Rao provides a summary of village life in Kanthapura, South India, in his book, mostly concentrating on the years after the Gandhian independence movements. Rao beautifully portrays the post-freedom circumstances and the effects the struggle had on the people of Kanthapura via the lens of his creative imagination. The intricate story of the novel explores how politics, identity, and culture interact against the background of colonial India. Its foundation is the Gandhian concept of nonviolent protest (Rao, p 145). In order to properly capture the many and well-known arguments, this article will engage in a scholarly discussion that will examine and interpret Kanthapura in detail. It will also connect the main arguments and interpretations based on several academic lenses.

Rao provides a realistic account in his book of how the Gandhian Indian independence movement affected the peasants of Kanthapura’s daily life (Rao, p 145). The main character of the novel, Moorthy, appears as a Gandhian leader who encourages the peasants to cherish nonviolent resistance. The story portrays the routines of rural life by fusing mythology, folklore, and daily hardships with the greater struggle for liberation. One of the critical arguments shared by Rao in his novel is that power resides in its capacity to vividly depict the pre-independence Indian terrain, including the peasants’ emotions and cultural context. The author examines how politics, culture, and identity intertwine in the setting of colonial India, which is a philosophy of nonviolent resistance. After he arrived from South Africa, Gandhi was disparaged by the atrocities taking place in India due to foreign rule (Rao, p 142). He, therefore, took matters further and started mobilizing citizens by conducting meetings with the present leaders. Initially, the movement was one of violence, especially with the unprecedented violence of the Chouri-Chaura. Gutted by the increased violent actions, he chose a nonviolent tactic by suspending the movement, as quoted in Kanthapura, “Gandhi was shocked, regarded it as a personal failure and suspended the movement.” (Rao, p 142)

Rao, in his book Kanthapura, depicts women’s participation in the Indian freedom movement via a complex prism that considers both customary beliefs and newly developed forms of empowerment. The novel depicts the women’s transforming journey through the socio-political shifts created during the Gandhian movement as they traverse life in Kanthapura. Moorthy decided to include women in the movement by organizing them and forming a Women Volunteer Corps. By following through with Gandhi’s action program, women were solely introduced to the freedom struggle through the eradication of untouchability and various social evils, such as the purdah system. This program ensured women could participate in the struggle for independence without discrimination (Rao, p 143). As mothers and homemakers, women are firmly rooted in their conventional roles and represent the standards of femininity in society. However, the book also emphasizes how actively they participated in the nationalist movement. Ratna embodies resistance when involved in political activities and defies conventional gender stereotypes (Rao, p 163). The intricate interaction between traditions and change in women’s lives amid the Indian independence movement is reflected in this contradiction.

On the other hand, Rumina, in his article, Contesting Identities, Involvement and Resistance of Women in the Indian National Movement, shares that while women actively took part in the independence movement, their positions were frequently restricted by gender stereotypes within the movement (Rumina, p 305). It, therefore, highlights the contentious nature of women’s participation in the movement. The position held by women in Kanthapura can be interpreted as both empowering and limited in light of Rumina’s criticism. Although the book shows women participating in political activism and acts of resistance, a more thorough examination of their difficulties within the patriarchal confines of nationalist discourse is required. It is, therefore, imperative to consider whether the novel adequately addresses the intricacies of women’s autonomy when confronted with deeply embedded gender standards common in nationalist and colonial contexts in Rumina’s analysis. Furthermore, Rumina’s paradigm invites a critical analysis of the novel’s treatment of the interconnected nature of women’s identities, taking caste and class into account (Rumina, p 305). Even though they were all involved in the fight for independence, the women in Kanthapura might have faced different difficulties because of their socioeconomic status, as indicated in Kanthapura, “The workers are exploited sexually also. If the Sahib takes a fancy to any of their wo