This blog is written as a task assigned by Megha Trivedi ma'am.

 The Curse or Karna by T.P. Kailasama

 Critical note on the class conflict and caste conflict in The Curse.

I. Introduction

T. P. Kailasam (1884–1946) occupies a distinctive position in the evolution of modern Indian drama. Widely regarded as the “Father of Modern Kannada Theatre,” he was among the first Indian playwrights to blend traditional mythological material with modern psychological realism and social critique. Writing both in English and Kannada, Kailasam used the stage as a vehicle to question India’s moral, social, and religious hierarchies. His works often center on the conflict between idealism and social conformity, and between individual conscience and societal pressure. Among these, The Curse or Karna remains his most powerful and enduring work, dramatizing the tragic destiny of one of the most complex heroes from the Mahabharata.

Written in the early decades of the twentieth century, The Curse or Karna reflects the transitional phase of Indian society under British rule a time when ancient cultural values were being interrogated in the light of emerging modern sensibilities. Kailasam retells the epic story of Karna, the son of Kunti and the sun god Surya, who is abandoned at birth and raised by a charioteer’s family. Despite his divine heritage, Karna is stigmatized by his low-caste identity and systematically denied recognition by the upper-caste elite. Through this reimagined narrative, Kailasam exposes how caste and class hierarchies deform human relationships and moral values. The play becomes not merely a retelling of myth but a mirror of social injustice prevalent in Indian society.

At its core, The Curse or Karna explores profound moral and psychological dilemmas. Karna’s struggle is not only external  against a world that refuses to acknowledge his worth — but also internal, as he wrestles with feelings of alienation, pride, and loyalty. Kailasam portrays Karna as a tragic hero, whose nobility lies in his moral integrity rather than in his birth or status. The play’s title itself  The Curse  symbolizes the collective weight of fate, social prejudice, and systemic inequality that crushes the individual spirit. Within this framework, the themes of class conflict and caste conflict emerge as the play’s central concern, revealing Kailasam’s humanistic vision and his critique of a society bound by inherited privilege and moral hypocrisy.

II. The Myth of Karna and Social Hierarchy 

1. Reinterpreting the Mahabharata Myth

T. P. Kailasam’s The Curse or Karna revisits one of the most tragic and morally complex figures in the Mahabharata—Karna, the son of Kunti and the Sun God, abandoned at birth and raised by a charioteer. In the epic, Karna’s identity crisis and exclusion from the Kshatriya fold shape his destiny. Kailasam takes this myth and transforms it into a modern social allegory, using the ancient tale as a mirror to reflect India’s deep-rooted caste divisions and moral contradictions.

The playwright humanizes Karna, portraying him less as a mythical hero and more as a social victim, trapped between divine destiny and human prejudice. By dramatizing his humiliation and rejection by the Brahmins and Kshatriyas, Kailasam exposes how mythic structures sustain social hierarchies in real life. Karna becomes a voice for all those marginalized by rigid systems of birth and privilege.

2. The Caste System as a Determinant of Identity

In Kailasam’s reinterpretation, caste is not merely a background detail but the central engine of conflict. Karna’s worth as a warrior and as a man is constantly questioned because of his supposed low birth. Despite his unmatched talent, he is denied recognition, illustrating the tyranny of hereditary hierarchy. Kailasam critiques how, even in myth, society prioritizes lineage over merit, reinforcing Brahminical dominance and the exclusion of the lower classes.

When Karna is publicly humiliated by Dronacharya and others for not being a Kshatriya, Kailasam brings out the psychological violence of casteism. The rejection symbolizes how the oppressed internalize guilt and inferiority, perpetuating their own subjugation. Karna’s tragedy thus becomes a sociological metaphor the struggle of a capable but stigmatized individual trying to assert dignity in a world governed by purity and pollution.

3. Class Conflict and Feudal Morality

Beyond caste, The Curse or Karna also explores class conflict through the economic and social contrast between Karna and the royal elite. The Pandavas and the Kauravas represent the feudal ruling class, inheriting privilege by birth. Karna, in contrast, embodies labor, skill, and self-made worth traits associated with the emerging modern consciousness. Kailasam thereby aligns Karna with the working class, positioning him as a proto-modern figure who challenges inherited power.

This conflict between merit and hierarchy parallels the broader colonial and postcolonial tensions in Indian society. During Kailasam’s time (early 20th century), India was awakening to social reform and nationalist consciousness. The playwright subtly links Karna’s oppression to the colonial condition, where Indians were judged not by capability but by racial and cultural hierarchy. In this sense, caste within India mirrors colonial domination: both rely on systemic exclusion and moral hypocrisy.

4. Karna as a Symbol of the Marginalized

Kailasam’s Karna transcends the epic narrative to become a universal symbol of alienation. His silence, endurance, and inner conflict reflect the lived experiences of the oppressed across time. The playwright’s use of English as the medium is significant it bridges mythic India and the colonial modern world, suggesting that the struggle for dignity is both ancient and contemporary.

Karna’s moral dilemman his loyalty to Duryodhana versus his awareness of dharma also represents the paralysis of the marginalized subject. Though intellectually aware of justice, he is bound by gratitude to the only person who acknowledged his worth. Kailasam portrays this as the tragic irony of oppression: the marginalized are often compelled to serve the very powers that sustain their subjugation.

5. Critique of Brahminical Orthodoxy

Through dialogues between Karna and figures like Krishna or Kunti, Kailasam critiques Brahminical orthodoxy that sustains social stratification under the guise of divine law. The play questions the moral legitimacy of a system that denies basic dignity based on birth. In this sense, The Curse or Karna becomes a social protest play, prefiguring later Dalit and subaltern writings that expose the hypocrisy of sacred hierarchies.

Kailasam uses myth not as escapism but as a tool of reform, showing how spiritual ideals have been corrupted by social prejudice. The “curse” in the title thus becomes metaphorical the curse of being born in a society where purity and pollution determine destiny.

6. The Tragic Irony of Recognition

Ironically, Karna achieves recognition only through death, when his true lineage is revealed. Kailasam emphasizes this moment as the ultimate indictment of social blindness society values individuals only after they conform to its standards of legitimacy. Karna’s tragedy is not divine punishment but social injustice.

This realization gives the play a strong reformist message: true nobility lies in action and character, not in ancestry. By reinterpreting Karna’s mythic fall, Kailasam challenges both ancient and modern systems that measure worth through inherited privilege.

III. Class Conflict and Colonial Modernity 

1. Colonial Context and the Rise of Social Consciousness

T. P. Kailasam wrote The Curse or Karna in the early decades of the twentieth century, a time when India was undergoing rapid social transformation. The nationalist movement, inspired by figures such as Gandhi, Tilak, and Vivekananda, had not only political but also ethical and social dimensions. Caste reform, education, and equality were becoming central questions in Indian society.

Kailasam’s drama emerges from this charged milieu. By reworking the Mahabharata myth, he translates ancient moral dilemmas into a colonial modern context, revealing how traditional hierarchies persisted under British rule. The colonial government, while claiming to bring civilization and progress, reinforced divisions among Indians to sustain its dominancea phenomenon scholars later called “divide and rule.”

Thus, in The Curse or Karna, the conflict between birth and merit also reflects the broader colonial contradiction: a nation aspiring for freedom yet bound by its own oppressive structures. Kailasam shows that true liberation cannot occur unless India first liberates itself from internal inequalities.

2. Karna and the Modern Working-Class Ethos

Kailasam’s Karna can be viewed as a proto-modern working-class hero. Though born outside privilege, he rises through discipline, skill, and self-reliance qualities that contrast sharply with the decadence of royal life. In this sense, the play becomes a critique of feudal values that reward lineage rather than labor.

By aligning Karna with the self-made individual, Kailasam bridges the ancient epic with modern humanist ideals. Karna’s struggle to gain recognition mirrors the plight of colonial subjects and emerging middle and lower classes, who had begun questioning hereditary privilege in all its forms.

The play’s tension between Karna and the royal elite Drona, Arjuna, and Bhishma represents not just caste hierarchy but also class antagonism. The ruling elite live off inherited wealth and social capital, while Karna represents those who work, create, and sustain society yet remain unacknowledged. Kailasam thus transforms the epic conflict into a symbolic battle between the privileged few and the dispossessed many.

3. The Bourgeois Morality and the Ethics of Gratitude

One of the most striking aspects of Karna’s tragedy is his loyalty to Duryodhana, the Kaurava prince who elevates him to kingship. While Duryodhana’s gesture appears generous, it is also politically strategic he uses Karna to challenge the Pandavas. Kailasam interprets this relationship as a metaphor for the exploitation of the marginalized by the ruling class.

In the modern sense, Duryodhana represents the colonial bourgeoisie those who offer limited empowerment to subalterns while maintaining ultimate control. Karna’s gratitude, though noble, becomes a trap of dependence; it prevents him from pursuing moral autonomy. Kailasam suggests that the oppressed often internalize their subjugation, mistaking servitude for loyalty.

This moral complexity gives the play psychological depth. Karna’s tragedy lies not only in social rejection but also in his inability to revolt. He becomes both victim and collaborator, echoing the position of colonial subjects who served imperial interests while dreaming of freedom.

4. Religion, Karma, and the Ideology of Obedience

Another key layer in Kailasam’s critique of class and caste is the ideological use of religion. Hindu dharma, as represented in the play, becomes a mechanism of social control. The doctrine of karma, often invoked to justify inequality, is questioned by Kailasam through Karna’s suffering.

Karna, despite being virtuous and brave, is doomed by circumstances of birth an irony that exposes the moral failure of deterministic theology. Kailasam thereby aligns with rationalist reformers like Iyothee Thass, Periyar, and B. R. Ambedkar, who argued that religion had been weaponized to maintain social hierarchy.

In The Curse or Karna, this critique unfolds subtly through dialogue and action. Characters like Krishna embody divine wisdom but also uphold the status quo, reminding Karna of his “place.” Kailasam uses these interactions to reveal how divine order can disguise human injustice. The supposed moral law that governs the epic world is, in reality, a justification of inequality.

5. The Symbolism of the “Curse”

The title The Curse itself operates on multiple symbolic levels. On the surface, it refers to the literal curses that define Karna’s fate his charioteer birth, his curse by Parashurama, and his tragic death. However, in Kailasam’s reinterpretation, the “curse” becomes a social metaphor the inherited stigma of caste and class.

This curse is not divine but cultural, passed down through generations as prejudice, custom, and law. Kailasam transforms mythic fatalism into social determinism, arguing that Indian society continues to punish individuals for their origins. The curse, then, is the condition of the marginalized, the eternal outsider denied belonging.

In doing so, Kailasam anticipates the concerns of Dalit literature and postcolonial thought: that true freedom requires dismantling the psychological and structural remnants of hierarchy.

6. The Influence of Western Realism and Humanism

Kailasam’s exposure to Western education and literature profoundly shaped his dramatic style. His approach to The Curse or Karna reflects elements of Ibsenite realism and Shaw’s social critique. Like Ibsen, Kailasam uses personal conflict to explore moral hypocrisy; like Shaw, he employs irony to reveal social absurdities.

Yet, he remains deeply rooted in Indian ethos, blending mythic narrative with modern realism. This synthesis allows him to universalize the problem of caste and class. Karna’s alienation resonates not only with Indian audiences but also with any society structured by exclusion be it racial, economic, or cultural.

Kailasam’s theatre thus becomes an early experiment in Indian modern drama one that seeks to humanize myth while politicizing morality. His use of English, far from being colonial mimicry, becomes a medium for critique, enabling him to engage both Indian tradition and Western rationalism.

7. Resistance, Reform, and the Question of Redemption

Unlike purely tragic interpretations of Karna, Kailasam’s version ends with a note of moral awakening. Karna’s recognition of his mother and his silent acceptance of fate become acts of ethical resistance. He refuses to perpetuate hate or vengeance, embodying the possibility of spiritual victory even within social defeat.

This ending aligns with the reformist spirit of Kailasam’s age a belief that moral regeneration must precede political freedom. Through Karna’s suffering, Kailasam invites society to confront its conscience. The redemption lies not in divine justice but in human empathy and social change.

Thus, The Curse or Karna transcends myth to become a manifesto for social ethics, calling for a world where dignity is based on humanity, not hierarchy.

IV. Caste, Class, and the Tragic Vision 

1. Karna as the Tragic Everyman

In The Curse or Karna, T. P. Kailasam reinvents the mythic hero as a tragic everyman, whose suffering transcends time and social context. Karna’s life embodies the paradox of human existence in an unjust world his nobility lies not in divine power but in endurance, humility, and moral clarity. Kailasam uses Karna’s downfall to dramatize how social structures destroy the individual spirit.

Karna’s tragedy is not caused by personal flaw (hamartia) as in classical Greek tragedy, but by systemic injustice the moral corruption of a society governed by caste and class. His heroism lies in his moral resilience amid humiliation, his capacity to retain compassion even toward those who reject him. Through this, Kailasam redefines the essence of tragedy: not the fall of the powerful, but the suffering of the virtuous under the weight of social falsehood.

This reinterpretation reflects Kailasam’s humanistic philosophy. In a world divided by inherited privilege, Karna represents ethical individuality the assertion of self-worth through action, not ancestry. His silent strength contrasts the arrogance of those born to power, making him a moral victor even in physical defeat.

2. The Dual Axis of Conflict: Caste and Class

Kailasam’s play operates simultaneously on two axes of conflict—the vertical hierarchy of caste and the horizontal opposition of class.

On the caste axis, Karna’s exclusion by Brahmins and Kshatriyas exposes the cruelty of hereditary social stratification. The varna system, presented as divine order, becomes a tool of human domination. The Brahmin monopoly over knowledge and the Kshatriya monopoly over valor combine to suppress the lower strata, whose only crime is birth.

On the class axis, Kailasam’s portrayal mirrors early modern India’s material inequalities. The royal palace represents wealth, lineage, and political power, while Karna symbolizes labor, skill, and moral merit. The play thus dramatizes the timeless tension between privilege and performance, inheritance and individual worth.

By fusing these two axes, Kailasam anticipates the intersectional analysis later articulated by thinkers like B. R. Ambedkar, who argued that caste is not only a social but also an economic and psychological structure. The Curse or Karna therefore reads as both an epic tragedy and a sociological critique.

3. The Psychological Dimension of Oppression

Kailasam delves deep into the psychology of subjugation. Karna’s inner torment the conflict between self-respect and social rejection reveals how caste and class oppression operate not just externally but internally. The victim internalizes inferiority, doubts his worth, and seeks validation from the very system that rejects him.

This is most visible in Karna’s loyalty to Duryodhana. Though he knows Duryodhana’s motives are political, he clings to that bond because it gives him a sense of belonging denied by others. Kailasam presents this as a tragic paradox of dependence: the oppressed cannot afford moral autonomy because survival depends on the approval of the powerful.

This psychological realism distinguishes Kailasam’s version from the Mahabharata’s fatalism. He transforms mythic determinism into existential anguish a modern condition where identity is both self-created and socially denied. In this sense, Karna becomes a prototype of the alienated modern subject, struggling to reconcile individuality with social belonging.

4. The Role of Dharma and the Question of Justice

Kailasam questions the traditional notion of dharma that governs epic morality. For centuries, the caste system justified inequality by invoking dharma, claiming that one must perform the duties of one’s birth without complaint. Kailasam exposes the moral hypocrisy behind this ideal.

In the play, Karna’s adherence to dharma leads to his destruction, while others use it to rationalize exploitation. Krishna’s insistence that Karna must die for siding with adharma reflects a divine double standard justice is applied selectively, depending on status and power. Kailasam thus redefines dharma not as obedience to hierarchy but as ethical self-awareness and compassion.

This reinterpretation aligns with modern humanist ethics and anticipates postcolonial moral thought. Kailasam’s dharma is rooted not in divine command but in human equality—a radical idea for his time.

5. Women, Birth, and the Question of Purity

An important but often overlooked dimension in The Curse or Karna is the role of Kunti, Karna’s mother. Her abandonment of her son out of fear of social stigma exposes how patriarchal structures sustain caste. Purity of lineage, the foundation of caste, depends on the control of female sexuality.

By portraying Kunti’s guilt and Karna’s silence, Kailasam subtly critiques the gendered foundation of social order. The system that condemns Karna also enslaves his mother, forcing her to choose reputation over love. Thus, caste conflict is intertwined with gender oppression—both products of a society obsessed with purity and status.

This dimension adds depth to Kailasam’s critique: the curse of caste corrupts not only institutions but human relationships, turning love into guilt and motherhood into silence.

6. From Tragedy to Reform: Kailasam’s Social Vision

Unlike classical tragedy, which ends in fatalism, Kailasam’s vision is redemptive. Karna’s suffering becomes a catalyst for moral awakening. The revelation of his true birth after death forces society—and the audience to confront its prejudice. The tragic hero becomes a martyr for social justice, his silence echoing as an indictment of collective guilt.

Kailasam’s conclusion reflects his faith in ethical reform and education. A social realist as well as a moral philosopher, he believed that drama could awaken conscience and inspire change. The Curse or Karna thus stands not merely as literature but as a manifesto for social enlightenment, bridging traditional Indian ethics with the modern call for equality.

7. The Humanist Legacy of Kailasam

T. P. Kailasam’s contribution to Indian drama lies in his fusion of mythic symbolism, social critique, and modern realism. He transformed English-language theatre in India from imitation to introspection, using it as a platform for national self-examination.

By centering his play on a marginalized hero, he anticipated the themes later developed in Dalit literature, Subaltern Studies, and postcolonial drama. His work stands alongside other reformist thinkers Tagore, Ibsen, Shaw, and Premchand who used art as a tool for ethical reflection.

Kailasam’s Karna is not a passive victim but a moral rebel, whose dignity outlasts his defeat. His pain becomes a mirror for India itself a nation wounded by its hierarchies yet capable of redemption through compassion and justice.

 Conclusion

In The Curse or Karna, T. P. Kailasam transforms a familiar epic episode into a profound meditation on caste, class, and human dignity. Through Karna’s tragedy, he exposes the moral bankruptcy of a society that privileges birth over merit, and divine law over human empathy.

The play’s critique extends beyond myth into the social realities of colonial India, where the struggle for freedom was inseparable from the struggle for equality. By giving voice to the silenced, Kailasam elevates drama into an instrument of moral education and social reform.

Ultimately, Karna’s life and death symbolize the universal human quest for recognition—the longing to be valued not for one’s origin but for one’s truth. Kailasam’s vision remains timeless: that a just society must rise from the ashes of its own prejudice, and that the true measure of nobility lies in the heart, not in the hierarchy.

 Karna - The voice of Subaltern

I. Introduction: The Subaltern and the Forgotten Voice

The term subaltern, derived from Antonio Gramsci and popularized by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, refers to those excluded from dominant power structures—politically, socially, and culturally silenced subjects. The subaltern cannot “speak” in mainstream discourse because their voices are either suppressed or appropriated by the elite.

In this context, Karna, the tragic hero of the Mahabharata and the protagonist of T. P. Kailasam’s play The Curse or Karna, emerges as one of the earliest symbolic representations of the subaltern consciousness in Indian literature. He is born divine, yet socially condemned; capable, yet excluded; moral, yet misunderstood. His struggle embodies the pain of those marginalized by caste and class hierarchies, whose worth is denied by the very system that depends on their labor and talent.

Kailasam’s modern reinterpretation of Karna transforms him from a mythic hero into a social metaphor the man of merit silenced by birth, the ethical outsider whose truth unsettles the complacent moral order. Through Karna’s humiliation, silence, and eventual death, Kailasam gives voice to the voiceless, making him a prototype of the subaltern rebel.

II. The Subaltern Condition: Birth, Silence, and Exclusion

1. The Stigma of Birth

In both the Mahabharata and The Curse or Karna, Karna’s tragedy begins at birth. Though the son of Kunti and the Sun God, he is abandoned out of fear of social shame and raised by a charioteer. Society immediately brands him suta-putra the son of a low-born family stripping him of identity before he can assert it.

This condition defines the subaltern’s position: identity determined by external labels rather than intrinsic worth. Kailasam emphasizes that Karna’s greatest curse is not divine but social—his inability to escape the stigma imposed by birth. He becomes a metaphor for the millions who remain trapped within caste hierarchies, where human potential is measured by ancestry, not ability.

2. Silence as a Form of Oppression

Spivak’s famous question “Can the subaltern speak?” finds a powerful echo in Karna’s life. He is articulate, ethical, and heroic, yet his words are constantly dismissed by those in power. His silence is not natural but enforced, a consequence of systemic exclusion.

In Kailasam’s portrayal, Karna’s silence becomes both a symbol of subjugation and moral strength. He refuses to beg for recognition or sympathy, embodying the quiet dignity of the oppressed. His silence speaks louder than the hollow rhetoric of the elite revealing the moral emptiness of a system that glorifies virtue while practicing discrimination.

3. Exclusion from Knowledge and Power

In epic and dramatic tradition alike, the Brahmins and Kshatriyas monopolize knowledge and power. Karna’s exclusion from Drona’s military academy and the refusal of spiritual recognition from Parashurama dramatize the gatekeeping mechanisms of elite authority.

This exclusion parallels the colonial and postcolonial subaltern experience—the denial of access to education, representation, and voice. Karna’s yearning for learning and dignity anticipates the struggles of the marginalized in modern India, from Dalits seeking education to colonized subjects seeking self-definition. Kailasam thus universalizes Karna’s suffering, transforming his story into a timeless allegory of systemic silencing.

III. Karna’s Moral Integrity: The Subaltern as the Ethical Center

While society labels Karna as “low-born,” Kailasam portrays him as morally superior to those who reject him. His loyalty, generosity, and sense of justice contrast sharply with the hypocrisy of the ruling elite.

1. Loyalty as Resistance

Karna’s unwavering gratitude to Duryodhana who alone acknowledges his worth may seem misguided, but in Kailasam’s reading, it becomes an act of resistance against the established order. By siding with the marginalized (the Kauravas as social outcasts of the royal clan), Karna rejects the Brahminical monopoly on virtue.

His loyalty signifies a political stance: a declaration that worth is not conferred by sacred law but earned through action. In this sense, Karna stands against varna-dharma, the moral code that legitimizes inequality.

2. The Ethics of Compassion

Despite repeated humiliation, Karna never loses compassion. His generosity symbolized in the moment when he gives away his armor and earrings to a disguised Indra embodies a humanist morality that transcends caste.

Kailasam uses this act to invert traditional values: the “low-born” man becomes morally divine, while the gods themselves appear petty and envious. The playwright thereby deconstructs the myth of divine justice, exposing it as a disguise for social privilege. Karna’s ethics become a subaltern code of resistance, grounded not in power but in empathy and sacrifice.

IV. The Caste System and Subalternity: A Social Reading

1. Caste as the Machinery of Silence

In The Curse or Karna, caste operates as a social technology of exclusion. It defines who can speak, who can learn, and who can lead. Kailasam exposes this machinery not through abstract philosophy but through Karna’s lived suffering. Every interaction his humiliation in the archery contest, his rejection by Drona, his discovery of his parentage reveals how caste erases human individuality.

This aligns with Subaltern Studies’ core idea: history is written by the dominant classes, while the voices of the oppressed remain buried. Kailasam, by rewriting the Mahabharata myth from Karna’s perspective, performs an act of literary decolonization he reclaims the silenced narrative and forces readers to confront the cruelty of social order.

2. The Curse as a Social Metaphor

The play’s title, The Curse, operates on two levels:

• The literal curses (from Parashurama, Earth Mother, and fate).

• The metaphorical curse of social prejudice the inherited stigma that defines one’s fate before one acts.

For Kailasam, the true “curse” is being born in a society governed by purity and pollution, where talent is suffocated by tradition. Karna’s tragedy, then, is not divine but man-made a mirror of India’s historical injustice.

3. Parallels with Colonial and Dalit Oppression

Kailasam wrote during British rule, when Indians were themselves the subalterns of empire. By using the myth of Karna, he draws a subtle analogy between colonial domination and caste hierarchy: both thrive on exclusion and dependency.

Later thinkers like B. R. Ambedkar would echo this idea, calling caste “a system of graded inequality.” Kailasam’s drama anticipates this critique, suggesting that freedom from colonialism means little without freedom from caste.

V. The Subaltern’s Voice Through Suffering and Silence

1. The Dialectics of Suffering

Kailasam’s Karna does not rebel violently; instead, he internalizes suffering as a form of resistance. His quiet endurance exposes the brutality of those who oppress him. In Subaltern theory, such endurance can become a mode of testimony the body of the oppressed becomes the site where history is inscribed.

Karna’s suffering, then, is not mere tragedy but a political act: it forces the audience to acknowledge the pain that the dominant culture denies. His death becomes symbolic redemption, transforming personal humiliation into universal protest.

2. Silence as Speech

Gayatri Spivak argues that “the subaltern cannot speak” because her voice is either silenced or mediated by elites. Yet Kailasam’s Karna subverts this impossibility. His silence is not absence but assertion—a refusal to participate in false justice.

When Karna learns of his true parentage, he remains silent, choosing not to weaponize the truth for personal gain. His silence becomes a moral language, a rejection of systems that define worth by lineage. Through this, Kailasam turns silence into a form of eloquence, where the subaltern speaks not through words but through ethical presence.

VI. The Voice of Humanism: Kailasam’s Subaltern Aesthetics

Kailasam’s genius lies in his ability to merge myth, social realism, and moral philosophy. His dramatic style resists both Western imitation and religious glorification, creating a new Indian humanist theatre.

Through Karna, he gives the marginalized a language of dignity. Unlike upper-caste reformers who spoke about the oppressed, Kailasam allows the subaltern to speak from within his pain. His Karna is not a helpless victim but a moral visionary, whose suffering exposes the falseness of privilege.

Kailasam’s use of English is equally significant. In colonial India, English was a language of power; Kailasam appropriates it to articulate Indian injustice to an educated audience, turning the master’s language into a tool of conscience.

VII. Karna and Modern Subaltern Discourse

1. From Myth to Modernity

Kailasam’s reinterpretation of Karna anticipates modern Subaltern and Dalit literature. Later writers such as Omprakash Valmiki, Sharan Kumar Limbale, and Namdeo Dhasal would echo Karna’s voice in their depiction of caste humiliation, identity, and dignity.

Karna’s experience of exclusion mirrors the collective memory of Dalit consciousness, where centuries of silence are transformed into self-assertion. His story thus becomes an archetype of subaltern history the awakening of the oppressed to their own worth.

2. Resonance in Postcolonial Thought

Postcolonial theory often examines how colonial and traditional hierarchies silence native voices. Kailasam’s The Curse or Karna prefigures this concern, showing that oppression begins at home. By deconstructing Hindu social order, he challenges India to confront its internal colonization before seeking external freedom.

In this sense, Karna becomes the postcolonial subject educated, aware, yet alienated from both his roots and the ruling elite. His tragedy is the tragedy of a hybrid identity, torn between divine origin and human degradation, knowledge and rejection, modernity and tradition.

VIII. Conclusion: Karna’s Legacy – Speaking for the Voiceless

In The Curse or Karna, T. P. Kailasam transforms an ancient myth into a modern social text, where the personal becomes political and the tragic becomes ethical. Karna, born divine yet treated as untouchable, becomes the voice of the subaltern a symbol for all those denied agency by birth, race, or class.

Through him, Kailasam exposes the moral hypocrisy of society and demands a redefinition of virtue based on humanity rather than heredity. Karna’s suffering, silence, and moral grace articulate a counter-narrative to the official history of power.

In the end, Karna’s death is not defeat but revelation. He dies unheard, yet his silence echoes across generations, questioning every structure that legitimizes inequality. Kailasam’s art gives this silence a stage and a language, making Karna the eternal conscience of India’s social history.

Thus, Karna stands as the first subaltern hero of Indian drama the one who cannot speak, yet makes the world listen.

References:

• “Karna (the Unsung Hero of Mahabharata: The Voice of the Subaltern).” International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, vol. 2, no. 4, journal-article, Nov. 2016, pp. 15–25. media.neliti.com/media/publications/281255-karna-the-unsung-hero-of-mahabharata-the-1a9f6184.pdf.

• Mahābhārata: Sanskrit Text and English Translation. 2018.

• MORRIS, ROSALIND C., editor. Can the Subaltern Speak?: Reflections on the History of an Idea. Columbia University Press, 2010. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7312/morr14384. Accessed 3 Oct. 2025.

• Rao, B.S. The Curse of Karna: An Impression of Sophocles in Five Acts. B.S. Rama Rao, 1969.

• “SUBALTERN STUDIES 1 : GUHA, RANAJIT, ED : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive.” Internet Archive, 1982, archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12743/page/n7/mode/2up.