Umr Qaid - A life sentence

Umr Qaid is an interesting story – it is a story set in an upper-caste Hindu family, told from the perspective of a man, and written by a Muslim woman, Hajira Shakoor. It was first published in 1977.  

Contextualization

The story itself does not mention any dates. The way it is written though, we could assume that the story is set in the "here and now".  From the story, it is evident that the narrator married Janaki 27 years ago, i.e., sometime in the 1950s. India had received its independence 3 years earlier, and the constitution came into effect in 1950. The educated youth that had been active during the freedom struggle carried on their do-good zeal to better the country. As the narrator himself mentions, “I was from the very beginning preoccupied with the ideas of social reform and the desire to achieve something. In those days, the strongest desire of us college kids was to do something truly constructive.” This do-good attitude causes the narrator to step in as a hero and rescue the girl's family from the humiliation that would ensue if the bride was not married then.

Synopsis

The narrator is the youngest son of a well-educated jagirdar. He marries the neighbor’s daughter in a heroic gesture when the intended groom’s family creates a fuss just before the ritual, demanding more dowry. In the story, the narrator is reflecting on his marital life as he observes his youngest son’s interactions with his newly wedded wife.

The narrator, whose name the reader never learns, thinks back to the almost uni-dimensional relationship he had with his now dead wife. Though he “rescued” her from an unpleasant situation, he never took an effort to get to know her, or make her feel at home. On the contrary, as he reflects back, he thinks that he made her feel forever indebted to him – a debt she tried to repay by doing all the work in the house and refusing to accept any privileges and rights that she might by being married to him. He realizes the indifference with which he treats her only after her death, when he feels her absence. “My person, protected and surrounded once by a wall of attention and care, now feels exposed and shelterless.”

Response/Interpretation

Hajira Shakoor brings the story to life with her words. Though I could not relate to Janaki’s character much - she has lived a life I can only imagine, the author’s words helped me empathize with Janaki. Even viewed through the lens of her husband’s eyes, the reader can understand her perspective and reasons for behaving the way she does. It makes one wonder how one might have reacted in a situation like that. Her words, even when translated, bring out the mood of the story. When she writes describing the marriage setting when the protagonist enters the bride’s house “In the courtyard a lightbulb – for which a makeshift connection had been taken from somewhere – emitted a sickly light. A few shapeless bits of bunting hung desolately across, and an old record was playing. Those present were mostly silent.”, it evokes a sense of foreboding. Indian marriages are among the noisiest in the world. The scene describes a wedding like none that I have been to – there is no sense of happiness in the event – almost like an omen of what is to come, not just in the story, but also in Janaki’s life.

I found the way the author has described her main characters quite interesting. For instance, though the main character, the author has not described many facets of Janaki’s character. The whole story revolves around her, but by telling us the story through the memories of her husband, the author leaves her character a mystery. It leaves the reader wondering what she really was like – was she really as stoic and duty-bound as her husband portrays her to be? In 20 years of married life, her husband never really cared to understand her, and his thoughts about her now are colored with the guilt of how he feels he treated her. He believes that Janaki considered even taking care of their kids as just another chore, like doing the dishes or washing the clothes. But if you consider that her last thoughts, as she lay dying, was of her daughter, it seems to belie that idea.

The husband’s portrayal too is a bit puzzling. Here is a man who makes a grand gesture by offering to marry a girl whose family is being hassled for additional dowry just before the wedding. He goes on to have four (or more) children with her, but in the twenty years that he is married to her, he does not make any effort to really get to know her, to understand her desires, or even to just make her feel welcome in what should have been her home. He seems to believe his heroic gesture ended when he married Janaki. He sees, but ignores, the state in which Janaki keeps herself – wearing only old clothes, doing all the work of the house to extent of helping the maid with her job if she has finished her chores, etc. He wants his mother and siblings to never feel that his house is not theirs, but he does not notice that the person he is expecting to make them feel at home herself never feels at home. The author does not completely define her main characters, which makes it easy to sympathize with both of them.

Perhaps due to our own personal experiences and characters, I felt that the members of the circle interpreted the story slightly differently. We placed emphasis on different events within the story, which led to our understanding the story and the characters differently. For instance, while I felt that a big part of how Janaki behaves after the wedding is due to the indifference shown by her husband, there were others who felt that Janaki was shown to have a naturally self-effacing character, and that perhaps even if the husband had behaved differently, she might not have taken over as the mistress of the house. I felt that the part of the story where her husband tells her to dress up a bit nicely for the picture and compares her with his younger sister, who is loved by her husband, who dresses nicely as specially relevant to my interpretation. The sad smile Janaki gives seems to ask her husband whom she should dress up for, since she does not feel loved. For the others, a paragraph in the beginning where the narrator describes Janaki as a “very quiet, very shy girl… her whole being was so subdued and unobtrusive” seemed to support their interpretation of Janaki’s character.

Discussing the stories with the other members of the literary circle made me aware of their experiences, which allowed them to relate to the story better. Having always lived in an urban, nuclear family, my understanding of the story was completely intellectual. Hearing the perspective of others, some of who have been part of a joint family in a rural context brought an understanding to the story that I would not have had otherwise. 

All the women I know from that generation (and earlier) have been very strong characters. Unfortunately, I never knew my grandfathers, so I do not know what the dynamics of their relations with their spouses, but my grandmothers have been very outspoken women who literally ran the family. Of course, their families, though a joint family, were set in urban contexts (Bombay), and perhaps that impacted the group dynamics in some form. After my marriage, I got to meet my husband’s grandparents who live in a joint family in their village. My grandmother-in-law is also a very strong lady – the matriarch of the family. I cannot imagine her ever being in a similar state as Janaki. Given this background, Abhinav’s comment on my blog added some perspective to the story. As Abhinav mentioned in his comment, in traditional settings in the village, many women would consider their husbands their God. He did not find it surprising that Janaki’s husband seemed to hardly ever communicate with her or bother to understand her perspective.

Reading others blogs also added to the perspective. For instance, Abhinav’s blog, where he compares Janaki to Sita and Droupadi, commenting on the lack of independence that women have. It got me thinking of the similarities that can be seen between Janaki and Sita, starting with the name. The narrator sees their 20 years of marriage as Janaki repaying a debt, but it could just as well be seen as banishment from happiness. Both have husbands who make decisions that impact their lives without taking their feelings, let alone opinions, into account.

Reflections

Being a part of the literary circle taught me a few things:

• ·       The success of the literary circle depends on whether or not all members of the circle have read the story or not. We spent the first 10-15 minutes of the story ensuring that everyone had read the story. 
• ·       It might perhaps be better if there is heterogeneity in the composition of the literary circle. I understood more about the story from people who had a different set of life experiences as compared to mine, than from the people I find it easier to relate to due to our similar backgrounds.
• ·       A literary circle is a good way to dig into the depths of the story. We were building on each other's insights into the story to get a better idea.
• ·       Until I actually try it out with children, or watch one of my peers do it with children, I am not too sure if it would actually work with them. The story we used was one with some depth, and we are all mature adults who have been, over the course of the literary pedagogy course so far, been slowly inducted into the idea of literary discussions. This made it slightly easier for us to participate. Even then, we had starting trouble, and it did take some time before our discussions became interesting. All this makes me wonder how easy or difficult it might be to do this with younger children.

Swati’s observation that a well-conducted literary circle would help children become nuanced thinkers is valid though. I guess my point is not on whether or not literary circles would be a useful technique to use with children but more about how difficult it would be to prepare them for one.