight back for their

independence. My next chapter will describe in detail that how there is subtle established

relationship between women and nature, which remains the same even when nature is unkind

to men and how all these pinpoints are prevalent in the text. I shall seek help from this

intersectional and interdisciplinary theory of Ecofeminism to analyse this piece of work and

to meet comprehensive and fine conclusion.

46

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1- ECOFEMINIST CRITIQUE OF “NECTAR IN A SIEVE”

This chapter answers my first research question by in-depth analysis of the text under the

guidance and directions of Ecofeminists theory. 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 and 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 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 (in the form of western

thought of Industrialists) that allows one group to rule another and many other theorists’

point of views. 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

47

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

48

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; that has been

discussed in the previous chapter, and they come out to produce literature and to raise their

voices to grant respect to both.

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

49

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.

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 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

50

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. Their happiness can also be estimated with the fact that these rural families do not

want to move towards cities from their rural houses. While reading the text I noted; 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)”.

51

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, but

the things of their own necessity and use. 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,

“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. 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 them on their being mothers. 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

52

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

53

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

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 colonial 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. While ecofeminists

reject this colonial dualistic approach and try to establish the worth of land as well as of

women including all humanbeings equally.

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

54

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 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 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.

55

She does also 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)”.

56

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 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.

“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)”.

Kunthi and some more women, minor characters in the novel, accept the so called

modernization caused by the establishment of Tannery in the village. Perhaps these are the

people who do not know the value of independent life and again want to give themselves in

colonizer’s control, while Rukmani, our narrator, is against the Britisher’s building of

tannery in her village. She craves for the charming, hushed and quiet life of the village. She

wants to go away from the clatter and crowed set due to tannery. Their village community

has changed into such kind of people as do not give value to the humanity but only design for

their own wealth. That’s why, Rukmani mourns over the construction of Tannery because it

has taken their land, has made them alienated from their work and is a cause of destruction of

their livelihood. It has ruined their days serene and night’s slumber. This mechanization has

contaminated the environment, and more than this, it is also dangerous for different species

of animals. It is not a productive and positive phenomenon, but the obliteration of nature. It is

right to mention here Jackie, A. Giuliano’s point of view that ecofeminists construct such

new cultures as embrace and honour caretaking and development. They hold close, men and

women of each culture uniformly. They embrace plants, animals and ecological

interconnectedness. That’s why, Rukmani feels desperately sorry for those tannery workers,

who went away from nature,

57

“Deprived of the ordinary pleasures of knowing warm sun and cool breeze upon their

flesh, of walking out light and free, or of mixing with men and working beside them (p.48)”.

These mechanical people have taken themselves away from nature, and when our protagonist

goes to the Muslim houses, she says the same: 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 again looks happy when one day of the week

tannery is closed and she finds the placid and calm environment of her own choice. Infact life

in the company of nature is cool and contented. She gives a beautiful account.

“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.

She also seems to be the object of speciesist nature of this industrial process that is evident

from her grumbling against the merciless use of non human animals at tannery, when she

ponders upon, within her fears for her daughter’s safety. Here Nectar in a Sieve becomes an

exemplar of ecofeminist theorists like Josephine Donovan and Carole J. Adams, who have

worked to highlight the connections between the subjugation of women and the

subordination of animals. Here one day, when the tannery is closed, is the blessed day for

her, because she finds the things of her choice, the natural productions. She praises the cool

morning, clean and unsullied air without clamor, and a variety of notes of the striking birds.

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

58

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 white

masters to learn something, though they do some positive things yet for their own benefit, but

they do this even after barbaric and inhuman treatment; we also come to know in the text

about their savage inhuman commentary for village people. With this art they are in a

position to impart same art to the coming generation and to other people. That’s why

Rukmani grumbles when her own children decide to join tannery,

“Two sons have gone, now the third is going- and not to the land, which is in his blood, but

to be a servant, which he has never been. What does he knows of such work (p.68)”.

But in order to relax themselves they come back towards their land; the only source of their

happiness and reparation. Here Nathan for the first time encourages Rukmani, though your

son has gone, yet you can feel the joy of land that is still with us. 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).

It is a time when they have shifted themselves away from tannery resources, as their son

went to tannery against their will, and they started to live on those resources but for a little

time. 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.

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 tannery not only has taken the land of

fields but its chemicals are continuously being added into the earth to destroy it. When there

59

is 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.

60

“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 (capitalists) 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)”.

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,

61

“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. Rukmani takes these gifts of

nature and go to sell them in the bazaar. What the men do? They make “spiteful observation”

about women as there is Biswas in the text, and Rukmani does not go there. She is a typical

rural woman who has reared her children on the only source that is land. They have earth in

their blood. They are involved in the land to the extent that they cannot survive without land.

But Rukmani mentions that her children have no love for the land (p.109). 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

62

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.

Markandaya’s protagonist, Rukmani was against the tannery from the very beginning

to establish the worth of the land. She was in the state of fear in the same way as she was in

the fear of nature’s bitter side, when there was nothing to harvest and the groceries were

unfilled. Calamity over calamity! on one side there is fear of tannery and on the other side

Sivaji comes to say to empty the land in two weeks because they want to sell the land to the

tannery owners. With these outcomings Rukmani’s prediction turned into reality as she had

said in the beginning, “tannery would eventually be our undoing. I had seen it since the day

the carts had come with their loads of bricks and noisy dusty men, staining the clear soft

greens and cleaving its cool silences with clamour (p.131)”. It means, she understands well,

how they as poor beings can suffer? These establishments (like tannery) and the departure of

land are the points against ecofeminists approach. Moreover, tannery is like a serpent in the

garden that begin to nurture its poisnous head, devouring green open spaces, polluting the

green atmosphere and tempting simple peasants into greedy, self centered and immoral.

“Wavering light from the wick in its saucer of oil fell on his face, somber and serious as

it always was in repose” Markandaya gives beautiful aspects to Rukmani to illustrate and to

give a picture of her as a great devotee and admirer of nature. She is the personality that

enjoys nature on a great extent. Here we also come to know that Nathan also shows his deep

interest in land, as he wants to return to the land by considering his body able to do work

only at fields and to console himself he says,

“Together we can rent another piece of land------ live as we did (p.134)”.

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

63

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 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).

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 marvellous 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

64

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. But it is pitiable to see that the particular labour, which they do, 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 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. 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.

65

4.2- INTERSECTIONS OF ECOFEMINISM IN “NECTAR IN A SIEVE”

As Nectar in a Sieve is structured in the same way as Mahboob Khan’s film “Mother

India”, Pearl Buck’s “The Good Earth” (which deals with the fortitude and dignity of the

peasant women. Moreover it is related to “Things Fall Apart” by Chinua Achebe where

changing pattern of rural village is brought by outside forces. Critics have also compared it

with, as Thirty Umriger mentions in his afterword for Kamala Markandaya’s “Nectar in a

Sieve” Agnes Smedley’s “Daughter of Earth” and Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle”. Rukmani

shares a lot of things with Smedley’s heroin Marie, and Upton Sinclair’s Sinclair. Though

there are points of departure also, but she resembles Marie in her stoicism and shares with

Sinclair that, how poor live under inhumane conditions. In the previous chapter I analyzed

the text of “Nectar in a Sieve” as an ecofeminist text, but that analysis was of women in

relation to nature only, that is dominant and prevalent part of the text; this chapter shows that

gender discrimination and exploitation of the rural families and other social evils are also at

its affinity, as Susan Griffin and Val Plumwood highlights that how alienation from land

created complex cultural reality. Moreover, the arrival of white missionaries creates the

problems for innocent, village dwellers in the form of displacement. These points intersect

the theory and establish its dimensions in relation to Marxism and Post Colonialism. We can

note that due to having profound and compassionate tale of the changing village pattern this

text of Nectar in a Sieve is comparable to the Cry, the Beloved Country by Alan Paton, a

story of troubled and changing South Africa during 1940s. Both these works touch the hearts

of the readers deeply and inspires a rehabilitated and improved faith in the dignity and

seemliness of mankind. There is exploitation, poverty, early marriages, over population, and

patriarchal feudal systems as Misra also points out, that “Nectar in a Sieve” is a clear picture

of hungry rural peasantry, whose life is afflicted by the existing social institutions and rituals

such as child marriages, widowhood, negligence of female child, slavery, casteism and

illiteracy (2001).

In the very beginning it has been seen that dowry is a big problem to find a suitable match

in South-Asian societies. Even a person’s designation, which he has had once, does not work

in this regard. As in this text Rukmani the daughter of village headman was married to a poor

tenant farmer due to not having rich dowry and everyone said about them, “a poor match”.

Rukmani speaks it in this way,

66

“That was why they could not find me a rich husband and married me to a tenant farmer who

was poor in everything but in love and care (p.01)”.

We come to know about rich man’s standard that is dowry, rich in form, to marry a girl;

beauty of the young girls does not matter in these self centered, selfish societies. Due to not

having dowry these women do work for day and nights; not only at homes but also at fields

while their work is not valued. Absence of dowry becomes a source of exploitation for these

poor women. They are treated as inferior beings, as Rukmani herself feels when she was

taking to her husband’s house in a slow moving bullock cart,

“Such a disgrace for me”. How shall I ever live it down (p.05)”.

It is a time when she is continuously yelling and crying, during the whole six hours of her

journey. It is the custom of village and patriarchal societies to do not call their husbands by

their names, as it is considered humiliation for men figures. Similarly Rukmani also says

husband, instead of his real name Nathan.

Nathan is a poor peasant that is evident from Rukmani’s description about his house, in

which she does work equal to Nathan to build it.

“Together we twisted the fiber and bound the palms, shaping them to the roof and

strengthening the whole with clay (p.17)”.

On the other hand Rukmani’s father already knowing the consequences of his being

poor, permits Rukmani to practice hard in writing and reading, because he is also suspicious

about her dowry in future due to his changing status. He knows what hurdles can come and

stop the way of his daughter’s happy marriage. Whereas her mother’s attitude towards her

education is wretched and deplorable (woman against woman), when her father advises her

to practice hard; her mother considers it all vain and futile. She does not favour her

husband’s idea. She thinks it is only husband and son’s duty to look after a woman, while

education is not necessary as she has to do work at home; take care and fed children. Though

point goes against feminism but it favours feminism also; it often happens and it is common

everywhere that woman does not favour woman for many reasons.

After facing the problem of dowry, there is another suffering for Rukmani, when after

many years a female child is born to her as a first child. It is a common custom of the

patriarchal societies to get disappointed and consider themselves unlucky. In this way gender

67

discrimination is at peak in these rural communities. Rukmani knows about this custom,

that’s why she grumbles,

“The tear came, tears of weakness and disappointment; for what woman wants a girl for her

first born? (P.15)”.

She complains and cries, perhaps due to knowing the bitter fact that Nathan wanted a male

child as his first child. While she (Ira) is such a humble creature as sits merrily, playing by

herself without differentiating between shade and sun. It is pitiful to note that Nathan neither

gives value and care to land, nor loves or care Ira, but both are inferior objects for him. Like

the colonizer, as Susan describes, when master/ slave and self/ other dualism is applied to

colonizer, the other in this dualism is inferior. Nathan inspite of a tenant farmer has the same

standards as other people of his society have. Her first born female child is not valuable for

him because he does not want a pulling infant who would take all the things in the form of

dowry and leave nothing behind except painful memories (Markandaya, 2010). Nathan’s

approach about female child is not rational but in the dualistic approach, categories of

colonizer, culture, men are considered reasoned, humane and rational, while nature, women

and colonized receive the qualities of primitivism, emotional and uncivilized (animal). It is

quite right to say here that these rural men consider women only life producing entities.

Rukmani has become a pathetic figure on the birth of a female child as her first baby; she had

not fulfilled the wish of her husband, so she is not happy. She seeks the help of western

doctor Kenny whom she met for the first time to get help for her ailing mother. She was at

cross purposes first, perhaps due to his being western or due to being impatient with

Rukmani’s cultural practices, at which he shows resentment and uses non- human

commentary for her and for other villagers. But instead of all these drawbacks she likes and

waits for Kenny due to his compassionate and honest manners. Over time she develops such

sort of relationship as every village fellow criticizes, but we can understand that she is not

totally illiterate, she has high values for her reading and writing skills and does appreciate

Kenny’s education and humanistic values also. She has developed a kind of intellectual

romance with Kenny; a kind of love which she is unable to develop with Nathan (who does

not know anything beyond his village life). That’s why she enjoys dialogue and

conversations with Kenny inspite of his rough tone for sometimes. That’s why she starts and

fluently goes on speaking,

68

“I have no sons, only one child a girl (p.20)”.

She was unable to stop herself as she is full of complain and objections.

“What have we done that we must be punished? Am I not cleaned and healthy? Have I not

borne a girl so fair, people turn to gaze when she passes? (p.20)”

But she becomes terrified also when he offers to come and see him for help, upon which

Kenny cries,

“You are an ignorant fool,” I will not harm you (p.20).”

She gets treatment from that western doctor whom she unlike otherwise and Kenny’s

intercession makes her to born many sons after the time period of seven years. Rukmani

narrates,

“My husband was overjoyed at the arrival of a son (p.20)”.

It is also worth noting the villagers’ common practice to have a great feast on the son’s birth,

by preparing a variety of dishes. They celebrate many merry hours in this great celebration.

Rukmani mentions that the boy was not beautiful like Ira but it does not matter for the

patriarchal societies. I think it, a sheer exploitation of the female child to give her a sense of

inferiority since her very birth. Whereas Ira’s great love for her brother shows her feminine

and motherly qualities. As Rukmani also tells that,

“She looked after them as much as I did, while she was still a child (p.22)”.

It seems Markandaya’s reading of the text Nectar in a Sieve shows Markandaya’s realistic

depiction through factual explanations about Rukmani; she elucidates her class, family and

resources for her family’s survival. Vegetables which Rukmani grows in her garden are not

approachable as a whole due to a large number of family and due to their poverty. They have

to sell from those vegetables, and it is pitiful to know that best vegetables are sold and stale

or spoiled vegetables are left to eat at home. Such a pathetic picture leads us towards

Marxism, where we come to know about the exploitation of working class; where there is

double suppression of these poor tenant farmers; one by the land owners ( can be regarded as

capitalist) who receive high revenue without considering the arrival of any calamity and its

effect on production and cultivation, second, tannery( arrival of the white men with a

superficial purpose of providing employment to the villagers but with a hidden motive of

establishing market or capitalism) has created problems for these poor workers that has given

them a sense of alienation( a Marxist term) and displacement (a post colonial term). Their

69

connection with nature has got weakened due to these interferences (my emphasis). Further it

is important to note, when she goes from house to house to sell vegetables she also goes to

Muslim house and observes “her fingers, fair and slender were laden with jeweled rings any

one of which would have fed us for a year (p.48)”. Rukmani’s own prejudices and the

society’s economic differences and hierarchies are evident from this detail and the major

cause that can be taken behind this entire problem is tannery.

Tannery on one hand is the source of pollution and dirt, and on the other hand it is a

source of good wages. People working over here earn much more than the field workers and

they are able to buy more articles of daily use. Shopkeepers have made their prices high with

these tannery workers, and they showed regression when these workers were going, while

Rukmani favours their going and grumbles by describing tannery’s drawbacks. Robert

Session point out in her work Ecofeminism and Work that we tend to think of economic

values such as cost and benefits, profits and efficiencies, instead of environmental values

such as biodiversity, ecosystem health, homeostasis or the inherent merit of natural beings.

She further made clear through tireless research of justice movement that pollution affects

the health of women and children inexplicably. The movement broke new ground when

Dorceta Taylor with session argued that the capitalist manipulation resources were connected

to the degradation of nature and women. Robert Session and Dorceta Taylor’s emphasis on

the degradation of nature and women echoes Markandaya’s approach in her work Nectar in a

Sieve when her protagonist raises her voice in favour of tannery workers’ going back, and

grumbles over the drawbacks of tannery,

“Tannery has been built on maiden, an open field shared by all. They have invaded our

village with clatter and din, had taken from us the maiden where our children played, and had

made bazaar prices too high for us (p.27)”.

In this way Rukmani is full of objections and does not like the mechanization of

tannery. She recollects the past when there was no tannery, when children played in the

fields, when there was no noise of machines but peace in the presence of greenery and nature,

when the prices of the things were not sky rocketing but very common. That’s why she says

when the tannery builders go that she is not sorry to see them go. High prices are a problem

for all villagers because most of the village community is poor, workers, or tenants. Rukmani

also mourns at high prices, and elaborates the fact that arrival of the tannery has made all the

70

things beyond their approach. They have not tasted dhaal (pulses), ghee, sugar since their

arrival. In this modernity man has become selfish and corrupt.

But we come to know that men are ready to accept their arrival realizing the fact that

they( white men) will not go back , only Rukmani does not agree to accept their presence,

because those people have crushed nature and the habitats of animals as well as of human

beings, and Rukmani can’t tolerate all these. These are the reasons when Nathan speaks in an

uncultured way to knee down before them by using the simile of grass.

“Foolish woman, Nathan said. There is no going back. Bend like the grass, that you do not

break (p.28)”.

She again cries that her son Murugan has gone to city, because “tannery frowned on

him” and these ruthless tannery men have taken the life of my other son; many other people

have also been affected by its arrival. She seems to be ambiguous character as she speaks

when, her son Murugan has gone away and has made a silent marriage, even without inviting

his parents, perhaps that is also a reason that Rukmani says, “Tannery can’t be blamed for

every act (p.132)”.

There are double standards for the Whiteman as village is not a suitable place to live for

them. That might be due to poor housing facilities, poor environment due to clatter of

tannery, pollution and dirt (they themselves have created), and due to poor community as

most of the tenant farmers are living there in that village. Their standards are much high than

that of the villagers. Though they are in charge of this whole mechanical process, they do not

dwell neither in the tannery outlets nor in the village apartments, but prefer to live

somewhere else.

Rukmani is somehow thankful because her house lies at a suitable distance from the

tannery. So she can save herself and her family from large part of noise pollution but still

noise is there. The air pollution due to the chemicals used in brews and liquors is not

uncommon to them. It had made air sick with foul smell. It is a cause of bad health, many

upper respiratory tract infections. It is also a source of rich land’s destruction and has made

problem grim and bitter for the villagers. They are unable to take breath serenely. Rukmani

goes to illustrate that even birds have forgotten to sing hymns, because trees are being cut

down hardheartedly. These colonizers or tannery builders have destroyed their habitats, they

have no natural place to sit and sing; they have gone far away and their voices have become

71

strangers for the nature lover villagers. These villagers especially Rukmani thinks not only

for her own self, for all humanbeings but also for land, for environment, for trees and for

birds and animals. She is the creature to take care of all. Further, it can also be noted that the

people who can’t think for human beings can never be considered to have favour for animals,

birds and their habitats (Markandaya, 2010, with my emphasis).

Rukmani’s doing compells us to think as she is not a woman but an angel. All the day she

is active in doing hectic work in garden and at the field; in the early morning she does not sit

free rather goes to collect cow dung. It makes patent that life for the villagers is tough to

manage. It is also dismal to know about Rukmani’s son undernourishment due to untimely

weaning. She can provide her milk only from her goat which she sold due to not having

proper resources for her family’s survival.

Further there is bleak and grim picture of poverty again when Rukmani mentions the

destruction due to storm, which blew away all the mud houses of the poor villagers, only

tannery’s strong buildings were eminent there. All the huts, including Rukmani’s were

demolished. There was merciless and pitiless destruction with all of their belongings. Nature

has become destructive only for these poor dwellers of the village. There are calamities for

time and time again. People are without eating resources and shopkeepers have nothing to

sell. If someone have something to sell he has made prices sky rocketing. There is no worth

of two rupees in those days. There is height of exploitation even by the villagers themselves.

As Biswas says that,

“Two ollocks I will let you have and that is charity (p.43)”.

It is the time for shopkeepers to earn more and to exploit poor by asking high prices,

“Take it or leave it. I can get double of this sum from the tanners (p.43)”.

In spite of all these predicaments Rukmani and Nathan say, “times are better, times are

better”. Kenny asks that you too are starving and enforces them to yell on these dilemmas,

cry for help. He feels sorry for them when they don’t speak for their rights. He advises them

that you people will die of starving if you do not ask for help, that can be taken from the

landlords or from the government of that time; it is the responsibility of the governments to

compensate people during hard and depressing times. But these illiterate people do not have

such manners to cry and ask for help. Here Kenny seems to be only positive white man who

72

have come and lives in the village as their well-wisher; have come to make them civilize, to

ensure them their rights and duties for a better survival (Markandaya, 2010).

“There is nothing in this country, oh God; there is nothing (p.43)”.

Poverty, as Social scientist S.C. Dube in Misra’s book also elaborates that “circumstances”

make Nathan unable to provide sustenance to his family and these issues compel Arjun and

Thambi to discuss their final decision to move to Ceylon Tea Plantation. Arjun explains to

her mother that there is nothing for us here, for we have neither the means to buy land nor to

rent it, would you have us wasting our youth, chafing against the things we cannot change?

(P.72). In this way displacement exists when the forceful events compel them to leave their

natural habitats, where there is exploitation, alienation and suffering for them, where the rich

and greedy zamindari thrive by their ruthless agents like Sivaji, where there are cunning

merchants in the form of Hanuman, and moneylenders in the shape of Biswas. In the

presence of these cruel figures how these poor villagers can prosper, that’s why they decide

to displace for their harmonious survival.

Within this picture of poverty there is another poignant issue of gender differences.

Women, especially from working classes encounter many problems. Ira after few years of

her marriage is divorced due to her barrenness, whereas the men of patriarchal society need

sons. It is very painful to know that Ira’s husband left her, while it was his responsibility to

get medical treatment for his/her deficiencies. But it is generally considered underestimation

in patriarchal societies, and a woman becomes only a play toy in the hands of men. It is

totally on man’s discretion to take a woman or to leave her whenever and wherever he wants.

It does happen with Ira also. She, the poor figure gets medical treatment at her parents’ home

with the help of her mother, and the western man Kenny is again there to help them as

poverty is constantly there with them. Perhaps that is the reason Ira cannot get treated at her

husband’s house. Her parents are also unable to pay for her treatment, but they have Kenny

in the form of a miracle and are get treated free of cost. In this way, it seems Markandaya

wants to establish positive values of the westerns into the heart of eastern people, even after a

long rule of British colonization and after establishing the capital markets or trade zones after

decolonization. She wants to tell through Rukmani, a practical woman and a protagonist that

a small percentage of white men also live there who are not as much merciless as others are.

73

There is a glance of poverty again when Rukmani narrates her feelings about her youngest

son Arjun that her little teaching has improved him very much, otherwise we were not in a

position to buy books or to send him school. Rukmani was glad to see his efforts that he has

started to teach others, and took no interest in land, at which Nathan, a traditional farmer was

shunned and terrified; he was unhappy with his son’s decision. Arjun understood that rented

land was not constructive for them, and decided to join tannery. Rukmani showing offence

on the name of tannery mentions,

“You are not of the caste of tanners, what will our relations say (p51)”.

It is not essential for Arjun to think what others say. The only thing important to him is to

earn for eating. That’s why he does not care for Rukmani or other relatives’ statements and

goes to work in the tannery. He also mentions that,

“We never have enough to eat, especially since Ira came to live with us (p.51)”.

It seemed a burden first for Nathan when he didn’t want a female child who would take all

the belongings with her, second for her husband who left her with an accusation of being

barren; without getting any medical aid and thirdly for her brother who is a newly earning

hand of the family. Does she have any fault that she has to bear all these bitter attitudes? This

gender politics and gender discrimination in South-Asian societies particularly in India

illustrates how stereotypes and notions about women’s traditional roles are hard and

inflexible to negate. No one cares while she has become a pitiable figure. She spends most of

her time in loneliness, in resentment and in calmness. It seemed she had lost the bloom of her

youth. Her ways of thinking and feelings have been injured by all the male figures around

her. Another sorrowful issue is, who would take care of her when her parents want to move

to their elder son and they think that other sons will also get marry soon; there is no one to

take care of Ira.

Their long thinking takes them back into their past and they ponder about dowry that make

them able to marry Ira for the second time and she will get happy with this decision.

Rukmani’s son Arjun’s words on the other hand illustrates the impact of capitalism,

exploitation of the poor and alienation of the workers, when he describes to Rukmani that he

does not want to do work n the field as there is more exploitation of the workers than that of

working in the tannery.

74

“If it were your land or mine, I would work with you gladly. But what profit to labour for

another and get so little in return? Far better to turn away from such injustice (p.52)”. Here

Nectar in a Sieve seems similarity to the Raja Rao’s Kanthapura, a tale of South Indian

village by means of same narrative mode, and the conflict caused by the changing social

processes; exploitation of the villagers by the British colonizers. Though it makes them equal

on one thematic level but similarity exists.

When landlords ask for annual revenue they also say that if they get fail to pay, the land

will be given to another. How painful it is when these poor tenants say,

“It is hard time for us (p.73)”.

In these hard times nobody is able to buy anything.

On the other hand we can see villagers are not ready to live under white man’s rule for

the second time. They are not ready to get alienate from their work in which they consider

themselves “master”. They have got such skills as make them feel free and independent.

Hence, the troubles start when Rukmani’s two son go to tannery to do work against the

wishes of their parents. Here the exploitation of the workers starts when they ask for high

wages. Their discourse on labour, rights and power is anomalous to Rukmani. She being the

worker on land is unable to separate the workers from that work which she does. She is

unable to understand that her own sons would take a contradictory stand towards her own

work. Hence, it happens there at tannery that their eating times are taken back from them,

and they go on strike with that kind of stubbornness that they will not go without increment

with a logic that they are not asking for charity. Rukmani’s sons were at the forefront in this

voice. Rukmani, the poor pathetic figure advises them to obey as they are master but her sons

know better what they are to do. That’s why they say,

“People will never learn (p.65)”.

Once Kenny said the same but Rukmani was unclear. They (Kenny and Rukmani’s sons)

mean to say this is, people will not learn how to fight for their rights. They will not learn how

to raise voice against injustices, against exploitation, and against cruelty. Rukmani’s sons

have this sense because they are somehow educated. They are able to recognize their rights

and the tricks of white missionaries. These white men are also ambiguous; exploiter and

adviser at the same time. At one side they themselves are exploiting the workers by

establishing markets in the post colonized country, but on the other hand they are here in the

75

same country to make people civilized. Kenny becomes harsh while guiding them that they

should be their masters like me, and if they are not, they can at least speak for their rights.

Particularly at the point when Rukmani says that time will be better soon, he gets frustrated

and harsh over her fatalistic attitude. His harshness can be judged from these words,

“I go when I am tired of your follies and stupidities, your eternal, shameful poverty. I can

only take you people in small doses (p.70)”.

Another gender issue prevalent in the novel is of fake relations. Kunthi’s husband has left

her and is living somewhere else, while Nathan, Rukmani’s husband is living with Kunthi,

who comes to get rice and water in a manner as she is the owner of these things. She comes

and says,

“I have come, not to be seen, or to see you, but for a meal. I have not eaten for a long time

(p.81)”.

Due to having this illicit relations with Kunthi, Nathan robs his own food store and hands it

over to Kunthi, by whom he has got more sons. That is why he says,

“Not for myself, he was muttering, trying to control his treacherous voice, for another. I took

it for another. There was no other way. I hoped you would not notice. I had to do it (p.82)”.

How strange it is that he has five sons from Rukmani, a hardworking and lovable wife but

he is still disloyal to her. He inspite of poor tenant is following the rule and pattern of

patriarchal society. Then he adds that it was a long time ago, I was very young, even before

marriage for the first time I did it (p.85)”. It is sorrowful to know about man, woman’s

mutual but fake relationship when Rukmani mentions,

“The man, who finds a woman in the street, raises an eyebrow and shapes his finger so that

she follows him, throws her a few coins that he may possess her (p.114)”.

These are common activities among South- Asian patriarchal societies and common

villagers to chase woman and to develop relationships, though on fake bases to create

disloyalty among their own families. Even in hard days they, themselves are unable to do any

other work, their families starve, even children die of malnourishment, but they don’t avoid

such activities.

It is vital to note that how alienation is affecting the poor farmers. For these tenants, in

hard days when no one was able to buy or grow something, there was frantic and desperate

competition among people who have and who have not. This competition put an end to

76

humanity, except Rukmani as poverty and hunger also are unable to dehumanize her. Those

who have not, were compelled to eat grass, because there was not enough to fulfill the need.

They bore severe pain and stomach cramps in those hard days. Markandaya provides a

gloomy and bleak detail of their efforts done to make both ends meet. They have to eat food,

which even animals reject. Rukmani narrates,

“We fed on whatever we would find: a sweet potato or two, blackened and half rotten,

thrown away by some more prosperous hands; my sons return with a few bamboo shoots, a

stick of sugarcane left in some deserted field, for every edible there was a desperate struggle

(Markandaya, 2010)”.

Rukmani’s son Raja is killed by the tannery men and the text illustrates in this way that

Markandaya’s critique is not only about gender issues but class and caste vulnerabilities are

also point of discussions for her. These capitalists are not only alienating the workers from

land but are also making living, off the land more difficult by offering meager wages. These

workers killed the innocent boy in a false suit of robbery. This alienation of the poor class

leads us towards Susan Griffin and Val Plumwood’s point of view that men in authority or

power decide, what is to be alienated and from what?, where that elite class’s men are only

identified on the basis of separation from nature, poor class and even from women.

Plumwood’s point of view that complex cultural identity is based on the context of class,

race, species and gender discrimination, is the hallmark of this alienation, as Rukmani and

her family are only identified as poor tenant farmers.

Within this alienation there is exploitation of these workers also, when tannery man states

to Rukmani,

“You may think of it later, and try to get compensation. I warn you it will not work (p.90)”.

She, the poor lady is unable to understand, if death has some compensation. They continue to

argue that they have no fault in killing him, but they are absolutely exempted from this

killing; you can’t file lawsuit against us (Markandaya, 2010, emphasis in original).

We see when poverty and starvation are continuously there with this poor family, it is Ira’s

turns to do work for the survival of the family. Kuti, her youngest brother was about to die of

starving, which she could not see and made instantaneous resolution to do work. Nathan

shows resentment while she is not ready to accept any morality; only to fulfill the hunger is

her intention. She adds that she will do work each and every time as much as there is need,

77

and that she cannot bear hunger anymore (P.99). Nathan’s bitter attitude at Ira’s stubbornness

is childish, he says, “No man will look at you, defaced as you are (p.98)”. Though she was

unable to save Kuti from death, and he died of starvation. Rukmani is relax, as she feels her

son has got salvation from the cruel trap of hunger.

He is a self centered man, doing wrong deeds, even in his downtrodden life and doing

nothing constructive for the better existence of his family. While on the other hand Ira with

her doings is able to buy household things and milk for the younger child. She is a brave girl

who hides her tears inspite of a series of sorrows and predicaments. She has fought her

battles alone (p.114). She was meant to have children (same page). When she has a child

Rukmani narrates that she was as happy as a bird (p.115). She enjoyed every moment with

her son. Though Rukmani’s comparison (by using simile) of a woman with a bird is not

praiseworthy and is taken as a point of departure from an ecofeminists’ approach, while she

as a woman is a lover of mankind, lover of animals, trees and children. She describes her

baby the most beautiful. Perhaps the compensation of Ira’s life tragedy lies in carrying this

approach by negating the moralities that patriarchal society and her own family, especially

her father has set for her. It seems that she wants to assert her own agency over her body, and

also sets a way of undermining patriarchal society’s perception about Indian peasants as

subjugated beings.

On other side Kenny was back to England for a long time, he gets back here to help every

downtrodden villager. He struggles hard to make people aware of the negligencies of the

government, and the mean villagers are discussing Rukmani and Kenny’s scandal, inspite of

having their different approaches and priorities. Biswas, a cunning man says to Rukmani to

stop to listen to news, when she was going to sell vegetables. Kenny is back. Rukmani

responds it is good for everybody; he immediately adds especially for you. Kunthi has told

me that he is a good friend of you and has done much for you. She answers again that he has

done much for us.

No doubt that she is indebted to doctor Kenny because he has treated Rukmani’s ailing

mother for the first time, then he has treated Rukmani’s and her daughter Ira’s infertility

respectively. That’s why her hate for westerns has changed into love, but only for Kenny, a

western doctor; and she goes with garlands and lime to welcome him as some other people

also do. Once again Kenny shows his short manner,

78

“Outside laid a heap of garlands, rosés, lilies, and chrysanthemurns; evidently others had

been before me (p, 105)”.

Rukmani starts to describe her own hard times to which he does not respond and Rukmani

musters up her courage to overcome her shyness and asks about his home life. She asks with

curiosity, “why your wife does not accompany you? (p.106)” and in this way once again they

enter into a discussion related to gender role and gender priorities. As Rukmani mentions,

“A woman’s place is with her husband (106)”. She wants to say perhaps that Kenny must

keep his wife with him, it is his responsibility. These are the remarks what Kenny

understands from Rukmani’s statement while it can also be said that she wants to mention

that it was duty of her wife to follow him to India. Kenny is ruthless and short tempered over

Rukmani’s continuous and nasty and spiteful discussion and says to her impatiently,

“You simplify everything, being without understanding. Your views are limited it is

impossible to explain to you (p.106)”.

Here for the first time Rukmani competes with Kenny when she answers,

Limited, though my knowledge is, but not wholly without understanding (p.106)”.

And again she tells,

“I saw a spark of admiration in his eyes for the first time (p.106)”.

This meeting of her, while discussing gender roles, is a turning point in Rukmani’s lifelong

ability to speak for her. They also discuss Ira‘s quick conceiving. It does not wonder Kenny,

though they also are with some specific boundaries, but they also accept the freedom of

choice approach of a person, yet it is hard for Rukmani to accept Ira’s illicit pregnancy. It

also differentiates their approaches to life, which are totally opposite.

Rukmani narrates about Kenny’s return as another change in their life, as he is ready to

build a hospital and Selvam will find a job there. Kenny has been portrayed as a positive

character, a non exploiter, as K.R Chanrashekharan illustrates in his essay “East and West in

the novels of Kamala Markandaya”, that the novelist has projected good missionary and

philanthropic spin doing his best for a backward country without vanity or ostentation. He is

also a natural observer of Indian villager’s lives (in Misra, 2001). His high ambitions for the

survival of poor people are complimentary. He again calls, “you must cry again if you want

help (p.111)”. It again shows his approach, that is totally different from villagers (patriarchal

and peasants), and he is ready to ask for help and to collect charity to construct a hospital. He

79

gathers charity from western community to serve humanity of under developed, South- Asian

countries. There is dire need of this hospital in the poor and poorly managed villages and

countries, where poverty can be estimated by not having schools for education and hospitals

for treatment, where poor die in the streets inspite of the fact of having patriarchal control

over these villages, and where westerns want to establish a charity hospital for poor people.

When Plumwood says that anthropocentrism is used to justify European process of

colonialism, and European process of colonialism see indigenous cultures as less rational,

closer to animals and nature. She is right in her argument, but what else can be said when

people are not rational to develop some necessary facilities for themselves. I think European

colonial process and to point out indigenous as irrational, closer to animals was justified, but

the real problem was of exploitation, that on the name of help they established their own

capital and these indigenous poor became poor forever. When Kenny wanted to establish

hospital, his approach was without exploitation, while there was need of enough money to

establish this hospital, as Selvam said, “every pie has to be fought for; it cannot be easy

(p.122)”. Though Kenny is with an open mouth to criticize villagers at their deeds at once,

but his approach is without greed, and he is pitiful and careful to the people. He often comes

to check Rukmani’s husband and tells that he is not getting much to eat as rice water and rice

everyday are not beneficial for him; he also needs protein in the form of milk and eggs.

These dreadful issues explain how poverty strikes the life. Due to his poverty stricken illness

and attacks of several diseases like rheumatism and fever Nathan is unable to do work at

land, and Rukmani herself is unable to pay her forcible attention to land, that’s why she says,

“ the land is mistress to men, not to women: the heavy work needed is beyond her strength

(p.127)”.

That particular land is also being taken back by the landlords and no one has courage to

speak for his/her rights. We see that only Selvam has got courage to speak on his father’s

behalf, perhaps he has learnt to speak for his rights from Kenny. When the land has taken

back from them by the landlord, only Selvam inquires after his father to protest against this

loss. He from younger generation expresses his anger against the injustices and exploitation,

to which Nathan answers,

“I protested, but it has availed me nothing”.

80

We can understand that there is no law for the poor people, who suffer every time and

everywhere, and Nathan again says that we can only grieve but there is no redress (p.133).

When the land has been taken back they have no other source of their survival in the village

and have decided to go to Murugan (their third son). Ira is not ready to go she is happy and

satisfied in her chosen task, though immoral yet needed for her survival. As we come to

know during reading this text that many women (whose husbands do not work or those who

are prey of poverty like Rukmani and Nathan) have indulged themselves in indecent act of

prostitution for their survival. These gender issues (that men are responsible to compel

women to indulge in illegitimate acts and same men are responsible to criticize the same

women for these acts). We also get an opportunity to understand that women are more

careful about human, plants and animal’s life, as on the way, when carter unyokes the

bullocks, Rukmani observes the scratch on the shoulder of one of the bull. She mentions it to

the man who doesn’t care and only shrugs his shoulders that what can he does? This makes

evident to us that villagers are not only ruthless to women and nature/ environment but they

are merciless to animals too. Though he has no other source of earning for his survival

instead of these bullocks, yet he can get it treated for its benefit and for his own better

earning. But it is a dilemma that men do not care. They do not care for anything.

Everywhere they seek opportunity to criticize women and everything. We can see that

Rukmani, the angel of mercy is a sufferer again in the hands of men when she goes to get

charity food at the temple. She asks for her husband’s portion and gets scornful remarks like

she expects a double portion, another said, she is mad or she tries to make capital out of

charity (p.147). There is a long queue of people fighting to find out their way in an impatient

and ferocious way without waiting for their own turn, and how painful it is to know, when

Rukmani and Nathan lost their small assets in the form of money on the temple and could not

stop to buy anything for food stalls and went on the way without having a glance on the

bazaar. They wanted to go to their son’s house in the city to seek shelter, but found many

troubles in finding him. Reaching the place where Kenny has sent to her son, she finds him

absent as a man tells that he has gone for two years. How pathetic it is to know that in a

pitiable and pathetic way she asks, “Had he done some wrong? (p.155)”. Infact after the

tannery worker’s killing of her son she is conscious of such vicious acts as done by the white

colonizers. It is also pitiable that these poor figures are taken as beggars in the city periphery.

81

Again we come towards gender issues as we come to know that Murugan has gone leaving

his wife alone at home. She is living in a poor condition, without having enough to eat inspite

of the fact that she does work as a sweeper and cleaner at someone’s house. She gets only

fifteen rupees per month and free residency in return, but she has to do this to nourish her

children. Here this lady has right to get appreciation that she chooses and prefers work hard

to feed her family. On the other hand Nathan and Rukmani decide to get back as they do not

want to be burden on that lady anymore; Rukmani decides to write and read letter but poverty

makes them sad as they also have to buy paper and ink, and they don’t have money. How

lovely it is when they calculate words and money per day and they will collect the exact for

their departure. As Rukmani, now an old figure wants to go to her youngest son living at

their old house. She hopes to get comfort and support from him.

Troubles and hardships are always with her. Poverty stricken, lost in city life, away from

her natural connection Rukmani loses her husband on the way to home and she loses her only

company that was with her on the whole journey. She became alone and more helpless. She

is grieved over this loss. She finds difficult to live without him, considering him her love and

life by forgetting his all disloyalties. People on the way, showing mercy to her, ask,

“Have you no sons to help?” and she replies no- not here (p.183)”.

She is optimist about her old home and leased land that deserted her. By doing this she comes

to overturn the fate of those migrants who travel from rural areas to city. She proves that she

is not ready to accept the harsh and raucous city space as her fate. She gets back and thinks

the land “the life to my starving spirit (p.186)”. Their small home, where Selvam and Ira are

living welcomes her and provides shelter to Rukmani and Puli (the small boy) in which she

showed her optimism that he drew out all the arrow of sorrows one by one and she is no

more alone. We, the reader can just imagine about their hard and difficult continuation of a

new life in a new arrangement (Nathan has died, Rukmani has turned old, Puli is there as a

new member in that family, only small piece of land is there to live, their land for cultivation

has gone). Rukmani, the axis of this superb tale sacrifices her whole life in a gallant way in a

persistent battle for the sake of those whom she does care and give value. She has

inextricable bondage with human community and for all other characters, though from non

human community. Moreover, it can be said on a greater extent that novel illustrates,

worsened socioeconomic conditions responsible for a number of social evils that has been

82

explained and discussed in this chapter. Hunger, poverty, exploitation and feudal systems can

lead towards problems like disintegration of family, illegal institution of prostitution, and a

mad migration towards cities. This socioeconomic conditions lead people towards illiteracy,

and illiteracy is a big cause of exploitation and suffering within the worse socioeconomic

condition itself. It will not wrong to say, that to be poor is a crime in this world, and people

suffer and are punished for being poor. As long as there is poverty, social evils and

malpractices also continue and humanity gets its end out of human beings.

83

CONCLUSION

Ecofeminism as a theoretical and critical field of study can not only be taken as a sub genre

of feminism or ecocriticism, but as an interdisciplinary field it takes Post Colonial and

Marxist dimensions also. It is concluded that ecofeminism highlights hierarchical dualism,

self/other opposition, environmental destruction, social injustices, feminine principles

exploited by masculine regimes, considerations of racism and colonialism, disparaging

potential by emerging scientific rationality and opposing attitudes towards nature and

environment and let the women do work for the emancipation of both entities; environment

and women. As a social movement, it can be said that ecofeminism includes socialist

materialism/ Marxism in it. It is straightforwardly nature/ culture binary that joins women

naturally to nature. While, in a postcolonial perspective, it becomes clear that many of

ecofeminists critiques evolve from western point of view. When we move away from this

realm, ecofeminism must spread out its focus to include non western thoughts and to

understand the double binding of “marginalization” of being female and being colonized. It is

important to mention that ecofeminists want to give women and nature their personal

identities without any discrimination, and that their emphasis is not to call them equal to

men. In short, ecofeminist reading of fiction enables us to understand that women and nature

both exist in literature, regardless of their apparent absence. This reading also enabled us to

recognize that both these entities are autonomous, and in the last it also pointed out that

where in the text women and ecosystem are oppressed and victimized and fight back for their

independence. I conclude 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 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.

84

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. Further, this land/ environment have an undeviating link not only with

women, but all other human beings also, living on this planet.

In the same way it is associated with literary circle also, because it deals with human

beings and living non- humans. When we come towards the text of Nectar in a Sieve, it can

be justified that 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. Her other aspect that peasants including women and men

are regarded feminine infact, historically and colonially is also point of significance. The

novel also depicted Rosemary Radford Ruether’s argument that human’s destruction of

nature and women’s degradation were perpetuated and legitimized by a social structure based

on hierarchy (in the form of western thought of Industrialists) that allowed one group to rule

another and many other theorists’ point of views. I also say briefly that women’s working at

houses and in the fields is not the mark of degradation, but I suggest that work never

degrades a human being; it provides stateliness and self esteem to the worker. The only

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 wastes 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, it is finalized that 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; who come out to produce literature in favour of these entities and to

launch special movements by establishing non- governmental organizations and by setting

different walks.

85

It is also finalized, 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. It is also a

crux point that these villagers find their ways and means of survival in nature, inspite of its

being hard. Nature provides them in the days of high production and in the days of floods and

other calamities, and Markandaya’s approach to connect Rukmani and nature in all the good

or bad days of life, in all the complex situations of life is justified. When these villagers give

a gloomy picture of nature, it becomes necessary for me to reject their point and to tell them

the factual picture that we ‘ourselves’ are responsible for these floods and other destructions.

We are cutting trees ruthlessly and mercilessly for the process of mechanization or to

establish so called modernization, or to develop high capital out of agricultural land, and we

forget to give value to our green land. 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 destroying nature and call her

(nature) disparaging and harsh for us.

It is commonly said that nature has ambivalent role in this novel. In a compact way it can

be said that if nature is ambivalent or cruel, the same is the community also, the praiser of

nature, now curse nature. The beautiful sky becomes cruel now; the earth and gods become

indifferent. No doubt, another community is responsible to destroy the land and its fertility,

as tannery not only has taken the land of fields but its chemicals are continuously being

added into the earth to destroy it. When there is not enough water on the land to evaporate or

to make vapours, how the rain would come? And the result is famine in their villages in those

times.

I would also like to mention rich man’s standard in this conclusion, that is dowry, rich in

form, and to marry a girl; beauty of the young girls does not matter in these self centered,

selfish societies. Due to not having dowry these women do work for day and nights; not only

86

at homes but also at fields while their work is not valued. Absence of dowry becomes a

source of exploitation for these poor women. They are treated as inferior beings or the human

beings of second rank in male chauvinistic societies. I also conclude that there are double

standards for the Whiteman as they don’t think village a suitable place to live for themselves.

That might be due to poor housing facilities, poor environment due to clatter of tannery,

pollution and dirt (they themselves have created), and due to poor community as most of the

tenant farmers are living there in that village. Their standards are much high than that of the

villagers. Though they are in charge of this whole mechanical process, they do not dwell

neither in the tannery outlets nor in the village apartments, but prefer to live somewhere else.

In this way Whiteman never does favour of the orients in most of the matters, but always

undermine them and consider them inferior beings. While on the other hand tannery is a

cause of destruction not only for human beings but it also has perished bird’s habitats and the

dwelling places of animals. Villagers are unable to take breath serenely.

The pivotal character of this text Nectar in a Sieve, Rukmani, can be concluded as an

angel of mercy, a tragic figure due to a series of grave problems and an active agent to do

work for the whole day, within nature and without nature. Here women not only suffer due to

their being close to nature, but also due to many other social problems like marriages, dowry,

barrenness, being poor, fake relations and due to giving birth to a female child. Hence, they

become tragic figures due to all these grim issues and due to colonizer’s consumption of

agricultural land. Further, it can also be concluded that these villagers take interest in

education, but their poverty does not allow them to buy books and other articles for

education.

Gender politics and discrimination in South Asian societies particularly in India illustrated

that these women’s stereotypical traditional roles (equal to nature, reproductive, and

nurturer), are hard to negate or change in these societies.

I can say in a nutshell that the critique of Markandaya’s novel Nectar in a Sieve is not only

about women nature connection and about gender issues but class and caste vulnerabilities

are also things of discussion in this text. The nascent and burgeoning factor of alienation that

had created the frantic and desperate competition among have and have not had also become

the source of vanishing humanity in that village. People had no other option instead of eating

grass and they bore severe stomach cramps. The tannery builders are not only alienating the

87

villagers from their natural work, but they are exploiting them also by introducing meager

wages. They are killing the innocent lives in petty disputes and the poor parents are crying

continuously in that loss. They are being exploited that if they think for compensation of that

loss, it will not work. Hence, it is true to say that men in authority decide between right and

wrongs, they decide, who is to be awarded and to what extent. In this way complex cultural

identities are formed on the basis of class, race, and species and on the bases of gender

differences. But with all these difficulties these peasant women are not ready to accept

themselves as subjugated beings. They have done a life long struggle for themselves and for

their families. Their effort at every stage is praiseworthy and a matter of great respect.

Markandaya has given voice to nature, a non human character to speak on its behalf. It is

devalued, degraded and exploited equal to women, or even more than women in patriarchal

regimes. In these societies men consider themselves the master of all the productions and it is

right to use the dichotomy of malefactor/ benefactor, but they consider themselves benefactor

of women and nature and all other things present in the community.

Men everywhere seek opportunity to criticize women in every matter. Here in male

centered societies they are considered the benefactor and well wisher and the agents to

control women, and provider of each facility. These men do not give value to land, animals,

and women. They consider themselves the master and all in all of all the things. In this way

they use negative use of their power, which is given to them in a particular society.

Moreover, it can be said on a greater extent that novel illustrates worsened socioeconomic

conditions responsible for a number of social evils that i.e. hunger, poverty, exploitation and

feudal systems can lead towards problems like disintegration of family, illegal institution of

prostitution, and a mad migration towards cities. These socioeconomic conditions lead

people towards illiteracy, and illiteracy is a big cause of exploitation and suffering within the

category of worse socioeconomic condition itself. It will not be wrong to say, that to be poor

is a crime in this world, and people suffer and are punished for being poor. As long as there

is poverty, social evils and malpractices also continue and humanity gets its end out of

human beings.

It can also be added in the conclusion that, perhaps men bring women from their parental

houses to their own houses in order to bear children and experience motherhood. Otherwise

they are expelled from the houses just like a stray animal without getting any medical aid

88

within the issue of bearing children the dominant aspect is to have male children, otherwise

women don’t have any worth in these societies.

It can be said bluntly that women and land both are abused and devalued particularly in

masculine regimes, where their worth is not considered, where people don’t come to the fact

that destruction of land will perish and disappear them from its surface. I argue that we may

healthy, if our land/ environment is healthy, and if we value both of our land and ladies by

considering them two independent entities, and don’t intermingle them due to some of their

identical (like reproductive) qualities we will be esteemed and valued in the world.

Moreover, it is concluded, that writers are coming towards giving a potent voice to women

and nature to speak individually, as Markandaya gives voice to Rukmani and nature to speak

itself, while these voices have been remained missing frequently in English especially in

South Asian literature. Deep reading highlighted and made aware to the reader that their

(women and nature) voices were pressed under labor; this pressure and absence of voice

became the subject matter for ecofeminists readers and writers. Further, it can be said finally

that it is not the story of a particular village with only characters of Rukmani and Nathan, but

they depict the whole agrarian community who are indulging in or facing these grim issues of

exploitation and sufferings. Markandaya’s realistic portrayal is notable and a point of

appreciation.

89

REFERENCES

Assissi, C.F. (2004). Homage to Kamala Markandaya. India: Indolink. P. 1-4. Retrieved from

http:// www. Beilharz.com/autores/ markandaya.

Arora, K.S. (2006). A Study of Kamala Markandaya’s Women. New Delhi: Atlantic

Publishers and Distributors.

Ahmad, H. (Edi.). (2010) Postnational Feminism: Post Colonial Identities and

Cosmopolitanism in the works of Kamala Markandaya, Tsitsi Dangarembga, Ama

Ata and Anita Desai. New York, Bern, Berlin: Peterlang Publishers.

Agarwal, B. (1992, spring). The Gender and Environment Debate: Lessons from India, in

“Feminist Studies”. 18(1). Pp.119-158.

Almeida, R. D. (2004, June 3). The Epitome of Simplicity: A Tribute to Kamala

Markandaya. Retrieved from www. Outlookindia.com.

Almeida, R.D. (1994). A Field of one’s Own: Gender and Land Rights in South Asia.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ashcroft, B. Griffiths, G. & Tiffin, H. (2004). Key Concepts in Postcolonial Studies. London

and New York: Routledge.

Bansal, S., Rani, A. (2011, December 12). Quest for Feminine Autonomy: A Brief Survey of

Kamala Markandaya’s Novels. Language in India, Vol.11. P.101-103.

Bhatnagar, K.M. (Edi.). (2002). Kamala Markandaya: A Critical Spectrum. New Delhi:

Atlantic Publishers and Distributors, accessed by http://www. Google Books. Pp. 3-

14.

Bhatt, N. (2011, March 3). A Comparative Study of New Woman through the Female

Protagonists of Kamala Markandaya & Shashi Deshpande. Language in India, Vol.

11. P.46, 56, 57.

Bhangaonkar, G.S. (2001). Fertility Symbols in Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve in

Prasd, N.A. (Edi.). Critical Response to Indian Fiction in English (pp. 62-68). New

Delhi: Atlantic Publishers & Distributors. Retrieved from http:// Google Books.com.

90

Black, B., Camuamba, E., McKean, A. (2002, June 26). Tradition and Modernity in Kamala

Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve. White Mountain School Class, University of

Minnesota.

Birkland, J. (1993). Ecofeminism: Linking Theory and Practice, in Gaard, G. (Edi.).

Ecofeminism: Women, Animals and Nature. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Campbell, A. (Edi). (2008). New Directions in Ecofeminist Literary Criticism. UK.

Cambridge Scholars Publisher.

Cuomo, J.C. (1998). Feminism and Ecological Communities. USA and Canada: Routledge.

Faber, K. (2008, March 22). Nectar in a Sieve Book Review. Retrieved by http://

bookstove.com.

Goldwasser, J. (2002). Nectar in a Sieve by Kamala Markandaya. Signet Classic Review. P.1.

George, M.R. (2009). Where in the World Did Kamala Markandaya Go? Novel: A forum on

Fiction.42:3, P.400-407.

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.

Geetha, P. (1991, January 1). Images and Archetypes in Kamala Markandaya’s Novels: A

Study in Cultural Ambivalence. The Journal of Commonwealth Literature, Vol. 26. P.

169.

Ghorpade, V.P. (2002). Rural India In Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve. In

Bhatnagar, K.M. (Edi.). Kamala Markandaya: A Critical Spectrum. New Delhi:

Atlantic Publishers & Distributors. Retrieved from Google Books.

Gaard, G. (2001). Ecofeminism Revisited: Rejecting Essentialism and Re-placing Species in

a Material Feminist Environmentalism. Feminist Formation Journal, 23(2), 26-53.

Retrieved from http://www.gretagaard.efoliomn.com/uploads/ ecofeminism revisited.

Gaard, G. (1997). Ecofeminism and Wilderness. Department of Women Studies, University

of Minnesota, 2(1), 1-35. Retrieved from http:// umweetethik.at.

91

Gruen, L. (1993). Dismantling Oppression: An Analysis of the Connection between Women

and Animals. In Gaard, G. (Edi.). Ecofeminism: Women, Animals, Nature.

Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Huggan, G. & Tiffin, H. (2010). Postcolonial Ecocriticism. London; New York: Routledge.

Iyer, S.N. (2004) Orchestration of Themes in Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve. In

Kundu, R. & Ray, K.M (Edi.). Studies in Women Writers in English. New Delhi:

Atlantic Publishers & Distributors.

Jackson, E. (201). Feminism and Contemporary Indian Women’s Writing. London and New

York: Palgrave McMillan.

Joseph, P.J.S. (2004). Confrontations and Reconciliation in the Novels of Kamala

Markandaya. In Ray, K.M. & Kundu, R. (Edi.). Studies in Women Writers in English.

New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers and Distributors.

Kumar, J. (2004, June 25). Kamala Markandaya. The Guardian Review.

Kumar, K.S. (1979). Tradition and Change in the novels of Kamala Markandaya. Books

Abroad. 43, No.4 9 August 19690.

Karthykayan, C., Gunaskaran, S. (2010, March 3). Glimpse of Traditional Indian Rustic Life

and its Ruin in Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve and Two Virgins. Language

in India, Vol. 12. P.145-246.

Kaur, G. (2012). Postcolonial Ecofeminism in Indian Novels in English. International

Journal of Social science and Humanity. Advance online publication. Doi:

10.7763/IJSSH.2012. v2.131.

Kaur, G. (2012). Women and Environment: Postcolonial Ecofeminism, Activism and Women

Writing Indian Fiction in English. United Kingdom: University of Warwick.

Kirk, G. (1997). Ecofeminism and Environmental 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.

Landow, M.S. (1989). The Value of Suffering in Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve.

Anthropology 302, Princeton University.

92

Landow, M.S. (1989). Changing Image of Women in South Asian Fiction. Anthropology

302, Princeton University.

Legler, G.T. Ecofeminists Literary Criticism in Warren’s Ecofeminism: Women, Culture,

Nature (1997). P 227-238. USA: Indiana University Press. Accessed by http://www.

Google books.

Lahar, S. (1993). Roots: Rejoining Natural and Social History. In Gaard, G. (Edi.).

Ecofeminism: Women, Animals, Nature. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Li li, H. (1993) A Cross cultural Critique of Ecofeminism. In Gaard, G. (Edi.). Ecofeminism:

Women, Animals, Nature. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Mount, C.D. (2011). Bend Like the Grass: Ecofeminism in Kamala Markandaya’s First

Novel Nectar in a Sieve. Postcolonial Text, Vol. 6, No 3. P. 1-9, Cape Breton

University.

Misra, p. (2001). Class Consciousness in the novels of Kamala Markandaya. New Delhi:

Atlantic Publishers and Distributors accessed by Google books. Pp. 2, 7, 67.

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.

Myles, A. (2006). Feminism and the Post-modern Indian Women Novelists in English. New

Delhi: Sarup & Sons. Retrieved from http:// Google Books.com.

Markandaya, K. (1954/ 2010). Nectar in a Sieve. New York: Day.

Mckibben, B. (2010). The Death of Nature. In Huggan, G. & Tiffin, H. Postcolonial

Ecocriticism. London; New York: Routledge.

Merchant, C. (1980). The Death of Nature, Women, Ecology and Scientific Revolution.

London: HarperCollins.

Naik, K.C. (2002) Rural India in Transition: A Study of Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a

Sieve in Bhatnagar K. M. Kamala Markandaya: A Critical Spectrum. New Delhi:

Atlantic Publishers.

93

Oster- H.L. (2002, August 18). Ecofeminism: Historic and International Evolution.

Georgetown, Texas: Southern University.

Parameswaran, U. (2000). Kamala Markandaya. Jaipur, India: Rawat Publications. Accessed

by Google Books.com.

Piciucco, P.P. (Edi.). (2004). A Companion to Indian Fiction in English. New Delhi: Atlantic

Publishers& Distributors. Retrieved from http://www. Google Books.

Ravi, R.D. (2010), September 2). Dr. Rakesh Ravi’s Evaluation of Kamala Markandaya’s

Nectar in a Sieve as a novel of Rural India.

Razia, M. (2009, July 12). The Feminine Mystique: Kamala Markandaya’s Nectar in a Sieve.

Palgrave Journals, Vol 1.

Ray, K.M. & Kundu, R. (Edi.). (2004). Studies in Women Writers in English. New Delhi:

Atlantic Publishers and Distributors.

Seldon, R., Widdowson, P., & Brooker, P. (2005). A Reader’s Guide to Contemporary

Literary Theory (5th Ed.). Great Britain: Pearson, Longman.

Sandilands, C. (1999). The Good-Natured Feminist Ecofeminism and the Quest for

Democracy. United State of America: University of Minnesota Press.

Seaman, D. (2007, November 15). Another Look At: Kamala Markandaya’s First Novel

Nectar in a Sieve. Booklist. P.32.

Shiva, V. (1988). Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India. New Delhi:

Indraprastha Press.

Study guide for Nectar in a Sieve by Kamala Markandaya. New York: Glencoe McGraw-

Hill.

Warren, J.K. Introduction in Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical

Ecology. (1993). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. P. 253-256.

Wagner, L.B. (2008, March 4). Ecofeminist action in the 21st century. Accessed from

Canadian Dimension Magazine. http://www. Canadiandimension.com/ article/1758.

94

Young, C.J.R (2009, October 12). Postcolonial Ecofeminism. Accessed by

http://www.dennishidalgo.blogspot.com/2009/10/postcolonial-ecofeminism.

95