Analysis of Chaman Nahal’s Azadi ‘Freedom’ in the Light of the Freudian Theory of Nachträglichkeit ‘Deferred Action’

Amrik Singh

Assistant Professor

Lovely Professional University

Phagwara- 144411

Punjab (India)



The present paper explores some new covert factors of trauma which haven’t had been paid attention by Sigmund Freud and Josef Breuer during their psychoanalytical efforts to treat the patients of corporeal exploitation. Secondly, the paper corroborates that the augmented Freudian psychoanalytical theory of Nachträglichkeit can be applied to the texts that possess traumatic incidents so that some more unexplored reasons for trauma and its ramifications on victims can be surfaced. The paper will definitely help the psychologists and psychiatrists to treat the patients of hysteria and trauma more effectively. The results are achieved by implementing the ‘deferred action’ theory in Chaman Nahal’s novel Azadi ‘freedom’. The paper concludes some new factors of trauma such as stillbirths, witness of murders, loss of land, house, friends, and hometown etc. These factors of trauma create repercussions such as flashback to the past traumatic incidents, tearfulness, incommunicability, abhorrence, revenge, confusion, uncanniness, restlessness, trauma, and collective trauma etc.

Keywords: Nachträglichkeit; deferred action; trauma; factors; repercussions

  1. Introduction


The German word, Nachträglichkeit has been translated into different phrases such as “deferred effect” (Freud, 2010, p. 472), “deferred fashion” (Freud, 2010, p. 387), “après-coup, afterwardsness, retroactive temporality, belatedness, latency, and retrospective attribution” (Bistoen, Vanheule & Craps, 2014, p. 672) and “deferred action” (Freud, 2001, p. 356). To Sigmund Freud, Nachträglichkeit is a two way process; it leads from the happening of a traumatic incident towards the reaction of a casualty and vice versa (Caruth, 2014, p. 28). It’s “something much more connected with the whole of a life” (Caruth, 2014, p. 43) of the victim of trauma.

Freud further states if a traumatic memory isn’t expressed, it turns the victim into trauma through the mechanism of ‘deferred action’.  Freud writes, “We invariably find that a memory is repressed which has only become a trauma by deferred action” (Freud, 2001, p. 356). But it’s observed that Freud confines the relationship between a victimizer and a victim only to sexual abuse. Both Sigmund Freud and Josef Breuer conducted their clinical experiments to develop their psychoanalytical theories of hysteria and trauma through the treatment of the victims of corporal abuse. These psychoanalysts believe that a victim understands an original incident much better when he/she leaves the stage of infantile sexuality. Freud records, “During the interval between the experiences of those impressions and their reproduction (or rather, the reinforcement of the libidinal impulses which proceed from them), not only the somatic sexual apparatus but the psychical apparatus as well has undergone an important development […]” (Freud, 2010, p. 472).

The Freudian psychoanalytical experimentations primarily focus on the victims of sexual abuse. For instance, Freud treated Emma Eckstein who was a victim of sexual abuse and whose treatment is documented in Project for a Scientific Psychology (Freud, 2001, p. 353) and another identical patient Dora whose treatment records are available in in Freud’s essay On the History of the Psycho-Analytic Movement (Freud,  2010, p.  2880). His other similar treatments include the case of somatic exploitation of a young boy documented in The Interpretation of Dreams (Freud, 2010, p. 685), impact of sexual abuse of a mother on her child added in Psycho-Analytic Notes on an Autobiographical Account of a case of Paranoia (Freud, 2010, p. 2426), and the case study of a child who witnesses the “picture of copulation between his parents” (Freud, 2010, p. 3527) which is documented in From the History of an Infantile Neurosis etc.

The researcher agrees with the Freudian psychoanalytical discoveries that if the victims of sexual abuse repress their feelings, they definitely become victims of trauma by deferred action (Freud, 2001, p. 356). But the researcher proposes that if just the relationship between a victim and a victimizer is executed in the texts having traumatic incidents, a number of factors of trauma will be explored in addition to Freud’s factor (sexual exploitation) of trauma.

  1. Research Methodology

The covert factors and repercussions of trauma are discovered by implementing the Freudian Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ theory in Chaman Nahal’s novel Azadi ‘freedom’. The novel Azadi is autobiographical in nature and it has several elements of Sigmund Freud’s theory of Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of trauma. It’s Nachträglichkeit that Chaman Nahal composes this novel in 1975 whereas he has had witnessed the harrowing incidents and suffered because of them in 1947. After the gap of twenty eight years, Nahal couldn’t disremember the holocaust and his personal loss caused by the frenzied mob and the exile. In the opening of the novel, Nahal quotes the poetic lines by Rabindranath Tagore stating as, “Where the mind is without fear and […] Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic wall […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 9). The revivification of Tagore’s poetical lines, advocate Nahal’s haunting fear and traumatic experience inherited from the Partition and it still exists in his psyche. Nahal, at the time of writing the novel Azadi, was still under the impact of “fear” (Nahal, 1988, p. 351). After losing his sister, brother-in law, property, home, and homeland during the savagery, Nahal projects his grief through his protagonist Lala Kanshi Ram and expresses his angst as, “No, he wanted to live in no camp now, among strangers. He wanted a home […] and see his two children” (Nahal, 1988, p. 351). In the above poetical lines, where Nahal refers to the “broken” world and “domestic walls” (Nahal, 1988, p. 9), he directly points towards the startling Partition that has created barriers in the mindsets of the broken-hearted Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims against each other.  Like Lala Kanshi Ram, Nahal also “felt small and debased” (Nahal, 1988, p. 343) when he begged the Rehabilitation and Custodian officers just for a shelter to cover his head in Delhi but they rejected and abused him sternly.

  • Analysis of Chaman Nahal’s Azadi ‘Freedom’ in the Light of the Freudian Theory of

Nachträglichkeit ‘Deferred Action’

The element of Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ is traced when the protagonist Lala Kanshi Ram refers to Germany’s attack at the Soviet Union. In fact, in the world history, there hasn’t been a war like the acrimonious war between Germany and the Soviet Union. From Kiev to Stalingrad, from Leningrad to the Crimea, the Soviet Union was badly devastated – causing the death of 25 million Soviet citizens in the years of 1941 and 1942. Being a hardened racist, even before his attack at the Soviet Union, Hitler had started to detest the natives of the Soviet Union. In his public rally at Nuremberg in 1937, Hitler referred them as, “uncivilized Jewish-Bolshevik international guild of criminals and called the Soviet Union the greatest danger for the culture and civilization of mankind […]” (Rees, 1999, p. 15). Along with Germany’s attack at Russia, the Lala also mentions its invasion at Japan and the butchery of millions of Japanese (Nahal, 1988, p. 16-17). Lala Kanshi Ram asks Prabha Rani saying, “Arun’s mother, you know what? Germany has turned round and attacked Roos. (Coming as it did from a mouth filled with milk, ‘Roos’ sounded far more impressive and terrible than Russia). They’ve dropped an atom bomb on Japan” (Nahal, 1988, p. 16).

In the evening of 3rd June 1947, Lala Kanshi Ram was actually talking to Prabha Rani about the turbulence during the Partition but he suddenly got connected to the Germany’s invasion at Russia and Japan about which he had read a lot in the newspapers and heard on Bibi Amar Vati’s transistor. Then, the Lala starts associating the destruction and holocaust in Russia and Japan with the ongoing chaos and bloodshed in the Punjab. It’s a “deferred action” of trauma that, after witnessing the present carnage, Kanshi Ram goes almost five years back and resuscitates the ethnic-cleansing caused by Germany in Russia and Japan in 1941 and 1942.

It’s impact of this incident that the eyes of Kanshi Ram become “tearful” (Nahal, 1988, p. 16). Secondly, he has to “stop in the middle of his exclamations” (Nahal, 1988, p. 16) which means the shock of violence hampers his communication as well. Moreover, his trauma becomes a collective trauma when Kanshi Ram frets about Gandhiji who was the foremost hero of the Indian freedom movements and who got intensely upset after hearkening the British Viceroy’s announcement of the Partition of the Subcontinent. Accordingly, Kanshi Ram adds, “Today, Gandhiji goes on a fast unto death. . . . Gandhiji might now die – he might pass away” (Nahal, 1988, p. 16)! Kanshi Ram’s memory not only resurrects the massacre of millions of Russians and Japanese, but also it gets connected to the epic battle of Kurukshetra between the Kauravas and the Pandavas.

The Freudian Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of trauma is again explored when Lala Kanshi Ram refers to the classic battle of Mahabharata.  On the one hand where the Lala connects the holocaust of the Partition with Germany’s aerial bombardment at Russia and Japan, on the other hand, he also associates the former with the carnage that took place during the battle between the Pandavas and the Kauravas in 3000 BC (Nahal, 1988, p. 17). Though at this stage, Kanshi Ram doesn’t lose any property, friends, relatives or family members, but he is the eyewitness of the savagery, lootings, killings and rapes committed in Sialkot and in the other parts of the Punjab. For instance, Nahal writes, “The first riot took place in Sialkot on the twenty-fourth June. Many cities of the Punjab had been aflame for months; there were large scale killings and lootings in Lahore, Gujrat, Gujranwala, Amritsar, Ambala, Jullundur, Rawalpindi, Multan, Ludhiana and Sargodha” (Nahal, 1988, p. 125). It’s discussed earlier that the proclamation of the independence is made on 3rd June 1947, so just after 21 days, the entire Punjab gets aflame. Lala Kanshi Ram, being the eyewitness of the haunting scenes, gets traumatized and associates the upsetting scenes with the vexed events of the Mahabharata. It is ‘deferred action’ of trauma that the Lala goes thousands of years memorably back when the kamikaze battle of Mahabharata occurred between the Kauravas and the Pandavas.

It is very shameful that Yushishthira loses everything even his wife Draupadi to Duryodhan in the dice game. All sages and gurus remain silent when Duryodhan, Dushashana and Karna start disrobing Draupadi publicly. Then Lord Krishna saves Draupadi from dishonor after hearing her supplications. But there was heavy bloodshed when the Pandavas avenged against the Kauravas. The ongoing vicious violence is the signifier for Kanshi Ram because it connects him to the historical traumatic incident that took place several years ago. Lala Kanshi Ram refers to the historical epic battle questioning his wife as, “You remember the Mahabharata, don’t you? [ …] The fire darts they threw at each other, the Kauravas and the Pandavas? […] Well, it is like that, the atom bomb. You throw a dart or a bomb at your enemy, and that burns him up” (Nahal, 1988, p. 17)!

Another Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of trauma is explored when Lala Kanshi Ram witnesses the merciless and gratuitous shooting of Indian dogs by the British soldiers, but at that time he also resuscitates the Jallianwala Bagh massacre of 13th April 1919. Actually, the British soldiers kill some Indian dogs during their parades claiming that the dogs create mess and hindrance while the former organize the victory parade to celebrate the British triumph over the Germans in the 2nd World War. Another parade that comes to Kanshi Ram’s mind is concerned with the celebration of the enthronement of King Edward VIII (Nahal, 1988, p. 22). But, Lala Kanshi Ram states that there was no need to kill the dogs. He witnesses as, “It must be stressed that not once did any of these Indian dogs break the decorum of the parade. There is no record that any of them defiled the ground with its feces […] nor that any of them ever used a motionless soldier as a prop for lifting its leg and emptying its bladder” (Nahal, 1988, p. 28). After watching the lethal incident, Kanshi Ram’s memory takes him back to the massacre of the Jallianwala Bagh that took place at 05:30pm of 13th April 1919 – the time when approximately 1,000 defenseless Indians were killed and over 1,100 males, females and children were wounded at the command of the British Indian Brigadier-General Reginald Edward Harry Dyer. At that time, over 20,000 Indians were celebrating the Baisakhi fair at the Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar – the holiest city of the Sikhs. Though, Brigadier Dyer accepted that “it was quite possible that he had killed between four and five hundred” (Collet, 2007, p. 262) whereas the exact death toll was higher than 1,000 (Collet, 2007, p. 262). General Dyer was a ruthless opportunist who always looked for a large congregation of Indians to shoot them on the spot. His wife, Annie Dyer unfolded the bitter reality that General Dyer would have murdered lots of Indians, if he had found them earlier at such a platform as was the Jallianwala Bagh. Annie Dyer adds stating as, “How was he to fight the rebels, how was he to bring them to decisive action in the narrow streets and winding lanes of Amritsar? It was a problem […]. It placed them where he would have devised them to be – within reach of his sword” (Collet, 2007, p. 255). Thus, it’s observed that Lala Kanshi Ram witnesses the slaughter of the Indian dogs  in June 1947, but he gets connected to the extermination of the Jallianwala Bagh on 13th April 1919 that took place almost twenty eight years ago, and it happens only through the mechanism of Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’.

It’s the repercussion of the butchery of some Indian dogs that Lala Kanshi Ram starts again abusing the British officials. He calls this incident the “sacrilege committed by these filthy beasts of a filthy race” (Nahal, 1988, p. 28).  Secondly, Lala Kanshi Ram assimilates a revengeful attitude towards the British administrators and wishes that the latter must be retaliated for this vile crime as Shaheed Udham Singh Kamboj has avenged against their heinous crime contravened at the Jallianwala Bagh. Lala Kanshi Ram expresses his excruciating feelings as, “[…] the sergeants would have made men pay for that crime – as they did as recently as in 1919, when they shot hundreds of them out of hand with machine guns at the Jallianwala Bagh” (Nahal, 1988, p. 28). Thirdly, Lala Kanshi Ram also develops deep-rooted abhorrence for the penultimate British Viceroy in India – Lord Archibald Wavell (October 1943 – March 1947), who fail to manage India as a single platform for the Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims and paves the way for the Partition of the Punjab (Chawla, 2012, p. 7).

Again, it’s Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of trauma that Lala Kanshi Ram recalls the horrid days of 1943 of the British Raj in India under the leadership of a British Viceroy, Lord Wavell. The Lala adds, “If the British were going to lose India […] it was because of the tactical error they made in sending out an ugly Viceroy in the crucial days of their Raj” (Nahal, 1988, p. 30). Lala Kanshi Ram compares the administration of Lord Wavell with the leadership of the Punjab under Maharaja Ranjit Singh (1780-1839).  It’s Nachträglichkeit that Kanshi Ram revivifies the glorious, meticulous, candid, and open-hearted empire of Maharaja Ranjit Singh who established a great Sikh Empire in the Punjab which extended from Kashmir (in the North) to Sind (in the South) and from Sutlej (in the East) to Khaiber (in the North West). The Maharaja was an outstanding ruler of this mighty kingdom for forty years from 1799 to 1839 (Singh, 1996, p. 1). Lala Kanshi Ram expresses his regard for the Maharaja as, “It is true that Maharaja Ranjit Singh was one-eyed too, but then he had many virtues to make up for that. He tied such a beautiful turban and he supported a hawk so superbly on his hand as he rode” (Nahal, 1988, p. 31). But, Kanshi Ram condemns the British Raj led by Lord Wavell stating as, “[…] whereas Wavell blinked like an owl. Why of all the persons at their command, did the big sahibs have to send him? They had taken themselves very close to ruin in 1857 […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 31). It’s another “deferred action” of trauma that the Lala compares the devastation that took place during the revolt of 1857 with the wretched administration by Lord Wavell.

The first insurgency was literally started, for the Enfield rifle was greased with lard and tallow in February, 1857. Later, it was confirmed that the British had manufactured the standard cartridges with pork fat (lard) which was assumed sacred by Muslims and cow fat (tallow) which made Hindus furious, for cows were sacrosanct to them. The sepoys (Indian soldiers) had to open the shells of these cartridges with their teeth before loading the Enfield rifles and it insulted the religious practices of Hindus and Muslims. Afterwards, the rebellion took the form of mutiny and the revolts started against the British administration, British taxation and land annexations by the East India Company in Saharanpur, Rurki and Muzaffar Nagar and Buland Shehr. Even the 3rd Light Cavalry based at Delhi attacked the British Army headquarters situated at Gurgaon (Nadiem, 2006, p. 45). Consequently, hundreds of the mutineers from the Bengal army that was comprised of 74 regiments of infantry and 10 regular regiments sacrificed their lives in order to get freedom from the gigantic clutches of the British (Mason, 1974, p. 241).

Likewise, Lala Kanshi Ram perceives that the efforts of Lord Wavell are also abortive as he fails to keep the geographic unity of India. For instance, the Shimla conference was organized in June 1945 to convince Muslims to give up their demand for an independent Muslim-majority state, but it turned to be an ineffective attempt as well. The penultimate British Viceroy even failed to withdraw the British authority from “the four Hindu-majority provinces of Bombay, Madras, Orissa and the Central Provinces […] before March 1948” (Chawla, 2013, p. 219). It’s ‘deferred action’ of Lala Kanshi Ram’s trauma that he associates the turbulent days of the Partition with a sheer botch of Lord Archibald Wavell (October 1943 – March 1947) and with those of the revolt of 1857. It’s Nachträglichkeit that Kanshi Ram’s memory takes him ninety years back when he wasn’t even born but he has just learnt about the mutiny through books, radios and people.

The traumatic incidents such the tempestuous days of the Partition, Kanshi Ram’s flashback to the chaotic administration under Lord Wavell and the revolt of 1857, make him too “timid” (Nahal, 1988, p. 32) to feel safe alone. Kanshi Ram’s wife, Prabha Rani expresses his wretched condition as, “And he seemed so scared. Nothing had happened in the house for several days to upset him; nor anything special in the store, either. What then” (Nahal, 1988, p. 32)?  But what impact him severely are the six deaths of infants in his house along with the incidents discussed so far.

It’s another Nachträglichkeit that Lala Kanshi Ram revivifies the appalling time of his life when his wife has had given birth to six infants but none survive (Nahal, 1988, p. 36). In one of the mornings of March 1947, Lala Kanshi Ram feels worried about the Lord Mountbatten’s announcement. Instantly, his mindset recalls the cramps and labour-pain of Prabha Rani when she has had given birth to Arun Kumar, their son. But straightway, Kanshi Ram resuscitates the six ceaseless deaths of his infants whom his wife and he couldn’t save. The revitalization of the stillbirths starts when the Lala just talks about the birth of Arun stating that Prabha Rani “might have shouted a lot when she gave birth to Arun, but that was not her fault, if the pain became too unbearable” (Nahal, 1988, p. 39). But this flashback gets connected to the traumatic time when the Lala and Prabha Rani have had lost their six infants in Sambrhial – the village where they used to live before they settled in Sialkot. Nahal depicts their grief as, “She gave birth to many, but none survived. Prabha Rani knew for certain it was because of the evil spells cast on her by the wives of Kanshi Ram’s brothers, who were ever busy mixing charms and going to fakirs […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 35). This unpredictable loss of his six infants always haunts Lala Kanshi Ram and he never wants any kind of harm to his son Arun and daughter Madhu Bala.

It’s the impact of this incident that he always feels insecure, timid and anxious during the chaotic days of the looming Partition. That’s why, the Lala sighs soberly that “everything will be ruined if Pakistan is created” (Nahal, 1988, p. 39). The second repercussion of the incessant deaths of his six infants is that Lala Kanshi Ram utterly loses his “husbandly functions” (Nahal, 1988, p. 39). Though he is fifty and Prabha Rani is forty-eight (Nahal, 1988, p. 37) but after the birth of their son Arun, he always scares to have intercourse with her. He always thinks that he has already been given retribution from the gods in the form of the deaths of his infants because he has had mated Prabha Rani repeatedly. The Lala adds as, “When Arun was born, she had suffered badly. It was the seventh or eighth child […]. Lala Kanshi Ram knew it was a punishment from the gods – for continuing to mate […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 36). The incessant deaths of his infants and the panic of the frenzied circumstances created by the Partition make him unreservedly confused, uncanny, restless, and “upset in the soul” (Nahal, 1988, p. 41). The Lala becomes so uncertain that he starts amalgamating his personal grief with the national problem of the Partition and he utters worriedly as, “What if the English agree to give Pakistan to Jinnah? […] And you know these English, they would rather divide than leave behind a united India” (Nahal, 1988, p. 39).

Apart from his personal anguish emerged out of the loss of his six infants (Nahal, 1988, p. 36), what really haunts the Lala are the imminent announcement of the Partition, too “much killing going on for the past many months” (Nahal, 1988, p. 41) and the unproductive meetings of the Cabinet Mission in Delhi in August 1947 – reflecting the inharmoniousness between Lord Mountbatten and the Indian political leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, and Baldev Singh (Nahal, 1988, p. 40-41). That’s what concerns Kanshi Ram the most and he always questions himself, “What accord had they reached on Pakistan, on the future of the Punjab and Bengal? […] If Pakistan is created, we’ll have to leave. That’s if the Muslims spare our lives” (Nahal, 1988, p. 41)! Lala Kanshi Ram actually knows that there will be a lot of carnage if two new nations come into existence. This looming holocaust due to the Partition haunts him repetitively because he has already had experienced the trauma because of the loss of his six infants, and he doesn’t want to lose anything now in the impending debacle. He never wants to lose his happy family – Prabha Rani, Arun Kumar and Madhu Bala. He feels satisfied with his land and house. And now, he doesn’t want to be pushed out of his “safe little nest, in the name of freedom” (Nahal, 1988, p. 41). But, Lala Kanshi Ram’s 2nd trauma starts when everything happens in contrast to his wishes and he has to lose his shop, land, homeland, house, daughter (Madhu Bala), son-in-law (Rajiv), and friends in the name of freedom. Actually, it was not only Lala Kanshi Ram, but also innumerable people were impacted by the holocaust of the Partition. Sahitya Akademi advocates the fate of a number of émigrés such as Kanshi Ram stating as, “Millions of human beings, whose lives were affected in one way or another, do find a place in Nahal’s novel” (Sahitya Akademi, 1978, p. 117). Lala Kanshi Ram is one of the representatives of the victims who faced traumatic incidents during the Partition.

Another traumatic incident is witnessed by Lala Kanshi Ram when the Amritsar train fully loaded with the dead bodies of Muslims reaches Sialkot at six O’clock in one of the evenings of August 1947. Lala Kanshi Ram watches nine tongas in Trunk Bazaar of Sialkot. The surviving Muslim passengers in the tongas wail as, “Hai – they’ve killed us! Oh Allah, may your wrath fall on these Sikhs – they have ruined us […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 127-28). The news spreads like wildfire in the entire Trunk Bazaar, Mahalla Dharowal, Mianapura and Kanak Mandi that the Muslims living in Amritsar “had been attacked and driven out of their homes by the Hindus and the Sikhs” (Nahal, 1988, p. 128).  The arrival of this Amritsar train in Sialkot makes the situation viciously rancorous and it initiates fires, lootings and killings of the Hindus and the Sikhs in Sialkot as well. Tai Yong Tan and Gyanesh Kudaisya also quote G.D. Khosla advocating that “madness swept over the entire land, in an ever-increasing crescendo, till reason and sanity left the minds of rational men and women, and sorrow, misery, hatred, and despair took possession of their souls” (Tan and Kudaisya, 2000, p. 7). For instance, the Muslims of Sialkot en masse, start stabbing the Hindus and the Sikh natives to death. But Kanshi Ram witnesses not only murders but the extreme brutality of the violence. Nahal advocates Kanshi Ram’s statement as:

“The killing was invariably done with a knife, and often the knife, the large blade driven clean through, was left in the body of the victim. Where the victim survived the first blow, he was repeatedly stabbed in the chest and the abdomen. Faces were disfigured […]. In each case, the intestines of the man would have spilled from the body and would be lying next to him in a pool of his blood” (Nahal, 1988, p. 126).

This type of bloodbath continues for several months and millions of victims lose their lives unnecessarily in the name of freedom. Urvashi Butalia also records in her book Other Side of Silence: Voices from the Partition of India that “estimates of the dead vary from 200,000 (the contemporary British figure) to two million (a later Indian estimate) but that somewhere around a million people died is now widely accepted” (Butalia, 1998, p. 6).

It’s the impact of the expropriations, stabbings and fires executed in Trunk Bazaar, Mahalla Dharowal, Mianapura, Kanak Mandi and in the neighboring towns of Sialkot that Lala Kanshi Ram feel “frightening and demoralizing” (Nahal, 1988, p. 126). It seems to him that “a red glow of death” (Nahal, 1988, p. 127) is waiting for him and his family. Lala Kanshi Ram becomes “numb with fear” (Nahal, 1988, p. 127) when he witnesses victims wailing in the crowd hysterically and uncontrollably (Nahal, 1988, p. 128). His heart fills with severe angst when he hearkens from the natives of Trunk Bazaar that they are heading towards the refugee camp established out of the town. Nahal adds that “these two words – ‘refugee camp’ – were to become a household name all over India in the next few months, but Lala Kanshi Ram was as yet not familiar with them” (Nahal, 1988, p. 129). After the arrival of the Amritsar train that brought the wounded and the dead Muslims in Sialkot and the subsequent violence emerged against the Hindus and the Sikhs of Sialkot, Kanshi Ram fails to “ sleep at all that night” (Nahal, 1988, p. 130). The situation becomes unmanageable and the police ask the Hindu and the Sikh inhabitants to evacuate Sialkot, but Lala Kanshi Ram never wants to become a refugee in his own hometown. The word ‘refugee’ haunts him recurrently when he copiously understands the real meaning of this word, and he starts shouting at the police saying, “I was born here, this is my home – how I can be a refugee in my own home” (Nahal, 1988, p. 130)?

Traumatic incidents gradually increase in Sialkot and they deteriorate the psychic condition of Lala Kanshi Ram.  Bistoen, Vanheule and Craps discover abruptly that “Delayed-onset PTSD may develop in some people due to a subsequent event which gives the original trauma a more threatening meaning” (Bistoen, Vanheule and Craps, 2014, p.  671). Lala Kanshi Ram has had lost his six infants, and he couldn’t forget that trauma. Now the fires, lootings, killings, and the news of evacuating Sialkot totally dishearten him, and he questions the competency of the authorities as, “Why can’t the government protect us? I’ve seen communal riots before in this country. How were the English able to put them down” (Nahal, 1988, p. 130)? Being a helpless émigré, Kanshi Ram cries and “his eyes filled with tears as he felt so unprotected and forlorn” (Nahal, 1988, p. 131). Lala Kanshi Ram feels psychosomatically and physically very tired when he thinks to leave his house and the shop. He defenselessly utters as, “What of the shop – the grain stored there? How would he dispose of it? Would anyone give him any price for it in such times? His tone was mournful […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 132).

It’s Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of trauma that Lala Kanshi Ram runs his hands over the walls of his beloved house and instantly recalls his childhood days when he used to eat earth from the mud walls. He remembers how his mother used to beat him sternly. Lala Kanshi Ram revitalizes his infantile time when he is forced for exile as:

“How could he give this earth up? – and again he ran his hand over the wall. Some of his earliest memories, memories of his remote childhood, came back to him as he stood there. He remembered how as an urchin he was very fond of eating earth and how his mother used to beat him for that [ ..] he very much wanted to scrape a part of that earth and eat it again. We aren’t leaving yet, he said aloud […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 132).

In the above incident, the walls and the clay that he used to eat, act as the signifiers and take him back to his impish childhood. Jacques Lacan also states that a signifier plays a vital role in the mechanism of Nachträglichkeit. To Lacan, signifier is a “Surprise, that by which the subject feels himself overcome, by which he finds both more and less than he expected […] it is always ready to steal away again, thus establishing the dimension of loss” (Lacan, 1998, p. 25).

It’s the repercussion of the loss of his land, house, friends, and hometown that Kanshi Ram gets ready to change even his Hindu religion so that he won’t leave for India. Lala Kanshi Ram acknowledges that “he would become a Muslim to stay here, if need be […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 132). Secondly, the Lala starts using an abrasive language against the military, the police and even against his friends. For instance, when one of his old friends Abdul Ghani – a hookah manufacturer of Sialkot, laughs at the discomfort of Kanshi Ram since the Hindus and the Sikhs have been ordered to evacuate Sialkot, the latter shouts at the former uncontrollably and calls him an “idiot” (Nahal, 1988, p. 133). When Abdul Ghani addresses Kanshi Ram as a “kafir” (Nahal, 1988, p. 134) and adds that “I want you to leave because you’re a Hindu, and you don’t believe in Allah” (Nahal, 1988, p. 134), Kanshi Ram starts shouting aloud. Kanshi Ram retaliates that he too believes in God as much as Abdul Ghani does. But Kanshi Ram feels utterly distraught when he perceives that some of his Muslims friends such as Abdul Ghani turn hostile to him and want to take away his business (Nahal, 1988, p. 134).

Another traumatic incident happens in Lala Kanshi Ram’s life when his grain shop is looted by some Muslim lunatics of Mohalla Dharowal. After the incident, Kanshi Ram stands transfixed; his color turns ashen grey; he looks so crestfallen that he returns home surreptitiously like a ghost (Nahal, 1988, p. 136). Prabha Rani also witnesses that Kanshi Ram “now stood motionless, unable to decide what to do, as though he had come to the wrong house or he were not the same man” (Nahal, 1988, p. 137).  Afterwards, the Lala loses his faith in the military, the police and the local authorities as they fail to protect the émigrés and their property. Kanshi even curses the local Muslim leaders such as Professor Ghulam Hussain, Chaudhri Imam Baksh and Dr. Wazir Khan asserting that “I’m afraid there is no organized body of Muslims denouncing what is happening in the city” (Nahal, 1988, p. 140).

Kanshi Ram’s trauma becomes a collective trauma when he listens Chaudhri Barkat Ali advocating the wretched condition of émigrés as, “[…] everyday hundreds of refugees from India continue to arrive with tales of terror and disgust. Whatever is happening here in Sialkot, things very much like that are happening on the other side too – let’s make no mistake about it” (Nahal 1988: 140). As Ian Parker states in his book Lacanian Psychoanalysis: Revolutions in Subjectivity that trauma is the “breaches of the body and by implication also of the mind” (Parker, 2011, p. 29). Likewise, traumatic incidents such as the loss of his six infants in the past, the heist of his grain store and the witness of the Amritsar train fully loaded with the dead bodies of Muslims etc. increase in Kanshi Ram’s life day by day and they partition his body and mind. For instance, when his store is looted, Kanshi Ram becomes extremely numb; his arms and shoulders don’t seem to be the parts of his physique (Nahal, 1988, p. 132).  Then, his psyche also gets divided when he associates his own fear, safety and grief with the similar apprehension of other émigrés. Kanshi Ram asserts as, “Moving the populations would ruin both the countries. Yes, the leaders said, don’t move, stay where you are. But that was half-hearted, that was rather a lie, when they were doing nothing to protect the people […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 131).

A further traumatic incident happens in Lala Kanshi Ram’s life when his daughter, Madhu Bala and son-in-law Rajiv are murdered in a train coming from Wazirabad to Sialkot to see him (Nahal, 1988, p. 168).  Lala Dina Nath who was in the same train and who had saved his life pretending that he is a Muslim, informs Kanshi Ram that the incident took place near Nizamabad – a village just the outside of Wazirabad. Not only were Madhu Bala and Rajiv exterminated, but also other “Hindus and Sikhs in the train were singled out and mercilessly slaughtered” (Nahal, 1988, p. 171).

It’s the ramification of the murder of Madhu Bala and Rajiv that Kanshi Ram body and psyche are “crushed” unreservedly (Nahal, 1988, p. 210). Nahal further states, “The death of Madhu was the last blow to his shattered psyche” (Nahal, 1988, p. 212). Now, he wishes to leave for India grudgingly as soon as possible. About his father, Arun also frets adding, “He was benumbed by the event” (Nahal, 1988, p. 210). The ceaseless traumatic incidents such as the loss of his house and land, the looting of his store and now, the death of his beloved daughter and son-in-law etc., narrow further his chances of living in his beloved hometown, Sialkot. Subsequently, Kanshi Ram abuses General Rees – the Commander-in-Chief of the Punjab Boundary Force, Nehru, Jinnah and Kripalani – the President of the Indian national congress and call them “the villains” (Nahal, 1988, p. 211). After Madhu’s death, Lala Kanshi Ram becomes speechless, and he hardly communicates even with Prabha Rani and Arun. Nahal advocates his psychosomatic condition as, “He was not an introvert. He liked meeting people and talking to them. But after Madhu’s death, he withdrew himself into a shell. Even to members of his own group, he spoke in monosyllables (Nahal, 1988, p. 212).  After the tragedy, Kanshi Ram emerges as a man “indifferent to the generosity” which he was known for (Nahal, 1988, p. 213). Madhu’s death shatters his mindset. Whenever Arun talks of Madhu, Kanshi Ram closes the subject because her separation haunts her severely and cyclically. Kanshi Ram tries to regain his consciousness but the spontaneous flow of traumatic incidents renders him unconscious again. In his concept of repetition, Jacques Lacan also states that the victim “loses itself as much as it finds itself again and in the sense that, in an interjection, in an imperative, in an invocation, even in a hesitation it is always the unconscious that presents you with its enigma” (Lacan, 1998, p. 26). Kanshi Ram fails to come out of the shock of his deceased daughter. Nahal also mentions Kanshi Ram’s psychic enigma as, “Arun saw him stop in the walk and turn his face furtively aside. Surreptitiously, furtively, like a thief, he lifted a corner of his shirt and wiped his eyes. Before Arun, he displayed nothing” (Nahal, 1988, p. 213). Moreover, the Lala looks “delirious”, “shrunken”, and “flaccid” (Nahal, 1988, p. 249). Nahal, next adds, “The good humour did not stay with him for many days; he was soon fussing and fuming as of old” (Nahal, 1988, p. 149).

Lala Kanshi Ram’s trauma becomes a repetitive trauma when he faces multiple harrowing incidents.  He had witnessed and experienced some of the incidents such as the loss of his house, store, land, friends, homeland, and the death of his beloved daughter and son-in-law but the “problems that loomed in the future were a thousandfold more complex and bewildering than what he had gone through” (Nahal, 1988, p. 274).  Kanshi Ram has just been busy piling up his haemorrhages for a couple of months. “Many parts of him had died” (Nahal, 1988, p. 274), writes Nahal, because of the innumerable and irretrievable losses. The Lala has “faltered and fumbled in his steps” (Nahal, 1988, p. 274) before he faces new looming calamity in his life.

Another phase of traumatic incidents starts in the life of Kanshi Ram when the foot convoy leaves Sialkot Cantonment and reaches Pasrur through the route of Gunna Kalan. The convoy moves farther side of Pasrur on 5th September 1947, and Kanshi Ram witnesses, “[…] the remains of parties that had been attacked and butchered. In many cases, the dismembered human limbs and skeletons were still lying there, and the stench was intolerable” (Nahal, 1988, p. 283). Such distressing scenes refresh Kanshi Ram’s traumatic wounds. The reminiscence of Madhu rigorously haunts him when the Muslim marauders attack at the 2nd unit of their convoy before it reaches the refugee camp at Qila Sobha Singh and carry away “a number of young refugee girls with them” (Nahal, 1988, p. 286). Being a civil leader of the 3rd unit, Lala Kanshi Ram feels utterly distressed when he further watches the holocaust of the 2nd unit of their convoy. Lala Kanshi Ram observes, “[…] a few women lay with their breasts exposed, with a dead child next to the breast. Most of the children lay with their faces downward. The men lay on their backs or on their sides, their mouths open. Some women lay doubled up like bundles […]” (Nahal, 1988, p. 287).  Kanshi Ram’s physique shudders when he scrutinizes the dilapidated body of Dr. Chander Bhan who has had brought the news of the murder of Madhu Bala and Rajiv.

Lala Kanshi Ram and the other émigrés have been attacked several times since they leave Sialkot. Their convoy just covers thirty-six miles from Sialkot but they lose over fifteen hundred of their colleagues during the various ambushes executed near the villages such as Gunna Kalan, Qila Sobha Singh and Manjoke. Several women are abducted and the number of the wounded rise to several hundred (Nahal, 1988, p. 288-89). It’s Nachträglichkeit that Kanshi Ram’s memory goes back to Madhu again when he learns that two of Dr. Chander Bhan’s “daughters, aged nineteen and seventeen, had been carried away by the mob” (Nahal, 1988, p. 288).

It’s another Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of trauma that Kanshi Ram still recalls Sialkot though he reaches Amritsar. He knocks at the doors of his distant relatives in Amritsar but none of them welcome him and his survival family. He abominates the idea of his settlement in Jullundur, Ludhiana and Ambala. The Lala whines saying, “I don’t like the sound of them. There was only one worthwhile town for him in the Punjab – and that was Sialkot” (Nahal, 1988, p. 325). Further, Lala Kanshi Ram’s traumatic reminiscence of the murder of Madhu and Rajiv along with hundreds of Hindus and Sikhs who were also butchered mercilessly in a train near Nizamabad (Nahal, 1988, p. 168, 171), revitalizes when he witnesses the carnage of innumerous Muslim refugees at the Amritsar railway station (Nahal, 1988, p. 327). While sitting in the waiting room of the Amritsar station, the Lala listens the wailing of the Muslim survivors. But it’s Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of his trauma that Kanshi Ram recalls the wails, cries, sobs, and moans of the Hindu and Sikh survivors who lose their family members and whose women are abducted during the attacks at the foot convoy near Pasrur (Nahal, 1988, p. 283), Qila Sobha Singh (Nahal, 1988, p. 286-87) and Alipur Saiyidian (Nahal, 1988, p. 288). Kanshi Ram accepts that “the wailing had a familiar ring” (Nahal, 1988, p. 328). Lala Kanshi Ram also recalls the failure of the Pakistani troops when he witnesses the ineffectiveness of the Indian soldiers to protect the lives and property of the Muslim émigrés. He asserts, “Indian soldiers stood guard with machine guns, but they were only a façade – like their counterparts in Pakistan. They had failed to protect the Muslims” (Nahal, 1988, p. 328).

Lala Kanshi Ram gets fed up with the governments, armies, Rehabilitation and Custodian Officers of both sides. Whatever practical help is provided to the émigrés, it is from private and charitable trusts. Kanshi Ram adds, “The government itself was ill-prepared and ill-equipped to handle them. Nearly two months after independence, it still had not come to grips with the situation” (Nahal, 1988, p. 326). Like thousands of other refugees, the Lala gets distressed when the Indian police ask him injudicious questions such as what his purpose to come in India is (Nahal, 1988:, p. 328). Subsequently, the Indian towns, officials and circumstances look “disgusting” (Nahal, 1988, p. 336) to Kanshi Ram. Prabha Rani knows that her husband is primarily upset because of the irrevocable loss of his house, store, land, friends, and hometown Sialkot. But the demise of Madhu is fundamental amongst them. Madhu’s death impacts him physically and psychosomatically. Prabha Rani gives an account of Kanshi Ram as, “He looked so much thinner now, the face especially. She knew he had suffered for Madhu. He had said not word. But she knew how excruciating had been his pain. A slow, silent eroding pain that had torn him asunder” (Nahal, 1988, p. 336).

Lala Kanshi Ram’s psychic condition becomes very miserable when he begs the Rehabilitation and the Custodian Officers in Delhi to allot him any flat in the middle of November 1947. Chaman Nahal delineates his condition stating as, “Lala Kanshi Ram became pale by degrees and now it seemed there was no blood left in him. He positively did not want to go to another refugee camp. Four months of that had shrunk his heart. Never before in his life had he felt so exposed, so naked, so defenceless” (Nahal, 1988, p. 350). It’s again Nachträglichkeit that homeless Kanshi Ram revivifies his appealing home and the other homely comforts which were snatched from him in Sialkot in the name of freedom. Nahal adds what Kanshi Ram now wants is only “[…] walls around himself and doors and he wanted a bed to lie on and clean sheets and he wanted Prabha Rani to be alone with him” (Nahal, 1988, p. 350). But the tragedy is that he has lost even his identity in Delhi. He wants “a name for himself once again – not fame, just a name” (Nahal, 1988, p. 350).

Another Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of trauma is observed when Madhu’s absence haunts Lala Kanshi Ram cyclically and he tries to rebuild her from his memory. The other girls remind him of Madhu and he traces her amongst them. Nahal asserts, “He remembered, to be sure he remembered, but the images overlapped and then it was so difficult for him to give them life even if he did succeed in putting the features together” (Nahal, 1988, p. 350). The demise of Madhu pains him so tremendously that sometimes he feels that she comes back to see him in person. Kanshi Ram fails to express whether it is reality or imagination, magic or charisma.   At this peak of his angst, the Lala becomes a victim of schizophrenia – a serious mental illness in which someone cannot understand what is real and what is imaginary. Rachel Miller and Susan Elizabeth Mason also advocate the lethal nature of schizophrenia as, “All illnesses are hard to talk about, but schizophrenia seems even harder. For many people the term schizophrenia carries a stigma so strong that just thinking about it is frightening. It reminds them of the strange thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that resulted in their needing treatment. They remember their weird beliefs and hallucinations or their disorganized, isolated or moody ways” (Miller and Mason, 2002, p. 1).

On the one hand, the Lala is utterly distressed because of the loss of his house, store, daughter, son-in-law, friends, land, and hometown, but he also suffers due to his homelessness in Delhi on the other hand. One of the Custodian Officers scolds the shattered Kanshi Ram and asks Arun to take him away. Nahal adds the statement of the Custodian Officer as, “Take care of your father. He has been weeping. I’ve told you people. There is nothing that I can do! There simply aren’t any more houses” (Nahal, 1988, p. 353). Because of the complicated and shocking circumstances, Kanshi Ram loses his thirst, hunger and sleep. He wants to take a sip of tea but he can’t; he wants to eat a biscuit, but he is unable to eat it; he wants even to weep, but there is no water left in the ducts of his eyes (Nahal, 1988, p. 353).

At last, Lala Kanshi Ram is allotted a brick hut in Kingsway Camp on Alipur Road in Delhi where he sets-up a small shop, but homelessness, nostalgia and poverty deteriorate him extremely (Nahal, 1988, p. 354). In the Punjabi culture, the Lala had grown up in, turban has its own dignity for Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims. Lala Kanshi Ram always turbaned whether he was inside or outside his home, but now in Delhi, he couldn’t save even his milky turban. Nahal writes, “Turban was a sign of respect, of dignity. He had no dignity left […]. He sat bare-headed, advertising his humble position to the world” (Nahal, 1988, p. 366).

It’s another Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of trauma of Lala Kanshi Ram that, while assessing the loss of his personality, acceptance, identity and the other material losses, Kanshi Ram’s memory gets connected to his daughter’s loss. This is what he primarily couldn’t forget for the rest of his life. Chaman Nahal delineates his shattered psychic condition as, “Lying on his bed late in the night, he thought of it. What of the loss of personality he had suffered? What of the material losses? What of Madhu? That could never be made good, never atoned for. And he saw years of bleakness before him, years of desolation” (Nahal, 1988, p. 369).

It’s the repercussion of his “material losses” and the “physical losses” that he couldn’t see anything for the future but just bleakness, coldness, gloominess and despondency (Nahal, 1988, p. 369). He feels himself in such a tunnel that has no other end (Nahal, 1988, p. 369). He can just see the “rude faces of the men” (Nahal, 1988, p. 369) who decide his future. He wants to talk about his distressed psychic condition, but he loses his “ability to communicate with his family” (Nahal, 1988, p. 369). He cries inwardly as he fails to “establish his contact either with his wife or with his son” (Nahal, 1988, p. 369). Kanshi Ran fails to fathom his “restlessness” and “sadness” (Nahal, 1988, p. 370). He feels himself guilty for “the material losses” (Nahal, 1988, p. 369) and for the demise of his daughter and son-in-law, though he isn’t responsible for this series of calamities. Kanshi Ram’s trauma enhances day by day and it deteriorates his mindset further as he lacks friends in Delhi unlike Sialkot. Judith Lewis Herman also states that social-relations are constructive for the recovery of trauma. The psychiatrist states, “The core experiences of psychological trauma are disempowerment and disconnection from others […]. In its renewed connections with other people, the survivor re-creates the psychological faculties that were damaged or deformed by the traumatic experience” (Herman, 1997, p. 133).

  1. Results

The researcher has analyzed only one character (Lala Kanshi Ram) from the selected novel Azadi in the light of the augmented Freudian theory of Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ of trauma. Kanshi Ram encounters some traumatic incidents such as the vicious shooting of Indian dogs by the British soldiers (Nahal, 1988, p. 28), stillbirths (Nahal 1988: 36), witness of holocaust of the Partition (Nahal, 1988, p. 125), witness of the Amritsar train fully loaded with the dead bodies of Muslims (Nahal, 1988, p. 127-28), loss of his land, house, friends, hometown and heist of his grain store in Sialkot (Nahal, 1988, p. 136), slaughter of his daughter (Madhu Bala) and son-in-law Rajiv (Nahal, 1988, p. 168), and witness of the carnage of innumerous Muslim refugees at the Amritsar railway station (Nahal, 1988, p. 327) in his life. These harrowing events are considered as the factors of trauma and they affect Kanshi Ram’s body and psyche with several impacts.

Through the psychoanalysis of Kanshi Ram it’s observed that the protagonist faces the repercussions such as a flashback to the devastation caused by Germany in Russia and Japan (Nahal, 1988, p. 16), tearfulness (Nahal, 1988, p. 16), incommunicability (Nahal, 1988, p. 16, p. 213, p. 369), collective trauma (Nahal, 1988, p. 16), association of the current savagery with the epic battle of Kurukshetra between the Kauravas and the Pandavas (Nahal,  1988, p. 17), flashback to the massacre of the Jallianwala Bagh that took place on 13th April 1919 (Nahal, 1988, p. 28), abusiveness against the military, police and his friends (Nahal, 1988, p. 28, p. 133, p. 211), revengeful attitude and deep-seated abhorrence for the penultimate British Viceroy in India – Lord Archibald Wavell (Nahal, 1988, p. 30), flashback to the revolt of 1857 (Nahal, 1988, p. 32), timidity (Nahal, 1988, p. 32), wretchedness, scared and upset (Nahal, 1988, p. 32), insecurity and anxiety (Nahal, 1988, p. 39), loss of his husbandly functions (Nahal, 1988, p. 39), confusion, uncanniness and restlessness (Nahal, 1988, p. 41), amalgamation of his personal grief with the national problem of the Partition (Nahal, 1988, p. 39), feeling of death (Nahal, 1988, p. 127), numbness (Nahal, 1988, p. 127, p. 210), angst and sleeplessness (Nahal, 1988, p. 130), fearfulness even to hear the word ‘refugee’(Nahal, 1988, p. 130), disheartenment,  psychosomatic tiredness and defenselessness (Nahal, 1988, p. 132, p. 350), readiness to convert Hinduism into Islam so that he can keep his home, store and homeland (Nahal, 1988, p.132), shouting and distress (Nahal, 1988, p. 134), transfixion, disappointment and paleness (Nahal, 1988, p. 136), motionlessness, indecisiveness (Nahal, 1988, p. 137), loss of trust in the military, the police and the local authorities (Nahal, 1988, p. 140, p. 326), curse (Nahal, 1988, p. 140), loss of good humour (Nahal, 1988, p. 149), paralysis of his body and psyche (Nahal, 1988, p. 210, p. 274), indifference to generosity (Nahal, 1988, p. 213), unconsciousness particularly because of the repetitious reminiscence of his deceased daughter (Nahal, 1988, p. 249, 288), delirium, unwillingness, flaccidity (Nahal, 1988, p. 249), unsteadiness (Nahal, 1988, p. 274), hatred of the new country (India), officials and its new cities such as in Jullundur Ludhiana, Ambala etc. (Nahal, 1988, p. 325, 336), flashback to the Amritsar train fully loaded with the dead bodies of Muslims (Nahal, 1988, p. 328), feeling of an excruciating pain (Nahal, 1988, p. 336), debasement (Nahal, 1988, p. 343), display of his nakedness before the Custodian and Rehabilitation officers (Nahal, 1988, p. 350, p. 353), nostalgia (Nahal, 1988, p. 350), schizophrenia (Nahal, 1988, p. 350), repetitive fear (Nahal, 1988, p. 351), deep rooted desire to return to his home and homeland (Nahal, 1988, p. 351), loss of thirst and hunger (Nahal, 1988, p. 353), mournfulness, rootlessness, homelessness, and destitution (Nahal, 1988, p. 354), loss of dignity, personality and identity (Nahal, 1988, p. 366), bleakness, desolation and suffocation (Nahal, 1988, p. 369), and unnecessary feeling of guilt (Nahal, 1988, p. 369).

Similarly, the trauma of other victims such as Prabha Rani, Arun Kumar, Sardar Niranjan Singh, Sergeant William Davidson, Isher Kaur, Inayat-Ullah Kahn, Madhu Bala, Sunanda Bala, and Mukanda’s mother can be explored in the light of the Freudian theory of ‘deferred action’ to detect some more concealed reasons and ramifications of trauma.

  1. Conclusion and Recommendation

In the modern world, millions of people are suffering from the psychosomatic disturbance created by a number of traumatizing factors which lead to trauma either immediately or through the mechanism of ‘deferred action’. The researcher has explored some of the factors and ramifications of trauma through the analysis of Chaman Nahal’s Azadi but lots of covert factors of trauma can be explored if the Freudian theory of Nachträglichkeit ‘deferred action’ is applied to the texts which contain traumatic experiences because a detailed exploration of the reasons for trauma and its repercussions on the lives of traumatized victims is required for the trauma treatment centres worldwide dealing with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PSTD) to alleviate the travails of the victims of trauma. As each distressing factor is different, so are the traumatic experiences and the repercussions of trauma. There is no single protocol for grasping and treating the patients of trauma; therefore, the implementation of the Freudian theory of ‘deferred action’ in the suggested discourses is recommended to discover concealed factors of trauma so that the treatment of the patients of trauma could be made effectively productive.


Nahal, Chaman. 1988. Azadi. New Delhi: Orient Paperbacks.


Bistoen, G., Vanheule, S., & Craps, S. (2014). Nachträglichkeit: A Freudian Perspective on Delayed Traumatic Reactions. Theory & Psychology, 24(5), 668-687.

Butalia, U. (1998). Other Side of Silence: Voices from the Partition of India. New Delhi: Penguin books.

Caruth, C. (2014). Death in Theory. Listening to Trauma: Conversations with Leaders in the Theory and Treatment of Catastrophic Experience. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Chawla, M. I. (2012). Wavell and the Dying Days of the Raj: Britain’s Penultimate Viceroy in India. Islamabad: Oxford University Press.

Chawla, M. I. (2013). Wavell’s Breakdown Plan, 1945-47: An Appraisal. Journal of Political Science, 16 (2), 219-234.

Collet, N. (2007). The Butcher of Amritsar: General Reginald Dyer. London: Hambledon Continuum.

Freud, S. (2010). From the History of an Infantile Neurosis.  In Ivan Smith (Ed. and Trans.), Freud-Complete Works. Accessed 05.08.15.

Freud, S. (2001). Project for a Scientific Psychology. In James Strachey, (Ed. and Trans.), The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Vol.1. London:  The Hogarth Press.

Freud, S. (2010). Psycho-Analytic Notes on an Autobiographical Account of a Case of Paranoia. In Ivan Smith, (Ed. and Trans.), Freud-Complete Works. Accessed 20. 05.16.

Freud, S. (2010). Sexuality in the Aetiology of the Neurosis. In Ivan Smith (Ed. and Trans.), Freud-Complete Works. Accessed 19. 04. 16

Freud, S. (2010). The Interpretation of Dreams. In Ivan Smith, (Ed. and Trans.), Freud-Complete Works. Accessed 09.11 15.

Herman, J. L. (1997). Trauma and Recovery: The Aftermath of Violence – From Domestic Abuse to Political Terror. New York: Basic Books.

Lacan, J. (1998). The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. In Jacques Alain Miller, (Ed.), In Alan Sheridan (Trans.), New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company.

Mason, P. (1974). A Matter of Honor.  Austin: Holt Rinehart & Winston.

Miller, R., & Mason, S. E. (2002). Diagnosis: Schizophrenia: A Comprehensive Resource. New York: Columbia University Press.

Nadiem, I. H. (2006). Punjab and the Indian Revolt of 1857. The University of Michigan: Sang-e Meel Publications.

Parker, I. (2011). Advancing Theory in Therapy. Lacanian Psychoanalysis: Revolutions in Subjectivity. (1st ed.), In Keith Tudor, (Ed.), London and New York: Routledge.

Rees, L. (1999). War of the Century: When Hitler Fought Stalin. London: British Broadcasting Corporation.

Sahitya Akademi. (1978). Indian Literature. The University of Michigan: Sāhitya Akademi.

Singh, K. (1996). How the Sikhs lost their kingdom. The University of Michigan: UPS Publishers’ Distributors.

Tan, T. Y., & Kudaisya, G. (2000). The Aftermath of Partition in South Asia. London & New York: Routledge.




Your views and comments are most welcome

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s