‘Rajmohan’s Wife is about transgression’. Would you agree? Discuss this statement in the light of Bankim’s understanding of transgression?

The question we should finally raise is whether such a vision of tragedy is reconcilable with the historically rooted nature of his narratives. Is Bankirn saying that some people are just fated to suffer? Are most marriages doomed to end in tragedy? Will desire rear its head always? Will the lust for beauty remain forever? In which case how do we see widows and child marriages?

What Bankim is doing is reconciling these two world-views. He sees tragedy and desire as cutting across history insofar as he recognises that desire is intrinsic to social codes. Every society defines itself by certain laws and taboos. But Bankim’s heroes and heroines are not content within what is socially sanctioned – thus the violation or the transgression which brings about the tragedy. He is not saying that tragedies would not occur if society changed or became more tolerant. Perhaps the nature of tragedy would.