What is property law? Property law entails much more than the average person may believe it to. Many may think it only concerns land and ownership of said land, and while it does, it also deals with land ownership through the lenses of gender, socioeconomic standing, or even race. In general, property law deals with categories of people and their accessibility and rights to land. However, in our class, we focused on people’s rights to land based on their gender and class. A better way to phrase this is to say property law determines how rights get distributed.
On this page you will be able to find works on The God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy, “Women, Marriage, and the Subordination of Rights” by Flavia Agnes, “Land Rights for Women” by Bina Agarwal, and “Literary Evidence and Legal Aesthetics” by Simon Stern.
Arundhati Roy’s Use of The God of Small Things to Criticize Laws in Indian Society
Literature can be used to communicate an author’s opinion on the current state of the world. This can be seen in Arundhati Roy’s novel The God of Small Things. This book follows an Indian family as they deal with the death of a family member, Sophie Mol. The book focuses on a pair of twins, Rahel and Estha, and their mother, taking place in two separate timelines, one when the twins are children and the other when they are adults. Arundhati Roy builds essential themes throughout her novel The God of Small Things that not only criticize the laws in India in the 1960s, but also express a disdain for the strict society and its priorities at the time.
First, Roy builds a theme of struggling to maintain boundaries and utilizes it to criticize Indian marriage laws at the time and society’s expectations of people. The first example of blurred boundaries is Roy’s description of nature in the beginning. Nature is seen as slowly overtaking the social world around it as, “pepper vines snake up electric poles” (Roy 7). The description parallels Baby Kochamma’s fear of the twins’ arrival back to India. Baby Kochamma does not want the twins to uproot all she has established since their departure. The twins themselves are an example of blurred boundaries. They lack individual identities apart from each other and are often grouped together as one. Rahel is depicted as curious, while Estha takes to housework, both of which are the opposite of what societal gender roles would expect of them at the time. The breaking of boundaries between the twins reaches its climax in the final chapters when they sleep together ultimately defying all societal rules. The twins are not the only ones in the family that do not fit in the bounds of the people they are meant to be according to society. Ammu, the twins’ mother, also does this by divorcing her husband. At the time people would describe Ammu as “die-vorced” because a woman lost many of her rights without a husband, and Ammu ends up dying because her choice leaves her destitute after her family abandons her (Roy 140). By making Ammu divorce her husband, Roy depicts the cruelty of the law to divorced women.
Next, Roy develops the theme of elusive love which she utilizes to criticize the caste system and depict the impact of colonialism on the area. The first example of love that is hard to achieve is seen in the movie theatre when Ammu tells Rahel, “when you hurt people, they begin to love you less” (Roy 121). This comment caused Rahel to constantly fear not having her mother’s love for the rest of her life. This comment takes a piece of Rahel’s childhood safety from her and pushes her into constant fear of not being loved. The only character that is shown love outwardly is Sophie Mol. She is described as, “loved from the beginning” (Roy 145). The character not from India is the only one getting shown love, which emphasizes how the characters are anglophiles. The only true, untainted love depicted is between Ammu and Velutha. Although they are in love, they cannot be together because the “Love Laws” forbid it (Roy 188). Velutha does not belong to a caste; he is a Dalit. Them being together completely goes against Indian law and societal expectations. Their love, although pure, ultimately succumbs to the tragedy of the novel, as it gets taken away from them because they did not follow strict social expectations.
Finally, Roy utilizes the theme of pride and shame to critique how British ideas were infiltrating and modifying Indian society at the time. When Sophie Mol first arrives, Baby Kochamma memorizes Shakespeare to impress her. Baby Kochamma is trying to demonstrate her worth to Sophie Mol by doing this, which feeds into the family’s admiration of British people and culture. The obsession the family and society have with British ideas creates an ironic situation in the story. When the police find Velutha after Baby Kochamma lies about him taking advantage of Ammu, they beat him with a sense of pride. They viewed it as if they “were merely inoculating a community against an outbreak” (Roy 322). The real plague in their society is the British influence. They changed traditional Indian dances to make them more suitable to tourists. They molded their culture to be more appealing to a different culture.
Overall, Roy’s use of literature to criticize societal expectations and laws is impactful because of her use of literary elements to make a story in which the reader can become emotionally invested in. Literature can be helpful in spreading awareness on societal issues; however, it must first gain the interest of readers first. Roy appeals to readers by utilizing a tragic love story plot, which is not only used to engage the reader, but also to communicate and criticize the laws around love and the caste system in India. Roy has not only accomplished writing an impactful, attention-grabbing novel, but she has also raised consciousness on the property law issues taking place in India.
Works Cited
Roy, Arundhati. The God of Small Things. Random House Publishing Group, 2008.
By Kaylea Lantz
Flavia Agnes’s “Women, Marriage, and the Subordination of Rights” and Women’s Property
Flavia Agnes’s “Women, Marriage, and the Subordination of Rights” tasks itself with the exploration of women’s rights, or lack thereof, in a both historical and contemporary India. This region has a documented history of placing laws into act that specifically undermine the rights of women of any relationship status. Marriage for many women across India was much more than a legal commitment to a partner, and oftentimes women of all ages were forced into these unions and left with little to no personal identity. The implications of marriage during this time did not just stop at the loss of personal identity, though, but the loss of economic identification as well.
Agnes works to identify the effects that a patriarchal society has on Southern India as a whole, but specifically women and their rights.
This piece of literature examines the overtone of marriage and commitment of women in both a historical and modern Southern India. In an archival India, the rights of a woman and her property varied greatly depending on their personal status. These three phases are maidenhood, coverture, and then eventually widowhood. Within each phase of their life, women suffered greatly, however coverture offered the most brutal of inferiority. Under both Roman and English Law, coverture were placed under complete guardianship of their husbands, and deprived of all rights regarding property. During this time, divorce was extremely uncommon and highly frowned upon, which meant that the only way a woman could be released from coverture was widowhood.
Islamic Law appears to be the most progressive surrounding women’s rights to property, and was the first legal system to release women from the idea of coverture and recognize a women’s right to property during marriage. From its inception in the seventh century, Islamic Law viewed marriage as a sacred event, as long as it was completely consensual to both parties involved. A thousand years later, this same idea was cemented into law by the Continental legal system, where it then spread to England, and then subsequently incorporated into Hindu Law as well. Many changes were set into place by the Islamic Law with the attempt to protect women and their rights during the time of marriage; this included a mandatory contract between husband and wife that included specific safeguards set in place to protect a women’s economic rights. In tribal Arabia, a custom referred to as bride price (an amount of money paid to the bride’s father) was formally changed to mehr, which was used to represent the respect of a woman, and was a crucial piece of each marital contract. According to the Hedaya, a woman has the right to refuse cohabitation if the husband does not pay the agreed upon amount. Since this system did not subscribe to the notion of coverture, the legal status of a married woman is never to be suspended during a time of marriage.
Ancient Hindu law was much more conservative with women’s rights after marriage, and under this system (as well as the Christian system), a woman lost all legal rights to property ownership and control after the union. Property rights under this legal system were based solely around Joint Family Property, where ownership of property is split between four generations of male members. However, this was more for notion than reality because property was wholly controlled by the male head of the family. The men in these families held the right to demand partition, however since women did not legally have rights to acquire land, they completely lost the right to demand partition. A widow, however, could claim a share that is equal to the value of her son’s land. While women had limited access to property rights under the Hindu legal system, they did have the ability to demand marriage expenses that came directly from the profits made by joint family property. After the marriage ceremony, the bride was removed from her natural nuclear family, and transferred to the home of her new husband. After marriage, a woman completely lost her legal rights to live and maintain within her natural nuclear home. Through this agreement though, a woman was promised access to six categories: gifts received from her father, mother, brother, husband, and in-laws, gifts at marriage, and a marriage fee on the occasion that her husband remarries.
Agnes’s “Women, Marriage, and the Subordination of Rights” identifies the variations of women’s rights after marriage under different systems of law. However, one thing remains constant – a woman’s right to property is severely impacted after marriage regardless of the legal system they are married under. This account of property rights fully encompasses the inequality of law based on gender, as well as social status.
Works Cited
Chatterjee, Partha, et al. “Women, Marriage, and the Subordination of Rights.” Community, Gender and Violence, Columbia University Press, New York, 2000.
By Jena Spies
Power in Bina Agarwal’s “Land Rights for Women”
“Land Rights for Women” is an excerpt from Bina Agarwal’s 1994 book A Field of One’s Own: Gender and Land Rights in South Asia and explores the property, gender, and power dynamic in South Asia. Agarwal explains the ways women in South Asia have been oppressed in their lives such as being forced into marriages, being overlooked for inheritance of ancestral land, and struggling to survive after the losing of a marriage. She states that the gaining of property ownership for women can be “the single most critical entry point for women’s empowerment in South Asia” (Agarwal 2). “Land Rights for Women” is about the power of cultural values keeping women oppressed, the power of land ownership, and the power that women can gain from property ownership.
Agarwal claims the women of South Asia have “struggled for and won fairly extensive rights to inherit and control land in much of South Asia; but in practice most stand disinherited”(2). Women have fought and won the rights to be land owners but are still blocked by a barrier that prevents them from exercising these rights: the cultural values of South Asia. These values have placed men as the heads of households and assume that there is no need for a woman to have rights to land leading to the practice of land being inherited by sons, brothers, brothers in law instead of women who may be more rightful and legal inheritors of the land. This is due to the cultural and social values of the region which prefer men over women when inheriting land and property. Cultural values of South Asia have denied women the power to control their lives through the denial of rightful property and the assumption of male supremacy preventing women from being equals in their communities.
Land ownership can be powerful for any person in South Asia having economic, political, and symbolic importance. Agarwal claims arable land has the ability to be a “productive, wealth-creating, and livelihood sustaining asset” (17). When compared to other forms of property such as jewelry, money, and wage work, land that can be used to make money is more valuable in every case due to its ability to continue to provide. Land has the power to be what one depends on to support themselves and their families and it even provides a sense of identity within communities. Agarwal explains that land is often seen as a symbol of status in South Asia, being a large factor in determining one’s place within society determining much of one’s social power and is often viewed as being more valuable than other assets due to its significance ancestrally and its stability.
Women stand to gain much from expanded land ownership in South Asia and Agarwal is quick to point this out through statements that highlight the upside for women such as higher social standing, greater household stability, and the ability to effect change. She says “Those who own and/or control wealth generating property can exercise considerable direct or indirect control over principal institutions that shape ideology”(16). Land Rights for Women shows that if women can gain access to valuable land the resources that have influence over the lives of people such as the newspaper, TV, and literature become a tool for women to continue to expand their rights. The power that women can gain from owning and controlling land can be exerted in many areas of their lives and can potentially improve the qualities of life for all women of South Asia through their influence.
“Land Rights for Women” details the power associated with cultural beliefs over laws, the power of land ownership for any persons of South Asia, and the huge potential upsides of women’s land rights being implemented. Agarwal manages to explain the complexities and implications of certain systems and how they relate to the power that is spread through communities and how it may be subject to change. She is able to highlight the importance of women’s land rights, along with the power that has been used to oppress and can potentially be gained by women.
Works Cited
Agarwal, Bina. “Land Rights for Women.” A Field of One’s Own: Gender and Land Rights in South Asia, Cambridge University Press, 1995, pp. 1–50.
By Kyle Grenier
The Relationship of Law and Literature in “Literary Evidence and Legal Aesthetics”
Simon Stern’s “Literary Evidence and Legal Aesthetics” observes the connection between the teachings of legal and literary courses. Stern takes into account the methods of both law professors and English professors to examine the ways that they go about assessing course materials, and the impact of their differences. Stern analyzes the relationship between law and literature to find the significance of each and consider the reliance that they have on each other. Stern addresses these claims through describing each field’s method of teaching and suggesting ways that they are both helpful to students, and for finding the answers to legal questions.
English classes focus on cultural analysis and extracting ideas from narrative. Law is seen as a place to explore humanistic meaning, not just the formalities of legal decisions. Stern states, “While students in the English classroom are carefully parsing an opinion’s rhetorical and narrative structures and inquiring into the cultural logic entailed, there is usually little understanding of issues that would be fundamental to any legal discussion” (249). Rather than focusing on the factual evidence that brings closure, the English department finds closure “by examining the narrative strategies that produce it” (252). English departments will utilize readings of fiction and drama to highlight certain similarities that they may have with legal readings, to affirm the importance of detailed cultural analysis. Literary elements become significant when considering a law’s representation of society and evaluating legal justification. Literary accounts can point out the ways that legal documents may not be transparent.
Courses on law are going to focus on a curriculum that is strictly significant to the legal process. Law course readings are chosen for the purpose of “logic, rigor, or consequentialist analysis” (249). The understanding and use of evidence is used as a basis for judgement. Professors tend to fixate on the ethical and the moral questions within a story. Rather than emphasizing legal and literary similarities, “law professors usually rely entirely on readings imported as a corrective to the students’ standard fare” (249). According to Stern, law professors may protest that “language ignores the many other considerations that inform legal analysis and scholarship- such as legitimacy, transparency, and jurisdictional authority” (245). Rather than finding relations between legal readings and narratives, law professors typically present readings of fixed perspective to find evidential reasoning.
Although the approach of law and literary classes are different, there are qualities of each that are beneficial in expanding a student’s frame of reference and understanding of the law. According to Stern, professors notoriously have the “tendency to poach on other fields, enthusiastically selecting the material that seems to support their agenda and not much caring about debates in the other discipline” (245). For example, law professors may regard a piece of literature as a source of humanistic principle to further make a point about the law. Fixation on a specific aspect of a piece can diminish the importance of interdisciplinary work. Interdisciplinary work provides the opportunity to gain skills from one style of teaching and apply it to others. According to Stern, “Promoting cross-disciplinary discussion in this way may help develop a more truly interdisciplinary body of scholarship” (246). Understanding the concepts of both disciplines allows for the discovery of thought patterns and analysis that could have been missed within a piece. Stern ultimately concludes that, “a class in law and literature can give students a more sophisticated interdisciplinary understanding of both narratives and legal opinions” (252).
Stern’s essay “Literary Evidence and Legal Aesthetics” explores the barriers placed between the teachings of law and literature. These courses provide varying strategies and goals, yet they are both concerned with the concept of representation. A legal mind will focus on competent evidence and finding conclusions based off details. A literary mind approaches a conclusion through a more unfocused analysis that might consist of “Questions about tradition, convention, allusion, literary movements, and generic form” (247). The collective goal is to have a world in which the principle of justice is present. Although justice is brought about through factual circumstances within the law, justice stands as a moral value that renders what a person deserves. Understanding both the specific and broader ideas within the law allows for more progressive decisions moving forward. Navigating the attainability of justice becomes brighter and clearer when lawmakers have an expanded understanding of law and literature. Having the interdisciplinary knowledge of both departments creates a more versatile thinker. Given their differences, there is much more room to explore and form new answers to questions.
Works Cited
Sarat, Austin, et al. “‘Literary Evidence and Legal Aesthetics’.” Teaching Law and Literature, Modern Language Association of America, 2011, pp. 244–252.
By Laura Pallay
Legal Fictions 