INTRODUCTION

Sex is a motive force bringing a man and a woman into intimate contact. Satisfying
usual experience is an essential part of a healthy and enjoyable life for most people.
Sexual activity is a multifaceted activity involving complex interactions between the
nervous system, the endocrine system, the vascular system and a variety of structures
that are instrumental in sexual excitement, intercourse, and satisfaction. Though
essentially it is meant for procreation, it has also been a source of pleasure, a natural
relaxant, it confirms one's gender, bolsters one's self-esteem and sense of attractiveness
for mutually satisfying intimacy and relationship. The World Psychiatric Association
has defined sexual health as “a dynamic and harmonious state involving erotic and
reproductive experiences and fulfillment, within a broader physical, emotional,
interpersonal, social, and spiritual sense of well-being, in a culturally informed, freely
and responsibly chosen and ethical framework; not merely the absence of sexual
disorders.” This can be considered the most comprehensive definition of sexual health
as it incorporates many domains like historical, physiological, psychological,
interpersonal, sociocultural, and ethical views, including attention to human rights
issues.
Sexuality is a central aspect of being human throughout life and encompasses sex,
gender identities and roles, sexual orientation, eroticism, pleasure, intimacy, and
reproduction. Sexuality is experienced and expressed in thoughts, fantasies, desires,
beliefs, attitudes, values, behaviors, practices, roles, and relationships. While sexuality
can include all of these dimensions, not all of them are always experienced or expressed.
Sexuality is influenced by the interaction of biological, psychological, social, economic,
political, cultural, ethical, legal, historical, religious, and spiritual factors.[3] This article
is a review of female sexuality.

FEMALE SEXUALITY
In the first millennium BC, human cultures clearly experienced a “axial period” in a striking
transformation of human consciousness. The transformation occurred independently in three
geographical regions: In China, in India and Persia, and in the Eastern Mediterranean,
including Israel and Greece. In this cultural transformation, a prevailing mythic, cosmic,
ritualistic, collective consciousness embedded in a tribal matrix with the female in the
foreground, slowly gave birth to a male dominated, rational, analytical, and individualistic
consciousness. This transition in cultural values began very slowly after the last ice age
retreated.
In a developing country like India, modern Hindu cultures even today contain a general
disapproval of the erotic aspect of married life, a disapproval that cannot be disregarded as a
mere medieval relic. Many Hindu women, especially those in the higher castes, do not even
have a name for their genitals. Though the perception of modern Indian women is
transforming, many of them still consider the sexual activity a duty, an experience to be
submitted to, often from a fear of abuse.
According to Sigmund Freud, both sexes seem to pass through the early phases of libidinal
development in the same manner. Psychologically, the male-female difference in sexuality
starts only during the phallic phase, with the appearance of Oedipus complex. However, the
difference becomes most clear only during the genital phase.Though generally, women are
sexually active during adolescence, they reach their peak orgasmic frequency in their 30 s,
and have a constant level of sexual capacity up to the age of 55 with little evidence that aging
affects it in later life.
Masturbation is a mode of sexual activity for both men and women though it has been a
source of social concern and censure throughout human tradition. It has been said that 99% of
young men and women masturbate occasionally, and the hundredth conceals the truth. In
women, masturbation can happen in many ways. Here the stimulation of the clitoris is the
central issue. Typically the hand and finger make circular, back and forth or up and down
movements against the mons and clitoral area. Most women avoid direct stimulation of the
glans of the clitoris because of extreme sensitivity. Some women thrust the clitoral area
against an object such as bedding or pillow, others by pressing thighs together and by teasing
the pelvic floor muscles that underlie the vulva. Contrary to what is depicted in pornography,
vaginal insertion to reach an orgasm is not common. Some women can reach orgasm by
pressing the breast alone and a few women (2%) by fantasy alone. Some individuals use
vibrators for added enjoyment and variation. By masturbation, many women need <4 min to
reach orgasm.
Promiscuous Women in Literature

Women have always been pretty hard done by in the history of fiction.

Whether being sold off on the whims of their fathers or murdered by jealous lovers, female
characters in literature, especially in the past, are often at the mercy of the wills of men.

The ones treated most harshly are the women who go against societal expectations in not
bowing loyally to their father or husband or refusing otherwise to be good and pure by the
standards of the time. This is why traditionally so-called promiscuous female characters often
get the short end of the stick, with most ending up dead or, at the very least, miserable and/or
deeply repentant.

Shame and disgust at a character’s sexual activity has in the past, and arguably still is,
reserved for the women in the stories, with male characters often able to engage in sexual
activity without punishment. While men are ‘playboys’, ‘philanderers’ and ‘womanisers’,
women are ‘slags’, ‘sluts’ and ‘whores’, words with deeply negative connotations compared
with their male counterparts.

This list is about women for whom sex is an integral part of their character, either because
they thoroughly enjoy sex and have it on their own terms (not a given in literary history), or
because they embody sex, whether on purpose or not.
Helen of Troy

Greek and Roman mythology has been the subject of fascination for thousands of years, and
rightly so. These myths contain everything a good story needs: murder, betrayal, heroism,
and of course, sex. One of the most famous female figures in ancient mythology is also one
of the most sexual and sexualised: Helen of Troy. Described a millennium after the fact by
Christopher Marlowe as ‘the face that launched a thousand ships’, Helen is most well known
for being the catalyst for the Battle of Troy after leaving her husband for the Trojan Prince
Paris. Whether she left willingly or was kidnapped depends on which translation you read,
but either way, Helen’s place as supposedly the most beautiful woman in the world makes her
sexual appeal an integral part of her character.

Jezebel

Arguably one of the most influential texts in western literature, the Bible, features a number
of promiscuous female characters. While Jesus may save an adulterous woman from stoning
in one part of the Bible, not all the women are as lucky. Jezebel is arguably one of the most
famous of these fallen temptresses, in her case literally fallen; in her story, after persuading
her husband to worship a different deity, the people threw her out of a window where she was
eaten by dogs. While not explicitly adulterous, Jezebel is often depicted in fine clothes and
makeup in a sexualised manner. As with many Biblical figures, her character has morphed
into a representation beyond what was first described, with her name becoming synonymous
with promiscuity.

Nancy (Oliver Twist by Charles Dickens)

One of the most memorable characters in Dickens’ classic novel, Nancy is a classic example
of a Victorian ‘fallen woman’. Defined as ‘a woman who transgressed Victorian sexual
norms’, Nancy fits this description perfectly, being the lover of criminal Bill Sykes, as well as
heavily implied to be a prostitute. Nancy was actually a controversial character among the
readers of the novel, as many felt that Dickens was too sympathetically portraying the
immoral Nancy. Of course, she still ended up being murdered by Sykes, because a ‘fallen
woman’ couldn’t get too much of a redemption arc.
Lady Chatterley (Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D. H. Lawrence)

One of the most controversial books of the 20th century, when it was originally written in
1928 Lady Chatterley’s Lover wasn’t allowed to be published in the UK. The explicit sexual
descriptions and use of then-unprintable words meant that the novel was banned from
publication until 1960. Lady Chatterley was a provocative character for a number of reasons
– not only does she have an extra-marital affair and happily expresses her sexuality, she also
does it with someone below her class status.

Shug Avery (The Color Purple by Alice Walker)

The portrayal of Black women as sexually active and with a happy ending was uncommon
when The Color Purple was written, and sadly remains not common enough today. The
character of Shug Avery in this novel is portrayed as unapologetically promiscuous, taking
numerous lovers, both men and women, throughout the novel. Shug helps to open up Celie,
the main character, to love and self-esteem, eventually leading her to leave her abusive
husband. Other characters imply that she gained a ‘nasty woman disease’ as a result of her
promiscuity, but that doesn’t stop her from expressing her sexuality.

Anastasia Steele (Fifty Shades of Grey by E. L. James)

One of the most popular and controversial books of the past decade, Fifty Shades of Grey is
infamous for its explicit descriptions of BDSM (Bondage and Discipline, Dominance and
Submission, Sadism and Masochism), as well as launching erotic literature fully into
mainstream view. Originally based on the character of Bella Swan from the Twilight series,
Anastasia starts Fifty Shades as a naive virgin before being thrown into the BDSM lifestyle
that her partner, Christian Grey, partakes in. While of course having developed controversy
for its explicit sexual descriptions, the book has also been heavily critiqued for its depiction
of an unhealthy relationship and inaccurate representation of BDSM.

History of Women sexuality

There are many stories in history and legend where rampant females are seen as posing a
particular threat to the social order.

In classical mythology it was the maenads, or followers of Dionysus or Bacchus, who

frenziedly tore Orpheus apart. Dolled up in fawn-skins, wine-fueled, and brandishing their
thyrses (long sticks wreathed in ivy and tipped with a pinecone), on a night out the maenads
were uncontrollable. In the 17th century, women were often seen as more lascivious than
men, their passions ruled by nature rather than reason. Nineteenth-century physiologists
clung to this notion that women were governed more by nature than by civilized thought. But
they fiddled around with the concept of female nature, adjusting it to preconceptions about
social class. They argued that women—at least the descent, middle-class sort—were pure at
heart and not driven by physical passion in the way that men were. Lower-class women might
be seen as more physical (read, more in touch with their animal nature) than their middle-
class equivalents. In a certain male mindset this helped to explain why some middle or upper-
class men turned to prostitutes. It could even be suggested that a class of “prostitute” women
was a necessary evil, so that men could relieve their lusts on one group without
compromising the virtue of “respectable” females.

Where this Victorian illusion that respectable women were passion-free beings prevailed was
often in the face of plenty of evidence to the contrary and at great cost to women themselves.
All women—whatever their class backgrounds—were effectively lumped into one of two
categories: “respectable” or “fallen.” That men were allowed a degree of license while
women were caged in by expectations of chastity and virtue was all part of a distinct double
standard of sexual morality which has persisted up to the present day. For a woman, giving
vent to passion has always carried serious risks, quite aside from the physical risk of
unwanted pregnancy. The social cost of being labelled unfeminine—or of being seen as a
loose or fallen woman—has been high. Loss of reputation could expose a woman to the worst
features of masculine exploitation: there was the danger that she would be seen as worthless
and therefore “fair game.”

Passionate feelings of all kinds could look unfeminine. Even writing about them was risky.
Charlotte Brontë felt obliged to apologize for her sister Emily’s rendering of the “harshly
manifested passions, the unbridled aversions, and headlong partialities” of northern folk in
Wuthering Heights. That a quiet, well-behaved girl could even imagine a Heathcliff was
somewhat unseemly. Emily had been unworldly, a home-bred country girl, Charlotte
explained, much accustomed to the rough folk of the rugged moorlands, and it showed in the
“perverted passion and passionate perversity” of her characters. Not that Charlotte herself
was able to fully disguise her passions: her love for the (married) French teacher, Professor
Constantin Héger, with whom she lodged and worked in Brussels in the 1840s, was a
disruptive influence in her life and erupts through the surface of her novels.

Women sometimes colluded with the idea of themselves as modest and passionless because
that way they could look pure and innocent, avoid censure, and appear stronger candidates for
masculine protection. In a world in which the balance of power between the sexes was so
unequal, having a protector counted. It was extremely risky to look knowing, experienced, or
in any way sexually needy as a woman. But it has also been hard for women to give
expression to what they want, or even to recognize their own desire in the first place.
“That men were allowed a degree of license while women were caged in by expectations of
chastity and virtue was all part of a distinct double standard of sexual morality which has
persisted up to the present day.”

As Marie Stopes had explained to her “young husbands,” social conditioning could be very
effective in blocking off desire. Understanding this goes some way towards explaining the
vexed question of the appeal of “rape” scenes in imaginative literature, such as the episodes
in E. M. Hull’s The Sheik. Hull tells us that Diana’s body “throbbed with the consciousness
of a knowledge that appalled her.” Even once sexually awakened, she feels that she has to
keep her desires hidden, to protect herself. The fact that the heroine is overwhelmed by a
strong, desirable hero at an imaginative level frees her from responsibility, excuses what
otherwise might be interpreted as her own risky, culpable, or even unrecognizable sexual
longings. That this “rape” only takes place within the realms of fantasy, where the
woman/fantasist is in control of both the characters and the narrative, is crucial.

Dance was one medium through which women could express and explore desire and passion.
The 1900s saw the eruption of what was widely described as “dance mania” or a “dance
craze” in America and Britain, regularly linked—in the minds of both contemporaries and
later historians—with new forms of liberation for women. The dance craze had various
manifestations. There was the impact of Russian ballerina Anna Pavlova, choreographed by
Mikhail Fokine in The Dying Swan in 1905. There was Diaghilev’s Ballets Russes,
reinforcing an already fashionable orientalism. There was ragtime; a passion for the tango in
London, Berlin, and New York; the Charleston and Josephine Baker in Paris between the
wars.

Dance allowed transgressive fantasies about both gender and power. Scheherazade,
performed for the first time in Paris in 1910, was based on the first chapter of One Thousand
and One Nights (Arabian Nights). In this story a despotic Persian king goes off hunting, and
while he’s away his favourite wife, Zobeide, persuades the eunuchs guarding the women to
free the king’s slaves. The black, male slaves are seduced by the concubines. Zobeide
chooses the king’s exquisite “golden slave” (Njinsky) as her lover. Scenes of breathtaking,
orgiastic sensuality follow, before the king returns and massacres everyone except Zobeide,
who takes her own life.
As cultural historian Mica Nava has emphasized, this was shocking and exciting on many
levels. Lustful, libidinous women were shown dancing a defiance of patriarchy and initiating
erotic adventures with black subordinates. Vaslav Njinsky, gorgeous and bisexual, became a
cult figure. Whether androgynous as a bejeweled sex slave in gold harem pants, or stitched
into silk elastic and rose petals, he fired the imagination of both men and women. After his
performances in Fokine’s Le Pavillon d’Armide, Le Spectre de la Rose, and Scheherazade,
Njinsky found himself the object of what classical scholar and critic James Davidson has
described as “a great geyser of sexual and romantic fantasies” across the world.

Highly significant for women were the performances of individual female dancers such as
Isadora Duncan and Maud Allan. Isadora Duncan moved from California to London in 1898.
She described her innovative, expressive form of dance as inspired by a mixture of classical
sculpture (she studied Greek vases and bas-reliefs in the British Museum) and American
ideals of freedom. She drew heavily on fantasy and imagination, performing barefoot in
flimsy draperies or a Greek tunic. Ruth Slate, recorded in her diary that she had been
particularly keen to see Isadora Duncan perform at the Duke of York’s Theatre in London in
1908. Ruth’s then boyfriend Wal, less keen, had stood her up, so Ruth decided to go alone.
She found the performance a revelation, recording children dressed as sprites and fairies
frolicking around with ferns and lilies; but it was Isadora’s expressiveness and freedom that
made such an impact: “I do not think I have ever seen anything more exquisite than Miss
Duncan’s dancing and my heart went out to the woman herself and loved her,” Ruth
enthused. Isadora Duncan’s dance style was controversial: her lifestyle even more so. She
was bisexual, and in 1906 had given birth to her first child without marrying the father.

Canada-born Maud Allan created even more ructions with her interpretation of Salome, first
staged in 1908. Allan performed what dance historian Judith Mackrell has summed up as “an
audacious choreography of desire.” She wore very little apart from ropes of pearls and a
wispy skirt. There were many who dismissed this expression of a young girl’s physicality as
the height of decadence, but it fascinated nonetheless. Like the ballet Scheherazade, it opened
up a register of expression for female lust which was both shocking and appealing to many
women. In 1918 the right-wing Noel Pemberton Billing, editor of a magazine called
Vigilante, denounced and derided such eroticism as “the cult of the clitoris,” by which he
meant deviant and depraved. He further declared it unpatriotic, contriving to suggest that
Maud Allan’s close friendship with Margot Asquith, wife of the former prime minister, was
implicated in a web of German conspiracy to bring down Britain. Allan sued, but in the
context of wartime uneasiness Pemberton Billing got away with it.

Women’s freedoms were both amplified and attacked as a consequence of the First World
War. Young women moved into munitions work and previously male occupations, and many
had their horizons widened by travel, work, and cinema. These new opportunities generated
moral panics, such as that over “Khaki Fever”: the belief that young women were turning into
nymphomaniacs, throwing themselves at soldiers. Popular travel writer Mrs Alec Tweedie
alleged that as soon as war was declared, “girls went out like cats on the tiles,” looking for
mates and shrieking madly. During the war, there were fears that young women’s passions
were being inflamed by cinema-going. As cinema historian Chris Brader has pointed out,
films with titles such as The Shop-Soiled Girl or A World of Sin weren’t calculated to reassure
the censors, however mild the content. There was concern about improper goings-on in the
dark of the picture palace, in dance halls, or indeed anywhere where young people hung
about together.

Girls gathered together in groups were held to egg each other on to unruly behavior. Anxiety
about this is clearly reflected in a story written by D. H. Lawrence, which was published in
1922. The story, entitled “Tickets Please!,” features a group of girls working as conductors
on trams during the war years. Described as “fearless young hussies,” we are told that “they
fear nobody—and everybody fears them.” One of the girls, Annie, develops a passion for a
young male inspector, John Thomas Raynor, who is something of a Don Juan. When she
shows a desire for a fuller, more intimate relationship with him, the inspector, wary of her
possessiveness, cries off. Annie and her mates lure John Thomas into the Ladies’ Waiting
Room and taunt him about his behavior, seeking some kind of retribution. They press him to
make a choice, to commit himself to one or other of them. He gets uneasy, feeling himself
cornered, and then the girls set on him like Bacchantes, ripping his clothes and drawing
blood. When they let him go, crestfallen, Annie is left miserable, and the girls completely
nonplussed.

“While it was risky for individual women to lose control or to surrender to passion, there
could be safety in numbers.”
The idea that women should know their place and behave with modesty was deftly satirized
by Anita Loos in her 1925 comic novel, Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, and its sequel, But
Gentlemen Marry Brunettes (1928). Originally subtitled The Intimate Diary of a Professional
Lady, Gentlemen Prefer Blondes focused on the adventures of a pair of resourceful,
libidinous American flappers, Lorelei and Dorothy, who travel around Europe creating
mayhem. High-spirited and irrepressible, they zestfully pursue pleasure and personal gain.
They are magnets for men wherever they go, and though good-natured, they exploit their
suitors shamelessly. The men are shown as gullible, shallow creatures, somewhat infantile
and often at the mercy of their wives and mothers. Lorelei, as narrator, is something of a
philosopher. Twisting men round her little finger is to her a skill, a sensible strategy for the
ambitious girl. And ambition in a girl, she reflects, is a form of prudence. Through the voice
of Lorelei, Loos makes hay with the strictures of a society structured by class and patriarchy,
up-ending double standards of morality. Courted by the rich Henry Spoffard, a moralist and
prohibitionist, Lorelei suggests that a girl might be considered to be “more reformed if she
knew what it was to be unreformed.” Experience, to her, is invaluable: for how else can a girl
learn what she wants? In Vienna, concerned about Lorelei’s state of mind, Spoffard sends her
to Sigmund Freud (“Dr. Froyd”), who confesses that he can find nothing wrong with Lorelei
apart from her lack of repression. He advises her to cultivate some inhibitions.

The fashionable young woman, characteristically casting off her stays and inhibitions, caught
the imagination of the 1920s. This image of the pleasure-seeking flapper could be tongue-in-
cheek, but still basically positive. The term “It,” denoting sexual attractiveness, was widely
discussed at this time. Elinor Glyn, invited to Hollywood to turn her hand to screenwriting in
1920, claimed ownership of the term, based on her short story, “It,” which she developed for
the cinema screen in 1927. Glyn kept insisting that “It” was not merely sexual, but rather a
quality of “potent romantic magnetism,” but the public wasn’t in the mood for such fine
distinctions. Clara Bow’s legendary performance as the “It” girl in this silent movie broke
box office records in America. She played the part of a shop girl, Betty Lou, who set her
sights on seducing and marrying the handsome owner of the department store in which she
was a lowly employee. After a number of misunderstandings, and a lot of scheming, she pulls
this off. The film—carried by Clara Bow’s bubbly, appealing performance—celebrates Betty
Lou as full of joie de vivre, irresistibly attractive and winningly feminine as well as having a
shrewd eye for self-advancement.

Two other films of the period featuring girls on the make pushed the boundaries further.
Warner Brothers’ Baby Face (1930) starred Barbara Stanwyck as Lily Powers, a girl who
survives sexual abuse and a deprived background by being inspired by Nietzsche and
learning to exploit men before they exploit her. In an uncut version of the film she’s advised
to “crush all sentiment” and to face life “defiantly and unafraid,” not to waste any energy
“yearning for the moon.”

A publicity poster for the film showed Stanwyck in a sexually challenging pose, declaring
that “She had ‘It’ and she made ‘It’ pay!” Lily sleeps her way up through the management
structure of the company she works for before eventually falling in love. The screenplay of
MGM’s Red Headed Woman (1932) was written by Anita Loos. In this film, Jean Harlow
plays Lil, an out-and-out exponent of sexual opportunism who stops at very little to get what
she wants, destroying marriages in the process. Lil is lustful and sexually self-possessed,
juggling between her own sexual needs and determination to marry wealth as it suits her. The
film proved highly controversial, and was banned in Britain. Both of these films starred
uninhibited female characters who had no difficulty with owning or expressing desire, or in
deploying various forms of sexual opportunism. Both characters, Lily and Lil, profited from
such sophistication, and went unpunished. They stood as examples of precisely the kind of
license and moral laxity that the Motion Picture Production (Hays) Code, which took effect in
America from 1934, was designed to censor and clamp down on.

In films like Baby Face and Red Headed Woman the men’s roles are undeveloped. They are
like cardboard cutouts, characterized by, and differentiated from each other simply by age,
wealth, and handsomeness, serving as ciphers for, or objects of, feminine desire. This is in
contrast with the male icons of celebrity culture of the 1920s and 1930s. Here, the Hollywood
“star” system, together with the production of movie magazines and other forms of
journalism, encouraged mass adulation among female fans, usually involving a near-forensic
interest in stars’ personalities and private lives.

While it was risky for individual women to lose control or to surrender to passion, there could
be safety in numbers. The men, after all, went around in a gang. In North America, by the late
19th century, groups of adoring girls had haunted matinée performances at the theaters in
pursuit of actors whom they elevated to the status of “matinée idols” on account of their
desirability.

Displays of collective passion became commonplace around matinée and movie stars, as fans
fought to see and to touch their heroes, and to secure autographs and mementoes. There were
historical precedents for this kind of thing. Back in the early 19th century, the composer and
pianist Franz Liszt had inspired women to heights of devotion which contemporaries dubbed
“Lisztomania.” Women were said to have collected Liszt’s cigar stubs, which they would
encase in jewelry or hoard as relics. Such behavior has long been deplored and labelled
hysterical. Late 19th-century observers spoke of a new disease affecting young women,
which they dubbed “idolitis.” In his historical study of matinée idols (published in 1972),
writer David Carroll commented on “the hundreds of palpitating, breast-beating females”
who cornered such performers in the 1890s and 1900s “like wolves surrounding a stag, some
reaching out to stroke his coat, his shoes, anything; some standing planted to the earth on
which he walked, in mute adulation.”

Rudolph Valentino, variously described as “Love-God,” prototype “Latin Lover,” or the

“greatest screen lover of all time” was a phenomenon on quite a different scale. An estimated
125,000 people rushed to see The Sheik within weeks of its opening in New York. Valentino
is said to have received thousands of letters a week from adoring women in his heyday,
although as in many of the stories which surround his popularity, it isn’t easy to separate fact
from fiction. Women were said to swoon or shriek at the very mention of his name. When he
appeared in public, they snatched at his clothing, jewelry, or cufflinks for mementoes. After
Valentino’s shockingly sudden, untimely death from peritonitis in 1926, huge unruly crowds
jostled to file past his body; there were faintings, hysterics, and even reports of women driven
to suicide with grief. Valentino was, and remains a superstar, whose cult status has endured:
his sex appeal is anatomized and hotly debated on the internet even today.

A significant part of Valentino’s appeal on screen was transgressive. In The Sheik, a brown-
skinned man, ostensibly an Arab, carries off a pale-skinned girl, likened in the text to a pretty
boy or a white gazelle. The frisson of difference is there although ultimately we’re reassured
that Ahmed is the son of an English lord and not really an Arab at all. But fears about
miscegenation were on the rise in the late 1920s, and soon the Hays Code set out explicitly to
clamp down on suggestions of interracial romance. More generally, the movie production
code asserted that scenes of passion, “impure love,” and lustful kissing might threaten moral
standards everywhere. Adultery should never be made to look attractive, in order to protect
the sanctity of marriage and the home. All this had an impact. Film historian Molly Haskell
noted that before the mid-1930s, American cinema could show women as sexually desiring in
their own right “without being freaks, villains, or even necessarily Europeans.”

“If it became harder to show women as explicitly sexually desiring, several films made just
before and after the Second World War focused on heroines driven by unruly passions and
worldly appetites.”

Stars such as Jean Harlow, Norma Shearer, Marlene Dietrich, and Barbara Stanwyck all
played convincing roles as women of uninhibited sexuality, pursuing men, enjoying sex, and
challenging sexual double standards head on. In the later 1930s this changed, and sex had to
take cover under metaphor. “It is the difference between Ginger Rogers having sex without
children—Gold Diggers of 1933, Upper World (1934)—and Ginger Rogers having children
without sex—Bachelor Mother (1939),” Haskell explained.

If it became harder to show women as explicitly sexually desiring, several films made just
before and after the Second World War focused on heroines driven by unruly passions and
worldly appetites. The most famous of these was of course Gone with the Wind, the historical
romance epic based on Margaret Mitchell’s 1936 novel of the same name, set in the
American South during the Civil War. The novel was a huge hit when it was first published,
and has continued a best-seller, with estimates of between 26,000 and 30,000 copies having
been printed worldwide. In the text, the young Southern belle Scarlett O’Hara is introduced
as trouble from the start. Her education at Fayetteville Female Academy has schooled her in
feminine demeanor and taught her how “to conceal from men a sharp intelligence beneath a
face as sweet and bland as a baby’s”; but her green eyes are a give-away, “turbulent, willful,
lusty with life.”

She is passionately in love with Ashley Wilkes, who is bent on marrying the much more
conventionally feminine Melanie. Scarlett is “fast.” She throws herself at Ashley but gets
nowhere. Ashley—represented in the book as a gentle, gallant, and cultivated young man—
will never leave Melanie, however much Scarlett tries to push him into doing so. A man of
honor, he is aghast at her lack of loyalty to a friend. In the meantime, Scarlett goes from man
to man, marrying variously out of pique, out of self-interest, and for survival. Sex is not one
of her goals: indeed it is really to be avoided; Scarlett wasn’t keen on having babies. She feels
nothing much for Rhett Butler, the handsome, debonair “hero” who watches her behavior
with amused detachment and even admiration. Although Mitchell suggests that Scarlett
experiences the odd sexual frisson in Rhett’s company, when he is in gaol and teases her for
her manipulative behavior, she knows that she wouldn’t care very much were he to be
hanged.

The reader/viewer roots for Rhett, but Scarlett continues to be driven by her “wild dreams,
her mad desires” for the unattainable Ashley. In the film version of Gone with the Wind
Leslie Howard, not altogether keen on the role, played the part of Ashley Wilkes. His
performance failed to appeal to women viewers. Helen Taylor, who has made an extensive
study of women’s reactions to the film, was surprised by the vehemence with which most of
her respondents dismissed Ashley as a “wimp” and couldn’t understand why Scarlett would
waste her time on him. Clark Gable’s Rhett Butler, on the other hand, was every woman’s
dream. Nevertheless, when Scarlett and Rhett do eventually marry, the marriage degenerates
into a mutually destructive power struggle, with neither character able to respond positively
to tenderness in the other. We have to get to page 1,016 in this (very long) book before
Scarlett starts to realize that her obsession with Ashley has had a negative impact on her life.
But then she has a sudden revelation: “I loved something I made up” she confesses to herself:
I made a pretty suit of clothes and fell in love with it. And when Ashley came riding along, so
handsome, so different, I put that suit on him and made him wear it whether it fitted or not.
And I couldn’t see what he really was. I kept on loving the pretty clothes—and not him at all.

In the book, and at this point, Scarlett begins to respond to Rhett sexually. She realizes that
Rhett’s earlier accusation had substance: that she had been behaving all along like “a child,
crying for the moon.”

But it’s too late. The tragic death of their daughter, Bonnie, and a row with Rhett, in the
course of which she falls and miscarries another potential child, sharpens their mutual
resentments and misunderstandings. The ending is well known. After a night of heady
passion, when Rhett, in his cups, carries her upstairs and forces her into sex, Scarlett starts to
feel something like love and compassion for him. The film shows her smiling coyly to herself
in the morning light. But Rhett’s had enough. And so off he goes, frankly not giving a damn.

Feminism, the belief in social, economic, and political equality of the sexes. Although

largely originating in the West, feminism is manifested worldwide and is represented by

various institutions committed to activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests.

Throughout most of Western history, women were confined to the domestic sphere, while

public life was reserved for men. In medieval Europe, women were denied the right to own

property, to study, or to participate in public life. At the end of the 19th century in France,

they were still compelled to cover their heads in public, and, in parts of Germany, a husband

still had the right to sell his wife. Even as late as the early 20th century, women could neither

vote nor hold elective office in Europe and in most of the United States (where several

territories and states granted women’s suffrage long before the federal government did so).

Women were prevented from conducting business without a male representative, be it father,

brother, husband, legal agent, or even son. Married women could not exercise control over

their own children without the permission of their husbands. Moreover, women had little or

no access to education and were barred from most professions. In some parts of the world,

such restrictions on women continue today.

History of feminism

The ancient world

There is scant evidence of early organized protest against such circumscribed status. In the

3rd century BCE, Roman women filled the Capitoline Hill and blocked every entrance to the

Forum when consul Marcus Porcius Cato resisted attempts to repeal laws limiting women’s

use of expensive goods. “If they are victorious now, what will they not attempt?” Cato cried.

“As soon as they begin to be your equals, they will have become your superiors.”
00:03:45

That rebellion proved exceptional, however. For most of recorded history, only isolated

voices spoke out against the inferior status of women, presaging the arguments to come. In

late 14th- and early 15th-century France, the first feminist philosopher, Christine de Pisan,

challenged prevailing attitudes toward women with a bold call for female education. Her

mantle was taken up later in the century by Laura Cereta, a 15th-century Venetian woman

who published Epistolae familiares (1488; “Personal Letters”; Eng. trans. Collected Letters

of a Renaissance Feminist), a volume of letters dealing with a panoply of women’s

complaints, from denial of education and marital oppression to the frivolity of women’s

attire.

The defense of women had become a literary subgenre by the end of the 16th century, when

Il merito delle donne (1600; The Worth of Women), a feminist broadside by another Venetian

author, Moderata Fonte, was published posthumously. Defenders of the status quo painted

women as superficial and inherently immoral, while the emerging feminists produced long

lists of women of courage and accomplishment and proclaimed that women would be the

intellectual equals of men if they were given equal access to education.

The so-called “debate about women” did not reach England until the late 16th century, when

pamphleteers and polemicists joined battle over the true nature of womanhood. After a series

of satiric pieces mocking women was published, the first feminist pamphleteer in England,

writing as Jane Anger, responded with Jane Anger, Her Protection for Women (1589). This

volley of opinion continued for more than a century, until another English author, Mary

Astell, issued a more reasoned rejoinder in A Serious Proposal to the Ladies (1694, 1697).

The two-volume work suggested that women inclined neither toward marriage nor a religious

vocation should set up secular convents where they might live, study, and teach.

Liberal Feminists
1) Main Source Of Gender Inequality Is The "Process Of Socialization" (Learning Process

By Which You Acquire The Knowledge, Skill, And Motivations Required To Participate In

Social Life).

2) The Circumstances That Shaped Women’s Lives Were The Laws And Prejudices

(Shared By Men And Women) That Excluded Them From The Public Sphere And From The

Right To Earn Their Own Living On An Equal Footing With Men.

3) Women Struggled For The Right To Higher Education, Entrance Into The Professions,

The Right To Own Property And Hold Public Office, And For Suffrage, The Right That

Came To Symbolize Full Citizenship.

4) The Solution: – Education = Remove Individual Ignorance. Therefore, These Laws And

The Prejudices That Underwrote Them Would Gradually Be Replaced By Extending

Equality Of Opportunity To Women.

Socialist Feminism:

1) Oppressive Relations Between The Sexes Are Not Simply Derivative Of Class. The

Interconnections Between Sex Oppression And Class Exploitation Have (Had)To Be

Addressed.

2) A. Focused On The Labour Done By Women In The Household—called Domestic

Labour—helps To Sustain The Capitalist System.

(A) Rearing Children;

(B) Sustaining Husbands.

Result: Both Capitalists And Individual Men Benefit From The Unpaid And Personal

Service Of Women In The Home.

3) Some Socialist Feminists Analyzed The Interconnections Between The Public Sphere

Of Capitalist And State Relations And The Private Sphere Of The Family/ Household.

(A) Capitalism Done At Fraction Of The Cost;

(B) The Appearance Of The Distinction Between Private And Public Sustains The Unequal

Relations Between Men And Women Throughout Society.

4) The Solution: Overcome The Private And Public Split È Family Wage; Denial Of

Education; No Social Supports For Child Care.

Radical Feminist

1) Gender Inequality Is Rooted In The Material Conditions Of Men And Women. The

Biological Family Is An Inherently Unequal Power Distribution.

Like Marxism Which Contends: Monogamy Was The Fires Form Of The Family To Be

Based Not On Natural Conditions But On Economic Conditions: The Exclusive Aims Of

Monogamous Marriage Were To Make The Man Supreme In The Family And To Propagate,

As The Future Heirs To His Wealth, Children Indisputably His Own.

2) The Sole Purpose Of Monogamous Marriage Is To Subjugate The Female Sex To The

Male È They Locate Men’s Power Over Women In Their Ability To Control Women

Sexually And To Develop The Institutions That Ensure Continuing Control.

Western Societies Are A Form Of Patriarchy -- Rule Of Men, Men Are The Main

Beneficiaries Of These Societies È In A World Of Unequal Power Relations Between Men

And Women, Compulsory Heterosexuality Ensures Not Only Women’s Sexual Dependence

Upon Men But Also Their Economic, Social, And Psychological Dependence.

3) The Solution: The Elimination Of Men And The Traditional Family From Women's

Lives -- "Compulsory Heterosexuality" Is The Key Way Women Are Subordinated And

Enslaved In This Society Èwomen Should Build Their Own Institutions From Health Clinics

And Women's Shelters To Small Businesses, Art Galleries Etc.

Supplemental:

A) Third Wave Feminism È Third Wave Feminists Use “Media As A Tool Of

Resistance.”È Riot Girrls And Zinesè New Forms Of Media To Disseminate And Circulate
Knowledge Pertaining To Justice For Women – Taking Place Within An Underground
Culture. }

B) Black Feminism È Black Feminist Theory Has Argued That Black Women Are
Positioned With In Structures Of Power In Fundamentally Different Ways Than White
Women

[Aside/ All In All: È Black Feminism/ Evolved Paralell And Different From White
Feminism È Sojourner Truth, Harriet Tubman, Frances E. W. Harper, Ida B. Welles Barnett
And Mary Church Terrell, President Of The National Association Of Colored Women
Founded In 1896 È Candada – Mary Ann Shadd {The Provincial Freeman} / Viola
Desmond {The New Glasgow Revolt}È Black Feminist Theory Has Argued That Black
Women Are Positioned With In Structures Of Power In Fundamentally Different Ways Than
White Women.

See Themselves As Having Struggled For Recognition, Not Only From Men In Their Own
Culture, But Also From Western Feminists.

Three Fundamental Propositions:

1) Black Feminist Theory Has Argued That Black Women Are Positioned With In
Structures Of Power In Fundamentally Different Ways Than White Women

2) See Themselves As Having Struggled For Recognition, Not Only From Men In Their
Own Culture, But Also From Western Feminists.

3) [Upshot] Black Feminists Contend That The Liberation Of Black Women Entails
Freedom For All People, Since It Would Require The End Of Racism, Sexism, And Class
Oppression.

Thesis: Black Feminism Argues That Sexism, Class Oppression, And Racism Are
Inextricably Bound Together È
Aside: There Is A Long-standing And Important Alliance Between Postcolonial Feminists,
Which Overlaps With Transnational Feminism And Third-world Feminism, And Black
Feminists È Both [Or All] See Themselves As Having Struggled For Recognition, Not Only
From Men In Their Own Culture, But Also From Western Feminists [And Their ‘comfortable
Concentration Camps’].

Summary of Hayavadana

Hayavadana Summary

The play is a 1971 rendition of a 1940 Thomas Mann novel which retells, in part, the
eleventh-century Kathasaritsagara, a collection of Indian folktales. The play begins with the
narrator, Bhagavata, thanking Ganesh for his blessings and asking the Hindu god to watch
over the following performance. After Bhagavata has thoroughly thanked Ganesh, he tells the
audience that our two heroes are Devadatta and Kapila. Devadatta is the smartest man in all
of Dharmapura, and Kapila is the strongest man in the city. Devadatta is born into the
Brahmin caste, while Kapila is born into the Shudra caste, but they are the best of friends.

Before Bhagavata can continue with the play, an actor runs in from the wings and screams
that he has seen a talking horse. Bhagavata does not believe him, but then the talking horse
comes on stage. Hayavadana is a man with a horse’s head. He cries and explains that he was
born into his mutated body. His mother was the beautiful Princess of Kamataka. She was
given the choice to marry anyone she wished. When she saw the Prince of Araby on his white
stallion, she decided she wanted to marry the beautiful horse. Her father agreed and she lived
with the horse for over a decade, eventually giving birth to Hayavadana. One day, her stallion
turned into a beautiful man and explained that he was a gandharva that had been cursed by a
god to live as a horse until he won the love of a human woman for fifteen years. He invites
the princess to come to his celestial home with him, but she refuses to go if he will not turn
back into her stallion. He curses her to be a horse and ascends to heaven, leaving Hayavadana
orphaned.

Bhagavata encourages Hayavadana to visit the goddess Kali to get rid of his horse’s head.
Hayavadana sets off with the actor and Bhagavata returns to the central story. Devadatta sees
Padmini at a market and becomes instantly obsessed with her. He tells Kapila about his
feelings, and Kapila offers to find the girl and ask her to marry Devadatta. When Kapila sees
Padmini himself, he is struck by her beauty, but his loyalty is to Devadatta, his dearest friend.

Kapila successfully arranges for Devadatta and Padmini to marry and Padmini gets pregnant,
but the two are not happy. Padmini is quick-tempered and bold, which rubs Devadatta the
wrong way. Devadatta hates that Padmini wants to spend time with Kapila because he wants
her all to himself. When they go on a trip to Ujjain together, Kapila stops the cart to get
flowers for Padmini. Padmini watches Kapila with lust that Devadatta cannot ignore. When
Padmini and Kapila go to the temple of Rudra together, Devadatta sneaks off to the temple of
Kali and cuts his head off.

When Padmini and Kapila get back to their cart, they realize Devadatta is gone. Kapila leaves
Padmini and goes in search of his friend. When he sees what has happened, he kills himself
to be with his best friend. Padmini goes in search of them and finds them. She decides to kill
herself because she knows people will call her a “whore” (101) and blame her for the death of
both men. However, the goddess Kali intervenes and offers to restore the men to life and asks
Padmini to put their heads on so she can revive them. Padmini mixes the heads up and
Devadatta emerges with Kapila’s body and vice-versa. The three think this is hilarious. They
dance and sing in the woods until the collapse.

When they finally leave, they get into a fight about who Padmini is rightfully married to.
Bhagavata interrupts the action and announces the intermission, then asks the audience to
ponder what the right decision is.

In the second act, the trio go to see a rishi who tells them that, since the head rules the body,
Padmini belongs to Devadatta’s head and Kapila’s body. Kapila is devastated, so he goes off
alone into the woods to live as a hermit. Padmini and Devadatta enjoy the new excitement of
their revamped sexual lives, but soon these feelings begin to fade. After their son is born,
Devadatta transforms into his old self and Padmini finds herself dreaming about Kapila.
When she learns that Kapila’s mother has died, she sends Devadatta to get dolls at the Ujjain
fair and leaves to find Kapila in the woods. The two speak and then embrace one another.

Devadatta learns of Padmini’s betrayal, so he seeks Kapila out in the forest with a sword and
two dolls. When Devadatta sees his old friend, though, he feels no anger. Nevertheless, the
two men agree that they cannot live happily together so they must kill one another. After they
do, Padmini decides to go off into the woods and commit suicide, leaving her child with
Bhagavata.

The play seems about to end, but then another actor runs on stage screaming about a talking
horse. Hayavadana returns to the stage as a complete horse who can still speak with a
human’s voice. The first actor also returns with a child everyone recognizes as belonging to
Padmini. The child is sullen and does not talk at all until he sees Hayavadana and starts
laughing. Hayavadana says he wants to lose his human voice so he can be a complete being,
and the child shows Hayavadana how to laugh until his voice is gone. In the end, Bhagavata
thanks Ganesh for the performance.

Objectives of research:

1. To show the nature of women in Karnad’s plays with a special reference to

Hayavadana.
 2. To depict the non-traditional way of being a woman.In this woman’s sexuality is
foregrounded followed by how tradition and patriarchy was overlooked and discarded
by Padmini.
3. The concept of thinking out of the box, free thinking nature of women is showcased
and subjugated/suppressed feelings and aspirations are brought to the surface level.
4. The concept of Brain and brawn, Body-Mind argument will be analysed.

Chapter 2

Hayavadhana .

The play opens with a prayer ritual performed by Hindus to the god Ganesha, who has the
head of an elephant and the body of a boy. Bhagavata asks that Ganesha bless the
performance that he and the assembled company are about to perform, and then tells the
audience that the play is set in Dharmapura, and the central characters are close friends
Devadatta and Kapila.

A scream comes from offstage and an actor runs on screaming that he has just seen a man
with the head of a horse and a human voice. Bhagavata does not believe him and even when
the creature enters he thinks a prank is being played and that the horse head is actually a
mask. He tries to pull it off but realizes it is a real head. The creature is called Hayavadana
and he explains that he is the son of a princess and a god in equine form. All he wants is to
become a full man. Bhagavata suggests that he go to the temple of Kali, the Hindu goddess of
death, because she is known to grant any wish that anyone has. Hayavadana does as he
suggests.

After he leaves, the narrator continues talking to the audience where he left off, explaining
that the two young men are both in love with the same girl. Devadatta, who is a slender
intellectual and poet, and Kapila, who is muscular and darker-complected, enter. Devadatta
tells of his love for Padmini. He claims he would sacrifice his head and arms if he could
marry her.

Kapila decides to find where she lives because he sees that his friend is truly lovesick. He
goes to the street where she lives and knocks on every door until he finds her home. When
she answers the door he falls head over heels in love at first sight. He woos her on
Devadatta's behalf but he privately believes that Padmini is too quick-witted for him and that
Devadatta is too sensitive for a woman like her.

Padmini and Devadatta are married quickly and all three continue to be friends. Padmini
becomes pregnant with a son but Devadatta starts to believe that she is a little too affectionate
with Kapila. They are planning a trip together to the Ujjain fair but when Devadatta tells
Padmini that he wishes he could spend more alone time with her (secretly jealous of Kapila,
whom he knows has feelings for his wife), she offers to cancel the trip. When Kapila arrives,
though, she changes her mind and decides to take the trip as planned.

As the trip progresses, Padmini pays Kapila many compliments. Devadatta sulks and
becomes more and more envious. They pass the temple of Kali, and Devadatta remembers his
pledge to cut off his head if he were to be allowed to marry Padmini. Full of grief over his
disintegrating marriage, he strikes off his head. When Kapila goes to look for Devadatta, he
finds his decapitated body and in his grief beheads himself as well.

The men are gone for so long that Padmini becomes worried. She sets off to look for them
and when she finds their bodies, she tries to kill herself. The goddess Kali appears to her and
tells her that if she agrees to put the men's heads back on their bodies herself then they will be
brought back to life. Padmini is so excited by this that she puts the wrong heads on the wrong
bodies by mistake; the men come back to life but Devadatta's head is on Kapila's body, and
vice versa.

Everyone thinks this is quite funny at first, but when they get home, there are complications.
Both men feel that Padmini is his wife. Devadatta says as the head rules the body, she must
be his wife, whereas Kapila argues that as the child she is carrying was fathered by his body
then it is he who is her husband. After deliberation, Padmini elects to remain with Devadatta's
head. Kapila is left behind and goes to live in the forest.

The union between Devadatta and Padmini is initially strong as she feels that this is a new,
brawny, improved version of her husband. When they buy two dolls to give to their new baby
son, the dolls begin to address the audience and fill them in on what happens next. Over time,
Devadatta's body reverts to how it used to be and he and Padmini start to fight a lot over the
best way to raise their son.
 Padmini starts to think once again of Kapila. She takes her son to the forest to show it to him
for the first time, and she finds Kapila living there. As Devadatta has lost physical strength
over time, so has Kapila regained his. He accepts that he is fully Kapila. Padmini stays in the
forest for several nights with Kapila. When Devadatta finds them together he is distraught
and the men decide to kill each other to end the rivalry once and for all. After they are dead,
Padmini throws herself upon the funeral pyre. Before doing so, she tells Bhagavata to give
her son to hunters to raise, and when he is five to bring him to the Brahman, Devadatta’s
father and thus the child’s grandfather.

The tragedy is offset by a man who comes onstage telling of a horse walking down the street
singing the national anthem. Another actor joins him on stage with a crying child, who is
Padmini and Devadatta's son. Hayavadana returns to the stage, and tells of how he asked Kali
to make him complete, but rather than making him a complete man, she made him a complete
horse instead. Padmini's son likes him and the two sing and laugh together. Hayavadana
wishes that his voice was not human and Padmini's son tells him to laugh. As he does so, the
laugh becomes less like that of a man and more like the whinnying of a horse.

The play ends with Bhagavata heralding the mercy of Ganesha for helping Hayavadana and
Padmini's son. He begins to pray and thanks the Lord for the successful performance of their
play.

Hayavadana Character List

Bhagavata
A Bhagavata in Hinduism is a worshiper; in this case he is also the play's narrator and he gives
the audience a synopsis of the characters' lives before the start of the play. He is able to talk to
the characters during the play and he also reacts to what is happening, especially when he does
not approve of one particular course of action or another. He is often more of an observer than
the narrator because he is also surprised and taken aback by much of what happens. His
symbolic role in the play is to show the audience how unpredictable life can sometimes be.
Devadatta
One of the play's two main protagonists, Devadatta is a fair and slender man who is smart as a
whip. His father is a Brahmin and he is both poet and political observer. He is close friends with
Kapila at the start and the end of the play but feels a great deal of jealousy when he sees that
there is a mutual attraction between Kapila and Padmini. Ironically, he becomes more jealous
after he is married to Padmini and still sees his erstwhile friend as a rival.

When his head is put back on Kapila's body he feels that he has the best of both worlds, because
he has combined his wit with Kapila's strength, and he has Padmini. However, eventually he
body starts to become what it used to be and he is swiftly returned to his soft, flabby form again,
which leaves him feeling dissatisfied and grumpy. He and Kapila kill themselves in solidarity at
the end.
Kapila
A muscular, dark man, Kapila is the son of an ironsmith, and he is the brawn to Devaratta's
brains. He is a man of courage and he has great daring and a sense of adventure. He is a far
better friend than Devadatta gives him credit for; he talks to Padmini on his friend's behalf even
though it is clear to him that they are a mismatch. He also cuts off his own head in solidarity
with Devadatta when he finds his decapitated body. When Padmini chooses to remain with
Devadatta's head on Kapila's body, Kapila goes into the forest and withdraws from society. He
gradually regains his former fitness and physique but he realizes that this is a hollow, half-
existence. He and Devadatta kill themselves in solidarity at the end.
Padmini
Padmini is a beautiful young woman who is the object of desire of both Devadatta and Kapila.
She chooses Devadatta because she is attracted by his intelligence but she comes to realize that
her sharp tongue is too much for his sensitive nature. She is also very attracted to the physicality
of Kapila.

Although it is a complete accident when she puts the wrong heads back on the wrong bodies, it
does seem that Padmini is now able to have her cake and eat it too, because she gets the mind
that she adores atop the body she craves. This is only fleeting, though, because when the bodies
of the men start to readjust back to the way they used to be, she is quickly dissatisfied with her
lot again.

Padmini is left alone twice by the men, as they kill themselves and leave her twice. The second
time she kills herself too, having been dissuaded from doing so the first time around by the
goddess Kali.
Hayavadana
Oddly, while the eponymous character in the play, Hayavadana does not appear that much and is
not the protagonist. He is a man with the head of a horse—or a horse with the body of a man,
depending on your perspective, born from a woman who married a horse and bore his son. He
wants desperately to be made complete, which he defines as being a full man. At the narrator's
suggestion, he asks Kali to bless him with this but we find out that although she acceded to his
request to be made whole, she elected to make him all horse rather than all man. He is joyful
when his human voice, the last vestige of his humanity, fades away at the end.

Kali
Kali is the Hindu goddess of death and she appears to most of the characters during the play.
Devadatta sacrifices his head to her, and she does receive both men in the end but only because
Padmini has put the wrong heads on the wrong bodies and intense suffering ensued. Padmini
also addresses her when she burns herself on the funeral pyre. Kali makes Hayavadana a
"complete" horse but in doing so demonstrates the perception that the Hindu gods don't really
pay attention and can create as much havoc as good.
Dolls #1 and #2
The dolls are snarky, mischievous, rude, selfish, and prideful creatures. They narrate what is
happening to Devadatta and Padmini through the birth of their son, Padmini's dreams of Kapila,
and more.
Actor #1
This actor is the first to be shocked by the horse-man Hayavadana. He is tasked by Bhagavata to
take Hayavadana to Kali's temple. He also ends up with the child when he passes through a
hunters' village and they give him the boy, saying he no longer belongs there.
Actor #2
This actor is frightened by Hayavadana singing the National Anthem.
Child
The child is the son of Padmini and Devadatta, given to be raised by hunters until he is five, and
then Devadatta's father, the Revered Brahmin. He is silent and surly, and only begins to use his
voice when he laughs at Hayavadana.

Hayavadana Symbols, Allegory and Motifs

Switching Heads (Motif)

The motif of switching heads is pivotal to the themes of incompleteness and of hybridism. The
first character that Bhagavat introduces is the god Ganesha who has the head of an elephant and
the body of a child. The next character that the audience meets in person is Hayavadana, who
has the body of a man and the head of a horse.
At first, the two male protagonists have their own heads correctly connected to their own bodies,
but after an excitable Padmini makes an error and puts each man's head on the other's body by
mistake, they, too, have a body and a head that does not belong together. This motif is followed
all the way through the play until the end, when Hayavadana does reach a stage of completeness
thanks to the help of both Kali and the little boy who is the son of Padmi and Davadatta.
The Flower (Symbol)
The Fortunate Lady flower that Kapila shows to Padmini is a symbol of Padmini, though the
flower's name is ironic since she certainly is not that fortunate. The flower has the marks of a
married woman, such as the dot on the forehead, the parting of the hair, and a necklace. It is
beautiful and beguiling, sensual and redolent just like a woman. At the end of the play
Bhagavata tells the audience that the Fortunate Lady flower tree sends up a lovely scent and
song on the night of the full moon, reminiscent of Padmini and her tragic, glorious death for
love.
Dreams (Motif)
Dreams occur multiple times throughout the text, particularly in relation to Padmini. It is in her
dreams that the audience/reader finds a fuller understanding of how she really feels about
Devadatta and Kapila. They are where she indulges in her most sensual and, in the eyes of
traditional, patriarchal Indian society, forbidden desires.
Dolls (Symbol)
Dolls are traditionally seen as symbols of childhood. They are toys, faint replicas of children
themselves, intended to teach the skills of nurturing and sympathy. In this play they are
associated with the child, purchased near the time of his birth and then kept until they are
replaced by new ones later. However, Karnad turns the symbol on its head a bit by making these
dolls very much alive, not to mention catty, cruel, and selfish. This doesn't necessarily reflect
upon the child as much as it does his parents, the ones who brought the dolls into the home.
Padmini's Door (Symbol)
There is a two-headed bird above Padmini's door, which symbolizes her split when it comes to
Devadatta and Kapila. She finds it difficult to reconcile her desire for Kapila's body and
Devadatta's brain, and since both men are so entrenched in their incompleteness, she cannot
make any headway in determining to be with only one of them.

Hayavadana Metaphors and Similes

Devadatta (Metaphor)
Bhagavata explains, “Comely in appearance, fair in colour, unrivalled in intelligence, Devadatta
is the only son of the Revered Brahmin Vidyasagara. Having felled the mightiest pundits of the
kingdom in debates on logic and love, having blinded the greatest poets of the world with his
poetry and wit, Devadatta is as it were the apple of every eye in Dharmapura” (73-74). The
metaphor of Devadatta as the "apple of every eye," which means he is highly esteemed (the
idiom derived from "aperture," or pupil), is one that lets the reader/audience see that the
residents in Dharmapura adulate Devadatta unconditionally due to his appealing attributes and
intelligence. They consider him a source of pride for the entire city; his respect from the city
dwellers is outstanding and unconditional.
Lives and Roads (Metaphor)
Bhagavata explains, “So the roads diverged. Kapila went into the forest and disappeared. He
never saw Dharmapura again. In fact he never felt the wind of any city again. As for Devadatta
and Padmini, they returned to Dharmapura and plunged into the joys of married life" (111). The
metaphorical, poetic "roads" indicate the different courses which the lives of the two friends
take. They aren't real roads per se, but two diverging lives—one with Padmini, one without; one
in the city, one in the woods.
Padmini (Simile)
Devadatta is besotted with Padmini, and describes her beauty with a simile of light: she is "as
stars before the moon, as the glow-worms before a torch" (83). She is the moon, so bright she
dims the stars; she is a flaming torch, so bright she mutes the glow-worms. These similes show
Devadatta' poetic tendencies and his esteem for Padmini.
Kapila (Metaphor)
Kapila is so overcome by Padmini's beauty and wit and sharp tongue that he moans, "I'm
finished—decimated—powdered to dust—powdered into tiny specks of flour" (89). These
metaphors of Kapila being ground down like flour or crushed into dust reveal how impressed
and gobsmacked he is by this woman before him. He cannot muster any wit or repartee or
command to deal with her, only weakly asking for her mother.
Padmini (Simile)
As with the above metaphor, Kapila is keenly aware of how witty and piquant and sassy
Padmini is. He wonders if she is actually too much for the poetic Devadatta, thinking, "But this
one is as fast as lightning—and as sharp" (90). Devadatta is a scholar, a poet, a rich man—
perhaps the sensual and clever Padmini will overwhelm him, Kapila wonders—and she does.

Hayavadana Irony
Vighneshwara’s Perfection - Act 1
Bhagavata states, “May Vighneshwara, the destroyer of obstacles, who removes all hurdles and
crowns all endeavours with success, bless our performance now. How indeed can one hope to
describe his glory in our poor, disabled words? An elephant’s head on a human body, a broken
tusk and cracked belly—whichever way you look at him he seems the embodiment of
perfection, of incompleteness. How indeed can one fathom the mystery that this very
Vakratunda-Mahakaya, with his crooked face and distorted body, is the Lord and Master of
Success and Perfection?” (74). Vighneshwara’s physical form does not depict the perfection
which he is believed to foster. The ironic divergence between his appearance and power to
facilitate perfectionism underscores his mysticism which is beyond mortals’ comprehension.
The mortals’ perception of perfection is divergent from Vighneshwara’s.
Theatre Critic
Actor I says this of the silent child: "See? No response—no reactions. When he grows up he
should make a good theatre critic" (134). This snarky comment is ironic because a theatre critic
is supposed to have responses and reactions—after all, this is what they are paid to do. Here,
Actor I is suggesting that theatre critics are dull and lame, lacking reactions and responses yet
still somehow being lauded for their "effort." A silent child, a theatre critic—they are one and
the same.
The Audience
Bhagavata says this twice: "And there is our large-hearted audience. It may be that they fall
asleep during a play sometimes" (75). It is gently ironic, poking fun at how theatre audiences
can sometimes grow bored or weary with the drama unfolding before them on the stage. They
are "large-hearted," meaning they are kind and hospitable, but at the same time they can nod off
and not heed the work of the actors. This is an irony, but one with relatively low stakes.
Strangers
When Kapila comes to Padmini's door to woo her for Devadatta, she engages him in a battle of
wits (which she wins handily). She piques him and makes him uncomfortable with her wit,
asking him to touch her feet and then saying ironically, "I knew it. I knew you wouldn't touch
my feet. One can't even trust strangers any more" (89). Of course, one should never (or rarely)
trust strangers, but Padmini says this to mess with Kapila's head, for he is obviously kind but not
very intelligent. Her irony here demonstrates her salient wit.

Hayavadana Imagery

Hayavadana
Hayavadana is, first, a horse's head on a man's body, and thus strange, terrifying, grotesque, and
amusing. This image runs parallel to the evocation of Ganesha, also an animal head (elephant)
and a human body (a boy). This may indicate that we humans do not necessarily understand how
everything in the universe should work and what perfection and completeness actually are. It
also foreshadows the transposed heads of Kapila and Padmini, and is thus an important image all
around.
The "Forest Fair"
Padmini states, “my poor child, you haven’t seen the witching fair of the dark forest, have you?
Let’s go and see it. How can I describe it to you? There’s so much. Long before the sun rises,
the shadow of twigs draw alpanas on the floor. The stars raise arati and go. Then the day dawns
and the fun begins. The circus in the tree-tops and the cock-fights in a shower of feathers. And
the dances! The Tiger-dance, and the peacock dance, and the dance of the sun’s little feet with
silver anklets on the river. In the heart of the forest stands the stately chariot of the shield bearer.
It is made of pure gold—rows of birds pull it down the street, and rows of flames of the forest
salute it with torches" (121-122). The fair is absolutely enthralling and impressive. Main
participants are the animals which predominantly inhabit the forests. Each animal plays a
distinct role which makes the fairs a success. Trees offer an ideal ambiance for the fair to
proceed. Dancing depicts the animals' happiness which comes from having a serene
environment where they can conduct their affairs far from the interference of humans; this is the
world Padmini yearns for at this point in her life.
Head and Body
Throughout the latter part of the play the audience is consistently faced with images of head and
body—sometimes familiar in their fusion, sometimes unfamiliar. This forces us to consider the
dichotomy between head and body, consider which is more powerful, and ponder how identity is
constructed.
Kali
Kali is presented first as a "terrifying figure, her arms stretched out, her mouth wide open with
the tongue lolling out" (101), but Karnad swiftly inverts this image and reveals that she is
actually yawning. It is a play on the traditional view of the goddess, and an amusing image of
how silly and inconsequential the affairs of humans are to her. There will be divine intervention
in the characters' lives, but they're really their own worst enemies—not the gods.

Hayavadana Literary Elements

Genre
Drama
Setting and Context
Dharmapura, India
Narrator and Point of View
As this is a play, it uses third-person limited, although Bhagavata speaks to the mindset of
others.
Tone and Mood
Tone: lively, questioning, anxious

Mood: playful, apprehensive, confining

Protagonist and Antagonist
The protagonists/antagonists are Devadatta and Kapila.
Major Conflict
There is conflict between the two friends when Devadatta realizes that Kapila is attracted to
Padmini. There is also conflict after their heads have been put on the wrong bodies; both feel
that they are the logical choice for Padmini to be with moving forward and both argue their
points with the other.
Climax
The men kill each other and Padmini commits sati on a funeral pyre because she realizes she
feels incomplete on her own.
Foreshadowing
Bhagavata foreshadows the friends' transposed heads and Hayavadana with his early paean to
Ganesha, a god with an elephant head and a boy's body.
Understatement
Bhagavata says that he is surprised to see the Hayavadana character walking onto the stage,
which is an understatement since this figure is a man with the head of a horse; surprise is far too
calm of a term to describe this reaction.
Allusions
1. Hindu gods and goddesses (Ganesha, Rudra, Kali), as well as Hindu social and religious
rituals (pooja, namaskara, sati)
2. The Shastras—the sacred Hindu books (106)
3. Pandavas and Draupadi (129): husband and wife in the Hindu epic "Mahabharata"
Imagery
The most conspicuous imagery is that of the masks and bodies to which they are attached, and
the switching that takes place frequently. With this, Karnad is commenting on the problems with
identity, such as the dichotomy between the head and the body.
Paradox
1. At the start of the play, the god Ganesha, who is a boy with the head of an elephant, is said to
be the god of perfection and success. He is also the embodiment of this. This is a paradox
because he is a hybrid of two creatures, and the other characters in the play find an
incompleteness in being a hybrid that does not suggest perfection or success at all.
Parallelism
1. The bodies that belong to the new heads parallel each other in their return to the head's
original bodily form.
2. Padmini's initial lapse in affection for Devadatta is paralleled by her later lapse in affection
for him.
Personification
1. "And the head is bidding good-bye to the heart" (95)
2. "The wrong road stuck to my feet—wouldn't let it go" (123)
3. "...this body, this appendage, laughed and flowered out in a festival of memories to which I'm
an outcaste" (126)
4. "it [the body] wasn't made for this life. It resisted. It also had its revenge" (128)

Chapter 3

In Hayavadana, Karnad deals with the question of Head and Body with a different
purpose. Interestingly, the main and the sub-plot of Hayavadana deal with the moral and
philosophical aspect of the problem, raising more important issues relating to human
existence. Girish Karnad projects the female character in a very different manner. His
female character possesses qualities like attractive, clever, energetic, and more dominant
than male character in the play. Through female characters, Girish Karnad presents the
image of a modern woman who is caught between two ideas, one is her quest for
completeness and other is her search for individual rights in male-dominated society.
Girish Karnad presents his female protagonist's relevance to modern context to show
weakness of male-dominated Indian social system. In this respect, observations on woman
character in Hayavadana are discussed in detail. It is important to note the plot structure
of Hayavadana to understand the central theme of the play.

Girish Karnad links the thematic contents of this subplot with the main plot at the end of
the play presenting a union of the energy of the horse in relation to the human world. This
sub-plot presents the problem of Hayavadana’s desire for completeness. In the main plot,
through the character, Padmini shows the human’s desire for completeness. At the end of
the play, the dramatist shows that human’s desire for completeness cannot be fulfilled.
Also, the Goddess does not fulfil the wish of Hayavadana.
Girish Karnad presents the superiority of head not only in the main plot but also in the
sub- plot. In the sub-plot, Hayavadana possesses the head of a horse therefore the Goddess
turns him into a complete horse. In the main plot, Padmini misplaces the heads of
Devadatta and Kapila to get a perfect husband for her. In other words she wants to possess
a complete man who has a head full of intellect like Devadatta and a strong body of
Kapila. But, Devadatta no longer possesses the strong body of Kapila and he starts to lose
strength of body. Thus, the story of the sub-plot reasserts the central thought of the main
plot. The main and subplot merge together at the end.

Girish Karnad makes use of the traditional myth and theatre of India along with the
techniques of modern drama. The fusion of the traditional and modern elements imparts a
unique dramatic effect in Hayavadana. It achieves a unity of structure and produces a very
cohesive dramatic effect displaying the mastery of dramatic craft of the playwright.

Padmini is one of the major characters. She is a beautiful female character. Hayavadana is
multidimensional play presenting a love triangle involving Devadatta, Kapila and
Padmini. Padmini is innocent, beautiful, perceptive cleaver, energetic and cruel; all these
qualities ingrained in her make her a matchless personality. Padmini, the centralized
figure, is wonderfully dramatized in the play. She is a beautiful woman gifted with
charming body.
As concerned to the familial background of Padmini; she is the daughter of the leading
merchant in Dharmapura. Padmini is quite considerate and rational, and being born and
brought up in a rich family, she seems to have been loved to her utter satisfaction, her
every desire fulfilled by her parents. It can be seen when Kapila proposed to Padmini for
his friend, Devadatta, she accepted it immediately, even before the parental permission.
The marriage proposed from such a well known family, the revered family, makes her
happy and proud.

Devadatta has gifted these fine qualities in his personality, but he is fragile in body, is
emotional and sentimental. Devadatta loves Padmini, her beauty and her body but has not
applied his reasoning power to read her mind, nature and personality. On other hand, in
the very first meeting with Padmini, Kapila realizes that she is an unfit match for
Devadatta. Even Kapila expressed his feelings to Devadatta.

Therefore, the married life between Devadatta and Padmini does not look to be full of
happiness and satisfaction. Devadatta who is weak and delicate is unsuitable; her
expectation of a muscular and physically powerful person takes her away from her
husband towards his friend, Kapila. She keeps a secret desire for Kapila, awaits his arrival
and becomes restless if Kapila does not visit the house. But Devadatta does not like
Kapila’s over presence in the married life and even in the house. When Devadatta
complains about Kapila’s disturbs in his reading of Bhasa’s and also blames Padmini for
his over entertainment. Without compromising, Padmini reacts, “Don’t blame him. It’s
my fault. He learnt a bit about poetry from you and I thought he might enjoy Bhasa. So I
asked him to come…He didn’t want to –but I insisted.” 6

Thus, she plays the role of a rescuer whenever Devadatta holds Kapila responsible for
disturbances in his married life.

Padmini wants her husband to pay much attention to her desire but Devadatta spends
much of his time reading poetry or plays or writing and Padmini needs a man in her
company who can fulfil her desire. So the trip to Ujjain is an opportunity for Padmini
which would offer her much of the time to spend in the company with Kapila.
Consequently, Padmini insists on a journey to Ujjain after Kapila comes with the cart and
forces Devadatta to load personal belongings. Padmini projects her passion for the ‘iron-
black-body’ of Kapila when she observes him, from the very close side when he goes to
bring “the Fortunate lady’s flower that is meant for a married woman.
The words for Kapila’s body and his physical movement reveal Padmini’s strong desire
for a strong and steel body of Kapila. Devadatta realizes that Padmini is in love with
Kapila when he observes her, her interest in Kapila’s body and her secret thought to
possess him.

Padmini grows self-centred and conscious of the possible events. She knows that she
would be held responsible for their death: “And who’ll believe me? They’ll all say the two
fought and died for this whore. They are bound to say it. Then what’ll happen to me?”
The people would certainly discuss that Padmini had an extramarital relationship with
Kapila and in their fight to take possession of her body both have killed each other. Under
the social burdens she decides to offer her life in sacrifice in front of the goddess Kali.

It is for the first time, Padmini accepts her love for Kapila. She pleas the goddess to save
her from the difficult incident in which her husband and lover have killed themselves. By
accepting her prayer, the goddess Kali asks her to put “these heads back properly. Attach
them to their bodies and then press that sword on their necks.” 11 So, they can come alive.

But she misplaces the heads, Devadatta’s head on Kapila’s body and Kapila’s head on
Devadatta. This misplacement of heads serves her dual purposes; in one stroke she has
now got Devadatta’s mind and Kapila’s body in one person. Padmini can be termed a
hypocrite and shrewd woman. Padmini does not publicly admit her love for Kapila
because she is aware of the socio-cultural restrictions which prohibit a married woman
from developing extra marital relationship, a relationship which would violate of
marriage. When Kapila claims her as her wife on the ground that it his body with which
Padmini spent days and night also he says “This body she’s lived with all these months.
And the child she’s carrying is the seed of this body”, Devadatta argues “When one
accepts a partner in marriage, with the holy fire as one’s witness, one accepts a person, not
a body. She didn’t marry Devadatta’s body, she married Devadatta- the person” 13. And
Devadatta proves that according to the Sacred Texts with all the human limbs the
topmost-in position -is the head. So he has Devadatta’s head and it follows that he is
Devadatta. Also, Padmini goes with Devadatta because she finds security and stability in
Devadatta having obtained Kapila’s body in him and she can save herself from the
criticism and blames of the society. She feels very happy having obtained a complete man
with intellectual mind and strong body together.

Devadatta tries to show his manliness and strength and Padmini is perfectly satisfied with
a fabulous body and brain in one person for her. But this joy does not remain long ever
when Devadatta turns to study, to read and write. The strength and the steel body of
Devadatta went weak after a few days, consequently the body degenerated into lean and
thin as it was earlier. Thinking about this Padmini feels disappointed and her thoughts
take her back to Kapila.

Padmini’s words reveal her inner feelings for Kapila and she compels her husband to go
to the Ujjain fair to bring new dolls. She says ‘it’s unlucky to keep torn dolls at home’.
For this fair reason Devadatta would go out so she could get an opportunity to go in
search of Kapila. Further she manages to send Devadatta to Ujjain and in the absence of
her husband she goes to the forest with her small baby to meet Kapila. She shows Kapila
the child having a mole, “the same mole on his shoulder.” When Kapila refuses to listen to
her and requests her to return to her husband, Padmini turns emotional and with pain she
admits.

Padmini manages to express her love for Kapila and she tries to keep both the persons
under her control. But at the end Kapila and Devadatta stand face to face and the fighting
between Devadatta and Kapila turns into their horrible death. At last Padmini knows that
she is responsible for the dance of death with such bloodshed. She laments the reason for
their death as well for her own act as “Kali, Mother of all Nature, you must have your joke
even now. Other women can die praying that they should get the same husband in all the
lives to come. You haven’t left me even that little consolation.”

Girish Karnad projects the significant changes in the female character, Padmini.
Ambitious Padmini wants to keep a combination of qualities- intelligent, handsome,
scholar and physically strong in one person and that would be her ideal husband. For her,
Devadatta is very intelligent, handsome, a scholar and poet. Kapila is rough, rugged and
the embodiment of bravery and strong physical body. So, Padmini intentionally mixes up
the two heads in the Kali temple, for her suppressed desire to get a perfect man. And her
dream of a perfect man comes true when she finds that Devadatta has acquired the body of
Kapila. In this sense, Padmini’s search for perfection comes to an end and she starts the
life of enjoyment. But this enjoyment does not last longer in her life because Devadatta
could not survive Kapila’s strong body because basically he is a scholar and a poet. He
starts losing the strong muscles, so Padmini

complains as “Your body had that strong, male smell before –I liked it.” So, she again
makes plans to send Devadatta to the Ujjain fair to purchase new dolls for her son, and she
would get a chance to meet Kapila in the forest.

Padmini is a hypocrite and shrewd woman. Padmini does not publicly admit her love for
Kapila because she is aware of the socio-cultural restrictions which prohibit a married
woman from developing extra marital relationships which would violate the marriage
institution. She tells Devadatta that she will not commit that mistake again.

Padmini is very ambitious to achieve her inner desire. She would like to accompany
Kapila. That is the reason why she instantly becomes ready when Kapila comes with a
cart to go for the Ujjain trip. But Padmini is a very clever woman, she first denied the trip
for the satisfaction of Devadatta on account of her headache. But when she finds Kapila
with Devadatta, she becomes ready to go without any consent of her husband. Also, her
consent for the trip shows her reason for headache is false one.

In conversation Padmini goes to the extent of asking Kapila to touch her feet. Naturally, it
is difficult for Kapila to conquer her. But then, Kapila is equally a real fighter, when he
advances fearlessly and forcefully she takes her heels calling after her mother. At this
stage, Kapila realizes that his good friend Devadatta is no match for her because only an
iron man will suit her. Padmini is a powerfully witty and wild woman as she proves
herself throughout the play. Padmini requires a man of similar temperament who will
accept her as she is.
Therefore, when Padmini does not hesitate to seek out Kapila in the forest, Kapila is angry
with her because he was hurted in very first meeting with Padmini. Even Kapila asks her
25
again why she has come to him, she replies confidently, ‘I had to see you’ . It is very
important to note that here Kapila is confused about Padmini who is married to Devadatta
even when she comes to see and express her interest.

1. Image of Modern Women:

In ancient India, the women enjoyed equal status and rights as with men in all fields
during the early Vedic period but the status of women began to decline in the medieval
period of India. Medieval period of India was not progressive for women. In this period,
many foreign cultures came in contact with Indian culture which resulted in the decline in
women's status. In order to protect women, Indian women started using 'Purdah', (a veil),
which covers the body. Due to this their freedom also became affected. They were not
allowed to move freely and this led to the further decline of their status. People began to
consider a girl as misery and a burden, which needs extra care. Traditions among some
communities such as sati, Jauhar, and devadasi have been banned and are largely
outdated in modern India. But, some cases of these practices are still found in remote parts
of India. The purdah is still practiced by Indian women among some communities.

In the medieval period, women's rights disappeared and patriarchy began exercising
control over her position, restricted women's freedom and suppressed her identity. Woman
must be kept in custody by the male of the family, her father protects her in childhood, her
husband protects her in youth and her son protects her in old age. Thus, women are never
fit for independence. Even though the husband willingly is not to follow virtue and seeks
pleasure elsewhere, he must be worshiped as God.

The status of women in modern India is a sort of a paradox. On one hand she plays the
role of mother, sister wife etc. on the other hand she is mutely suffering the violence on
her by her own family members. Compared with past women in modern times have
achieved a lot but in reality they have to strive for their rights in society. In the modern
age, women have established themselves as equal with men. But in India they are yet to
get their equal rights in the familial life. There are many problems which women in India
have to suffer in day to day life. These problems have become the part and parcel of life
of Indian women and some of the women have accepted their problems as their fate.
Girish Karnad presents the suffering of the youthful woman through Padmini, the wife of
Devadatta in Hayavadana. Her family represents a higher class of society. Karnad displays
Padmini as a lonely figure facing the experiences of loveless marriage like any modern
woman of contemporary higher class of society where men are busy with making money
and fame. The problems of the modern alone woman are not much different. Therefore,
Padmini’s confession of her betrayal and her forceful justification of it to her husband is
like the modern woman.

Girish Karnad wants to reflect through Hayavadana the face of modern women. This is
perhaps due to the changes in the modern women brought by the new awakening in
women, the reform movements and the influence of economic independence of the women
in the modern age. Karnad’s women openly protest against being treated as an object of
exchange between men. The Female characters of Girish Karnad challenge the authority
of her husband and question the religious principles that support patriarchal power. In this
respect, Padmini not only tries to free herself from the shackles of marriage life but also
boldly expresses her commitment to her love for Kapila. In her, it seems that the image of
the free independent and self-respecting modern woman. Though she does not fight
patriarchal domination in the true sense but merely marks a beginning in the long process
of reform in the existing social system in the Indian context. Here the comment of Jaya
Kapoor is significant to quote:

Karnad finds a special interest in the rich wealth of Indian

mythology which offers him ample threads to weave his stories

where he is not just narrating a tale but constructing and

exploring narratives at various levels. The richest in this multi

layered narrative explorations is his play ‘Hayavadana’. 31

Karnad presents modern woman’s desires through the youthful woman, Padmini who
openly denies Devadatta’s orders and wants to follow Kapila. The character of Padmini
not only presents the condition of higher class women in ancient India who were fettered
by the man- made laws of society but also provides an example of certain shades of her
personality which are related to the women in the present times.

Girish Karnad presents his women protagonists in such a way that appears to challenge
patriarchal tradition. He uses myths in order to create heroines trapped in patriarchal
tradition. While Karnad’s presentation of the woman is romantic, the solutions offered in
his plays for the woman’s dilemma are realistic, with patriarchal overtones. The woman
character seems destined to be caught between the man made rules.

1. Women and Moral Social code:

Women in modern society enjoy far more freedom. They have an easy right to learn and
people are more liberal in their approach to educate women. The status of women in the
modern age is better than that in the medieval age. But it is observed that Indian women
have to follow some moral social code and conduct in their life.

The family members fix the marriages in India. The girl is not consulted but is told to
marry a boy whom her family has chosen for him. And she has to accept it without any
complaints. They are taught to stand for their husbands. Women are supposed to live a
pious life after their marriage. In married life, women are not allowed to mix with other
people. Extra marital relationships of women are labeled as immoral deeds in Indian
social system. Woman’s extra marital relationship is condemned. In married life, a woman
has to be faithful, paying respect to the elder relatives in the family and remaining truthful
to her husband and relatives to preserve the honour in society.

Girish Karnad’s female character, Padmini seems to break the moral social code and
conduct in her life. Being wife Padmini should not tell lie to her husband but she is such a
woman who tells lies and deceives her husband in married life. For example, when
Devadatta and

Padmini talks together to decide about visiting the Ujjain fair, Devadatta is not willingly
ready to visit Ujjain with Kapila therefore he asks Padmini to cancel the trip. Also,
Padminin and her husband decided that they would not go to the Ujjain fair. Even
Devadatta asked about her disappointment but she tells lies to her husband.

The conversation between Padmini and Devadatta reveals that Padmini though she
becomes disappointed because she is denied a journey by her husband but she does not
show her agony and she accepts the psyche of male dominated society. It is the principle
of patriarchal society that a husband is to take decisions in conjugal life. However,
Padmini’s psyche is described by dolls. The dolls express the feeling in the unconscious
level of the human psyche in Hayavadana. Padmini thinks of breaking the social code
when she is alone. The dolls work out of Padmini’s mind and decodes the inner sensibility
of Padmini into a language before the audience. Thus, the presence of dolls becomes
functional in order to show the audience the contents of Padmini.
The conversation between the dolls reveals that the image of man in dream of Padmini is
not related to her husband but someone else. The image of man means nothing but Kapila
one. It means that Padmini dreams to meet Kapila and she loves Kapila. It is the breaking
of the moral social code and conduct which do not permit a wife to see another man’s
existence in her life without her husband.
Karnad’s Hayavadana is a post-colonial offshoot of a matured post-colonial mind
highlighting social and psychological problems, interrogating human ideas and ideals.
Hayavadana represents everyman’s predicament more authentically, and tries to access
the definition of his place in this indifferent universe.

Padmini is not a pious wife even though she prefers Sati. And this Sati episode reveals
how Padmini breaks the moral social code and conducts. The Sati episode begins when
Devadatta comes back from Ujjain and enquires about the presence of Padmini.
Bhagavata tells him about her presence in the forest with Kapila. Devadatta comes to the
forest and a fight takes place between them and both of them die. Padmini declares to be a
Sati. This Sati episode becomes a comic and ironic one. Padmini before becoming a Sati
gives out the hidden and the mysterious speaks of the human relationship which reveals
her illegal relationship with Kapila. She tells Bhagavat, about her child.
Padmini becomes Sati, but the idea of Sati becomes humorous and ironic, because the
comment of Bhagavata specifies the act of Sati thus:
 “Padmini became a sati. India is known for its pativaratas-wives who dedicated
their whole existence to the service of their husbands -but it would not be an exaggeration
to say that no “Pativrata '' went in the way Padmini did. And no one knows the spot
where she went sati”
According to the moral social code and conduct in married life, a woman has to be
faithful, and remaining truthful to her husband and relatives to preserve the honour in
society. But Padmini is not a pious wife to Devadatta. It is observed that Padmini gets a
perfect man in the form of Devadatta who possesses the body of Kapila. So she should be
happy to achieve perfection in her life. But she is such immoral woman who while leaving
with Devadatta, she secretly comes near to Kapila and says as:

“Let’s go. Wait. (she runs to Kapila) Don’t be sad, Kapila.

We shall meet again, shan’t we? (in a low voice, so

Devadatta can’t hear.) It’s my duty to go with Devadatta.

But remember I’m going with your body. Let that cheer you

up. Good-bye, Kapila”.

Thus, Padmini presents her excitement for Kapila and goes on to praise him and seeks to
meet in the future. It is an immoral act on the part of Padmini for being the wife of
Devadatta she should not talk to Kapila like this.

The irony lies in the dialogue of Padmini when she was becoming sati. Her request to
Bhagavata reveals the truth that she is very thirsty for perfection. In her life she tried to
achieve the perfect husband but could not succeed to bring such perfection. Such
perfection is not possible and even Goddesses Kali has not given to Hayavadana also, but
Padmini could not understand it.

Padmini becomes sati like Sita. The irony lies in itself that Padmini is becoming sati but
she is not a moral and pious wife to Devadatta. She keeps extra-marital relationship. She
is even described as a true widow who prepares to follow her husband to the next world.
Earlier she says that if goddess Kali could have saved any of the two males she could
have found a reason to live. Goddess Kali appreciates her truthfulness and honesty. Her
 love for one male is always questionable. Thus, the desire of Padmini to seek love outside
marriage and her cruel nature also comes under the irony.

12. Female Sexuality and Natural Law

A different kind of disagreement with Aquinas is registered by Christine Gudorf, a Christian
theologian who otherwise has a lot in common with Aquinas. Gudorf agrees that the study of
human anatomy and physiology yields insights into God’s plan and design, and that human
sexual behavior should conform with God’s creative intentions. That is, Gudorf’s philosophy
is squarely within the Thomistic Natural Law tradition. But Gudorf argues that if we take a
careful look at the anatomy and physiology of the female sexual organs, and especially the
clitoris, instead of focusing exclusively on the male’s penis (which is what Aquinas did),
quite different conclusions about God’s plan and design emerge and hence Christian sexual
ethics turns out to be less restrictive. In particular, Gudorf claims that the female’s clitoris is
an organ whose only purpose is the production of sexual pleasure and, unlike the mixed or
dual functionality of the penis, has no connection with procreation. Gudorf concludes that the
existence of the clitoris in the female body suggests that God intended that the purpose of
sexual activity was as much for sexual pleasure for its own sake as it was for procreation.
Therefore, according to Gudorf, pleasurable sexual activity apart from procreation does not
violate God’s design, is not unnatural, and hence is not necessarily morally wrong, as long as
it occurs in the context of a monogamous marriage (Sex, Body, and Pleasure, p. 65). Today
we are not as confident as Aquinas was that God’s plan can be discovered by a
straightforward examination of human and animal bodies; but such healthy skepticism about
our ability to discern the intentions of God from facts of the natural world would seem to
apply to Gudorf’s proposal as well.

13. Debates in Sexual Ethics

The ethics of sexual behavior, as a branch of applied ethics, is no more and no less
contentious than the ethics of anything else that is usually included within the area of applied
ethics. Think, for example, of the notorious debates over euthanasia, capital punishment,
abortion, and our treatment of lower animals for food, clothing, entertainment, and in medical
research. So it should come as no surprise than even though a discussion of sexual ethics
might well result in the removal of some confusions and a clarification of the issues, no final
answers to questions about the morality of sexual activity are likely to be forthcoming from
the philosophy of sexuality. As far as I can tell by surveying the literature on sexual ethics,
there are at least three major topics that have received much discussion by philosophers of
sexuality and which provide arenas for continual debate.

14. Natural Law vs. Liberal Ethics

We have already encountered one debate: the dispute between a Thomistic Natural Law
approach to sexual morality and a more liberal, secular outlook that denies that there is a tight
connection between what is unnatural in human sexuality and what is immoral. The secular
liberal philosopher emphasizes the values of autonomous choice, self-determination, and
pleasure in arriving at moral judgments about sexual behavior, in contrast to the Thomistic
tradition that justifies a more restrictive sexual ethics by invoking a divinely imposed scheme
to which human action must conform. For a secular liberal philosopher of sexuality, the
paradigmatically morally wrong sexual act is rape, in which one person forces himself or
herself upon another or uses threats to coerce the other to engage in sexual activity. By
contrast, for the liberal, anything done voluntarily between two or more people is generally
morally permissible. For the secular liberal, then, a sexual act would be morally wrong if it
were dishonest, coercive, or manipulative, and Natural Law theory would agree, except to
add that the act’s merely being unnatural is another, independent reason for condemning it
morally. Kant, for example, held that “Onanism . . . is abuse of the sexual faculty. . . . By it
man sets aside his person and degrades himself below the level of animals. . . . Intercourse
between sexus homogenii . . . too is contrary to the ends of humanity”(Lectures, p. 170). The
sexual liberal, however, usually finds nothing morally wrong or nonmorally bad about either
masturbation or homosexual sexual activity. These activities might be unnatural, and perhaps
in some ways prudentially unwise, but in many if not most cases they can be carried out
without harm being done either to the participants or to anyone else.
Natural Law is alive and well today among philosophers of sex, even if the details do not
match Aquinas’s original version. For example, the contemporary philosopher John Finnis
argues that there are morally worthless sexual acts in which “one’s body is treated as
instrumental for the securing of the experiential satisfaction of the conscious self” (see “Is
Homosexual Conduct Wrong?”). For example, in masturbating or in being anally sodomized,
the body is just a tool of sexual satisfaction and, as a result, the person undergoes
“disintegration.” “One’s choosing self [becomes] the quasi-slave of the experiencing self
which is demanding gratification.” The worthlessness and disintegration attaching to
masturbation and sodomy actually attach, for Finnis, to “all extramarital sexual gratification.”
This is because only in married, heterosexual coitus do the persons’ “reproductive organs . . .
make them a biological . . . unit.” Finnis begins his argument with the metaphysically
pessimistic intuition that sexual activity involves treating human bodies and persons
instrumentally, and he concludes with the thought that sexual activity in marriage—in
particular, genital intercourse—avoids disintegrity because only in this case, as intended by
God’s plan, does the couple attain a state of genuine unity: “the orgasmic union of the
reproductive organs of husband and wife really unites them biologically.” (See also Finnis’s
essay “Law, Morality, and ‘Sexual Orientation’.”)

The Mind-Body Distinction

One of the deepest and most lasting legacies of Descartes’ philosophy is his thesis that mind
and body are really distinct—a thesis now called “mind-body dualism.” He reaches this
conclusion by arguing that the nature of the mind (that is, a thinking, non-extended thing) is
completely different from that of the body (that is, an extended, non-thinking thing), and
therefore it is possible for one to exist without the other. This argument gives rise to the
famous problem of mind-body causal interaction still debated today: how can the mind cause
some of our bodily limbs to move (for example, raising one’s hand to ask a question), and
how can the body’s sense organs cause sensations in the mind when their natures are
completely different? This article examines these issues as well as Descartes’ own response
to this problem through his brief remarks on how the mind is united with the body to form a
human being. This will show how these issues arise because of a misconception about
Descartes’ theory of mind-body union, and how the correct conception of their union avoids
this version of the problem. The article begins with an examination of the term “real
distinction” and of Descartes’ probable motivations for maintaining his dualist thesis.

The mind–body problem is really two problems. The item problem concerns the nature of
mental items: are they or are they not physical? The essence problem concerns the nature of
the defining essences of mental phenomena – consciousness and intentionality: can they or
can they not be explained in physical terms. With regard to the item problem consensus
gradually seems to be coalescing on a combination of (1) mental–physical identity at the level
of tokens, (2) mental–physical supervenience at the level of types, where this supervenience
is underwritten by (3) a functionalist account of the nature of mental properties. There is no
such consensus with regard to the essence problem however. The problems of explaining the
nature of both consciousness and intentionality are among the hottest topics in contemporary
philosophy of mind. While there is much agreement about the nature of the problems,
substantive solutions are still very much up for grabs.

Padmini in the play Hayavadana who not only knows what she wants but is courageous
enough to defy the traditional norms in order to get what she wants. Padmini is bright like
lightning and sharp witted. She gets married to Devadatta scholar who has fallen in love with
her and moreover belongs to her class-the brahmin upper middle class and the marriage is
socially accepted. But Padmini remains dissatisfied as she is attracted towards Kapila, a close
friend of Devadatta who is an embodiment of physical strength. She desires a fine
combination of intelligence and physical strength in a man. Even though she conforms to the
societal norms and gets into a traditional marriage with Devadatta and calls him her saffron
and her mangalsutra her desire for "a perfect man" coaxes her to openly encourage Kapila.
Among the three main characters of the play Padmini stands out as an independent individual
actively responding to her own impulses and not caring for the society and the people around
single body? A head for each breast. A pupil for each eye. A side for each arm. I have neither
regret nor shame". Further Padmini creates what she wants. She in her excitement transposes
the heads of Devadatta and Kapila and creates the man she wants and is not ashamed to walk
out with the body of Kapila and the head of her husband. It may be only a temporary solution
but Padmini succeeds in getting what she wants. Padmini grows from a sensuous, luscious
bride to an assertive individual. Her pursuit for perfection doesn't stop here. When she
realizes that Kapila's body is behaving according to Devadatta's mind she once again loses
interest in Devadatta and goes in search of Kapila into the forest. Padmini is not satisfied in
knowing only Kapila's body; she wants to know the mind of Kapila also. But Devadatta's
arrival on the scene ensures a fight between Kapila and Davaddata. They kill each other.
Padmini asserts her will through her death. She doesn't consent to the idea of living with both
Kapila and Devadatta. She is quite firm till the end about what she wants in a 'perfect manner.
She is quite different from the traditional image of women as she is not a bashful bride nor
does she treat her pregnancy as an obstacle to her girlish behaviour. She is quite unmindful of
her husband's feelings and continues to entertain Kapila's companionship. Her uninhibited
nature or the feminist in her is reflected in the female chorus "why should love stick to the
sap of a single body? A head for each breast. A pupil for each eye. A side for each arm. I
have neither regret nor shame". Further Padmini creates what she wants. She in her
excitement transposes the heads of Devadatta and Kapila and creates the man she wants and
is not ashamed to walk out with the body of kapila and the head of her husband. It may be
only a temporary solution but Padmini succeeds in getting what she wants. Padmini grows
from a sensuous, luscious bride to an assertive individual. Her pursuit for perfection doesn't
stop here. When she realizes that Kapila's body is behaving according to Devadatta's mind
she once again loses interest in Devadatta and goes in search of Kapila into forest. Padmini is
not a satisfied in knowing only Kapila's body she wants to know the mind of Kapila also. But
Devadatta's arrival on the scene ensures a fight between Kapila and Davaddata. They kill
each other. Padmini asserts her will through her death. She doesn't consent to the idea of
living with both kapila and Devadatta. She is quite firm till the end about what she wants a
'perfect man'.

Girish Karnad affords us with his way of expression. Predominantly Karnadi‘s concern lies in
exploring the psychic depths of his characters. He portrays them as individuals facing single-
handed, the violent assaults of existence. It is clear that his concern as a playwright is a
rational and a logical approach towards the feeling of inner experiences of life in individual
men and women. To Karnad, it is not needed of any separate technique for the composition of
the play but it is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings blooms into enticing symbols
and images. Moreover, the painting of sequences in a picturesque manner 5 takes the front
seat of the narration. Myths and legends serve as metaphor for contemporary situation in
Karnad‘s plays. He employs them to discuss the different problems that a modern woman
faces in the patriarchal society in India. Karnad paves a new way to Indian English drama by
experimenting with folk traditions, Sanskrit drama, Brechtian techniques and strategies of
avant-garde.

Patriarchy as an age-old institution has silenced women without a voice of their own. It has
also institutionalized all social systems and cultural traditions that strongly divide the world
on gender lines, masculine and feminine, privileging the former at the cost of the latter. This
social/historical/cultural construction of woman as man‘s other, the secondary roleplayer, has
made her suffer from marginalization, victimization and subordination in so far as the male-
formulated power structured relationships are concerned. Women‘s confinement in a
traditional society within a Lakshman-rekha which permanently shuns them from being
noticed/visible to the male gaze, causes their life, experience and emotion to linger in the
background, invisible.

Karnad‘s plays represent the harsh and realistic situation faced by women in India. Being a
conscious and sensitive dramatist, Girish Karnad envisages insightful changes in traditional,
socio- psycho-cultural status of a woman and tries to create the identity of women in his
plays. The lives of women have been manipulated by patriarchy in all ages and cultures
undoubtedly in various ways by prescribing values, norms, gender roles and ethics to keep
the male dominance at the top.

Karnad championed the cause of silenced womenfolk in Indian orthodox society through his
plays. Karnad was well acquainted with feminist ideologies and the havoc wrought by
patriarchal ideologies in Indian society. His plays abound with 6 subalterns especially women
and lower caste people subjected since ancient time by patriarchy or upper hierarchy of the
society. Karnad has not only exposed their subalternity but also fused energy in their lives so
that they can speak; shifted their position from ―margin‖ to ―centre‖. The chapter endeavors
to analyze the plays of Girish Karnad from a feminist perspective. Theme/motif,
characterization, image and psychology of the women have been targeted with the purpose to
evaluate Karnad‘s vision, attitude, concern and treatment of the feminine issue. His deep-
rooted humanism and concern for the upliftment of Indian women have produced two sets of
characters—one the traditional representing the gendered subalternity; another progressive
which mark the evolution of womenfolk.

Psychological exploration of Women Characters, tries to probe the deeper scars in the inner
world of Karnad‘s characters and thereby scan the truth behind their eccentric behaviour.

Unlike the Western women, Indian women's identity is deeply embedded not in the marital
twosome but in the entire family, caste, class and community. Her role in the family is either
given a heavy white-wash or new roles are added to the existing ones. Contrary to western
women, Indian women are committed to the idea of gradual change. While focusing on the
identity of Indian women in a traditional society, it is observed that, where and when tradition
governs, an Indian woman does not stand alone; her identity is wholly defined by her
relationships to others. In most societies, a woman (more than a man) defines herself in
relation and connection to other people; this is singularly true of Indian women. The
dominant psycho- social realities of her 7 life can be condensed into three stages: as a
daughter, as a wife and as a mother to her sons and daughters.

The character Padmini lays emphasis and focuses on the psychological problems, dilemmas,
and conflicts experienced by the women characters of Girish Karnad‘s plays in their different
social situations. It primarily deals with the way the women liberate themselves from a male-
dominated society. Further, this chapter deals with the concept of dreams and how it helps the
psychological development of the women characters in the select plays of Girish Karnad.