Summary of: Women Writing in India at the Turn of the Century

-Nabaneeta Dev Sen

‘Women Writers in India at the Turn of the Century’ is an essay based on the Nabneeta’s
inaugural address at the Sahitya Akademi Conference of 2001. The essay is a reflection on
the experience of women writers in India when transitioning from 20th to the 21st century.
The author highlights the importance of women coming together to discuss their lives, work,
and growth. They express a concern that despite their aspirations, most women have not been
able to make writing the center of their lives. The author hopes that their efforts will make it
easier for future women writers, just as their own predecessors did for them. The essay
mentions the intention to address practical questions without being delayed by academic
feminist theory and critical jargon, which is seen as a patriarchal practice that creates a
distance from reality.
The literary conference will discuss about three things:
1. Discussing the state of women writing at the tun of the century.
2. Telling each other how we grew as women writers.
3. Listening to each other’s works.

Women writing in India.

The section discusses the impact of patriarchal resistance on women's writing. The author
points out that this resistance has led to various tactics aimed at silencing the female voice,
such as making women faceless, marginalizing them, excluding them from the historical
process, refusing to read or acknowledge their work and making the woman writer a part of
her own text to be consumed.
The author highlights personal experiences of being mistaken for other female writers and the
struggle to maintain individual identity in the face of patriarchal assumptions. Some of the
experiences mention by the author are:
1. “Hi Nabaneeta, I liked that earthquake poem of yours in Desh this week.”
– “Ah! Did you? Thank you! I liked it too. It is not mine, though, Bijoya wrote that
one.” “Ha ha, is that so? I thought it was you.” Incidentally, we write in very different
styles.
2. Since I am the woman who writes funny stories, I have been regularly complimented
for the last ten years for the single humorous piece ever written by Kana Basu Misra. I
have stopped correcting people now and have humbly appropriated the authorship of
the story, to make life simpler for everyone. Except Kana, of course.
3. But you must know what happened when we went to a lavish farmhouse party thrown
by a writer friend some lavish farmhouse party years ago…. Because there was a huge
gang of writers, our hosts had made this little arrangement for us to entertain
ourselves by reading. A smart young person was inviting the guests to the
microphone. I suddenly heard the name of Kabita Sinha being called, though she was
not present that evening…. I wondered why. Then I saw the Master of Ceremonies
 frantically signaling to me. I was a bit confused at first, then I knew what the problem
was. Here I was, a woman poet. He knew one woman poet’s name. It did not matter
whether the face went with the name, in any case weren’t we all the same?

So I went up, took the mike, and gently corrected the announcer, saying, “Sorry, there
has been a slight mistake, I am not Kabita Sinha, my name is Mahashweta Devi, and I
do not write poetry. But I shall be happy to recite to you the whole of my award-
winning novel, Aranyer Adhikar.” Sunil Gangopadhyay was present among the
guests. Being the peace-loving gentleman that he is, he stopped me right there, and
the evening was saved. But no one can save us women writers from being bundled
together, a bunch of nameless wild flowers.
Despite some progress and recognition, the author argues that patriarchal tactics persist,
causing women writers to be grouped together and their individual identities disregarded. The
section highlights the ongoing challenges faced by women writers due to patriarchal
resistance and the need for awareness and change in the literary landscape.

The woman writer.

The section "The Woman Writer" discusses the intertwined identities of women and writers,
emphasizing how women often come before their roles as writers. It highlights the challenges
faced by women writers and the importance of recognition and transcendence when women
succeed in literature. The paper mentions examples of successful women writers such as
Agatha Christie and Mary Ann Evans, who had to navigate a male-dominated literary world.
It also delves into the concept of "She writes like a man" as the ultimate compliment for a
woman writer, symbolizing powerful and masculine writing, while proposing that women
possess a different kind of diffused energy in their writing.

She writes like a man.

The section “She writes like a man” also explores the idea of women occupying male
territories in their writing and the extra-literary source of strength that comes from a
consciously taken political stance. The case of Mahashweta Devi is presented as an example
of a woman writer who broke the silence of marginalized groups, empowered them, and
demonstrated nurturing as a form of powerful activism. Ultimately, the section challenges the
conventional idea of masculine strength in writing and celebrates the unique, nurturing
creative energy of women.

Writing in the margin.

This section discusses the concept of "men's writing" as the norm and "women's writing" as
an exception to the rule, leading to the labeling of women writers. The section highlights the
views of Kabita Sinha, Mahashweta Devi, Sivashankari, Krishna Sobti, and Qurratulain
Hyder, who all objected to being categorized as feminist writers and instead preferred to be
seen as writers without gender distinction. The author emphasizes the desire of these women
writers to belong to the mainstream rather than being labeled and marginalized. The “writing
in the margin” section of the paper emphasizes the reluctance of many women writers to be
limited by gender categories and their preference to be recognized simply as writers, not
specifically as women writers. The authors cite specific examples of women writers who
resisted being labeled and expressed their desire to be considered as humanists or mainstream
writers rather than being confined to the margins due to their gender.
In the fifties, Kabita Sinha fought tooth and nail against the marginalization of women writers. She was Bengal’s first radical
feminist writer, but she did not like the literary grounds to be gender-demarcated. Mahashweta Devi also objects to being
called a woman writer; in fact, she regards herself not a feminist but a humanist, an activist. I have heard Sivashankari say “I
am not a feminist but a humanist”. Krishna Sobti has said that she is “basically a writer, who happened to be born as a
woman'. Qurratulain Hyder, too has declined to be stamped as a feminist writer.

In the harem.
The author discusses the historical marginalization and condescension faced by women
writers in the context of Bengali literature. They criticize the treatment of women writers in
one of the standard reference works on History of Bengali literature, ‘Dr. Srikumar Banerji’s Banga
Sahitye Upanyaser Dhara. (History of Bengali Novel, first published in 1938) which dedicates two
chapters to women and separates them from their male counterparts. The author highlights
the outdated and gendered perspective of the academic treatment of women writers,
exemplified by the inclusion of major Bengali novelists in a special women's room, or
"harem," in the reference work. The author questions the lack of challenges or objections to
this treatment, emphasizing the need for women to write their own histories of literature and
for male scholars to support this endeavor. The author suggests that similar cases of
marginalization may exist in other regional literatures and calls for a change in the academic
representation and recognition of women writers.

I have not read her as yet.

Women's success in the literary world is often suppressed, with Ashapurna Devi being a
prime example. When she received the Jnanpith award in 1975, a young reviewer, Sanatan
Pathak, insulted her by stating that he had not read her yet. This was because the all-male
Bengali literary criticism misread and misrepresented her deep and complex subversive style
as simple domestic details. Ashapurna was the most powerful and popular fiction writer in
Bengali at the time, and her efforts to lend voice to the silent minority were noticed as a
political act. However, Ashapurna also wrote about a marginalized group, middle-class
women, who were not observed as such. Their pain, oppression, and ability to withstand it
within the middle-class reality was labelled as the 'narrow domestic scene'. Ashapurna's
works were flatly labelled as women's reading material, and even feminist critics rejected her
as trivia.

Times have changed, with Indian women writers drawing more media attention in English,
especially if they write in English and do not call themselves feminists. However, women in
regional languages demand womanist critics to read, review, and represent them in the right
light, giving them their due at the turn of the century.

Which group do you belong to?

The section discusses the two groups of writers in India, Regional writers with twenty-one
members and English writers being a single, young entity. It highlights the increasing number
of Indian women writing in English, citing the freedom, power, financial benefits, and global
recognition associated with the language. The section also emphasizes the double bind faced
by women who are subjugated by both society and their language, encouraging them to
embrace English for liberation. This will soon make the regional tongues sisters of languages,
like Pali, Prakrit, and Apabhransh, moving backwards to the Charyapada days.

A feminist? A post-feminist? A womanist? A humanist?

The author argues that feminist criticism has entered the post-feminism era, and writers who
focus on women's issues should not be considered post-feminists. The author suggests that
writers should focus on their own way, the traditional Indian way, and not give it an academic
name or foreign address. The author mention the works of Mahadevi Varma, Ashapurna
Debi, Krishna Sobti, Qurrutulain Hyder, and Mahashweta Devi, who have successfully
tackled women's issues without using fancy English terms. The author encourages writers to
follow suit, as the feminist is transitioning to the womanist and humanist.

I am not a feminist, but…

The "I am not a feminist, but…" section of the essay explores the complex relationship
between women writers and the feminist movement in India. It discusses the hesitation of
female writers to identify as feminists due to the negative connotations associated with
radical feminism. This section highlights the challenges faced by women in literature,
including the pressure to conform to societal expectations and the double standards applied to
their work. It addresses the evolving attitudes towards female sexuality and the impact of
societal changes on literary expression. The section also delves into the issue of self-
censorship imposed by family and cultural norms and emphasizes the need for women to
assert their voices and challenge traditional gender roles. Furthermore, it examines the
diversity of feminist voices in India and calls for a reevaluation of the publishing and
reviewing processes to ensure fair representation and recognition for women writers.

The producer, the consumer and the consumed.

The readership of women's writings and films has changed significantly over time. Women
writers are often tied to their work, with their bodies tied to it, while men can stand outside
their art. This is due to a tacit consent between the male producer and the male consumer.
When the producer is female and the consumer is male, the producer becomes part of the
product to be consumed. This is true not only in women's writings but also in women's films.
Women writers are in a double-bind, having to construct their own identity and heroines.
However, the overlapping and merging of these identities makes them identifiable with the
heroine/protagonist. This leads to an unhealthy curiosity for the private personal story of the
writer. This is why some writers turn to prose writing, as it allows them to be on par with
their readers and avoid pity. Reader response has continually changed the writer's literary
career, opening up new possibilities and pushing the horizon further back. This can often be
the case with women, as negative and destructive aspects can become positive sources of
power.

Facing the Mirror.

Indian women's courage in self-expression has significantly improved, with the first
collection of lesbian writing in India, Facing the Mirror (1999), out in the sun. The collection
features genuine lesbian writing in English, some signed and some using pseudonyms.
Sanjukta Bandyopadhyay's Arabya Upanyaser Meye, baa Meyeder Bratakatha (1996) is the
first book of gay lesbian poetry in Bengali.

However, it is not an easy experiment, as there may be problems with one's job. In the past,
Ismat Chughtat was sued for writing "Lihat" in Urdu, but she won the case. Bani Roy's story
"Sapho" created hostile waves but was not personally harassed. Sanjukta's book has not
attracted hostile attention so far, indicating that the Indian middle-class family has learned to
adjust with their women poets.

The author shares her own experience of suffering deeply from her loyalty to her family,
which hindered her ability to write about life and relationships. Her mother, who was a major
woman poet in Bangla, was not liberal anymore and could not accept her divorce. This self-
censorship hindered her ability to write, as she had to consider her daughters, friends,
teachers, estranged father, distant relatives, and others.

Today's women worth her salt will not let themselves be blackmailed by their family and
make their writing suffer. They should be free to find their way with words and let their
families adjust to their needs.

Androgyny is the mantra of tomorrow.

At the turn of the century, India is witnessing a diverse range of feminist visions, from
aggressive, militant voices like Ranganayakamma and Taslima Nasreen to sensitive
androgynous writers like Krishna Sobti and Lakshmi Kannan. Subversive and self-critical
writers like Shivani and Bani Basu are also emerging. Sensational and patriarchal voices are
prevalent in women's magazines, while academic and historical studies focus on feminist
politics. Dedicated feminist publishers like Kali for Women and Stree are also presenting
creative visions. As old ideals and systems crumble, it is crucial to reconsider past
achievements and strategies, invent new routes, and make new connections. Key questions
include who publishes, sells, buys, reads, and reviews, as well as whether fair reviews are
received and the full benefit of talent and hard work is being fully realized.

Hara-Gauri
The Hara-Gauri section emphasizes the importance of androgyny for women writers in order
to fully utilize their talents. The author advocates for embracing the Hara-Gauri image as a
motto, promoting the idea that great art requires androgyny and that being gender-bound is
self-defeating. The paper challenges the traditional portrayal of women as helpless and
homebound, highlighting the need for women writers to transcend gender limitations in the
practice of literature. The author calls for women to be recognized and acknowledged by their
fathers, husbands, lovers, and sons, and emphasizes the importance of working together as
family units to bring about systemic change. The section acknowledges the ongoing transition
in society and emphasizes the need for family support in this process. It also stresses that
women writers will always be women, but that they seek to understand life in its entirety, not
just their own experiences. The section concludes by asserting the irreversibility of women
writers' progress and the desire to comprehend the broader human experience.