Conferring of Wilderness upon the
Marginalized: A Cultural Simulation between Heathcliff and Manik
Bandhopadhyay's Primeval
Sanghamitra
Ghatak
Assistant Professor
Brainware University
Kolkata, West Bengal, India
Abstract:
Deprivation and continuous humiliation are
often found to be one of the primary factors behind the ruthless and wild
behaviour of a being. However, categorising a specific section of society as an
abomination of general morality and relegating them to the margins is another
widely present worldview. At this juncture, Emily Bronte is seen creating a
character who not only denounces the categorical norms but creates a “centre”
of his own. This quality of Heathcliff is projected upon the protagonist of
Manik Bandhopadhyay while he is constructing his Pragoitihasik (Primeval).
As the name suggests, both Wuthering
Heights and Primeval deal
with the characters' wild and primordial instincts, bringing out their
psychological “id” to the foreground as a reality check to all who intend to
belittle them. The different parameters of cultural and psychological
inferences are so similar to its core that a simulation of emotions and
connectivity with the audience arises between two cultures or regions that are
geographically and mentally different.
Keywords: Cultural assimilation, Decentering,
Marginality, Simulation, World-view
Introduction:
Marginalisation throughout history had an uncanny resemblance to the
wild and the wilderness. The ruthless, rogue characters showcasing beastlike
wild nature are often pitted against the chiselled urban populace in history
and literature. Through her Wuthering Heights, Emily Bronte is seen to
cater to this binary when a wild Moorish Heathcliff is posited in contrast to
the civilised Lintons. However, the element of surprise that befalls the
readers is when this same savage character is constructed as the protagonist of
the Novel. This was something that was unexplored by the writers of the
previous generations. Bronte was not just successful in creating a character
that was so true to its flesh and bones, but at the same time was able to
generate compassion towards a character that defied the norms of a typical
romantic Hero.
Indian Literature,
though fostering upon the brown ethnicities, had usually catered to the
upper-middle-class section of society. Cultural Assimilation is rampant in
these kinds of texts, where the Natives thrive upon the ‘Babu Culture’ to fit
in within the familial status of the English Colonists. They are often seen to
be stuck within what Homi K. Bhabha refers to as ‘The Third Space’, where they
can neither be regarded as their English superiors nor return to the place of
total Indianness. Bandhopadhyay is seen to relegate this hybrid condition of
the Indians in his construction of Bhiku. Leaving behind the middle-class
sensibilities, through Primeval, Bandhopadhyay touches the sensibilities
of the marginalised section of society. A part of the society that merely
formed as the backdrop of the leading characters was now seeing its due
representation in mainstream literature.
The Byronic tendencies of Heathcliff can be
seen within Bhikuas well. The uncanny resemblance between Heathcliff and Bhiku
brings out the core understanding that the marginalised sufferings and
disrespect in the face of civilised society are somewhat similar. As Spivak
points out, “The Subaltern cannot speak”; we find both the characters to be men
of few words but much of wrath and wilderness. Both texts, constructed
centuries apart and culturally from two opposite hemispheres, share the same
cord of unanimity—people belonging to the lower social strata exploited bythe
capitalists. Both the characters delve into sadistic pleasures and possess an
unbending zeal to circumnavigate through the walks of life in quest of
attaining the heart’s innermost desires. This cultural simulation between two
very different types of literature can be considered the crux of humanity,
which is similar at its core.
Denouncing
the World-View:
Human perception of reality is often the culmination of certain
ideological practices that influence our actions and reception of different
events. Lucien Goldmann termed this perception as the “world-view”. He thought
that a “world-view” is produced on attitudes that create a coherent
understanding towards social relations. On the other hand, an ideology
generally signifies a false and distortive understanding, consisting of only a
partial consciousness. However, this distinction between ideology and
“world-view” seems to evaporate when the ideological basis of a literature
piece becomes the reflection of its contemporary time. It is undeniable that
though the character arch of Heathcliff and characters like Catherine Linton
were well progressionist in their viewpoints, Emily Bronte had to take recourse
to the traditional tropes of a Black man syndrome while constructing the
physicality of Heathcliff. Even a child who happens to be black cannot be
spared from the demeaning stereotype. He was regarded as “dark, almost as if it
came from the devil” when he was first brought to the Earnshaw residence. He
was also denied of his masculine pronoun when referred to as “it” by his fellow
characters. Only after establishing the initial ground based on the prescribed
worldview towards the Black civilisation does Bronte come out of the usual
hackneyed idea and develop her dark-toned protagonist as the central figure of
her Novel. The mainstream perception is so rigid that it can be understood from
the perspective that, even after the tremendous reception of the novel from all
quarters of society, Heathcliff is still majorly considered an Anti-hero, a
hero defying the mainstream. On the other hand, characters like Rochester enjoy
the status of archetypal Victorian heroes.
It is very ironic that
Heathcliff, who at the beginning of the text represents his entire class, is
stuck in such a situation that the subaltern section of the society also
despises him. Ellen Dean (Nelly), a maid at the Earnshaw house, shows her
dislike and mistrust towards the new foundling boarding the house. She
considers him solid and intelligent yet subdues him, believing in a hidden
aggressiveness within Heathcliff, just waiting to come out. In a household
teeming with children’s energies, Heathcliff is found to adorn the position of
“doubly-jeopardised”. His status of being both an outsider and a black created
a space of non-acceptance for both Hindley and the house-helps alike.
In the eastern front of
the World, where on one side, the privileged class was in a desperate attempt
to relinquish their subaltern status, the less fortunate section was segregated
to the societal margins. Bhiku, belonging to such a relegating class,stood out
as a stereotypical anti-social image. An outcast to the ideological perception
of the “world-view”. Notwithstanding the upper-middle-class Indian morals,
Bhiku becomes an outcast, dacoiting being his only source of survival. On the
one hand, we find the young Heathcliff discarded on the streets of Liverpool
when finally adopted by Earnshaw, who still had to bear the wrath of his race
and skin tone. On the other, an injured Bhiku, on asking for help and shelter
from his socially upright friend, Pehlaad, is relegated to a forest abode to
keep him outside the family domain. Though the characters managed to find
support to rely upon, they were mistreated with distrust and humiliation.
Bhiku, a wanted dacoit, was considered by his friend not to be allowed within
the premises of the house. Hence, he was posited at a fragile natural abode
within the forest devoid of any medical treatment for his injured hand. With
minimum food sustenance and an irregular visit from his friend, Bhiku was
subject to torments that further led him away from the prevalent societal
doctrines. Bandhopadhyay describes his forest struggle alongside a wounded arm:
“Bhiku cursed Pehlaad as he struggled for
survival… When he could not bear his thirst, he went to the nearby canal with
indescribable difficulty to fetch about half a jar of water. He munched on some
cheere (flattened rice) to suppress his hunger. With one hand, he kept
squishing the ants and insects. He put leeches all around his wound, hoping
that the poisoned blood would be sucked out of his body…
... Pehlaad went to visit his relatives in
the village… He got wasted on toddy there. Not even once in three days did it
occur to him how Bhiku survived in that forest.”
(Bandhopadhyay,
120)
This lack of apathy and quick action from Pehlaad’s side ultimately
rendered Bhiku paralysed. With one arm unnerving, Bhiku is further pushed along
the threshold of the society to carve a sustainable living. In this politics of
treatment and mistreatment, a parallel between both the West and the East is
noticeable in total disregard for anything that does not adhere to the conventional
norms of society.
De-centring the Fundamental Figure:
Every society establishes certain norms adhering to certain viewpoints,
which can either be the culmination of their specific cultural history or
development along the lines of global interactions. Those pivotal viewpoints
are the centres within a society and are called as the “locus” points by
Derrida. As he points out, this central locus is the “Original Truth”. It is
centred on the truth upon which different societies construct their ideas and
ideologies. But the complexity arises when this truth gets diluted and
distorted with time. Hence making the meaning unattainable. This
uncomprehending nature of the locus leads to a shift in the “Centre”. Bronte
tried her hands at shifting this “Centre” when she attempted to demystify a
black body, bringing forth the psychological development of such a character to
be no different than any other. Heathcliff is a product of his torments and the
treatment he received from his surroundings. The audacity to love Catherine
Earnshaw and, so earnestly, to lead a life of vengeful thirst marks the
highlight of his character. The zeal of a being who could not win at life but
planned enough to unite after death leaves the readers with nothing but awe
towards him. Bronte shifts the perception of a beastly black man to a lover
epitome in a much effortless way.
The degrading
perception of the black community is not a rare instance in literature. From a
feral Caliban to Aphra Behn Oroonoko, the myth of their nature and habitat
is typical. It stands as a shocking revelation when Conrad, in his Heart of
Darkness, describes the black community as people having “faces like
grotesque masks” and “a wild vitality”. This led Chinua Achebe to point out
that Africans are considered by the West as “the other world”, an antithesis of
Europe, in his An Image of Africa. They are believed to be mystified
creatures with pagan values and aggressive projection of inhuman strength. The
fate of the Browns with their Black counterpart again intertwines with the
conception of lawlessness and savagery. A person of colour is considered to be
susceptible to crime, especially those meted out against the white race. Be it
Tom Robinson, a black character in Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird,
or Dr Aziz, a brown Indian in E.M Foster’s A Passage to India, are
accused of female harassment at the first go, even without proper
investigation, or the possibility of an alternate reality. The association of
savegery with the people of colour was not just a problem of dated times but a
stark reality of the modern-day world itself. Hence, it becomes all the more
pertinent to re-analyse the literature of the times to re-access this black
mystifying attitude.
Bronte harmonises the
ruggedness of her character to give him a universal appeal. The cultural
history of both races might differ vastly; but they unite in their sufferings
and objectification. The demonisation of Heathcliff’s behaviour acts as an
impression when Bhiku, the dacoit, brings forth a similar kind of temperament
in dealing with the world that has been unjust to him. Both the characters
unite not just in their vengeance but in love as well. The unwavering love
towards Catherine leads to a series of events throughout the novel; on the
other hand, Bhiku’s love towards Paanchi draws him back to a world of crime.
Just as Heathcliff is forced to bring out his innate cruelty towards the people
who have wronged him constantly, Bhiku, too, who left behind the world of
robbery and murder to become a beggar, had to kill again to claim his woman.
The only difference in context might appear that, while it took death for
Heathcliff to unite him with his love, Bhiku had a slightly better fortune for
claiming his woman, even if that meant leaving behind their domicile for a new,
unknown world.
The Physicality:
Emily Bronte’s work provides a more comprehensive and penetrating view
into the contending forces that were in action during her time. Terry Eagleton
pointed out that an “elaborated impersonality of Emily’s novel” can be
perceived, which brings out the “intensive totality of its world”. To address
this totality, Bronte beautifully depicts the reality of things, eliminating
the mythical approach one might see through the works of Charlotte Bronte. In
touch with its existence, Bronte could not defy the problems of race, pedigree,
and property issues that were so pertinent during her time. Nelly repeatedly
questioned the background status of this new finding that Earnshaw brought to
the house. It traumatised Hindley as he visualised a rising contestant to his
property claims. Hindley’s sadistic nature of making Heathcliff work in the
moors is a kind of intelligent indication of the position of the blacks within
the society and what was considered best suited to him. Edgar Linton always
carried a superior air to himself towards his black counterpart through his
manoeuvres and tactics. He almost condescendingly claimed his right over
Catherine as if that was the only logical way to go about it. However, one
should never forget the approach Catherine had towards Heathcliff. Though she
was aware of her lineage, her confession to Nelly about loving him sheds some
light on the impartial nature of the female protagonist. But it has little to
do with Catherine's personality alone. It was a far greater commentary upon the
society, where the muscular build of a black man was often an object of desire
for the Victorian ‘angels of the house’. The female narrator falls in love with
the titular character in Aphra Behn’s novella Oroonoko. Catherine
Earnshaw and Isabella Linton are all seen falling into the same trope of black
masculinity. However, they understand the hierarchical gap but are lured to the
sheer physical exertion a character like Heathcliff can have upon the ladies of
the story. His returning rich forms as a bonus upon his validity for a secured
abode of existence. This same ideological attraction to physicality is
replicated in Primeval as well. Bhiku’s extraordinary life zeal and her
capabilities to survive through every possible scenario led the writer to
state:
He will not die. No
way. Although he is human, he would survive as a wildling. (120)
This wildling further goes on to murder his arch-rival with one hand
paralysed to exert his strength and capacity upon his lover, Paanchi. This
sheer masculine energy that oozes out of him enchanted his love interest to
throw away her secured life and thread towards a journey of uncertainty with
him. Both the characters heralded the crowns of an archetypal man of colour,
rich in strength and vigour.
‘Id’ as a Reflection of Savagery:
Love and revenge form the basic
theme of both stories, which reflects no reformation of the protagonists even
by the end of the narrative. Revenge is a motif that can be expressed as
outsourcing their respective ‘id’, not comprehended by the outside world. ‘Id’ constitutes
our raw and unfiltered emotions, usually checked and balanced through our
‘ego’. To exist in a society healthily, a person develops specific rules and
decorum to enact. However, for people who are outcasted for their skin tone,
unknown family lineage, or social status, the question of whether they need to
adhere to social norms is often raised. A social structure that has deranged
them at every step and has been the reason for their constant pestilence holds
little value to be abided by. The regulations of the social environment thus
appear redundant to such characters. Unfortunately, Bhiku and Heathcliff have
fallen to the other side of society, where traditional morality holds little
value.
The innate instinctive
impulses come out as a natural consequence for people who have been repeatedly
subjected to torture and recurrent insults from the people around them. At
their first visit to the Thrushcross Grange, where one Catherine Earnshaw is
accepted within the house and tended for the injuries she has incurred, we find
Heathcliff shooed away as an untouchable back to Wuthering Heights. If the
matter was not bad enough, on Lintons visit to the Heights, he pairs up with
Hindley to mock the household foundling. The impressions of such incidents can
have exponential effects on the mental health of the victim. Heathcliff could
have curled up in his domain and been an object of abuse all his life or broken
free from the shackles of slavery once and all. Bronte provided him with a
scope towards life. His decision to leave the moors and return as rich is a
testament to his capabilities if given proper opportunities.
Disrespect from the
people around is not rare in Primeval, as well. Bhiku, as already
discussed, was disposed of by his friend at a jungle abode as he was considered
not a person good enough to keep acquaintances with. He was further belittled
by his love’s rival Bashir, who, having a mutilated leg, thought himself of
possessing greater physical strength due to the hand paralysis of Bhiku. Bashir
had money and two functioning hands, making him a better candidate for his
lover, Paanchi. It was only after Bhiku claimed the life of his rival that
Paanchi realized she now has no one to protect her. Hence, understanding the
reality of the situation, accepted Bhiku's offerings. Bhiku’s ability to
assassinate people with just one hand makes him desirable to Paanchi, who
disregarded him until then.
In both cases, money
and strength play a significant role in applying love to their lives. However,
the dearth of love, affection and carnality pushed them into unchartered paths
instrumental in bringing out the wild and savage side of these characters. Bhiku
harassing the lady of the house who spared him with an abode or demanding
sexual favours from a fellow beggar on accounts of being a strong-built man are
the glimpses of ‘id’ coming to the foreground of the actions. Again, the
ill-treatment of Isabella Linton, rendering Hindley to an insufferable
condition, can trace its roots to the denouncement of any physical intimacy
with the woman, who is an object of his love. This scarcity of their physical
domains psychologically departed them from humanitarian spaces. Bhiku doesn't
think twice before burning his friend's house or killing the rival to attain
his love interest. Neither do we find Heathcliff indulging in any goodwill
towards his son, Linton. His wish to raise Linton in the Heights is merely a
tactic to keep the power in possession. Further wanting a union between Linton
and Catherine was just desperate move to capture Thrushcross Grange, a place
that pained him throughout the ages.
Psychological Simulation:
“Oh, East is East, and West is West, and
never the twain shall meet,
Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God’s
great Judgement Seat…”
(Kipling,
1)
In the above lines, Rudyard Kipling reflected the thought processes of
many of his contemporary theorists, who opined that since the experiences and
value systems of the two are so vastly different, it is impossible to bring
them under a singular umbrella. The West will continue to exert its superior
position, while the East will try to illudeits marginal status. However, human
understanding and psychology hardly find differences in their geographical
demographics. Humans, as a species with the same ancestral heritage, are bound
to share similar reactions when met with the same treatment. As a result of
this, Baudrillard, in his discussion about territorial simulation, states:
“… it is with this same
imperialism that present-day simulators attempt to make the real, all of the
real, coincide with their simulation models. But it is no longer a question of
either maps or territories. Something has disappeared: the sovereign
difference, between one and the other… It is a hyperreal, produced from a
radiating synthesis of combinatory models in a hyperspace without atmosphere.”
(Baudrillard,
2)
Here, through the concern of ‘territory’ Baudrillard wants to express
that the clear distinction between the imperialistic powers and the colonised
state has merged into a singularity regarded as hyperreality. In this
hyperreality, we see both cultures merging in functionality. Through this
simulation, we can find a 20th Century Native Indian, Bhiku, finds
his relevance and behavioural parallels with the 19th Century
Byronic Hero, Heathcliff.
References
Achebe, Chinua. “An Image of
Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.”The Massachusetts Review,
vol. 57, no. 1, 2016, pp.14 - 27.
Bandyopadhyay, Manik.
“Primeval.”Modern Indian Literature: An Anthology, Volume Two, edited
by K.M. George, Sahitya Akademi,
1983, pp.118 - 127.
Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture.
Routledge, 1994.
Derrida, Jacques. “Structure,
Sign and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences.”The Modern Literary
Theory: A Reader, edited by Philip Rice and Patricia Waugh, Arnold,
1996, pp.176 - 190.
Dyer, Richard. White:
Essays on Race and Culture. Routledge, 1997.
Eagleton, Terry. Myths of
Power: A Marxist Study of the Brontës. Anniversary ed. Palgrave
Macmillan, 2005.
Kipling, Rudyard. “The
Ballad of East and West.”Kipling: Poems, selected and edited
by James Cochrane, Penguin Books, 1977, pp. 99 - 103.
Loomba, Ania. Colonialism/Postcolonialism.
Third edition. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group,2015.
Nussey, Miss Ellen.
“Reminiscences of Charlotte Brontë.”Brontë Society Transactions, vol.
2, no. 10,1899, pp. 58 - 83.Taylor and Francis Online, https://doi.org/10.1179/030977699798899712.
Oates, Joyce Carol. “The
Magnanimity of Wuthering Heights.”Critical Inquiry, vol. 9, no.
2,1982, pp.435 - 449.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty.
“Can the Subaltern Speak?”Kipling: Poems, The Post-Colonial
Studies Reader, edited by Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffins and Helen
Tiffin, Routledge, 1995, pp. 24 - 28.