From Victim to Rebel: Gendered Resistance in
Mahasweta Devi's “Draupadi”
Pallab Kumar Sarker,
Assistant Professor
of English,
Cooch Behar
College,
Cooch Behar, West
Bengal, India.
Abstract: Mahasweta Devi's short story "Draupadi," translated by Gayatri
Chakravorty Spivak, depicts a tale that explores both subaltern resistance and
feminist assertion. The story centres on Dopdi Mejhen, a tribal woman who
transforms from a victim of patriarchal and colonial violence to a symbol of
resistance against state oppression subverting hegemonic power structures. This
article critically investigates the short story through the lens of subaltern
studies and feminist theory and examines how Dopdi's body and voice become
sites of both oppression and resistance, challenging the intersections of
caste, gender and class. Using theoretical frameworks from Spivak, Gramsci, and
Butler, This article seeks to explore the interplay of gender, class, caste,
and power in shaping subaltern agency taking into account the theoretical
frameworks from thinkers like Spivak, Gramsci, Butler and so on. The analysis
underscores Dropdi’s transformation from victim to rebel and offers a
counter-narrative of subaltern as well as feminist resistance against
patriarchal and colonial domination.
Keywords: Body politics,
Patriarchy, Gendered resistance, Intersectionality, Postcolonial oppression
feminism, Subaltern agency.
Introduction
Mahasweta Devi (1926-2016) is one of
the most prominent writers of Bengali literature and she, in her works, stands
for the right and struggle of the marginalised and subaltern communities Devi’s
short story “Draupadi” remains as a seminal text in subaltern literature in
India, particularly tribal and Dalit populations. Set against the backdrop of
the Naxalite Movement in West Bengal, India, the story reinterprets the
mythological Draupodi from the
Mahabharata as Dropdi Mejhen who is presented as both a victim as well as a
rebel. Through the oppression and resistance of this tribal woman, Devi
explores the intersection of gender, class, caste and politics in a postmodern
context. Interestingly, by investigating the dynamics of state power and the
resilience of the subalterns, the short story operates not merely as a
narrative of victimization but as a radical representation of subaltern
resistance, in which the body becomes both a site of violation and a means of
defiance. The story, on the one hand, is a powerful exploration of the systemic
exploitation of the subalterns; on the other hand it also presents a counter
narrative of resistance against patriarchal and colonial oppression.
Subalternity and the Politics of Representation
The
term "subaltern," was first used by Antonio Gramsci, the Italian
philosopher in his “Prison Notebooks” and by the term he refers to those groups
who are excluded from the dominant power structure. Theorists like Gayatri
Spivak, describes subalterns as groups in society who are socially,
politically, and geographically outside the hegemonic power structures. In
Draupadi, Dopdi has been presented as a subaltern and she is triply subaltern –
oppressed by caste, class and gender. subalternity in multiple ways: she is a
tribal, a woman, poor, and a member of a revolutionary group. The state
agencies view her, like other tribal people, as an enemy and target her to
crush any kind of protest or resilience. So, the resistance of Dropdi, who is
marginalised in multiple ways, is really remarkable.
Spivak,
in her essay "Can the Subaltern Speak?" questions whether the
subaltern can truly find a voice within the discourse of power and is of the
opinion that the voice of a subaltern remains unheard. Devi’s narrative both
echoes and challenges this notion of Spivak. At the initial stage of the
narrative, readers find Dopdi as a helpless and voiceless figure, who is a
victim oppressed by the state machinery and patriarchal violence. But as the
story progresses, she transforms from a victim to a rebel against the state
machinery and other such oppressive agencies. Instead of remaining passive and
mute, Dropdi registers her protest and resistance in a very radical and
powerful way. So, through Dropdi and her astounding act of resistance, Devi
presents a counter-point to Spivak’s pessimistic argument in her famous essay "Can the
Subaltern Speak?," illustrating the fact that even a subaltern can
register his or her protest or resistance in a very powerful and meaningful way
instead of refusing to submit.
The State and Systemic Violence
“Draupadi”
depicts the state as an oppressive entity that employs all its agencies to
crush the resistance movements of the subalterns people (in this case the
tribal people). The state agencies consider the resistance of the tribal people
not as a legitimate movement for their right but a militant activities and have
no hesitation to crush the resistance movement of the tribal people in the most
cruel and brutal way. The narrative sincerely exposes the brutal exercise of
state violence upon the tribal people. The story presents Dropdi as a symbolic
character who as a victim of state violence. On the other hand the character of
Senanayak, the officer tasked with capturing Dopdi, is emblematic of this state
violence. He acts as a part of the state mechanism that operates systematically
often resorting to force and violence to curb and movement as well as to
silence dissent represents a rationalized brutality, one that uses systemic
mechanisms to silence dissent. The state mechanism often use propaganda and
other such means to attach the tag of criminality against such political
resistance of subaltern communities and by reducing the resistance as a law and order tries to
validate their brutal exercise of state violence in curbing the resistance of
the subalterns .
“Draupadi”
depicts the brutal torture of Dropdi, the tribal woman, by the state machinery
and her capture and torture of clearly demonstrates the extremes to which the
Dropdi is not just arrested but she is raped and she undergoes the double
agonies – both physical and mental for being raped. Here state uses rape as a
weapon to punish Dropdi for being resistant and this shows not only class based
oppression but also gender based oppression. Dropdi is repeatedly raped and her
body becomes a battleground to demonstrate naked dominance over a subaltern-
both on the basis of class and gender. The state even tries to rob Dropdi of
her identity and humanity. But, what makes Dropdi so remarkable is her spirit
of rebellion. She refuses to be silent and becomes a symbol of protest and
resistance by her final act of defiance against the oppressive state mechanism.
Her resistance is recognition of satanic exhortation in Milton’s “Paradise
Lost”:
“Awake,
arise or be forever fall’n
Senanayak and his forces deploy harsh and inhumane
tactics that reflect the systemic oppression directed at tribal communities.
These actions go beyond suppressing dissent—they aim to obliterate the identity
and existence of these groups. Women like Dopdi become unintentional symbols of
resistance simply because they live beyond the boundaries of dominant social
and political norms. Their suffering—through abduction, sexual violence, and
physical abuse—is not random but part of a broader institutional effort to
assert control over the oppressed. Viewed this way, Draupadi becomes a
powerful condemnation of state-sanctioned violence, revealing how brutality is
legitimized under the pretext of preserving national order.
The Body as Battleground: A Site of Resistance
The ending of “Draupadi” is very powerful as well as
symbolic. Dropdi, who is naked and bleeding, confronts Senanayak,
"Draupadi...
stands up. She turns towards Senanayak and says, ‘What’s the use of clothes?
You can strip me, but how can you clothe me again? You can’t.’”
The ending of this short story reminds one of
Devi’s play “Mother of 1084” where the protagonist Sujata voices her protest
and anguish against the brutality of the state machinery at the concluding part
of the play:
Here,
the body of Dropdi becomes a battle ground - the site of the most brutal
violence on the one hand and the medium of the most potent resistance on the
other. Dopdi is naked but she refuses to be shamed, refuses to be silenced and
also refuses to surrender before the state machinery. By standing naked and
confronting her oppressor, she not only registers her protest but also reclaims
her agency. Her radical way of resistance is a clarion call for her community
and shakes the very fabric of the society.
She refuses to cover her body—a body that has been violated by the
state, but it is not an act of submission but a declaration of defiance against
the oppressive system.
This
desperate act of Dropdi is really powerful and thought provoking and through
this scene Devi renegotiates the issue of honour and shame associated with
female nudity. In The Mahabharata,
Draupadi's honuor is preserved by the divine intervention of Krishna during a
public disrobing. But, In contrast, Devi's Dopdi has no divine protector and
seeks not also. She shows herself as a defiant character who shakes off the
stigma of nakedness and emerges as a rebel who even uses her nakedness as a
form of protest hitherto unknown to those powers who sought to cow down
her.
The
impact of this act lies in its reversal of the gaze. Dropdi is raped, standing
naked and bleeding the state, represented by Senanayak, expects that Dropdi
after being raped and in her naked and bleeding state must be terrified,
ashamed and broken woman but to his utter dismay Dropdi emerges as a figure of
unflinching power and resistance. Dopdi who is stripped of clothing but not
dignity, stares back defiantly at the agent of the state, rendering him
speechless and bewildered. In this moment, the subaltern does speak—not through
language but through embodied resistance that disrupts the patriarchal and
state-sanctioned norms of silence and submission.
This defiant act
transforms what is traditionally seen as weakness into a form of power, opening
the narrative to a feminist interpretation. Dopdi takes control of the space
where she was violated, transforming it into a platform for asserting her
agency. Her nakedness does not reflect disgrace; rather, it becomes a symbol of
unbreakable strength. In this redefinition, she challenges and expands the idea
of female empowerment, especially in settings where typical modes of resistance
are denied or unavailable.
Revisiting and Rewriting Myth: From Victim to Resistor
Employment
of myth is a common practice in Indian literature. Mahesweta Devi’s “Draupadi”
is also no exception as it alludes to Draupadi, One of the most important and
controversial events of the epic are the disrobing of Draupadi in front of all.
The scene shows that Draupadi is disrobed and humiliated before all men present
in the court but she is ultimately saved from this humiliating situation by the
divine interference of Krishna, the Lord. But, in Devi’s narrative, Dropdi
finds no divine assistance to deliver her from her precarious situation rather
she relies on her own courage and tenacity. She resist in a radical way instead
of seeking divine or any form of assistance The story’s mythic resonance adds a
layer of intertextuality that deepens its political impact.
So,
“Draupadi” recontextualises the myth within a modern political framework and by
doing so she seeks to subvert the traditional image of the helpless woman. In
Devi’s narrative, Dopdi becomes a symbol of contemporary resistance, one who
confronts the oppressor and by extension, awakens the readers to be aware of
the reality and to rise against any sort of oppression and injustice. This subversion of classical mythology
challenges cultural complacency and insists on new narratives of empowerment
rooted in lived realities rather than divine intervention.
Moreover, Devi’s
choice to name her protagonist “Draupadi” serves a deliberate purpose beyond
mere symbolism. By referencing a prominent figure from mythology, she creates a
powerful bridge between historical and contemporary realities, blending the
sacred with the subversive. This narrative strategy compels readers to
recognize the persistent nature of violence against women across time and to
critically reflect on the stagnation in societal progress regarding gender
justice.
Gendered Subalternity and Political Agency
In Draupadi, Mahasweta Devi reshapes
the discourse on women’s agency in subaltern politics. Dopdi Mejhen does not
conform to the standard image of an activist—she neither addresses crowds nor
writes ideological tracts. Instead, her political presence is communicated
through her bodily actions and deliberate refusals. Even when silenced by
systemic violence, her body becomes a text of resistance, refusing erasure
(Devi 29).
Her final act unsettles dominant narrative
expectations. There is no savior to deliver her, no fatal end that marks her as
a martyr. She survives, holding her ground against her aggressors. This
survival is not passive endurance but a conscious defiance that undermines
state authority and confronts the reader with a mode of resistance grounded in
silent but potent dissent. Her stance complicates the idea of political agency,
which is often equated with public speech or leadership roles, by offering a
counterexample: insurgency embedded in lived, bodily experience.
Devi’s portrayal
also reframes trauma. Rather than allowing suffering to conclude the narrative,
the text insists on the persistence of agency within pain. Here, survival
becomes a political act, and in enduring, the subaltern can reclaim
subjectivity (Spivak 88). This ethic of survival resists the totalizing power
of oppression, asserting that even in the aftermath of dehumanization, the
possibility of reclamation remains.
Feminist Assertion
From a feminist
standpoint, Draupadi stands as a direct challenge to patriarchal scripts
that cast women as passive victims. Dopdi’s resolute defiance following sexual
violence dismantles such portrayals. In the climactic moment when she confronts
her captors unclothed, she refuses to accept the shame they seek to impose,
demanding that they witness the outcome of their own brutality (Devi 33). Her
declaration transforms the scene into both a personal triumph and a public
indictment of state power.
Judith Butler’s
concept of gender performativity—where gender is produced through socially
repeated acts—offers a critical lens here (Butler 34). By rejecting the
performance of the “ashamed victim,” Dopdi refuses the patriarchal narrative of
concealment and silence. Her nudity becomes a deliberate political statement,
revealing the violence of the state rather than her own vulnerability.
Her resistance
further exposes how female suffering is often commodified within nationalist or
patriarchal discourse. By wielding her wounded body as a truth-bearing weapon
rather than a symbol of defeat, Dopdi asserts full narrative and bodily
sovereignty. In Devi’s telling, feminist assertion is inseparable from
political consciousness; it is enacted not through rhetorical flourish but
through embodied defiance.
Conclusion
Mahasweta
Devi's Draupadi is a profound exploration of subaltern resistance. It brings to
light the struggles of tribal communities in India while engaging with broader
questions of power, gender, and agency. Through Dopdi Mejhen, Devi creates a
character who transcends victimhood and embodies the spirit of resistance. Her
silence, her nudity, and her defiance are louder than any speech, asserting
that even in the face of extreme violence, the subaltern can—and does—speak.
In a
world where marginalized voices are often ignored or distorted, Draupadi serves
as both a political indictment and a call to consciousness. It forces us to
recognize the humanity, the strength, and the resistance of those who exist
outside the margins of power. Moreover, it demands that readers and critics
alike expand their understanding of resistance beyond the conventional
political arena, acknowledging the radical potential of bodily defiance and
symbolic gestures.
Ultimately,
Draupadi compels a reconsideration of how we understand oppression and agency.
It is a story of immense brutality, but also one of tremendous strength.
Mahasweta Devi’s reworking of the mythic into the material, the divine into the
human, renders Dopdi not as a footnote in someone else’s history, but as the
author of her own resistance.
Works Cited
Bandyopadhyay, Samik. Class and Conflict in Mahasweta Devi’s Fiction. Seagull Books,
2004.
Basu, Tapan. Narratives of Indian Modernity: The Subaltern and the State.
Routledge India, 2011.
Chakravarty, Radha. Feminism and Contemporary Women Writers: Rethinking Subjectivity.
Routledge, 2008.
Chatterjee, Partha. The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories.
Princeton University Press, 1993.
De, Rohini. “Subaltern, Gender and Resistance
in Mahasweta Devi’s Draupadi.” International
Journal of English and Literature, vol. 5, no. 9, 2014, pp. 230–235
Devi, Mahasweta. Draupadi. Translated by
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, in Critical Inquiry,
vol. 16, no. 2, 1988, pp. 381-402.
Guha, Ranajit, editor. Subaltern Studies: Writings on South Asian History and Society.
Vol. 1, Oxford University Press, 1982.
Sarkar, Tanika. "Rape and the Public
Man: The 'Indian' State in a Feminist Perspective." In Gender and Politics in India, edited by
Nivedita Menon, Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 201–238.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. "Can the
Subaltern Speak?" In Marxism and the
Interpretation of Culture, edited by Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg, University
of Illinois Press, 1988, pp. 271-313.
Tharu, Susie, and K. Lalita, editors. Women Writing in India: 600 B.C. to the
Present. Vol. 2, Feminist Press at the City University of New York, 1993.