Reclaiming the self: Feminist consciousness in three poetic traditions

By Ravi Ranjan 

Savita Singh’s Main Kiski Aurat Hoon stands today as one of the most intellectually expansive works in contemporary Hindi poetry—a poem that begins with a seemingly simple question of women’s identity but unfolds into a profound meditation on selfhood, history, language, and human freedom. When read alongside Kishwar Naheed’s Hum Gunahgaar Auratein and Adrienne Rich’s Diving into the Wreck, Singh’s poem becomes part of a global feminist conversation that interrogates how identities are constructed, imposed, resisted, and ultimately re‑imagined.

At its surface, Main Kiski Aurat Hoon appears to be a poem about patriarchy and women’s social condition. But the poem’s opening question—“Main kiski aurat hoon?”—is not merely social; it is philosophical. As the document notes, the question is not “Who am I?” but “Whose am I?”—a shift that exposes the deep cultural assumption that a woman’s identity is defined through ownership rather than existence. The elderly woman in the poem, who asks, “Whose woman am I, whose feet do I press, whose given food do I eat, whose beatings do I endure…” embodies generations of internalised subjugation. Her body, described as marked by “plateaus of sorrow” and “chasms of rebukes,” becomes a living archive of women’s historical suffering.

The poem’s turning point arrives when the speaker responds: “I am no one’s woman, I am my own woman.” This declaration is both feminist and existential. It rejects the entire symbolic order that has defined womanhood through relational dependence. As the analysis in the document emphasises, this is not merely resistance—it is the construction of a new self. The speaker claims autonomy over the smallest acts—“I eat my own food, I eat when I feel like eating”—transforming everyday gestures into political assertions of agency.

From a feminist perspective, the poem dismantles patriarchal structures that normalise violence, economic dependence, and religiously sanctioned subordination. The word “parmeshwar”—traditionally used to elevate the husband to divine status—is exposed as a linguistic tool that legitimises hierarchy. The poem’s refusal—“Mera parmeshwar koi nahin”—is therefore a radical linguistic intervention.

From an existentialist lens, the poem echoes Sartre’s dictum that “existence precedes essence.” The speaker refuses pre‑fabricated identities and constructs her own meaning. The elderly woman’s fear—“How will this woman get through her life!”—captures the existential anxiety that freedom often provokes. As the document notes, freedom is not merely liberation from structures but the acceptance of responsibility for one’s own existence.

From the perspective of discourse and language theory, the poem exposes how identity is manufactured through repeated linguistic patterns. Words like “kiski” and “kiska” reproduce ownership-based identities. The poem resists not by inventing new vocabulary but by transforming the meanings of existing words—turning “aurat” from an object of possession into a sovereign subject.

Historical Consciousness and Generational Dialogue

One of the poem’s most striking features is its historical layering. The train compartment becomes a metaphorical space where past, present, and future meet. The elderly woman represents the past—shaped by duty, sacrifice, and silence. The speaker represents the present—aware, questioning, self-defining. And the imagined woman of the future embodies possibility—“far from the curses and desires of her ancestors, entirely her own.”

This tri‑temporal structure reflects what the document calls a “long historical process.” Freedom is not a sudden achievement but a continuum shaped by inherited struggles and future aspirations. The speaker’s assurance—“My life is your life, my journey is your journey”—acknowledges this continuity, refusing to sever the present from the past.

Utopian Vision and the Future Woman

The poem’s final movement is utopian in the Blochian sense—not a blueprint of a perfect world, but an opening of possibility. The future woman stands under an open sky, claiming the world not as property but as existential belonging: “This sky, this ocean and its waves, this air… all are mine.” Her freedom is expansive, sensory, and ecological. She is not merely free from patriarchy; she is free from inherited burdens—“poornataya apni” (entirely her own).

This utopian gesture distinguishes Singh’s poem from Rich’s. While Rich dives into the wreckage of history to uncover suppressed truths, Singh imagines a future beyond inherited wounds. Both, however, share a commitment to redefining identity beyond patriarchal narratives.

Comparative Resonances: Naheed and Rich

Kishwar Naheed’s Hum Gunahgaar Auratein (“We Sinful Women”) offers a collective, defiant voice. Where Singh’s poem is intimate and dialogic, Naheed’s is incendiary and public. Her women refuse to bow, refuse to sell their lives, refuse to be silenced. They reclaim the label “sinful” as a badge of rebellion. The document notes that Naheed’s poem exposes the hypocrisy of a society where “those who trade in the harvest of our bodies are deemed honourable.”

Adrienne Rich’s Diving into the Wreck is more symbolic and mythic. The diver descends alone, armed with a “book of myths” and a knife, seeking “the wreck and not the story of the wreck.” Rich’s journey is inward, archaeological, and solitary. Singh’s journey is social, intergenerational, and dialogic. Yet both poets reject imposed narratives and seek the truth of lived experience.

Beyond Feminism: A Humanistic Statement

While the poem is undeniably feminist, the document argues that its implications extend to a universal humanistic philosophy. The line “Koi kisi ka nahin hota / Sab apne hote hain” (“No one belongs to anyone; everyone belongs to themselves”) transcends gender. It asserts that no human being should be treated as property—echoing Kant’s principle that every person is an end in themselves.

The poem thus becomes a meditation on human dignity, autonomy, and the right to self-definition. It critiques all forms of ownership-based relationships, not only those affecting women.

Conclusion

Main Kiski Aurat Hoon is far more than a feminist poem. It is a philosophical inquiry into identity, a critique of linguistic and cultural structures, a historical dialogue across generations, and a utopian vision of human freedom. When placed alongside Naheed’s collective defiance and Rich’s mythic excavation, Singh’s poem becomes part of a global poetic project: the reclamation of selfhood from the debris of imposed identities.

The poem begins with a question asked in fear and ends with a declaration spoken in freedom. Between these two points lies the entire journey of human self‑construction—painful, uncertain, but ultimately transformative.

---

This is the abridged version of the original paper by Ravi Ranjan, Professor & former Head (Retd.), Department of Hindi, University of Hyderabad