Ray Chaudhury

“Laugh like Surpanakha”: Modern Literary Re-Imagining of a

Famous Villainess in Indian Folkloric Traditions

Sarita Ray Chaudhury

California State Polytechnic University, Humboldt
USA

Abstract
The Ramayana, a mythological tale passed down in oral folkloric traditions with the earli-
est discovered written version dating between the 4th and 6th centuries BC, continues to hold
dominant cultural sway in India and many south Asian countries. To the many millions of
people in South Asia, Surpanakha, the female character in Ramayana who instigated the great
war between good and evil, continues to be upheld as the embodiment of all things women
should not be―vocal of her lustful desires, fearless to proposition a man, violent and selfish.
However, her role as a villainess is being questioned. In contemporary re-imagined narrative,
she is portrayed as a misunderstood and oppressed female in a patriarchal system. Through
qualitative analysis of online user generated content (UGC), this study explores how modern
readers perceive Surpanakha’s characterization in Kavita Kane’s novel The Lanka’s Princess.
Findings suggest readers’ willingness to accept Surpanakha’s villainous traits as expressions
protesting mainstream expectations of the female ideal.

Keywords: female villain, villainess, fairytale, folklore, feminist revisioning, India,

Surpanakha

I
n Western countries, fairytales are some of the first stories children hear. These
continue to be part of cultural socialization narratives. While growing up, children
continue to build familiarity by seeing the same characters in films, television, and
market mediated narratives like advertising (Odber de Baubeta 1997; Mieder 2007).
Beginning in 1960 with the use of fairytales and traditional folklores by the advertis-
ing industry and up to the present-day framing mechanisms of contemporary issues
of modern society, demonstrates the continued relevance of characters in popular cul-
ture (Greenhill and Rudy, 2014). Within this broad genre, where the fight between
good and evil imparts the ideals of gender norms by pitting the hero against the vil-
lain, the female antagonist is the focus of this study. Although pivotal, their stories are
typically secondary to the male characters. In Western narratives, enduring villainess
characters continue to have their presence culturally felt, such as Maleficent (Sleeping
Beauty), Mother Gothel (Rapunzel) and Ursula (The Little Mermaid) in contempo-
rary revisions and reimagined retelling of the original stories. Deviating from earlier
one-dimensional portrayals where gender role portrayals remained intact, contempo-
rary creators of entertainment content are exploring narratives that extend such bi-

Cultural Analysis 22.1 (2024): 52–72

© 2024 by The University of California.
All rights reserved
52
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

polar depictions such as re-imagining the wicked stepmother as the heroine (Williams
2010). The American Broadcasting Company (ABC), in their television series Once
Upon a Time, which ran from 2011 to 2018, as well as the National Broadcasting Com-
pany’s (NBC) Grimm series incorporated fantasy imaginings of fairytale characters in
real-world settings, thus giving them back-stories where none existed. Along similar
lines, Angelina Jolie’s Maleficent films (2014, 2019) produced by Disney centralize and
portray the character of the villain in Sleeping Beauty in a sympathetic light.
So, what stories of villainesses do children in India hear of while growing up that
continue to hold sway into their adulthood? If one were to ask, one of the most famous
would be that of Surpanakha, the strong-willed sister of the villain Ravana in the Ra-
mayana. Her story is familiar to hundreds of millions of people in Asia (Erndl 1991;
Pillai 2020; Ramanujan 2004). She is a pivotal character who manipulates and connives
to trigger the war between good and evil in the epic tale. The legendary story, crafted
a few thousand years ago, has been told and retold in several languages, intertwined
in folktales and performance arts in multiple countries across South-East Asia. Stories
from the Ramayana can be found in various forms in folktale arts, fiction and nonfic-
tion books, comics, video games, theater arts, television and films (Austin 2014; Pillai
2020). In recent times, with a growing interest to discover the rich literary heritage of
India’s folklore including mythical narratives, women writers are offering fictional re-
tellings of female characters. One such effort is the fiction novel, Lanka’s Princess which
offers Surpanakha’s story from her point of view (Kane 2017). This study answers the
call to explore modern interpretations of the female villain in popular culture content
(such as the fictional novel). The perceptions of modern Indians, articulated in the
form of user generated content (UGC) within the context of participatory culture in
today’s networked era, offer insights into the evolving nature of gender identity and
socio-cultural norms of such retelling efforts by feminist writers.

Surpanakha as the Female Antagonist in Traditional Telling of

The Ramayana
The Ramayana is described as an exemplar of the Hindu ideals where Rama, the main
male protagonist, is the epitome of an ideal male faithfully sacrificing himself in his
duties as a son, a husband, a brother and a king (Goldman 2004). At the behest of one
of his stepmothers, Kaikeyi, Rama gives up his right to the throne and accepts a four-
teen-year exile accompanied by his wife Sita and one of his brothers, Lakshmana. Kai-
keyi wanted her own son to ascend the throne and Rama, although the eldest and thus
the rightful heir, fulfils his filial duties towards his ailing father Dasaratha who owed a
promise to Kaikeyi. In the tenth year of exile, Rama meets Surpanakha. Surpanakha is
the princess of Lanka, the kingdom of Ravana, the demon king. Smitten by his beauty,
Surpanakha propositions to Rama. Rama rejects her, noting he is married to Sita and
humorously suggests she proposition Lakshmana instead (he too is married having
left his wife Urmila behind as he followed Rama into exile). Lakshmana also rejects
Surpanakha, who mistakenly believes that Sita is the cause for the rejections, and
lunges at her. Lakshmana intervenes and cuts off Surpanakha’s ears and nose. Strick-

53
Ray Chaudhury

en, Surpanakha goes back to Lanka, recounts her humiliation and manipulates Rava-
na by describing Sita’s beauty as worthy of his possession. Ravana, upon confirming
Surpanakha’s claims for himself, abducts Sita and takes her back to Lanka. Rama then
fights with Ravana and defeats him to rescue Sita. This fight is described as the Great
War where good overcomes evil (Kishler 1965; Ramanujan 2004). While Rama is the
male ideal and Sita is the epitome of the ideal woman, the villains are the extreme
opposite. Ravana is the main antagonist with no moral character. Surpanakha, the
sister of Ravana, is portrayed as selfish and cunning. Surpanakha’s brief but pivotal
appearance in the story begins and ends with the war between the male hero and vil-
lain. This black and white, good versus evil characterization has remained consistent
over thousands of years as the epic tale has been shared across geographic borders in
various written, oral, and performative traditions. In popular culture, stories from the
Ramayana remain popular in media and entertainment (Booth 1995; Mclain 2001; Pil-
lai 2020). Surpanakha is never too far from the public attention, as women who do not
conform to heteronormative gendered ideals are often compared to her.

Situating the Mythical Narrative of Surpanakha in Fairytale Discourse

One would argue why mythical tales like the Ramayana should be part of the fairytale
literature. The answer would be to decolonize fairytale academic discourse from the
predominantly Western focus (Haase 2010). This is evident where stories from Asia
are classified under “Asian Literature” or “Asian Studies” with predominantly West-
ern authors leading the scholarship (Brockington and Brockington 2016). Scholars
have long suspected the origins of fairytales in folk narratives to have diverse Indo-
European roots dating back thousands of years (Hasan 2009; da Silva and Jamshid
2016; Sugiyama 2001). This view is not without merit, given that the artificial lines
drawn by academe cannot untangle the threads of storytelling that has woven itself
across borders through human activities (migrations, trade) over thousands of years
(da Silva and Jamshid 2016; Jacobs 1892; Zhang 2015). Parsons (2004, 138) notes that
despite the Grimms or Perrault given credit for popularizing fairy tales, “there is no
genuine or authentic version of a fairy tale.” This is evident in the uncanny similari-
ties between Jataka folktales from India and Aesop’s Fables, where Jacobs (1892, viii)
notes:

Some—as Benfey in Germany, M. Cosquin in France, and Mr. Clouston in England—

have declared that India is the Home of the Fairy Tale, and that all European fairy tales
have been brought from thence by Crusaders, by Mongol missionaries, by Gipsies,
by Jews, by traders, by travellers…..So far as the children of Europe have their fairy
stories in common, these—and they form more than a third of the whole—are derived
from India. (Jacobs 1892, viii)

In response to Haase’s (2010) call to acknowledge the cross-cultural heritage of the

origin of fairytales, this study introduces an iconic female villain from Indian folkloric
traditions. Although her story is a few thousand years old (at least what can be traced
at present), it is known by many people around the world. Acclaimed as one of two

54
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

great epics of India (the other being the Mahabharatha), its earliest origins, believed to
have been passed down through oral folkloric traditions in various regions and lan-
guages, is estimated to have originated between the 4th and 6th centuries BC (Ramanu-
jan 2004). Historians have traced approximately three hundred different versions of
the Ramayana in written form adopted across countries such as Myanmar, Indonesia,
Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, China, and Japan amongst others (Ramanujan 2004; Wata-
nabe 1907).
The Ramayana permeates every aspect of the Indian culture in every form of con-
tent imaginable, comparable to fairytale influences in Western societies. Similar to the
depiction of Snow White and the Evil Queen as female ideals of the good and the bad
in Western fairytales, Sita is upheld as the ideal woman in a righteous Indian society
steeped in Hindu traditions while Surpanakha is “othered” as the opposite of this
ideal. In this “other” framing, villainesses, irrespective of their origins, often suffer
violence resulting in death, to depict the triumph of good over evil (Luthra 2014). The
mutilation of Surpanakha is upheld as a just punishment for a woman’s transgression
of overstepping gender norms to proposition to a man. There are various interpreta-
tions of this act as the critical event that changes the trajectory of the plot (Erndl 1991;
De Clercq 2016). Similarities of such is also seen in Western fairytales with Cinderella
suffering active and passive injuries from her step-mother and step-sisters (Alcantud-
Díaz 2012).
Arguments against the stereotypical depictions of female ideals (pure versus evil)
and aspirations (happy endings resulting in marrying the handsome prince) have
been evident in the waves of feminist critique of fairytale literature in the 20th century
(Ragan 2009). Haase (2000; 2004) notes that the works of Suzanne Barcher, Rosemary
Minard, Ethel Johnston Phelps, Kathleen Ragan, James Riordan, and Jane Yolen chal-
lenge patriarchal gender norms in the literature to subvert such narratives. Feminist
‘rewriting’ have expanded the genre of folkloric conventions to encode novel dis-
courses challenging troubling patriarchal ideologies that are detrimental to modern
societies (Crew 2002; Luthra 2014). Indeed female characters, even the idealized, have
little agency in the narrative.

Surpanakha’s Relevance in Contemporary India

Sabhapati ji meri aapse vinti hai Renuka ji ko kuch mat kahiye. Ramayan serial ke
baad aisi hansi sunne ka saubhagya aaj jaake mila hai. (Chairman sir, don’t stop Ms.
Renuka. Ever since seeing Ramayana serial, for the first time I have got an opportunity
to hear such a laughter)

Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India, February 7, 2018

The traditional interpretation of Surpanakha has sustained well into the 21st century.
To this day, Surpanakha continues to be referenced in stereotypical ways to draw com-
parisons of the actions of modern women. In 2018, an incident involving a female poli-
tician was widely covered in the national media. Ms. Renuka Chowdhury, a member

55
Ray Chaudhury

of the opposition party, laughed during a parliamentarian session. She was rebuked
harshly by the presiding chairman at the time. Mr. Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of
India, and the leader of the ruling party, mocked her loud laughter and jokingly asked
the chairman to not censure her with the remark in the above quote (Bhatia 2018). The
quote references the exaggerated cackling laughter made famous by an actor essaying
the role of Surpanakha in the extremely popular Ramayana television show (Cusack
2012), and refers to Surpanakha’s disregard for gender norms of the demure female.
In this popular series aired in the 1980s, the exaggerated laughter of Surpanakha as
she made her entrance to proposition Rama made a significant impact on the public
(Nagpaul 2018). Mr. Modi’s censure of Ms. Chowdhury was criticized by the media as
a form of gender oppression (Bhatia 2018). Surpanakha trended again on Social Media
platforms such as X (formerly Twitter) March 2021. Media reports of a physical alter-
cation where Hitesha Chandranee, a female customer, uploaded a video of herself on
Instagram with her nose bleeding where she narrated the story of being assaulted by
a male food delivery service person. In subsequent reports, the male service person
accused Chandranee of fabricating the story. While the police reviews the case (Arakal
2021), social media users created and shared memes of Chandranee referring to her as
the modern day Surpanakha, falsely accusing a man of a fight which she may have ini-
tiated. Thus, be it Renuka Chowdhury or Hitesha Chandranee, women in 21st century
India are familiar with societal comparisons to the female characters in the Ramayana
in their everyday, mundane lives.
To question such stereotypical depictions, along with the growing interest in In-
dia’s rich literary folkloric heritage, some women writers are re-imagining such nar-
ratives. One must note that feminist retelling of traditional stories is not new in In-
dia. Reviews of historical oral traditions by women have found that the male ideal of
Rama has been questioned (Rao 1998; Dev Sen 1998). In the 21st century, a myriad of
retellings of India’s folklore in the works of Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni, Anuja Chan-
dramouli, Amruta Patil, Samhita Arni, Sara Joseph, Kavita Kane to note a few, have
been received enthusiastically by readers eager to explore their rich literary history
(Ramadurai 2021; Sattar 2017). In her review of the portrayal of Surpanakha in the arts
and media in modern times, Pillai (2020) reveals the primary depictions continuing
along similar plots as seen through centuries, with some exceptions where cinematic
portrayals and fictional writings showcase Surpanakha in a more sympathetic light.
One such retelling of Surpanakha’s story is the fictional novel Lanka’s Princess by au-
thor Kavita Kane published in the English language in 2017 (Binoj 2019). Kavita Kane
is noted for her attention to the lesser known female characters in traditional tales. She
conducts in-depth research and does not deviate from what is already known about
the story or the characters. Her intent is on providing a fictional feminist account of
characters that do not have any notable narrative arc in the original stories.
The interest amongst academic scholars to understand the author’s retelling of
Surpanakha’s story is evident in recent works (Meenakshi and Kumar 2021; Srishti
2021). Readers are encouraged to review these studies for an in-depth understanding
of the novel. For instance, in her analysis De (2020) reviews Surpanakha’s disfigure-
ment in the hands of Lakshmana by authors Kavita Kane and Navanita Debsen as

56
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

seen through the lens of abusive patriarchy. Similarly, Dirghangi and Mohanty (2019)
conclude that Kane portrays Surpanakha as the “new” woman of the modern times
who seeks independence from male-centric societal dominance. Asha and Nandini
(2019), in their review of Kane’s approach to feminist retellings in her novels, note
that the author sought to make her readers view the patriarchal subjugations faced
by the female protagonists through the latter’s point of view. Kane gives voice to the
voiceless, thus offering a different perspective than what the traditional versions offer
through the male gaze. In her re-imagination of Surpanakha, Kane stays within the
traditional view of her role as the villainess while giving her voice and agency by nar-
rating the story from her point of view. Kane’s work is comparable to the philosophy
of that of Donna Jo Napoli who offers revisioning to empower characters, alter narra-
tive conventions and encode feminist themes and values (Napoli 1993, 2000; Napoli
and Tchen 1999). Kane writes in English. Her works have been translated into regional
languages. For this study, the novel itself is not the focus. It is the reader’s responses
that are analyzed as a form of participatory culture.

Methodology and Data Analysis

The purpose of this study is to explore how Lanka’s Princess resonated with contem-
porary readers as articulated in their own UGC, which depict a form of participa-
tory culture in today’s networked world (Jenkins, Ito and Boyd 2016). Not content
in merely reading books, people are sharing their experiences in the form of online
reviews, blogs and social media posts. Since the advent of Web 2.0 technologies, UGC
is ingrained in participatory culture. Empowered with digital tools and platforms, us-
ers are able to create and share their thoughts and creative output (text, audio-visual
content) “at the intersection between old and new media, (and) are demanding the
right to participate within the culture” (Jenkins 2006, 24). UGC is understood to be “i)
content which is made publicly available, through internet, ii) boasting a certain level
of creativity and maybe the most important aspect iii) created outside of professional
practices” (Balasubramaniam 2009, 28). Examples of UGC are online blogs, fan fiction,
wikis, images and videos prevalent on websites and social media. For the purposes of
this study, since the story developed Surpanakha’s villainous character that is promi-
nent in its absence in the original version, the readers’ perceptions of the re-imagined
narrative was of particular interest. Blogs in particular are utilized by women to ex-
press their thoughts and feelings in the online domain (Chen and Huang 2020; Kurtz
et al. 2017).
Table 1 lists the sources of secondary data gathered through purposive sampling
(Kurtz et al. 2017). Simple keyword search of “Kavita Kane” and “Lanka’s Princess”
was used to access publicly available data using Google’s search engine, social media
platforms and other websites. The textual content of blog posts and review comments
on Goodreads, Amazon India and Flipkart formed the units of analysis of this study.
To access these data sources, one can find the book Lanka’s Princess on these promi-
nent websites. The review comments of consumers who purchased the book are easily
accessible. Several consumers include hyperlinks to their individual blogs that are

57
Ray Chaudhury

also available in the public domain. A majority of the blog posts and reviews were fa-
vorable. Adhering to the best practices recommended by Kurtz et al. (2017), personally
identifiable information have been removed when presenting quotes in the analysis.

Table 1: Data Sources

Type of Data Number Select sources Data Format
Units of analysis
Online reviews on 375 Goodreads.com Textual content : Review

E-commerce sites Amazon.in comments

Flipkart.com
Online Blogs 37 Blogspot.com Textual content : blog

Wordpress.com posts
Informed the analysis
Media reviews Hindustan Times Textual content :

India Today News articles on the

The Hindu book

Times of India News articles on author

Daily News & Analysis

The Statesman

The Indian Express

Social Media UGC 843 Instagram Audio-visual content

Not counted Twitter and accompanied text in

Not counted Facebook original post, comments,

27 Youtube emojis.

Qualitative analysis was adopted to analyze the textual content of the blogs and
review posts to examine readers’ perceptions of the reimagined story of Surpanakha
in Lanka’s Princess. Qualitative inquiry was appropriate for the purposes of this study,
as cultural transference of meanings needed to be interpreted in a nuanced way. Data
was analyzed within (e.g blog posts) and across (e.g e-commerce purchase reviews).
Additional sources of secondary data that informed the analysis include social me-
dia posts, mainstream media reviews of the book, interview videos and transcripts of
Kavita Kane in literary festival venues and mainstream media outlets. A hermeneutic
interpretivist approach (Laverty 2003) was used to develop codes from emic terms evi-

58
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

dent in the data such as gender norms, power dynamics, and cultural systems. These
were supplemented with codes from feminist fairytale literature (e.g. androcentrism,
renegotiation of patriarchal ideologies) to situate the findings within the context of ex-
tant knowledge. Throughout the analysis, the iterative practice of continuous compar-
isons of the data analysis and the literature (Strauss and Corbin 1998) helped identify
emergent descriptive themes. Representative quotes from the UGC of blog posts are
utilized to elaborate on the perceptions of the readers of Surpanakha as reimagined in
Lanka’s Princess. These are discussed as follows:

What’s in a name? Meenakshi First, Surpanakha Later. In this theme, percep-

tions of Surpanakha as the beautiful princess of Lanka in the re-imagined narrative
takes center stage, rather than the grotesque demon Surpanakha of conventional por-
trayal. Often female villain characters are used as props to further the plot and per-
petuate gender stereotypes (Austin 2014; Fisher and Silber 2000). After they serve the
purpose, they are either killed or negated to the background. In traditional depictions,
we first see Surpanakha as she happens to encounter Rama in the forest. In Lanka’s
Princess, readers are introduced to her at birth. She is an unwanted girl child. She is
named Meenakshi by her father which refers to her beautiful golden hued eyes. UGC
blog posts marveled at the fictional story arc that encompass Surpanakha’s childhood
and growing up years.

I remember in my younger days where we used to watch Ramayana cartoon at home

in one of those old DVRs. This character gets approximately 10 minutes of screen pres-
ence, but the most important 10 minutes. (Blogger 1)

The POV is brilliant. Surpanaka’s story is an often neglected one. She gets a secondary
appearance (firstly because she is a monstress and secondly as she is a woman) in the
epic. I like how Kane weaved the story from Meenakshi’s thoughts as a child and the
grief she encounters because she is always loved lesser than her brothers. (Blogger 6)

The agency of her story arc, where her neglected childhood and fraught relationship
with her parents, resonated with readers. Here, the point of view of the female vil-
lain allowed her to reclaim her voice. The absence of the male gaze allowed her to
demonstrate low self-esteem stemming from gendered discrimination she faced in her
environment.

It is a tale of a girl, a kid who yearned for love from the ones who mattered most her
parents but who faced nothing but ridicule. Always the butt of ridicule Meenakshi or
the one with beautiful, fish-shaped eyes finally became Surpanakha the woman ‘as
hard as nails.’ (Blogger 35)

Meenakshi is the youngest of the children born to Kaikesi, an asura, and Vishravas,
a rishi (yes a scandalous intercommunity marriage). She was also the only girl born
after 3 sons- Ravan, Kumbha and Vibhishan. One would expect the youngest girl to
be petted and pampered, but unfortunately that was not Meenakshi’s life. (Blogger 17)

59
Ray Chaudhury

The childhood incidents of Meenakshi were beautifully narrated, especially the one in
which she attacks Ravan with her nails because he killed her pet. (Blogger 14)

It Is Not All Black Or White. It Is Mostly Gray. The reimagination of Surpanakha’s

life allowed for character development typically subverted by the folkloric bi-polar
gender identity depictions (Austin 2014). How the young Meenakshi earned the name
of Surpanakha gave the female villain agency and a venue for self-determination. As
she tried to save her pet by fighting with her bigger and stronger brother, effective
use of her sharp, long nails earned her the name of Surpanakha. The retelling with
detailed incidents in Surpanakha’s life allows a multi-dimensional portrayal of the
progression of the female self (Haase 2000).

….as the story progressed I found myself going through a myriad of emotions directed
at, and sometimes with, Surapanakha. The story makes you reflect at what is right and
what is not, and whether what you’ve believed them to be so far is the truth. (Blogger
3)

I felt various emotions for Surpanakha. It’s not whether her actions justified the blood-
shed and loss but what forced her to take such drastic steps. In retrospect, she suf-
fered a lot. Right from being neglected by her parents and brothers in her childhood
to always competing for her parents love. Constantly trying to prove her worth but
failing each time. People who were close to her left her. Her father left her after Ravan
captured Lanka. Her grandmother whom she had immense respect for was killed. She
lost her husband. Her son was killed. Her face was maimed by Lakshman. Suparnakha
lived a life of pain and loss. (Blogger 12)

These character development narratives over the course of the novel allowed for a
deeper reflection into how Surpanakha attempted to challenge the traditional power
dynamics within patriarchy. Due to her lack of power she resorts to manipulations,
as the sex-gendered system did not allow her to succeed and resulted in persistent
failures. Associating Surpanakha’s tactics as trickery resonates in fairytale literature
where villainesses, like witches, justify such acts as necessary to overcome the oppres-
sive systems within which they live (Mills 2018). As androcentric views of utilizing
extreme measures to get one’s way is denounced by society, readers are left to wonder
what is right and what is wrong if the system is designed to oppress women (Schim-
melpfennig 2013).

Be it Helen of Troy or Draupadi, women were indirectly the reason behind great wars.
In Ramayana, it was Surpanakha who triggered the war by manipulating events and
provoking Ravana to kidnap Sita.…. In the first few pages the reader will feel sym-
pathy for the poor Meenakshi. In the later pages, as Meenakshi’s happy family gets
devastated, she takes no time to show her grey, vamp shades. (Blogger 9)

60
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

All throughout the book, you will alternate between feeling bad for Meenakshi on one
hand and on the other hand feeling disgusted with her choices. (Blogger 2)

Kavita Kané’s books usually have lead female protagonists who haven’t been given
much voice in the telling of the epics. This is a first though, where the lead is an an-
tagonist. Surpanakha as we know her has no redeeming qualities, by the end there is
no good in her. (Blogger 27)

Violence Continues To Be Internalized. Gender role expectations are utilized as a

comic mechanism with the warning of violence if the women propositions to a man.
These misogynistic interpretations of Surpanakha’s mutilation are commonplace in
social media discourse. Memetic imagery in media and contemporary UGC often con-
textualize Surpanakha’s violent mutilations from a macabre male gaze (Arakal 2021).
This theme reinforces the internalized gender norms where UGC comments refer
to the incident as a recount of the traditional narrative. The bloggers, the majority
women, appear to seek the reclamation of Surpanakha’s agency but are ambivalent
in engaging with the physical violence, perhaps in deference to prevalent norms of
hegemonic masculinity. Agarwal (1995) notes that perhaps it is because of conserva-
tive patriarchal structures that protect women who belong and violate those that do
not, thus legitimizing the latter. As folkloric traditions often espouse glorification of
gendered violence against non-conforming women as a form of patriarchal honor, one
can only speculate if the disfigurement of Surpanakha is accepted by modern readers
as a symbolic act.

I knew of her as Ravan’s ugly sister who was attracted to and tried to entice Laxman
and had her nose and ears cut off as a punishment and to teach her a lesson. (Blogger
3)

How much do we really know about Surpanakha apart from the fact that she was
Ravana’s sister? We do know that she had her nose cut off by the hands of Laksham
but that is pretty much it. She has always been portrayed as an evil character who
was the reason behind the war between Ram and Ravana. (Blogger 25)

Despite the ingrained internalization of violence against women, there are some read-
er comments likely arising from lived or observed experiences which demonstrate the
need for further retelling of these significant events in the story of Surpanakha.

Lanka’s Princess may be a mythological retelling of events. However in today’s day

and age, when women are still subjected to various forms of discrimination. (Blogger
7)

Surpanakha’s role is often glossed over to one episode where she suffers a nose cut
when she makes her advances to Ram and Lakshman in the forest and rushes back to
goad Ravan into taking her revenge. (Blogger 29)

61
Ray Chaudhury

Every woman (and I mean ‘every’ not ‘almost every’) I have met in my life experi-
ences some form of abuse, just that the abuser adorns a different role in each case;
husband or parent or sibling or colleague or friend and so on. (Blogger 36)

Appreciation of Reimagined Narrative. As Surpanakha gains agency and ques-

tions gendered norms in the patriarchal system she was born into, UGC comments ap-
preciated the re-visioning of her place in the story. Where earlier she was a convenient
prop, the catalyst that ignited the war between good and evil, Lanka’s Princess allowed
for a space where she is able reclaim her voice and agency. It is her point of view envi-
sioned in feminist retelling (Palmer 2016). The familiar tropes of gender socialization
where female characters are pitted against each other is utilized (Zipes 1994). Here
Surpanakha is reviled by her mother who favors sons over daughters. However, in
the absence of the male gaze with no gendered admonition in the context, one is able
to view through the female lens and sympathize with her perspective.

Surpankha or Meenakshi reminded you of someone who is beyond reason and needed
a moment of catharsis to even consider a different viewpoint. It reminds you of a lot of
the younger generation today who think the world is out to get them and fail to even
consider or notice that the people who care are only looking out for them. (Blogger 8)

Kavita Kane bravely picked up the most difficult character to narrate the events of Ra-
mayana. Story of Surpanakha was shrouded in mystery throughout the epic. Author
did a beautiful job of connecting all dots and filling the gaps with her vivid imagina-
tion. One unique element of the novel is the depiction of all shades of feminism, joy
and warmth of jovial girl, agony and pain of hurt woman. This novel is a blend of all
recognizable-unrecognizable human emotions. (Blogger 13)

Having grown up despising Surpanakha to an extent due to her antics this story was a
refreshing read in terms of the descriptions. The layers of her character brought out so
beautifully by the author make her more relatable now than she ever was. It is like try-
ing to see her a new light altogether and in a way try to understand why she behaved
the way she behaved.(Blogger 33)

Conclusion
This study answers the call to decolonize and expand the purview of fairytale and
folklore literature (Haase 2010) by introducing a famous villainess from the Indian
subcontinent’s vast trove of traditional literature. India is a Hindu majority country,
hence folkloric traditions are intrinsically intertwined with mythological tales that are
part of societal tenets. Such folkloric traditions have been crafted both in oral and
written versions by men from ancient times to present day renditions in contempo-
rary formats such as books, performance arts, television and films. In this predomi-
nantly patriarchal world view, female characters are marginalized with little agency
of their own. They are depicted as either the idealized yet subservient heroines or the
loathed and indomitable villainesses. The latter in particular are held up as examples

62
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

of everything that a woman should not be. The villainess’s violent destruction is often
the highlight where good wins over evil at the climax of the story. Such established
fairytale and folkloric narratives are cultural sources from which millions of women
develop their self-concepts, what they can and cannot accomplish, what type of be-
havior is rewarded and censored, indeed the type of rewards and censors as well
(Haase 2000; Lieberman 1972; Zipes 1994). Even in modern media such as comic books
and videogames, Sita is the epitome of the ideal Indian woman deserving of a happy
ending and Surpanakha is the extreme “other” who meets a violent end (McLain 2001;
Austin 2014).
In the 21st century, some women writers are venturing into this male dominated
genre to re-write the scarcely developed female characters. This form of intervention
is posited as a form of ‘refleshing’ of these characters by defamiliarizing the masses
from the previous version with a new characterization. The notion of ‘re-vision’ is
established in post culturist thought of feminist writers and refers to their decision of
how to rewrite the original by retaining certain original elements while challenging
others (Parsons 2004). This goal is achieved with fictive versions that lend agency to
the voices of female and gender queer storytellers (Evans 2011; Fisher and Silber 2000;
Palmer 2016). Although fairly recent in India, such feminist rewritings of established
mythical and folkloric narratives have been previously published in the West (Carter
1979; Joosen 2004; Le Guin 2008). To re-imagine narratives of these highly revered
folklores, particularly in the patriarchal society of India, is a sensitive undertaking.
Surpanakha, in particular, continues to be referenced in public discourse to persecute
women who deviate from the heteronormative patriarchal gender norms through cen-
turies of the established traditional narrative.
However, modern Indians are also contesting such societal manifestations by
reading emergent retellings such as that of Kavita Kane’s Lanka’s Princess. Moreover,
they are generating UGC as a form of engaging in participatory culture to share their
thoughts and perceptions of such retellings in online public spaces. The findings of
this study demonstrate that modern Indians’ evolving perceptions of the negative ste-
reotypical female archetypes welcomes the negotiation of patriarchal ideologies in
these reimagined narratives. Subverting black and white characterization of the fe-
male villain to where a spectrum of gray is acceptable is cause for celebration.

ORCID
Sarita Ray Chaudhury https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5388-8360

Works Cited
Agarwal, Puroshottam. 1995. “Surat, Savarkar and Draupadi: Legitimising Rape as a
Political Weapon.” In Women and the Hindu Right: A Collection of Essays, edited
by Tanika Sarkar, and Urvashi Butalia, 29–57. New Delhi: Kali for Women.

63
Ray Chaudhury

Alcantud-Díaz, Maria. 2012. “The Sisters Did Her Every Imaginable Injury: Power and
Violence in Cinderella.” International Journal of English Studies 12, no. 2: 59–71.
Arakal, R.Alex. 2021. “‘Abused, Threatened Since Zomato Row, Haven’t Left City
To Evade Probe’: Hitesha Chandranee.” The Indian Express, March 18, 2021.
https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/bangalore/abused-threatened-since-
zomato-row-hitesha-chandranee-7234706/
Asha, M. and R. Nandini. 2019. “Retrieval of Female Subjectivity in Indian English
Writing: Kavita Kane’s Feministic Concern.” Infokara Research 8, no. 11: 2390–
93.
Austin, Sara. 2014. “Sita, Surpanakha And Kaikeyi As Political Bodies: Representa-
tions Of Female Sexuality In Idealised Culture.” Journal of Graphic Novels and
Comics 5, no. 2:125–36.
Balasubramamiam, Niroshan. 2009. “User-Generated Content. Business Aspects of
the Internet of Things.” In Seminar of Advanced Topics, edited by Florian Micha-
helles, 28–33. Zurich: ETH Zurich.
Bhatia, Sahiba. 2018. “Narendra Modi Puts Down Renuka Chowdhury: What Is It
About Women Laughing That Makes Men Angry?” First Post, February 9,
2018. https://www.firstpost.com/india/narendra-modi-puts-down-renuka-
chowdhury-in-parliament-what-is-it-about-women-laughing-that-makes-
men-angry-4343737.html
Binoj, Saraswathi. 2019. “Kavita Kane’s Lanka’s Princess: A Revisioning of the Rama-
yana,
Breaking the Binary of the Concepts of Asura and Sura.” International Journal of English
Language, Literature in Humanities 7, no. 7: 485–513.
Booth, Gregory. 1995. “Traditional Content and Narrative Structure in the Hindi Com-
mercial Cinema.” Asian Folklore Studies 54, no. 2: 169–90.
Brockington, John. L. and Brockington, Mary, ed. 2016. The Other Ramayana Women:
Regional Rejection and Response. UK: Routledge.
Carter, Angela. Ed. 1979. The Bloody Chamber. New York: Harper and Row.
Chen, Gina. M and Huang, Elyse. 2020. “Women’s Blogs.” In The International Encyclo-
pedia of Gender, Media, and Communication edited by Karen Ross, Ingrid Bach-
mann, Valentina Cardo, Sujata Moorti and Cosimo Scarcelli. Online Edition.
Crew, Hilary. 2002. “Spinning New Tales From Traditional Texts: Donna Jo Napoli
And The Rewriting Of Fairy Tale.” Children’s Literature in Education 77–95.
Cusack, Carole. 2012. “The Gods on Television: Ramanand Sagar’s Ramayan, Politics
and Popular Piety in Late Twentieth-Century India.” In Handbook of Hyper-real
Religions, edited by Adam Possamai, 279–97. Leiden: Brill.
Da Silva, Sara Graca and Tehrani, Jamshid. J. 2016. “Comparative Phylogenetic Analy-
ses Uncover the Ancient Roots of Indo-European Folktales.” R. Soc. Open. Sci.
3:150645.
De, Anindita. 2020. “Surpanakha’s Mutilation or That of Womanhood? An Inquiry
into Two Feminist Retellings.” Journal of the Department of English 12, no. 1: 1-9.
De Clercq, Eva. 2016. “Surpanakha in the Jain Ramayanas.” In The Other Ramayana
Women: Regional Rejection and Response, edited by John L. Brockington, and

64
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

Mary Brockington. UK: Routledge. Online Edition.

Dev Sen, Nabaneeta. 1998. “When Women Retell the Ramayan.” Manushi 108:18–27.
Dirghangi, Aditi and Mohanty, Seemita. 2019. “De-mythifying the Ramayana: A Study
of the ‘Devoiced’ Surpanakha.” Proceeding of the 6th International Conference on
Arts and Humanities 6: 8–15. https://doi.org/10.17501/23572744.2019.6102
Erndl, Kathleen. 1991. “The Mutilation of Surpanakha.” In Many Ramayanas: The Di-
versity of a Narrative Tradition in South Asia, edited by Paula Richman. Berkeley:
University of California Press. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft3j49n8h7/
Evans, Laura. 2011. “Little Red Riding Hood Bites Back: A Feminist Reinterpretation.”
Visual Arts Research 37, no. 2:128–32.
Fisher, Jerilyn and Silber, Ellen. 2000. “Good and Bad Beyond Belief: Teaching Gender
Lessons through Fairy Tales and Feminist Theory.” Women’s Studies Quarterly
28, no. 3/4:121–36.
Goldman, Robert. 2004. “Resisting Rama: Dharmic Debates on Gender and Hierarchy
and the Work of the Valmiki Ramayana.” In The Ramayana Revisited, edited by
Mandakranta Bose. NY: Oxford University Press.
Greenhill, Pauline and Rudy, Jill. T. 2014. Channeling Wonder: Fairy Tales on Television.
Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Haase, Donald. 2000. “Feminist Fairy-Tale Scholarship: A Critical Survey and Bibliog-
raphy.” Marvels and Tales 14, no. 1: 15–63.
Haase, Donald, ed. 2004. Fairy Tales and Feminism: New Approaches. Detroit, MI: Wayne
State University Press.
Haase, Donald. 2010. “Decolonizing Fairy-Tale Studies.” Marvels and Tales 24, no. 1:
17–38.
Hasan, Seemin. 2009. “A Comparative Study of Folk Tales of UP Tribes and European
Fairy Tales.” Indian Literature 53, no. 2 (250):202–8.
Jacobs, Joseph. Ed. 1892. Indian Fairy Tales. David Nutt: London UK. Online Edition.
Jenkins, Henry. 2006. Convergence Culture: Where Old And New Media Collide. Cam-
bridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jenkins, Henry, Ito, Mizuko and Boyd, Danah. 2016. Participatory Culture in a Networked
Era. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Joosen, Vanessa. 2004. “Feminist Criticism and the Fairy Tale.” New Review of Chil-
dren’s Literature and Librarianship 10, no. 1: 5-14.
Kane, Kavita. 2017. Lanka’s Princess. New Delhi, India: Rupa.
Kishler, Thomas. C. 1965. “The Ramayana.” Thought: Fordham University Quarterly 40,
no. 1: 59–72.
Kirtz, Liza. C., Trainer, Sarah, Beresford, Melissa, Wutich, Amber and Brewis, Alex-
andra. 2017. “Blogs as Elusive Ethnographic Texts: Methodological and Ethical
Challenges in Qualitative Online Research.” International Journal of Qualitative
Methods 16, no. 1:1–12.
Laverty, Susann. M. 2003. “Hermeneutic Phenomenology and Phenomenology: A
Comparison of Historical and Methodological Considerations.” International
Journal of Qualitative Methods 21–35.
Le Guin, Ursula. K. 2008. Lavinia. Orlando, USA: Harcourt.

65
Ray Chaudhury

Lieberman, Marcia. 1972. “Some Day My Prince Will Come: Female Acculturation
Through The Fairy Tale.” College English 34, no. 3: 383–95.
Luthra, Rashmi. 2014. “Clearing Sacred Ground: Women-Centered Interpretations of
the Indian Epics.” Feminist Formations 26, no. 2: 135–61. https://www.jstor.org/
stable/43860745
McLain, Karline. 2001. “Sita and Shrupanakha Symbols of the Nation in the Amar
Chitra Katha Comic Book Ramayana.” Manushi (122): 32–39.
Meenakshi and Kumar, Nagendra. 2021. “A Deviant or a Victim of Pervasive Stigma-
tization:
Wicked Women in Kavita Kané’s Lanka’s Princess.” Journal of International Women’s
Studies 22, no. 9: 285–97. https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol22/iss9/19
Mieder, Wolfgang. 2007. “Advertising.” In The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Folktales and
Fairytales: A-F, edited by Donald Haase. Santa Barbara: Greenwood. Online
edition.
Mills, Margaret. A. 2018. “Afghano-Persian Trickster Women: Definitions, Liminali-
ties, and Gender.” Marvels and Tales 32, no. 1: 33–58.
Nagpaul, Dipti. 2018. “Surpanakha Still Cackles.” Indian Express, March 25, 2018.
https://indianexpress.com/article/express-sunday-eye/surpanakha-renu-kha-
nolkar-mansi-singh-bhagyashree-mote-5109692/
Napoli, Donna J. 2000. Beast. New York: Atheneum Books for Young Readers.
―――. 1993. The Magic Circle. New York: Dutton Children’s Books.
Napoli, Donna J. and Tchen, Richard. 1999. Spinners. New York: Dutton Children’s
Books.
Odber De Baubeta, Patricia. 1997. “Fairy Tale Motifs in Advertising.” Estudos de Litera-
tura Oral 3:35–60.
Palmer, Helen. 2016. “Rewritings/Refoldings/Refleshings: Fictive Publics and the Ma-
terial Gesture of Defamiliarization.” Continuum 30, no. 5: 507–17.
Parsons, Linda. 2004. “Ella Evolving: Cinderella Stories and the Construction of Gen-
der-Appropriate Behavior.” Children’s Literature in Education 35: 135–54.
Pillai, Sohini. 2020. “From Villainess to Victim: Contemporary Representations of
Surpanakha.” In Oral–Written–Performed: The Rāmāyaṇa Narratives in Indian Lit-
erature and Arts, edited by Danuta Stasik. Heidelberg, Berlin: CrossAsia eB-
ooks.
Ragan, Kathleen. 2009. “What Happened To The Heroines In Folktales? An Analysis
By Gender of A Multicultural Sample Of Published Folktales Collected From
Storytellers.” Marvels and Tales 23, no. 2: 227–47.
Ramadurai, Charukesi. 2021. “Indian Epics Get a Feminist Makeover.” Nikkei Asia,
April 28, 2021. https://asia.nikkei.com/Life-Arts/Life/Indian-epics-get-a-femi-
nist-makeover.
Ramanujan, Attipate Krishnaswami. 2004. “Three Hundred Rāmāyaṇas: Five Exam-
ples and Three Thoughts on Translation.” In The Collected Essays of AK Ramanu-
jan, 131–60. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Rao, Velcheru Narayana. 1998. “A Ramayana of Their Own: Women’s Oral Tradition
in Telegu.” In Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of a Narrative Tradition in South

66
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

Asia, edited by Paula Richman. USA: UC California Press. Online edition.

Sattar, Arshia. 2017. “The New Gods of Fiction.” India Today, April 27, 2017. https://
www.indiatoday.in/magazine/books/story/20170417-mythological-literature-
amish-tripathi-devdutt-pattanaik-986145-2017-04-11.
Schimmelpfennig, Annette. 2013. “Chaos Reigns: Women as Witches in Contempo-
rary Film and the Fairy Tales of the Brothers Grimm.” Gender Forum 44: 1–13.
Srishti, Richa. 2021. “A Psychoanalytical Deconstruction of Surpanakha in Kavita
Kane’s Lanka’s Princess.” International Journal of Jungian Studies https://doi.
org/10.1163/19409060-bja10022
Strauss, Anselm and Corbin, Julia. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sugiyama, Michelle S. 2001. “Food, Foragers, and Folklore: The Role of Narrative in
Human Subsistence.” Evolution and Human Behavior 22: 221–40.
Watanabe, Kazuo. 1907. “The Oldest Record of the Ramayana in a Chinese Buddhist
Writing.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 99–103.
Williams, Christy. 2010. “Who’s Wicked Now? The Stepmother as Fairy-Tale Hero-
ine.” Marvels and Tales 24, no. 2: 255–71.
Zhang, Juwen. 2015. “Introduction: New Perspectives on the Studies of Asian Ameri-
can Folklores.” Journal of American Folklore 128, no. 510: 373–94.
Zipes, Jack. 1994. Fairy Tale as Myth / Myth as Fairy Tale. Lexington: Kentucky Univer-
sity Press.

67
Ray Chaudhury

Response
Thus, the text chosen for this study,
Sritama Maitra thus, is particularly well-suited to cur-
Loyola Academy rent literary trends. It is, however, also
Hyderabad, India pertinent from the still prevailing social
perspective of women being compared
favourably or unfavourably to mytholog-
ical characters, particularly in India. The

A
sympathetic reconstruction of the char-
t a time when the rereading and acter of Surpanakha in the novel, Lanka’s
rewriting of canonical texts is Princess, assumes an ironic significance
done with much fervour, per- in how women in real life are shamed by
haps with respect to mythological texts being compared to Surpanakha, as seen
in particular, and which has expect- in the Indian parliament as cited by the
edly caught the attention of scholars the author in the section of the article entitled
world over, a subversive, feminist read- ‘Surpanakha’s Relevance in Contem-
ing of the Indian epic poem Ramayana’s porary India’. Significantly, the remark
arguably minor character, Surpanakha, alluded to in this section made by the
is timely as well as relevant. There have Prime Minister in the Indian Parliament
been several creative attempts in recent seems to be based on an understanding
times when Indian mythological charac- of Surpanakha’s laughter as depicted in
ters, particularly female characters who a famous television adaptation of the Ra-
did not have a major voice in their origi- mayana, called “Ramayan” (Sagar 1987)
nal narrative spaces, have been revisited which is often considered a faithful ad-
by creative writers. Kavita Kane herself, aptation of the epic and rules public per-
the author whose novel Lanka’s Princess ception as wholly representative of the
(2017) has been selected for this article by epic for many years. A reference made
Ray Chaudhury, has attempted similar to the allegedly monstrous laughter of
reinterpretations in other novels of hers, Surpanakha as depicted in the television
such as Karna’s Wife: The Outcast’s Queen series in order to mock the laughter of a
(Kavita Kané 2013), Sita’s Sister (Kavita female Member of the Parliament may
Kané 2014), and Menaka’s Choice (Kavita be seen as an act resulting from a refusal
Kané 2016). Her works may be seen in to indulge in critical thinking, since an
the larger context of this literary trend of adaptation can never really stand in for
reinterpreting female characters of popu- the text it represents. An adaptation is
lar Indian mythological narratives. Some the adapter’s take on a particular text,
other such famous endeavours, especially and therefore a completely new text in
by female writers, include The Palace of Il- its own right. A completely faithful rep-
lusions (Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni 2009), resentation of the source text is impos-
Yajnaseni (Pratibhā Rāẏa 1995), Sita’s Ra- sible to achieve in any adaptation. An
mayana (Samhita Arni, Moyna Chitrakar, adaptation can also take creative liberties
and Vālmīki 2018), Liberation of Sita (Vol- in approaching a text, in accordance with
ga C Vijayasree T Vijay Kumar 2018), and the adaptor’s vision and agenda. Never-
Until the Lions: Echoes from the Mahabharata theless, the incident referred to bespeaks
(Karthika Nair 2019), among others. how popular culture sways public per-

68
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

ception in terms of their interpretation sions of The Ramayana and so many ver-
of ancient epics. People who may not sions in other media such as television,
have read any of the existing versions of films, radio shows and graphic novels,
the epic Ramayana (and there are several one must ask here which of these ver-
hundred versions that exist, as famously sions’ Surpanakha’s supposedly raucous
seen in the now controversial essay of Ra- laughter was alluded to in the comment
manujan called “Three hundred Rama- made in the Parliament. Just as there
yanas: Five examples and three thoughts are different Ramayanas, there are sev-
on translation” (Ramanujan 1991), and eral different Surpanakhas too, and the
several other works on the topic that ones created from the point of view of
came later) or people who may only be creative works like Lanka’s Princess offer
familiar with certain aspects of the epic a human understanding of a largely vil-
transmitted to them through the oral cul- lainised character. If one had to imagine
ture of storytelling, which often involves Surpanakha’s laughter in terms of her
a selective narration of certain parts of portrayal by Kane, it would perhaps first
famous epics, might strongly associate be a rather beautiful laughter. In fact,
certain traits with Surpanakha based en- most of the epic versions of The Rama-
tirely on her portrayal in the television yana describe Surpanakha as a beautiful
series. The comment in question appears woman with a beautiful smile. Second,
to have been made in a similar situation. it must be a melancholy laughter tinged
The several epic versions of The Ramayana with sad irony because Surpanakha has
(such as Valmiki’s Ramayana (Vālmīki been imagined as a wronged and dis-
et al. 2021), Tulsidas’s Ramcharitmanas criminated child who grew up to become
(Ojha 2003), and the Kamban Ramayana a bitter adult in this particular represen-
(Kampan 2008)) do not make any men- tation. Seen in this light, the meaning of
tion of Surpanakha’s demonic laughter the female Member of the Parliament’s
that Ramanand Sagar’s televised version laughter’s meaning would change entire-
does, in addition to several animated ver- ly and one would then perhaps see her as
sions of the epic made specifically for emitting a sad laughter as an ironical re-
children’s consumption. The reference sponse to a policy she sees as problematic
to Surpanakha’s laughter, therefore, is in the Parliament. So, if one is referring to
in itself a questionable mythical element Surpanakha as a devilish woman and her
since the various versions of the epic do laughter as equally diabolical (in order to
not mention it but television series often establish a real, living woman as equally
depict it to emphasise the demonic nature disgraceful), one perhaps needs to ask:
of Surpanakha as well as to paint her as Which Ramayana? Which Surpanakha?
a villainess. One would expect that when Which description of Surpanakha’s
epics that are considered to be holy texts laughter? The answers would be so baf-
in a country and are cited in parliamen- fling that the logic behind the compari-
tary proceedings, one would refer to the son would topple entirely. The reference
epical narratives themselves rather than to this incident in the article, therefore,
the televised artistic recreations of them, problematizes not only the general refus-
but that is not quite the case in daily par- al to see the interpretations of mythologi-
lance. If there are so many written ver- cal characters as non-absolute but also the

69
Ray Chaudhury

problematic vilification of real-life wom- As Ray Chaudhury points out, the re-
en through their comparison with these telling of a canonical text which strongly
mythical figures. shapes public perception of good and
On the other hand, the various kinds evil in Indian society is indeed a difficult
of online reviews to Lanka’s Princess that and sensitive endeavour on part of an au-
constitute the analytical matter of this thor like Kane. More so because India is
article tellingly make references to alter- a predominantly religious country where
native understandings of Surpanakha’s even mythological tales written in epical
character. Many of these reader respons- forms such as the Ramayana and the Ma-
es rightly perceive the childhood discrim- habharata are believed to depict historical
ination faced by the character which can- reality rather than fictional. The portrayal
cels out the uncritical acceptance of her of characters as good or evil in such re-
as an out-and-out monster. The percep- ligious mythological texts is considered
tion of the importance of Surpanakha’s sacrosanct (even if, ironically, the under-
backstory as expressed by the readers is standing of these characters is often based
encouraging in the critical thinking these on the simplistic televised representa-
reviews reveals. In fact, the last reader tions of these epics which are naively
comment cited in the article (Blogger 33) regarded as faithful representations and
shows that some readers are willing to wholesome substitutes of the texts them-
reevaluate their own conventional stance selves). Any alternative narrative is there-
of understanding the character as typi- fore likely to be seen as a threat to the be-
cally villainous, a stance they presumably liefs of the people, possibly even as a sin-
held strongly for several years. The obvi- ful understanding of the canonical texts.
ous limitation of such a survey, however, It is then indeed a risky as well as brave
is that the general public’s perception of venture to undertake a sympathetic, es-
the characters from mythological stories pecially feminist, rewriting of a character
is not shaped or reshaped by the read- like Surpanakha who is almost unques-
ing of such alternative narratives. In fact, tionably seen as a villainess in popular
the desire to read an alternative narrative Indian understanding. What is definitely
such as Lanka’s Princess will stem likely encouraging are the online responses of
from an earlier reading of at least one or readers to this novel which have been
two versions of the several available of analysed in this study, most of whom
the epic, Ramayana. But a major part of have opened up to the possibility of re-
the general populace would not read the evaluating the character of Surpanakha.
epic followed by a reading of its subver- However, in this context, another obvi-
sive rewritings, and would rather allow ous limitation of this study is that it only
their perception of these epical characters takes into consideration the responses of
to be shaped solely by their uncritical re- presumably well-educated, perhaps also
liance on depictions of such characters in urbane, readers. These readers would,
film and television media, most of which first, have the interest to read a subver-
often lead to very simplistic interpreta- sive novel like this and second, have the
tions of rather complex characters, quick- openness of mind to accept not only the
ly heroizing or villainising them to allow depiction of an otherwise marginalised
people to take sides conveniently. character brought into the centre of the

70
 “Laugh Like Surpanakha“

narrative as the protagonist of the novel, Indians. One can view the comments sec-
but also to see the flaws in the traditional tion of the video (“PM Modi’s Ramayana
black and white reading of her character Jibe in RS Has Renuka Chowdhury Seeing
and admit the possibilities of seeing her Red | the Quint” n.d.) where the Prime
character as grey, especially from the Minister had taken the liberty to ridicule
point of view of the childhood traumas his colleague by an explicit comparison
that she has survived. Ray Chaudhury’s with Surpanakha, and the way several
article brings into focus the importance people have expressed their enjoyment
of public perception of villainous char- and approval of the comment. Books like
acters depicted in religio-mythological Lanka’s Princess are unfortunately meant
texts by mentioning the Prime Minister’s for a niche readership in India, and
disparaging comments on a female Mem- therefore, the possibility of a progressive
ber of the Parliament by comparing her and empathetic relook at characters like
raucous laughter to that of Surpanakha’s. Surpanakha also remains limited to such
It needs to be considered that the part of an audience. The impact of a study such
the population (in no way a small minor- as Ray Chaudhury’s, therefore, remains
ity) that would enjoy, appreciate, and ap- equally limited at the social level, albeit
prove of an act of shaming as such would highly pertinent and deeply enriching in
also do so based on their perception of the scholarly and academic arenas in the
Supanakha’s character from televised ways in which it sheds light on perspec-
adaptations of the Ramayana, as seems to tives related to feminism and literary re-
have been the case with the Prime Min- writing.
ister who made the remark. It is unlikely
that they have read any of the existing
versions of the text where the description
or even mention of Surpanakha’s suppos- Works Cited
edly demonic laughter has, to the best Divakaruni, Chitra Banerjee. 2009. The
of my knowledge, not been made. This Palace of Illusions : A Novel. New
group of people are also unlikely to be in- York: Anchor Books.
terested in reading a subversive version Kampan. 2008. Kamba-Rāmāyaṇa.
of the character of Surpanakha, as dealt Kané, Kavita. 2013. Karna’s Wife : The Out-
with in the novel ‘Lanka’s Princess.’ It is cast’s Queen. New Delhi: Rupa
presumably some of India’s city-educat- Publications India.
ed people, endowed with critical think- ―――. 2014. Sita’s Sister. New Delhi:
ing skills and an interest in the rethink- Rupa Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
ing of mythology, who would ever pick ―――. 2016. Menaka’s Choice. New Delhi:
up such a novel like that and explore its Rupa Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
nuances. The popular public opinion of ―――. 2017. Lanka’s Princess. New Delhi:
Surpanakha, and by extension, its poten- Rupa Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
tial comparison with real women in order Mahadevan, Madhavi S. and Dhīraja
to vilify them, therefore is unlikely to be Kumāra. 2017. Kaunteya. Chennai:
changed by novels like Kane’s or the re- Westland Publications Ltd, In As-
ception of such novels by the presumably sociation With Yatra Books.
well-educated and progressive-minded

71
Ray Chaudhury

Nair, Karthika. 2019. Until the Lions :

Echoes from the Mahabharata. Steer-
forth Press.
Ojha, S P. 2003. Sri Ram Charit Manas. In-
dia: Diamond Pocket Books (P)
Ltd.
“PM Modi’s Ramayana Jibe in RS Has
Renuka Chowdhury Seeing Red |
the Quint.” n.d. Accessed Septem-
ber 2, 2023. https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=H-8L5MBlvXc.
Rāẏa, Pratibhā. 1995. Yajnaseni. India:
Rupa Publications India Pvt Lim-
ited.
Ramanujan, Attipate Krishnaswami. 1991.
“Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five
Examples and Three Thoughts on
Translation.” In Many Ramayanas:
The Diversity of a Narrative Tradi-
tion in South Asia, 22–49. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Sagar, Ramanand. 2001. Ramayan. Natraj
Studios, 2001.
Samhita, Arni, Moyna Chitrakar, and
Vālmīki. 2018. Sita’s Ramayana.
Toronto, Berkeley: Groundwood
Books.
Vālmīki, Robert P. Goldman, Sally J.
Sutherland, Rosalind Lefeber,
Sheldon I Pollock, and Van Noo-
ten. 2021. The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki
: The Complete Translation. Princ-
eton: Princeton University Press.
Volga, C. Vijayasree and T Vijay Ku-
mar. 2018. Liberation of Sita. India:
Harper Perennial.

72