Note: Dan S Paper Will Be Emailed on Monday Morning
NOTE: DAN’S PAPER WILL BE EMAILED ON MONDAY MORNING
Ronald J. Pipion
November 30, 2004
To: Professor Dubois
Word Count: 1,377
Devotional Power or Dangerous Magic?
(Chapter 5)
Outline
- Introduction
- Selective Summary
- The Jangli rani Story Paraphrased
- The dilemma
- Evaluation
- How women respond to the predicament of being perceived as split when they are really whole.
- Wider Relevance
- The Portrayal of Women's Role
- Introduction
In the book, Listen to the Heron’s Words, in chapter 5 the authors Raheja and Gold provide their opinion on whether a woman possesses devotional power or dangerous magic in the story of “Jangli rani”. They argue about the perceived fine line between dedication and enchantment. Through the story told about "Jangli rani" the authors are demonstrating their belief that women vision themselves as persons empowered by divine beneficence as well as maintaining familial bonds. By exploring, "What was the purpose of this legendary story?" it should reveal the essence of female identity and define what women's role was in Hindu life at that time.
I I. Selective Summary
In this section a legendary story about " The Jangli rani" is told in order toinspire a sense of instruction. The moral of the story is that devotional power can be misconstrued as dangerous magic:
The story of the jangli rani--which could translate as "queen from the jungle" or by strong implication "uncivilized queen'--offers further insights into the ways female identity may be split and yet stay whole, not only in relation to particular kinship roles but beyond these always partial facets of a woman's total career (Raheja and Gold, 149)
The Jangli rani's story contains a daughter-to-wife transformation, as told by a village patriarch. The Jangli rani claims to be a Brahman's daughter, whose devotion is to honoring the sun god by being a good daughter, wife, and mother. She is blessed by the sun god for her dedication and devotion. The sun god's blessings are rumored by the Kings people to be an act of manipulation upon him and furthermore founded in magic:
The king thought, I have never tasted such delicious food. I am a king, but I have never eaten anything like it. The king was astonished. How could there be food this good in the jungle? Then another crumb fell. And she was drinking water, and a drop fell into his mouth, and he said, "Oh, I was so thirsty, and with one drop my thirst was extinguished. (Raheja and Gold, 154).
Raheja and Gold assert that the mindset of the Barber, convinced of black magic, was male centered and could not perceive that a woman could entice a King with virtue alone: “The source of the Jangli rani's problems is more basic still: the people around her assume that female virtuosity cannot coexist with female virtues, at least not without a supporting male lineage (Raheja and Gold, 149).” The dichotomy perplexes the King. In one hand, his queen's virtue is sure and lineage is questionable; on the other hand, her source of consecration is doubted:
The barber took his whip and came to the king and said, "Hey King, this queen is a very big magic worker (156). Another queen said to the king, "That queen is a magician (kaman. gari), a magic knower (jan. jugar), a magician, doing magic on you. The king said, "Oh, you're just talking."
"This jungli rani is doing magic on you (155). This queen isn't good. She is a witch, a magician. A woman came, and this jungli rani ate her. At this the king became angry (Raheja and Gold, 155).
In conclusion of the story, Raheja and Gold said that the King desired to verify his Queens lineage to confirm her origin. She claimed to be a Braman's daughter, but the King needed proof that it was so. The sun god provided her an alibi by creating a fictitious regal family:
They went there and found a nine-story mansion, and in it were aunts and uncles, mother and father, brothers and brothers' wives and all. And when they got there these relations sang son-in-law songs for the king, and they seated them. (Raheja and Gold, 156).
The moral of the story, "devotional power can be misconstrued as dangerous magic," is made apparent in the King’s revealing confirmation of his Queens lineage. Raheja and Gold conclusion that the imaginary family provided sufficient evidence that her virtues and worshiping habits were misunderstood for having mystical powers.
I I I. Evaluation
The jungli rani's story, as retold by Raheja and Gold did have its intended impact upon Hindu village women. It was a story that made a statement to Hindu village women. That statement was to convince men of their loyalty to them through their devotion to God. Further, Raheja and Gold illustrate that:
The jungli rani's tale should help us understand how women respond to the predicament of being perceived as split when they are really whole, and of being perceived as threatening when they are only deacting according to moral and devotional convictions. (Raheja and Gold, 151).
The judgment placed upon women by this story implies that they should appease male concern regarding their commitment to God. Women do not owe an explanation to convince man of his perceived duality about their devotion. Raheja and Gold explains:
There is indeed in men's minds an important "split" between approved womanly skills and disapproved black magic. What truly clever brides should do is perform wonders without drawing accusations of performing in magic. This implies an externally imposed, judgmental dichotomy straddled by a female person selfconsciously trying to sustain her integrity (Raheja and Gold, 150).
Raheja and Gold places the jungli rani's tale in perspective helping the reader understanding how female identity is formed:
although marriage changes a woman's life in many ways, her identity as a person is continuous from girlhood into the marital state. The jungli rani always refers to herself as a "Brahman's daughter," thus sustaining her valued natal identity (151). I hope, then, effectively to contrast the way that women may sympathetically portray unsupported women as viewed with unjust suspicion by men, and by women aligned with men, with the ways that men zestfully describe independent, saucy, "bad" women whose rebellion is enjoyable because it inevitably ends in defeat. (Raheja and Gold, 151).
I V. Wider Relevance
Household roles and relationships were articulated to new generations by the telling of stories that directed and taught culture and tradition of that society. The Jangli rani story was a legendary tale North Indian women told as an integral part of domestic rituals. "These tales portray household roles and relationships. They also articulate the conflicts and anxieties entailed by those roles and relationships. Some stories focus on relationships in a woman's natal home, where she is daughter or sister; others on her married roles, most often as a brother's or son's wife (Raheja and Gold, 150)."
The conflicts and anxieties that the Jungli rani's power suggested was mistaken for black magic or witchcraft. In fact, she had appropriately earned, through worship, the favor granted to a loyalist.
The tool of self identification for women was the "Jungli rani" tale. I referred to it as a tool because it was used by men to mold the behavior of Hindu women. Males emphasized through lore how women should traditionally interact. Raheja and Gold promoted that the male perspective was the "interaction" is bound to reflect ambivalence between devotional power or dangerous magic, thus, a male judgment is required to accurately confirm the truth. The King represented male authority in the jungli rani's tale. The King's character taught that male approval should be sought as a sufficient reference to confirm a woman's virtue:
Definitions of the self in women's lore are probably in part responses to male labeling and in part expressions of selfknowledge. In examining the jungli rani's tale, we have seen some interplay between these two modes--an interplay reflecting something of the ambivalence aroused in the Hindu world by manifestations of women's power when divine gifts are not immediately channeled into domestic bliss (Raheja and Gold, 163).
Perceived female duplicity was vindicated by male justification. Raheja and Gold sufficiently supported their argument about the perceived fine line between dedication and enchantment.
1