Abstract:
This article critically examines the representation of queer and transgender
identities in Malayalam literature, focusing on the pervasive influence of
authorial cisgender gaze in shaping these narratives. Through an analysis of
works such as Ram C/o Anandhi, Randu Penkuttikal, and Shabdangal,
the study highlights how cisgender authors often frame queer lives through
heteronormative lenses, reducing them to tropes of suffering, or moralistic
resolutions. Drawing on theorists like Butler, Halberstam and Stryker, the study
argues that such portrayals reinforce heteronormative comfort rather than
transgender authenticity. Transgender characters are frequently excluded from
visual narratives or depicted as tragic figures, while lesbian relationships are
invalidated through forced heteronormative conclusions. The article also
explores the commodification of trans trauma and reader-pleasing strategies that
prioritize sympathy over agency. By contextualizing these literary trends within
broader theoretical frameworks such as performativity, the male gaze, and
transgender critiques, the paper underscores the need for authentic, inclusive
storytelling that transcends cisgender perspectives. Moving on from tracing the
evolution of queer studies, this study examines a few queer narratives in
Malayalam, and concludes with an examination of the politics of authorial
cisgender gaze in Akhil P. Dharmajan’s Ram C/o Anandhi (first published
in 2019), emphasizing the need to move beyond reductive portrayals and embrace
the complexity of queer lived experiences.
Keywords:
Queer narratives, cisgender gaze,
heteronormativity, transgender representation,
trauma commodification.
Queer theory can be considered as a
theoretical approach that engages with defining and interpreting non-binary
gender identities and experiences. It is an academic and political framework
that encompasses gender and sexual diversity prioritizing the politics of
visibility. It developed by questioning the power structures embedded in
traditional gender and sexual norms and by problematizing existing systems of
dominance. In terms of knowledge production, queer theory introduces a radically
new perspective that challenges conventional understandings of gender and
sexuality. Although studies on sexual diversities such as lesbian and gay
identities were part of feminist thought since the 1970s, it was only after the
1990s that the term “queer” developed
into a theoretical approach in academic discourses. Subsequently, discussions on
lesbianism and gender diversities began to gain strength in society. Therefore,
queer theory’s conceptual framework
is closely linked to feminist studies.
Susan Stryker states that trans-studies was “queer theory’s evil twin (214).
Andrea Long Chu in dialogue with Emmett Harsin Drager, rephrases it: “Trans
studies is the twin that queer studies ate in the womb. The womb, as usual, was
feminism” (Chu and Drager 2019, 103)
Both
feminist thought and queer theory simultaneously challenge the politics of
traditional patriarchy and actively participate in efforts to deconstruct it.
Queer theory establishes that gender and sexuality are distinct, asserting that
gender is not determined by traditional notions of the body but rather by the
brain (Butler). By emphasizing that gender and sexuality are matters of personal
choice, queer theory completely dismantles conventional gender norms. Bisexual,
transgender, and intersex communities have come to recognize their shared
experiences and similarities. Halberstam observes that while “feminism has
historically interrogated the oppression of women under patriarchy, queer theory
extends this critique to the policing of sexuality and gender norms. Together,
they destabilize the foundational assumptions of heteronormative power" (108).
Within this context, queer theory brings
visibility to gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer, and fluid identities,
undermining the idea of a singular, fixed understanding of gender and sexuality.
A common thread among these identities is that they all question and resist the
power structure of heteronormativity. Linda Schlossberg observes that
‘heterosexual culture continually passes itself off as being merely natural, the
undisputed and unmarked norm (5). Gender diversity has no social sanction in
such societies. Berlant and Warner comment: “Heteronormativity is more than
ideology, or prejudice, or phobia against gays and lesbians; it is produced in
almost every aspect of the forms and arrangements of social life: nationality,
the state, and the law; commerce; medicine; and education; as well as in the
conventions and affects of narrativity, romance, and other protected spaces of
culture (554-5).
The queer movement, which began in
America, carried the politics of visibility and spread to various parts of the
world. The 1969 Gay-Lesbian Movement, the Lesbian Movement, and later the
emerging transgender communities all played a crucial role in shaping the
political landscape of queer theory. By the 1980s, the LGB (Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual) collective was the first to align under the queer umbrella. It was
only later that transgender individuals became part of this expanding framework.
"While early gay and lesbian movements laid the groundwork for queer resistance,
their politics often reinforced a binary understanding of gender. The
incorporation of transgender critiques in the 1990s fundamentally disrupted this
logic, forcing queer theory to confront its own exclusions and expand its
liberatory potential." (Valentine 58). Now, queer studies have evolved into a
broad and inclusive space, encompassing LGBTIQA+ identities, recognizing the
diversity of gender and sexuality.
The relationships and diversities of
queer identities cannot be confined within the heterosexual socio-legal
structures. Queer struggles primarily focus on securing their identity within
the citizen society they live in, and integrating it with broader social and
cultural frameworks. The word ‘queer’ has traditionally been defined in
dictionaries as meaning ‘different,’ ‘distinct,’ ‘strange,’ or ‘unnatural.
However, today, the term queer has evolved into a theoretical, political,
social, and academic concept. Instead of signifying isolation or otherness, the
term has evolved celebrating diversity and inclusivity. Jagose observes: "Once a
term of exclusion and pathologization, ‘queer’ has been reclaimed as a defiant
theoretical and political stance—one that embraces fluidity, resists fixed
categories, and challenges normative structures of gender and sexuality. In its
contemporary usage, queer theory does not merely include marginalized identities
but actively critiques the systems that produce marginalization itself."(3). The
queer community advocates for revising the traditional understanding about sex,
gender, and sexuality. It asserts that the expressions of gender identity are
either constructed or shaped in accordance with social structures.
The political nature of queer theory
began to be articulated through writings and organizations in the early 20th
century. However, two texts written in 4th century BCE Greece ‘Symposium’ and ‘Laws’ are
considered among the earliest studies discussing queer individuals. These works
were authored by Plato. By the 1990s, serious academic studies on queer
identities were consolidated, defining a new political landscape for queer
theory. William G. Tierney’s ‘Academic
Outlaws’ (1997) and Patrick Dilley’s ‘Queer
Man on Campus: A History of Non-Heterosexual College Man 1945-2000’ attempt
to explain queer theory based on these ideas.
Sexuality and gender identity are social
constructs. It is society that dictates the idea that only male and female
genders are natural while everything else is unnatural. In ‘Gender
Trouble, Butler asserts that both gender and sexuality are performative. A
person is not born a man but becomes one through cultural shaping. In other
words, gender is constructed through social and cultural practices including an
individual's lifestyle, clothing choices, psychological aspects, and social
structures. Butler emphasizes that gender and sexuality are not fixed states but
are fluid and constantly changing. She argues that binaries such as man/woman,
masculinity/femininity, and gender roles are constructs and are performative in
nature. Simone de Beauvoir’s interpretation of gender aligns closely with Judith
Butler’s theory of performativity. Beauvoir famously stated,
“One is not born a woman but becomes one” (Second Sex 283).
Similarly, Butler’s ‘Bodies That Matter’
(1993) explores how cultural and social constructs shape perceptions of
sexuality. Butler’s ideas delve into how identity and selfhood are constructed
through social practices. She argues that gender and sexuality are both produced
and defined within these practices. Understanding this helps to contextualize
the claim that gender is not innate but performatively constructed (2). In
addition to Judith Butler, scholars such as Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, Michel
Foucault, Teresa de Lauretis, Diana Fuss, Michael Warner, and William G. Tierney
have also attempted to theorize the construction of gender. Post-structuralism
challenged essentialist notions of identity. Michael Foucault’s ‘The
History of Sexuality’ argues that sexuality is not a natural essence but a
socially constructed discourse shaped by power (43). Derrida’s concept of
deconstruction inspired queer theory to dismantle binaries like male/female,
heterosexual/homosexual, and natural/unnatural. Queer theories challenge the
authoritative spaces of the male-female binary and symbolically unite under the
umbrella of rainbow colors.
The representation of queer identities in
Malayalam literature must be understood within the broader socio-historical
context of Kerala’s complex relationship with gender and sexuality. While Kerala
boasts high literacy rates and progressive social indicators, its cultural
narratives have often been constrained by rigid heteronormative frameworks.
Early Malayalam literature either erased queer existence or relegated it to
tragic tropes; a trend Judith Butler’s concept of the "heterosexual matrix" (Gender
Trouble 6) helps explain, where narratives naturalize binary gender and
cis-heterosexuality. The few works that engaged with queer themes taken for
scrutiny here; such as Randu Penkuttikal
(Two Girls) by V.T. Nandakumar (1974),
Shabdangal (Voices) (1947) by Vaikom Muhammed Basheer, and
Napumsakangal (Impotent) (1983) a
story by Madhavikutty; did so through what Laura Mulvey terms the 'male gaze' (Visual
Pleasure 11), here extended to a 'cisgender gaze,' reducing queer lives to
objects of pity or moral instruction. Such portrayals exemplify Lauren Berlant
and Michael Warner’s critique of how heteronormativity operates through "the
conventions and affects of narrativity" ("Sex in Public" 554), where queer
characters serve as plot devices rather than fully realized subjects. By
examining these texts through queer theory’s disruptive framework, this section
exposes how Malayalam literature has both resisted and reproduced the power
structures it claims to challenge.
Queer themes were rare and indirect in
Malayalam literature in the early stages, and they were often framed as intense
friendships or doomed relationships. Lesbian narratives appeared earlier than
gay ones, possibly due to the greater social acceptance of female intimacy, and
such stories often ended in separation, madness or death, reinforcing
heteronormative morality. Randu
Penkuttikal (1974) by V. T Nandakumar is a poignant tale of the emotional
intensity of the warm affection between two young girls. It is considered the
first novel in Malayalam to address the theme of same-sex love. The novel
narrates the extraordinary story of Girija and Kokila, two schoolgirls, and
their mutual affection. Written in the popular narrative style of the time, the
novel traces how their friendship gradually transforms into love, ultimately
culminating in a physical relationship. The deep and inseparable bond between
Girija and Kokila is beautifully portrayed. However, all the conventional
stereotypes of lesbian relationships seen through the perspective of
heterosexual male imagination are present in this novel. Though the story was
controversial for its time, it opened discussions on same-sex love in Malayalam
literature.
Lesbianism is one of the sexual
orientations under the broader LGBTQA+ spectrum and focuses specifically on
women’s same-sex attraction. Studies have not succeeded in substantiating the
origin of lesbianism, but suggest that it may have biological, familial and
environmental reasons (Shree and Gayathri 1002). However, in
Randu Penkuttikal, the author portrays lesbianism in a misguided
manner, suggesting that any kind of 'shock' or traumatic experience in a
person's life can lead them to become a lesbian. This depiction creates a false
understanding of what lesbianism truly is among readers. Similarly, the author's
heteronormative perspective becomes evident in this novel. Towards the end of
the narrative, there is a departure from its core theme. Girija and Kokila's
bonding is shattered. Instead of choosing to live together, their romantic bond
is broken, and they move toward what society would consider a "normal" marital
relationship. Girija is set to marry Dr. Babu in the final part of the novel,
and Babu speaks to her about their separation. “It doesn't matter, Girija.
That's how it happens.
Nature has created men and women to come together
and create future generations. Anything
outside of that cannot last.
All of it is just an illusion, a kind of
obsession” (283). Considering the nature of the theme, the ending of the
novel seems forced. Adrienne Rich’s seminal work, “Compulsory Heterosexuality
and Lesbian Existence” (1980) argues that ‘heterosexuality, like motherhood,
needs to be recognized and studied as a political institution’ (637) challenging
the idea that heterosexuality is natural and instinctual but ideological.
Heterosexuality enforces a power relation which succeeds in othering lesbians as
‘deviant, as pathological, or as emotionally and sensually deprived’ (652). She
suggests a ‘lesbian continuum’ as possible remedy to compulsory heterosexuality
and a collective resistance to patriarchy, which can efficiently counter the
binary between ‘women’ and ‘lesbians’ (657). The novel’s abrupt shift to
heterosexuality mirrors what Rich terms ‘compulsory heterosexuality;’ a
patriarchal institution that enforces heterosexuality as the only viable
outcome. Girija’s marriage to Dr. Babu reflects societal pressure to conform,
reducing lesbianism to a ‘phase’ or ‘obsession.
The cisgender author's heteronormative
voice is heard prominently in the narrative, and it disseminates several
misconceptions about lesbianism and ultimately privileges heterosexuality. The
novel fails to clearly distinguish between sexuality and identity. It emphasizes
the notion that same-sex attraction arises due to circumstances. Adapted into a
film in 1978, Randu Penkuttikal was
one of the first Indian movies to address lesbianism.
As Carroll argues, heteronormativity not only
oppresses non-heterosexual identities but also penalizes heterosexuals who
deviate from marital or reproductive norms. This dynamic is evident in works
like Randu Penkuttikal, where lesbian desire is invalidated through
forced heterosexual resolutions. Directed by Mohan, many elements of the novel
were excluded in the film, and the same-sex love depicted in the novel was
reduced to mere friendship. As a result, the film
Randu Penkuttikal failed to do justice to the revolutionary theme,
and to those who belong to the LGBTQA+ spectrum.
In Vaikom Muhammad Basheer's novel ‘Shabdangal’
(Voices) published in 1947,
there is a transgender character who appears to have all the physical attributes
of a woman. However, after engaging in a physical relationship, her rough voice
startles the protagonist. The seventh chapter ends with the question,
“Why? You were born a man after all!
(431)". The protagonist, who initially fell in love with her, believing her
to be a woman, realizes his mistake upon discovering that she is transgender.
Basheer’s narrative style and language reflect the thought process of a
heterosexual male writer. Basheer titles the eighth chapter
"Aanveshya"
(translated as ‘male
prostitute’) (432), which presents a linguistic and cultural issue. The
use of terms writers employ to address transgender individuals influences
readers and contributes to the practice of labeling them with politically
incorrect terminology. Basheer does not perceive transgender lives in terms of
gender diversity; rather, the narrative unfolds through a lens heavily focused
on sexuality. The emphasis is placed more on the material problems they face
rather than their identities or psychological experiences beyond suffering.
“Napumsakangal”
(Eunuchs) is a short story written by Madhavikutty in 1983. The story is set
against the backdrop of Bombay city. It unfolds in a slum area, amidst squalid
surroundings, where people who cross-dress as women yet must shave their faces
daily. The author describes that their primary means of livelihood include
blessing people, begging, and sex work. The main characters are Ram Kinkari, the
leader of the hijra community, and a mother who lost her child years ago.
Believing that hijras had abducted her child, the mother arrives at their slum
in search of it. Madhavikutty gives significant emphasis to the theme of
motherhood in this story. Here, sexually deviant individuals are positioned
outside the framework of maternal emotions. The narrative is influenced by
notions of heteronormativity and abhorrence of gender diversity. By evaluating
hijras through the lens of mainstream society, the author portrays them as
aggressive and violent.
In Malayalam literature, there is still a
noticeable dearth of works that vividly depict transgender characters and their
struggles; notwithstanding the contributions made both directly or indirectly by
by Vijayarajamallika, Living Smile Vidya, Akkai Padmashali, Jeeva Rajagopal,
Kalki Subramaniam, Nandini Krishnan, Kishore Kumar, K. Vaishali, and Adarsh E to
name a few. In some novels, these characters appear fleetingly only to vanish
quickly. A few cisgender authors have ventured into this territory; Akhil P.
Dharmajan, the author of Ram c/o Anandhi, being a recent example. In
Ram c/o Anandhi,” Malli a transwoman character, occupies a significant role
throughout the novel. However, her image is not included in the illustration on
the cover of the novel whereas all the other important characters are given a
place in it, serves as a metaphoric representation of the social exclusion that
transpeople face. This omission may be due to the uncertainty around how to
portray a trans woman. The societal ideas of womanhood are at odds with Malli’s
identity. Or it could be to satisfy the society’s secret wish to make invisible
everything that does not conform to its notions of ‘normalcy.’
There is a politics behind the exclusion
of the character Malli from the cover. It can be attributed to the author’s
cisgender gaze. According to Lora Mulvey, gaze creates a subjective power
dynamic. Both the gazer and the gazed at feel this power difference, as the
latter becomes objectified. Three types of gazes namely ‘the spectator’s gaze,’
‘the male gaze, and ‘the woman’s gaze’ are in vogue in literary discourses since
Mulvey’s problematization of ‘gaze’ as it operates in visual culture. Similarly,
the extended term ‘cisgender gaze’ used here refers to the perspective that a
cisgender person is conditioned to practice, being a subject heteronormativity.
Such a gaze would tend to
portray transgender individuals through a narrow lens that reflects societal
norms and biases, leading to misrepresentation or oversimplification of their
identities and experiences. Similar to the male gaze, the author’s cisgender
gaze can form a new power dynamic, where cisgender perspectives dominate
transgender lives.
Another reason for the exclusion of Malli
from the cover page may be the commodification of trans trauma. It is primarily
a book marketing strategy. In the novel, the writer compares the love that Ram
has for Anandhi to the life of the pearl spot fish (karimeen) (301). The
fish has only one partner during its lifetime, and if it loses that partner, it
does not choose another. This reflects the intensity and beauty of Ram’s love
for Anandhi. As a result, this love finds a special place in the hearts of the
readers. Now, Malli reveals her past to Ram. She tells him that her old name was
Kalidas and that her father’s friends had raped her. When it was discovered that
Kalidas chose to identify as a girl, her education was stopped, and Kalidas left
the village after falling in love with someone else, but that person deceived
her. She was gang raped, and then she was discarded like trash. She eventually
joined a group of transgenders and accepted the name Malli. In a particular
context, when Anandhi asks what does Kalidas say, Ram responds, “Kalidas is
dead; now it is Malli who lives (108).” Later, when Malli decides to return to
her home, she meets Ram for the last time. She writes her name next to Ram’s and
says, “Let me have a place beside your name, at least on this cement bench
(199).” At this moment that Ram realizes that Malli’s love is genuine. Ram holds
Malli in a tight hug and calls her Kalidas,” and says, “I’ll pray to God that
you become my child in the next life, and then I’ll protect you as my dearest,
keeping you safe from all harm (200)”. Despite having earlier said that “Kalidas
is dead, and now Malli lives,” Ram now calls her Kalidas in this moment. Here,
the writer’s heteronormative thinking becomes evident. The writer is unable to
free himself from the traditional concept of love that was previously mentioned.
The writer is suggesting that Malli, as a transwoman, cannot transcend into that
idealized notion of love.
Queer theory exposes how heteronormativity constructs
homosexuality as ‘deviant.’ This is where Malli’s trans identity is othered; her
exclusion from the book cover and Ram’s final words reinforce a binary logic
that denies her agency.
Gratifying the heterosexual society’s
expectations maybe necessary for a writer to ensure financial success and career
advancements. The heterosexual society fetishizes the rape, suffering and
victimhood of transpeople. The novelist finally ensures a safe landing by
affirming the reader’s existing worldview. Rather than challenging or expanding
the reader’s perspective, the writer seems to strive to meet readers’
expectations, ultimately succeeding in doing so. Some readers may view Malli
through the lens of sympathy, as they are conditioned to see transgenders as
deserving only sympathy.
1.
Basheer,
Vaikom Muhammad. Shabdangal. DC Books, 1979.
2.
Berlant,
Lauren, and Michael Warner. "Sex in Public." Critical Inquiry, vol. 24,
no. 2, 1998, pp. 547-66. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.1086/448884.
3.
Butler,
Judith. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of "Sex." Routledge,
1993.
4.
---. Gender
Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge, 1990.
5.
Carroll, Rachel. Rereading
Heterosexuality: Feminism, Queer Theory and Contemporary Fiction. Edinburgh
University Press, 2012. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt3fgtnm.
6.
Chu, Andrea
Long, and Emmett Harsin Drager. "After Trans Studies." Transgender Studies
Quarterly, vol. 6, no. 1, 2019, pp. 103-16. Project MUSE,
doi:10.1215/23289252-7348476.
7.
De
Beauvoir, Simone. The Second Sex. Translated by Constance Borde and
Sheila Malovany-Chevallier, Vintage Books, 2011.
8.
Dharmajan,
Akhil P. Ram C/o Anandhi. Green Books, 2019.
9.
Dilley,
Patrick. *Queer Man on Campus: A History of Non-Heterosexual College Men
1945-2000.* RoutledgeFalmer, 2002.
10.
Foucault,
Michel. The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction. Pantheon
Books, 1978. Translated by Robert Hurley.
11.
Halberstam,
Jack. The Queer Art of Failure. Duke UP, 2011.
12.
Jagose,
Annamarie. Queer Theory: An Introduction. NYU Press, 1996.
13.
Madhavikkutty. "Napumsakangal." Palayanam. Current Books, 2009.
14.
Mulvey,
Laura. "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema." Screen, vol. 16, no. 3,
1975, pp. 6-18. Oxford Academic, doi:10.1093/screen/16.3.6.
15.
Randu
Penkuttikal. Directed by Mohan,
performances by Lakshmi and Jayabharathi, Uma Films, 1978. Film.
16.
Rich,
Adrienne. "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence." Signs, vol.
5, no. 4, 1980, pp. 631-60. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3173834.
17.
Schlossberg, Linda. "Introduction: Rites of Passing." Passing: Identity and
Interpretation in Sexuality, Race, and Religion, edited by María Carla
Sánchez and Linda Schlossberg, New York UP, 2001, pp. 1-12.
18.
Shree, K.
Rupa, and N. Gayathri. "Understanding the Concept of Lesbianism: From Lifestyle
to Social Phenomenon." Journal of Positive School Psychology, vol. 6, no.
12, 2022, pp. 1002-12, http://journalppw.com.
19.
Stryker,
Susan. "Transgender Studies: Queer Theory's Evil Twin." GLQ, vol. 10, no.
2, 2004, pp. 212-15. Project MUSE, doi:10.1215/10642684-10-2-212.
20.
Tierney,
William G. Academic Outlaws: Queer Theory and Cultural Studies in the
Academy. SAGE Publications, 1997.
21.
Valentine,
David. Imagining Transgender: An Ethnography of a Category. Duke UP,
2007.