Khirad and Sara: Deriving Personalities and Fates from the Public and Private Domains

From the list of issues I have with the plot of Humsafar, the most excruciating one is the depiction of women and their ‘appropriate’ domains. The drama opens with the stark contrast of Khirad hanging laundry on the line and telling her mother that she has performed all the household chores, against Sara, who has no such responsibilities and is spending time with Ashar in a coffee shop. The characteristics of both women are immediately drawn up according to the functions they perform within their private and public spaces. Sara has a job and the independence to go out with Ashar for coffee and is instantly labeled as the spoilt one, whereas Khirad looks after the house, takes great care of her mother, and gives private tuition within the confines of her home and is therefore labeled as the ‘ghareeloo one’.

Throughout the drama, the characteristics of both girls are reinforced by the concept of their public and private spaces. Khirad leaves her home only when her mother falls ill and wants to go to her brother’s house in Karachi. After her marriage to Ashar she leaves the home only when she is with him, and when she gets invited to her friend’s engagement she asks for his ‘permission’. Continuing with this idea of Khirad’s ‘izzat’ stemming from her life confined to the private space, it is interesting to see how she covers her head with a dupatta but takes it off when she marries Ashar and when she goes out with him to social events. However, when she goes to university (without Ashar) the dupatta is back on her head. I can’t help but wonder how the private space can determine a girl’s ‘izzat’ and to such an extent.

On the contrary, Sara is shown mostly in the public space, she often goes out for coffee and dinner and does not have to answer to anyone in her house. I can’t help but wonder if her situation would be even slightly different had her father been around, because as we saw in Khirad’s case the man ‘in charge’ plays an important role in how strongly the private space influences a girl’s character and reputation. Moreover, Sara is the one who often calls Ashar and asks him to go out for dinner even after he is married. It is interesting to see how Sara’s public space easily interferes and threatens Khirad’s private space. Another instance of this interference is when Sara visits Khirad to degrade her and remind her of her lowly position in front of Ashar. Again, Sara is the one who is shown in her public domain and she threatens Khirad’s private domain.

This concept of the public and private domains of both the girls runs throughout the entire drama, and if the theme is looked at in its entirety, I can’t help but wonder if the drama is trying to say that Khirad was betrayed by Mrs. Baseerat only because she allowed herself to accept her public domain and to let both her spaces intervene.

HUMSAFAR: Exploring the idea of a "Ghar kee larkee"

Khirad: Ami  please, ab aap kitchen mein mat jayeey ga. Araam se beth kr chai peyain apnee. 

Apa : Aray beta bethay bethay thak gayee hoon. Mujhey koi kaam bhee krney day. Wasiey bhee saarey kaam tu ne khud sambhal rakhay hain.

Khirad: Saarey kam ho tau chukey hain amee. Salan bhee mein ne charaha diya hai, aur aata bhee mein goondh chukee hoon. Maghrib kee namaaz k baad mein rotian paka loon gee

It is very often (and I say this without exaggerating) that we encounter phrases  that label girls as either, “ghar bananey waalee”, “ghar chalaaney waalee”, “ghar rakhney waalee” or simply “ghar kee larkee”. Interestingly, in  each of these cliché statements the word “house” remains the one constant, like a prefix, inseparable from the being of the women. It fosters an identity and becomes the lens through which one perceives women but also in the way that  women see themselves  as bearing  the responsibilities of the house and more so  “REMAINING” within the house.  In light of the above mentioned quote uttered by Khirad in Humsafar, I couldn’t help thinking how this idea of a “ghar kee larkee” and the role of the domestic space is relevant to Khirad’s character whose existence in the rural domestic setup  in Hyderabad is shaped by the numerous chores “saarey kaam” that she performs. Life out here is busy for women like Khirad as opposed to the city based housed of Mr. Baseerat. Here nothing to be done versus everything that needs to be done by Khirad.

The picturization of  Humsafar  makes the Hyderabad domestic sphere  Khirad’s ultimate priority; the drama opens with her hanging the washed clothes and turning down the narrow passage towards the kitchen. Thus, within the first few minutes the two most important areas of her domestic space; the kitchen and the washing line, are shown.  This is where she is expected to be found and nowhere else. Contrarily, Sarah is hardly picturized within the house except when she is angry or pulls up a childish stunt in her bedroom. She is not bound by the house and is mostly found in her office or at a coffee spot. Khirad on the contrary never leaves the house to meet Batool Khala and her mother engages in home tutoring of students. Here we come across another aspect of Khirad’s domestic life whereby the house is both a private and professional space. However, what I found most striking in the portrayal of her domestic sphere is that more than  a place of work or female confinement, it appears to engender the “right” kind of woman that a grand lifestyle of a city based house fails to do so.  Khirad’s  habit of never lying, being religiously oriented, well mannered, dutiful and caring are some of the good qualities that are amiss in Sarah’s domestic upbringing. One should only look at how her dupatta acts as a garb of integrity. At the same time it is upsetting why the writer seems to  attach the notion of the “right”  girl to the nature of her domestic setup. Why is the Khirad, the “ghar kee larkee” the  good girl in Humsafar? Why is Sarah, the working women shown in a negative light?  It could have been  possible to endow Sarah with some sweetness. After all, Ashar wouldn’t still have married her. In my opinion, the drama conforms to the male mindset, in portraying that a woman cannot and must never detach herself from her domestic sphere, as it is only within  it’s confines of her house that her character remains uncorrupted, intact, moralistic and  virtuous. This may be a pain for all working women who are not Sarah’s at all but it answers as to why Humsafar was popular among many housewives- simply because it exploits  the notion of a “ghar kee larkee” and her domestic life as an INEVITABE reality for all women. 

The collision of the private and the public.

Humsafar brings to light the social inequality in our Pakistani society in terms of Khirad’s life before and after marriage. When we first see Khirad, she is washing clothes in a mohalla in Hyderabad. This mohalla is a close knit community where we see females running the household with the home serving the dual purpose of a workplace. The private life of the inhabitants of this community is shown to be limited with Batool khala being the only frequent visitor.

However, the sphere of the private life also extends as the play progresses. Once Khirad’s mother is ill and her brother’s family enters the picture, the private sphere increases to include them too. Though, they are part of her family, they are a foreign influence in Khirad’s life who has never really known them and then finds herself married to Ashar.

Yet, even after marriage, Khirad’s entire existence is seen to be within the four walls of the house, she only ventures out with Ashar. Her only real public interaction with the world is seen in the garden, depicted as a place of reflection in the house, a private place, which is intruded upon by Sara’s appearances in the garden, first to chastise her then to initiate a friendship.  So, here is another instance of the public intruding in the private and since, Sara’s interference is viewed negatively, this seems to be suggesting an aversion to the intermingling of the private and public life.

In contrast to Khirad, Sara’s first appearance is at Café Ciao where she is spending time with her “bachpan ka dost”, Ashar. The lives of the two females who will vie for Ashar’s affections are extremely different. Sara lives the elitist lifestyle while, Khirad is the “ghareloo” girl who is considered backward because, of her lack of exposure to the world.  A lot of emphasis is placed on initially showing Khirad to be a quiet, timid girl who cannot speak for herself. She poses no strong opposition to her marriage with Ashar and her refusal to display her opinion on even the most trivial questions exasperates Ashar. In contrast, we see Sara taking the reins in their relationship, being extremely forward and ready to fight for what she wants. So, Sara’s independence and her exposure to the public sphere had made her more confident to deal with the events in her private life.

In a nutshell, the private sphere and public sphere do intersect but, the thing that remains to be considered is how welcome the intrusion of public life is on the private and what happens when they collide.

Syed Abbas Shah's Post: The Colony in Mansfield

A brightly colored object will cast a shadow that, upon being seen, will not enable one to discern the properties of its subject. Nebulous. Enigmatic almost. Similar to the handful of references to Antigua strategically knitted in the large web of power dynamics woven by Jane Austen. What one should bear in mind is that, notwithstanding the seemingly casual position of the colony in the novel, the Imperial Society cannot function without the colony and it would be unwise to look at the two as separate entities in any sense, just as one cannot negate the link between the shadow and the object.

The Colony in Mansfield Park serves the function of a bulwark to the structured, stratified and sophisticated society in which the Mansion is supported. Said societies seek solidification of their own standards and practices by devaluing and subsequently exploiting colonies, whom they consider to be merely convenient extensions of the Empire- akin to farmlands. The ethnocentric lens which is used to survey the indigenous denizens makes them be perceived as “Savages” or “Primitives” who can be effectively regulated by the helpful assumption of their rightful place in a morally consolidated hierarchy employed by their civilized Masters. And so Lord Bertram the Slave Owner goes to oversee the business in Antigua along with his son Tom whose profligate ways added to the financial burden faced by the family. Lord Bertram practiced and enforced himself and his morality with the same authoritarian austerity he maintains at home, while his son Tom was sent back after a short period of time. Everyone and everything in the Structure has a position and a set of roles that they need to follow; for the inhabitants of the Colony, it is an unenviable one of legitimizing and aiding the continued existence of a structure that is crushing their backs.

The troubles and traditions of existence in colonies is rather inadequately expressed by the few references to Antigua that we read of in the novel. Issues like slavery are met with silence when they are raised. In short, the all-consuming nothingness of the shadow successfully enshrouds the colony, obfuscating it from the eyes of all but the most astute of readers.

Pashmeena Problems

" Fanny, William must not forget my shawl, if he goes to the East Indies; and I shall give him a commission for any thing else that is worth having. I wish he may go to the East Indies, that I may have my shawl. I think I will have two shawls, Fanny."

While reading this line in Mansfield Park, I couldn't help but notice how unbelievably rude Lady Bertram was being. Not that I appreciated her existence in the first place, all she did was complain about her sick health and play with her Pug but here she was being just plain selfish. If somebody told me that they hoped my brother, who I had recently parted with, went halfway across the world just so they could get their shawls or something equally stupid, I would have been furious. Of course, Fanny was occupied with different thoughts at that time. I told myself that if she wasn't so stunned by Henry Crawford's proposal, she would have shown some displeasure at her aunt's suggestion.

After reading what Said had to comment on Mansfield Park did I realize the reasons for Fanny's 

lack of reaction. Fanny herself is a commodity. I wouldn't go as far to say just like the shawl Lady Bertram desires but not very different from it either. Said writes: "the facts of the empire are associated with sustained possession"

The Bertrams, and more specifically Sir Thomas Bertram, are characterized as the empire. Sir Thomas possesses Fanny and William just as he possesses his estate in Antigua and just as Lady Bertram wishes to posses one, no wait, two shawls from East Indies. The colonies exist at the disposal of the empire. Lady Bertram has every right to own as many shawls as she wishes and the colony of East Indies exists only to provide her with what she wants. Similarly, she has every right to wish an around the world journey for William to fetch her the said shawls. 

I don't want to come off as hating on Lady Bertram, in fact I believe we don't give the woman enough credit. She was able to woo Sir Thomas and from what I'm getting Sir Thomas isn't an easy fellow to woo. The Lady has clearly got some tricks up her sleeve.

Anyway, what I'm trying to say here is that the comparison that Maryam made in class and Said makes in his book(?) is apt. That is all.

Decolonizing the Colonized

It is evident from the novel that Fanny's indebtedness to her Uncle's family for housing and nurturing  her, albeit begrudgingly, has somehow put Fanny into a position of slavery. This gratitude, which is not just expected of her by the family that she is living with, but also emanates from her very self, in the way she prioritizes looking after Mrs Bertram over any other activity, is what has enslaved Fanny during her upbringing. It is interesting to note that while Fanny's increasing familiarity with the Bertram family should make her feel more at home with them, she is frequently put into her place by the likes of Mrs. Norris and Maria Bertram. With the entry of the Crawfords, whom the Bertram siblings are keen on impressing, it becomes a matter of utmost importance to push Fanny to the background so that by reiterating their superiority over Fanny, the Bertram sisters can reinstate their own importance. As tells this line from the novel “She was not often invited to join in the conversation of the others, nor did she desire it. Her own thoughts and reflections were habitually her best companions.” 

I want to focus on Fanny's ascent from the slave who is unable to rise beyond her apparent lack of skills and worldly knowledge, to the woman who is able to exercise agency not only in the choices she makes but also in the opinions she is able to express to those around her. 

“I can never be important to any one.'

'What is to prevent you?'
'Every thing — my situation — my foolishness and awkwardness.” 

While the above conversation with Edmund sheds light on how Fanny viewed herself initially, we see later than Fanny is able to command respect and position for herself through many ways. For starters, Fanny becomes an object of admiration for Henry Crawford, which lends more significance to her role as a young, pretty, desirable woman. Moreover, Fanny starts making choices which the reader might not have predicted earlier-her rejection of Henry's proposal, her dismissal of the lifestyle that her family is living in, her righteousness laying foundation for a certain desirability during moments of chaos and dysfunction of morality- all of that helps the individual surface. And with this ascent, we see the subject of colonization discard the strings that tied her to slavery or to any form of indebtedness to the Bertrams. Moreover, with the impending nuptials with Edmund Bertram, who is the most respectable and sensible of the siblings, Fanny is established as someone of importance. Together with the help of her own character and that of Edmund, Fanny is decolonized. Her Uncle sees her for the virtue she represents and realizes that he has wronged her in the past- this alone is very significant in removing her role as a slave because it her uncle who was her benefactor. 

The heathen Folly of the Bertrams

         In Joseph Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness” the protagonist Mr. Kurtz screams of the horror that he had been plagued with during his travels in Africa, just before he succumbs to his last horror, that of death.  His companion, Marlow, who had been sent in search of him exclaims “But his soul was mad. Being alone in the wilderness, it had looked within itself and, by heavens I tell you, it had gone mad”. The white man had been rendered uncivilized by that which he was sent to civilize in the first place.

      Throughout Austen’s work Mansfield Park, there is consistent acknowledgement of this very civilizing mission. The very condescending nature of Fanny price’s removal from her home and all that had been hers, on the whims of her uncles and aunts is in itself indicative of this fact. They felt it incumbent upon them to “send for the child” feeling that “they [could not] do better”, relieving themselves of the burden of their degenerate poor relatives, by taking in their eldest daughter and “introduce her properly into the world”. This condescending attitude reminds us of Kipling’s famous poem the White Man’s burden where he exclaims:  

“Take up the White Man's burden, The savage wars of peace--

Fill full the mouth of Famine And bid the sickness cease;

And when your goal is nearest The end for others sought,

Watch sloth and heathen Folly Bring all your hopes to nought.”

          Mrs. Norris’s references to “breeding” Fanny up with the Bertram children, falls little short of this colonial narrative. She says that they must prepare themselves for her “gross ignorance, some meanness of opinions and a very distressing vulgarity of manner”, which can be compared to Kipling’s version of the “sickness” that must be ceased. She encourages a “smallest degree of arrogance” in the Bertram children in their conduct towards their less-fortunate cousin, as fundamental to civilizing her and showing her her real place in the family.

             However with the end of the novel we see the ascent of Fanny to the very position Mrs. Norris held in the household, due to her marriage to Edmund. The burden of the White man had been fulfilled and Fanny had been civilized. But the other Bertram children, who had been given all the world had to offer, had been uncivilized by these very worldly exploits. The fate of Maria and Tom Bertram is particularly reminiscent of Kurtz’s degeneration in the Heart of Darkness. On the other hand, unlike Kurtz’s who had been overpowered by the horror of the colony, Maria had been shunned to the country with Mrs. Norris and Tom was left to assume his secondary position in the household, due to the “heathen Folly” that was their own creation, as opposed to a colonial import. The domesticated and civilized Fanny, in my opinion serves as a critique of the White Man’s burden, as at the end she is the very voice of propriety that was so missing in her civilizers in Mansfield Park.