What do you think?
Rate this book
The Ramayana
Ramayana, The by Menen, Aubrey
276 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1954
About the author
Aubrey Menen
31 books19 followersSalvator Aubrey Clarence Menen was born in 1912 in London, of Irish and Indian parents. After attending University College, London he worked as a drama critic and a stage director. When World War II broke out, he was in India, where he organized pro-Allied radio broadcasts and edited film scripts for the Indian government. After the war ended, he returned to London to work with an advertising agency's film department, but the success of his first novel, The Prevalence of Witches (1947), induced him to take up writing full-time. Aubrey Menen’s writings, often satirical, explore the nature of nationalism and the cultural contrast between his own Irish–Indian ancestry and his traditional British upbringing. Apart from his novels and non-fiction works Menen wrote two autobiographies titled Dead Man in the Silver Market (1953) and The Space within the Heart (1970). He died in 1989 in Thiruvananthapuram.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
January 18, 2013
The reason I picked up this book was that Aubrey Menen, an Irish-Indian satirist, used to live until his death in 1989 in Trivandrum, the city where I grew up. Though I never met him personally, he apparently was a regular visitor to the British Library, that I too used to frequent in the early 1980s. He at that time reportedly looked like a Biblical prophet, with flowing white hair and beard, as he pottered about in the library and the nearby coffee house. Hard to miss, but unfortunately, I never saw him.
The Ramayana is his retelling of the epic of the same name. Though all the critical elements of the story are present -- Dasharatha and his three queens, Manthara's machinations, Rama's exile, Sita's abduction to Lanka, the war, and Rama's triumphal return to Ayodhya -- Menen's tone is irreverent and satirical.
**SPOILER ALERT**
The ambiance of 'Ayoda' is that of a native state during the British Raj sometime in the late 19th century, with palace intrigues and craven courtiers. Dasaratha himself is a dissolute and lecherous old man, and Rama is an earnest and well-meaning, but rather naive and none-too-bright young man, given to noble gestures and grand sounding sentiments, the meaning of which he himself does not fully grasp. Luxman on the other hand, is brave, but brash and hot-headed, with no patience for his brother's philosophical ruminations. Sita is rather ordinary, "a good woman, a good wife, and a simple soul."
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the book is how Sita ends up in Lanka. While in exile, earnest young Rama, intent on cultivating his scholarship spends endless hours in conversation with Valmiki. Bored to tears, Sita escapes for long walks in the forest. There she chances upon Ravana, the ruler of a small frontier state in the wilderness, but also a bandit and raider. Intrigued by the somewhat dangerous but respectful stranger, twice more she meets him in secret. Luxman learns of these meetings after he himself runs into Ravana at a forest pavilion, and has a fierce fight with him from which he barely escapes. But Rama, deep in his discussions, is oblivious.
Then one night, Ravana attack's Valmiki's hermitage. Taken by surprise, the brothers and Sita run into the woods to save themselves, but watch helplessly as Ravana's soldiers torture and kill the hermits. Through the chaos, Sita walks to Ravana and leaves voluntarily with him, on his blood-soaked horse. His soldiers too stop the violence and leave.
Though he saw this, to redeem his honor, Rama has to recover Sita. The brothers assemble a coalition of local rulers, all with their own grievances against Ravana and attack Lanka. But their 'generals' have no idea how to proceed, and Lanka is too well-defended (though behind the scenes there too, chaos and incompetence rule). Luxman, hothead that he is, provokes Ravana and engages him in man-on-man combat in which Ravana manages to floor Luxman using an illegal chariot move. Enraged at seeing this, Rama's soldiers attack pell-mell, and through good fortune, manage to break through the castle gates.
Rama, finally moved to action, and liking it once he got started, fights his way into Ravana's palace, only to find him already dead, killed by his own soldiers to get at his jewelry and treasure. The reunion with Sita is tense and Rama cannot bring himself to forgive her. But eventually, through Luxman's intervention, the couple reconcile and return to Ayoda. But wait, it is not over yet -- Sita's trial by fire is stage-managed with props and "Egyptian fire" that looks like smoke and flames, but does not hurt.
Traditionalists would obviously be shocked by this book, and it was banned in India for a while. Sita's infidelity is the most controversial aspect of the book, but as she explains to Luxman later, she had not intended to be unfaithful. She went to Ravana seeing in Luxman's face that he was preparing to die fighting Ravana's soldiers. It was part of a bargain, that Ravana will stop the killing and torturing if she would leave peacefully with him. She said she intended to kill herself, if Ravana had come to her drunken and raging, as she expected him to. But unfortunately for her chastity, he did not; he was courteous and kind -- and this proved to be her undoing.
This humanizes Sita, though her motives are still not entirely clear. Thrice before she had met Ravana secretly in the forest. Did she know before she went to Ravana, that the bargain would be acceptable to him? Did she herself desire it, but suppress it from her conscious mind? Did she really mean to kill herself. Later, after Ravana died, Luxman blames himself that he had three opportunities to kill Ravana -- at the forest pavilion, during the attack on the hermitage, and man-on-man at the walls of Lanka -- and failed to do it, on each occasion. Had he succeeded the first two times, Luxman says, none of this would have happened. At this, Sita breaks down weeps bitterly. Was this out of regret at her lost chastity, or because she was mourning for Ravana?
In the mode of classic folklore, Menen too has side stories and digressions in plenty. The four side stories are interesting tales in themselves.
In the tale of the hermit and the hidden wife, a false hermit seduces a rich merchant's wife and elopes with her to his hermitage, only to find that she is insatiable in bed. Exhausted, he tries to send her back, but to no avail, because the merchant, freed of his onerous marital responsibilities has prospered in his business.
In the tale of the studious locust, a locust believing itself superior to its fellows, wants to pursue a life of scholarly study. Luckily for it, he chances upon a hermit who offers to teach him if the locust would confine himself to eating only four leaves each day. The locust, now learned but hungry, abides by this regimen until one day breaking loose and escaping back to gluttony. Meanwhile, back at the hermitage, a placid cow that the locust used to berate as being lazy and stupid, continues to peacefully eat and live, untroubled by false pretenses about herself.
In the tale of the four jealous fishermen, four men fear that their wives are unfaithful even though they are not. Shiva gives them a magic power that lets them be two places at the same time, on their boat fishing and back home with their wives invisibly. The men are thrilled and relieved to find that their wives are faithful, but the temptation to spy invisibly on each others' wives is too hard to resist. The invisible men all sleep with their friends' wives, but the women innocently believe that they are having erotic dreams. The men are much chastened when they discover what they all have been up to -- but wiser.
In the tale of the sculptor and the stone woman, a talented young sculptor is set to work on a dark corner of a temple by a jealous master mason. He carves a beautiful woman's figure, a composite of all the village women he observes. The local prince visits and spots the woman's statue and asks that the woman who modeled for the sculpture be presented to him, on threat of death to the sculptor if he does not. Not knowing what to do, the sculptor seeks the advice of an older colleague who recommends that he present the village whore to the prince. Despite his pretensions of being a man of discrimination and taste, the prince proves to be not immune to lust and is perfectly satisfied -- though the woman looks nothing like the statue.
Menen is also the master of the epigram, and here are a few.
"Valmiki was the first human being to be recognized as a literary genius, he was therefore penniless and much disliked" (p. 4)
"Metaphysics is little more than an ingenious postponement of the stage when the philosopher has to admit that he does not know what he is talking about" (p. 18)
On Shiva the destroyer: "What we call history is merely Shiva's procrastination" (p. 177).
The Ramayana is his retelling of the epic of the same name. Though all the critical elements of the story are present -- Dasharatha and his three queens, Manthara's machinations, Rama's exile, Sita's abduction to Lanka, the war, and Rama's triumphal return to Ayodhya -- Menen's tone is irreverent and satirical.
**SPOILER ALERT**
The ambiance of 'Ayoda' is that of a native state during the British Raj sometime in the late 19th century, with palace intrigues and craven courtiers. Dasaratha himself is a dissolute and lecherous old man, and Rama is an earnest and well-meaning, but rather naive and none-too-bright young man, given to noble gestures and grand sounding sentiments, the meaning of which he himself does not fully grasp. Luxman on the other hand, is brave, but brash and hot-headed, with no patience for his brother's philosophical ruminations. Sita is rather ordinary, "a good woman, a good wife, and a simple soul."
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the book is how Sita ends up in Lanka. While in exile, earnest young Rama, intent on cultivating his scholarship spends endless hours in conversation with Valmiki. Bored to tears, Sita escapes for long walks in the forest. There she chances upon Ravana, the ruler of a small frontier state in the wilderness, but also a bandit and raider. Intrigued by the somewhat dangerous but respectful stranger, twice more she meets him in secret. Luxman learns of these meetings after he himself runs into Ravana at a forest pavilion, and has a fierce fight with him from which he barely escapes. But Rama, deep in his discussions, is oblivious.
Then one night, Ravana attack's Valmiki's hermitage. Taken by surprise, the brothers and Sita run into the woods to save themselves, but watch helplessly as Ravana's soldiers torture and kill the hermits. Through the chaos, Sita walks to Ravana and leaves voluntarily with him, on his blood-soaked horse. His soldiers too stop the violence and leave.
Though he saw this, to redeem his honor, Rama has to recover Sita. The brothers assemble a coalition of local rulers, all with their own grievances against Ravana and attack Lanka. But their 'generals' have no idea how to proceed, and Lanka is too well-defended (though behind the scenes there too, chaos and incompetence rule). Luxman, hothead that he is, provokes Ravana and engages him in man-on-man combat in which Ravana manages to floor Luxman using an illegal chariot move. Enraged at seeing this, Rama's soldiers attack pell-mell, and through good fortune, manage to break through the castle gates.
Rama, finally moved to action, and liking it once he got started, fights his way into Ravana's palace, only to find him already dead, killed by his own soldiers to get at his jewelry and treasure. The reunion with Sita is tense and Rama cannot bring himself to forgive her. But eventually, through Luxman's intervention, the couple reconcile and return to Ayoda. But wait, it is not over yet -- Sita's trial by fire is stage-managed with props and "Egyptian fire" that looks like smoke and flames, but does not hurt.
Traditionalists would obviously be shocked by this book, and it was banned in India for a while. Sita's infidelity is the most controversial aspect of the book, but as she explains to Luxman later, she had not intended to be unfaithful. She went to Ravana seeing in Luxman's face that he was preparing to die fighting Ravana's soldiers. It was part of a bargain, that Ravana will stop the killing and torturing if she would leave peacefully with him. She said she intended to kill herself, if Ravana had come to her drunken and raging, as she expected him to. But unfortunately for her chastity, he did not; he was courteous and kind -- and this proved to be her undoing.
This humanizes Sita, though her motives are still not entirely clear. Thrice before she had met Ravana secretly in the forest. Did she know before she went to Ravana, that the bargain would be acceptable to him? Did she herself desire it, but suppress it from her conscious mind? Did she really mean to kill herself. Later, after Ravana died, Luxman blames himself that he had three opportunities to kill Ravana -- at the forest pavilion, during the attack on the hermitage, and man-on-man at the walls of Lanka -- and failed to do it, on each occasion. Had he succeeded the first two times, Luxman says, none of this would have happened. At this, Sita breaks down weeps bitterly. Was this out of regret at her lost chastity, or because she was mourning for Ravana?
In the mode of classic folklore, Menen too has side stories and digressions in plenty. The four side stories are interesting tales in themselves.
In the tale of the hermit and the hidden wife, a false hermit seduces a rich merchant's wife and elopes with her to his hermitage, only to find that she is insatiable in bed. Exhausted, he tries to send her back, but to no avail, because the merchant, freed of his onerous marital responsibilities has prospered in his business.
In the tale of the studious locust, a locust believing itself superior to its fellows, wants to pursue a life of scholarly study. Luckily for it, he chances upon a hermit who offers to teach him if the locust would confine himself to eating only four leaves each day. The locust, now learned but hungry, abides by this regimen until one day breaking loose and escaping back to gluttony. Meanwhile, back at the hermitage, a placid cow that the locust used to berate as being lazy and stupid, continues to peacefully eat and live, untroubled by false pretenses about herself.
In the tale of the four jealous fishermen, four men fear that their wives are unfaithful even though they are not. Shiva gives them a magic power that lets them be two places at the same time, on their boat fishing and back home with their wives invisibly. The men are thrilled and relieved to find that their wives are faithful, but the temptation to spy invisibly on each others' wives is too hard to resist. The invisible men all sleep with their friends' wives, but the women innocently believe that they are having erotic dreams. The men are much chastened when they discover what they all have been up to -- but wiser.
In the tale of the sculptor and the stone woman, a talented young sculptor is set to work on a dark corner of a temple by a jealous master mason. He carves a beautiful woman's figure, a composite of all the village women he observes. The local prince visits and spots the woman's statue and asks that the woman who modeled for the sculpture be presented to him, on threat of death to the sculptor if he does not. Not knowing what to do, the sculptor seeks the advice of an older colleague who recommends that he present the village whore to the prince. Despite his pretensions of being a man of discrimination and taste, the prince proves to be not immune to lust and is perfectly satisfied -- though the woman looks nothing like the statue.
Menen is also the master of the epigram, and here are a few.
"Valmiki was the first human being to be recognized as a literary genius, he was therefore penniless and much disliked" (p. 4)
"Metaphysics is little more than an ingenious postponement of the stage when the philosopher has to admit that he does not know what he is talking about" (p. 18)
On Shiva the destroyer: "What we call history is merely Shiva's procrastination" (p. 177).
October 19, 2022
In 1954, a British author of Indian descent by the name of Aubrey Menen wrote a book, which at its core was an imaginative retelling of one of India's best know Mythological epics (along with Mahabharata) 'The Ramayana'. The book was appropriately titled 'Rama retold' (in some versions the titled has been changed to 'Ramayana as told by Aubrey Menen').
Now, if you are anyone like me who has spent his entire life living in India, I'd say it is impossible for you to not be aware of this tale. I am using a definitive word like "impossible" here because of two reasons, first being that, with the advent of television in majority of Indian households that roughly coincided with the liberalisation of Indian economy in 1991 led to, Doordarshan or DD National, India's state owned and only TV channel of the time, to broadcast shows based on the epics like 'The ramayana, 'Mahabharata' etc. Them becoming an instant hit overnight. I would not go into the political reasons behind this - even though there are many - I would, however like to talk about the political consequences culminating over the years due to this phenomenon and that brings me to my second point. 2014 saw the rise of fascism inspired right wing hindu party at helm of political food chain. One of the defining features of this ruling dispensation is the weaponisation of 'Rama', the protagonist of Valmiki's tale as a war cry against minorities across the country. 'Rama' has become such a polarising figure in today's time that it is impossible not be aware of him.
At a time like this, reading Menen's rendition of the tale is truly a breath of fresh air. The book trims down all the mystical Mumbo-jumbo and humanizes the characters to such a degree, - showing them with all the human vices, making each and every character so much more relatable - that 'Rama retold' became the first book to be banned in Independent India. But this begs the question, why was it banned in the first place and that too by a prime minister who is projected as an epitome of liberalism and tolerance ?
I think the answers to these questions lies the objectives menen wanted to achieve through this book. In a section just after the introduction, appropriately titled 'Indian Enlightenment' menen explains thet when this tale was originally written, there was a movement that was taking shape in India which was nothing short of an Indian enlightenment. And that the author of 'Ramayana' Valmiki was one of the first sceptics to challenge the orthodox brahamanical hegemony and that, it was due to this he was forced to live his adult life in exile and he died in poverty. Later, the Brahmins appropriated and distorted his work, giving birth to the tale of 'Rama' we today see on TV and is celebrated by the the Hindu Right wing. What Menen tries to do with this book is what, -according to Menen, Valmiki intended to do with the original Ramayana - that is to question the foundations of society and civilization itself and just like Valmiki - who was exiled for thinking differently from the dominant orthodoxy at the time - Menen also faced the same fate for more than half a century, his book still banned to this day.
The structure of the book is fairly simple. It has been divided into three sections, first section concerning itself with life in the Kingdom of Ayodhya before Rama's exile, the second section recounts Rama's exile and his meeting with Valmiki and the final section deals with the siege of Lanka and Rama's return, just like any other Ramayana, there is s catch however, menen in order to break away from the Brahmincal hegemony over the text omits parts glorifying tye Brahmins adding his own stories in the mix as well. The book is a satire on the society itself and most of its humour comes from ironies and contradictions in the stories.
In conclusion, 'Rama retold' urges us to be more sceptical and not to hold anything sacred to the point of becoming delusional and nonsensical, which I believe is the need of the hour in today's political climate, but most importantly this book asks us to laugh. With Valmiki saying, "There are three things which are real: God, human folly, and laughter. Since the fi rst two pass our comprehension, we must do what we can with the third."
Now, if you are anyone like me who has spent his entire life living in India, I'd say it is impossible for you to not be aware of this tale. I am using a definitive word like "impossible" here because of two reasons, first being that, with the advent of television in majority of Indian households that roughly coincided with the liberalisation of Indian economy in 1991 led to, Doordarshan or DD National, India's state owned and only TV channel of the time, to broadcast shows based on the epics like 'The ramayana, 'Mahabharata' etc. Them becoming an instant hit overnight. I would not go into the political reasons behind this - even though there are many - I would, however like to talk about the political consequences culminating over the years due to this phenomenon and that brings me to my second point. 2014 saw the rise of fascism inspired right wing hindu party at helm of political food chain. One of the defining features of this ruling dispensation is the weaponisation of 'Rama', the protagonist of Valmiki's tale as a war cry against minorities across the country. 'Rama' has become such a polarising figure in today's time that it is impossible not be aware of him.
At a time like this, reading Menen's rendition of the tale is truly a breath of fresh air. The book trims down all the mystical Mumbo-jumbo and humanizes the characters to such a degree, - showing them with all the human vices, making each and every character so much more relatable - that 'Rama retold' became the first book to be banned in Independent India. But this begs the question, why was it banned in the first place and that too by a prime minister who is projected as an epitome of liberalism and tolerance ?
I think the answers to these questions lies the objectives menen wanted to achieve through this book. In a section just after the introduction, appropriately titled 'Indian Enlightenment' menen explains thet when this tale was originally written, there was a movement that was taking shape in India which was nothing short of an Indian enlightenment. And that the author of 'Ramayana' Valmiki was one of the first sceptics to challenge the orthodox brahamanical hegemony and that, it was due to this he was forced to live his adult life in exile and he died in poverty. Later, the Brahmins appropriated and distorted his work, giving birth to the tale of 'Rama' we today see on TV and is celebrated by the the Hindu Right wing. What Menen tries to do with this book is what, -according to Menen, Valmiki intended to do with the original Ramayana - that is to question the foundations of society and civilization itself and just like Valmiki - who was exiled for thinking differently from the dominant orthodoxy at the time - Menen also faced the same fate for more than half a century, his book still banned to this day.
The structure of the book is fairly simple. It has been divided into three sections, first section concerning itself with life in the Kingdom of Ayodhya before Rama's exile, the second section recounts Rama's exile and his meeting with Valmiki and the final section deals with the siege of Lanka and Rama's return, just like any other Ramayana, there is s catch however, menen in order to break away from the Brahmincal hegemony over the text omits parts glorifying tye Brahmins adding his own stories in the mix as well. The book is a satire on the society itself and most of its humour comes from ironies and contradictions in the stories.
In conclusion, 'Rama retold' urges us to be more sceptical and not to hold anything sacred to the point of becoming delusional and nonsensical, which I believe is the need of the hour in today's political climate, but most importantly this book asks us to laugh. With Valmiki saying, "There are three things which are real: God, human folly, and laughter. Since the fi rst two pass our comprehension, we must do what we can with the third."
May 8, 2021
This book is banned in my country (India) and I was too excited to read this when I got a copy from a friend. I am a big fan of Indian mythology and try to read different versions and opinions of scholars on them.
First off, I was excited to read a 'satirical' view point of Ramayana and the portrayal of Lord Rama, the biggest Indian God by a Westerner (Mr. Menen is half Indian though). But the Ramayana retold is a huge disappointment.
The book starts with Brahmin bashing. The whole book seems to be a rhetoric of hatred against Brahmins and their way of life. Don't get me wrong, I am a Brahmin myself and have heard the horror stories of oppression of lower castes and women by my patriarchal forefathers. But I don't like being hit my a sledgehammer on my head saying how bad they were all the time, especially when I'm trying to read a beloved mythological epic.
The author tries to rewrite Ramayana as 'satire' and explicitly mentions that he has erased the 'Brahminical' adaptations and has added his own storylines.
King Dasharatha is reduced to a pot bellied womanizer who is afraid of his son Rama usurping the throne and everything that belonged to him.
Lord Rama is portrayed as dimwitted and cursed.
Goddess Sita is portrayed as a helpless simpleton.
I want to mention more here but I don't know if the facts that the author mentions are from some folk lore or his own entities, and I couldn't double check or find the references to some of his ridiculous statements. Also I am too exhausted after reading complex and useless falsification of the original poem and characters to suit the author's vendetta against Brahmins.
The book is bad. I didn't laugh. I did not find this satirical. I found this as a wasted opportunity. The author had so much potential to write something worthwhile, than make fools out of beloved Hindu kings and God's. The humor is wry and illogical. I still don't understand what the author was trying to convey. It's ok to have an opinion and bash an entire community and a country. But I would rather he wrote another book on evils of Brahmin society in India with supporting facts.
I am glad that this book was banned in India. For one thing the author was spared of the extreme right wing Hindu groups who would not have taken their Lord Rama or his father's insults lightly and Mr Menen would not be allowed to enter India. For another, I do not want anyone to read this without reading the actual translation of the Valmiki Ramayana as the facts here are too distorted.
First off, I was excited to read a 'satirical' view point of Ramayana and the portrayal of Lord Rama, the biggest Indian God by a Westerner (Mr. Menen is half Indian though). But the Ramayana retold is a huge disappointment.
The book starts with Brahmin bashing. The whole book seems to be a rhetoric of hatred against Brahmins and their way of life. Don't get me wrong, I am a Brahmin myself and have heard the horror stories of oppression of lower castes and women by my patriarchal forefathers. But I don't like being hit my a sledgehammer on my head saying how bad they were all the time, especially when I'm trying to read a beloved mythological epic.
The author tries to rewrite Ramayana as 'satire' and explicitly mentions that he has erased the 'Brahminical' adaptations and has added his own storylines.
King Dasharatha is reduced to a pot bellied womanizer who is afraid of his son Rama usurping the throne and everything that belonged to him.
Lord Rama is portrayed as dimwitted and cursed.
Goddess Sita is portrayed as a helpless simpleton.
I want to mention more here but I don't know if the facts that the author mentions are from some folk lore or his own entities, and I couldn't double check or find the references to some of his ridiculous statements. Also I am too exhausted after reading complex and useless falsification of the original poem and characters to suit the author's vendetta against Brahmins.
The book is bad. I didn't laugh. I did not find this satirical. I found this as a wasted opportunity. The author had so much potential to write something worthwhile, than make fools out of beloved Hindu kings and God's. The humor is wry and illogical. I still don't understand what the author was trying to convey. It's ok to have an opinion and bash an entire community and a country. But I would rather he wrote another book on evils of Brahmin society in India with supporting facts.
I am glad that this book was banned in India. For one thing the author was spared of the extreme right wing Hindu groups who would not have taken their Lord Rama or his father's insults lightly and Mr Menen would not be allowed to enter India. For another, I do not want anyone to read this without reading the actual translation of the Valmiki Ramayana as the facts here are too distorted.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 11, 2019
To begin with, it's necessary to establish exactly what this particular book is. The Indian classic narrative poem of 24,000 couplets existing today, it is not. Neither is it the original, much shorter novel in verse as written over 25 centuries ago by Valmiki, since that work of genius appears to have been buried under an avalanche of revisions and additions heaped upon it by subsequent generations of scholars with their own agendas.
What Menen has given us then can best be classified as a translated précis and commentary. To his credit, Menen has delivered a highly readable and entertaining satire, replete with that particular flavor of humor that seems only to exist among Indians and people who have been deeply immersed in the culture of the Subcontinent.
The primary narrative concerning the downfall and recovery of Prince Rama, along with several other tales embedded therein are replete with often hilarious and always pithy illustrations of the pretentious nonsense of courtiers and kings, the duplicity of priests, the bafflegab of philosophers and the monumental stupidity of generals.
An altogether enjoyable read.
What Menen has given us then can best be classified as a translated précis and commentary. To his credit, Menen has delivered a highly readable and entertaining satire, replete with that particular flavor of humor that seems only to exist among Indians and people who have been deeply immersed in the culture of the Subcontinent.
The primary narrative concerning the downfall and recovery of Prince Rama, along with several other tales embedded therein are replete with often hilarious and always pithy illustrations of the pretentious nonsense of courtiers and kings, the duplicity of priests, the bafflegab of philosophers and the monumental stupidity of generals.
An altogether enjoyable read.
July 27, 2017
This is a beautiful read. It isn't offensive at all, so I have no clue why it is/was banned. Interestingly, it is available here - https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.... - the digital library of India provides it. The version I read, and available for download from the link I shared is titled slightly differently. It is called Rama Retold.
While I am hearing and reading in other reviews that the book is irreverent, I feel not. The story is a different story, a story of familiar characters in a similar situation but different times. For example, the original Ramayana is supposed to be in an era called Satyug. I couldn't relate to the original story, but this one is extremely real and pragmatic. The parables that are interspersed in between are also very relevant in today's times. To get worked up on this book and ban it, is just silly.
There is one moment in the book where Rama realises that he has been made a fool of and robbed of his right to inherit and rule the kingdom. His naiveté is endearing, and the realisation even more so. Particularly in an era of game of thrones.
Sita is a fabulous character, and Valmiki is awesome. Rama seems the most human. Maybe that's why this book is irreverent.
The epilogue is fantastic, a good observation on the caste system of India.
Please read.
While I am hearing and reading in other reviews that the book is irreverent, I feel not. The story is a different story, a story of familiar characters in a similar situation but different times. For example, the original Ramayana is supposed to be in an era called Satyug. I couldn't relate to the original story, but this one is extremely real and pragmatic. The parables that are interspersed in between are also very relevant in today's times. To get worked up on this book and ban it, is just silly.
There is one moment in the book where Rama realises that he has been made a fool of and robbed of his right to inherit and rule the kingdom. His naiveté is endearing, and the realisation even more so. Particularly in an era of game of thrones.
Sita is a fabulous character, and Valmiki is awesome. Rama seems the most human. Maybe that's why this book is irreverent.
The epilogue is fantastic, a good observation on the caste system of India.
Please read.
March 3, 2010
The Ramayana is one of the oldest novels ever written, and quite possibly the oldest love story. It is a great and engaging story even today, and I really enjoy it. However, I think that I would like to read a version that is closer to the original epic written by Valmiki. This was the only version I could find at my college library, but it has been changed a lot from the original. For instance, all the parts about the gods and goddesses are removed from the storyline, making is a fully human story. In the introduction, Menen explains that she is trying to bring the story back to what she believes that Valmiki originally wrote, because the story has been changed so much over time by the Brahmins of India, but I feel like her interpretation of the story is somewhat lacking. She also narrates within the story, and while her narrations are clever and poignant, I feel like they take away the reader's opportunity to interpret the story as they wish. To an extent they force the reader to accept Menen's views on Indian history and on this classic love story itself.
August 9, 2015
WARNING: This version of the Ramayana is a SATIRE. If read as a satire, it is an enjoyable read with plenty of thought-provoking points throughout. This is my second reading, though admittedly it has been many years since the first time I read it. Surprisingly even after all these years I still remembered the story of the locust, the cow, and the sage that Valmiki tells to Rama.
One other point that I really appreciate in this version is the author giving Sita a stronger role. Instead of being outwitted by Ravan and captured, in Menen's telling Sita bravely gives herself to Ravan to save the lives of Luxmun and Rama.
Put back on my shelf to pull out in a few years to reread it again.
One other point that I really appreciate in this version is the author giving Sita a stronger role. Instead of being outwitted by Ravan and captured, in Menen's telling Sita bravely gives herself to Ravan to save the lives of Luxmun and Rama.
Put back on my shelf to pull out in a few years to reread it again.
June 27, 2019
This was the penultimate novel I read as a young civilian in May 1975, on a series of planes and buses to arrive at the US Navy induction center in Great Lakes, Illinois. The last was Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury. Fortunately for me, the trip from Hanover, New Hampshire, was long enough for me to finish both, because the books were immediately confiscated when I arrived, and I was shorn of them as I was of my hair.
Anyway, this novel made me laugh at the time, and I was enthralled by adventures of an exiled prince whose naivete was time and again shown up in the street-wise peasants’ parables of an exiled, iconoclastic wise man. In the mental limbo I was experiencing at the time—a surrender to higher, official forces—I knew that I had to divest myself of illusion, and this book served that purpose admirably, showing me how to step back and observe the folly of those who presumed themselves powerful.
In this current reading, I was most impressed with Menen’s preface to his version of the Ramayana. In this he makes a parable of the book itself, how it was at first a cheeky, anti-authority picaresque about a naïve prince who by stages comes to power, then the story accreted over the years—as one Brahmin after another touched it up—more and more orthodoxies about the Gods and proper reverence to the status quo, so that now in all of its 48,000 ornate, over-worked lines the story’s initial irreverence is completely obscured (or would be, if it weren’t for Menen’s astute insight).
Valmiki, the wise man who advises and disabuses Rama, is also the author of the original Ramayana, and Menen ensures he remains at the heart of the story. In fact, Rama is such a dunderhead and so lacking in any real character, that it is only Valmiki and Rama’s fellow exiles (brother and wife) who exhibit the ability to act, thereby defining themselves. Rama, it turns out, was essentially a non-entity, but because he was at the right place at the right time, he earned a name and reputation for himself. The story itself is less enthralling than when I first read it, but there was still enough freshness in Menen’s goosing satire that I often found myself twixt a guffaw and an amen of recognition.
Anyway, this novel made me laugh at the time, and I was enthralled by adventures of an exiled prince whose naivete was time and again shown up in the street-wise peasants’ parables of an exiled, iconoclastic wise man. In the mental limbo I was experiencing at the time—a surrender to higher, official forces—I knew that I had to divest myself of illusion, and this book served that purpose admirably, showing me how to step back and observe the folly of those who presumed themselves powerful.
In this current reading, I was most impressed with Menen’s preface to his version of the Ramayana. In this he makes a parable of the book itself, how it was at first a cheeky, anti-authority picaresque about a naïve prince who by stages comes to power, then the story accreted over the years—as one Brahmin after another touched it up—more and more orthodoxies about the Gods and proper reverence to the status quo, so that now in all of its 48,000 ornate, over-worked lines the story’s initial irreverence is completely obscured (or would be, if it weren’t for Menen’s astute insight).
Valmiki, the wise man who advises and disabuses Rama, is also the author of the original Ramayana, and Menen ensures he remains at the heart of the story. In fact, Rama is such a dunderhead and so lacking in any real character, that it is only Valmiki and Rama’s fellow exiles (brother and wife) who exhibit the ability to act, thereby defining themselves. Rama, it turns out, was essentially a non-entity, but because he was at the right place at the right time, he earned a name and reputation for himself. The story itself is less enthralling than when I first read it, but there was still enough freshness in Menen’s goosing satire that I often found myself twixt a guffaw and an amen of recognition.
June 13, 2016
In some sense when you start to read a book called the 'Ramayana' you have an entire childhood of sketchy memories and ages of religious dictum with which to approach the story. At some juncture you read it only because you want to show off a rebellion to conformation -especially since the book is banned for a bit. It is extremely difficult to review impartially with such baggage about the story and the book.
However, Menen's Ramayana was more pragmatic and anti-godly. I feel his stories were not as much in the Ramayana as they were in between them. Valmiki's placement in the text as a character and his interactions with Ram weaved through the core of the book. I would especially indicate the story of the Locust, and the story of the four fishermen as interesting philosophical exercises in its own. But when they are placed in context of the story do two things - (a) they bring Ram to the position of an ordinary man who is trying to think through for what is correct (b) they take the larger philosophical content of these stories outside the realm of Ramayana and depict them for what they are - a philosophical question - what should one do in a certain situation? Is there a clear answer.
It is this that caught my attention and hence made Ramayana an interesting story. I think he also cautiously tries to digress form all the glamour and jingoism of a certain form by not really bringing in all the characters which I recall from the Ramayana. Certainly this is in part fictionalizing and re-writing or even re-interpreting parts of it. For eg - there is no Hanuman (the monkey god king - or however you name him). This implies that he can keep track of the story within only 276 pages and does not have to focus on development of a lot of characters.
I am hesitant to give more details on how the transition form Ramayana to stories narrated by Valmiki are beautifully (sometimes ever sarcastically) woven. For eg - The chastity issues (not giving details) is led into a story of the four fishermen. These fishermen go fishing at night and come back and sleep during the day. Now they are in doubt whether their wives are faithful or not. How can one determine the faithfulness (or in the present context - Is it an issue?)? I feel the associated problems are complex with determining an approach to the issue and it is justified to a good bit in the story. Though you cannot expect him to tie all ends of these debates together.
This is the biggest gap in the book - Sometimes I feel that the stories themselves were so fond to the writer that he drifted off the main emphasis for Valmiki narrating these stories. They often created a moral problem for the author also - obviously resolving these issues isnt his intention. So, his indecision (or maybe my incomprehension) left the ends open - these philosophical trysts between the author and the subject in a state of ambiguity.
There was a certain haste at the end to close the story without it dragging into realms of war explanations etc.
In all, I think I like the sub-plots and the obvious rebellion to the religious narratives - however, its just only one of those books which would not stretch too deep into your minds but leave you with just a smirk!
However, Menen's Ramayana was more pragmatic and anti-godly. I feel his stories were not as much in the Ramayana as they were in between them. Valmiki's placement in the text as a character and his interactions with Ram weaved through the core of the book. I would especially indicate the story of the Locust, and the story of the four fishermen as interesting philosophical exercises in its own. But when they are placed in context of the story do two things - (a) they bring Ram to the position of an ordinary man who is trying to think through for what is correct (b) they take the larger philosophical content of these stories outside the realm of Ramayana and depict them for what they are - a philosophical question - what should one do in a certain situation? Is there a clear answer.
It is this that caught my attention and hence made Ramayana an interesting story. I think he also cautiously tries to digress form all the glamour and jingoism of a certain form by not really bringing in all the characters which I recall from the Ramayana. Certainly this is in part fictionalizing and re-writing or even re-interpreting parts of it. For eg - there is no Hanuman (the monkey god king - or however you name him). This implies that he can keep track of the story within only 276 pages and does not have to focus on development of a lot of characters.
I am hesitant to give more details on how the transition form Ramayana to stories narrated by Valmiki are beautifully (sometimes ever sarcastically) woven. For eg - The chastity issues (not giving details) is led into a story of the four fishermen. These fishermen go fishing at night and come back and sleep during the day. Now they are in doubt whether their wives are faithful or not. How can one determine the faithfulness (or in the present context - Is it an issue?)? I feel the associated problems are complex with determining an approach to the issue and it is justified to a good bit in the story. Though you cannot expect him to tie all ends of these debates together.
This is the biggest gap in the book - Sometimes I feel that the stories themselves were so fond to the writer that he drifted off the main emphasis for Valmiki narrating these stories. They often created a moral problem for the author also - obviously resolving these issues isnt his intention. So, his indecision (or maybe my incomprehension) left the ends open - these philosophical trysts between the author and the subject in a state of ambiguity.
There was a certain haste at the end to close the story without it dragging into realms of war explanations etc.
In all, I think I like the sub-plots and the obvious rebellion to the religious narratives - however, its just only one of those books which would not stretch too deep into your minds but leave you with just a smirk!
November 5, 2020
As a non-religious person, and someone who has only read this one version of The Ramayana, I am reviewing this book based solely on it's own merits.
I found this book second hand and it struck me as interesting, and it was. It was a pleasant read all the way through, filled with thought provoking stories told in a lighthearted and appealing manner. It wasn't until I finished the book that I discovered that it is an interpretation of religious text, and this particular one was supposedly banned in India for being too irreverent. I won't comment on that other than to say I fail to see how it is at all distasteful or disrespectful in any way.
I found this book second hand and it struck me as interesting, and it was. It was a pleasant read all the way through, filled with thought provoking stories told in a lighthearted and appealing manner. It wasn't until I finished the book that I discovered that it is an interpretation of religious text, and this particular one was supposedly banned in India for being too irreverent. I won't comment on that other than to say I fail to see how it is at all distasteful or disrespectful in any way.
June 14, 2007
A retelling of the Ramayana by someone with nothing but contempt for Indian society. An interesting read for its dated-ness, and Orientalist hubris.
Read
November 4, 2024Love the writing style.
It is said that the tale of Rama's adventures is the first story ever put together. I do not know that this is true: but it is certain that Valmiki was the first human being to be recognised as a literary genius. He was therefore penniless and much disliked. He lived in a thatched hut and had to grow his own food.
The Brahmins said ( and their views have survived down to our own times ) tha t he was a brigand in his youth, and in his maturity he became an assassin. This may mean that when he was young he stole other people's property and, ,.,·hen he was older, killed someone. On the other hand it may mean only that his verses scanned better than anything the Brahmins could write themselves
The Brahmins said that the man he killed was one of their fraternity. The killing of a Brahmin was the most heinous crime that the Brahmins could think of: but subsequently, millions of Indians who are not Brahmins have not taken too gloomy a view of it
Sita lowered her head in obedience; such, the Brahmins taught, was her duty as a wife. She also determined that, come what may, she would sleep in the hermitage that night. This was her duty to herself as a woman, about which the Brahmim taught nothing because they knew nothing.
"The man's name," said Rama, "is Valmiki. I remember being told by one of my instructors that he was a murderer."
Sita raised her face in alarm at this, and even Luxmun showed uneasiness.
"Yes," said Rama, "I was told that he killed a Brahmin."
"Oh," said Sita, calm again. "That is a very terrible thing to do, of course."
"Of course," said Luxmun, once more resting easily on his spear. "But then none of us is a Brahmin."
"And I have very sore feet," added Sita.
"He says," went on Rama, "that he has committed four thousand other crimes ."
"That is a very large number," said Sita. "The surprising thing is that he has been able to keep count of them . I think I should be more frightened of a man who had commi tted one crime than of a man who says he has done four thousand."
"Besides," said Luxmun, "they are probably old woman's crimes, like not finishing his prayers. These hermits grow very odd in their ways."
It is said that the tale of Rama's adventures is the first story ever put together. I do not know that this is true: but it is certain that Valmiki was the first human being to be recognised as a literary genius. He was therefore penniless and much disliked. He lived in a thatched hut and had to grow his own food.
The Brahmins said ( and their views have survived down to our own times ) tha t he was a brigand in his youth, and in his maturity he became an assassin. This may mean that when he was young he stole other people's property and, ,.,·hen he was older, killed someone. On the other hand it may mean only that his verses scanned better than anything the Brahmins could write themselves
The Brahmins said that the man he killed was one of their fraternity. The killing of a Brahmin was the most heinous crime that the Brahmins could think of: but subsequently, millions of Indians who are not Brahmins have not taken too gloomy a view of it
Sita lowered her head in obedience; such, the Brahmins taught, was her duty as a wife. She also determined that, come what may, she would sleep in the hermitage that night. This was her duty to herself as a woman, about which the Brahmim taught nothing because they knew nothing.
"The man's name," said Rama, "is Valmiki. I remember being told by one of my instructors that he was a murderer."
Sita raised her face in alarm at this, and even Luxmun showed uneasiness.
"Yes," said Rama, "I was told that he killed a Brahmin."
"Oh," said Sita, calm again. "That is a very terrible thing to do, of course."
"Of course," said Luxmun, once more resting easily on his spear. "But then none of us is a Brahmin."
"And I have very sore feet," added Sita.
"He says," went on Rama, "that he has committed four thousand other crimes ."
"That is a very large number," said Sita. "The surprising thing is that he has been able to keep count of them . I think I should be more frightened of a man who had commi tted one crime than of a man who says he has done four thousand."
"Besides," said Luxmun, "they are probably old woman's crimes, like not finishing his prayers. These hermits grow very odd in their ways."
October 8, 2024
So, I picked this book up thinking that "as told by Aubrey Menen" meant "Valmiki's original work translated into English by Aubrey Menen" and I found out, like, two pages in that I was wildly incorrect about that. But I was at work running lunch duty and had no other book options, so I kept reading, and by the time I had the option to return it to the library, I was so charmed by Menen's voice that I had decided to read the whole thing.
This is NOT a translation of the Ramayana, to be clear- I still have yet to read the actual Ramayana- I've only read summaries and synopses. This is also not, like, a faithful retelling. This is a satirical critique of the Ramayana and, as far as I can tell, of Brahmin supremacy in Hindu culture. I'm not Indian or Hindu so I really cannot judge its accuracy in that regard. However, it was an incredibly charming book and I especially enjoyed Menen's take on Sita's character (I spent a year studying Indian feminist art movements in college, so I've always liked Sita and thought she deserved better. Shoutout to the graphic novel Sita's Ramayana Sita's Ramayana ).
The book does slog a bit, and is fond of inserting long digressions into parables, which is absolutely not the end of the world and I enjoyed Menen's satirical approach there, but it gets to be a little annoying at times. It's also very deeply a book written in the mid-20th century by a guy who was strongly entrenched in Western views of Indian culture. Aubrey Menen was half-Indian, but you can definitely see that he was writing with British readers in mind at certain points, and some of the attitudes and ideas are a bit antiquated.
This is NOT a translation of the Ramayana, to be clear- I still have yet to read the actual Ramayana- I've only read summaries and synopses. This is also not, like, a faithful retelling. This is a satirical critique of the Ramayana and, as far as I can tell, of Brahmin supremacy in Hindu culture. I'm not Indian or Hindu so I really cannot judge its accuracy in that regard. However, it was an incredibly charming book and I especially enjoyed Menen's take on Sita's character (I spent a year studying Indian feminist art movements in college, so I've always liked Sita and thought she deserved better. Shoutout to the graphic novel Sita's Ramayana Sita's Ramayana ).
The book does slog a bit, and is fond of inserting long digressions into parables, which is absolutely not the end of the world and I enjoyed Menen's satirical approach there, but it gets to be a little annoying at times. It's also very deeply a book written in the mid-20th century by a guy who was strongly entrenched in Western views of Indian culture. Aubrey Menen was half-Indian, but you can definitely see that he was writing with British readers in mind at certain points, and some of the attitudes and ideas are a bit antiquated.
May 25, 2023
Aubrey Menen's Retelling of the Ramayana is a delightful, satirical and tongue-in-cheek version of the old epic with a modern twist. Some of the old characters, barely recognisable, take their places on this new stage: Rama as a poltroon, Lakshman as the military hero he really was, Ravana as a noble king of a neighbouring land, and Sita, well, not quite the Sita who is worshipped. Only Dasaratha and Mantara retain their original characters.
But it is dangerous to expect it to run true to the original. This is a completely different tale, though it has certain incidents in common with the other. It is to be enjoyed for its rambunctious delight in a good round story, told with great glee. And the little side parables and fables that creep in have a wicked charm of their own.
Good humour, fun and satire are the only words to do it justice.
But it is dangerous to expect it to run true to the original. This is a completely different tale, though it has certain incidents in common with the other. It is to be enjoyed for its rambunctious delight in a good round story, told with great glee. And the little side parables and fables that creep in have a wicked charm of their own.
Good humour, fun and satire are the only words to do it justice.
November 29, 2018
Liked it. Didn't love it though. Found the writing a bit too tedious.
December 1, 2018
Idk how i start to read here
October 31, 2020
Laughed so hard. Can't understand why this was banned in the first place!
August 17, 2023
Definitely do not need such retellings (?) of Ramayana. Don't waste your time if either you want to know the real Ramayana or real Valmiki. Sadly enough, there is no way to give zero stars here.
Did Not Finish
April 7, 2025Read almost half of this one. It had some really witty and enjoyable bits, but I’d had my fill of satire after a while, and the story being told was not particularly interesting to me.
September 28, 2015
I read this book because it was featured on a 'if you want to be well read' Times list soo I had to. It is a story tale/fables style book based on East Indian culture (I think). I loved the first half of this book because I have heard of some of the names and now was able to have a history for them, but half way through I was done with story time and ready for bed or a new book or anything else really. Read this if you feel the need to be more cultured.
April 22, 2016
This one came as a suggestion from very close friend circle, and I couldn't resist my temptation of stopping myself from reading this one. With the book explained, I loved the author using analogies a lot of different types. Lord Chamberlain, the locust etc. An okay read, as the narration isn't that gripping.
September 20, 2008
I liked this version of the Ramayana. It was much less fanciful than other version I have read or am familiar with. The book focuses largely on the teachings of Valmiki. Despite the lack of fanciful creatures, the prose is very fairy tale like.
June 29, 2009
Good tory
September 12, 2012
this book is nothing but a western perspective of an indian epic!!
although it is pretty good.
although it is pretty good.
Want to Read
April 13, 2013should and must read
May 17, 2016
The introduction was amazing. It went rather downhill after that, though.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews