Saturday 15 June 2013

Agnipareeksha


 May be it had to come as a part of my course, an assignment. However here it comes. Bases the 1996 Deepa Mehta film, Fire. 17 years on, and hardly anything seems different.


Desire brings ruin, they say. But I desire to live.
Who sage does not desire to live? And then what are humans if they desire to live? Who has the authority to limit this desire unless I harm? Even He did not have the right to kill this desire once I’d passed my agnipareeksha.

Deepa Mehta’s astounding story on a simple, yet complex for intransigents, Fire burns and still smokes today. “It’s a sin in the eyes of God and man,” says Ahok (Kulbhushan Kharbanda). And it would be foolish, yet saddening to expect any lesser Ashoks today than then. The 1996 movie strokes those sensitive nerves that have mostly been avoided, those on homosexuality.

Radha (Shabana Azmi) and Sita (Nandita Das) are sisters in law, two women with tales of their own; two women wronged in their own right; two women (practically) unmarried to their husbands; two women who discover love, sadly in the societal structure, discover it in each other. Sadly, because Sita confesses that there’s no word to describe their relation. Hindi hardly provides a word except samlaingik for a same-sex relationship which is barely common usage unlike the English translation.

“Women without husbands are like boiled rice, bland and unappetizing” and pat Radha replies, “I like being boiled rice.” However Radha would want to be independent, a woman’s life boils down to being around her man. The gender rules as they are in India, and in many parts of the world, revolve around men and their fancies. While Sita’s husband Jatin (Jawed Jaffery)is candid about his romantic affair with another woman, he goes unquestioned by everyone in  the family. Ashok under his esteemed swami’s directives pledges of celibacy for he’s told that sex’s sole role is reproduction and Radha couldn’t reproduce. Her role is reduced to supporting him in the endeavor. The men have their right to work upon their whims and fancies. The women are ordered and constantly reminded of their ‘duties’ towards their husbands – be it helping them resist temptations or fasting for such who hardly make a marriage to their wives. Leave alone the rights of men and women with alternate sexualities.
 
Duties delivered upon, ironically are all forgotten or made null upon the revelation of fundamental truths. For all her life for a ll her devotion that she took care of her, cleaned her, bathed her, dressed her, fed her, her mother in law, all that Radha gets is spit in her face. 

Radha and Sita, contextually are two women whose fate met no justice. And interestingly the two names have been used for the leads. Two women worshiped for their love, devotion and purity. Ironies in India that despite chaste, women are required to answer and clarify. It’s fascinating to the extent that the names have been reversed for the two characters. Being a Radha to Ashok, bound by love (duty), she ends up taking the agneepariksha. While our Sita waits, waits for her love. Love has its way through fire.
What more is the desire to live, after all, than the right to?