Assignment of Paper 202 - Indian English Literature – Post-Independence

Assignment Details:
Paper Name:Indian English Literature – Post-Independence
Paper No:202
Unit: 1
Topic: The Politics of the Marginalised Body: A Critical Study of Caste Oppression, Gender Inequality, Social Exclusion, Mythological Revision, and Poetic Resistance in Meena Kandasamy’s “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed” within the Framework of Dalit Feminism and Subaltern Studies
Submitted to: Smt. S.B. Gardi, Department of English, MKBU
Submitted Date:19th October, 2026

ABSTRACT

This assignment examines the politics of the marginalised body in Meena Kandasamy’s poems “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed” through the theoretical frameworks of Dalit Feminism and Subaltern Studies. It explores how caste oppression, gender inequality, social exclusion, and dominant cultural narratives influence the representation of marginalised individuals. The study considers the body not merely as a physical entity but as a site where social power, discrimination, humiliation, and resistance become visible. “Eklavyam” invites a critical reconsideration of the mythological narrative of Ekalavya from the Mahabharata, particularly the relationship between knowledge, authority, sacrifice, and social exclusion. “One-Eyed” provides an opportunity to investigate bodily differences, visibility, identity, and the social judgments through which individuals may be marginalised. Dalit Feminism helps explain the interconnected nature of caste and gender, while Subaltern Studies examines the silencing and exclusion of people from dominant cultural narratives. Scholarship by Shruti Shukla, Debakanya Haldar, Maitray Kaushik, Laura Brueck, and other critics provides a wider context for understanding Dalit women’s poetry as a form of testimony, identity reconstruction, and resistance. The assignment argues that poetry can challenge inherited interpretations, expose unequal power relations, and question the social assumptions that make discrimination appear natural. It concludes that the marginalised body is not simply a site of oppression but can also become a medium of self-expression, cultural memory, and resistance.

KEYWORDS

Meena Kandasamy, “Eklavyam,” “One-Eyed,” Dalit Feminism, Subaltern Studies, caste oppression, gender inequality, marginalised body, social exclusion, mythological revision, poetic resistance, Dalit poetry, identity, representation.

RESEARCH QUESTION

How do Meena Kandasamy’s poems “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed” represent caste oppression, gender inequality, and social exclusion through the politics of the marginalised body, and how do Dalit Feminism and Subaltern Studies help us understand mythological revision, silenced voices, and poetic resistance in these poems?

HYPOTHESIS

This assignment hypothesises that Meena Kandasamy’s “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed” challenge social hierarchies by exposing the ways power influences the representation and treatment of marginalised bodies. Through mythological revision, bodily imagery, and the questioning of dominant interpretations, the poems can be examined as forms of literary resistance. Dalit Feminism and Subaltern Studies provide useful frameworks for understanding how caste, gender, authority, and social exclusion affect identity and representation. The study further proposes that poetry can transform experiences of discrimination into opportunities for questioning established cultural values and recovering marginalised voices.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The primary objective of this assignment is to examine the representation of marginalised bodies in Meena Kandasamy’s “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed.” The study aims to understand how caste and gender influence social identity, investigate the relationship between bodily experience and social power, and examine mythological revision as a means of challenging dominant cultural interpretations. It also aims to apply Dalit Feminism and Subaltern Studies to questions of voice, silence, representation, and resistance. Finally, it seeks to understand how poetry can challenge social exclusion and contribute to the recognition of marginalised experiences.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This assignment follows a qualitative and interpretive method of literary analysis. It examines the selected poems through close reading and applies the theoretical frameworks of Dalit Feminism and Subaltern Studies. The analysis focuses on bodily representation, cultural narratives, authority, social exclusion, identity, and poetic resistance.

The secondary sources supplied for this assignment provide critical perspectives on Dalit women’s poetry, caste and gender politics, feminist language, bodily experiences, and the relationship between poetry and identity. These sources are used to establish the theoretical background and support the broader discussion.

The study is limited to “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed.” The secondary articles are not treated as direct analyses of both poems unless their full texts confirm that connection. The final interpretation should be supported by the exact wording of the poems in the prescribed edition. Publication details and page numbers must also be verified before submission.

1. INTRODUCTION

Literature plays an important role in representing society, culture, identity, and power. It can preserve established traditions, but it can also question the values and institutions through which inequality is maintained. Literary works often represent individuals who experience discrimination because of caste, gender, class, disability, or other forms of social difference. Through these representations, literature can expose the relationship between individual experiences and larger structures of power.

The body is particularly important in literary studies of caste and gender because social discrimination is often experienced through physical appearance, labour, humiliation, restrictions on movement, and unequal access to education and public spaces. A person’s body may become a marker through which society assigns status, respectability, or inferiority. However, such judgements are not natural or universal. They are produced through social practices, cultural beliefs, and unequal power relations.

The term marginalised body in this assignment refers to a body that is socially devalued, controlled, excluded, or discriminated against because of prevailing hierarchies. It does not suggest that the body itself is inferior. Instead, it draws attention to the social systems that attach negative meanings to particular bodies and identities.

Meena Kandasamy is an important contemporary Indian writer whose work is frequently discussed in relation to caste, gender, political resistance, and social inequality. Her poetry offers opportunities to examine how literary expression can challenge dominant cultural narratives and question the social structures that silence marginalised people. Rather than accepting established interpretations as neutral, a critical reading asks who has the authority to speak, whose experiences are remembered, and whose suffering remains unacknowledged.

The poems “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed” provide different points of entry into these questions. “Eklavyam” invokes the mythological narrative of Ekalavya, a figure whose experience raises questions about access to knowledge, social privilege, authority, and sacrifice. The familiar story can be reconsidered by focusing on the cost of the demand placed upon Ekalavya rather than celebrating sacrifice without examining the inequality behind it.

“One-Eyed,” through its title, invites attention to bodily difference, visibility, and the social gaze. It raises questions about how physical difference can become a basis for judgement and how an individual may be reduced to a single visible characteristic. A detailed interpretation must be grounded in the poem’s actual language, but its title provides an important starting point for considering the relationship between the body and social identity.

Dalit Feminism and Subaltern Studies provide the principal theoretical frameworks for this investigation. Dalit Feminism examines the interconnected relationship between caste and gender, while Subaltern Studies draws attention to people whose experiences and voices have been excluded from dominant historical and cultural narratives. Together, these frameworks help explain how literature can question social hierarchies and create alternative interpretations of marginalised experience.

Shruti Shukla’s article, “Speaking Through Bodies: Dalit Women’s Lyrical Testimonies of Trauma and Possibilities of Encounter,” is particularly relevant because it examines how Dalit women’s poetry communicates experiences of trauma and creates possibilities for recognition and encounter (Shukla). Her work provides a useful context for understanding poetry as a form of testimony and cultural memory.

The central argument of this assignment is that the marginalised body should not be understood only as a victim of social power. It can also become a medium of expression, resistance, and the reconstruction of identity. Through critical reinterpretation and poetic expression, marginalised experiences can challenge dominant assumptions and create new ways of understanding social justice.

1.1 Caste Oppression and Social Hierarchy

Caste is a historically established system of social hierarchy that has influenced access to education, occupation, resources, public recognition, and social participation. Caste discrimination is not limited to individual prejudice; it is also maintained through social institutions, inherited beliefs, and everyday practices.

Literature can expose caste oppression by showing how apparently ordinary social arrangements produce unequal outcomes. A person may possess talent, knowledge, and determination but still face exclusion because the established system does not recognise that person as equally deserving. This contradiction is particularly relevant to the Ekalavya narrative.

Ekalavya’s story raises questions about who is allowed to learn and who has the authority to determine the value of knowledge. His self-directed learning demonstrates dedication and ability, yet these qualities do not protect him from the demand that he surrender his thumb. A critical interpretation therefore shifts attention from his devotion alone to the social power that makes such a demand possible.

Research on caste and gender politics in Dalit poetry offers a wider framework for understanding these issues. Gunja Patni and Sheehan S. Khan examine Dalit consciousness through the poetry of contemporary Dalit writers, providing a context for considering poetry as a form of social and political expression. Gautam and Sahana’s study of power dynamics in Kandasamy’s poetry is also relevant to examining the relationship between literary representation and unequal social structures.

1.2 Gender Inequality and the Marginalised Body

Gender inequality frequently operates through expectations about the body. Social norms may regulate women’s behaviour, sexuality, labour, movement, appearance, and speech. These expectations are not experienced equally by all women because caste, class, and social position influence the forms of discrimination they encounter.

Dalit Feminism challenges the assumption that all women share the same social experiences. It argues that caste and gender must be studied together because each influences how the other operates. Dalit women may experience caste-based discrimination in society and gender-based marginalisation within social and political movements that do not adequately address their experiences.

Sunaina Arya’s article, “Dalit or Brahmanical Patriarchy? Rethinking Indian Feminism,” is useful for understanding the limitations of a universal approach to women’s experience (Arya). Her discussion encourages readers to consider how caste structures and patriarchal practices interact.

The body becomes an important site in this analysis because it is often through the body that social power is exercised. Physical appearance, sexuality, labour, and bodily autonomy may be controlled by social expectations. Yet the body can also become a source of self-expression and resistance when individuals challenge the meanings imposed upon them.

Talat’s article, “From Submission to Resistance: The Transformation of Dalit Women Bodies,” provides a relevant context for examining the relationship between bodily oppression and resistance (Talat). Shukla’s study similarly highlights how poetry can represent experiences of trauma and make marginalised voices available for recognition (Shukla).

These perspectives are useful for the present study because they encourage an examination of the body as both a site of oppression and a possible source of agency.

1.3 The Significance of Studying “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed”

Reading “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed” together makes it possible to examine different forms of marginalisation and the literary strategies through which they may be represented.

“Eklavyam” draws upon a familiar mythological narrative. Because readers may already know the story of Ekalavya, the poem can invite them to reconsider the moral assumptions attached to the episode. A critical reading asks whether the celebration of sacrifice hides the unequal distribution of educational opportunities and the power of established authority.

“One-Eyed” offers a different interpretive starting point. Its title directs attention to the body and to the social meanings attached to bodily difference. It encourages questions about visibility, stigma, identity, and the authority to define another person.

The poems should not be forced into identical interpretations. Their literary strategies and central concerns may differ. However, comparing them allows the study to investigate how social power influences bodily experience and how poetry can challenge established meanings.

The comparison also highlights the importance of voice. Marginalised individuals may be represented in cultural narratives without being allowed to define their own experiences. Poetry can question this imbalance by changing the perspective from which a familiar story or a bodily identity is understood.

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: DALIT FEMINISM

Dalit Feminism is an important theoretical framework for studying the relationship between caste, gender, identity, and power. It challenges approaches to feminism that treat women as a single, uniform social category. Women do not experience inequality in identical ways because caste, class, and other social structures influence their opportunities and social positions.

Dalit Feminism also questions accounts of caste oppression that ignore the specific experiences of Dalit women. It argues that gender cannot be separated from caste because the two structures often operate together. The framework therefore makes visible experiences that may be overlooked by both dominant feminist discourse and male-centred accounts of anti-caste struggle.

A Dalit feminist reading asks who is represented in a literary text, who controls the representation, and what social structures shape the experiences of the represented individual. It also investigates whether the text challenges expectations of silence, obedience, and submission.

In “Eklavyam,” this framework can help examine the relationship between social authority and access to knowledge. Although Ekalavya is a male mythological figure, the episode raises broader questions about exclusion and the control of bodies. A Dalit feminist interpretation must acknowledge this distinction rather than treating his experience as identical to that of Dalit women.

In “One-Eyed,” the framework encourages an examination of how bodily identity and social judgement may intersect with caste and gender. However, these connections must be established through the poem’s actual language rather than assumed from its title.

Arya’s discussion of patriarchy provides a theoretical basis for understanding the relationship between gender and caste (Arya).

2.1 Caste and Gender as Interconnected Structures

Caste and gender should not be understood as completely separate systems. Caste influences access to resources, education, labour, and recognition, while gender shapes expectations concerning behaviour, sexuality, domestic responsibility, and public participation. Their interaction can produce experiences that cannot be fully explained through either category alone.

This intersection is particularly important when examining the representation of bodies. A body may be judged through assumptions about caste, gender, occupation, and social respectability. These judgements may determine whether a person is treated with dignity or subjected to exclusion.

The Ekalavya narrative illustrates how access to knowledge can be shaped by social position. His ability does not automatically provide him with equal recognition. A Dalit feminist reading can examine the broader implications of such exclusion while recognising that the mythological episode does not directly represent every dimension of Dalit women’s experience.

For “One-Eyed,” the same method requires attention to the poem’s specific representation of bodily difference. If caste or gender influences the treatment of the figure, that relationship should be demonstrated through textual evidence.

2.2 Dalit Feminism and Poetic Language

Language is an important part of literary resistance. Certain forms of speech are often considered refined, respectable, or suitable for literature, while other forms are dismissed as improper. These distinctions can reproduce social hierarchies by determining whose experiences and expressions are recognised as legitimate.

Debakanya Haldar’s article, “Tracing the Language of Dalit Feminist Discourse: A Study of the Alternate Modernity in Dalit Women’s Poetry,” examines the language of Dalit feminist poetry and provides a context for understanding how marginalised writing may challenge dominant literary expectations (Haldar).

Laura Brueck’s “Mother Tongues—the Disruptive Possibilities of Feminist Vernaculars” is also relevant because it explores the disruptive possibilities of feminist vernacular expression (Brueck). Her work encourages readers to consider how language can challenge dominant cultural and literary standards.

Poetic resistance may involve anger, irony, direct accusation, unconventional expression, or the reinterpretation of familiar cultural stories. Such choices can question the expectation that marginalised people should speak only in ways acceptable to established authority.

In the selected poems, language should therefore be examined not simply as a means of describing oppression but as a possible method of challenging the meanings through which oppression is justified.

3. SUBALTERN STUDIES: VOICE, SILENCE, AND REPRESENTATION

Subaltern Studies examines the experiences of groups whose voices and histories have been marginalised within dominant systems of knowledge and representation. It asks how certain groups gain authority to describe history while others remain excluded from its accepted narratives.

In literary criticism, this approach is useful for examining characters and communities that are represented by powerful institutions but are not allowed to define their own experiences. A marginalised figure may appear prominently in a story while still being interpreted according to the values of the dominant group.

The Ekalavya narrative illustrates this problem. The episode can be interpreted as a story of devotion and sacrifice. However, such an interpretation may direct attention away from the unequal relationship between teacher and student and from the physical cost of the demand placed upon Ekalavya.

A subaltern reading changes the central question. Instead of asking only whether Ekalavya demonstrates loyalty, it asks why he is placed in a position where his loyalty requires the surrender of his ability. This shift challenges the assumption that the traditional moral interpretation is complete or neutral.

Subaltern Studies also draws attention to silence. Silence may result from exclusion, fear, or the absence of recognised opportunities to speak. A literary text can expose such silence by bringing neglected experiences into focus.

Shukla’s article on Dalit women’s lyrical testimony is relevant to this discussion because it examines how poetry can communicate experiences that have been marginalised or inadequately represented (Shukla). The relationship between testimony and representation is particularly important when considering how literature challenges established narratives.

3.1 The Problem of Speaking for the Marginalised

Representation is not simply a question of whether marginalised people appear in literature. It also concerns who controls the meaning of their experiences.

A marginalised individual may be celebrated as a symbol of loyalty, courage, or sacrifice while the injustice affecting that person remains unexamined. Ekalavya can be admired for his devotion, but admiration may hide the unequal conditions under which his sacrifice is demanded.

A critical interpretation therefore asks whether the individual is represented as a complex human subject or reduced to a moral example. It examines the relationship between the person’s actions and the social structures that shape their choices.

The same question can be applied to bodily difference. A person may be visible because of a physical characteristic but remain unheard as an individual. The observer may define the person through a label without considering the complexity of their identity.

A close reading of “One-Eyed” should investigate whether the poem reproduces this form of representation or questions the social gaze through which bodily difference is interpreted.

3.2 Silence, Memory, and Testimony

Silence can be a sign of exclusion, but it can also reveal the limits of dominant forms of expression. Experiences may remain unacknowledged because the language or institutions available to describe them do not adequately recognise them.

Poetry can challenge such limitations through imagery, repetition, tone, metaphor, and the recovery of neglected stories. It can make readers recognise experiences that have been ignored or treated as insignificant.

Shukla’s article considers Dalit women’s poetry as a form of lyrical testimony that connects bodily experience, trauma, and the possibilities of encounter (Shukla). This approach is useful for understanding how poetry can preserve memory and challenge erasure.

Pramila Venkateswaran’s article, “Resounding Voices: Witnessing Caste Injustice Through Dalit Poetry,” also provides a relevant context for discussing poetry as a means of witnessing caste injustice (Venkateswaran).

However, the two selected poems must be interpreted according to their own content. “Eklavyam” primarily invites discussion of mythological revision and cultural memory, while the treatment of testimony in “One-Eyed” should depend on the poem’s actual voice and imagery.

4. MEENA KANDASAMY AND THE POLITICS OF POETIC RESISTANCE

Meena Kandasamy’s poetry can be situated within contemporary Indian writing that challenges caste hierarchy, gender inequality, and established forms of social authority. Poetry can resist injustice not only by describing suffering but also by questioning the cultural narratives and social assumptions through which suffering is justified.

Literary resistance may take several forms. A poet may give attention to a neglected figure, question a traditional story, expose the relationship between power and the body, or challenge the language through which marginalised individuals are described. Such strategies can make literature a space for questioning dominant interpretations.

Gautam and Sahana’s article, “Exploration of Power Dynamics in Meena Kandasamy’s Poetry,” provides a useful context for studying the relationship between Kandasamy’s poetic expression and social power. Pooja’s article, “A Feminist Outcry: Gendered Resistance in Meena Kandasamy’s Works,” offers a further context for discussing gendered resistance in her writing (Pooja).

These articles should be consulted in full before specific claims are attributed to them. Their relevance to the present assignment lies in the broader critical questions they raise about power, gender, and resistance.

Poetry can challenge established meanings by changing the reader’s perspective. A familiar story of sacrifice may become a question about coercion and inequality. A bodily characteristic may become an opportunity to question the assumptions through which society judges individuals.

The importance of poetic resistance therefore lies not only in its political message but also in its ability to change how readers understand identity, authority, and social relationships.

5. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF “EKLAVYAM”

5.1 Mythological Background and Critical Reinterpretation

“Eklavyam” invokes the familiar narrative of Ekalavya from the Mahabharata. In the traditional episode, Ekalavya is unable to receive formal instruction from Dronacharya and develops his archery skills through self-training. When his talent becomes evident, Dronacharya demands Ekalavya’s right thumb as guru-dakshina.

The episode has often been interpreted through the values of devotion, discipline, and sacrifice. Ekalavya’s willingness to surrender his thumb is presented as evidence of his loyalty to his teacher. However, a critical interpretation asks what this moral framework leaves unexplored.

Why is Ekalavya denied the same educational opportunity? Why does his talent become a problem for the established order? Why must he sacrifice a part of his body to satisfy an authority figure? These questions shift attention from the celebration of obedience to the unequal social relationship that makes the demand possible.

Mythological revision occurs when a writer reconsiders a familiar story from a different perspective or questions the values attached to its traditional interpretation. It can reveal exclusions hidden within a dominant narrative and allow readers to reconsider what they have been taught to admire.

In this context, “Eklavyam” can be examined as an opportunity to question the relationship between devotion and injustice. A critical reading asks whether sacrifice remains admirable when it is demanded under unequal conditions.

5.2 Caste, Education, and Institutional Authority

Education is frequently presented as a means of personal development and social advancement. However, access to teachers, institutions, resources, and recognition has not always been equally available to all social groups.

The Ekalavya narrative highlights the difference between possessing ability and receiving institutional recognition. Ekalavya demonstrates determination and skill, yet his achievement does not guarantee equal standing within the established order.

The demand for his thumb can be interpreted as an attempt to restrict the consequences of his learning. His ability challenges an arrangement in which educational authority and recognition are unequally distributed.

The episode therefore raises questions about merit. If a person has the necessary talent and determination but is denied equal opportunity because of social position, individual effort alone cannot overcome structural exclusion.

A critical reading of “Eklavyam” can examine how mythological narrative makes these inequalities visible. The poem’s importance lies in its potential to question whether a system can be considered just when it restricts the abilities of those who challenge established boundaries.

The comparison between the mythological narrative and modern institutions should remain careful. Ancient social contexts and contemporary educational systems are not identical. Nevertheless, the story provides a framework for thinking about exclusion, gatekeeping, and the unequal distribution of opportunities.

5.3 The Body as a Site of Oppression

The thumb is central to the Ekalavya episode because it connects the body with skill, agency, and opportunity. Its removal is not merely a symbolic act; it affects the practical use of the ability that Ekalavya has developed.

The body becomes the place where authority produces a material consequence. The demand does not simply communicate that Ekalavya occupies a subordinate position; it restricts his ability to practise the skill through which he has demonstrated his talent.

This makes the body an important site for examining social power. The injury has a physical dimension, but its wider significance is connected to educational exclusion and the protection of privilege.

At the same time, Ekalavya’s body represents determination and agency. His self-training demonstrates that knowledge and ability can develop outside formal institutions. The attempt to restrict that ability does not erase the fact of his achievement.

The continued circulation of the story also creates an opportunity for reinterpretation. A critical poem can redirect attention from the expected celebration of sacrifice toward the injustice experienced by the person who sacrifices.

Shukla’s discussion of bodily testimony provides a broader context for understanding how literary representation can connect the body with memory and social power (Shukla). The Ekalavya narrative is not a direct testimony of a Dalit woman’s lived experience, but it allows the assignment to explore how the body can become a site where exclusion is enforced and later questioned through literary reinterpretation.

5.4 Sacrifice, Obedience, and Resistance

Sacrifice is often celebrated as a virtue in cultural and religious narratives. However, the moral value of sacrifice depends partly on the conditions under which it occurs. A voluntary act made freely is different from an act demanded by someone who possesses greater social authority.

The Ekalavya episode raises this distinction. His willingness to offer his thumb may be interpreted as devotion, but a critical reading asks whether the unequal relationship between teacher and student limits the freedom of his decision.

When sacrifice is praised without examining the power relations behind it, the suffering of the marginalised person may be transformed into a lesson about obedience. Such an interpretation risks protecting the authority that produces the suffering.

Mythological revision can challenge this process by making the cost of sacrifice visible. It invites readers to consider whether a tradition should be accepted simply because it is familiar or whether its moral assumptions require critical examination.

In this sense, resistance can begin through reinterpretation. The reader is encouraged to question the accepted meaning of the story and recognise the unequal social conditions that shape the character’s experience.

6. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF “ONE-EYED”

6.1 The Body and the Social Construction of Difference

The title “One-Eyed” directs attention to a bodily characteristic and invites questions about the social meanings attached to physical difference. A body may be judged according to expectations of normality, completeness, attractiveness, or ability. Such expectations can influence how individuals are perceived and treated.

However, bodily difference does not automatically create social inferiority. Stigma develops when society attaches negative meanings to a physical characteristic and uses those meanings to judge the individual as a whole.

A critical reading of “One-Eyed” should therefore examine how the poem represents bodily difference and whether it questions the assumptions through which that difference is interpreted. The analysis should consider the speaker, the imagery, the tone, and the relationship between the individual and the surrounding social environment.

The title also encourages reflection on the difference between seeing and understanding. A person may be physically visible to others but remain unrecognised as a complex individual. The social gaze can reduce a person to one characteristic and ignore other dimensions of identity.

The poem’s actual language must determine the final interpretation. The title provides a starting point, but it cannot establish by itself whether the poem focuses on disability, caste, gender, social judgement, or another form of marginalisation.

6.2 The Social Gaze and Bodily Stigma

The social gaze refers to the ways people observe, classify, and judge others according to socially accepted standards. It becomes a form of power when the observer assumes the authority to define another person’s identity and worth.

A person marked as different may become an object of curiosity, ridicule, pity, or exclusion. In such circumstances, the body is no longer perceived simply as part of a human being; it becomes a label through which the entire person is judged.

A critical interpretation of “One-Eyed” can investigate whether the poem exposes this process. Does it present bodily difference as a source of social judgement? Does it question the authority of the observer? Does it allow the individual to challenge the meanings imposed by others?

These questions are important because social stigma often appears natural even though it is produced by cultural expectations. Literature can reveal the process through which a physical characteristic becomes a social disadvantage.

The concept of the social gaze also helps explain why visibility does not always produce recognition. A marginalised person may be noticed precisely because they are considered different, yet this attention may reinforce exclusion rather than produce respect.

6.3 Identity, Dignity, and Self-Definition

Identity is shaped partly by the ways individuals understand themselves and partly by the labels society assigns to them. When a person is repeatedly judged through a single characteristic, the complexity of their identity may be ignored.

Literature can challenge such reduction by presenting alternative ways of understanding the individual. A poem may reveal that the social label does not adequately describe the person and may question the assumptions behind the label.

Maitray Kaushik’s article, “Reclaiming Voice: Poetry as Identity Repair in the Works of Dalit Women Poets,” provides a relevant framework for understanding how poetic expression can challenge imposed identities and create possibilities for self-representation (Kaushik).

Identity repair does not mean pretending that discrimination has never occurred. It involves questioning the narratives that reduce individuals to their experiences of injury or exclusion and creating space for a more complex understanding of the self.

A reading of “One-Eyed” can use this framework to investigate whether the poem challenges externally imposed definitions of bodily difference. However, this interpretation should be supported by the actual wording of the poem.

6.4 Bodily Difference and Social Recognition

Recognition involves more than noticing another person. It requires acknowledging that person’s dignity, agency, and complexity. Social exclusion often occurs when individuals are recognised only through stereotypes or labels.

The body may become a visible sign through which society decides who belongs and who does not. A person’s physical difference may be treated as more important than their abilities, experiences, or individuality.

A critical literary reading questions the values behind such judgements. It asks whether the poem exposes the social standards that make some bodies appear normal and others appear deficient.

Dalit Feminism adds another dimension by encouraging attention to caste and gender wherever the poem’s language supports such connections. Not every form of bodily stigma is caste-based, and the analysis should avoid treating different experiences as identical.

The main concern is to understand how bodily difference acquires social meaning and whether poetic representation can challenge the authority through which that meaning is imposed.

7. COMPARATIVE STUDY OF “EKLAVYAM” AND “ONE-EYED”

7.1 The Marginalised Body as a Site of Power

Both poems can be studied through the relationship between bodily experience and social power, although their literary methods and specific concerns may differ.

“Eklavyam” invites discussion of a mythological figure whose body becomes the site of a demand that restricts his ability. The story raises questions about the relationship between education, authority, sacrifice, and social privilege.

“One-Eyed” invites attention to bodily difference and the social meanings attached to a visible characteristic. Its title encourages questions about stigma, recognition, and the power to define another person.

In both cases, the body must be understood in relation to social interpretation. A physical feature or injury does not exist only as a biological fact; its meaning can be shaped by cultural values and power relations.

The comparison demonstrates how literary representations of the body can reveal social inequality. The body may become the medium through which exclusion is imposed, but it can also become a means of challenging dominant assumptions.

7.2 Authority and the Construction of Identity

Authority plays an important role in the Ekalavya narrative. Dronacharya possesses the power to determine the conditions under which Ekalavya’s ability is recognised. The demand for the thumb demonstrates how authority can affect the body and restrict future possibilities.

In a reading of “One-Eyed,” authority may be examined through the social gaze that classifies bodily differences. The relevant question is whether the individual is permitted to define their own identity or whether the surrounding society determines the meaning of the body.

These forms of authority are not identical. One involves a demand made within a mythological relationship between teacher and student; the other, depending on the poem’s content, may involve social judgement and the construction of bodily difference.

Nevertheless, both raise questions about who has the power to define another person’s possibilities and identity.

7.3 Resistance Through Reinterpretation

Resistance can take place through direct protest, but it can also occur when a familiar story or social label is reconsidered.

In “Eklavyam,” the traditional celebration of sacrifice can be questioned by focusing on the inequality behind the demand. The reader is encouraged to reconsider the moral assumptions through which the episode has been understood.

In “One-Eyed,” a critical interpretation can investigate whether the poem questions the social meanings attached to bodily difference. If it challenges the reduction of a person to a physical characteristic, it may create space for self-definition and recognition.

These readings demonstrate that poetry can challenge power by changing how readers understand familiar cultural meanings. Resistance begins when the authority of an accepted interpretation is no longer treated as unquestionable.

7.4 Voice, Memory, and Representation

Subaltern Studies makes voice and representation central to the comparison. It asks whose interpretation becomes authoritative and whose experience remains marginalised.

The Ekalavya narrative has been retold through different cultural and literary traditions. A critical reading can redirect attention toward the cost of the demand made upon Ekalavya and question the moral assumptions through which his sacrifice is celebrated.

For “One-Eyed,” the important question is whether the poem reproduces the social gaze that marks the body or provides a perspective that challenges it. The answer depends on the poem’s actual language and structure.

The comparison therefore suggests that literary resistance involves not only representing marginalised individuals but also questioning the systems through which their experiences are interpreted.

8. POETRY AS TESTIMONY, MEMORY, AND RESISTANCE

Poetry can provide a space for experiences that have been ignored or excluded from dominant narratives. It can preserve memory, communicate suffering, question social assumptions, and challenge stereotypes.

Shukla’s study of Dalit women’s lyrical testimony is relevant because it examines how poetry can represent trauma and create possibilities for encounter between experiences that might otherwise remain separated (Shukla). Her work encourages readers to understand poetic expression as a form of witnessing and cultural memory.

Poetry does not communicate experience only through direct statements. Imagery, repetition, tone, silence, and bodily references can communicate complex meanings. Such features can make visible the emotional and social consequences of discrimination.

Kaushik’s discussion of poetry as identity repair provides a related perspective. Poetry may challenge identities imposed through stigma and allow individuals to articulate experiences in their own terms (Kaushik).

Venkateswaran’s article on witnessing caste injustice through Dalit poetry also offers a relevant context for understanding poetry’s public and ethical dimensions (Venkateswaran).

These perspectives are useful for examining the relationship between literary representation and resistance. However, the two selected poems should not automatically be described as direct testimonies of lived experience. “Eklavyam” works through a mythological narrative, while the interpretation of “One-Eyed” must be established through its own text.

The broader point is that poetry can transform the way experiences are remembered and understood. It can challenge the assumption that dominant narratives provide the only legitimate account of social reality.

8.1 Vernacular Expression and Literary Value

Language is connected to power because society often assigns different levels of prestige to different forms of speech. Certain expressions are considered refined or suitable for literature, while others are dismissed as improper or unsophisticated.

Such distinctions can exclude the voices and experiences of marginalised communities. Dalit feminist poetry can challenge these expectations by using language and forms of expression that question established literary standards.

Brueck’s discussion of feminist vernaculars provides a useful framework for understanding the disruptive possibilities of language (Brueck). Haldar’s study of Dalit feminist discourse also draws attention to the relationship between language, identity, and alternative forms of cultural expression (Haldar).

Poetic resistance may appear through directness, irony, anger, or the refusal to provide a comfortable moral conclusion. Such choices can challenge the expectation that marginalised people should remain silent or express their experiences only in socially acceptable ways.

In the selected poems, the language should be examined closely to establish how it contributes to the representation of authority, bodily experience, and resistance.

9. SOCIAL EXCLUSION AND THE POLITICS OF RECOGNITION

Social exclusion occurs when individuals or groups are denied equal participation, recognition, or access to opportunities because of their social position or perceived difference. It may operate through institutions, cultural practices, interpersonal relationships, or inherited beliefs.

The Ekalavya narrative raises questions about exclusion from educational opportunity and institutional recognition. Ekalavya demonstrates ability, but his talent does not guarantee equal treatment. His experience challenges the belief that individual effort alone is sufficient to overcome social inequality.

The story also illustrates how the language of virtue can hide unequal power relations. When sacrifice is celebrated without examining the conditions that demand it, the suffering of the marginalised individual may become a justification for the established order.

The title “One-Eyed” raises a related question about recognition. A person may be noticed because of a bodily characteristic but judged only through that characteristic. Such recognition is incomplete because it reduces the individual to a label.

Dalit Feminism helps explain why social exclusion must be examined through interconnected structures of caste and gender. Arya’s article on patriarchy and Indian feminism provides a context for questioning universal accounts of women’s experiences.

A critical literary study should therefore identify the particular form of exclusion represented in each poem and explain how the poem’s language challenges or reproduces the assumptions behind it.

10. CRITICAL DISCUSSION: STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE FRAMEWORK

The combined use of Dalit Feminism and Subaltern Studies offers several advantages for analysing the selected poems.

First, these frameworks connect individual experience with larger structures of power. A bodily injury or a mark of difference can be understood in relation to the social values that give it meaning.

Second, they direct attention to voice and representation. They ask who is allowed to speak, whose experiences are recognised, and who has the authority to interpret the lives of others.

Third, they encourage a critical reconsideration of cultural traditions. Familiar stories may contain assumptions about authority, sacrifice, and social hierarchy that deserve closer examination.

However, these frameworks must be applied carefully. Dalit Feminism should not be reduced to a general theory of every form of oppression, and Subaltern Studies should not treat all marginalised people as if they share identical experiences.

Caste oppression, gender inequality, bodily difference, and educational exclusion have distinct histories. They may intersect, but their differences should not be ignored. A responsible analysis explains these relationships through evidence rather than assuming that every form of disadvantage is the same.

Another limitation concerns the relationship between theory and textual evidence. A literary argument cannot rely only on theoretical terms such as “resistance,” “subaltern voice,” or “marginalised body.” It must demonstrate how the poem’s actual language supports the interpretation.

The secondary sources also have different scopes. Some discuss Dalit women’s poetry broadly, some focus on Kandasamy’s writing, and others examine related issues of patriarchy, vernacular language, and cultural performance. Their arguments should be used according to what the full articles establish.

These precautions strengthen the assignment because they maintain a clear distinction between theoretical interpretation and direct textual evidence.

11. MAJOR FINDINGS

The study produces several important findings.

First, the body provides a useful means of examining the relationship between individual experience and social power. In the Ekalavya narrative, the body is connected to skill and then subjected to a demand that restricts that skill. In the interpretation of “One-Eyed,” bodily difference invites questions about social judgement and recognition.

Second, mythological revision can challenge dominant moral interpretations. The Ekalavya episode may be celebrated as a story of devotion, but a critical reading draws attention to the unequal power relationship behind the demand for sacrifice. This shift makes it possible to question whether obedience should be praised without examining the injustice that produces it.

Third, Dalit Feminism demonstrates the importance of studying caste and gender together. It challenges approaches that treat women as a uniform category and approaches to caste that ignore gendered experience.

Fourth, Subaltern Studies highlights the politics of voice and representation. A marginalised figure may be visible within a story while still being denied authority over the meaning of their experience. Critical reinterpretation can challenge this imbalance.

Fifth, poetry can contribute to resistance through language, memory, bodily imagery, and the reconsideration of inherited narratives. Shukla’s work on lyrical testimony, Kaushik’s discussion of identity repair, and Haldar’s study of Dalit feminist language provide useful critical contexts for understanding this potential.

Finally, the comparison of the two poems demonstrates the importance of close reading. Theoretical frameworks provide questions and concepts, but the particular meaning of each poem must be established through its language, form, and context.

12. CONCLUSION

This assignment has examined the politics of the marginalised body in Meena Kandasamy’s “Eklavyam” and “One-Eyed” through the theoretical frameworks of Dalit Feminism and Subaltern Studies. It has considered how caste oppression, gender inequality, social exclusion, and cultural authority influence the representation of bodies and identities.

The central argument is that the body is not merely a biological entity. It is also a site where social hierarchies become visible and where unequal power relations can be enforced. The body may be judged according to caste, gender, physical difference, or other social expectations. However, literary representation can question the meanings attached to these characteristics and challenge the assumption that dominant interpretations are natural or unquestionable.

“Eklavyam” provides an opportunity to reconsider the familiar story of Ekalavya. When the narrative is read only as a celebration of devotion and sacrifice, the unequal relationship between teacher and student may be overlooked. A critical interpretation shifts attention to the social conditions under which Ekalavya is required to surrender his thumb. The episode then becomes a question about educational exclusion, Nevertheless, theoretical interpretation must remain connected to textual evidence. The poems should not be treated as interchangeable examples of oppression, and their meanings should not be predetermined by the frameworks applied to them. Close reading is necessary to understand their distinctive language, imagery, and literary strategies.

Ultimately, the politics of the marginalised body is also the politics of recognition and interpretation. Who is allowed to learn, who must sacrifice, who is judged as different, and whose experiences are remembered are questions shaped by social power. By reconsidering cultural narratives and examining bodily representation, Kandasamy’s poems can be studied as interventions into the ways society understands marginalised identities.

WORKS CITED

Arya, Sunaina. “Dalit or Brahmanical Patriarchy? Rethinking Indian Feminism.” CASTE: A Global Journal on Social Exclusion, vol. 1, no. 1, 2020, pp. 217–28. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/48644572. Accessed 17 Oct. 2026.

Brueck, Laura. “Mother Tongues—the Disruptive Possibilities of Feminist Vernaculars.” South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, vol. 43, no. 5, Sept. 2020, pp. 988–1008. https://doi.org/10.1080/00856401.2020.1800231.

Gautam, C., and Sahana R. “Exploration of Power Dynamics in Meena Kandasamy’s Poetry.” Shanlax International Journal of Arts Science and Humanities, vol. 12, no. S4.May, May 2025, pp. 44–48. https://doi.org/10.34293/sijash.v12is4.may.9150.

Haldar, Debakanya. “Tracing the Language of Dalit Feminist Discourse: A Study of the Alternate Modernity in Dalit Women’s Poetry.” Agenda, vol. 33, no. 3, July 2019, pp. 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10130950.2019.1667735.

Kalyani, K. “Repertoires of Anti-Caste Sentiments in the Everyday Performance: Narratives of a Dalit Woman Singer.” CASTE: A Global Journal on Social Exclusion, vol. 4, no. 2, 2023, pp. 213–29. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/48749126. Accessed 17 Oct. 2026.

Kaushik, Maitray. “Reclaiming Voice: Poetry as Identity Repair in the Works of Dalit Women Poets.” Journal of Poetry Therapy, Feb. 2026, pp. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/08893675.2026.2629542.

Kandasamy, Meena. “Ekalaivan.” Touch, Peacock Books, 2006.

Kandasamy, Meena. “One-Eyed.” Ms Militancy, Navayana, 2010.

Patni, Gunja, and Sheehan S. Khan. “Caste and Gender Politics: An Understanding of Dalit Consciousness in the Poems of Contemporary Dalit Writers.” Contemporary Voice of Dalit, Jan. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1177/2455328x231209628.

Pooja. “A Feminist Outcry: Gendered Resistance in Meena Kandasamy’s Works.” International Journal of Advanced Research and Multidisciplinary Trends (IJARMT), vol. 3, no. 1, Mar. 2026, pp. 1369–77. https://doi.org/10.65578/ijarmt.v3.i1.975.

Shukla, Shruti. “Speaking Through Bodies: Dalit Women’s Lyrical Testimonies of Trauma and Possibilities of Encounter.” Wasafiri, vol. 40, no. 1, Jan. 2025, pp. 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02690055.2025.2435141.

Talat. “From Submission to Resistance: The Transformation of Dalit Women Bodies.” Contemporary Voice of Dalit, Nov. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1177/2455328x231198663.

Venkateswaran, Pramila. “Resounding Voices: Witnessing Caste Injustice Through Dalit Poetry.” South Asian Review, Aug. 2026, pp. 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/02759527.2026.2709947.

Saturday, October 17, 2026