Myth, Autobiography, and Empowerment: Draupadi’s Re‑Visioned Journey in The Palace of Illusions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7492/g6n57611Abstract
This research paper analyses Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni’s The Palace of Illusions (2008) as a feminist reinterpretation of the Mahabharata, contending that the novel serves as a genuine stree parva or women’s chapter that restores Draupadi’s voice and inner life. By making Draupadi the first-person narrator, Divakaruni changes her from a symbolic, marginalised character in the epic to a self-reflective subject whose autobiography shows the mental and social consequences of patriarchy. Using Adrienne Rich's idea of "re-vision," the article explains how the book re-reads myth by dealing with silences, omissions, and male-centered historiography. This changes the way we think about traditional ideas of femininity that are based on sacrifice, chastity, and self-abnegation. The study shows how Draupadi's autobiographical narrative focuses on women's experiences, such as love and betrayal, exploitation, sexual servitude, and the denial of autonomy. It also shows how gender roles are made up. Polyandry, disrobing, and the political swayamvar are reconceptualised as arenas of compulsion and resistance, elucidating how tradition legitimises women's servitude. The study examines Draupadi's developing resistive awareness as a paradigm for an alternative femininity rooted on fury, desire, and agency, interlacing references to Rajeswari Sunder Rajan, Simone de Beauvoir, and other feminist theorists. The article ultimately chronicles Draupadi’s transformation from a compliant spouse to a symbol of spiritual and feminist self-assertion, seeing her final gesture towards Karna and the deconstruction of the palace of illusions as a metaphorical repudiation of patriarchal mythology. The research asserts that Divakaruni’s The Palace of Illusions not only reinterprets Draupadi’s narrative but also reconceptualises the Mahabharata as a feminist genealogy of women’s suffering and resistance via the lenses of communal memory, myth-revision, and the politics of storytelling.








