Chapter 4

India became independent in the year 1947 after the epic struggle against the colonial

power. The country redefined itself as a sovereign republic with a constitution of its own in the

year 1950. The early years of the country in the nascent stage witnessed a spurt of ideas,

aspirations and issues to grapple with. The long trail set ablaze with the ideals of the national

movement was burning brighter. So far the path leading to the formation of the nation was

defined by many factors and the way these divergent factors were tackled led to the formation of

the nation. Now, the formation of the nation -state encompassing all the fragments demanded an

engagement with the society with its own novel strategies, for the nation needed to sustain itself

within the structural framework of power. It became imperative that the reality of nationhood

needed to be structured and restructured according to the changing times to help the nation enter

the full panoply of the nation-state. In order to survive and progress as a nation India needed a

strong sense of cohesion. The land of diversities, in order to sustain itself needed a system with

unitary features. This is how the notion of centrality of power, in the context of the nation-state

becomes significant. The regional and linguistic pulls and pressures needed to be tackled for the

nation to remain coherent as a whole. Thus the years after independence witnessed yet another

version of power struggle that cuts through the dialectics of openness and diversity.

The policy of integration of native states was initiated by the State Ministry of the

Government under the guidance of Sardar Vallabhai Patel. This initiative by the government

improved the prospects of the formation of a United Kerala. The State of Travancore-Cochin

came into existence in 1949. The Maharajas of the two states signed the Covenant of Integration.

The legislatures and the ministers of the two states combined to form the legislature and the

ministry of the new state. Members were elected to the legislature to form the ministry. Owing to

internal dissensions in the Congress ministry, the cabinet headed by Panampilli Govinda Menon

fell. It was followed by the President’s rule. It was during the period of President’s rule in

Travancore- Cochin that the decision on the re- organization of the states of Indian Union on

linguistic basis was taken up by the Indian government. A. Sreedhara Menon in his A Survey of

Kerala History gives a detailed account of the process of integration:

Under the States Re- organization Act of 1956 the four southern taluks of

Tovala, Agastiswaram, Kalkulam and Vilavancode and a part of

Shencottah taluk was separated from Travancore- Cochin and included in

Madras state. The district of Malabar and the Kasargod taluk of South

Canara district were added on to the remaining portions of Travncore-

Cochin to constitute the new state of Kerala. The State of Kerala formally

came into existence on November 1, 1956 with a Governor as the head of

the State. The last vestiges of princely rule in Kerala also disappeared with

the end of the institution of Rajapramukh, consequent upon the formation

of the new state. (311)

Thus the region of Malabar became part of the State of Kerala. The integration of the

three Malayalam- speaking regions attempted to bring about an environment of political and

linguistic unity to the culture of Malayalam- speaking people. It shows that the issue of language,

both as a tool of cohesion and as a tool of division is becoming significant in the entire discourse

of the nation. The nation with diverse ethnicities speaking diverse languages, in order to remain

coherent had to assert its sovereignty through strategies developed with this goal in mind. The

story of the region had to be made the nation’s too for the nation- state to survive.

Oru Desathinte Kadha (1971) written by S. K. Pottekkatt attempts to portray the way the

nation tried to make the story of the region its own, through various strategies and techniques.

The final section of the novel entitled “Rustlings” talks about the years following independence

in the life of the nation. In fact “Rustlings” is a looking back, the casting of a long glance

backwards only to look forward again. The past is juxtaposed with the present to offer a

perspective on how the nation tried to imagine the region. The coming back of Sreedharan, the

protagonist of the novel to Atiranippadam, a part of the erstwhile Malabar throws open the new

picture of a region where the nation had been trying to paint its hues in the years after

independence.The huge petrol tank that Sreedharan sees on his arrival, the conversations with

Velu Moopar and the new Americanised youth of Atiranippadam who Sreedharan sees on his

way back- all pint toward the story of the nation read through the region. The present chapter

attempts to explore the issues that can be read between the words lying on the pages of the novel,

concerning the nation- state and the way it mediated with the region. Issues of development

planning, representative form of government, the way the region understands the nation and the

onset of neocolonialism are the significant aspects that could be deciphered from the novel.

The first issue that the novel brings forth is that of the impact of industrialization on the

region during the period of “nation- building.” The primary agenda of the sovereign republic in

the nascent stages was the development of the country. It was part of the modernization process

that was very much the need of the hour. It became imperative for the state to assert the

nationalist sovereignty. The site where the nation-state asserted its sovereignty with all its vigour

was the site of economy, for the nation- stated needed the language of developmentalism to bring

a society of mixed and diverse interests under one umbrella. In his article “Development Planing

and the Indian State,” Partha Chatterjee observes,

A developmental ideology then was a constituent part of the self-definition

of the post-colonial state. The state was connected to the people- nation

not simply through the procedural forms of representative government; it

also acquired its representativeness by directing a programme of economic

development on behalf of the nation. The former connected, as in any

liberal form of government, the legal- political sovereignty of the state

with the sovereignty of the people. The latter connected the sovereign

powers of the state directly with the economic policy of the people. (210)

The National Planning Commission was set up in 1950 under the chairmanship of

Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of free India. The Nehruvian vision of India was

based on the ‘socialistic pattern of development.” The objective of India’s development strategy

has been to establish a socialistic pattern of society through economic growth based on self-

reliance, social justice and alleviation of poverty. Emphasis was placed on the development of

state- owned heavy industries and a dominant role for the public sector in the economy. These

objectives were to be achieved within a democratic political framework using the mechanism of

a mixed economy where both public and private sectors co-exist. In fact in India’s peculiar brand

of Socialism centrally directed planning of the public sector operated in a mixed economy with a

substantial private sector and a democratic polity, observes Peter J. Boettke in his work The

Collapse of Development Planning (16). India initiated planning for national economic

development with the establishment of the Planning Commission. In his article “The Planning

Regime Since 1951,” Arjun Sengupta observes,

The twin legacy of the Indian national movement was the urge for

independence: independence and evaluation of everything in terms of the

question, is it benefitting the poor? Nehru believed that industrialization

was the natural product of these two legacies; it ensured independence and

benefitted the poor, gave them swaraj. He believed in industrialization not

just as a kind of a boost to economic growth but as an essential

desideratum for modernization of the country. (123)

The Planning Commission was entrusted with the task of directing and controlling the

process of resource generation and allocation. The main vehicle for the transmission of these

decisions was the Five- Year Plans developed by the Planning Commission and its associated

ministries and agencies. The plans were intended to bring coherence to the nation- state through

the language of developmentalism. The task of the nation- state to bring all the diverse entities

woven together in one strand recalls what Etienne Balibar has called the “delayed nationalization

of society,” which means successfully producing a “fictive ethnicity” from a population with

diverse interests. Regarding the nation- state’s attempts at “nationalization” of the diverse groups

Etienne Balibar writes in his work Politics and the Other Scene:

The nation is ultimately, an impossible entity, which can never entirely

achieve its ideal, and it is as such- that is to say, as a problem, that it is

real. An impossible task culturally, for ‘multi- ethnicism’ and ‘multi-

culturalism’ are present from the outset and are constantly reforming

themselves. An impossible task economically, since the ‘integral

distribution of human beings and resources between national units is in

no sense a tendency of capitalism; at most it is a means of its ‘political

reproduction or its hegemony. . . In these conditions, the nationalization of

society is a process of specific statization. But it is also a compromise- not

just a more or less stable compromise between classes, but a compromise

between the two ‘principles’ themselves: between the principle of

nationalism and that of class struggle. This is the first great factor of

ambiguity in national identities and class identities, and a corollary of their

reciprocal determinations. (650)

As Balibar points out the nationalization of society becomes a process of statization. The

ideals of nationalism that demanded a confluence of all the divergent voices, once the formation

of the nation- state is achieved die a slow death. This results in the birth of ambiguous identities

that interact with each other. Thus it can be argued that the Five Year Plans implemented by the

government attempted at the nationalization of the society leading to statization. The aim of the

First Five Year Plan (1951-56) was to raise domestic savings for growth and to help the economy

resurrect itself from colonial rule. The real break with the past in planning came with the Second

Five Year Plan (Nehru-Mahalanobis Plan). The industrialization strategy articulated by Professor

Mahalanobis placed emphasis on the development of heavy industries and envisaged a dominant

role for the public sector in the economy. The entrepreneurial role of the state was evoked to

develop the industrial sector. Kerala was reorganized as a State only in November, 1956 and by

that time the Second Five Year Plan was already formulated. The Second Plan gave greater

importance to industry, when compared to the First Five Year Plan. The later plans led to the

development of a variety of institutions around planning and development. These policies and

plans that were implemented by the government intended at changing the face of the regions

within the country, thereby leading the country on a linear path of development, subsuming the

differences and conflicts within. In the case of the newly formed state of Kerala, these plans

worked in two ways, observes J. Devika in her essay “ A People United in Development:

Developmentalism in Modern Malayalee Identity:”

. . . linguistic nationalism appears an apt tool aiding the central government to set

a national development programme in operation. The goals of the Malayalee

people, of achieving internal homogeneity, and secure and well- defined identity

vis- a- vis their neighbours, seem to blend effortlessly into the goal of the central

government seeking to transform a multiplicity of cultures into a unified,

economically powerful and modernized nation-state in and through large- scale

developmental activity. (27)

Thus for Kerala, the creation of internal homogeneity became tantamount to accepting

and taking part in the nation- building process. Kerala had to join the development planning

implemented by the central government since the resources needed to come from the centre to

promote industrialization in the state. This had another side to it. The backwardness of the region

in terms of its lack of industrial modernization made it dependent on the nation- state. J. Devika

brings in the remarks made by E. M. S. Namboodiripad, the first Chief Minister of Kerala on

development planning and its relation with the state of Kerala in the essay mentioned above:

The State of Kerala- its people and its government- however, cannot carry out this

task, by themselves. (This is so) . . precisely because Kerala is not an independent

country but an integral part of India; our economy is not an isolated one but part

of the general economy spread throughout India. . . So we Malayalees can find

solutions to our problems only as part of the organized efforts carried out by the

people and the government all over India to reform and develop India’s economy.

(27)

In Oru Deshathinte Kadha, the protagaonist witnesses the transformation of the region as

a result of the nation- state’s strategy of “nationalization.” Sreedharan visits Atiranippadam after

almost forty years. Coming back to the region where a large chunk of his life left memories

enough to last for a lifetime, Sreedharan encounters a lot of things, a lot of faces – both old and

new. These encounters throw light on how the region has changed under the sway of influences,

both national and global. Each and every aspect encountered and recalled brings forth the new

phase in the life of the country – the country that had left the garden with blooming flowers to

travel a long way into the arena of a wider space called the world, to join the legion of nation-

states.

“Sreedharan looked at the petrol tank that has a capacity of ten thousand gallons,” writes

S.K. Pottekkatt in the beginning of the chapter (505). The tank that could fuel thousands of

motor vehicles acts as a symbol in the beginning. The tank represents the memories that are

contained within the minds of each individual, the thousand memories that takes the mind in a

journey back in time. At the same time, the presence of an object like the petrol tank in a region

like Atiranippadam throws open many avenues of thought. The space that the tank occupies in

the landscape of the region is indicative of the nation-state’s mediation with the region, or with

the fragments within in at large. The huge tank stands for the transformation in the society as a

result of the introduction of Five –Year plans leading to the industrialization of the society.

Development in this context meant taking a linear path. The will of the nation was being

expressed for the wellbeing of its citizens. The region was now being defined by the nation. The

huge tank in Atiranippadam changes the face of the region itself, as Sreedharan sees it. It greets

him in the beginning giving an idea of what is to be expected to follow. Yet, the striking aspect is

that the development planning intended at the nationalization of the society often failed to

achieve the creation of the “fictive ethnicity” as Balibar puts it (64). When Emma, the girl who

Sreedharan meets in Germany gets fascinated by his identity of being an “Indian,” Sreedharan

says:

A large group of people widely at variance in all aspects ranging from skin

colour to body stature, to rituals, to language, to food habits, to dressing

manner, to behaviour live together in the ample space bordered by the

Bay of Bengal, the Arabian Sea, the Great Himalayas and the

southernmost point of Kanyakumari. They are called Indians. How can I

not tell this truth? . . . Emma, what you call the real Indian is an imaginary

figure. (557)

In spite of all the attempts by the nation- state to create the homogenized individual who

would ensure the existence and survival of the nation – state, the truth looms large that the “real

Indian” is an imaginary figure.

Now the attention shifts from the issue of development planning to the issue of

representative government and the way a region understands the nation. From the image of the

huge petrol tank, the writer turns our attention to the house of Velu Moopar. The character Velu

Mooppar is a representative of the past. He is one character who has been a witness to the

processes of nation formation that manifested themselves through the various struggles against

imperialism. Now, in the verandah of the early seventies in the life of the nation, Velu Moopar

sits sans eyesight. The conversation between Velu Moopar and Sreedharan throws light on a

whole lot of aspects regarding the intermingling of the lives of the nation and the region.

“Where do you live . . . heard that you were in some far off land…”

“In Delhi,” Sreedharan replied with respect.

“Where is Delhi?”

“It’s far away, in the north.”

“North? Farther than Kashi?”

“Yes, very very far.”

“The land of Gosayis! Am I right?”

“Yes, there are Gosayis also – It is the land of Hindustanis – the Capital of

India.”(509)

For Velu Mooppar Delhi is unheard of. The capital of the country of which he is a

citizen, does not hold much charm for him. The conversation unravels many layers of thinking.

On one hand, it focuses on how far Delhi is from Atiranippadam; in other words, how far the

capital of the Indian nation is away from the region of Atiranippadam. The region fails to

understand the regions far off. On the other hand, the conversation focuses on how one region

gets to know another region. The land of Gosayis or the land of Malayalees are all put under one

framework by the unitary features that the constitution espouses. Still there is always a lacuna

between understandings and misunderstandings. Velu Moopar represents the common man, who

is part of the past which was mired in the struggle against imperialism. The formation of the

nation, and the structurations and restructurations that followed did not seem to have occupied

his thoughts at all.

The conversation continues:

“What is your job there?”

Sreedharan felt confused. What should be the answer?

Would Velu Mooppar be able to understand the answer I give? Do I need

to tell him? Telling a lie is not the right thing to do.

An idea struck his mind. After all, hiding something is different from

telling untruth …(Sreedharan is an M. P., Member of Parliament)

He admitted the truth to Velu Moopar, “No work to do there. . . ( 509).”

What S. K. Pottekkattu tries to bring forth is an expression of the disillusionment that was

there in the atmosphere of the country in the years that followed independence. The basic

institutions of the democratic polity that were formed to protect the interests of the nation as a

whole, often failed to live up to the expectations. This is where a criticism of the nation- state

arises. The nation- state with the paraphernalia of institutions around it somewhere falls short of

the idealistic aspirations that the road to nationalism has envisaged. The truth about the job that

Sreedharan articulates reflects the chasm that exists between the state and the ordinary men and

women. Yet, the coin has two sides to it. One face talks about the merits of a democratic system

which is the government “of the people, by the people and for the people.”But the other face

talks about the disparities that exist between what has been imagined and what is existing in real.

To ensure representation from all regions, representatives from the regions were elected to the

parliament. Sreedharan thus becomes a representative of the region as well as of the country. The

ideals of democracy that went into the process of nation formation now get a new avatar. Earlier,

the regions were united together in the national movement, woven by different strands of

thoughts and ideas. After the nation became a sovereign republic, it is the turn of the nation-state

to uphold these ideals in a new fashion altogether. There have always been flipsides to it.

In his article “Reconfigurations in Indian Politics” Yogendra Yadav writes

As a representational device, elections are better compared to a camera; in

a sense it merely records ‘what is out there’, but it all depends on who

holds it, in which direction and with what focus. Like aesthetic

representation, mechanisms of selectivity, erasure and highlighting are

inevitably at work in political representation. And what is more, like a

camera, elections go much beyond recording the political reality; in a way

they create a reality of their own in their life for the sake of representation.

(179)

Elections have become a way of life in India, after the country gained independence. The

issue of representation displays its manifold impressions in all such processes in a democratic

polity like India. In a sense, the power struggle continues. The notion of equality in the face of

hierarchy depending on the position one occupies in the ladder of power becomes a central

concern as well as stark reality of Indian democracy. Velu Moopar and Sreedharan stands at the

opposite poles of power hierarchy. Sreedharan is the representative of the people while Velu

Moopar even fails to understand what the idea of representation means. The idea of

representation becomes central to the interpretation of the nation, for elections with its strict

compartmentalization and organizational structure fail to express the popular will as such. As

Ranabdir Sammadar points out in his article, “Nation Legitimised,”

Elections, thus not only compel an interpretation of the politics of the

nation, but also compel a politics of interpreting the nation. Votes lie at the

heart of elections. They are the essential image of the process, they

metaphorise the essentials; also metaphorise the non-essentials by making

them appear as essentials. Often, therefore, the language of votes becomes

more critical than the arithmetic essence of the act of voting. It

problematises the issue of mimesis in the political life of the nation. (176)

The institutions and practices like elections ensure the sustenance of the nation- state.

Representatives from among the people take part in elections conducted every five years. The

process of elections ensures the continuity of the life of the nation- state. Who are those whom

the representatives really represent remains an issue mired with ambiguities. The strategy of

development planning together with the nation- state’s way of legitimizing itself – the process of

elections recall the idea of ‘Governmentality’ put forward by Michel Foucault. The Foucauldian

notion of governmentality reminds that there is a “specific form of power that entrenches itself in

modern society having its goal the well being of a population, its mode of reasoning a certain

instrumental notion of economy, and its apparatus an elaborate network of surveillance” (qtd in.

Burchell). This modern form of power exercises itself through forms of representation thereby

offering itself an aspect of self- disciplining of the very population over which it is exercised.

Recalling the idea of governmentality in the Indian context as seen in the novel unravels the way

the nation tried to perform itself asserting its sovereignty, through development planning and

technological modernism. The huge petrol tank, symbolizing the onset of industrialization point

toward a situation where the ‘national economy’ becomes synonymous with the nation itself. The

protagonist of the novel, Sreedharan, being one among the many representatives sent to the

parliament by the people of India stands for the way through which the modern nation

legitimizes itself . To borrow Partha Chatterjee’s words, “This was an essential aspect of the

hegemonic construct of the post- colonial state: combining accumulation with legitimation while

avoiding the ‘unnecessary rigours’ of social conflict ( 259). The development decades saw the

combination of accumulation with legitimation, as Partha Chatterjee puts it. To sum up, the

Nehruvian ideal of the modern state, through the deployment of various strategies and the setting

up of new institutions, in fact changed the face of the region and the nation. This situation recalls

what Foucault has written about the paradoxical phenomenon of the governmentalization of state

in his essay “Governmentality:”

May be what is really important for our modernity- that is, for our present-

is not so much the etatisation of society, as the “governmentalization” of

the state. . . This governmentalization of the state is a singularly

paradoxical phenomenon, since if in fact the problems of governmentality

and the techniques of government have become the only political issue,

the only real space for political struggle and contestation, this is because

the governmentalization of the state is at the same time what has permitted

the state to survive, and it is possible to suppose that if the state is what it

is today, this is so precisely thanks to the governmentality, which is at

once internal and external to the state. . . (103)

Right at this point the doubt arises as to whether the modernizing state succeeded in

changing the attitude of its citizens to a more progressive level of thought. On one side we can

witness the rapid industrialization of the economy. On the other side certain attitudes remain

unchanged. The opinion that Velu Moopar forms about Kunjiraman is an instance where the

rigid notions of conservatism expresses itself in a different manner altogether. Eventhough the

country was getting modernized with the introduction of economic planning and all true

modernity was yet to arrive. The thought processes still needed to undergo transformations.

“Who is that young man?” Sreedharan asked.

“Stupid boy – he reeks of beef,” Velu Moopar said with contempt.

“Who is he?” Sreedharan asked again.

“He is the uncle of Supadra- studied till eighth standard- do you know

what his job is?- He is the cook of that company owner Sayippu– his job is

to prepare beef and pork – you have to bath if you happen to touch him !”

“Velu Moopar is a diehard conservative,” thought Sreedharan. Velu

Moopar thinks it cheap for men to work in someone else’s kitchen, that

too a work like cooking beef and pork. (519)

This passage expresses how the notion of untouchability, to put it broadly, prevails in a

totally new fashion. People like Velu Moopar views with contempt those who do jobs that are

considered ‘cheap’ and ‘low’. Another point of contention that Velu Moopar has with

Kunjiraman is that he does cooking which is in fact a work which is the prerogative of women.

Occupations are no longer based on the caste into which one is born as in the past. The fact is

asserted by the Indian constitution too. Now the issue is with regard to the gender. In other

words, Velu Moopar’s opinion reflects the mentality of the region regarding the notion of gender

equality and inequality. Yet, Sreedharan has a difference of opinion – “Is the job of a cook

something low? It is always better to do some work instead of sitting at home idle” (519).

The issues contained within the novel in fact gives a whole picture of Atiranippadam

during the first two decades following independence. The unitary picture put forward by the

nation- state could not confront all these issues widening the gap between the voices from

different directions. Through the words of Velu Moopar the novelist skillfully portrays the

picture of a region, where in spite of all the modernization strategies brought out by the post-

colonial state, certain attitudes remain the same. If it was based on the hierarchy determined by

caste system, the occupational status determine the hierarchies of today. The character of Velu

Moopar is far different from the character of Sreedharan. In fact while Velu Moopar represents

the vestiges of the past, Sreedharan represents the present as well as the future.

Toward the end of the novel, the writer brings in another significant aspect that speaks of

the negotiation of the region with the world through the agent of the nation- state. The focus now

shifts to the entry of India into the global order. By the middle of the twentieth century India’s

relationship with itself and the world outside changed leaps and bounds. India was entering the

arena of the world as the new, modern nation freed from the clutches of the British rule. The

newly formed nation- state started moving from the national to the global during the post-

independence period. The early years seemed crucial for the development of the country for the

country aspired to become a member of the world community. While the nation tried to enter

into the world order, the region also experienced its outcomes. It was inevitable now for the

region to enter into the panoply of the new horizon. Thus, for Atiranippadam, changes came

naturally as seen in the passage given below:

Near the road, engulfed in the noise made by mills and motor workshops,

a new restaurant could be seen. An aluminium board carrying the picture

of a huge red bottle is placed near the entrance – the advertisement of

Coca- Cola!

Bharatmata teashop were once delicious biriyani was served seems to be a

part of some distant dream. Bharatmata has gone. The memories of

biriyani have faded away – today Tashkent, Prawns Pulao and Coca- Cola

occupy its place. (567)

The advertisement of Coca-Cola displayed in front of the restaurant where the

Bharatmata teashop once stood speaks volumes. The space that a global brand occupies in a

region like Atiranippadam is indicative of the local merging with the national and the global. The

huge advertisement of Coca-Cola is indicative of a lot of factors that contributed to the

tremendous changes that occurred in the life of the nation. The years of Nehruvian vision of

economy saw the rise of a mixed economy at home. The years also witnessed the country’s

involvement with all available partners from the foreign world and the socialist countries like the

U. S. S. R. The fact that the three steel plants built in the country during this period were based

upon collaboration with one socialist country, the Soviet Union, and two capitalist democracies,

Britain and Federal Germany, indicates the emergence of a global outlook in the industrial

programme of the country. Though the earlier attitude of the country was inward-looking owing

to the idealistic spirit imbibed from the nationalist movement which emphasized on “Swadeshi,”

the entry of the country into the global arena and subsequent forging of relationships with other

countries were necessitated by the country’s existence as a “nation-state.” The country opened its

doors to globalization in the early 1990s only. What happened before which led to the arrival of

global giants into an economy like that of India leads us through the alley where the buds of

neocolonialism was slowly sprouting. The upper strata of Indian population was much larger

than the population of several imperialist countries, in spite of the lack of purchasing power of

the broad masses of people. Thus the Indian market was attractive to MNCs and their

compradors. In course of time foreign capital that penetrated into the vital sectors of the

economy under the cover of tariff and protection reaped huge profits from the production of a

variety of consumer goods. Ultimately this led to a worsening of the balance of payments and

deepening dependence of the country on neocolonial institutions, while domestically aggravating

social and regional inequalities. Criticism apart, the realities of the time showed that India was

entering the neocolonial phase. The Indian market remained attractive to the multinational

corporations and global giants of which Coca-Cola is a representative.

The advertisement of Coca- Cola leads the thoughts of Sreedharan to another direction,

emphasizing on the global reach the instruments and institutions of neocolonialism enjoy. While

he was in Egypt, Sreedharan came across one such advertisement of Coca-Cola. The image of

Coca- Cola placed near the Sphinx fails to leave his memory and he is not at all surprised at

seeing the same advertisement in Atiranippadam also.

Sreedharan was not surprised at the incarnation of cola in the old

Atiranippadam. Sixteen years ago, Right before the Sphinx in Egypt, a

deserted place where not even grass sprout, a huge board displaying Coca-

Cola invited the tourists who were burning with thirst, Sreedharan

recalled. Along with the Sphinx, the image of Coca-Cola still remains

etched in memory. (567)

Coca- Cola cut across geographical boundaries and cultural borders to became the

world’s most powerful brand. From Egypt in Africa to Atiranippadam in India, a brand like

Coca- Cola has spread its arms. It was in the year 1956 that Coca- Cola came to India. The

Indian market was witnessing the arrival of neocolonialism through the entry of multinational

corporations. The hold that the global brands had over India led to widespread criticism and the

country was not fully opened to the global economy. It was only in 1991 that India opened its

doors fully to the world economy. Coca- Cola controlled the entire soft drink industry of India

till 1977 only to return in 1993.Jennife Kaye writes in Coca- Cola India,

Coca- Cola was the leading soft drink brand in India until 1977 when it

left rather than reveal its formula to the government and reduce its equity

stake as required under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act ( FERA)

which goverened the operations of foreign companies in India. After a 16-

year absence Coca- cola returned to India in 1993, cementing its presence

with a deal that gave Coca- Cola ownership of the nation’s top soft drink

brands and bottling network . (3- 4)

The advertisement of Coca- Cola symbolizes the globe’s mediation with the nation as

well as the region. The economic policies formulated by the government of India led to basic

changes in the structure of the regional economy. Atiranippadam is no exception. The region,

mediated through the nation enters into the global arena with or without its consent. Bharatmata

teashop of the past does not belong to the present and the future of the country. “Bharatmata has

gone,” says Sreedharan (567). The notion of Bharatmata which evolved during the time of

nationalist struggles, when located in the context of a region like Atiranippadam, far removed

from the ideological implications it possess, becomes the symbol of the feeling of nationalism

that went deep into the mindscape of the region. Indigenous food items are replaced by foreign

recipes. The foreign flavour that pervades the entire atmosphere smells of neocolonialism and of

cultural imperialism. The teenager who walks around in “tight pants and terylene shirt” whistles

some “American rock and roll tune,” is a representative of the times. Just as Sreedharan stands

between a past with seething memories of the struggle against imperialism and a present where

the nation- state is in the state of an endless process of becoming, the teenager stands for the

preset state which is marked by the re- entry of colonialism in a new form. The “Americanised”

youth of Atiranippadam is the representative of the new era dominated by cultural imperialism.

He drinks Coca- Cola, wears western wear, and sings western pop tunes. Increasing integration

of the country with imperialist market led to the creation of new identities inscribed with

imprints of neocolonial agendas including cultural imperialism. It becomes imperative in this

context to recall Herbert Schiller’s seminal definition of cultural imperialism. Herbert Schiller

provided his seminal definition of cultural imperialism as: “. . . the sum of the process by which

a society is brought into the modern world system and how its dominating stratum is attracted,

pressured, forced, and sometimes even bribed into shaping social institutions to correspond to or

even promote, the values and structures of the dominating centre of the system” (9).

The aspects of the society that S. K. Pottekkatt tries to bring forth in the novel Oru

Deshathinte Kadha analyse the most significant chapter in the life of the nation- state, the era of

“nation building.”While the novel Sundarikalum Sundaranmarum affirmed the positive outlook

the Indian nation along with the region had in the early fifties, Oru Deshathinte Kadha examines

the engagement of the nation with the region through various strategies and the outcome of this

engagement. What happened to the spirit of idealism that led to the creation of a beautiful

garden, with promises of a new life in the novel Sundarikalum Sundaranmarum seems to be the

lingering question that lurks on the pages of Oru Deshathinte Kadha. The story of the region, as

written by the nation- state is the primary concern that S. K. Pottekkatt tries to bring forth in his

novel.