Sovereignty over Life and Death: A Necropolitical Reading of
Bhavani Bhattacharya’s So Many Hungers!
Bapi Karmakar,
PhD Research Scholar,
Department of English and Foreign Language,
Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya,
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, India.
&
Dr Prasenjit Panda,
Associate Professor,
Department of English and Foreign Language,
Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya,
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, India.
Abstract: The Bengal Famine of 1943 stands as one of the darkest chapters
in colonial India's history, marked by widespread hunger, suffering and death.
It is estimated that approximately three million individuals perished during
the Famine. Bhabani Bhattacharya's novel, So Many Hungers! (1947),
offers a literary exploration of this catastrophic event and stands as a grim
example of state power's role in shaping life and death. Drawing from
Foucault’s concept of biopolitics and Mbembe's notion of necropolitics, this
article examines how British colonial governance directly contributed to mass
starvation and deaths in Bengal. Biopolitics, to Foucault, refers to the state
of administration in which modern colonial power utilises its biopower to
regulate and control specific populations and individuals. Taking a cue from
him, Achille Mbembe introduced Necropolitics, which refers to the politics of
death, where state power determines who lives and who dies, making life
unlivable for certain communities and individuals. Through the requisitioning
of food supplies, prioritisation of military needs, and inadequate response to
famine conditions, the colonial administration exercised sovereignty over the
lives and deaths of millions of Bengalis. This article explores these themes by
examining how colonial governance influenced the experiences of the Bengali
people during this crisis. Through a close analysis of Bhattacharya's narrative
and historical context, this endeavour aims to uncover the dynamics of power,
survival and resilience in the face of adversity.
Keywords: Necropolitics, Biopolitics, Bengal
Famine 1943, Death, State of exception, Sovereignty
Introduction
The consequences
of the famine were devastating on multiple levels. Families were torn apart as
individuals struggled to survive, and communities grappled with the loss of
loved ones and the breakdown of social structures. The suffering and indignity
experienced by the people of Bengal caused resentment and anger towards the
British colonial rulers. Many saw the British administration's indifference to
their plight as a stark betrayal of trust and a clear indication of their
disregard for Indian lives. The Bengal Famine of 1943 was an anthropogenic
disaster that devastated Bengal, modern-day Bangladesh, and parts of eastern
India. It catalysed political mobilisation, strengthening the independence
movement led by Gandhi, Nehru, and Bose. The famine became a stark symbol of
colonial exploitation, deepening the demand for freedom from British rule.
Millions perished, and its effects lingered as families struggled to rebuild
shattered lives. The trauma left a lasting imprint on Bengal’s collective
memory, underscoring the need for effective governance and humanitarian aid.
Yet the resilience and solidarity of the people in the face of immense
suffering testified to human endurance.
Though different
critics often criticize his novel for its narrative structure, storytelling,
and fragmented style, Sourit Bhattacharya put it right by saying, “In order to
capture this dialectic of fragmentation of the total system and the perception
of totality, it becomes necessary for a socially committed writer to follow a
style of writing that is different from a conventionally written novel”(51)
However, we see how the famine affected real lives, not just as a lack of food,
but as a profound emotional and spiritual crisis. The author, through the use
of stories about characters, reveals the multifaceted nature of the famine and
its varied impacts on people. It wasn't just about not having enough to eat; it
was also about feeling lost, alone, and disconnected from everything.
Bhattacharya helps us understand that the famine wasn't just an accident; it
happened because of unfairness and neglect by those in power. He shows us how
colonialism played a big part in making things worse for people. Communities
were torn apart, and people struggled to find their place in a changed world.
But even in the darkest times, the book reminds us of the resilience of the
human spirit. It teaches us to look back at history, to understand where we
come from, and to learn from it so we can make a better future.
Drawing from Foucault’s seminal
concept of Biopolitics, Achille Mbembe formulated his idea of Necropolitics. If
Foucault's biopolitics is a system that governs the life of the population
through biopower, Mbembe's Necropolitics is more intense and dystopian; it is
often referred to as “politics of death,” in which state powers control the
life and death of the population through the fear of death. It attaches life to
death through austerity, immiseration, and merciless exploitation of the
ecosystem. We can say that the People of Bengal were subject to this
necropolitics, and it became a perfect weapon for the British colonial power to
demolish and eliminate the disposable Indians to keep the power structure
intact and to excel as imperialists. Inspired by Mbembe’s necropolitical ideas,
Christine Quinan also suggests in her contribution that a necropolitical state
differentiates its population into legitimate subjects and illegitimate
non-subjects. There is even targeted killing and deep-seated prejudices against
Indians because of their different background. Mbembe's world is very similar
to a race and caste-ridden Indian society. Mbembe defines necropolitics as “The ultimate
expression of sovereignty resides, to a large degree, in the power and the
capacity to dictate who may live and who must die.” (11) Now, Giorgio Agamben's
concept of the “state of exception”, intersects with necropolitics and
biopolitics in its examination of power dynamics during times of crisis. In a
state of exception, governments suspend normal legal frameworks, granting
themselves unchecked authority that often involves decisions about life and
death. This mirrors the dynamics of necropolitics, which focuses on the
politics of death and the power to determine who lives and who dies. According
to Agamben, “The state of exception is the sovereign decision on the threshold
between violence and law” (Agamben 27). Here, he emphasises the power of the
sovereign to suspend legal norms in times of crisis, thereby blurring the
distinction between legitimate authority and arbitrary rule.
Through the lens
of Foucault’s ‘Biopolitics’, Mbembe’s ‘Necropolitics’, and Agamben’s ‘State of
Exception’. The endeavour is an attempt to understand British policies and
actions and how those were directly responsible for this particular event.
Bhattacharya’s novel is a living example to showcases the unsaid realities of
the event. The above-mentioned lenses are essential for scrutinising the event,
as these theories and ideas are well-suited for exposing the nature of a
sovereign, authoritative government that exploits the basic rights of its
citizens during a ‘state of exception’ or emergency. However, extensive
research has been conducted to determine the actual cause of the famine, and it
has been found that the cause of the famine was not one, but many.
Bhattacharya and the Famine
Bhavani
Bhattacharya (1906-1988) was an Indian English writer who is famous for his
socio-political realistic novels like So Many Hungers!, And He Who Rides a Tiger, The
Golden Boat, Music for Mohini and A Goddess Named Gold, and
some others. Born in Bengal Presidency in British India, he received his
Bachelor’s degree from Patna University, and after he went to London, where he
received his PhD degree from the University of London. He was influenced by
Marxist ideas and was against British imperialism. Even his doctoral thesis was
also on the socio-political movements in Bengal in the nineteenth century. From
the very beginning, it was against British colonialism and imperialism. He took
different jobs, returned to India, served as a diplomat, became a teacher,
taught literary studies in various institutions, he also worked as a
journalist. However, he turned to become a writer and started translating some
of the poems of Rabindranath Tagore. And it was Tagore who asked him to write a
novel in the English Language. So, he started working on the novel Music for
Mohini, but destiny had other plans for him. The famine of Bengal had
already started, and he was deeply influenced and affected by this event. It is
because of this particular event that he started the novel, So Many Hungers!
It was followed by He Who Rides a Tiger, a novel loosely based on the
same event of famine. Many critics regard the latter as more well-structured
and mature since the plot structure is an engaging one. However, the prime objective
of this paper is to portray the famine through the lens of biopolitics and
necropolitics, and for this purpose, the novel, So Many Hungers! seems
more convincing and apt.
The title, So
Many Hungers!, is layered and multi-dimensional with special attention to
the use of the word ‘hungers.’ The
plural form of the word Hungers with an exclamation mark at the end makes it
more poignant and effective. The different pangs of hunger can be the hunger
for power, for an ideal world, for freedom, for money, for sex, and for food,
etc. The novel touches on many socio-political events of India at the time,
like the Quit India Movement, the Indian Freedom Struggle, and most importantly,
the Second World War, and the great Bengal famine. Incidentally, the novel was
also published two months after the Independence of India. However, the novel
is setagainst the backdrop of two main events: the Quit India movement and the
Bengal famine. Devish Basu, one of the major characters in the novel, is better
known as Devta (Meaning "God") in the village of Baruni and is
portrayed as an aged man who serves as the prototype of Mahatma Gandhi in the
novel. His son Samrendra Basu, on the other hand, is a barrister and owner of
Cheap Rice Ltd. Samrendra Basu is opposite to his father, and he is always
looking to make a profit in times even in times of crisis. He has two sons,
Rahoul and Kunal. Rahoul is an academician influenced by his grandfather and
wanted to be with him in his journey to make India Free from the British.
Devish Basu has left his home and dedicated his life to the villagers,
especially Kajoli and her family. The plots of the novel have parallel
development; on one hand, Devish Basu and Rahoul are showing the development of
the Quit India Movement along with Gandhiji and Nehru, and on the other hand,
Kajoli and her family show the dreadful scene of the famine. In one part,
Devish Babu, along with his grandson, is helping the poor villagers and
fighting against the British forces and gets arrested for their act of protest
against the government. Kajoli and her family demonstrate how far a famine can
impact the lives of ordinary people and families like theirs.
The
Necropolitical Study
Achille Mbembe,
a Cameroonian philosopher, political theorist, and post-colonial scholar,
introduced the concept of “necropolitics” in his work, particularly in his book
“Necropolitics.” Necropolitics refers to how political power operates through
the control and manipulation of mortality and the infliction of death upon
certain bodies or populations.“The ultimate expression of sovereignty resides,
to a large degree, in the power and the capacity to dictate who may live and
who must die.” (Mbembe 11) Though Foucault’s Biopolitics inspires his main
argument, it is often said that Mbembe starts where Foucault ended his idea.
Mbembe interprets the idea in a more modern sense, especially in the way in
which modern states function. In the novel, So Many Hungers! we see how
the man-made famine caused millions of deaths and exposed many people to
diseases, as the following lines go. “Haven’t you ever looked at the pavements
of our city as you drive by? The filthy bodies of both men and women, old and
young, strewn all about? Ugly sight. (Bhattacharya, So Many Hngers! 154)”.
The above imagery shows the necropolitical site that Mbembe is putting before
us. The term Necro is a Greek word that means ‘dead person’ or ‘corpse,’ and if
we study the novel carefully, we will witness a series of deaths and dead
bodies. Even in one of the famous scenes of the novel, where Kajoli and the
family are coming back, Kajoli’s mother notices a strange sight in which the
mother of a child is burying her child alive.
The young woman,
about Kajoli’s age, seemed intent on herwork. She did not hear the stranger’s
feet or feel her presence. It was a trench she had dug, a cubit deep, and the
mother watched her in amazed silence. The woman turned aside and picked up the
bare-limbed baby boy, rocking him in her arms as he whimpered faintly, and
coaxing, warm and tender: “No more hurt in the belly, my sweet one, my godling.
You will sleep.” And she laid the child in the trench, folded his reed-like
arms over the bony chest and pushed the eyelids down as though to put the child
to sleep, and then with hurried hands she began to pile the earth back into the
grave. (Bhattacharya107)
When
they inquired about the reason for the act, she answered, “Poor godling, so
hurt with hunger! Look, my breasts have no milk”, lifting the tatters that half
covered her bosom “he has no throat to cry. If he sleeps a little! Where is
sleep? He is hurt, and hurt all the time with his hunger. In his cool earth-bed
he can close his eyes, sleep.”(108) The reply gave a huge shock to Kajoli and
her mother, they further discovered that she is the fisherman’s newly-wed wife
and had no option after her husband was missing. This is the necropolitical
site where she had no option but to bury her dear child alive. The British
people have ruled us for a pretty long time, and they had also promised a
better life to their racial inferior Indian subjects, butwhat they had offered
was famine, especially in the Bengal region. Many researchers have shown how
the British could have avoided the famine, but it had to happen. Authors like
Madhushree Mukherjee in her famous book, “Churchill’s Secret War: The British
Empire and the Ravaging of India during World War II”, and another article by Zareer
Masani, entitled “Churchill and the Genocide Myth” have time and again questioned
policies of the then wartime British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and
investigated his true nature of dominance and sovereignty.
In
another scene of the novel, we are introduced to a character named, Prokash, he
is a researcher under Rahoul who worked under him. Prokash is a dedicated
scholar who has no other interest than the laboratory. On one such occasion,
when he was in the laboratory, he encountered Rahoul and discussed a few
topics. Suddenly, Rahoul asked him whether he had gone to jail, and he replied,
“So many times I have gone to Alipore Prison to see my father- four years he
has been there”. (Bhattacharya 38) Now, Prokash reveals his real state and his
family's condition.In the family is the only bread earner, who has to support
his mother and widowed sister with children, Prokash is a revolutionary
character, but because of his family, he can’t do anything outwardly against
the British. However, the British Government captured his father without any
solid ground. On questioning why he was in prison, Prokash replied, “He loves
his country” (38).Through his words, we can sense the dystopian state of India
under foreign rule. he speaks in a low voice, and always looks around as if he
is under some surveillance or panopticon (Foucault’s Panopticon). Prokash
wanted to contribute to the freedom struggle like his father, but he couldn’t
because a biopolitical state controls and regulates the life of the people like
Prokash. In a response to Rahoul, he said, “You see, sir, I have to support my
mother and a widowed sister with children. There’s my research grant, and I
have taken up private tuition. If I go, my dependents will starve. Otherwise…” (Bhattacharya
39)
So,
it is again an instance that how the state controls the life of its citizens.
The advanced form of this oppression can be the famine that caused all the
havoc. However, apart from the famine, the Indian Independence and the Second
World War struggle also developed and co-existed almost in parallel. That is
the nature of the British rule during that particular time; we can affirm it as
the ‘state of exception’. The concept of the “state of exception” originates
from political and legal theory, particularly associated with the work of
political philosopher Carl Schmitt. It refers to a situation in which the
normal legal and political order is suspended or overridden in the face of a
crisis or emergency. Schmitt argued that the sovereign power, usually the
state, has the authority to declare a state of exception, thereby temporarily
suspending the rule of law to deal with an existential threat to its existence.
Building upon Schmitt's work, Agamben further developed the concept of the
state of exception in his influential book “State of Exception” (2003). Agamben
argues that the state of exception has become the norm in modern democracies,
where governments employ emergency powers and measures in times of crisis,
leading to the erosion of civil liberties and the consolidation of sovereign
power. In this novel, we have witnessed how state power is used to regulate the
lives of the Bengali people who have suffered because of this reason
Foucault’s
concept of biopolitics examines how states exercise control over populations
through the regulation of bodies and life processes, and it intersects with the
idea of the state of exception. Now, during the famine, a kind of State of
exception was created by the British government for their profit. An instance
is shown in the novel where an alarming conversation takes place between Kanu
and a young fisherman when they are returning from somewhere on a boat. The
discussion was a fearless commentary on the age in which they are living,
starting from colonial policy and the nature of their power to the emergency
state in which they are living. They also commented on the world situation at
that time, how big power states were devouring inferior states here one name
was echoed every time, which was Japan. Kanu and his friends even called them
‘aliens’ as well. “Aliens,” said Kanu, and made a face. “Aliens all- Engraze
and German and Chinee and Japanee.” “And Iranee and Turanee and Armenee,” the
fisherman contributed the names he knew. Aliens all. Why don’t they keep to
their own hearth? (47)
The urgency in their movements is due to the imminent threat posed by boat wreckers who have been seizing boats in the area, likely as part of a strategic effort to hinder potential Japanese invasions during World War II.As they row, Kanu and the fisherman discuss the importance of boats to their livelihoods and express frustration at the boat wreckers' actions. These boat wreckers, acting on behalf of the ruling authorities, have been seizing boats under the pretext of strategic necessity, compensating the owners but causing resentment and hardship among the local fishermen. They mourn the loss of boats, lifelines for fishing, travel, and survival, symbolising body and soul. Hiding one with Kanu, he faces a boat-wrecker who, despite desperate pleas, seizes it under government orders and claims of compensation, stripping them of livelihood, dignity, and sovereignty in the process. Foucault described biopolitics as, a technology of power for modern nation-states to control large groups of people: “an explosion of numerous and diverse techniques for achieving the subjugations of bodies and the control of populations” (Foucault, History of Sexuality 140) Now, this plot can be interpreted through the lens of necropolitics, as in how power and sovereignty can be used to dictate who lives and who dies. Necropolitics also extends the concept of biopolitics, which focuses on the management of life, to consider how certain populations are targeted for death or subjected to conditions that render their lives disposable.
So
into the village of Baruni, as into five hundred others, the boat-wreckers had
come, agents of the rulers, with soldiers to help them. Fifty boats they had
seized, but a few were missing. Runaways! The boat-wreckers carried a typed
list for each village…(Bhattacharya 46)
The
action directly impacts the livelihoods of the fishermen, who rely on their boats
for survival and economic sustenance. By depriving the fishermen of their
boats, the ruling authorities are not only exerting control over their lives
but also exposing them to conditions that threaten their existence. The loss of
their boats means a loss of mobility, economic opportunities, and even access
to food, as fishing is a primary source of sustenance for these communities. Despite
the fishermen's protests and appeals for mercy, the boat wreckers prioritise
the interests of the state and the maintenance of authority, even at the
expense of human lives and livelihoods.
Conclusion:
Winston
Churchill’s racial prejudice played a decisive role in the Bengal Famine of
1943, which claimed millions of lives. Viewing Indians as inferior in a social
Darwinian order, he diverted food supplies to British forces and Greece while
Bengal starved. This famine, a brutal product of British imperialism, exposed
how colonial power exercised sovereignty over life and death, rendering
populations disposable. While the West condemned Nazi atrocities, it remained
silent on this catastrophe. Writers like Bhattacharya, Sukanta Bhattacharya and
Manik Bandyopadhyay bore witness through their works. Bhattacharya’s novel
captures the intersection of biopolitics and necropolitics, portraying how
famine, governance, and systemic violence stripped Bengalis of dignity,
survival, and fundamental rights to life.
As we navigate
the conclusion of this exploration, it becomes evident that the themes of
sovereignty over life and death remain profoundly relevant in contemporary
contexts. The echoes of necropolitical and biopolitical dynamics continue to
reverberate in our world today, manifesting in various forms of social
inequality, political oppression, and humanitarian crises. Therefore, So
Many Hungers! not only serves as a historical account of the Bengal Famine
but also as a compelling commentary on the enduring struggle for dignity,
justice, and the recognition of every individual’s right to life. Through its
vivid portrayal of human resilience and resistance, the novel invites us to
confront these pressing issues and strive toward a more equitable and
compassionate future. It is important and relevant as, in our modern democratic
society, governments are doing everything to regulate and control the life and
death of certain populations. As we have seen in this case, the so-called
British government, a modern and civilised people, has committed one of the
heinous crimes during the colonial period. It is also very evident how
governments often make some decision that benefits a particular population, and
on the other hand, the same decision can prove a disaster to some populations.
Works Cited
Agamben, Giorgio. “State of Exception.” State of Exception, translated by Kevin Attell, University of Chicago Press, 2005.
Bhattacharya, Bhabani. He Who Rides a Tiger. Arnold Association, 1996.
---. So Many Hungers!.Orient Paperbacks, 1987.
Bhattacharya,
Sourit. “Disaster and Realism: Novels of the 1943 Bengal Famine.” Postcolonial Modernity and the Indian Novel,
2020, pp. 41–95, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37397-9_2.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Vintage Books, 1995.
---. “The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the College de France,” 1978-1979. Edited by Michel Senellart, translated by Graham Burchell, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.
Foucault, Michel. Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. Vintage Books, 1988.
---. The Archaeology of Knowledge. Pantheon Books, 2010.
---. The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction. Vintage Books, 1990.
Komireddi,
Kapil, et al. “Churchill and the Genocide Myth: Zareer Masani.” The Critic Magazine, 6 Dec. 2020,
thecritic.co.uk/issues/December-2020/Churchill-and-the-genocide-myth/.
Mallik,
Senjuti. “Colonial biopolitics and the Great Bengal Famine of 1943.” Geo Journal, vol. 88, no. 3, 6 Dec.
2022, pp. 3205–3221, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-022-10803-4.
Mbembe, Achille. Necropolitics. Durham: Duke University Press. 2019
Miller, Toby. “Michel Foucault,the Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège De France, 1978–79.” International Journal of Cultural Policy, vol. 16, no. 1, Feb. 2010, pp. 56–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286630902971637.
Mukherjee, Madhushree. Churchill’s Secret War. Penguin Books, 2011
Quinan, Christine. “Necropolitics.” Posthuman Glossary, edited by Rosi Braidotti and Maria Hlavajova, Bloomsbury Academic, 2018.