The protagonist of Sita Haran
Meraj Rana
No one can disagree with E.M.Forster’s (1869-1970) assertion that an ordinary person in an ordinary position cannot become a character of fiction because he is not in a position to manifest his iniquity as a character in fiction.
In line with this argument a question arises why does an ordinary person in an ordinary position find himself unable to expose his/her mischief? Does expressive daringness exist in them? Or are they unaware of their wickedness?
If it is accepted, then the problem becomes more complex. For the time being, let’s suppose lack of expressive boldness prevents a person from displaying his/her depravity. If this is true then why this principle does not apply in other way by which he/she expresses his/her rectitude.
A man who proudly manifests his every act of nobility, strives to conceal his illegitimate relationship with a woman. It is unnatural, that a person, who is well aware of his /her good qualities, seems quite unaware of his/her wickedness.
There can be certain reasons behind this untold human inanity but man always swears by moral standard. Human morals are determined by social standard. It means that every society has its own principles and norms, followed by its people very strictly.
Deviation from social norms is the break from human morals. Generally this does not go well with the human society. Hence the real human society cannot be exact what has been depicted in the fiction.
It is not to suggest that the society of fiction is completely imaginary as imagination plays a vital role in creation of fictional society. This kind of imaginary society indicates a marked deviation. A character on imaginary level can only become a character of fiction if his/her actions betray digression.
Every memorable character of Urdu and European fiction denotes such freakishness frequently. The protagonist of ‘The Outsider’ (1943) ‘Meursault’ is a testament of the fact. He smokes cigarette at his mother’s dead body and continues it till he gets capital punishment. This aside, his each act exhibits a departure from the prevailing value system of society. A character invested with tremendous powers of deviation, becomes a powerful character of fiction.
Obviously some may disagree and they may rope in E.M.Forster by referring to like ‘Round’ and ‘Flat’ character, which ostensibly particularizes small and big character. Forster did not claim that only a round character can be a great character.
There are some characters in the history of world fiction which are flat but they are held in high esteem. Famous character of Urdu fiction Khuji who does not seem to be a round character in any respect. Being influenced by the ephemeral vicissitudes of life is not a prerequisite for a round character.
Aberration makes the character unforgettable and consequential. Khuji’s fascination for abnormal activities such as using opium and florid language does not show his flatness, but it displays his deliberate deviation from set rules of the society.
It makes it clear that no character is small or big on the basis of roundness and flatness of its personality; it depends on their power of drifting and rambling.
Sita Mirchandani a great character of Qurratul Ain Hyder (1928-2007) bears an eloquent testimony to her wandering conquest; she violates the norms and traditions of society, which are considered to be the symbols of a cultured society. Here some people can object to the used adjective, great.
Here it means a character on the basis of its violation of the set rules of the society, does not become a great character. A character becomes a failure in achieving its target for which it violates the social norms.
Notwithstanding its ‘failure’, it will be a great character. This sort of question arises in those minds who see the characters separately from the story and story separately from the characters. Success or failure of a character in achieving its goal can be determined only when its acts are seen in the context of the story.
Introductory parts of Abdullah Hussain’s novel ‘Udaas Naslain’(1963) can be referred to as an instance, where ‘Naim’ is fighting against German army in Belgium. One morning in the battlefield Hawaldar Thakur Das prohibits Naim from making tea by burning pieces of wet wood. Naim obeys his order for military discipline, but simmers with anger.
This sense of anger is not a deviational. It occurs again when German forces launch ferocious attack, then Naim and Thakur Das both feel dejected as they have little numbers of bombs. When, Naim gets more bombs from the military camp, the feeling of revenge crops up in his mind. He stands silently at some distance from the ditch of Thakur Das.
Thakur Das thinks that Naim has got injured and he comes out of his trench and becomes the target of German army. Further Naim is pitted against German army in East Africa where he lost his one arm. Loss of arm apparently shows Naim’s failure, which in fact is his success. His craving for “revenge after revenge” gets satisfied here.
The death of Thakur Das was a result of a sharp judgement but the loss of Naim’s arm was an unexpected tragedy. If we look at Naim’s act beyond the context of the story, then we see failure everywhere in him, this apparent failure is in fact his success. For Naim, failure is the ultimate goal; he achieves it with remarkable ease.
The failure of character cannot be dubbed as the crumbling of the story. It is doubtless that Sita Mirchandani is a dynamic character of Urdu fiction upon which Qurratul Ain Hyder has built the story of ‘Sita Haran’. Sita Mirchandani is the source of all the events, that’s why her character always remains in the centre of the story.
To say her greatness lies in her centrality is not correct in any way. English or any great fiction of European language bears a testimony to it. We find two kinds of fiction there. In the first type, events dominate, while in the second type character dominates the events.
Character-centred fiction does not have many events and if at all there are events then they are invariably linked with each other and look like one. Firstly, the character is hardly influenced by the events and if it is influenced then influence is minimal.
Moreover, the character has much impact on the events. The novel ‘Idiot’ of Dostoevsky (1821-1881) is a brilliant example; Prince Myshkin is placed at the centre of the story and has very strong influence on the events. In, Urdu, we can refer to Umrao Jan and Naim. It is not essential for the great characters to always be on the centre stage of the story. Hori of ‘Gaodan’ (1931) is the central character, but is not a great character. Not only does he depict his superficial rural life but does also leave no story unturned for realising his cow purchasing desire.
If he fails to purchase a cow, then little space of deviation from religious value can emerge, and his character can be slightly better. On the other hand in Urdu fiction we come across with a peripheral character such as Sheikh Ali Wjoodi who does not only outstrip the central character Zumurrud but also influences the whole story structure trough his great personality.
It cannot be expected from learned religious scholar like Wajoodi that he can rope in Hussain for killing contemporary religious scholars. It is nothing but an unmatched example of deviation in urdu fiction. Though a great character is always in the centre of the story, it is not a universal principle. ‘Sita Haran’s’ story is completely character dominated because all the story events centre around Sita Mirchandani.
No demarcation line exists between Sita’s personality and the story’s events; both are assimilated in one and cannot be separated from each other. It is the hallmark of character dominated story. One could see this throughout the story of ‘Sita Haran’.
There are some novels whose characters are not much assimilated in their stories but their dynamics become an example for us. The novel ‘Aangan’ of Khadija Mastoor is famous for its decentralized character than its story. In comparison to Aliya, the character of Chahmmi is much more active. Aliya looks very weak before Chammi’s deviating powers.
On this count, Chahmmi proves herself a stronger character in the novel. If we compare both the characters, we realize that the character of Chahmmi is not much interwoven into story.
But the fascinating character of Sita is assimilated in the story like waves in the sea. That’s why her greatness cannot be evaluated separately from the story of ‘Sita Haran’. Sita Mirchandani of ‘Sita Haran’ becomes unique not only from Chahmmi of ‘Aangan’, but from the characters of all those stories that are considered character dominated. But on what basis this character becomes an extraordinary, still remains unexplained.
Sita Mirchandani, a young, beautiful and highly educated Sindhi woman, symbolizes love, which is not confined to the boundaries of religion, caste, language and country. Consequently she tears apart those customs that deprive human beings of their natural liberty. Sita consciously does not give importance to her past but past is rooted in her unconscious mind. Humanity is her religion and love is her God. To reach her God and to assimilate herself in him is the only goal of her life. For this she becomes ‘Saiyada Begum’ from Sita Mirchandani and converts Jameel into Jaimal. She likes all the Shias as her lover Jameel belongs to this sect. To prove herself a good companion of Jameel, she drinks.
She fights against the whole world but is finally defeated by her own self. After losing her lover Jameel, she again tries to get him. She goes to Colombo for a brief meeting with Jameeel. She continues to pursue his image. It is not in her control to constrain this image but she continues keeps trying it. She meets Irfan in her struggle and then fall in love with him. She goes to Irfan’s flat in France with the intention of marrying him. She is completely baffled when she hears that Irfan went to Karachi with his new bride. The antithesis of internal and external world plays an important role in shaping her personality. A conscious craving for Jameel’s manners and style in her life reflects her mindset.
On the other hand her inclination towards Abul Fasahat Qamrul Islam Chaudhari and Irfan clearly shows her unsatisfied inner, which is the direct result of her separation from Jameel. Denial, boldness, insanity and vagrancy are the essential traits of Sita. ‘Sita Haran’ is the first and perhaps so far the only novelette of Urdu that turns attention to the philosophical strand of emotionalism, Sita Mirchandani, represents this philosophy. Qurratul Ain Hyder’s character distinctly resembles with, Samuel Richardson’s (1689-1761) ‘Pamela’ and ‘Clarissa’.
Pamela continuously struggles to protect her virginity and success gets her in mission. As a wife and as a mother Pamela depicted beautifully in the second and the third volume of the novel. While Clarissa is a romantic and tragic character that fails first in love and then instead of a happy life she chooses the death. The end of Sita’s life is also as pathetic as Pamela and Clarissa but she appears a bit different as her failure in love does not make her an example of idealism like Pamela nor does she commit suicide like Clarissa. This aside she considers the heart-rending moments as valuable gifts, which have been given to her by Jameel, Projesh, Qamar and Irfan.
Now Sita’s personality becomes more distinct. Her personality reveals her internal and external antithesis, but it remains unexplained what circumstances in her life gave rise to the antithesis.
It is a psychological point on which a reader’s eye does not focus at once. We do not have any information about her life before her love and marriage with Jameel. The whole life of Sita can be divided into four stages. First she lives in Delhi after her separation from Jameel; in the second stage she is in Pakistan where she meets Irfan. Her frantic search for Jameel constitutes the third part. This narration is brief but conclusive. Her defeat is vividly narrated in this part. It looks pertinent to quote Sita directly and also to mention the sentence uttered by others about her:
پہلا حصہ
اماں یہ سیتا ہے۔
آداب عرض، سیتا نے حسبِ عادت ایک ہاتھ سے سلام کرتے ہوئے کہا۔
نام تو تمہارا سیتا ہے، اور رام جی کے بجائے آداب عرض کہتی ہو
نیو یارک سے کوئی خط آیا؟
ہاں۔جمیل بھیا نے شادی کر لی ہے
ارے ہاں ہوگی ویٹرس یا ٹائپسٹ کمبخت۔ وہ میری طرف سے ایلزبتھ ٹیلر سے بیاہ کر لیں۔ مجھ سے مطلب۔
سیتا نے بڑی متانت سے جواب دیا۔
اماں یہ کہاں رہتے ہیں؟ سیتا نے آہستہ سے سوال کیا۔ یہ اپنا شریر چھوڑ چکے ہیں۔
اوہ what a pity اتنا خوبصورت تھا بے چارہ۔
اور یہ ؟ اُس نے سنیاسن کی طرف اشارہ کیا۔
یہ رادھا جی۔ یہ بھی دو برس پہلے اپنا شریر چھوڑ چکیں۔
نانسنس۔ سیتا نے دل میں کہا
دوسرا حصہ
وہ اسی طرح کھڑی بحث میں الجھ رہی تھی جب ایک شاندار شخص ہاتھ میں کافی کی پیالی لیے
اُس کے قریب سے گزرا اور اُسے دیکھ کر بڑی اداسی سے مسکرایا۔ اُس کے بالوں کے انداز میں
جمیل کی ہلکی سی جھلک تھی جس نے ایک لمحے کے لیے اُسے مضطرب کیا۔
کافی پیو گی۔ عرفان نے پوچھا۔ اُسے معلوم نہیں تھا کہ وہ غروبِ آفتاب کے بعد سیاہ قہوے پر
اکتفا کرنا پسند نہیں کرتی۔
تم مانگ میں سندور کیوں نہیں لگاتیں؟
آپ کہیں سے ڈھونڈ کر لا دیجیے۔اب ہم لوگ وہ ہیں جن کا کوئی دیس اپنا نہیں۔ پنجابیوں کو
کم از کم مشرقی پنجاب تو مل گیا۔
تیسرا حصہ
میں کل صبح کولمبو جا رہی ہوں۔ مجھے معلوم ہوا ہے کہ جمیل وہاں یو۔این کے کسی کام سے آئے ہوئے ہیں۔
میں جا کر آخری بار اُن سے پرارتھنا کروں گی کہ وہ راہُل مجھے دے دیں۔
شٹ اپ عرفان۔ وہ پوری طاقت سے چیخا۔ گیٹ آؤٹ!
تاریخ ڈسکس کرنے کے علاوہ اور کیا ہوا؟ اُس نے گرج کر پوچھا۔
وہ سفید پڑ گئی۔ آپ کو اس طرح سوال کرنے کا کیا حق ہے۔
حق تو تمہارے اوپر اپنے قانونی شوہر کا بھی نہیں جسے چھوڑ کر تم دو سال سے رنگ رلیاں منا رہی ہو۔
چوتھا حصہ
اب تک وہ قانونی طور پر مسز جمیل تھی۔ مگر اب کہ یہ کاغذ امریکہ سے آ چکا ہے۔ خود کو مسز عرفان کہلانے کا حق اب کوئی اس سے نہیں چھین سکتا۔ وہ جلد از جلد شادی کر لیں گے۔ عرفان اب اس کا عاشق نہیں شوہر ہوگا۔
مجازی خدا، دیوتا۔
کون؟
میں مادام عرفان ہوں۔
آپ کو یقین ہے کہ آپ مادام عرفان ہیں؟
جی ہاں۔ کیوں؟ کیا مطلب؟
مگر مسیو عرفان کل ہی صبح مادام عرفان کے ساتھ دو مہینے کی رخصت پر کراشی گئی ہیں۔
مادام عرفان۔ سیتا ڈوبتی ہوئی آواز میں اس طرح کہا جیسے کنویں کے اندر سے بول رہی ہو۔
پہر کو سیتا اور لیزلی پہاڑوں پر گھومتے پھرتے ایک آبشار کے کنارے گوری کامنی سیتا، سانولی رنگت کے پروجیش کمار چودھری کے بازوؤں میں اس طرح جا گری جس طرح گنگا کا شفاف پانی جمنا کے تاریک غضب ناک پانیوں میں گرتا ہے
Various stages of life reflect her internal and external conflict and this conflict exists in all the stages of her life. But it is strongly depicted in the first, second and the fourth parts of her life. For example, when she gets the news that Jameel has married someone, first she is displeased but then shows contempt by referring her to Elizabeth Taylor. Later, she sees Jameel’s style in Irfan’s hair, which makes it clear that Jameel’s style occupies her unconscious mind.
Then she goes to Colombo when got news that Jameel is staying there. It has been discussed that we do not know anything about Sita’s earlier life, like her childhood, except that she belongs to a Sindhi family. Her complete personality comes into light when she falls into love and is then separated from Jameel.
Her each and every act is associated with Jameel. Therefore the real source of her internal and external antithesis is Jameel’s personality in which she merges her own personality. This antithesis engendered the audacity of denial in Sita’s behavior. She pays no heed to the value system of religion, morality and society. The following sentences reflect behaviour of denial:
1. گوری کامنی سیتا، سانولی رنگت کے پروجیش کمار چودھری کے بازوؤں میں اس طرح جا گری
جس طرح گنگا کا شفاف پانی جمنا کے تاریک غضب ناک پانیوں میں گرتا ہے
2. میں واقعی قمر کی اور کھنچی چلی گئی جیسے سانپ کی اور اس کا شکار کھنچا چلا جاتا ہے۔
3.دو پہر کو سیتا اور لیزلی پہاڑوں پر گھومتے پھرتے ایک آبشار کے کنارے جا پہنچے۔
A courageous Sita meets Projesh, Qamar, Lesley, and her relationship with them hardly explains anything in the whole story. Sita’s character gives arise to the question why does she surrender before Qamar, Projesh and Irfan? It shows her vagrancy but simultaneously she tries to break the deadlock of her existence. She surrenders herself before the iconic beauty too.
On seeing the portraits of gods and goddesses she admires their beauty without spiritual fear. It is the spirit of her love that starts from beauty and comes to an end when attractive personalities like Irfan and Projesh become meaningless.
This boldness emerges only when Sita rises above love. After her separation from Jameel, Sita passes through a number of stages in her life. Can we expect any real Indian woman to pass through such agony?
This kind of deviational behavior is found in Urdu fiction. Double standard is a mentionable point of Sita’s personality which represents two tendencies. We can call them imaginary and practical tendencies. But one has to accept the other as well. It means that the imaginary tendency converts into practical tendency. The conversion of tendencies is denoted with the change of place and person:
- “I have become Irfan’s mistress”
- “Sita and Irfan spent some months in Paris. Sita purchased necessary goods from the market, ironed Irfan’s clothes”.
In the context of the story the first sentence expresses imaginary tendency while the second one reflects the practical tendency of Sita’s behaviour. The change of place and person is also presented in both the sentences.
The practical tendency is so vehement before which the marginal heroine of Henry Fielding’s(1707-1754) novel ‘Tom Jones’, Sophia and her feminine surrender looks less powerful. The same clash of tendencies is presented in the great story, ‘The Lady with the Dog’ of Chekhov (1860-1904) in which a young and beautiful lady is completely disenchanted with her bird-brained husband. One day she becomes the mistress of another married man. She faces a lot of difficulties but does not want to leave her real husband:
“Then they discussed their situation for a long time, trying to think how they could get rid of the necessity for hiding, deception, living in different towns, being so long without meeting. How were they to shake off these intolerable fetters?”
It makes clear that both are continually thinking for a better solution. Chekhov’s heroine is from the world of short story therefore only one dimension of the decay of her personality is expressed here. Like Chekhov’s heroine, Sita faces the same situation when she lives with Irfan in Paris. But there is a difference between Sita and Chekhov’s heroin.
Chekhov’s heroine tries to resolve the problems with the help of her lover while Sita feels a sort of detachment when she talks her lover about finding solutions of the problems, she continues to face. Chekhov’s heroin is seduced in the story and her tragedy becomes an extraordinary one. Unlike her, Sita does not escape mention anywhere in the story.
The novel ‘Gureez’ of Aziz Ahmad (1914-1978) is also a good example of this kind. The central character of this novel Naim loves three girls- Ellis, Mary, and Bilqis – one after another, and he tries to marry them, but finally does not marry any of them.
Aziz Ahmad tries to hammer that love is not complete without sexuality. Thus, Naim goes for sexual pleasure. He loves but his love does not have a centre. This is the reason his insanity is quite different from the insanity of Sita. Naim becomes a failure like Sita in the end of story but the pain of failure is more intensively depicted in the character of Sita. The character of Arshad of ‘Talash-e-Rang-e-Raigan’ (Syed Mohammad Ashraf) is another beautiful example of this kind of technique.
The character of Sita is completely deviational in every respect. It has also been expressed earlier that the character of fiction becomes big or small on the basis of his/her deviation. Needless to say that ‘Sita Mirchandani’ is a big character not only of ‘Sita Haran’ but of Urdu fiction.