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?
