Jyoti Biswas
M.Phil Scholar
Dept. of English
Studies
Central
University of Tamil Nadu
Abstract:
The ability to put labor force is not strictly restricted
within physical exercise. Intellectual labor does not require a buff physique.
But what if someone is asked to carry a burden of log as well as other sorts of
manual works? And what if has he not been provided with fair pay? What if does
he face injustice in the name of color or caste or ethnic origin in the hand of
the owner? All these questions are inextricably related with Caliban, a minor
but important character in The Tempest. Caliban helps us
understand the master-slave relation on one hand, and the relation between
legitimate labor force and productivity on the other in the play. Having chosen
the character of Caliban, this paper interrogates the dialectical relation
between the oppressor and the oppressed on one hand, and examines the societal
norms towards the accepted definition of masculinity based on the power of
muscle and Caliban’s status in it on the other. For the theoretical framework,
the present writer uses Ambedkarite scholar Prof. Kancha Ilaiah’s concept of
‘productivity.’ In other words, Caliban has been compared to a ‘dalit’ in this
paper from Ambedkarite perspective and tried to critique the default status of
masculinity in which Caliban is subject to.
Keywords: Masculinity,
Labor, Master, Slave, Oppressed, Productivity, Injustice, Dalit,
Ambedkarite.
What is masculinity? In popular perception, the
definition of masculinity rests upon the exhibition of certain attributes and
qualities by a male such as strong physique, ability of doing all sorts manual
labor, earning means by risking life in any work anywhere, physical appearance
with beard and moustache, sexual dominance and more importantly a masochistic
attitude towards weak fellow men and women in a given social setting and
culture. In Greek mythology, Hercules immortalizes the concept of masculinity
by his twelve labors. As the mythic narrative tells us, Hercules possessed by
madness murders his eight children born out of his union with Megara. As
expiation for his heinous infanticide, he is told by the oracle of Delphi “to
go to Tiryns in the Argolid, where he was to live for ten years while
performing a series of labours that would be imposed on him by Eurystheus, king
of Mycenae” (Hard 241-42). His twelve labors including holding the earth by the
tip of two fingers only remain a chosen reference point or citation while
writing about masculinity, physical potentiality and representation of manhood
both in popular imagination and culture in the West. Although many scholars argue that the common perception of masculinity is a social
construction (Shehan 2018), and ‘manliness’ has become obsolete in a society
that is becoming gender-neutral (Mansfield 2016), words like ‘manhood’ and
‘manliness’ are often taken as parallel to masculinity even in a democratic
society. And in all these three words, the popular imagination takes a halt at
a blonde, muscular and hardworking male figure. In popular culture,
bodybuilding competition such as Mr. Universe and Arnold Classics1
gives a solid platform to boys to exhibit their muscles in public, thereby
demonstrating the swelling biceps and triceps and other body parts as the most
authentic source of masculinity. All these arguments can be countered from the
perspective of Feminist and Gay studies (Selden 2005), but the weight of male
muscle holds on the arguments in favor of a preferred stand on masculinity.
On
talking about the creation of this popular notion of masculinity, George Mosse
observes “It is impossible to point to a precise moment when the ideal of
masculinity was born and become part of modern history, other than it happened
sometime between the second half of the eighteenth century and the beginning of
the nineteenth” (5). Mosse evaluates the creation of the concept of masculinity
as a social and cultural formation. He
frequently used ‘stereotypes’ to fix the traditional attributes of masculinity
within the wider social constraints that do not allow it to keep it isolated
from the question of gender equality. But what sort of notion about masculinity
was prevailing at the time of Shakespeare? Elizabeth A. Foyster uses
‘manliness’ instead of masculinity in her study Manhood in Early England
(2014) because, according to her, ‘masculinity’ is quite a new formation, perhaps
around mid-eighteenth century. On the other hand, manhood is as old as Greek
mythology. Robin Hedlam Wells shows how chivalry was widely taken to be the
hallmark of masculinity both in the Hundred Years War2 in the 15th
century and in defeating the Spanish Armada3 in 1588 in English
society (11). But the root of chivalry and masculinity lies in the legends of
King Arthur and his Round Table4 in medieval Britain as well as in
the adventures the knights undertook in the time of crusades. Major Shakespearean
heroes such as Macbeth, Othello, Lear, Anthony, and Coriolanus are all heroic
figures, representing the chivalric qualities. But they are protagonist in the
respective tragic plays, dominating the plot and other characters: “not only
are they, in their different ways, powerful and noble, but their capacity for
living is stupendous” (Gardner 1). But this is not the case of Caliban. He is
neither a major character nor someone bearing such high standard of chivalry
and masculinity as exemplified among Shakespearean heroes. Caliban is more of a
bonded labor the kind of which is found in India where dalits as they are known
by this name in contemporary political parlance survive with the status of an
eternal slave to upper castes irrespective of their qualities and
contributions. The question is: Does a minor character like Caliban represent
any particular trait of masculinity or is he a default masculine?
The text
introduces him as ‘Caliban, a savage and a deformed slave’ in the dramatic
personae. ‘Savage’ and ‘deformed slave’ have pushed the imagination of readers
to creating the image of Caliban as a beast on the one hand, and a subjugated,
defeated living hands and limbs on the other. His hands and limbs remain useful
to Prospero only, and not his anguished and frustrated speeches. The way he is
introduced to the audience in the text gives a fair idea of a polarized
relation between a master and a slave. Prospero tells Miranda “Shake it off…
come on,/ We’ll visit Caliban, my slave, who never/ Yields us kind answer”
(1.2.306-308). At the very beginning the master-slave relation sets the central
argument. Caliban has been enslaved in his own island by Prospero. This island
that Prospero found for him and his daughter Miranda becomes the habitat of
dominance. But Caliban is the owner of it: “I must eat my dinner…/ This
island’s mine, by Sycorax my mother,/ Which thou tak’st me” (1.2.332-334).
Caliban who inherited this island from his mother Sycorax is an indigenous
member whereas Prospero and his daughter Miranda are outsiders. The finding is
that “ ‘cannibal’ is derived from ‘carib’, the first tribal Indian name made
known to Europe. Caliban seems to have been created, on his historical side, by
a fusion in Shakespeare’s imagination of Columbus’s first New World savage”
(Fiedlar 198-99). The indigenous member (irrespective of his physical look and
in-built character) has been enslaved in his native land. It establishes the
motif of slavery rooted in daily chores of life: carrying the log, lighting the
fire and other sorts of manual work that Caliban is bound to work for Prospero.
When Prospero says that Caliban does not give him any “kind answer” loyally, it
visualizes the anger and dissatisfaction boiling in Caliban’s mind: “Curse be I
did so!” (1.2.339). His anger legitimizes his position in this power relation:
“In this hard rock, whiles you do keep from me/ The rest o’th’island”
(1.2.343-344). In this context the present writer wants to discuss the concept
and practice of slavery from ‘Dalit’ perspective and to analyze the character
of Caliban by bringing a proportionate relation between physical labor and the
concept ‘productivity’ put forward by Ambedkarite scholar Kancha Ilaiah.
The
concept of slavery or the state of being a slave in the West is as old as the
Classical Greece: “True slaves were persons without the bindings and linkages
common to even the lowest free persons, and who were thus completely dependent
on the will of their masters” (Klein 2). The Greek economy utilizes slave labor
in the middle of the first millennium the practice of “which historians would
later define as the original development of the institution” (Klein 3). “For in
classical Athens… all the perhaps 80-100,000 douloi of both sexes may be
categorized precisely as chattel slaves” and in a Weberian sense “the chattel
is the ideal type of salve- the most unfree of the unfree, the most servile of
the enslaved” (Cartledge 35-36). In the Roman law, the etymological definition
of ‘slave’ is rooted in servi and servitus “Slaves (servi)
are so called because commanders generally sell the people they capture and
thereby save (servare) them instead of killing them” (Jackson 88-89). In
the biblical canon there are many provisions certifying the practice of slavery
with certain terms and conditions. “The temporal status of debt-slavery is a
recurrent theme in biblical literature… Deuteronomy 15:12 imposes a
maximum limit of six year, fixed by the calendar to occur every fifty years”
(Jackson 91). The Covenant Code in Exodus decrees the specific rules of
slavery as well. “Roman slavery was a thriving institution so long as the Roman
empire survived” (Klein 7). Around the fifteenth century the European powers
initiated their colonizing mission in the New World, Latin America and Africa.
The plantation industry was also introduced at the same time. With this there
spread the modern system of slavery: purchasing slaves from Africa and selling
them to different plantations across the Atlantic, the sea route connecting
western coast of Africa, eastern coast of two Americans and the western coast
of Europe, known as The Middle Passage: “The arrival of Portuguese explorers
and traders on the sub-Saharan African coast in the early 1400s would
ultimately represent a major new development in the history of the slave trade
in Africa… Even when they began shipping slaves in 1444, they were mainly sent
in Europe to serve as domestic servants” (Klein 13).
From the above discussions it is found that slavery has a
long history in the West. But the
theoretical orientation of this paper is to justify the ‘Dalit’ status of
Caliban and the use of physical labor as a default status of masculinity in a
hierarchical society. In the domain of Hindu society there is a distinct
slavery system. Dividing the society into the four castes (jati or varna)5,
namely Brahmin, Ksatriya, Vaishya and Sudra the Hindu social order creates two
opposing poles: upper caste and lower caste. The first three castes, such as
Brahmin, Ksatriya and Vaishya constitute the upper caste status; whereas Sudra
and later on Ati-Sudra or Untouchables constitute the lower caste status.
According to Dr Ambedkar:
Besides dividing the society into four orders, the theory
of [Chaturvarnya] goes further and makes the principle of graded inequality the
basis for determining the terms of associated life as between the four Varnas.
Again, the system of graded inequality is not merely notional. It is legal and
penal. Under the system of Chaturvarnya, the Shudra is not only placed
at the bottom of the gradation but he is subjected to innumerable ignominies
and disabilities so as to prevent him from rising above the condition fixed for
him by law. (385)
Hindu
scripture Manava-Dharmasastra6 (Manu’s Code of Law)
prescribes strict rules and regulations for a Sudra. Let us see how Manava-Dharmasastra
looks into the matter: “… for the Sudra was created by the Self-existent One
solely to do slave labor for the Brahmin… Even when he is released by his
master, a Sudra is not freed from his slave status; for that is innate in him
and who can remove it from him?” (Olivelle 189). It has described slavery in
the following way: “There are seven kinds of slaves: a man captured in war, a
man who makes himself a slave to receive food, a slave born in a house, a
purchased slave, a gifted slave, a hereditary slave, and a man enslaved for
punishment” (Olivelle 189). In all seven types of slavery, a Sudra is always
been treated as a slave, not any member from three twice-born7
castes. If a Sudra is a slave, then what is his right over property? Manava-Dharmasastra
has its prescribed instructions too: “A Brahmin may confidently seize property
from a Sudra, because there is nothing that he owns; for he is a man whose
property may be taken by his master” (Olivelle 189).
The transition of Sudras and Ati-Sudras or Untouchables
into Dalits is a paradigm shift in the social, political and academic discourse
taken a concrete shape in contemporary India: “In descriptions of struggles for
dignity and against caste inequality, the term ‘Dalit’ is today widely used to
describe India’s former untouchables” (Rawat and Satyanarayana 2). It was first
used in modern parlance by an official of East India Company, J. J. Molesworth
in a Marathi-English dictionary. From Jyotirao Phule in nineteenth century to Ambedkar
and activists of Dalit Panther in twentieth century ‘Dalit’ more categorically
and methodologically has become an identical denominator in the public domain.
“Dalithood is a kind of life condition which characterizes the exploitation,
suppression and marginalization of dalits by the social, economic, cultural and
political domination of the upper caste brahminical order” (Guru). But it is
around 1970s that the use of ‘Dalit’ has become widely recognized both in
public domain and in culture because of the Dalit Panther movement8
of Maharastra. What was treated to be a slave society now turned into a
militant one, trying to dismantle the Brahminical hierarchy in every sphere of
life. “In the 80s and 90s… Dalitbahujan intellectuals have emerged from the context
of Ambedkarite theory and practice to displace brahminical forces and seize
power structures in all spheres” (Ilaiah 51).
Kancha Ilaiah, an eminent Ambedkarite intellectual
formulates his concept of ‘productivity’ based on the productive skills and
inexhaustible range of doing manual labor of ‘Dalitbahujan’ communities in his
writings and numerous lectures. While putting his inaugural speech at Jamia
Millia Islamia University on 19th December, 2013, Prof. Ilaiah
raises fundamental questions in respect of ‘productivity’ in Indian context.
Who are the pot-makers, ironsmiths, farmers, barbers, shoe-makers, sweepers,
toilet-cleaners, and members of other likeminded professions in India? What is
their status in the society? Is there any dignity of labor in all these
professions or is their work legitimate in the context of social hierarchy? Are
they nothing but eternal slaves despite having all sorts of productive skills?9
Prof. Ilaiah observes that “Brahminical Hinduism adopted an anti-production and
anti-scientific ethic, compared to the scientific, technological and productive
knowledge systems that Dalit-Bahujan communities have developed and nurtured
over the years” (Introduction ix). Prof. Ilaiah argues further by showing the
inherent contradictions between ‘productive culture’ and ‘unproductive
culture.’ Brahmins and other upper castes have cut off their existence from the
productive society because their prescribed works produce only caste and racial
discrimination on one hand, and unscientific, ridiculous and useless knowledge
for the future generations on the other. In contradiction to them, the
productive communities despite being subject to all sorts of humiliation and
torture both physical and mental continue their productive professions: “The human
essence gets generated and regenerated when something is being transformed from
one form into another. For example, there is in the process of transforming a
piece of leather into a pair of shoes a transcendental experience of giving
shape and birth to a new thing” (37).
The use of physical strength in all of their productions
is fundamental and Prof. Ilaiah reminds us that in all these productive
professions, the use of brain is equally fundamental: “Dalitism… would consider
them as acts of labour that give pleasure, for they exercise both the body and
the mind” (35). In other words, only
muscle cannot go alone; it requires the brain to give a clay pot a perfect
shape or to make a toilet basin crystal-clear.
As stated earlier, the master-slave relation between
Prospero and Caliban is the most discussed issue in The Tempest.
Connecting Caliban with Dalits is a new perspective that this paper wants to
highlight. The way slavery works and the outcome it provides in the text gives
some space to write about Caliban’s assigned work and its productive outcome.
Before the arrival of Caliban into the scene Prospero sets the atmosphere. His
conversation with Ariel regarding the inhabitants of this island casts a bright
light upon the ethical origin of Caliban. Caliban’s father has not been
revealed, but his mother Sycorax is the primitive settler of this island. When
the ownership of the island gets transformed to Caliban, he is enslaved by
Prospero. Prospero addresses Ariel, the spirit as his slave too: “thou, my
slave,/ As thou report’st thyself” (1.2.271-2). But his relation with Ariel is
more of a mutual kind as exemplified in Ariel’s speech: “Is there more toil?
Since thou dost give me pains,/ Let me remember thee what thou hast promised”
(1.2.243). The promise of relieving Ariel of his service is like an unsigned
treaty between Prospero and him, but this is not the case with Caliban. The
rebellious voice of him is heard multiple times the way a Dalit’s voice is
heard in their autobiographies and mass movements. Caliban tries to overpower
his physical prowess over Prospero. But the latter being a master magician,
Caliban is snubbed. But the rebellious character of Caliban is well-expressed:
“As wicked dew as e’er my mother brushed/ With raven’s feather from unwholesome
fen/ Drop on you both: a south-west blow on ye,/ And blister you all o’er!”
(1.2.322-25). It is quite clear that Caliban finds no respite from the daily
chores of manual work Prospero commands him to do. But a slave gets it no more unless the master
wants as found in the case of Ariel. Whenever Prospero sees Caliban being
furious over his subjugated position in his own island and tries to overpower
him, he either threatens him: “For this, be sure, to-night thou shalt have
cramps,/ Side-stitches that shall pen thy breath” (1.2.326-7), or asks Ariel to
disturb him with loud noise. In this matter, Ariel who was enslaved by Sycorax
and later on rescued by Prospero is the chief instrument with the help of which
he conducts his magical feat. To control a slave like Caliban is not an easy
task because he is enslaved in his own island, the very place once upon a time
ruled by his ancestors. The sense of belongingness with the soil is an
integrated part to a native settler, but what happened with Caliban is perhaps
one of the earliest literary representations of European colonialism.
“Outsiders provoked more debates, anxieties, and representations than the
population statics might warrant” (Loomba 148). The cultural and ideological
conflict between a native and an outsider in The Tempest is best
exemplified in the language. Caliban is presented as a ‘savage and deformed’
creature. More the play moves on, more readers get acquainted with his human
speech that becomes a powerful weapon to him to curse Prospero and set a plot
against him: “You taught me language, and my profit on’t/ Is, I know how to
curse’ (1.2.364-5). Whether cursing someone is immoral is a different issue,
but what is more important is: why is Caliban cursing Prospero?
To sketch out Caliban’s character in the play, critics
frequently refer to how he attempted to rape Miranda, how he gets drunk and
sets a plot against Prospero with the help of Trinculo and Gonzalo; but the
central argument of this paper is neither of them. Instead of interpreting him
from a commonly accepted view, the paper focuses on how much manual labor
Caliben puts as a slave and what sort of recognition he receives as his fair
pay. Survival in a deserted island cannot rest upon magic; one requires food,
and fire in any place of Northern hemisphere. Prospero and Miranda utilized the
full potentiality of Caliban’s physical strength to meet their daily chores.
“Hag-seed, hence…/ Fetch us in fuel, and be quick thou’rt best/ To answer other
business” (1.2.367-69). Tamil Dalit writer Bama gives an authentic portraiture
of the limitless hard work a Dalit does through the life of her Patti10:
More than three quarters of the land in these parts are
in the hands of the Naickers. People of our community work for them… as
pannaiyaal, bonded labourers… Everybody said that my Patti was a true and
proper servant. She worked as a labourer to a Naicker11 family…
She’d rise before cock-crow at two or three in the morning… walk a long
distance to the Naicker’s house, work till sunset, and then come home in the
dark and cook a little gruel for herself. (48-49)
But the social status of slaves’ remains always fixed
despite their labor. The question is not related with transferring the power
from master to slave in a de-colonized world; it is related more with dignity.
A careful study of speeches of Prospero shows how each of his utterance meant
for Caliban is loaded with verbal abuse: “I’ll rack thee with old cramps” or
“Thou most lying slave” or “I have used thee-/ Filth as thou are.” These and many
others are examples of linguistic domination, that language is the first tool
of making someone slave is well-proven in Prospero’s relation with Caliban. To
locate Caliban in the matrix of characters in the play, Harold Bloom writes
“Yet to associate Caliban with displacement is a peculiar irony; only he, in
the play, is where he belongs to” (243).
It is not a matter
of surprise that Caliban witnesses the departure of Prospero and others from
the island of his ancestors; neither is it important that Caliban becomes the
rightful owner of the entire place after their departure. The important part of
the discussion is the concept of slavery prevailing in the power relation
between the powerful and the weak on the one hand and the slave-master relation
between Caliban and Prospero till Prospero’s stay in Caliban’s land on the
other. The first one is more ideological whereas the second one more textual.
In both of the cases, the concept of masculinity in the life of a slave has
never been acknowledged despite their hard work and physical labor. As examined
earlier in the case of Dalits and Caliban, the indignity of their labor remains
tied with their social and parental status: a Dalit is a dalit by the accident
of his or her birth and Caliban is a ‘savage’ by the virtue of his birth and
ethnic origin. Despite his use of muscle and physical labor to accomplice the
daily chores which are immensely productive, Caliban has turned out as a
‘default masculine’, an unfit status in the terminology of popular masculinity
like his dalit counterpart.
End Notes
1 Two global bodybuilding competitions held every year in
USA.
2 Fought between England and France from 1337 to 1453.
This is one of the longest-run wars in the European history. See Baker, Denise Nowakowski, editor. Inscribing
the Hundred Years' War in French and English Cultures. SUNY Press. 2000.
3 A landmark incident of Anglo-Spanish war (1585-1604).
Hundred and thirty Spanish war ships under the command of Duke of Medina
Sodinia invaded England in May, 1588 to defeat Queen Elizabeth. See Hanson, Neil. The Confident Hope Of A Miracle:
The True History Of The Spanish Armada. Random House, 2011.
4 Legendary tales highly cherished by
kings and knights in the Court culture of Medieval Britain. See Sanders,
Andrew. A Short Oxford History of English Literature. New York, Oxford,
1998.
5 Jati is name of a community
attributed to it after its prescribed profession. Varna means color,
that is, the division of humans on the basis of complexion. Both terms have
significant implication in understanding Indian caste system.
6 It is widely known as Manusmriti
or Manusamhita. Dr. Ambedkar burnt its copy on 25th December,
1927 as a protest against Brahminism.
7 According to Manusmriti, boys
from three upper caste families, such as Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya have
the only right to have Upanayana, the special ceremony in which a sacred
thread is awarded to him. This ceremony certifies his second birth. With this,
he naturally becomes superior to a Sudra who, according to Manusmriti,
lost the right to have Upanayana.
8 Modeled after the Black Panther
movement in USA, it is one of the most tumultuous mass protests in contemporary
India by dalits held in Maharastra in 1972. For an authentic source on it,
read Power J. V. Dalit Panthers: An Authoritative History,
Forward Press, New Delhi, 2019.
9 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-vFqNWYmm0&t=998s)
10 Tamil word for grandmother.
11 One of the many upper castes in Tamil
Nadu, India.
Works
Cited
Hard, Robin, editor. The
Routledge Handbook of Greek Mythology. 8th ed., New York,
Routledge, 2020, pp. 241-42.
Shehan, Constance L. Gale
Research Guide for: The Continuing Significance of Gender. Gale, Cengage
Learning, 2018.
Mansfield, Harvey C. Manliness.
London, Yale UP, 2006.
Selden, Raman et al.
editors. AReader’s Gude to Contemporary Literary Theory. 5th
ed., Harlow, Pearson, 2005.
Mosse, George L. The
Image of Man: The Criticism of Modern Masculinity. New York, Oxford UP,
1996, p. 5.
Foyster, Elizabeth A. Manhood
in Early England: Honour, Sex, and Marriage. New York, Routledge, 2014.
Wells, Robin Headlam. Shakespeare on
Masculinity. Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 2000, p. 11.
Gardner, C. O. “Themes of
Manhood in Five Shakespeare Tragedies: Some Notes on “Othello,” “King Lear,”
“Macbeth,” “Antony and Cleopetra,” and “Cariolanous.” Theoria: A Journal of
Social and Political Theory, No. 29 (October 1967), p. 1, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41801805. Accessed on 26 February 2020.
Wilson, John Dover, editor. The
Tempest: The Cambridge David Wilson Shakespeare. vol. 33, Cambridge,
Cambridge up, 2009.
Fiedler, Leslie A. “The New
World Savage as Stranger.” Bloom’s Shakespeare Through the Ages: The
Tempest, edited by Harold Bloom, Bloom’s Literary Criticism, 2008, pp.
198-9.
Hornby, A. S., editor. Oxford
Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. 8th ed., New York, Oxford UP,
2010, p. 1446.
Klein, Herbert S. African
Slavery in Latin America and the Caaribbean. New York, Oxford UP, 1986, p.
2.
Ibid, p. 3.
Cartledge, Paul A. “Serfdom
in Classical Greece.” Slavery and Other Forms of Unfree Labour, edited
by Leonie J. Archer, London, Routledge, 1988, p. 35.
Jackson, Bernerd S.
“Biblical Laws of Slavery: A Comparative Approach.” Slavery and Other Forms
of Unfree Labour, edited by Leonie J. Archer, London, Routledge, 1988, p.
91.
Klein, Herbert S. African
Slavery in Latin America and the Caribbean, New York, Oxford UP, 1986, P.
7.
Ibid, p. 13
Rodrigues, Valerian, editor. The
Essential Writings of B. R. Ambedkar. New Delhi, 2002, p. 385.
Olivelle, Patrick,
translator and editor. Manu’s Code of Law: A Critical Edition and
Translation of the Manava-Dharmastra. New York, Oxford UP, 2005, p. 189.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Rawat, S. Ramnarayana and K.
Satyanarayana, editors. Dalit Studies. Durham, Duke University Press,
2016, p. 2.
Guru, Gopal. Politics of
Naming. http://www.India-seminar.com/2018/710/710_gopal_guru.htm.
Ilaiah, Kancha. Why I Am
Not A Hindu: A Sudra Critique of Hindutya Philosophy, Culture and Political
Economy. Kolkata, Samya, 1996, p. 51.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-vFqNWYmm0&t=998s
Ilaiah, Kancha. Post-Hindu India: A
Discourse in Dalit-Bahujan, Socio-Spiritual and Scientific Revolution. New
Delhi, Sage Publications, 2009, p. ix.
Ibid, p. 37.
Ibid, p. 35.
Loomba, Ania. “Outsiders in Shakespeare’s
England.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakeapeare, edited by Margreta de
Grazia and Stanley Wells, Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 2001, pp. 148.
Bama. Karukku. Translated by Laxmi Holmstrom, New
Delhi, Oxford UP, 2001, p. 48-9.
Bloom, Harold. “Introduction.” Bloom’s
Shakespeare Through the Ages: The Tempest, Bloom’s Literary Criticism,
2008, p. 243.