Lantanacamara’s Justification and the Christian Doctrine of Atonement

For years in the town of Lantanacamara, Asha and Mala Ramchandin silently suffered sexual abuse from their father. On this colonized island, Christianity is now the main religion and the people embrace its values and principles on this colonized land. In Cereus Blooms at Night, Shani Mootoo describes the feelings and attitudes held by the townspeople toward Chandin Ramchandin and his sinful (but not confessed nor publicly condemned) behavior: “While many shunned him there were those who took pity, for he was once the much respected teacher of the Gospel, and such a man would take to the bottle and to his own child, they reasoned, only if he suffered some madness. And, they further reasoned, what man would not suffer a rage akin to insanity if his own wife, with a devilish mind of her own, left her husband and children” (195). This quote shows that while the town was knowledgeable of the abuse these girls suffered, they not only ignored and suppressed this reality but justified it. Mootoo’s use of the words “reasoned” and “further reasoned” explains how Mr. Ramchandin’s sin is covered up and excused while Sarah’s and Lavinia’s is not (195). Chandin’s Christian upbringing, thanks to the Thoroughly family, allows for his once very high respect to still be somewhat maintained throughout the town. Sarah and Lavinia’s escape positions Chandin as a victim: this was something that happened to him, not something he may have caused. As Mootoo puts it, they took “pity” (195).

The continual rape of Asha and PohPoh is the misdirected punishment meant for their aunt and mother. But, due to their absence, the girls take their place. This can be explained by the Christian doctrine that all sin must be atoned for. According to the New Testament of the Bible, Jesus took humanity’s place on the cross to die for humanity’s sins. Essentially, the idea states that the world’s debt would always be there and had to be paid, so it really was a matter of who would suffer and die in order to fulfill that payment. Jesus is the answer to atonement in Christian myth. This logic/doctrine can be applied to this passage in which the town of Lantanacamara justified Chandin’s abuse. It is Sarah, with her “devilish mind,” that caused this, not Mr. Ramchandin (195). In this way, he is partially absolved from responsibility for his own actions. He is the one that plays god in this trinity of sin, punishment, and atonement. He is only suffering “some madness”—this language implies a space for empathy—while Sarah and Lavinia were committing a sin that has no reasoning for justification as a result of homophobia in the Christian tradition (195).

 

One thought on “Lantanacamara’s Justification and the Christian Doctrine of Atonement”

  1. This is really interesting. I don’t think I ever considered the connection between how Chandin treated the girls with Christian notions of “sins of the father” (or in this case, mother). I always understood it was punishment for Lavinia and Sarah leaving, but I never considered her might think that Mala and Asha had to atone for it because of his Christian upbringing and these teachers. I think, also, that part of the reason that Lantanacamara can so easily justify Chandin’s abuse is because Sarah and Lavinia were sapphic women and thus “others” that the church very likely was unaccepting of. They can pity Chandin because his wife was gay and “unholy” and therefore turn a blind eye to the crimes he commits in the wake of being left by his wife.

Comments are closed.