Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
10.55041/IJSREM57064
Volume:
10 |
2 |
Feb 2026
Pages:
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Early criticism of Kamala Markandaya’s fiction, particularly between 1968 and 1985, positioned her novels within frameworks of East–West cultural dialectics, identity formation, symbolic patterning, and tragic inevitability. While these foundational readings established her as a major Indo-Anglian novelist, they frequently privileged civilizational conflict and aesthetic structure over gendered material realities. This article revisits major early critics, including Chandrasekharan, Harrex, Chauhan, Gulati, Inamdar, Jain, and Jha—to examine how Markandaya’s critical reception was shaped by nationalist humanism and formalist paradigms that under-theorized women’s embodied precarity. Through the method of historiographical analysis and feminist re-reading, this paper contends that Markandaya’s fiction precedes postcolonial feminist realist trends in the areas of hunger, labour, economic dispossession, and agency. Rather than being situated in the East/West divide, this paper seeks to reposition Markandaya as a novelist of gendered vulnerability in the colonial and postcolonial contexts. Moreover, this paper also argues that the early Indo-Anglian criticism itself needs to be re-read, as its own canon-forming project precluded feminist analysis. Through a re-reading of Markandaya’s fiction and early criticism, this paper seeks to reinsert Markandaya into contemporary debates and to open up new methodological possibilities for feminist literary studies in India. Markandaya appears not only as a mediator of cultural conflict but also as a precursor to structural feminist critique based on precarity, endurance, and ethical survival.
KEYWORDS
Publication Date
1/2/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
2
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...