Leslie Orr and Davesh Soneiji, did an excellent job in reframing the context in which devadasi (temple women) have been viewed socially by Western scholars after British colonization. What they attempt to do is try to restore a tradition that not only has been lost to the social reform movement, but also has been greatly misinterpreted. They focus on a very important point, the fact that self interest (colonial powers) have focused on manipulating certain situations for the purpose of their own political agenda. They stress that women who were devadasi were not in fact victimized, oppressed or being abused for sexual fulfillments, but that they were in fact agents in shaping their own faiths. Soneiji illustrates through the lives of devadasi’s how these women actually enjoyed what became not only part of their identity but their profession (whether sexual relations were involved or not). This however is an argument that greatly meets his bias, one is left to question what part of the population actually suffered from being sold into this type of profession? The fact that children were involved in this institution makes me question this. In other words, one could certainly argue that since these woman start as children they are manipulated to think a certain way. It is one thing to support this institution in terms of wrong political agendas, but not right to support it when there are human rights abuses.
The fact that the temple was generating money that the state did not have a control over was one of the reasons for its elimination. This is very central in the moves that these women made from the temple (public) to the court (more controlled) to the home which is totally inclusive. It has almost evolved into a practice that is no more accessible but is reached only through ‘illegal’ means. More specifically the sanctions put on them make it a lot harder for the survival of these institutions. Therefore, I agree with the argument put forward that the government forces these institutions out for reasons of controlling the flow of money. However, the fact that these women need money for their survival should be taken into consideration. The government who at first tries to subdue these institutions for monetary reasons, has now created an atmosphere that leads to more degradation than before. More specifically, now these women are forced to become prostitutes, because they are cut out of support that they were once getting.
The last interesting point is how Soneiji illustrates that past experience plays a prominent role in one’s identity. To illustrate, he speaks to many women who still hold onto the memories of when they were temple women. He shows then how these women are socially and ritually shaped by these past experiences, that even though there are religious conventions that state that women cannot be menstruating when doing ritual acts, they do not hold to this up to present day. What is problematic is that the author does not take into account how with historical changes these identities could have been changed or informed. This assumes that one’s identity is stagnant. However, this is problematic. Sometimes identities change according to social acceptance. For example, now that it is a little more acceptable to have sex changes, one’s identity can take a dramatic turn. In this respect, one’s past memories holds no significance in such an individual’s life.
These authors illustrate how modernity can do more violence to a cultural perspective. In other words, the fact that colonists come in and try implement western ideals, is in fact imposing a matrix that is not even called for. What if these women were happy with their surrounding circumstances? This is the question that is definitely being addressed. In other words, maybe the situations were such that the woman felt they were not being oppressed or victimized.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
You raise many interesting points in this post, Aveisha. It is indeed a twisted irony that the legislations, supposedly implemented in the interest of moral decency, succeeded in driving devadasis to degradation. Also, regarding the ideological impositions of colonialism, westernization, modernity, etc., what is especially problematic is that even the Indians who see such activities as morally depraved are implicitly informed by English Victorian sensibilities which they have inevitably inherited. Clearly, judging from the eroticism in celebrated Indian art and literature from the past, prudish attitudes must have arrived late on the scene.
Raj
Two points in your blog particularly were particularly poignant the question of children being put into a situatation that then forms their lives is beyond their "choice" and control and how much this is really responsible for the resultant "identity" and the foilbles of the constant church and state conflicts that almost arbitrarily result in drastic changes to peoples lives..policy over humanity. Great blog! See you in class. Barbara
Hey Aveisha,
This is a good critical response on the issue at hand. It is indeed possible that the women have been manipulated since childhood into thinking their predicament is favourable. But it sort of was. They had land, status, and more freedom than the average women. They did not have o follow the same restricting taboos than others did surrounding menstruation and they did not have to always answer to a dominating husband. I can see how they would reminisce about the status they once had when it was all taken away. But yes, there are obvious downsides to the position, especially if it was indeed a form of prostitution, and child prostitution at that. But the women Soneji interviewed mostly only had slept with one man. And it is true how the removal of the institution created the need for these women to turn to prostitution.
On page 12 Orr discusses how scholarship generally does not focuses on how these women may have possessed autonomy or agency in shaping their own circumstances. These two writings are different from previous scholarship in that way.
Post a Comment