Of security and marriage

        In one part of the play, Khirad questions the very institution of marriage (.... if we choose to read between the lines). She says, “Kya mein aap ki bhateeji ban ke iss ghar mein nahi reh sakti thi? Kya mujhe aapki bahu banna zaroori tha?”. While that may not have been her explicit intention, this viewer notes this as a commentary on Pakistani society and the meaning marriage holds in it. The rishta aunties, the class-biraderi dyamic, the chai-serving debacles – all serve one purpose: the guaranteeing of the well being of the woman in question.

       In this part of the world the notion of marriage and security go hand in hand. The collectivist nature of society ensures that the basic unit is that of the nuclear family, such that there is virtually no concept of a partnerless life. It is something that falls out of the norm, a degradation of the traditions of the nuclear family. The unmarried female particularly is considered a menace, mostly because she is likely to be a burden on her parents, or brothers (regardless of whether she is capable of fending for herself or not) because she has never officially become the responsibility of another individual. Furthermore if a woman remains unmarried for long it is often assumed to be because of some tragic flaw in her character. Thus mothers beckon their daughters to agree to rishtas because “unki ummar guzar rahi hai”, or because “shaadi tou aik na aik din kissi na kissi se karni hai”, or in this case because “Khirad ka iss sunya mein koi nahi hai”.

       Thus what it all boiled down to in Humsafar was the question of the Khirad’s security after her mother’s death. Why is it that a man is the only way Khirad can be secure in life? Given her tender age shouldn’t her mother have asked her brother to ensure that Khirad be allowed to continue her education if she was in fact so bright? is a man really the answer to all of life's problems? And if a woman does choose to remain single is there something wrong with her? Or is it the intolerant society she belongs to that treats her with pity and often with contempt?  In such a society the only way woman to exist is to marry and marry as well as she possibly can. There was no consideration of an alternative to marriage in this case, because as a daughter in law Khirad would no longer be an outsider in the collectivist nuclear family setting, nor a burden; rather, she would be a part of this very nuclear family, and would thus be acceptable in Pakistani society.

      This is particularly relevant in the case of Sara, where her mother is constantly beckoning her to get married, wishing to see her settled, while she is perfectly capable of financially securing her own future. The Islamic whole notion of “farz poora karna” comes in here as well, with marriage being an all encompassing end for women, indicating the self-actualization of the woman and validation in the eyes of the society. This points to the fact that regardless of how successful a woman is professionally; her existence is meaningless if she does not have a nuclear family setting to come home to. Sara’s end is therefore particularly tragic, where the partnerless female, rids her parent of the burden of her unmarried existence.