Grass-Eaters Reborn as Grass-Eaters: The Circle of Reincarnation

 

India, in the twentieth century, was a relatively less developed nation. A large number of people lived in the worst conditions. As time went by, some of them might  become rich and lived a better life, but the rest, still lived in extreme misery. (www.freeindia.org)

         

The living conditions of the inferior level of society are never out of the sight of the writers around the world. In the story “The Grass-Eaters”, under the context of a common belief in reincarnation, the author Krishnan Varma depicts the life of Ajit Babu and his wife, which reflects the life of the poorest people in society. Although the couple feed on grass, I wonder if they are the grass-eaters in the title or refer to something else. As I see it, the grass-eaters in the story are not literally grass-eaters but a metaphor and the word “grass-eaters” in the story actually refers to all the people who live the poorest life in society.
      

As part of the context, reincarnation plays an important role in the story. An understanding of the word may contribute to our thorough comprehension of the whole story. In the Hindus culture, it’s a widely accepted fact that when a person dies, he or she is born into a new existence as another form of life. "Exactly what form the new life takes depends on how that person lived his or her previous life. Those who live honest, virtuous lives often return as powerful, well-respected creatures. Those who live lives of hate and sin, however, typically return as lower forms of life.” (www.reincarnationstation.com)
      

In the story, the author relates to us the extreme conditions of the poorest people with a very skillful method—combining the depiction with the context of reincarnation to reflect the misery, thus a feeling of absolute hopelessness is generated.

The author uses the plainest words to picture the life of Ajit Babu, an important part of which is looking for “a stationary home”. There is not a sign of psychological depiction and strong conflicts between the characters. What the characters do, what they look like and what they say are the most basic components of a story. Despite the seemingly not vivid depiction, you can feel a strong sense of sadness cast upon you heart. In here the author addresses a method in which he uses the relatively moderate words to depict things that are truly painful, thus creating an atmosphere which is even more painful than the real one.
      

However, I think what makes the story sad is not the difficult life itself, but the endless circle of life. At the end of the story, Ajit Babu and his wife are satisfied with their “stable” life, “content to look at the passing scene: a tram burning, a man stabbing another man, a woman dropping her baby in a garbage bin”. This is equally evil. They are not willing to make even the slightest difference to their life. What a shame it is that they are so indifferent about others’ misery and pain! Such indifference can only lead to one result: being reincarnated into lower forms of life, just as what they already are. Although there is a chance of being honest and virtuous and live a better next-life, they sadly give it up. Here you can see the circle: they are the poorest people, and they don’t tend to make a difference to their life, so through the reincarnation they are still the poorest people. There is no way out. They are the most inferior people forever and they live the most miserable life forever.
      

Now I understand what the title means—just as grasshoppers, the grass-eaters are such trivial beings that they can hardly make any difference. Their existence in the world has little effect to other people. They are the people who are almost forsaken-- first by themselves, then gradually by the world. This is what the author wants to inform us, to arouse our sympathy and awareness to care about those people, to help awake their self-consciousness and then make a difference for a better life.

Grass-eaters Reborn as Grass-eaters: The circle of reincarnation

India, in the 20th century, was a relatively less developed nation. A large number of people live in the worst conditions. As time goes by, some of them may become rich and live a better life, but the rest, still live in extreme misery.

The living conditions of the inferior level of society are never out of the sight of the writers around the world. In the story “The Grass-Eaters”, under the context of a common belief in reincarnation, the author Krishnan Varma depicts the life of Ajit Babu and his wife, which reflects the life of the poorest people in society. Although the couple feed on grass, I wonder if they are the grass-eaters in the title or refer to something else. As I see it, the grass-eaters in the story are not truly grass-eaters but a metaphor. The word “grass-eaters” in the story actually refers to all the people who live the poorest life in society.

Reincarnation plays an important role in the story. An understanding of the word may contribute to our thorough understanding of the whole story. “Reincarnation is a: the action of reincarnating: the state of being reincarnated; b: rebirth in new bodies or forms of life; esp.: a rebirth of soul in a human body”(Taken from Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition) In the Hindus culture, it’s a widely accepted fact that when a person dies, he or she is born into a new existence as another form of life. Exactly what form the new life takes depends on how that person lived his or her previous life. Those who live honest, virtuous lives often return as powerful, well-respected creatures. Those who live lives of hate and sin, however, typically return as lower forms of life.

The characters in the story are Hindus, who have a belief in reincarnation. The author uses the plainest words to picture the life of Ajit Babu, an important part which is looking for a place to live. The story tells us Babu’s adventure of seeking a stable house. Finally, he finds it, and is of course, fairly satisfied. There is not a sign of psychological depiction and strong conflicts between the characters. All the words in the passage seem so shallow and only describe the simplest things. What the characters do, what they look like, what they say, all those are the most basic components of a story. Despite the seemingly not vivid depiction, you can feel a strong feeling of sadness cast upon you. Simplest words as they are, the power is almost overwhelming. I think in here the author addresses a method in which he uses the relatively plain or happy words to depict things that are truly painful, thus creating an atmosphere that is even more painful than the real one.

What makes the story sad, I think, is not the difficult life itself, but the endless circle of life. At the end of the story, Ajit Babu and his wife are satisfied with their “stable” life, content to look at the passing scene: a tram burning, a man stabbing another man, a woman dropping her baby in a garbage bin. This is evil. They are not willing to make even the slightest difference. What a shame it is that they are so indifferent about others’ miserable life. Such indifference can only lead to one result: being reincarnated into lower forms of life, just as what they already have. Here you can see the circle: they are the poorest people, and they don’t tend to make a difference to their life, so through the reincarnation they are still the poorest people. There is no way out. They are the most inferior people forever. They live the most miserable life forever.
      

Now I understand what the title means—just as grasshoppers, the grass-eaters are such trivial beings that they can hardly make any difference. Their existence in the world has little effect to other people. They are the people who are forsaken. This is what the author wants to inform us, to arouse our sympathy and awareness to care about those people, to help them make a difference for a better life.

This story mostly depicted the changes happened in one family, between father and sons. After reading the story, if you think it was the sons' behavior that influenced their father and made him change, perhaps I'll say something different.

From the first sentence--"There is no set rule for the turning of the worm; most worms, however, turn unexpectedly."-- we can almost catch hold of what the story is about. But when I first read the story, I carelessly misunderstood its meaning and took the whole story wrong. Now I know that the worm not only turned unexpectedly, but all by itself as well.

What promoted Shadrach Cohen's change were his two sons behaviour. In the very beginning, they decided to ask their father to live with them due to a lack of money for further investment. However, when they first met Shadrach at the shipyard, they were disappointed by his appearance which contrasted with the so-called Americanized people. As the story develops, they became more uncomfortable with their father who still stuck to his old habits. The clash between them finally reached the climax where Shadrach felt it necessary to teach his sons to show some reverence. And he succeeded, without any doubt.

In my opinion, the most attractive part of the story is that Shadrach was undergoing a process from tolerating to reacting. He tried to be tolerant and patient most of the time, but when he gradually found out that tolerance will not lead to a solution and his dignity was almost neglected, he chose to teach his sons a lesson. He changed in appearance, but not in heart. His religious belief still accompanied him.

That's why I like this character so much. What I learned from the story is: No matter what, never forget who you are.