Myth in Midnight’s Children

This has a nagging connection to postmodern irony and play. Salman Rushdie has become the darling of the post moderns for his playful treatment of all he touches. And the bete noire of the postcolonials for the same reason. Rushdie has protested against the uniqueness of “Indianness” in terms of tradition in “Commonwealth Literature Does Not Exist”. He felt that to describe a work as authentic or inauthentic in relation to its faithfulness to Indian tradition was to succumb do an essentialist definition.

But more important, Rushdie’s treatment of myth in Midnight’s Children questions the realism premise of fiction. Is fiction bound by the rules of accuracy as life? What is the relationship between fiction and fact? As Linda Hutcheon has pointed out parody need not necessarily rule out affection. The postmodern writer cannot participate in the world of tradition in an unqualified manner. He needs the distancing of parody. Yet the objective might not be to mock at tradition. Like Kirpal puts it, he can destabilize tradition to reinstall it. It is not fair at Rushdie should be singled out for his ironic attitude, Therefore, the writers that follow have also adopted the same route. Look at Shashi Tharoor’s The Great Indian Novel where he subjects the Mahabharata myth to the same ironic treatment.