Non-Fictional Prose

Table of Contents
1. Literary Merit of a poem and its comparison to prose.
2. 6 speeches of Vivekananda
3. Sri Aurobindo
4. Anand Kentish Coomaraswamy
5. Gandhi
6. Jawaharlal Nehru
7. Nirad C. Chaudhary
8. Vikram Seth
9. Amitav Ghosh

Questions and Answers

1. Simple prose does have the same literary merit as a poem, a drama or a
novel. Comment. (Unit 1)

2. Delineate the features of Nehru's prose style as illustrated in the passages taken from
Autobiography.

3. Write an essay on Vikram Seth's prose style.

4. Discuss the prose style of Nirad C. Chaudhari with reference to The Autobiography of an
Unknown Indian.

5. Discuss Mahatma Gandhi's Hind Swaraj as a postcolonial text.

6. In what ways does Swami Vivekananda see similarities between Hinduism and science?

7. Discuss the distinctive features of Hinduism on which Swami Vivekananda lays stress in
his Address.

8. What aspects of Indian culture figure in the writings of Swami Vivekananda or Sri
Aurobindo?

9. How does Swami Vivekananda view Buddhism? 20 Discuss. (450 words)

10.How does Sri Aurobindo make a case for India's civilization?

11. What, according to Ananda Coomaraswamy, does the bronze image of the
dancing Shiva symbolize? Discuss.

12.What does the bronze image of the dancing Shiva symbolize in Coomaraswamy's essay?
'The Dance of Shiva'? Explain.

13.Comment on Gandhi's views on education and their relevance in the age of

Globalization.

14.Comment on the nature of Gandhi's influence on Indian fiction in English.

15.What, according to you, is Gandhi trying to convey to the readers in Hind Swaraj?
Explain.

16.How can Gandhi's views of Swaraj and Swadeshi, be relevant in present day India?

17.There is a great deal of self-scrutiny in Nehru's writing. Do you agree? Give a reasoned
answer.

18.Compare and contrast the autobiographies of Nehru and Nirad C. Chaudhuri.

19.Do you agree with the view there are two (Nirad C) Chaudhuris, a historical witness and
a pseudo-historian? Give reasons.

20.Critically comment and Discuss the prose style of Nirad C. Chaudhuri with reference to
The Autobiography of an Unknown Indian.

21.Does Vikram Seth's writing lack depth? Discuss, offering your own views.

22.Write an essay on Vikram Seth's prose style.

23.Discuss Vikram Seth or Amitav Ghosh as travel writers.

24.'Seth achieves almost photographic realism in his travelogue. We feel that we are
travelling along with him on his journey'. Discuss.

25.Discuss Amitav Ghosh as a writer of travelogues.

26.Critically assess Amitav Ghosh as a travel writer.

PROSE HAS THE SAME LITERARY MERIT AS A

POEM, DRAMA OR A NOVEL.
The French poet “Paul Valery” compared prose to walking and verse to dancing. Verse is the
more stylized from, while prose is functional, and used for non-literary purposes also. But that
does not mean that prose is a lower form; prose can employ all the rhetoric techniques (like
simile, metaphor, personification, hyperbole, understatement, irony etc.) that verse uses.
Prose, too, can be rhythmic, though rhythm in prose is different from the music of poetry.
Literary genres can use either prose or verse. Traditionally, the epic has always been in verse,
but the qualities of an epic can be found in Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace, written in prose. The
novel is usually written in prose, but the great Russian poet Pushkin's Eugene Onegin is a novel
written in verse. Inspired by Pushkin, Vikram Seth has written a novel in the form of sonnets:
The Golden Gate. Drama can be either in verse or prose. Greek drama, and Elizabethan drama
which followed that tradition, was in verse. Shakespeare's tragedies are great poetic dramas,
but he has many prose passages in his comedies, which are interspersed with songs. Modern
English drama is in prose: T.S.Eliot is the only playwright to successfully attempt poetic drama.
Poetry confers a certain heightening, prose is derived from the Latin word meaning "direct,
straightforward".

SIX SPEECHES OF VIVEKANANDA

Focus on
Similarities between Hinduism and science
Stress on distinctive features of Hinduism in his address
Focus on Indian culture
Vivekananda’s views on Buddhism.

1 Response to Welcome
This is brief speech, given in response to the words of welcome that Swamiji received as a
delegate from India, representing the Hindu religion. It was at the start of this address that he
received a standing ovation for his opening words.
Swamiji receives the welcome not on his behalf, but on behalf of order of monks, of the Hindu
religion, and of the million of people of India.
Why does Swamiji call his order of monks the most ancient in the world?
We know that he was himself who founded this order not long after Sri Ramakrishna’s death.
We mustn’t forget, though, that Sri Ramakrishna himself had received sannyasa diksha or had
been initiated into monkhood by his guru, Totapuri, who belonged to one of the 10 prominent
order of monks in India. These 10 orders had been systemized by Shankaracharya in the 9th
century, but the tradition of sannyasa or renunciation was much, much older in India. The
buddha instituted the sangha or the sacred community of monks and seekers in the 5th
century B.C. It is believed that even before Buddha there were holy men and women in India
who wandered place to place. Cleary, Swamiji sees himself aligned to this ancient tradition of
renunciates, which was much older than the Christian monastic traditions. Cleary, Swamiji sees
himself aligned to this ancient tradition of renunciates, which was much older than the
Christian monastic traditions.
Similarly, Swamiji calls Hinduism the mother of all religions. This may not be true literally in
that there were several religions which originated outside the sphere of influence of Hinduism
or India. I suppose what Swamiji means is not conventional Hinduism or even the various
religions of India but Sanatana Dharma in its purest conception. Sanatana Dharma is so called
because it is eternal, with no origin and end, no beginning and no termination, no inauguration
and no closure. The Sanatan tradition, in this sense of the word, includes all the religions of
the world, wherever they may have been revealed or wherever they may flourish.
Swamiji also thanks the organizers in the name of those millions of people of India, whose
simple and pure faith sustains an ancient civilization. Though these people may be divided into
many classes and sects, there is perhaps a unity and commonality in them, which Swamiji will
talk of later.
Swamiji next emphasizes the tolerance and inclusiveness of India, which has already been
pointed out as its unique characteristic. In this respect, India stands in stark contrast to other
nations. In the latter, those who did not accept the dominant religion were often called
heretics and killed, exiled, or persecuted. Swamiji clearly shows that India, quite an exception
to this worldwide trend, actually welcomed not only the Jews and the Parsees, it always stood
for freedom of faith and belief.
India's strength, thus, lies in its view that all the different paths lead to the same goal. the
Supreme Lord, called by whatever name by His worshippers. Swamiji quotes from the Bhagwat
Geeta and from another unnamed source to strengthen his argument.
But what is perhaps the most important of Swamiji's points is his extremely clear statement
against dogmatism, intolerance, and bigotry. He advocates the "death-knell of all fanaticism"
so that there is an end to persecutors of both 'the sword'' and "the pen." Unfortunately,
fanaticism is still very much with us, as a threat not only to world peace but to freedom of
speech and expression. Swamiji was well-aware of the futility of all such fanaticism as it had
spilled the blood of countless innocents down the ages. The 20th century, at the edge of which
he stood, was the bloodiest and cruelest in all human history. Swamiji spoke like a Prophet
warning against the dangers of fanaticism, but unfortunately few people paid heed to him.

2 Why we Disagree?
In this speech, Swamiji uses the mode of the parable to illustrate his point about the futility of
narrow-mindedness. It deals with the frog in the well syndrome. Each frog believes that his
well is the biggest. Swamiji doesn't exclude himself or the Hindu from this syndrome. We are
all, according to him, guilty of it. We all think that we are the wisest and that our religion is the
best. But like frogs In the well, we might be deluded. This message is especially relevant to
those religions which claim an exclusive and absolute claim to truth and salvation. These
religions, or at least some sections of these religions, proclaim that theirs is the only true way
and that everyone else will be damned or go to hell or perish or whatever. Swamiji wants to
loosen the hold of such beliefs on his listener's minds. Hence the story.
From Swamiji’s remarks it is clear that religious harmony can be created not just by
recognizing the unity and underlying similarity in all faiths, but also to understand and accept
the difference in them.

3 Paper on Hinduism
This is clearly the longest and most detailed of all of Swamiji's talks. He calls Hinduism a
prehistoric religion, that is it goes back to times before recorded history as we know it.
However, unlike Judaism and Zoroastrianism, both of which are also ancient' religions, only
Hinduism flourishes in all its pristine glory in the place of its origin and maturation.
Swamiji next stresses the Vedas and the ancient perennial wisdom embodied in the Vedanta
as the key sources of Hinduism. But notice how he at once includes agnostic Buddhism and
atheistic Jainism as a part of Hinduism. His definition of Hinduism is thus, once again,
inclusive and broad. By Hinduism he therefore means not any restricted creed or set of
dogmas, but the wide and inclusive movement of India's spiritual traditions.
Next, he tries to describe the essence of Vedic thought in modern scientific terms. According
to Swamiji, it is only Hinduism whose worldview is not upturned or dislodged by the
discoveries of modem science because Hinduism was also a science of the spirit not a
collection of arbitrary beliefs or rituals.
Hinduism stresses the immortality of the soul, or atman, and declares that 'I am not my body
but the everlasting, indestructible spirit'. This is the liberative gospel of Hinduism. From the
Hindu point of view, there is no such thing as original sin; we are children of immortality, not
of degradation.
Hinduism also stresses the law of Karma, of endless cause and effect. It is by this law that we
can uplift ourselves, should we wish. Karma is not to be interpreted as destiny or blind fate,
which binds us from life to life, but rather as the inheritance of certain traits or predelictions,
which we can shape anew in a certain direction in this life.
He declares, "verification is the perfect proof of a theory," something no modem scientist
would disagree with, He wises to submit the assertions of religion to the same rigorous
scrutiny as a scientist does a hypothesis.
According to Vivekananda, Hinduisim is not a religion of hopelessness or despair, but a
liberative and self-perfecting way that encourages the souls to evolve. He defines God as
Almighty, formless one, who is also all-merciful. God is best worshipped through bhakti, or
selfless love. Through Divine grace. when a soul i s vouchsafed the knowledge of its true
identity, it becomes free and enjoys unrestricted bliss and peace. Thus the Hindu dharma is
not about believing in certain dogmas 01. rituals but in realizing oneself and one's inner
perfection. Self-realization. Swamiji explains, does not consist in a loss of individuality, but the
gaining of universal individuality.
Hinduism is not a system of polytheism or henotheism (the latter implies a belief in both one
God and many gods). neither is it a worship of idols, of stones and stocks. The idol is merely a
symbo1, because the Hindu believes both in God with form and God without form. In those
days, Hinduism was attacked for its idolatry and the Brahmo Samaj, a reform sect, even went
to the extent of banning idol worship. In the Abrahamic tradition, whether in Judaism,
Christianity, or Islam, idolatry is seen not only as an error, but as a great sin. Idolaters are seen
as evil. degenerate. and worthy of punishment. Swamiji, therefore, takes pains to clarify that
the average idol worshipping Hindu is neither a sinner nor an evil person. He or she is perfectly
harmless and well-intentioned. Swamiji cautions Christians against bigotry. pointing to
elements of superstition and idolatry in their faith. What he asks for is mutual tolerance in
religions matters and mutual respect, not condemnation and hatred. Swamiji uses the
argument that human beings start at a lower stage of evolution but move higher and higher; if
this is true, the higher need not condemn the lower. The beauty of Hinduism is that it does not
believe that we travel from error to truth but from truth to truth, from the lower truth to the
higher truth. In that sense. the absolute and the relative are not contradictory and opposed,
but the absolute can only be realized through the relative.

Hinduism, ultimately, aspires to universal religious harmony. According to Swamiji. it is the

only faith which does not say that the Hindu alone will be saved.
Vivekananda ends his speech with an appeal to all the assembled people to move to a new era
of inter-religious harmony and tolerance. He believes that is America's destiny to achieve it.
Throughout his speech, Swamiji has sought to be sensible and eloquent, trying to portray
Hinduism in a modern, rationalistic light. In doing so, he lays the foundations of Hinduism's
self-fashioning, offering strategies and techniques that will later he followed by a variety of
thinkers including Sri Aurobindo and Gandhiji.

4 Religion Not the Crying Need of India

Swami Vivekananda says that bread, not religion is the crying need of India. He exhorts
Christian missionaries not to try to convert the poor and wretched people of India but to do
famine relief work instead. India under British rule experienced hundreds of famines in which
millions of people died. Vivekananda declares in unequivocal terms that "It is an insult to a
starving man to teach him metaphysics."
Swamiji's great social mission is being unveiled where he clearly states his goal of seeking help
from the West for India's poor And yet lie confesses how difficult it is for a Hindu to get money
out of the Christian in a Christian country, especially if the beneficiary is to be a heathen!
The argument against the missionaries is based on their double standards – how for instance
they constantly criticize others but cannot take any criticism themselves, how they claim to
save souls but have an extremely low opinion of other faiths; how they offer material
inducement to encourage conversation while all the while claiming that they are interested in
the spiritual well-being of those they work with. Swamiji here questions this attitude of
superiority. It must be granted, however, that missionaries have also worked to alleviate
starvation, though usually with an ulterior (hidden) motive—hence the term “rice
Christians”— that is, those who converted for the sake of rice.

5 Buddhism, the fulfillment of Hinduism

Swamiji here makes certain arguments and claims that most Buddhists may find it hard to
agree with. For instance, he says that there are no Buddhists left in India. Even at the time
Swamiji gave this lecture, there were a large number of Tibetan Buddhists in Ladakh, Leh,
Himachal Pradesh, and the North Eastern parts of India. Buddhism itself had undergone a
reinvention in the 8th to the 10th centuries, absorbing a good deal of Hindu thought, ritual, and
spirituality.
Yet, Swamiji is undoubtedly right in claiming that the Buddha did not ever claim to start a new
religion or faith. Also, that Hindus do not regard Buddhism as a rival or antagonist faith, but a
part of the Sanatana traditions. That is why most Hindus accept Buddha as an incarnation.
Swamiji is also right in pointing out that many of the Buddha's leading disciples were Brahmins
and as such there was no antagonism between the two. But Buddhism, as it developed, did
deny the notion of God, something that most people in India could not live without. This is
what Swamiji says, but there is also the view that true cause of the decline of Buddhism in
India is not merely doctrinal; it has to do with the destruction of monasteries, trade routes,
and centers of Buddhist learning during the centuries of Muslim rule. Vivekananda does not
mention this theory here. Swamiji’s attempt not just to reconcile Buddhism and Hinduism but
to plead for their reunification. The Brahmin mind and the Buddhist and Hinduism but to plead
for their reunification. The Brahmin mind and the Buddhist heart of compassion is what he
calls for here, as he does the Hindu mind and the Muslim body elsewhere. His desire is to
strengthen and rejuvenate faith of the masses. He did not anticipate, for instance, that lakhs of
untouchables would embrace Buddhism at the call of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar. Today,
Buddhism is experiencing a revival in India, thanks to the presence of the Dalai Lama. Luckily,
the relations between the two are very cordial.
What Swamiji’s speech represents, then, is a sort of Hindu view of Buddhism. Hindus do not
regard Buddhism as an alien or exclusive creed or even as something apart from the broader
tradition of Sanatana Dharma. Buddhism, in other words, belongs as much to India as it does
to Burma, Tibet, China, Thailand, Cambodia, or Sri Lanka.

6 Address at the final session

What is striking, once again, is Swamiji's fervent plea for religious harmony. Once again, he
says that the way ahead is not through the domination of one faith over the others, but of the
acceptance of and respect for the various faiths of the world. The Hindu need not become a
Christian or vice versa, but both can continue to live in harmony. The great achievement of the
Parliament of Religions, according to Vivekananda, is that it proves beyond a doubt that
"purity and charity are not the exclusive possessions of any church." That is why Swamiji pities
those who believe that only their own religion should survive while all others should be
destroyed, He pleads for help, assimilation, harmony, and peace, as against fighting,
destruction and dissension among the various religions of the world.

SRI AUROBINDO
Main focus: Culture in the writings of Aurobindo, Sri Aurobindo making a case for
civilization.

Is India Civilized?
This essay by Sri Aurobindo was originally serialized in the quarterly Arya periodicals from
December 1918 to February 1919.

The series of articles of which this is one was inspired by an attack on Indian civilization by a
British critic, William Archer. In fact. there had already been a response to Archer by the
Indophile and Tantric scholar, Sir John Woodroffe. The title of the latter's book. Is India
Civilized? was meant to be a provocative, if rhetorical question. Sri Aurobindo uses the same
title in the first series to underscore the importance of Woodroffe’s argument, whose gist he
recapitulates, here in the first section.
Sri Aurobindo begins by stating unequivocally how a culture or civilization may be evaluated:
"A true happiness in this world is the right terrestrial aim of man, and true happiness lies in the
finding and maintenance of a natural harmony of spirit, mind and body. A culture is to be
valued to the extent to which it has discovered the right key of this harmony and organized its
expressive motives and movements" First of all, Sri Aurobindo clearly avows that happiness is
indeed the goal of human life. Such an admission is important because it shows how life-
affirming Sri Aurobindo is. He does not regard human life as intrinsically full of dukkha or
suffering.
Next, it is important to realize that behind such a definition of what constitutes true happiness
is a certain notion of what a hum being is. In Sri Aurobindo's scheme of things, a human being
possesses at least three levels of being--the physical, the mental, and the spiritual And, what is
more important, without a natural harmony between these three levels, we can never be
really happy.

When Sri Aurobindo wrote this there were no internationally recognized yardsticks for
evaluating the quality of human life as there are these days. Now we have recognized indices
to measure such things, yet these never take into account the fact that we are spiritual beings
too. The result is that in the most prosperous countries of the world, countries which score the
highest on the quality of human life indices, there is still a high level of discontent. I am not
only speaking of the discontent which comes from class and racial conflict or from poverty and
unemployment, though such things are also found in these "advanced" societies. The fact is
that the most privileged and affluent sections of these countries are also unhappy and
discontented.

Next, Sri Aurobindo tries to sum up the distinctive features of the Indian civilization. He says:
"India's central conception is that of the Eternal, the Spirit here incased in matter, involved
and immanent in it and evolving on the material plane by rebirth of the individual up the scale
of being till in mental man it enters the world of ideas and the realm of conscious morality,
dharma" . These lines sum up not only Sri Aurobindo's notion of India, but his whole
philosophy itself. He holds that matter is but the Spirit in its involved form. Striving to recover
its true self, the Spirit struggles through matter and through life, until it reaches the mental
plane in the human being. After this, evolution is not automatic, not merely subject to the
natural process, but can be conscious. Dharma is nothing but a system that leads us on the
path of spiritual progress. To Sri Aurobindo, the notion of progress in India is primarily
spiritual. It is this that makes India special and distinct.

It seems to me that long ago, the best minds in India discovered that it was not very difficult to
sustain life in this subcontinent. It was not very difficult to take care of all of one's bodily needs
and necessities. They lived on fruits and roots; they bathed in the flowing streams: they lived
in harmony with nature. Similarly, it was not very difficult to make a hut. a cottage, a
hermitage. Nature provided enough. So, they retired into the forest. devoted themselves to
contemplating the eternal truths. Most of the time and energy could be devoted to self-
realization, to sadhana. This does not mean that our ancient rishis and munis were isolated
from society. Instead, they interacted with the kings and commoners, guiding both, helping to
uphold Dharma. They held the remote control of our civilization in their hands, letting the
kings and courtiers to handle the mundane, material aspects of life. While other cultures
thought that it was more important to build cities, to subdue enemies, to increase one's
comfort and power, Indians recognized that all these activities were not as important as self-
realization. Without the latter, all human achievements were partial and transitory.

I believe that these ideals are still present in our culture. Everyone laments that we are
becoming more and more materialistic, yet as a civilization we have yet to admit that that is
the supreme goal of human life. How else can you explain why Prince Siddharth left all the
comforts of the palace to look for the ultimate Truth? All this means that in India we do not
consider the satisfaction of bodily or mental needs to be the sole purpose or even the highest
aim of life.

Now, Sri Aurobindo says that there are countries and cultures which aft: led by a different.
even opposite conception of human life: "Since some centuries Europe has become material,
predatory, aggressive, and has lost the harmony of the inner and outer man which is the true
meaning of civilization and the efficient condition of a true progress". Both Woodroffe and Sri
Aurobindo admit that Europe was not always thus, that in her medieval ages, she too was
dominated by the religious ideal. Yet, as Sri Aurobindo clarifies, this idea was narrow and
intolerant; it cramped the spirit of man.

Since the 15th century, Europeans have overrun our earth, destroying entire civilizations.
killing off populations, colonizing continents, subduing people, taking slaves. fighting wars,
conquering territories, and so on. The entire history of humankind has never witnessed the
scale and degree of violence that modem Europe unleashed on the rest of the world. What
they did to Africa, to South America, to the native communities of North America, to India,
South East Asia, to China, and so on is well recorded. All along, Europe considered itself to be
the most civilized part of the world, the leader, the carrier of enlightenment. How ironic! Does
the essence of civilization lie in killing others, destroying their culture enslaving them, grabbing
their wealth, and ruling over the world?

He says that the West has lost the harmony between the inner and the outer lives and thus
what they have achieved cannot be considered to be true progress. Most of us are still dazzled
and blinded by the achievements of the West. Naturally, we regard the West as our model; we
must emulate them and try to have a similar society in India. We still regard progress as
merely material progress: From such a standpoint the West is the most advanced society in
the world. Yet. according to Sri Aurobindo, that is not true progress.

Sri Aurobindo believes that "Each nation is a Shakti or power of the evolving spirit in humanity
and lives by the principle which it embodies". If so, a clash and conflict between nations is
inevitable. In fact, Sri Aurobindo defines the three stages of the interaction between nations.
These are conflict and competition, concert, and sacrifice. At present, nations are in the first
stage, that of competition and conflict. The second stage, that of cooperation, has hardly
begun. People may talk of enlightened self-interest as the governing principle behind
international diplomacy, but the word enlightened ought to be taken with a pinch of salt.
What obtains more often is a brutal self-interest disguised behind high-sounding principles as
to the third stage, that will only happen after a nation has realized its Self. At present, only
individuals have attained that high degree of realization which allows them to sacrifice
themselves for the good of others. According to Sri Aurobindo. "the perfected sannyasin, the
liberated man," may consider self-defense to be needless, but ordinarily, "To allow oneself to
be killed, like the lamb attacked by the wolf. brings no growth, furthers no development,
assures no spiritual unity". Concert, unity, may come at a future time, but for the present, we
must go through conflict and competition.

For Sri Aurobindo, there has been a perennial conflict for supremacy between Europe and
Asia. In this conflict, either Asia will become Europeanized or Europe Asiaticised. William
Archer's attack on India is a part of Europe's hegemonizing drive to subdue the rest of the
world. Ever since England conquered India. it has endeavored to subdue our civilization. First,
was the attack on Hinduism by the missionaries. That was successfully fended off, not only by
a Hindu revival, but by West to East movements like Theosophy. Now, the second wave of the
attack is not religious, but rationalistic and materialistic.

Many other nations of Asia, from Turkey to Japan, have "grown rationalistic and materialistic";
"India alone is still obstinately recalcitrant". So, in this conflict between India and Europe, "Will
the spiritual motive which India represents prevail on Europe and create there new forms
congenial to the West, or will European rationalism put an end forever to the Indian type of
culture?" —this for Sri Aurobindo is the crucial question, the question at the heart of the
essay.

There are several people who have told me haw uncomfortable they feel with this framework
of confrontation. There are three chief ways in which their discomfort is articulated. On the
one hand, they claim that both Sri Aurobindo in particular and lndian spiritual view in general
are universal. There is no distinction between countries and cultures.

The second kind of objection comes from those who are quite comfortable with the level of
synthesis that they seem to have achieved between their Indian heritage and the modem
world. They have made the required adjustments and believe that we can have the best of
both worlds. What is the need to confront the West or to confront ourselves? Why not go on
living in this convenient synthesis?

The third kind of objection comes from those who consider Sri Aurobindo to be both outdated
and essentialistic. They believe that such generalizations about cultures and civilizations are
arrogant and unjustified. Each individual is different and that it is pointless to attribute any
special characteristics to nations, peoples, or communities.

The question is not that of us versus them, but about two competing and conflicting value
systems. To those of us who love India and what she stands for, the question of protecting
Indian civilization or of fending off the West does not even arise. There is no choice here; we
must live or die according to our beliefs. If we believe that the highest goal of human life is
self-realization, then it is natural for us to strive for it. We don't need any special inducements
or incentives to work for this ideal. To me, every Indian has the potential to be spiritual seeker,
a sadhak or sadhika, whether we realize it or not. It is believed that this is a punya bhoomi, a
holy land, where every inch of soil has been irradiated by the tapas of our seers and
mahatmas. It is in our very blood to walk this path; it is natural for us. For Sri Aurobindo,
ultimately, it does not matter if we are defeated or if we triumph. What is important is to
uphold the life that we believe in.

Sri Aurobindo urges us not to indulge in a vigorous self-defense as Woodroof had advocated:
"But defense by itself in the modern struggle can only end in defeat. and if battle there must
be, the only sound strategy is a vigorous and aggression based on a strong, living and mobile
defense". He is saying that if our ideal is worth preserving, we must be bold and take the
battle into the enemy's camp. This is precisely what Swami Vivekananda did. Similarly,
Gandhiji believed in an aggressive ahimsa, not in cowardly non-violence. Indian spirituality,
thus, needs to be aggressive, not cowardly.

But what does aggression mean? It means that we should actually teach the West: look here,
you have solved several material problems with your high levels of prosperity. But you have
not solved human problems. Who are we? Where do we come from? What is the purpose of
life? And so on. For that a different approach is needed. Moreover, your prosperity Is based on
the exploitation of non-renewable resources, resources which rightfully belong to the whole of
humankind. Such hedonism, luxury, and waste may lead not only to your own destruction, but
to the destruction of the earth. So, before it's too late, YOU must alter your civilizational
goals.

In the concluding paragraph of this section, Sri Aurobindo explains what he means by
aggressive spirituality: "India must defend herself by reshaping her cultural forms to express
more powerfully, intimately and perfectly her ancient ideal. Her aggression must lead the
waves of light thus liberated in triumphant self-expanding rounds all over the world which it
once possessed or at least enlightened in far-off ages”.

Sri Aurobindo also ends on a note of hope and optimism for those who dislike conflicts. He
says, "An appearance of conflict must be admitted for a time, for as long as the attack of an
opposite culture continues." But later, this very conflict. because it will help to bring out the
best in us and in our adversaries, will "culminate in the beginning of a concert on a higher
plane". It is only when a culture is under attack that it is impelled to bring out the best in itself.

ANAND KENTISH COOMARASWAMY

Focus on: The Dance of Shiva
The Dance Of Shiva: Fourteen Essays is a collection of fourteen stimulating essays about the
uniqueness and traditionalism of Indian Art and Culture, and was authored in the early
twentieth century (published in 1918). These essays on Indian culture and art a offer a lucid
and profound representation of the attitudes and opinions held by Indian intellectuals during
the British Raj.

It is a learned essay, full of learned quotations, footnotes, and citations. It is explicatory, that
is, to explain the significance of the image of Nataraja, or the dancing Shiva. But in doing so,
Coomaraswamy also helps us understand a whole philosophy and way of life, taking us into
the very depths of an ancient tradition. One single image, if examined minutely, will reveal the
whole tradition. This is how the microcosm reflects the macrocosm in Indic traditions.

Coomaraswamy starts by explaining one of the names and aspects of Shiva- Nataraja, or the
master of the dance or the king of actors. Of course, Shiva is himself both the dancer and the
audience. This aspect of Shiva is akin to that of Eros Protogonos of Lucian. Lucian (AD 1 17-c.
180) was a Greek satirist. The idea of Eros Protagonos is that of a primary, creative, and life-
affirming force, that Sigmund Freud later used to identify one of the primary drives of human
nature. In other words, the primitive, frenzied dance of our ancestors was to imitate a cosmic
act of creation. like the spurt of life-giving energy at the beginning of the cosmos.

Note: - EROS was the primordial god (protogenos) of procreation who emerged self-formed
at the dawn of creation. He was the driving force behind the generation of new life in the
cosmos.
Coomaraswamy mentions three dances of Shiva-the evening dance at Kailasa the Tandava,
and, finally, the Nadanta dance at Chidambaram. It is on the last that he focuses, because it is
this dance that is depicted in the famous Nataraja bronzes.
We are incapable of understanding what it represents. The
whole composition is circular, with Shiva, perfectly
proportioned, poised on his right leg. It's a magnificent
conception, both dynamic and controlled at the same
time. Certainly, this image is one of the great masterpieces
of Indian art. Coomaraswamy helps us understand it
better.

The legend behind this dance is that of the submission of

the Rishis in the Taragam forest. These Rishis did not
accept the divinity of Shiva. They were, presumably. the
followers of the Vedas-Coomaraswamy mentions This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY
Mimamsa, of the three pairs of classical Hindu
philosophical traditions. Though Coomaraswamy doesn't interpret the legend, it suggests the
harmonizing of the diverse elements in Indian traditions, what might be called the Aryan and
the Dravidian, the Classical and the folk. Clearly, Shiva belongs to the latter and the dominant
tradition must bow before him, because he is the supreme Lord. The Rishis try to overcome
and destroy Shiva but are worsted in the fight. Like his victory over Daksha, Shiva's defeat of
the Rishis represents the triumph of the higher over the lower. Shiva has already mastered the
animal energies, that is why he is called Pashupati, the Lord of the beasts. That is why he can
so easily disarm the fierce tiger and the poisonous serpent. The malignant dwarf underfoot
may be taken to represent the ego-it is so small, but imagines itself to be so big. Thus Shiva,
the beautiful and the auspicious, as his name implies, shows his true grace and power as the
Lord of the Universe, in this dance.

Shiva, with four arms, braided hair, Ganga in his locks on which rests the crescent moon,
adorned with both men's and women's ornaments, fluttering scarf and sacred thread, left foot
upraised, and the right hand in the abhaya or reassuring gesture, thus represents a whole
philosophy. In this image, you'll be able to identify several names of Shiva. For example,
Bhalachandra, he whose forehead holds the moon or Chandrashekhar, he whom the moon
adorns, or Gangadhar, he who holds the Ganga, of Vyomkesh, he whose locks are space itself,
and so on. The dual nature of Shiva, how he is both male and female, the skull of Brahma, the
Ganga in his locks, the drum-all these details have stories and myths behind them. So when we
see the image it's like a short hand to a whole cultural tradition.

But, as Coomaraswamy explains, the image shows the five activities of Shiva creation,
preservation, destruction, veiling, and release. These five, taken together, explain a
philosophical totality. Separately, they are the activities of Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra,
Maheshvara, and Sadashiva. Note that the trinity of popular Hinduism is a different version of
what Shaivit philosophy considers a five-fold process. Whatever we do or see may be thought
of as belonging to one of these five categories. To see this image, therefore, to understand its
deeper significane, is to be released or emancipated. It is nothing short of understanding the
nature of the Ultimate Reality itself.

Books like The Tao of Physics have argued that Shiva's dance represents the whirl of subatomic
particles that make up the texture of the cosmos. It is a vibration of matter and energy that
contemporary physics are trying to understand. Shiva's drum is the striking of the primeval
cord that sets this huge cosmic force into motion. The balance of Shiva and Shakti, of Uma and
Maheshwara, is like the balance of matter and energy, each turning into the other, but each
remaining indestructible. When Shiva danced thus, the sages were liberated. They saw the
entire cosmos as sacred, the play of Absolute in its various guises. The dance of Shiva is in
Chidambaram, which is not only a real place in Tamil Nadu but symbolizes the sky of
consciousness. Where is this sky of consciousness? Ultimately, it is within the heart space of
each of us. There Shiva dances his magnificent dance. Meditating on his auspicious form within
ourselves, we can attain divinity, bliss, and freedom from process-that is the meaning behind
the iconography of the dancing Shiva.

Towards the end of his essay, Coomaraswamy elaborates his reading by references to the
Shakta traditions of Bengal. Here, Kali, not Shiva is the dancer. Kali is the embodiment of the
dynamic aspect of Shiva, of his energy. The two forms are related, even complimenting one
another.

All these references are meant to suggest the solution to the deepest questions of human
existence. Why are we here? Who are we? Why was the world created? Looking at the
dancing form of Shiva, the answers to these questions might he as follows. We are here as a
part of the cosmic play of the Lord. The Lord's own body has become the universe. He sets the
whole process of creation into being ad can also withdraw it into himself at his will. Activity
and inactivity are two simultaneous attributes of the Lord because he is both at peace and in
activity at the same time. The Lord is both matter and energy, both male and female. He is
pure consciousness, the eternal Spirit, and he is matter, the stuff of which the whole universe
is created. His form is beautiful and full of joy, as is his creation. We are a part of his own
consciousness, which is why we are aware of this dance of his. By remembering the auspicious
form of the Lord in our own inner heart space, we can understand the mystery of this
universe. The whole world is a unity, both the here and now and the hereafter; both the
material and the spiritual; both the profane and the sacred; both the imminent and the
transcend&; both illusion and truth. By understanding this totality and interrelatedness, we
may be free forever and anon.

Towards the end of the essay, Coomaraswamy, quoting texts, identifies the image with the
panchakshara mantra, the five-syllabled chant, namashivya. By adding "Om,'' which represents
the Shakti, we have a complete mantra, what is traditionally known as the mahamrityunjaya or
the great victory over death mantra.
GANDHI
Focus on: - Hind Swaraj as a postcolonial text
Gandhi’s influence on Indian fiction
Gandhi’s views on Education.
What does Gandhi want to convey in Hind Swaraj
How Swadeshi and Swaraj are relevant in present day India.
Hind Swaraj is small but highly provocative and influential book, originally
written in Gujrati, but translated into English by Gandhiji himself.
What is hind Swaraj and Why Gandhi had Written it?
Hind Swaraj is one of the most important books that Gandhi wrote. It was originally written in
Gujarati and published in Indian Opinion, a journal that Gandhi used to edit in South Africa.

What is the message of Hind Swaraj? As Gandhi himself says, "It teaches the gospel of love in
place of that of hate. It replaces violence with self-sacrifice. It pits soul force against brute
force."

What was its immediate context? What provoked Gandhi to Write this book with so much
passion? While in London, Gandhi met, in his own words, "every known anarchist." It is
recorded that among these was Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, the leading ideologue of the
extremist group and later of the Hindu Mahasabha. Savarkar was a brave and patriotic man,
who wished to overthrow British rule through violent revolution. His study of world history
had convinced Savarkar that no country had won its freedom without an armed insurrection.
Savarkar was therefore working to train a band of Indian terrorists in London. With the help
Shyamji Krishna Varma, Sarvakar had instituted a scholarship for Indian students in Britain, but
his object was to indoctrinate and prepare leaders for violent revolt.

It was one such meeting in London that Gandhi met Savarkar and actually shared a common
platform with him. Gandhi and Sarvakar had detailed discussion over the means and ends of
the struggle for India’s freedom, but could not come to an agreement. Gandhi, unlike Savarkar,
was convinced that it was India’s unique genius and destiny not to imitate the other nations of
the world, and that India, indeed, would win its freedom through moral and spiritual force
which was superior to material force or the force of arms. Gandhi Wrote Hind Swaraj to
explain his point of view.

The form of Hind Swaraj

Hind Swaraj is written as a dialogue between an Editor and a Reader. The Editor is none other
than Gandhi himself, while the Reader is a prototype of the kind of angry, young man that
Gandhi met in London and wished to change. Gandhi adopts the dialogic mode because he
wanted to write a book which "can be put into the hands of a child."

Gandhi, though a ceaseless innovator, was also a traditionalist. The dialogue form reminds us,
at once, of both the Upanishadic and Socratic traditions. Gandhi, thus, uses a tried and tested
form to convey his thoughts. Hind Swaraj is made up of twenty little chapters. The book itself
is very small in volume, but packs in a very big punch, so to speak.

The summary of main points in Each chapter.

1. He argues against hating every Englishman just because they rule India: “We who seek
justice will have to do justice to others.” (chapter one – congress and it’s officials)
2. Real awakening of India took place with the partition of Bengal by Lord Curzon: “The
demand of the abrogation of the Partition is tantamount to a demand for Home Rule.”
The partition also divided India into two factions: the moderates and the extremists.
(Ch. Two – The partitions of Bengal)
3. Every reform must be preceded by discontent. (Discontent and Rest)
4. He makes it clear that Swaraj is not merely independence, but a different form of
government altogether. (What is Swaraj?)
5. Gandhi argues that the condition of Europe is not worth copying “The mother of
Parliaments is like a sterile woman and prostitute…..If India copies England… she will be
ruined. The pitiable condition of England is due to “modern civilization” under which
“The nations of Europe are becoming degraded and ruined day by day. (Condition of
England)
6. Just material well-being is not a mark of civilization, Gandhi clarifies. Modern civilization
is not just purely material, it is also immoral and irreligious. Modern civilization enslaves
people with “the luxuries that money can buy.”(civilization)
7. The English have not taken India, we have given it to them. We must not blame others
but scrutinize and correct our won weaknesses. The English “wish to convert the whole
world into a vast market for their goods.” (Why was India lost)
8. India is ground down, not under English heel, but under that of modern civilization….We
are turning away from God.” (The condition of India)
9. “Railways, lawyers, and doctors have imprisoned the country.” Railways help spread all
sorts of evil because while “good requires a long time” to travel. “Evil has wings.” (The
Condition of India – Railways)
10. The Hindus and the Mahomedans India is one nation because it has the “faculty for
assimilation.” Religion and nationality are not synonymous. Hindu and Muslims are
blood brothers and must learn to coexist. (The Condition of India)
 11. Lawyers are often immoral because their profession thrives on quarrels and and
disputes. The British also use law courts to strengthen their illegitimate rule. (The
condition of India Lawyers)
12.Most diseases are caused by lack of disciplines and by indulgence, which is encouraged
through medication. Modern medicine is cruel because it vivisects animals. Doctors use
their profession not to help people but to make money. (The conditions of India-
Doctors)
13.Civilization is that mode of conduct which points out to man the path of duty. The
tendency of the Indian civilization is to elevate the moral being, that of the western
civilization is to propagate immorality. (What is true civilization?)
14.Only by freeing ourselves first can we dream of freeing others. India’s strength is
unique: instead of Europeanizing ourselves, we can Indianize the British. (How can India
become free)
15.Unlike Italy, India cannot easily rise up in armed rebellion. "Moreover, to arm India on a
large scale is to Europeanize it." If assassination, terrorism, and violence is used to free
lndia, we will make this holy land unholy. (Italy and India)
16.We reap exactly as we sow….The force of love and pity is infinitely greater than the
force of arms.” (Brute Force)
17. “Passive resistance is a method of securing rights by personal suffering.” Passive
resistance is not the weapon of the weak, but actually it requires more power courage
than the use of brute force. Passive resistance “blesses him who uses it and him against
whom it is used. Passive resistance is an Indian specialty because common people of
India have always used it down the ages. “We cease to co-operate with our rulers when
they displease us.” (Passive Resistance)
18.Education is not merely the acquisition of letters, but the building of character. English
education has enslaved the nation. Though valuable English books may be translated
into our languages, religious or ethical education should take first place. Religious
education should not be left in the hands of the hypocritical clergy alone, but should be
an instrument of driving out Western civilization. (Education)
19.Machinery, or rather the use by Indians of machine-made goods, has enslaved us.
Capitalism is aligned to materialism. (Machinery)
20.Moderates and Extremists must join hands to work for Swaraj. The English must be
asked to stop exploiting India; they cannot rule us against our will.
21.Real home rule is self-rule or self-control. The way to it is passive resistance: that is soul-
force or love-force. In order to exert this force, Swadeshi in every sense is necessary….. I
bear no enmity towards the English but I do towards their civilization.

What is Swaraj?
Though it is clear that British rule impoverished and ruined India. Gandhi still does not make
the mistake of arguing that Swaraj can be achieved simply by substituting the British
imperialists with the native bourgeoisie.
"English rule without the English," Gandhi calls this position succinctly: this means the same
sort of government, with armed forces and the whole bureaucratic machinery of the modem
nation-state.

He believes that it is exploitative and extremely harmful to the general interests of the
population. Gandhi believed that Swaraj or self-rule should begin with at the bottom of
society, with the poorest of the poor. What he had in mind was not a pyramidal society in
which a few dominated and lived off the rest. But a society of ever-expanding oceanic circles
whose individual is the individual.

We have also seen how Gandhi clearly says that Swaraj obtained by violence will be no Swaraj
at all, but will demean us to the level of our former colonizers.

Civilization
One of the most interesting things about Hind Swaraj is its cross-cultural comparison between
modern Western civilization and the traditional Indian civilization. Gandhi realized that most
educated Indians were totally awed and overwhelmed by the glamour and power of the
former. How to wean them away from it and reorient them to their own cultural moorings was
a question that exercised him. He calls modern civilization Satanic and ungodly. Gandhi argues
that modern civilization caters only to the body and totally ignores moral development. As
such, it is degenerate. He says that Europe in the olden days was not all that different from
India of today. Most people labored with their hands to till the soil, plant the crops, and
harvest the grain. It was an agrarian and religious civilization. Precisely what some Europeans
called the Dark Ages, Gandhi thinks of as a worthy way of living. All that the modern
developments have done is to enable a few to amass a great deal of wealth while the
condition of the rest is "worse than that of beasts." Gandhi is concerned with the
dehumanization that industrialism produced, but he does not concede the manner in which it
freed both women and men from traditional, rather limited lifestyles and livelihoods. Gandhi
does not envisage the possibilities of moving beyond the drudgery of industrialism through
advancing technology. Instead he focuses on self-destructiveness of modernity, on its
immorality and greed. In other words, far from regarding it as a panacea (Hypothetical remedy
for all ills), he looks at modem civilization as a disease, but a curable disease.

After all the very English parliament which he called a “Sterile woman and a prostitute,” both
of which images are sexist, became the model for Indian democracy too. Gandhi's remarks
need to be viewed in the context of his times. Then it was very necessary to expose the
hideous underbelly of modem civilization, especially to those Indians who were enamored of
it. That is what Gandhi succeeds in doing in this chapter. He genuinely believed that a simple
way of life based on manual labor was the most conducive to moral and spiritual
advancements.
What is True Civilization?
For Gandhi civilization is simply Sudharo, the Gujarati word, which means "good conduct." It
consists of "performance of duty and observance of morality." In this respect, Gandhi feels
that India has "nothing to learn from anybody else" because since times immemorial the
mighty river of Dharma has flown through this land. For Gandhi, India was a land of Rishis and
Fakirs, of the exemplars and preceptors of renunciation and righteousness. The common
people lived in villages, away from the corruption of large cities. It is "this cursed modem
civilization" that has spoiled India. "The tendency of Indian civilization is to elevate the moral
being, that of the Western civilization is to propagate immorality.” Gandhi's belief that
modernity fundamentally changes the human being's equation with the cosmos by alienating
us from the natural order and placing up on top.

Why was India lost?

“The English have not taken India; we have given it to them.” He wants us to know that no one
can rule us without our consent. That is why he once called Swaraj nothing but a process of
self-purification: we have permitted foreign rule to sully us; by purifying ourselves of it, we are
merely returning to our natural, pristine state. What Gandhi does is to build a theory of
decolonization which stresses self-realization and self-scrutiny, instead of attacking the
oppressors as African and other anti-colonial struggles all over the world did.

He is changing the very equation between the oppressed and the oppressor. The former
considers himself powerless, helpless, abject, disarmed, and therefore unable to change his
destiny. Gandhi blames not the victor, but the victim.

Gandhi doesn’t stop there but offers the reason why the British can retain their hold over
India. He makes a very important point that British imperialism is, above all an economic
system. The military is there only to support this system, but that it is not primarily militaristic.

He wants Indians to recognize that to the British, "money is their God." The British, says
Gandhi, "wish to convert the whole world into a vast market for their goods." That is why, for
Gandhi, swadeshi or economic self-reliance and intent unity are the two necessary ingredients
of Swaraj.

Passive Resistance
As such, it is probably the most important chapter in Hind Swaraj It is also, I think, the longest
chapter. In fact, it is a very proactive way of intervening in the world. That is why Gandhi
preferred to call it "Satyagraha" or soul-force. It rather calls for extraordinary courage and self-
discipline, not to speak of several other qualities. Passive resistance, thus, isn't easier, but
much, much harder than violent reaction. Gandhi defines passive resistance as “a method of
securing rights by personal suffering; it is the reverse of resistance by arms.”

Next, the discussion moves to law, especially to unjust laws. Gandhi argues for the moral basis
of civil disobedience when it is directed against unjust laws. He believes that just because the
majority supports something or just because it has been made into a law it does not
automatically become right.

Next Gandhi refutes the idea that soul-force is the weapon of the weak, on the contrary, he
says, it requires greater courage to practice it than to practice violence. After all, it is easier to
injure. even kill someone else instead of being injured or being killed oneself, Moreover,
passive resistance, unlike violence, benefits both the subject and the object of it, that is both
she who uses it and he against whom it is used. According to Gandhi, the Indian people have
always used it against kings and governments, disregarding laws that they found unjust or
obnoxious.

What are the qualities necessary for a passive resistor? If one looks at their list, they include
chastity, poverty, truth, fearlessness, and so on, all of which are very difficult to attain. The
passive resistor, the satyagrahi, therefore, is like a saint; he is no ordinary person.
Education
We have inherited a colonial system of education, which is hardly relevant to our real needs.
The result is so many ignorant and job-less graduates, all of whom are too qualified to do any
hard work. We seldom realize that any of us are actually, burdens on society. Gandhi
anticipated this problem. He believed that true education was not merely literacy or the
knowledge of Mathematics, but the development of high moral character. In fact, he believed
that not everyone needs what we call education today. Most of those, for instance, who live in
villages and practice farming, may make do with some rudimentary knowledge of letters; they
don't need to go to school or college to earn degrees or diplomas.

The worst feature in the racket that is education is what was known as "English education."
This was a system devised by Lord Macaulay and his successors to produce a "class of persons,
Indian in blood and color, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect." Gandhi
knew that English education would alienate the classes from their native culture. This is
precisely what has happened. Those of us steeped in this type of education, therefore, need to
work extra-hard to reconnect with our roots to offer our advantages to the service of those on
whose behalf we enjoy all our privileges.

Gandhi is not exactly anti-English, but Wishes English to be given its rightful place, which is as
an international link language. English should not dominate us as it has come to do today.
Moreover, Gandhi wants every Indian to learn one classical language. like Sanskrit or Persian,
and one more language other than mother tongue. This is the only way of avoiding linguistic
chauvinism or fanaticism and encouraging a multilingual, multiethnic sensibility.

Gandhi also touches briefly on religious education. He believes that we need to return to
India's pristine civilization by throwing out Western civilization, but also by cleansing our own
traditions of the dirt and filth that has accumulated in them.

The importance of Hind Swaraj

The importance of Hind Swaraj extends far beyond its literary value. It is. in my opinion, a
seminal text for all those who wish to understand Gandhi. What is more. it is nothing less than
a non-violent revolutionary's handbook. It should be compulsory reading for all Indians. Why
do I make such a sweeping statement? That's because this book has the power to make us
wake up from our stupor. We. who are intoxicated by modernity and westernization, who are
continuing to be brainwashed daily via the mass-media to get entangled further into self-
destructive lifestyles of consumerism, require the kind of jolt that Hind Swaraj offers.

We have also seen how Gandhi clearly says that Swaraj obtained by violence will be no Swaraj
at all, but will demean us to the level of our former colonizers. Indeed, we need to recognize
clearly that Gandhi's approach is not fragmentary, but holistic. In Gandhian thought what
helps us attain political independence should also help us develop spiritually.

Gandhi identifies India as a spiritual and religious civilization, whose culture is superior to that
of modern western civilization. Modern civilization encourages vice and makes us forget the
purpose of life which is the cultivation of virtue. Modern life regards the human being as
essentially a physical entity the aim of whose life is accumulate comforts. In order to give us
the comforts that we seek modern civilization adopts a predatory and destructive approach to
nature. All the progress and development. we will realize, is at the cost of enormous damage
to our environment. Some of this damage is irreversible. The other way in which much of what
we call modern development happens is through the exploitation of human beings. Slavery,
colonialism, indentured labor, and other forced or ill-paid systems have been evolved so that
the majority of the poor toil for the comforts of the rich few. Gandhi shows us that modernity
is driven by the baser instincts of greed, lust for power, urge to dominate over others, and so
on. If all of us succumb to the craze for modernity, the whole species would be dehumanized.
Gandhi recognizes this and therefore criticizes the West, which is the custodian of modernity.
The so-called backwardness of traditional India, according to Gandhi, was no backwardness at
all, but a proof of its higher culture.

Gandhi considers the craze for machinery to be inappropriate to India. Here we have a surplus
of labor, so labor saving machinery will actually render millions jobless. It will dehumanize and
enslave those who are bound to machines in lifeless routines. It will concentrate the wealth in
the hands of those few who own machines. Instead of so much centralization of power and
wealth, Gandhi advocates decentralization. Each one must attempt to attain self-sufficiency;
we should become both producers and consumers, or to use postmodern jargon, we should all
become "prosumers."

Self-sufficiency, self-respect, self-realization are thus the planks of Gandhi's idea of Swaraj.
Swaraj itself is a concept deeper and wider than independence. Swaraj is a Vedic word which
means more than just self-rule. It suggests not just individual autonomy but a very high level
of moral and spiritual development. Such Swaraj is a life-long project and includes every
aspect of our lives. It is interactive and evolutionary, not just static or inert. By Gandhi's
yardstick, we are still far from attaining Swaraj. Indeed, in the ultimate analysis, Swaraj is not
just a self-centered or negative concept. It embraces all of humankind. both the oppressed
and the oppressor. Political independence is merely the beginning. Swaraj will be impossible
before the whole world learns to co-exist in peace and prosperity; it will be a world without
the rampant inequalities, dehumanizing poverty, crippling disease. internecine warfare of
today.

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU
Focus on: - Features of Nehru’s Prose style.
Self-scrutiny in Nehru’s Writing.
Compare and Contrast Nehru and Chaudhary.
Genesis of the Autobiography
How did the narrative come to be written?
It was to give himself a definite task that would fill in the long solitude of jail life and would
divert his mind from worry and depression. It was also an attempt at understanding -
understanding the past events with which he has been connected and understanding his own
responses to them and thereby trace his own mental development. In, Dehra Gaol Again, he
explains the mood of self-questioning in which the narrative began. "Distressed with the
present, I began thinking of the past, of what had happened politically in India since I began to
take part in public affairs. How far had we been right in what we had done? How far wrong'? It
struck me that my thinking would be more orderly and helpful if I put it down on paper" (559).
At the end of chapter xxviii we find Nehru asking again; "Why am I writing all this here in
prison?. . . I write down my past feelings and experiences in the hope this may bring me some
peace and psychic satisfaction."

His account is clearly and self-confessedly "egotistical" and selective. "I must warn him [the
reader], therefore that this account is wholly one-sided and, inevitably, egotistical; many
important happenings have been completely ignored and many important persons, who
shaped events, have hardly been mentioned. . . .a personal account can claim this indulgence."

The Autobiography as a narrative

The narrator is Nehru himself and he writes of past events in which he has played a part and of
persons with whom he has been connected.

Given the self-clarificatory nature of his narrative, it comes as no surprise that Nehru should
disclaim any intention of having any deliberate audience in view. But he hastens to add that
his audience consisted of his own countrymen and countrywomen. This partly accounts for the
generally intimate tone of the narrative. He knows that he enjoys the confidence of his people
and is confident that what he writes about the country's turbulent years will interest them.

Nehru's autobiographical narrative takes the story of his years up to February 1935 when he
was 45.

Like many narratives, this one tries to describe his moods and thoughts at the time of each
event, "to represent as far as I could my feelings on the occasion." But he concedes that "It is
difficult to recapture a past mood, and it is not easy to forget subsequent happenings" And
that "later ideas must inevitably have colored my account of earlier days".

Chapter-1 Descent from Kashmir

"An only son of prosperous parents is apt to be spoilt, especially in India"

Most of his narrative is taken up with an account of his ancestry, which expectedly narrows
down to his father Motilal Nehru who succeeded eminently at the law and made lots of money
and loved all the good things of life and took to western ways.

Here he presents facts about his father and the possible influences on him but he refrains from
drawing any conclusions.

Chapter-4 Harrow and Cambridge

In this chapter Nehru talks about his education in England at the expensive public school at
Harrow. Trinity College. Cambridge and the Inner Temple. He also talks of the Indian students
and Indian leaders he met there; of his being influenced by the aestheticism of Oscar Wilde
and Walter Pater and of the brief period when he cultivated expensive tastes and tried to live
like "a man about town"
He also writes of his agitation at the big events in Indian politics and of his vague dreams of
playing a gallant part in the fight for freedom. The chapter inevitably talks of his father's
"moderate brand of politics and his frank dislike of religious nationalism". a view that Nehru
himself shared.
Comments
Writing about himself as he was thirty years before, Nehru is disarmingly honest and objective.
Additionally, his self-deprecating tone and his quiet sense of humor are likely to appeal to the
cultivated reader. Here is an early hint of Nehru's self-deprecating manner: "Always I had a
feeling that I was not one of them [his classmates at Harrow], and the others must have felt
the same way about me. I was left a little to myself. But on the whole, I took my full share in
the games, without in any way shining at them, and it was, I believe recognized that I was no
shirker." "With a self-conscious air I wandered about the big courts aid narrow streets of
Cambridge, delighted to meet a person I knew" (p 19) Still later when he tries living
extravagantly like a 'man about town', his self-criticism becomes stronger: "I was merely trying
to ape to some extent the prosperous but somewhat empty-headed Englishman who is called
'man about town’. This soft and pointless existence, needless to say, did not improve me in
any way. My early enthusiasm began to tone down and the one thing that seemed to go up
was my conceit".

The self-criticism continues till the end of his chapter when he comes back to Bombay after a
stay of over 7 years in England as “a bit of a prig with little to commend to.”
Nehru's "writing is enlivened by a quiet sense of humor. Notice his dig at A.M.Khwaja as he got
up at a public meeting in Cambridge to ask the visiting Indian leader G.K. Gokhale a question:
"Khwaja got up from the body of the hall and put an interminable question, which went on
and on, till most of us had forgotten how it began and what it was about."

Nehru's usual weapon of criticism of those contemporaries whose conduct he did not approve
of is irony. This is how he speaks of those who at Cambridge talked extremist language but
ended up holding respectable jobs in British India: "Later I was to find that these persons were
to become members of the Indian Civil Services, High Court Judges, very staid and sober
lawyers, and the like. Few of these parlor firebrands took any effective part in Indian political
movements subsequently."

Besides, Nehru always has an eye for a vivid detail. Here is a very small example: "Eighteen
years later I was again in Paris when Lindberg came like a shining arrow from across the
Atlantic."

Chapter-7 The Coming of Gandhiji: Satyagraha and Amritsar

In spite of universal opposition, the Government passed the Rowlatt Bill that provided for
arrest and trial -- the checks and formalities the law is supposed to provide. The resulting
agitation saw the emergence of Gandhiji as an all India leader. The Jallianwala Bagh massacre
followed which sent shock waves throughout the country and gave a new shape and a new
orientation to the national movement.
The chapter narrowing its focus gives us a fascinating glimpse of Gandhi's power of leadership
and how he obtains the assent of Khilafat leaders who doubted the efficacy of his policy of
non-violence.

Comments
1. The irony that the draconian Rowlatt Acts were not used even once during the three
years of their existence is not lost upon Nehru. He observes: "One might almost think
that the object of the measure [The Rowlatt Acts] was to bring trouble." Further, the
laws enacted later were far harsher so much so that Nehru ironically says that the
Rowlett Bills might almost be considered a charter of liberty”.

2. Honesty marks this chapter as it does the others as Nehru tries to probe the motives of
his father's initial reaction to Gandhiji's plan of offering individual satyagraha.

What good would the gaol - going of a number of individuals do. what pressure could it
bring on the Government? Apart from these general considerations, what really moved
him was the personal issue. It seemed to him preposterous that "I should go to prison.
The trek to prison had not then begun and the idea was most repulsive [to the father].
3. Nehru is not bitter against Englishmen, not even against Gen Dyer of the Jallian Walah
Bagh notoriety. He of course describes the terrible event as a 'massacre' and gives a
graphic account of the murderous fire mowing down "people trapped within the four
walls of the Bagh". But all that he does is first to refute Edward Thompson, a friend of
Nehru's, who had suggested in an extenuation of Dyer's action that he (Gen. Dyer) was
under the impression that there were other exits from the Bagh. Then he records that
he overheard the hero of Jallianwala Bagh, as he ironically calls him, boasting in "an
aggressive and triumphant tone' about what he had done: "He pointed out how he had
the entire town at his mercy and he had felt like reducing the rebellious city to a heap of
ashes, but he took pity on it and refrained." Nehru abjures all condemnation and by way
of comment simply says. "I was greatly shocked to hear his conversation and to observe
his callous manner.”

4. Nehru's report on the meeting in Allahabad in which the Muslim leaders came to accept
Gandhiji's creed of non-violence is interesting on two counts. First his account is mildly
humorous and is a testimony of what a great leader can achieve on the strength of his
earnest convictions. Second it contains a brief but sharply etched estimate of Gandhiji
that one is unlikely to forget easily. Here is a longish extract from the chapter.

Gandhiji addressed them and after hearing him looked even more frightened than
before. He spoke well in his best dictatorial vein. He was humble but also clear-cut and
hard as a diamond, pleasant and soft-spoken but inflexible and terribly earnest, His eyes
were mild and deep, but yet out of them blazed out a fierce energy and determination.
Nehru reports Gandhiji's exhortation as follows:
This is going to be a great struggle, he said, with a very powerful adversary. If you want to take
it up, you must be prepared to lose everything, and you Must subject yourself to the strictest
non-violence and discipline. When war is declared martial law prevails, and in our non-violent
struggle there will also have to be dictatorship and martial law on our side, if we are to win. . ..
But as long as you choose to keep me as your leader you must accept my conditions, you must
accept dictatorship and the discipline of martial law. But that dictatorship will always be
subject to your goodwill.

The crowning irony is - and the irony is not lost on Nehru - that it is the apostle of non-violence
who is using what Nehru calls "military analogies:" "Something to this effect he said and these
military analogies and the unyielding earnestness of the man made the flesh of most of his
hearers creep. But Shaukat Ali was there to keep the waverers up to the mark, and when the
time for voting came the great majority of them quietly and shamefacedly voted for the
proposition, that is for war!

Chapter-30 In Naini Prison

In Naini Prison is largely reflective and shows Nehru's compassion for less fortunate prisoners.
Nehru begins realistically with a brief description of the part of the jail called Kuttaghar where
he was confined, the nocturnal jail noises he heard and of the inhuman practice of employing
human labor-power to work a huge water pump in front of his enclosure.

He then goes on to talk the plight of the lifers – convicts sentenced to life and how inhuman
treatment turned them into automatous responsive only to fear. He then goes on to point out
the discrimination made between the facilities available to European prisoners and to Indian
prisoners and stresses the need for a more humane treatment of them. He also feels a sense
of guilt at having an easier time in the jail.

Comments
We shouldn't forget that prison is central to the Autobiography. Nehru had thought of calling it
In and Out of Prison. Prison life meant a great deal of deprivation for Nehru. "One misses", he
says in Chapter XIV 'Out Again', "many things in prison. but perhaps most of all one misses the
sound of women's voices and children's" laughter." In Lucknow District Gaol he suddenly
realized that he had not heard "a dog bark for seven or eight months". But these experiences
also result in an expansion of his sympathies. He becomes aware of what it means to spend
long years in prison and of many a promising life lost in it.

At night he imagined “I was at the bottom of the well. Or else that part of the star-lit sky that I
saw ceased to be real and seemed part of an artificial planetarium.”
Nehru is compassionate towards the non-criminal prisoners herded together with hardened
criminals and he is guilt-ridden at receiving better treatment than most political prisoners. His
simple idealism is reflected in the suggestion that “a more sensible economic policy, more
employment, more education would soon empty out our prisons.”

Nehru's experience of Indian prisons leads him to compare them with the British rule in India.
Both are efficient and heartless. He works out the analogy in some detail:
Outside, in the government of our country, we see much of this duplicated on a longer, though
less obvious, scale. But there are the C.W 's [convict wardens) or C.0 's [Convict overseers] are
known differently. They have impressive titles, and their liveries of office are more gorgeous.
And behind them, as in prisons, stands the armed guards with weapons ever ready to enforce
conformity.

Nehru does not stop there. He expands his meditations further and says that "in prison, one
begins to appreciate the Marxian theory, that the state is really the coercive apparatus meant
to enforce the will of a group that controls the government. "

Chapter-54: The Record of British Rule

While he resented the presence and behavior of English rulers, he says he had no feelings
whatever against individual Englishmen. "In my heart I rather admired the English." Later he
reported a story that accounted for his father's "anti-British politics of his being refused
membership of a English Club, adding: " As individuals we had usually met with courtesy from
the Englishman and we got as well with him, though, like all Indians, we were no doubt racially
conscious of subjection and resented it bitterly.' In the chapter on What is Religion? he
censures the Church of England which has served the purpose of British imperialism and has
sought to justify its predatory policy in Asia and Africa. His censure of British rule goes to the
extent of calling the Government of India metaphorically as one big efficiently run but
heartless prison.

He states the different claims made for the British rule in India and then examines each one of
them giving credit and blame where each is due. Most of all while he is grateful to the British
for the one splendid gift of science and its rich offspring i.e. industry, he censures them for
encouraging disruptive, obscurantist, reactionary and sectarian elements in the country. But
more than the deficiencies of the British he is critical of the failings of Indians themselves.

Comment
The Record of British rule shows Nehru at his argumentative best. But though he presents his
case like a skillful lawyer, he is more interested in discovering the truth rather than in winning
it. Nehru begins by stating the British point of view and he does so in the words of the Joint
Parliamentary Committee on Indian Constitutional Reform (1934).
The Report credits the Government with establishing political unity, the rule of law and a just
and efficient administration and indeed with fostering the first beginnings of nationalism.
Nehru concedes that the British first opened India's" window to the West and bought her one
aspect of Western industrialism and science. But having done it, Nehru says, they throttled the
future industrial growth of the country.

Further, it has been claimed that the educational and material progress in the country has
been greater during the British period than at any other period of her long history. But
progress in these fields in almost every country has been tremendous during the past century.
We need to be grateful to the British for the benefits of railways, telegraphs, telephone and
the wireless but these things came to us primarily to strengthen the British rule.

The fault lay with the British concept of ruling India which was the police concept. The
Government job was only to protect the state. The economic need of the citizens were
sacrificed to British interests.

Nehru then examines the merit of the British claim of having fostered political unity. "Unity is a
good thing." Nehru agrees but, ''unity in subjection is hardly to be, proud of' Political unity
came about as a side-product of the British empire's progress but when that unity challenged
the alien rule the rulers promoted disunity and sectarianism. Likewise, peace is necessary for
progress, but peace imposed by 'an alien conqueror has hardly the restful quality of the real
peace.

Nehru then proceeds to examine the British claim of progress in India. There have been big
changes in India--railway, irrigation, factories, schools, colleges and huge government offices
but India, according to Nehru, is still a servile state. He then proposes a vital test of progress--
the wellbeing of the people as a whole and from this point of view "India makes a terribly poor
show today."

He raises his voice and asks a series of rhetorical questions.

We read of great schemes of unemployment relief and the alleviation of distress in other
countries; what of our scores of millions of unemployed and the distress that is widespread
and permanent? We read also of housing schemes elsewhere; where are the houses of
hundreds of millions of our people, who live in mud huts or have no shelter at all? May we not
envy the lot of other countries where education, sanitation, medical relief, cultural facilities
and production advance is rapidly ahead, while we remain where we were, or plod along at
the pace of a snail.

Then he focuses on Russia, Backward Turkey and Fascist Italy all of which made giant strides
towards widespread literacy ending with the words of the Italian Education Minister Gentile
who called for “a frontal attack on illiteracy”. That gangrenous plague, which: is rotting our
body of politics must be extirpated with a hot iron.” Nehru’s own comment is sharp and
ironical.

Nehru refers to the India of his day as “a poor and dismal sight”. But he does not absolve
Indians of all responsibility for their plight which he says, are the inevitable consequences of
their own weaknesses.

Nehru is very caustic about the virtues of the civil services. The ICS consists of men, Nehru
says, who are on the whole mediocre and who are out of tune with the spirit of changing
times. He quotes the example of the crises of the civil disobedience movement saying that
they came out poorly of the crises.
India's poverty, according to the ICS, Nehru says, is blamed on her social customs, and their
banias and moneylenders and above all her population. But he says, we ignore "the greatest
bania of all-the British government". About over- population, he says, that the much-
advertised increase of population in India has been at a much lower rate than in the West and
that as in the West limiting factors are likely to check population increase in India also.

At the end, Nehru repeats the question he asked in the first sentence: “What has been the
record of British rule in India?”
“Who are we to complain of its deficiencies when they were but the consequences of our own
failings?”: Are we to complain of the cyclone that uproots us and hurts us about, or the cold
wind that makes us shiver?”

Chapter-64: Epilogue
His mood is reminiscent. He tries to sum up how he has been a part of a great mass
movement: "Sometimes we were fortunate enough to that fullness of life which comes from
attempting to fit ideals with action." Life, he says, has been an "adventure of absorbing
interest" where there is so much to learn.

Nehru agrees that “he does not represent mass feeling.” Nehru takes this opportunity to say
that he is a queer mixture of the East and West. “out of place everywhere, at home nowhere.”
His thoughts and his approach are, he says, more Western but India clings to him in numerable
ways. Nehru is also proud of racial memories of generations of Brahmins. “I cannot get rid of
either that past inheritance or my recent acquisition.” As a result, he feels a stranger and alien
in the West but he also has “an exile’s feeling in his own country.”

NIRAD C. CHAUDHARY
Focus on: Prose style of Nirad C. Chaudhary with reference to the
Autobiography of an unknown India.
Highlight differences from Nehru’s Biography
Historical context, it is a pseudo-Historian approach (not real or genuine)
Objective
We shall critically examine one long chapter from The Autobiography of an Unknown Indian,
the book which catapulted Chaudhuri to fame, and then two selections from its sequel, Thy
Hand, Great Anarch, to acquaint ourselves with Chaudhuri's distinctive prose style and his
beliefs.

The Autobiography of an Unknown Indian (1951)

In Thy Hand, Great Anarch, Chaudhuri says about his first book that, "In spite of its title, the
book was not truly an autobiography. It was a picture of the society in which I was born and
grew up."

The story I want to tell is the story of the struggle of a civilization with a hostile environment,
in which the destiny of the British Empire in India became necessarily involved. My main
intention is thus historical, and since I have written the account with the utmost honesty and
accuracy of which I am capable, the intention in my mind has become mingled with the hope
that the book may be regarded as a contribution to contemporary history.

Target Audience: “I have written this book with the conscious object of reaching the English-
Speaking world”. Perhaps this intended relationship is responsible for Chaudhari always using
similes from European art, literature and history. There are many situations where only the
French or Latin quotation would do. But Chaudhuri seems to use foreign phrases even if
English equivalents exist. The common reader may not be fully conversant with these phrases,
and pausing to find out the meaning provides a needless break in the reading experience.
Examples – Panzers (armours) of the enemy, memoires d’outre Manche (an account from
beyond the grave) in a figurative scene.

He assumes that his reader should be as erudite as he is, and never provides a translation.
There is a tendency in Chaudhuri’s prose for the main point to get lost in the haze of verbiage.

Chaudhuri’s Dedication: The dedication has been widely denounced, and Chaudhuri has been
condemned as unpatriotic. The dedication is natural, even inevitable, considering Chaudhuri's
warm feelings towards the British Empire. It also reveals Chaudhuri’s egoism – he assumes
that everyone has the same admiration for the Empire, for he declares “Everyone of us threw
out the challenge”. It never strikes him that many Indians did not want to be British, they
preferred independence to citizenship. The vast majority would not say, "Civic Britannicus
Sum" (I am a British citizen). But a careful reading shows that the first part of the dedication
does not shower praise on the British without reservations, Chaudhuri hints at British
discrimination, when he mentions subjecthood without citizenship, implying that Indians were
subjects to be ruled (and perhaps exploited), but did not have the privileges and rights of a
citizen.

Unknown India is in Four parts;

Book I, “Early Environment” is devoted to the background, describing Kishorganj, his ancestral
village, and his mother’s village, and Bengali society at the end of the Nineteenth century.

Book II, “First Twelve Years”, describes his birth and early life.

Book III, “Education” covers the years he spent at school and college in Calcutta. He did well in
his B.A examinations, with a first class, and was placed first in order of merit. But his reading
for his M.A examination was encyclopedic and over ambitious as he candidly admits, he
“disliked and even despised examinations when they were not an immediate reality” As a
result, he dropped out after sitting for three papers, and the third book of Unknown Indian
ends with his failure in the academic field. But he became a self-taught scholar. All the people
who knew him vouch for his encyclopedic knowledge, and his biography of Max Muller brings
out his best qualities as a scholar. Though he did not get his M.A from Calcutta University,
Oxford University honored him with a D.Litt. Degree.

Book IV, "Into the World" is an essay on life in Bengal in the nineteen-twenties, rather than an
account of Chaudhuri's life after he left college. Like some of his later books like the Continent
of Circe, it reveals more about Chaudhuri's mindset than about the topic discussed, because
Chaudhuri chooses only the facts which support his argument, neglecting large chunks of
history. The concluding chapter, "An Essay on the Course of Indian History" is full of easy
generalizations; he believes that "Civilizations in the successive historical cycles in India are
foreign importations"

Chaudhury is always very conscious of the fact that his knowledge of English and England is
secondhand, yet he persists in describing things only in English metaphors. Chapter 1 begins:

Kishorganj, my birthplace, I have called a country town, but this description, I am afraid, will
call up wholly wrong associations. The place had nothing of the English country town about it,
if I am to judge by the illustrations I have seen and the descriptions I have read, these being my
only source of knowledge about England, since I have never been there, nor in fact anywhere
outside my own country.

This acceptance of England and things English as the norm for judging India is, no doubt, the
effect of colonization. That all writers of Chaudhuri’s generation need not accept England as
the standard is shown by the opening chapter of the novel Kanthapura in the description of
the village without reference to English Villages:
The Passage from Unknown Indian continues:
Kishorganj was only a normal specimen of its class one among a score of collections of tin-and-
mat huts or sheds, comprising courts, offices, schools, shops and residential dwellings, which
British administration had raised up in the green and brown spaces of East Bengal

One notices immediately that Chaudhuri's tone is quite detached - there is no sense of
closeness to his native village. The tone throughout tends to denigrate the village, it is one
"among a score", and he is dismissive of all the buildings, whether "residential dwellings" or
offices, schools or courts. From a height of five hundred feet, the buildings would have looked
like "a patch of white and brown mushrooms." The comparison with "mushrooms" has
pejorative (expressing disapproval) implications, with the suggestions of unplanned, untidy,
short-lived growth. There is no attempt to individualize the buildings: surely, the court would
not have been a hut or a shed, it would have had a permanent brick building.

Chaudhuri’s diction seems to be based on bureaucratic jargon, with endless reservation and
qualifications. Instead of saying that the small town would have looked like a patch of
mushrooms when seen from a height, or when seen from an aero plane, he writes, "Had there
been aeroplanes in our boyhood", as if he were giving evidence in a court of law. Metaphors
are always from the West; to express the importance of the river in their lifer, Chaudhuri
writes, "it was our Nile" (p.2). In referring to the boats which plied on the river, he does not
care to describe them in detail, instead he institutes comparisons which are meaningless to
the common reader, especially in India: the "country boats" have "the outlines and general
shape of the model boats found in the tombs of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt" (p.4). The
largest boats, used for passengers, "were our triremes".

He is at his best when he gives us concrete particulars, as in his description of the rainy season
(pp.5-8). Chaudhuri evokes this watery world through minute details -- their compound was so
flooded that they "could not walk from the hut which was our bed and living- room to the hut
which was our kitchen except on a line of bricks laid at intervals of about two feet or on a
gangway made of bamboos" (p.6). The reader can visualize the child in the inner courtyard,
fascinated by the "myriads of tiny watery marionettes" which were created by a heavy
downpour (p.7). The distinctive aspect of the heavy monsoon rain is revealed by the "pair of
pied mynas, dead and stiff. (p.7). Chaudhuri is capable of using short, simple, balanced
sentences:

Everything was wet to the marrow of the bone. Neither we nor our clothes were ever properly
dry. When we were not slushy, we were damp. The bark of the trees became so sodden that it
seemed we could tear it up in handfuls like moss.

Chaudhuri's style is usually prolix (verbal) -- he does not believe in using the minimum number
of words. He uses many connecting phrases to link different paragraphs. C.D. Narasimhaiah
labels his writing "inane", and declares: "Now like an Accountant's English, now like a District
Surveyor's report or a village chronicler's, now like that of an ossified (inflexible) academic,
seldom what one has associated with an imaginative writer"

The description of Durga Puja at Banagram (the next excerpt in your Reader), is one of the
better passages in Unknown Indian. It is rich in adjectives. The gory (covered in blood) scene of
the buffalo sacrificed before the goddess becomes more vivid in its horror because, of the
details he gives us: "My relatives fell on it, rubbing its neck with melted butter so as to make
the skin soft". The changing moods are well captured. This bloody sacrifice is followed by
chanting prayers to the Goddess.

One interesting feature Chaudhuri mentions about Durga Puja is that it is the occasion for
married daughters to visit their parental home. He is aware of the bond between mother and
daughter, and the loneliness of the mother after the girl is given away in marriage. To indicate
the mother's emotions, he cites a parallel from French literature: "She kept thinking of her girl
with an infatuation rivalling, if not surpassing, that of Madame de Sevigne for her cold and
shrewish daughter". The allusion reveals Chaudhuri's wide reading, but does very little to
describe this tender bond in a culture where it was not permissible for the mother to visit or
stay with her married daughter in her new home.

After the festivities end, the married daughters have to go back to their husbands' homes.
Chaudhuri has little sympathy for the ritual crying that goes on. This is how he describes it:

Not only the mother and the daughter, not only the other women and girls of the family, but
also all the visiting neighbors joined in a chorus of snuffling. The tradition was so well
established that the newly-married girl, whose only thought was to get back to her husband-
lover, and the matron, who felt ever so worried to have been away from her well-ordered
household, kept up the wiping of the eyes until they were at least five miles beyond the
parental village.

There is a welcome touch oi humor in Chaudhuri's humor of the women pretending to weep;
the young girl who wants to go back to her husband has to pretend to weep because it
prejudiced her reputation "if she remained dry-eyed on these occasions." The use of the word
"snuffling" indicates that Chaudhuri has no sympathy for these hypocritical women.

“The English Scene” is a chapter from the second book of Unknown Indian, “First Twelve
years”. He describes how he came to love the English Language and English Literature so
much, and has some perceptive comments on teaching. He tells us that he read his elder
brother's books, because they were taught English poetry and good stories, while students in
his batch were forced to repeat "The fox sat on the mat" on the theory that textbooks should
be Indianized. He is quite successful in conveying the enthusiasm that people in Bengal felt for
western civilization.
The fourth book, "Into the World" is in 'the same vein; it is a comment on Bengali society. We
have to turn to the second volume of his autobiography, Thy Hand, Great Anarch! to learn
about Chaudhuri's life after 1920.

Thy Hand, Great Anarch

"This book continues the story of my life and thoughts from the point of time at which it was
left in The Autobiography of an Unknown Indian, " writes Nirad C. Chaudhuri in the opening
sentence of Thy Hand. The earlier book gave an account of his childhood and student days till
1921. This one takes the account till 1952.

He says that he has made a conscious effort to "write the, book on the same lines and in the
same spirit as its predecessor." He is quite successful in this -- there is absolutely no difference
in style or tone between the two volumes. The same self-satisfied stance of wisdom, the
complete lack of modesty, can be found in the second book. In Unknown Indian he boasts
about his "capacity for experiencing the emotion of scholarship":
My appetite for information and explanation became as varied as my mental dentition became
versatile. I could pass from physics to Sanskrit literature or from novels to astronomy with an
agility which seemed like volatility to those who did not know me well.

In-Thy Hand, he talks about his wife, and how fortunate she is in having married such an
eminent person:

Even for my wife, I would say, it has been worthwhile, although I could, without unfairness, be
accused of showing no consideration for the inevitable trials I was going to inflict on a young
girl who had been brought up in affluence. But she is now the wife of Nirad Chaudhuri, instead
of being the nameless wife of a nameless official or professional, rotting in the low prosperity
of a suburban house near Calcutta.

Unknown Indian was very much concerned with the British empire and its civilizing mission in
India. This book, which records the decline and end of British rule in India, takes its title from
lines by Alexander Pope which describe the reign of chaos and disorder. The title page of the
book bears the complete quotation from Alexander. Pope's poem The Dunciad, Book 3:

Lo! thy dread Empire, Chaos! is restor'd;

Light dies before thy untreated word;
Thy hand, great hch! lets the curtain Ml;
 And universal Darkness buries All!

The epigraph is in keeping with the tone of the book. When Britain withdrew from India,
Chaudhuri felt an almost personal sense of loss.

VIKRAM SETH — FROM HEAVEN LAKE (1983)

Vikram Seth’s prose style
His Writing lacks depth
Vikram Seth as travel writer
 From Heaven Lake is based on his experience when he travelled to India over land,
through Sinkiang, Tibet and Nepal. This book also won the Thomas Cook Travel Book
Award, attracted a wider readership.

 Vikram Seth lived in China as a student at Nanjing University from 1980 to 1982. In the
summer of 1981, he returned home to Delhi via Tibet and Nepal. From Heaven Lake:
Travels through Sinkiang and Tibet is based on the journal he kept and the photographs
he took while he was on the road.
 The land route - for this was a hitch-hiking journey - from the oases of northwest China
to the Himalayas crosses four Chinese provinces: Xinjiang (Sinkiang) and Gansu in the
northwestern desert; then the basin and plateau of Qinghai; and finally, Tibet.

 The short book is divided into nineteen chapters, dealing with different stages of his
journey, starting with "Turfan" (Chapter 1) and "Heaven Lake" (Chapter 2) and ending
with "Kathmandu; Delhi" (Chapter 19).

 Seth provides a map of China, Nepal and a part of India, showing the route he took. The
book contains about twenty black and white photographs, of the various scenes he
describes -- Heaven Lake, the small town of Turfan and its people, a mosque at Lian,
Lhasa, the Bhotakoshi river in Nepal, yaks, a dust storm, trucks stranded on a flooded
plain.

 The second edition of the book, published in 1990, contains a foreword giving Seth's
reaction to the Tiananmen Square massacre of June 4, 1989, when the Chinese Amy
opened fire on hundreds of students who were demonstrating peacefully.

 He is filled with regret at China's increasing repression in Tibet. He makes it clear that
From Heaven Luke was not intended as a political commentary. I quote the opening
lines of the "Foreword to the 1990 Edition: 'This book is an account of what I saw,
 thought and felt as I travelled through Various parts of the People's republic of China as
a student. It is not Intended as a summary of the political or economic situation of that
country, although I did occasionally digress into such ruminations in the course of writing
the book. The book is basically a travelogue, describing his journey. Comments on the
people and the Chinese political system are incidental.

 Seth starts his account from Turfan, a small town in the province of Xinjiang which has a
common border with U.S.S.R. A three-week tour has been organized by Nanjing
University for its foreign students. Being part of an organized tour has advantages --the
authorities have taken care of transport, accommodation, guides etc. But he feels stifled
by the restrictions -- in group travel, they have to follow a strict time schedule "rushing
from sight to sight, savoring nothing"

 He decides to leave the group in Urumquai, their next step, even though he is aware of
the restrictions on travel in China -- a travel pass is needed for every place, and the
Chinese authorities do not want foreign students wandering away from a group.

 The second chapter, "Heaven lake” is memorable not for the wonderful description of
the lake: but for the old man from whom he buys a cap. The people of Xinjiang are an
ethnic minority, Muslim by religion, with their own language. Uighur, and it is only the
school going boy who understands Seth when he talks to them in Chinese.

 Seth wants to communicate with the old man who is selling caps, so he lets them know
that he is from India by writing the word "Hindustan" in Urdu (which has the same
Arabic scrip as Uighur). The old man is touched. He not only reduces the price of the cap
for the Indian, he even stitches it again to strengthen it.

 Seth found his way across central China by travelling in a variety of vehicles. The
excerpts in your Reader are from the middle of the book, Chapter 10 and Chapter 1 1
describing the coldest part of his journey mind the harsh weather conditions he had to
face when crossing into northern Tibet. August 14th, the eve of India's Independence
Day, finds him in a thoughtful mood, comparing India and China.

Seth’s Prose Style

 From Heaven Lake is written in a simple realistic mode. There is no attempt to follow
anything but a simple chronological narrative, and he does not combine narrative with
philosophical musings.

The qualities which distinguish his fiction -- vivid recreations of places and situations,
and character portrayal-- are revealed in this travelogue. Sui and Gyanseng, his
 companions in the truck, come across as very interesting people. Sui is Chinese, posted
in Tibet; the lonely life of a truck driver crossing some of the most inhospitable terrain in
the world is made tolerable by the friendships he has built up with people living in small
towns and villages on the way. Gyanseng is Tibetan, and keen to be in Lhasa as soon as
possible.

 Seth's talent for presenting memorable character sketches is not confined to prose;
some of the poems in All You Who Sleep Tonight are centered around specific
characters.

 Seth's experiences with bureaucracy in China could constitute a funny satire of

bureaucrats the world over; but he also shows how some officials have very human
feelings, and go out of their way to help him, a stranger in the land.

 The poet in Vikram Seth is revealed in passages of nature descriptions. He gives us

precise details, providing a sort of word painting of the scene. Consider his description
of the yaks, for instance:
... a herd of black, thick-haired yaks who emerge from behind a slight rise up ahead.
They stop about a hundred meters up the road and graze calmly. lowing and snorting
now and then. They are huge beasts, and have a solemnity becoming to animals their
size; not so the little yaks, however. who run around, alarmingly playful and ebullient.
Some of them stand in the middle of the road. When a truck passes every ten minutes or
so, they stare at it in shock until it is almost upon them, then pick up their heels in panic
and scamper off into the plain.
Yaks look like Pekinese dogs of willow trees in the way that their hair sprouts downward
off them. For all their largeness and solemnity, they are friendly beasts. I would like to
see them at close range sometime.

 Seth uses short sentences, and common words, unlike Nirad C. Chaudhuri who always
looks for Latinate adjectives. Seth uses no foreign words or quotations, and an educated
reader does not need a dictionary when riding him. This does not mean that Seth’s
vocabulary is limited; if the context demands it, he uses difficult words in order to write
concisely.

 Factual details we mentioned: "black, thick-haired”, "hundred meters", "tall green hills".
After a straightforward description (the yaks are grazing calmly, lowing and snorting),
Seth goes on to his impressions about them. He feels that the adult yaks move in a slow,
serious manner which suits their big size. But the young ones are different. He describes
the childish behavior of the young yaks, who stare at the trucks till the last moment, and
then tun away in confusion.
 The important thing is that Seth always uses words which perfectly fit the meaning.
Consider the word "scamper" in the above passage, which correctly describes the way
the young yaks scramble to safety. Seth uses comparisons from ordinary life, not art or
history. Many people would be familiar with Pekinese dogs, at reed with long, drooping
hair which is very popular as a pet. Willow trees are very common in England or
America. It is a tree which grows well in cool climates, so Indian who have visited hill
stations would have seen this tree which has drooping leaves, hanging downwards.

 As the Truck crosses the 4000-meter-high Tangula range, Seth suffers from high altitude
sickness (many people, including mountaineers on the Himalayas, suffer from headache,
nausea and other distressing symptoms because of the cold and the thin air which
provides less oxygen). He is conscious of the natural beauty of the place, but can not
appreciate it because he is suffering from headache and fever. He tells us how the
beautiful scene has become like a horrible dream:
 Our route takes us straight into the low sun. The atrocious glare merges with my
atrocious headache to give this beautiful landscape the quality of a scene in nightmare.
What’s more, I cannot tell if the nightmare is in color or in black-and-white. The antics of
the light cause grass and water to turn suddenly from green and blue to black and silver.
Round a corner the sun strikes directly again, and the scene is again green and blue. As
with the Kunlur Pass the higher we go, the flatter, more indefinite, more marsh like the
terrain becomes. Then the sun sinks and everything is permanently black and silver.

 Seth manages to convey both the beauty of the scene, as well as the fierceness of his
headache. The changing light makes the colors appear different: in direct sunlight. the
land with grass growing on it looks green, and the rivers blue. But in shade, and I after
sunset, they look black and silver respectively.

 Seth occasionally introduces short poems to break the monotony of the prose. These
poems, like much of his poetry, are written in regular meter and rhyme. The short poem
at the end of Chapter 9 sums up the difficult situation of the three travelers. and
concludes by laying stress on their common humanity, their common love of home. All
of them are suffering from the high altitude and cold: "I have my headache. a sore arm .
. . Sui now has his smoker's cough compounded by a running eye. Gyanseng has neck-
and toothache . . ." Each of them - the Tibetan Gyanseng. the Indian author and Sui who
is a Han (the majority community in China) all dream of home:
And sleeping drag the same
Sparse air into our lungs,
And dreaming each of home
Sleeptalk in different tongues.

 Seth's expository prose is equally effective. He uses short sentences, without imagery or
adjectives, to present facts: One overwhelming fact is that the Chinese have a better
 system of social care and of distribution than we do. Their aged do not starve. Their
children are basically healthy. By and large, the people are well clothed, very
occasionally in rags.

 The comparison between India and China, their success and failure, which follows this
passage is thought provoking. Seth has no hesitation about using long sentences. to
explain his ideas better: I am often asked (and I fear that a new spate of such questions
will be forthcoming from the moment I arrive in Delhi) about the relative success of our
two large overpopulated countries in satisfying the most basic needs of their people.
What is sometimes forgotten when making this comparison is that, except for the
greater mineral wealth of China (a result of its far greater land area), all the aprion'
advantages lie on India's side. India's needs are fewer, and its agricultural production
possibilities are greater.

 The book ends with him reaching Kathmandu, and taking an Aeroplan to Delhi: he
actually walks down to the border between Tibet and Nepal, and crosses on foot He is
one of the few travelers to have made the journey from China to India over the
Himalayas. His travelogue is a straightforward account of his experiences of travel, and
his impressions of the Chinese people he met on the way. There is no attempt to
explore history or philosophy.

AMITAV GHOSH — DANCING IN CAMBODIA, AT

LARGE IN BURMA (1998)
Focus on: Amitav Ghosh as Travel Writer
Dancing in Cambodia, at Large in Burma (1998) is based on three articles which had appeared
in Granta (1993), The Observer Magazine (1994) and The New Yorker (1996).

The first chapter, “Dancing in Cambodia” is based on his visit to Cambodia in 1993. Ghosh
makes skillful use of counterpoint to evoke the admirable resilience of a society ravaged by the
Pol Pot years. (Pol pot was Cambodia’s political leader from 1975 to 1979)

Descriptions of the present destitution are juxtaposed with an account of the visit of
Cambodian dancers to France in 1906. People. past and present, come to life vividly, ranging
from King Sisowath who visited France in 1906 to the young Bangladeshi sergeant working
with the UNTAC to rebuild modem Cambodia.

The Second Chapter, “Stories in Stone”, describes his experience in Angkor Wat, and the
dedication of the workers to restore the monument. The Life story of Kong Sarith, a forty-year-
old worker totally devoted to Angkor Wat reads like a well written short story.
"At Large in Burma" is dominated Amitav Ghosh by Aung §an Suu Kyi, who represents the very
spirit of hope, but Ghosh also describes a Karenni guerrilla camp on Burma's eastern border,
and sympathetically presents the point of view of the tribal minorities, who want to maintain
their autonomy.

Ghosh is completely self-effacing, he hardly appears in the book. Dancing in Cambodia outdoes
Ghosh's novels in the felicity of the language; it is a moving account of the undying courage
and the common humanity linking people of different countries.

The Khmer Rouge, lead by Pol Pot, took control of Phnom Penh, the capital of Cambodia. on
April 17, 1975. Then followed years of terror, when the upper and middle classes and
everyone of Vietnamese origin was butchered.

Society was broken up; intellectuals were sent into the countryside to work in the fields,
where those who did not die of overwork or starvation were killed by Pol Pot's soldiers. These
killing years 1975 to 1978 were followed by years of turmoil.

Ghosh visited Cambodia in 1993, when a semblance of peace was being restored with the help
of the United Nations, and elections were held under the auspices of the United Nations
Transitional Authority in Cambodia ('UNTAC).

One of the first things Pol Pot did was to kill artists, and any cultural and aesthetic expression
was banned. Dance, which had been encouraged by the royal family, was prohibited.

The first part of Ghosh's book juxtaposes King Sisowath's state visit to France in 1906 with
other journey’s -- that of young Saloth Sar, who travelled to France to study and was inducted
into the communist party. who disappeared into the jungles in 1963 to emerge as Pol Pot, the
dictator of Cambodia, and Ghosh's own journey to Cambodia, and his travels there in search of
Pol Pot's ancestral village.

The revival of dance in war ravaged Cambodia is symbolic of their will to put their life together
again. Many talented artists had been killed; others slowly emerged from hiding. Large
quantities of musical instruments, costumes and masks had been destroyed. Instead of silk,
they had to make their costumes from cheap cotton fabric. The city was full of debris, there
was a shortage of food, but still the people came pouring in to watch the first show in 1988,
pad "wept through the entire length of the performance. It was a kind of rebirth: a moment
when the grief of survival became indistinguishable from the joy of living,"

The huge multi-storeyed temples at Angkor Wat and the nearby ancient capital of Angkor
Thom are world famous. They represent a global heritage, and there is an international
campaign to reclaim them from the tropical jungle which has grown over these stone
structures. In 1867, the first photographic album of Angkor was published in Edinburg,
featuring sixteen photographs taken by the British explorer J. Thompson, and in 1873 the first
comprehensive study of Khmer art was published; Voyage d’exploration en Indochine by
Francis Garnier, Ever since these magnificent monuments have captured the imagination of
the world, and repeated attempts have been made to conserve them. These efforts received a
severe setback during the Pol pot years (1975-1979). But now the restoration work is in full
swing, with the help of the united nations.

“Stories in Stones” examines the significance of Angkor Wat, and how this medieval
monument has become a symbol of modernity for the people of Cambodia. It also shows the
importance of stories in human culture.

The main temple at Angkor Wat symbolizes Mount Meru. King Suryavarman II (who reigned in
the first half of the twelfth century) started its construction in 1119.

Suryavarman himself was a worshipper of Vishnu, but he supported Buddhism and the
worship of Shiva -- another temple in the metropolis has a shivalinga as the central idol. After
his death, Cambodia was defeated by the king of Champa in a surprise attack from the sea in 1
177. But its fortunes were revived by King Jayavarman VII, who came to the throne in 1181. He
defeated Champa, and organized measures to revive the economy.

He was an indefatigable builder. Ambitious irrigation dams and several new towns were built
all over the country. The biggest was the royal capital of Angkor Thom, not far from Angkor
Wat. Jayavarman made Buddhism the state religion, and so Angkor Thom is dominated by
statues of the Buddha. The friezes there depict day-to-day life, and tell stories of military
conquests and economic activity, unlike the Hindu Angkor Wat, which Jayavarman continued
to foster.

The monuments contain many inscriptions about the building activities of the rulers, giving us
a clear idea of the social and economic systems of the time. The walls of the temples are
covered with bas reliefs featuring stories from the Mahabharata and other Puranas; Angkor
Wat presents Hindu mythology through sculpture.

"Stories in Stone" has a blend of narrative, descriptive and expository prose. Ghosh's account
deals with basic concepts like the importance of storytelling in keeping a culture alive, but it
also operates at the level of a simple travelogue, vividly showing us the places, he has visited.

He begins with a description of the monument: "The device is a vast one -- it is said to be the
largest single religious edifice in the world-- . . ." He takes care to present facts: "The cast is the
entire pantheon of gods, deities, sages and prophets with which that cosmos is peopled."
Ghosh never tells us how impressed he was, how awesome he found the temple, how it was a
unique experience etc. He lets the monument speak for itself, through his descriptions and the
effect it has on the Cambodians. A unique characteristic of Ghosh's travelogue is that he never
talks about himself -- the focus is always on the place, its history and people.

The people he meets are described in such a way that we can visualize them. Kong Sarith "was
a thin, slight man, in his early forties, with a wispy (thin and weak), incongruously villainous-
looking moustache. He spoke fluent English, in a rapid, gravelly voice that sometimes broke
into a hacking laugh. His hands were never without a cigarette . . ."

Without any overt comment, Ghosh shows how culture is not determined by geography or
religious affiliations; the Hindu mythological stories of Angkor Wat have become part of the
cultural life of a country where hardly anyone follows Hinduism. Ghosh lets us draw our own
conclusions about the spirit of tolerance; for centuries, there had been a Buddhist monastery
within Angkor, and it had to be shifted under pressure from French archeollogists who were
restoring Angkor Wat.

For people round the globe, Angkor Wat is a symbol of a lost civilization swallowed up by the
jungle, and nineteenth century explorers like Mouhot are given the credit for discovering it.
But it had never been lost for the people of Cambodia; Buddhist monks continued to live in the
pagodas in the complex even after the Angkorian period, and it was well known to the
Buddhist Sangha and to the nobility of Cambodia and Thailand.

Ghosh helps us appreciate the importance of Angkor Wat in the life of the people by
describing how it appears on flags, uniforms, banks and brands of beer: the national airlines.
Kampuchea Airlines "even succeeded in transforming this most earthbound of structures into a
symbol of flight, by lending it a pair of wings." This image of a lost glory is used by the
Cambodian people as a symbol of modernity.

Another paradox is that Angkor Wat, a temple, never figures in anything to do with religion.
The Buddhist Wats found all over the country bear no reference to Angkor Wat, these shrines
ornamented with carved woodwork are very different from the massive stone structures of
Angkor.

Ghosh effectively uses narrative prose to convey ideas that less gifted writers would express
through expository prose. The story told by Kong Sarith is a terrible exposure of the terrors of
the Pol Pot years; his tale is as effective as the photographs of mountains of human skulls. He
saves his life by making up a story that he is poor and illiterate, not a student at the university
of Phnom Penh. He invents a new identity for himself as a waiter in a roadside eating place.
The well-practiced story saves his life. for intellectuals were killed without further enquiry. He
is released from this labor camp in the north-west of the country only with the approach of
the Vietnamese army. He started walking towards Phnom Penh; on the way, a young woman
in their group reveals that she is an archeologist, and takes them to Angkor Wat. They listen
spellbound as she tells them the stories carved on the panels.
Ghosh's prose in rich in detail: the pagoda(Asian temple pointy wala) is "an untidy, thatch-
roofed strticture", "the scrubbed tile floor of the shrine", the pilgrims "had come in share-taxis
and others had bicycled all the way from the town of Siem Reap, several miles away", they
"boiled their rice in empty milk-tins, over open fires." The similes he uses are quite original:
the elderly Buddhist monk is "a tall, aquiline man whose saffron robes hung upon his skeletal
limbs like sheets on a wire fence."

We are left to draw the conclusion for ourselves: storytelling is a strategy for survival.
Inventing a new identity by making up a credible story saved the lives of Kong Sarith and the
woman archeologist in the labor camp; now listening to old stories carved ‘in stone provides a
way for them to get back to normal human life.

The two travelogues of Seth and Ghosh have significant differences, though both vividly
recreate the countries the writers have passed through, Seth’s prose is simpler, and can be
read at the literal level. We get a clear picture of the author himself, his emotions and
experiences in the new places he travels to. He does concern himself with larger issues, such
as the difference in the growth rates of China and India, and the progress the two countries
have made. But these ideas are expressed separately, not blended into the narrative.

Ghosh has a gift for playing with ideas, and his English prose style has unrivalled beauty. In his
hands, the general and the ab-t turn into concrete realities. Dancing in Cambodia, at Large in
Burma does not recognize any dividing lines between travel, history, cultural anthropology,
and political analysis. The blend is used to provoke thought con the meaning of freedom, and
why human society involves so much violence. We are told very little of Ghosh’s own emotions
and experiences. The enthusiasm with which he greets people with a link to India, such as the
soldier from Bangladesh (in the first chapter) or the Burmese Mom fighter of Indian origin
(Chapter 3), reveals his emotion and attachment to his motherland, but there Is never any
direct expression of his feelings.

Seth always has both feet on the ground, he hardly ever strays into metaphysical speculation.
From Heaven Lake is a very gad conventional travelogue. Ghosh's book can be read and
enjoyed at the primary level of a journey through modern Cambodia or Burma but it is more
than that, it is a travel through history, culture and philosophy.