Bhupinder 176

CHAPTER FIVE

Towards the Future: India: A Million Mutinies Now

The present chapter attempts to study the conduct of the politicians and parties and use of

different instruments for attaining political power as portrayed in V.S Naipaul‘sIndia: A

Million Mutinies Now (1990). In this travelogue, Naipaul depicts how the politicians resort to

the use of illegal, undemocratic and unethical means to grab power. The cultural and religious

diversity of India poses a problem as it becomes immensely difficult to get consensus or

majority vote. People belonging to different castes, religions and regions and speaking

different languages are hardly able to have consensus regarding the governance of the nation.

The divide between the majority and minority communities may be attributed to the kind of

politics exercised by the main political players in India. The issues of caste, region,

subalterns and minorities form the basis of political organizations. These organizations aim at

fighting against the injustices meted out to them by the powerful political groups or the

leaders. Following the legacy of the colonizers, the rulers of post-colonial India continue with

same political practices of divide and rule. Yet India, as Naipaul discovered during his visit

in 1988, (the earlier visit being in 1975), had changed, even if ―it was not good and stable

country it had once been‖ (Naipaul, India: A Million... 4). The chapter examines the

continuous evolution of the Indian ethos and the emergence of ―group sense and political

consciousness‖ (4) that Naipaul discovered during his visit to India and which he narrates in

this travelogue.

Naipaul, as one of the eminent travel-writers and novelists in English frequently

expresses political opinions about the third world countries which are quite controversial.

His work depicts the weaknesses and shortcomings of the erstwhile colonized societies, so

much so that he seems to be expressing the colonialist‘s viewpoint.

Bhupinder 177

India: A Million Mutinies focuses on the legacy of colonialism and its aftermath.

Naipaul points out that the Indian political leaders and parties follow the legacy of the British

colonizers in negative terms. Corruption, criminalization and nepotism have become the

characteristic features of the Indian politics. In contrast to the past, when the leaders got the

opportunity to taste power by dint of their popularity among the masses, the leaders of the

day had attained power through manipulative practices. This has led to further dampening of

the democratic machinery. Caste and religion have become key features in the dynamics of

Indian politics. The political parties focus more on the dominant communities even if it

means the loss of support of the minorities. The corrupt Indian politicians provide political

protection to their henchmen just as the ex-colonizers retorted to the use of shrewd political

tactics to maintain their domination.

India: A Million Mutinies is a travelogue that describes the political and social

conditions of contemporary India. Contrary to his earlier books, An Area of Darkness (1964)

and India: A Wounded Civilization (1977) in which Naipaul‘s tone about India is rude, in this

he displays empathy. Naipaul aptly notes the numerous changes in the political and the social

system ever since his first visit to India. He is of the view that the Indians have become much

more vibrant and knowledgeable. The awareness level of the masses has heightened and is

indicative of the development of the nation. Naipaul notices ―a kind of intellectual life now

that didn‘t exist in 1960‘s‖ (Bhatia). The text is an important commentary on the Indian

politics, history and society. Naipaul‘s presentation of India in ravages, in disappointing

examples and depressive specificities during colonial rule arouses sympathy. He is deeply

moved by the social and economic condition of the people. Nevertheless, he appreciates the

tremendous economic growth India has achieved despite all odds. As Bruce King points out,

Naipaul sees ―signs of vitality and renewal...many people are prosperous and others can hope

to improve their conditions.‖ (King 150) Naipaul believes that the conflicts based on class,

Bhupinder 178

caste and gender are indications of a resurgent India. Naipaul also focuses on the

modernization process which currently underscores India. He notes that agriculture and

industry has made tremendous progress which has resulted in an overall development of

India. This can be attributed to the progressive politics of the Indian rulers. The green

revolution was one of the projects which certainly helped in the economic growth. There is a

considerable rise in the standard of living of Indians and they have become self-sufficient.

Naipaul is of the view that the freedom movement which liberated the Indians from

the clutches of colonizers led to their liberation in the true sense. They have become much

more confident. Naipaul sees the disturbances or mutinies in the post-independence era in

India as signs of positivity. Different groups of people indulge in various activities for

liberation from the present established political system.The significance of the term ―million

mutinies‖ may be seen as the fight of the people of India against the established political and

social order. The Indians feel that complete makeover of the nation is possible through

revolution. Naipaul sees mutinies as the commencement of consciousness among the Indian

individuals. The political and social scenario of different regions of India such as Bengal,

Punjab, Kashmir or South India is almost the same. The fragmented Indian society results in

a million mutinies. But Naipaul is optimistic as competition among different groups/

individuals leads to their working hard in order to maintain supremacy. This results in overall

development of the nation. Though Naipaul is hopeful about the future of the country, he

does not ignore the darker aspects of the Indian society.

Naipaul‘s visits to India reveal his obsession with the land of his forefathers who had

moved to the west for greener pastures. As compared to his previous visit, Naipaul during his

visit in 1988 encountered a changed Indian political scenario. This was the decade when

India witnessed the rise of regional parties. The regional parties aimed at promoting the

interests of the states. Naipaul argues that the differences on basis of caste class, gender,

Bhupinder 179

religion and region have led to a fragmentation of Indian society. The politics of leaders is

responsible for the infighting of Indians on various issues such as region, religion, caste or

language. National issues get neglected often at the expense of the local ones. The people are

more concerned about their own well-being rather than that of the nation. The dominant

Hindu nation seeks to homogenise the diversity of languages, cultures and religions. Contrary

to it, the men who are at the helm of political affairs attempt to give western touch to the

Indian society. The promotion of the language and culture of the colonizers by the so- called

nationalists is surprising.

The book comprises of nine chapters in which narratorlets the characters engage in

lengthy conversations. Thus Naipaul gives ample space to the voice of the people. The

characters narrate their life stories and family histories. Naipaul‘s voice only helps to

organize the narratives. In the book, he thus attempts to establish a close link with the country

of his origin and with the people from different walks of life. Through this narrative

technique, Naipaul presents a realistic portrayal of India. Papu, Ghate, Anwar, Patil,

Namdeo, Malika, Prakash, Subramanium, Pearveen, Dipanjan, Arati, Debu, Periyar,

Veermani etc. are the various characters presented. Through them Naipaul gives voice to

various castes, religions and regions of the country. Naipaul‘s description of the characters

and their family backgrounds makes it clear that there has been a remarkable development in

the lives of the present generation. This in turn reflects the progress of the nation. Rise in

education, awareness and economic levels has certainly transformed the lives of the

individuals.

In the first chapter titled ‗Bombay Theatre‘ Naipaul expresses his opinions as

formulated through his interactions with people from different fields. The description of

Indian politics, religion and social conditions is based on the portrayal of lives of eleven

people and their family backgrounds. Naipaul begins the book by listing his impressions of

Bhupinder 180

India. He describes the socio- economic conditions of the people of Bombay. As he comes

out of Bombay airport, he is struck by the vast crowds, the heavy traffic, the shiny bright

signboards and film posters, the English- language advertisements and newspaper hoardings

on a day which he subsequently discovered, was the birthday of Dr. Ambedkar, the great

leader of the people once known as untouchables, the Harijans. Ambedkar appears to Naipaul

to be more popular among the untouchables than even Gandhi as the true representative of

the Dalits. Naipaul notes how Ambedkar has become a motivating source for the Dalits to

work for the welfare of their community. The remembrance of Ambedkar depicts Dalits‘

assertion of identity and community‘s strength. In contrast to the past when Dalits lacked

confidence in their abilities and felt inferior, in the present day world, they exhibit buoyancy

and command respect.

Ambedakar, the leader of the Dalits holds a prominent position in the political

scenario of India. He drafted the Indian constitution. His political prominence is clear from

the fact that he became the law minister in the first democratically elected government after

Independence. His rise as a national leader may be attributed to his popularity among the

Dalits who form a large section of the Indian populace. Malika, the wife of Namedeo the

Dalit leader says that Dalits are sentimental about Ambedakar just as the Christians are

towards Christ, ―They would slaughter their wife. Anything for Ambedkar...‖ (108) They

consider Ambedakar as their Messiah. So the Dalits celebrate the anniversary of Ambedakar

to honour him and to claim their rightful place in the political and social set-up of the nation.

Naipaul thus projects the changing images of India, the conflict among the Indian masses on

the basis of caste, religion and region, in short ―the million mutinies‖ going on in the country.

Various critics have given their viewpoints about Naipaul‘s work India: A Million

Mutinies Now. Namrata Mahanta Rathore in the book entitled V.S Naipaul. The Indian

Trilogy writes that Naipaul ―sees a million mutinies breaking out in the margins: mutinies of

Bhupinder 181

castes, of class, and of gender‖ (Mahanta,70). Mahanta is of the opinion that Naipaul displays

a double- vision as a writer who writes as an insider as well as an outsider:

India: A Million Mutinies Now is a book in which Naipaul

has been able to create a pattern out of his double vision.

The book strikes a wonderful balance between the

interiority of Naipaul‘s experience and the external

experiences that he encounters and observes. (Mahanta, 72)

As a foreigner Naipaul gives his viewpoints about Indian political and social system. His

visits to India and interactions with people from different walks of life make him portray the

real picture of Indian life. Shanthi Sivaraman rightly points out that Indians tend to sing

glories of nation and refuse to acknowledge the shortcomings and contradictions in the Indian

culture. Naipaul‘s observations as an outsider come as a rude shock as Sivaraman succinctly

notes;

India: A Million Mutinies Now is virtually an account of

the Indian response to its own history. Sometimes the

individuals encountered retract with the sense of guilt,

sometimes it is an attempt to atone and rectify and at

times it is accompanied by the sense of fulfillment and

satisfaction. (Sivaraman, 137)

Naipaul‘s views are thus more comprehensive as he depicts the shortcomings in the political

system indicating that all is not well in the land of his forefathers. Naipaul however derives

satisfaction from the fact that India is moving ahead towards development.

Joseph Lelyveld also in his review praises Naipaul for a positive portrayal of India in the

book. He terms Naipaul‘s work as the ―most notable commitment of intelligence that post-

colonial India has evoked.‖ Lelyveld aptly remarks that Naipaul ―is indispensable for anyone

who wants seriously to come to grips with the experience of India‖ (Lelyveld). In Lillian

Feder‘s considered opinion, V.S. Naipaul ―has been acclaimed for his penetration into the

lasting impairment of postcolonial societies, especially the deprivations of individuals who

inherited a history of exploitation, and he has been excoriated as reactionary loyal to

Bhupinder 182

imperialist values‖ (Feder, 1). Critical appraisal thus of Naipaul‘s text has largely been

positive and congratulatory.

Indian society being diverse, having people belonging to different religions, regions

and castes, speaking different languages, the clash of ideas is but natural. The infighting

among the different sections is the consequences of the above-mentioned factors. The people

of India generally have an emotional orientation and lack political maturity. As such the

issues which can be easily resolved through dialogue take a serious turn. Even the petty

quarrels sometimes lead to violent fights among the members belonging to different

communities. As a European, Naipaul sees India in a more distant and logical manner. In

India, seventy percent of the people live in rural belt and have chosen agriculture as a

profession for their livelihood. The people of the villages are attached to their respective

faiths. The belief in religion is one of important causes for the emergence of religious outfits

such as the Shiv Sena.

Naipaul through the text highlights the sectarian political role that religion plays in dividing

the communities. The talk of secularism by the leaders proves to be futile as the infighting

among the various communities continues unabated. The politics of the Indian leaders is

essentially responsible for the great divide of Indian society in the name of ethnicity, religion,

region and language. The issues of caste, region, minorities, and subalterns, remain the

burning political issues. The political organizations attempt to achieve the maximum political

mileage from these issues. The organizations/ parties or the pressure groups project

themselves to be the protectors of the rights of the masses. The British as shrewd politicians

used force as well as consent to maintain their authority while describing their rule as a

civilizing mission aimed at all round development of the nation. It became their political

obligation to provide the basic facilities to the Indians. Even the postcolonial Indian rulers

talk about boosting the social and economic status of their subjects. As a postcolonial author,

Bhupinder 183

Naipaul shows that the influence of colonial rule continues to have its impact on the political

and social system even after independence. Domination of the British during the colonial rule

made the Indians work as slaves. After independence the Indians are yet to develop their

independent thought and political acumen. That‘s why there have been numerous upheavals

within the country. Naipaul describes the influence of the colonial rule witnessed after

independence:

What was true of Bombay was true of other parts of India

as well: of the state of Andhra, of Tamil Nadu, Assam, the

Punjab. All over India scores of particularities that had

been frozen by foreign rule, or by poverty or lack of

opportunity or abjectness, had begun to flow again. (6)

The local conflicts and clashes thus according to Naipaul, have been more or less regional

parties‘ political creation. As Champa Rao Mohan in the book titled Postcolonial Situation

in the Novels of V.S Naipaul aptly sums up, the political independence ―has changed nothing

and the imperialist states continue to retain their hold on the former colonies through newer,

more camouflaged methods of neo-colonialism‖ (Mohan, 9). Naipaul in the text repeatedly

returns to this theme through the portrayal of various characters.

Naipaul also highlights the difference between the pre-independence and post-

independence leaders. In the pre-independence period, ‗Gandhism‘ stood for service and

sacrifice, while in the post-independence period, it had become a tool for attaining power.

The political leaders tend to forfeit the true values for personal materialistic gains. They are

not concerned about poverty and unemployment which have increased manifold ever since

the nation got liberated from the colonial rule. Naipaul describes that before independence,

the political workers who participated in the freedom struggle had immense respect for

Gandhi. They wore home-spun as a symbol of sacrifice, service and their oneness with the

poor and the downtrodden. Naipaul discovers that the politician of the day wore homespun

for political power. The politics of the Indian leaders thus has become self-centered, and they

Bhupinder 184

hardly bother about the issues concerning the common masses. Poverty is a serious issue, but

for them it is just a political slogan. The leaders hardly do anything to eradicate poverty.

Rather they use the issue to garner the support of the downtrodden whom they forget soon

after attaining power. Naipaul does not believe that Five Year Plans and involvement of

people in the government formation following the democratic process has in any way helped

to eradicate poverty. With the advent of modernization and subsequent industrialization, the

people have become more commercial and have forgotten the old traditions and culture.

They are materialistic and honour only money. Investment in developmental projects after

independence has led only to corruption and criminalization of politics. Nothing is certain

now. The role of a policeman, thief and politician has become identical. Naipaul describes the

significant shift that has taken place:

And with money - the money of which the crowded, ugly

skyscraper towers of Bombay spoke - many long-buried

particularities had been released. These disruptive, lesser

loyalties of - region, caste, and clan - now played on the

surface of Indian life. (4)

No longer using political protest for achieving freedom, the prevalent dynamics of politics

thus has corruption and personal agenda at its centre. The modern day rulers are engaged in

corrupt practices for self- promotion. Corruption and politics has become inseparable in India

and the interests of the masses takes a back seat. Leaders have ceased to be a symbol of

sacrifice, dedication and honesty. It may be concluded that in contemporary Indian society,

politics has become merely a tool to mint money rather than means of promoting the welfare

of the masses. Pankaj Mishra aptly opines that the career of politician can be judged by the

wealth he has amassed through the game of politics. He suggests that ―politics is now little

more than an investment opportunity, an idea uncynically accepted in public discourse where

a politician‘s career is assessed with respect to the wealth he has amassed…‖ (Mishra, 63)

Bhupinder 185

Naipaul thus highlights the changing dynamics of politics in India. The period of

Emergency in 1975, comes into special focus for impacting Indian politics for years to come.

Indira Gandhi claimed to have declared emergency to eradicate poverty, crime and

corruption. But it led to criminalization of politics and corruption in everyday life. After

1975, many mafia dons gave up smuggling and took up real estate business which intensified

corruption. They encouraged people, for instance, to vacate the land. The corruption became

so deep- rooted in the Indian system that subsequent strict measures taken to eradicate it have

failed to bring about the desired results. So much so that in India, politics and corruption have

become synonymous with each other. It is rather disgusting to see the denigration of the

politicians who resort to all sorts of illegal practices.

Naipaul records the opinion of numerous people including newspaper columnists

about the criminalization of the Indian society being on the rise. The common people feel

themselves to be at the mercy of the leaders who used gangsters ―to get their work done or to

speed things up: to deter political defections, to encourage political donations; to enforce

payment of a debt, to compel adherence to an unwritten black-money contract‖ (69). The

politicians as well as the business people use the dons to serve their own political or business

interests. Such unholy practices obviously are a threat to the democratic processes. As a

result, the faith of the masses in the democracy is diminishing. The rigging of elections,

threatening of the influential people to side with politicians has become a common practice.

Political leaders attain political power, not by dint of their popularity but through

manipulations and resorting to illegal ways, using money and muscle power thus dampening

the democratic machinery. Sunil Khilnani highlights how the politicians commit illegalities to

attain power:

The compulsion to win power publicly and legitimately has

provoked unpicturesque illegalities, old and innovative –

Bhupinder 186

violence, corruption, and ‗booth-capturing‘. (Khilnani, The

Idea..., 158)

The lust for power thus has made the men engaged in politics indulge in illegalities of all

sorts. The politicians used gangsters for their ulterior motives. In a conversation with

Naipaul, Ajit (with whom he came in contact at Bombay) describes how the Dons had

―recently broken new ground: they had done a kidnapping for a political party‖ (71). The

politicians thus had come to employ all means in order to stay in power.

Naipaul further reveals the changing dynamics of Indian system when he points out the role

police has come to play in India. Police is hand in glove with the dons who have political

protection. As Naipaul noted, dons had become a political necessity for the politicians.

Majority community had bureaucratic and administrative apparatus at its beck and call.

There existed a nexus between the police, dons and the politicians; indicating a dangerous

trend in India. Naipaul describes how at Bombay airport a few young men were involved in

acts of extorting money from the passengers. Though there were policemen deployed at the

doorway yet, ―they seemed not to be offering protection to people outside, even when they

were almost at the door; and the young men understanding this, ran two or three at a time to

people just arriving…‖ (136) With no one to ensure the rule of law, the common people

without any patronage had to bear the brunt of corrupt practices.

The partisan and discriminatory practices of the police and political bosses had further

deepened the gulf between the majority and the minority communities. The political leaders

use parties and organizations as tools for their personal gains. Politics had become a ground

for exchange of benefits. There were many organizations who worked as pressure groups

seemingly for their respective communities and groups, but in reality, for their personal gains.

The Dalit Panthers supported the Emergency and in turn the government rewarded them by

withdrawing cases against them. Naipaul points out how the political system in India

Bhupinder 187

encouraged politics of convenience and expediencies rather than the politics of principles.

The political movements failed when their leaders opted for short term or personal gains. The

interests of the people they claimed to fight for, were neglected. The Dalits raised their voice

against all sorts of discriminations on the basis of caste. The Dalit movement however failed

because the leaders turned materialistic and had vested interests in running the movement.

The betrayal of the people by the self-centred and mean leaders told about the sorry state of

affairs of many political outfits which had mushroomed ever since India got independence.

In the pre independence era also, the British masters employed similar strategies and

wooed certain minority communities to project their own benevolent image. Naipaul gives an

example of the Mahars, one of the scheduled castes who enjoyed exceptional privileges under

the British, including the right to own land, due mainly to the colonial policy of wooing the

minorities. The British rulers also allotted territories to Princes or Maharajas of smaller states

who as a result became their political allies. Manmohan Singh in his article entitled

―Marxian view of the British Raj in Anand‖ forwards the Marxian view that held that the

―British rule in India, though motivated by a colonial quest for raw material and markets, laid

unintentionally the foundation of India‘s modernization and its ultimate emancipation‖

(Singh, 96). The rise of dalit groups in post independence India thus needs to be viewed as

linked with Indian progress and development.

Naipaul in the text emphasises that the assertion of identity by the marginalized

people reflects growth and progression of these people. Naipaul refers to Namdeo Dhasal, a

poet and a political organizer who successfully made his community a force to reckon with.

He had formed an oranization named the Dalit Panthers to protect the interests of the Dalits.

As Naipaul portrays, Namdeo devoted his poetry to the Dalit cause and to fight against

Bhupinder 188

oppression of all types. Naipaul quotes from one of Namdeo‘s poems ―The Road to the

Shrine‖ that depicts the miserable condition of Dalits.

I was born when the sun became weak

And slowly became extinct

In the embrace of night.

I was born on the footpath

In a rag. (96)

Namdeo was the founder of the organization, but soon it was taken over by his followers and

Namdeo ceased to be its leader. Naipaul thus reveals how politics had come to prevail upon

all groups and organizations, even those which had come into being to protect their minority

rights. The political aspirations of the followers of the leader led to a clash of interests and

subsequent loss of political support as the supporters turned political rivals:

Panthers, the Dalit movement, with its success, began to

fragment. That pitch of passion couldn‘t be sustained;

there was the temptation to many to make their peace

with the wider society. And though Namdeo became

famous and courted, he began to lose his followers. (97)

Naipaul thus emphasises the difficulty and isolation that an idealistic leader would face under

the contemporary system. Not only would he have to fight the aggressor but also face

resistance from the peers and followers.

Naipaul also notes how political affinities have a negative effect on family life

as well as social relations. The dalits developed a kind of hatred for the communists

who insisted on mainly a politics of class. Ambedakar, the leader of the Dalits, was

against the communists who insisted on the political class-system alone. Since dalits had

much reverence for their leader so much so that ―Every Dalit has Dr. Ambedakar‘s

picture in his house‖ (106), the community also developed an aversion to communism.

Namdeo was a Dalit leader while his wife Malika was the daughter of a communist.

This added to opposition to Namdeo. Malika describes to Naipaul: ―His marriage to me

Bhupinder 189

added to his troubles. I was the daughter of a well-known communist, and the Dalits

don‘t like communists‖ (106). Naipaul thus brings out the effects of political leanings on

personal life and relationships. Malika also expressed her resentment against her husband by

writing a book entitled I Want to Destroy Myself in which she claimed how she had been a

victim of oppression by her husband. As a political leader Namdeo would talk about the

rights of women, in his family life however, he was projected as a male chauvinist. The book

brought about Namdeo‘s political downfall.

Naipaul further points out how the politically weak groups join hands against the

politically powerful forces, not due to commonality of ideology, but rather merely as a

carefully thought out scheme aimed at immediate gains. The weaker political forces are

forced to enter into political alliance with other like-minded forces in order to compete with

the powerful political forces. As a consequence of exclusion and oppression, the Dalits and

Muslims in Maharashtra got together. They joined hands against the dominant Hindu outfit,

the Shiv Sena. The treatment of Dalits as inferiors and Muslims as minority in Maharashtra

brought them on one platform. Naipaul threadbare examines the factors responsible for this

alliance.

Both those sections, the Dalits and the Muslims, are

alienated. And someone thought it would be a good idea

to bring them together. (25)

The elements of convenience and immediate personal benefit thus are inherent to the

dynamics of politics.

Through his interactions with a variety of persons, Naipaul attempts to get an

insight into inherent caste/ religion based conflict in Maharashtra. It is to Naipaul‘s

credit that even though he is an outsider, he is able to unravel the immensely complex

undercurrents existing in the society. There are clashes between the Shiv Sena and

Bhupinder 190

Muslims. Caste and Religion thus are the major elements in the dynamics of politics in

India. The use of religion and caste in politics leads to some serious implications such as

riots and incidents of violence which results in a loss of public life and proper ty. The

politicians play with the emotions of the people. Religion and caste serve as tools to

provoke people to violence. Indians have a strong belief in their religion and also

maintain ties on the basis of caste. This gives them a sense of belonging and identity, yet

this invariably results in clashes between the communities. In the book, Anwar represents

the Muslims, while Nikhil is the leader of the Shiv Sena, a Hindu outfit. Different

communities have their own ways of asserting their identity. For instance, Anwar‘s father‘s

beard represents Muslim identity.Anwar believes that teachings of Islam can transform the

world. He lives in the area marred by crime and violence. He attributes the indulgence of

Muslim youth in criminal activities to lack of knowledge, awareness and exposure. Naipaul

describes that thepolitical and religious conflicts give rise to violent movements. Hindu-

Muslim clashes create hatred among communities to the extent that children fight over the

outcome of cricket matches between India and Pakistan. Anwar in a conversation with

Naipaul describes the clashes between the Hindu and the Muslim communities thus:

…clashes between children which turn into blood feuds with

adults, and I feel helpless to do anything about it. Fights take

place between neighbours all the time. When they are

Hindus and Muslims - Hindus are in a minority here - it

turns into a communal riot. It gets very bad during cricket

matches. (32)

Naipaul‘s description highlights how religion and caste instead of acting as unifying factors

have become major threat to the Indian social fabric and culture. Next, Naipaul also

demonstrates how regionalism as a tendency has emerged as the next important feature in

Indian politics. A nation which just a few decades back had witnessed the abdication of

regional Maharajas to emerge as one united country sadly was now dividing herself into

Bhupinder 191

various states. The regional issues create divisions in the Indian political set up as the clash

of interests of different regions poses serious problems. Inter- state disputes may be seen as a

consequence of regionalism and India as a nation stands shattered and divided. Naipaul

describes the effects of regionalism on the Indian politics whereby people take positions not

as Indians but as ‗Maharashtrians‘, etc. This regionalism could be attributed to the

discriminatory policies of the central government. Some states get more facilities from the

national resources as compared to others. As a result the people of states deprived of national

resources were more inclined to be influenced by the slogans of the regional parties. Naipaul

rightly points out that the politics of regionalism poses a serious threat to national unity. But

in this regard, it may be said that the central government is equally responsible for this rising

trend. Naipaul opines that Indians continue to believe in individual caste/religion based

identity rather than a unified secular Indian selfhood. Here Naipaul and Rushdie seem to be in

agreement as Rushdie also had succintly observed in Imaginary Homelands:

Now it can be argued forcefully that the idea of secularism

in India has never been much more than a slogan; that the

very fact of religious block voting proves this to be so; that

the divisions between the communities have by no means

been subsumed in a common ‗Indian‘ or national identity;

and that it is strange to speak of nationalism when the main

impetus in present-day India comes from regionalist, even

separatist political groups. (Rushdie, Imaginary, 385)

The talk of secularism by political leaders/parties thus is mere political talk which is not

really put into practice.

Some political parties in India derive their political strength from religion. Naipaul describes

that religion- based politics of Shiv Sena creates ripples in the state of Maharashtra. Sunil

Khilnani believes that the politics of Shiv Sena was aimed at raising local and regional issues.

He says that the Sena had succeeded in its ―ability to develop a quotidian local politics with

the local goals‖ (Khilnani, The Idea... 141). Naipaul examines how the Sena named after a

Bhupinder 192

famous Hindu warrior, Shivaji, had caught the attention of the people even as the media

termed it as fascist:

The movement was known as the Shiv Sena, the Army of

Shiva, taking its name from Shivaji, the 17th

-century

warrior-leader of the Maratha people. The Newspapers had

been critical; they called the Sena ‗fascist‘. (5)

The naming of political parties/organizations after the names of community heroes shows the

influence of religion on Indian politics. The rising trend of using religion in Indian politics is

dangerous for the unity and integrity of the country. The policy of leaders to use religion for

their short- term goals creates permanent boundaries between the members of different

communities.

Shiv Sena had become politically powerful because it appealed to the Hindu sentiment, so

much so that even the police needed their help. They seemed to run a sort of parallel

government to the elected one. It becomes evident from Naipaul‘s description of the police

inspector who had come ―that Sunday morning to ask for the Sena‘s help with the local

―‗Eve-teasing‘ problem‖ (17). Donations taken by the Sena men from the Muslims showed

their political domination and control over the society. Scared of the Hindu majority, the

Muslims felt being under constant threat. As such they chose to pay in order to avoid a clash.

Through a portrayal of the Shiv Sena‘s brand of politics, Naipaul heightens the change has

that emerged in Indian politics. The revered Gandhi believed in non -violence, but Shiv Sena

did not agree with Gandhian philosophy. In an interview with V.S. Naipaul, Patil, the Shiv

Sena leader says:

I have contempt for Gandhi. He believed in turning the

other cheek. I believe if someone slaps you, you must

have the power to ask him why he slapped you, or you

must slap him back. I hate the idea of non-violence. (24)

Bhupinder 193

This statement aptly highlights the changed scenario where an Indian leader unashamedly

airs his biased violent views. What makes it more alarming is the realization that it was soon

becoming a majority view point. The policy of non-violence propagated and practiced by the

nationalist leaders like Gandhi, was thought to have become redundant in the postcolonial

India. The political outfits like the Shiv Sena openly propagated use of violence as a means

to assert political identity. In an attempt to make the organization more powerful, the Shiv

Sena came up with a new ideological card and claimed to be the true representative of the

Hindus rather than Maharashtra‘s people alone. Naipaul describes the shift of stance in the

Sena‘s politics which aims to cover the entire nation.

The Sena, as it had become more powerful, was trying

to be less regional. It was appealing now to more

general Hindu sentiment... (63)

Naipaul seems to be fascinated with the functioning of the Sena and its emergence as a

prominent political group in India. He is quick to spot how politics in India has become,

more or less a family affair. The members of the same family occupied the prominent

political positions. The Shiv Sena formed in 1966 was entirely under the control of one

family just as the Congress had been. On the occasion of formation of Shiv Sena there were

eighteen persons present. Out of these, four were from Bal Thakeray‘s family. Naipaul points

out that it ―was Bal Thakeray‘s father who gave the name Shiv Sena‖ (44). In this respect it

may be said that the national as well as regional parties in India are controlled and operated

by kith and kin of political bigwigs. National interests are sacrificed for family hegemony.

The crucial issues are discarded when it comes to safeguarding the political interests of a

family.

Politics thus in India comes to be centred around personal relations and links. Political

organization becomes easier, if large sections of people of the same community reside in one

particular area. People sharing the same culture, tradition, language and religious beliefs and

Bhupinder 194

ideologies can easily be politically organized as there is a lesser chance of clash of interests,

beliefs and tastes. Community life of Chawl made the organization of Sena easier. Naipaul

enquires from Mr. Ghate, the Shiv Sena leader ―whether the communal life of the chawl lane

and of other packed areas made political organization easier‖ (66). Mr. Ghate replies that

―The chawl is like a bigger family. The area is an even bigger family‖ (66). Next to family,

the locality thus acts as another unifying factor in the political practice.

Naipaul introduces Papu, the stockbroker as a God fearing man. Unlike his father, he

is educated and recognizes the fact that he lacks the killer instinct. He moves to business

areas strategically more suitable to make more profit. Economic issues are embedded within

the political and social affinities. Papu highlights the importance of economic issues thus:

―‗All our problems are economic, we wouldn‘t have a problem if we didn‘t have an economic

problem‘‖ (53). The people‘s economic problems lead to political struggle for their survival.

The emergences of pressure groups, organizations and unions in India have to be seen in the

economic context.

Naipaul rightly points out that modern day politics has become a game of massive

investment. In modern society, idealism has taken the back seat and it has become difficult

for a commoner to rise in politics. Politics is a costly affair as it needs enormous investment

to attain the seat of political power. The middle class lacks resources and opportunities to rise

in life. So the political aspirations of the one who belongs to the middle class gets suppressed.

The man worried about his wherewithals cannot think about the issues of social and political

concern. Naipaul gives the description of Mr. Patil‘s father who worked as a worker in one

factory. He was bogged down by family obligations and as such he had no time to think about

political activity of any sort. He is totally unaware of the activities of Shiv Sena. Though

Patil‘s father did not possess sufficient finances yet he brought up his son (Patil) well. It was

Bhupinder 195

because of the sense of security that Patil developed while working for the issues of social

concern. Soon he became a successful leader of the Sena.

The secretary‘s tale is the story of Rajan, a middle class boy. His grandfather worked

as a petty officer in the courts while his father worked as a stenographer. His father lost

everything in the riots of Calcutta in 1946. Rajan was taken care of by his step-sister. He

became a typist and later on after working with number of companies he became a secretary

in one Bombay based company. In spite of the fact that he was brilliant and had an inventive

mind, he could find work only as a secretary. The political environment thus did not offer

many opportunities for the common folk to grow and progress on their own.

The chapter titled ‗Breaking Out‘ is about the development and growth of individuals

in new India. The characters Devia (science reporter), Dr. Srinivasnan (Chairman Atomic

Energy Commission) rise to high status but they remain linked with their religious traditions.

Subramanium is a scientist who belongs to Brahmin family. His father knew the importance

of English language. He provided English education to his son though he himself could not

get it. Subramanium talks about the importance of English medium schools. He describes his

own education from such schools:

I went to an English-medium school. But it was a very

Indian school. It was run by people who were orthodox

Hindus, but convinced that we had to learn English, science

and technology. (160)

The promotion of English language by Indians by running English schools after

independence was a clear indicator of the western influence. It may be said that in the

present day of migration and globalisation, knowledge of English has become a vital skill to

possess. While numerous scholars and thinkers have argued, notably among them, Ngugi Wa

Thiongo, about how the assimilation of English has resulted in repression of the native or

Bhupinder 196

indigenous languages, people however have continued to value knowledge of English as

supreme.

The political domination by the colonizer for a long period has led to the notion that

the colonizers were superior people. The dress and working style of the Indians can be seen

as an imitation of the colonizers. Even Dr Ambedakar, as also many other prominent Indians

wore European- style jacket and tie. Not just dress, even religion of the Colonizer evoked

much interest among the Indians. Naipaul shows that Nikhil, who belongs to the Hindu

family, talks about his belief in the Jesus Christ. He believes that with his ―devotion to the

image of Infant Jesus‖ (140), his numerous legal problems would disappear. Naipaul

describes the colonial effect on the Indians in the following words:

They had created in India something not of India, a

simplicity, something where the Indian past had been

abolished. And after 450 years all they had left behind this

emptiness and simplicity was their religion, their

language…the image of infant Jesus. (142)

The colonial forces thus continue to dominate culture, identity, traditions and religious

beliefs.

Homi K. Bhabha in his ―Signs Taken for Wonders‖ aptly unravels the ways Christian

missionaries adopted to introduce the Bible to the Indian population disguised as a gift from

―An angel from heaven ...at Hurdwar fair‖ (Ashcroft, 38). Translated into their language and

gifted at the holy city of Hardwar, the book attracted the ‗ignorant and simple‘ people with its

message of God. They were ready to accept it because it was the message of an alien religion

expressed in their local discourse. During the colonial rule, the British thus propagated

Christianity, disguised and intermingled with the mythology and cultural signs of the

colonized local people. The discovery of the English book thus established, as Bhabha

succinctly points out, ―...both a measure of mimesis and a mode of civil authority and order‖

Bhupinder 197

(Ashcroft, 40). Not only was the colonizer a coveted figure to be emulated, the spread of

English language also helped in disciplining and regulating the colonized.

Macaulay introduced English education in the year 1935 which became instrumental

in subsequent attaining of complete control over the country. It would have been difficult to

rule the Indians having multiple languages and cultures different from the colonizer‘s. Under

Macaulay‘s system of education, there emerged ―a class of persons, Indian in blood and

color, but English in taste, in opinion, in morals and in intellect‖ (Macaulay, 375). The

propagation of English at the cost of local languages was to attack the very basis of Indian

culture since, as Ngugi Wa Thiongo aptly observes, ―Language carries culture and culture

carries, particularly through orature and literature, the entire body of values by which we

come to perceive ourselves and our place in the world‖ (Thiongo, 267). The imposition of

English language on a willing nation thus was a political masterstroke dismantling the very

fabric of India.

Naipaul in the text, through his mouthpiece Subramanium points out the wrong notion that

Indians held with regard to the permanence of Indian culture in spite of western influences.

The Indians became weak because of centuries of subjection of them by colonial rule. The

Indians had a wrong notion that culture could endure despite the diverse system of

governance. Subramanium in a conversation with Naipaul states,

The country was run on principles that assumed that kings

would change, that wars would be fought, but that society

would go on, pretty much undisturbed by those events.

(159)

This however proved to be a wrongly held belief as Indians even after independence have

continued to aspire to be ‗like the British‘, the colonial rulers.

Bhupinder 198

Naipaul shows the political necessity of the rulers to seem to work for the welfare of the

people. The Lords and Maharajas who are the rulers are wealthy people. They work for

social and development causes, as such perform their duty towards society. Thus they remain

acceptable to the masses as their benevolent masters. Naipaul makes a special reference to the

Nizam of Hyderabad and the Mysore royal family.

The royal family of Mysore had been known not only for

their great wealth, second only to fabulous but idle wealth

of the Nizam of Hyderabad, but also for their responsibility

as rulers, their pride in their state and their people. They

had been known as builders of colleges and hospitals and

irrigation systems, plantation of roadside trees and big

public gardens. (150)

The rulers carried on with the development projects and thus won the support of masses. The

British also followed similar policy, as such they too had the image of being well wishers of

the common people.

Taking cue from Marx‘s letters on India, Manmohan Singh observes that the English ―did not

only lay down the foundation of industrial development, but they also acted as a powerful

civilizing force that eventually paved the way for India‘s emancipation‖ (Singh, 101). The

colonizer thus could hide behind the benevolent image hoodwinking the colonized into

believing that a great favour was being done to them. Such false beliefs led to the Indian

people going into a slumber and not realizing that what should have come to them as their

right was being projected as a great favour.

Naipaul believes that the inherent complacency and apathy of the Indian public is mainly

responsible for the breakdown of Indian culture. As Subramanium opines, ――As long as the

local environment is same, I don‘t care who is running things at the top‖‖ (162). The Indians

do not have a voice of their own. That Indians considered themselves inferior and incapable

Bhupinder 199

of governing becomes evident from Subramanium‘s airing of his grandfather‘s belief in the

continuation of political domination of the west:

And even if the British lost the war, the Germans would be

there. So he saw the future as still dominated by the west

for a considerable time. (159)

Lack of confidence in their ability to counter political powers has become inherent in the

Indian character. The image of the colonizer may have become a coveted model, yet it could

not strike at the basic caste based structure of Indian society.

Next Naipaul narrates the story of Prakash, belonging to an agricultural family of

Bellary, a lawyer by training and a Minister in government of Karnataka. Naipaul finds him

to be a politician with a difference as he believes in simplicity. His popularity and

accessibility to the common people has led to his rise in the political circles. Naipaul does not

find much crowd outside Prakash‘s home. This is contrary to the prevalent practice whereby

popularity of a leader can be judged by the strength of gathering at his house. Naipaul writes,

As in old Rome, so in modern Bangalore: the more

important the man, the greater the crowd at his door. (181)

Still Naipaul finds sufficient signs of Prakash‘s prominence as a political leader visible at his

residence.

Naipaul enquires about the corrupt practices prevalent in India and Prakash agrees

that corrupt practices are an inseparable part of Indian political system. The corrupt officers

get a clean chit as no evidence is found against them due to technical faults. Naipaul

highlights how the corruption gets rooted in the system from the lower to the higher level.

One suspended accountant who is from the constituency represented by Prakash visits him

for his recommendation for reinstatement. The charge against him is of misappropriation of

Rupees 5000 from the collection of the land revenue. Parkash observes that ―‗If there‘s been

that technical flaw, he will get his reinstatement, and his back wages‘‖ (183). This indicates

Bhupinder 200

how the corrupt officials are let off on the pretext of technical faults or lack of evidence. It

becomes a political necessity for leaders to help the corrupt officials as they belong to their

constituencies.

Through Prakash, Naipaul also talks about the political funding, which has become

common practice in the Indian politics. The bureaucrats, industrialists and businessmen who

want undue favours from the politicians give funds to the leaders of the political parties

contending for power. Politicians have an urge to mint money as well as keep their image

clean. Acceptance of gifts is a decent way of corruption. The funds taken at the time of

elections is considered fair practice. Parkash also highlights the negative trend of selection of

candidates to various departments on political recommendations. Even the members of

selection committees try every method to recruit their kith and kin. Parkash describes the

faulty system: ―At an appointments board someone will jump and say, ―I‘ am sorry, I can‘t

interview the next candidate. He‘s my brother-in-law. You must excuse me.‖ Perfectly nice

and correct, but it is also an indication to the selection panel that the candidate in question is

man‘s brother-in-law‘‖ (184). The charges of nepotism become the talk of the day. The

opposition charges the men in power of misusing their position to recruit relatives in

government departments but, same is the case when the opposition assumes power. It is

rather painful that idealism has taken a back seat, and politicians openly indulge in

manipulations.

Power has its comforts. Those in power enjoy the perks, and when one is out of

power, he is deprived of all such comforts. Parkash, the politician has the experience of

remaining in and out of power. As Minister, Parkash enjoyed all the facilities including a

bungalow, an official car, servants and a P.A. But with the loss of power, he was a lost man

without the aura and the prestige. Democracy has made it possible for individuals to assume

multiple roles. As a lawyer, Parkash had to address the Deputy Commissioner as ―Your

Bhupinder 201

Honor,‖ As soon as he attained the seat of power as minister, he started directing the D.C. as

his subordinate. Parkash talks about the jealousies and hatred, of his own men. It may be

said that, in politics, there are neither permanent friends nor foes, and people utilize relations

and affiliations for their ulterior motives. The people look with contempt at those in the seat

of power. He describes how because of his rise in politics, he aroused jealousy among his

fellows, ―… apart from the ruthless system, where my own colleagues are pulling down my

legs when I am climbing up fast‖ (190). In politics, there are no principles but only temporary

alliances. Naipaul observes that, ―In the politics of alignment and realignment there were no

principles or programmes. There were only enemies or allies: Penguin politics‖ (192).

There are a number of factors such as caste, religion, language and region which play

a key role in determining the political stature of a person. The politics of regionalism or rise

of regional parties in India is the consequence of these factors. Parkash talks about the

principles which are necessary for attaining political power:

A man looking for office or a political career would have to

be of a suitable caste. That meant belonging to the dominant

caste of the area. He would also, of course, have to be

someone who could get the support of his caste; that meant

he would have to be of some standing in the community, well

connected and well known. And since it seldom happened

that votes of a single caste could win a man an election, a

candidate needed a political party; he needed that to get the

votes of the other castes. So the whole parliamentary

business of political parties and elections made sense in

India. (187)

From the above it is clear that a number of factors come into play for the politician to climb

the steps to power. Surinder S. Jodhka in another context points out how caste affiliations

tend to decide the leadership issue and the programmes of political parties. Jodhka rightly

observes that the democratic process is extremely different ―from the visions of those who

laid the foundations and framed the constitution of Indian republic‖ (Jodhka, 154).In

independent India, communities and castes act as pressure groups. These pressure groups

Bhupinder 202

influence the governance agenda of ruling party at all levels starting from the local to the

national level. Naipaul in the text echoes these facts through various characters who act as his

mouthpiece.

In the chapter ‗Little Wars,‘ Naipaul focuses upon the tussle between the landlords

and the labourers, Brahmins and non-Brahmins. To attain power, the political parties raise

issues such as oppression and suppression of the masses. The parties, which raise such issues,

become the symbol of liberation. Suppression and oppression of the political opponents in

the postcolonial countries is an issue of serious concern. The establishment of a democratic

government is unable to free the system from bias and discrimination. The Zamindars exploit

the labourers by not giving minimum wages. Then Maoists create awareness among the

labourers and encourage them to fight for their right. This results into a fight between

landlords who are powerful and labourers who are socially and politically weak. Naipaul is

critical of Zamindari -system that exploits labour:

The zamindars employed women for three rupees a day and

men for five rupees a day. The minimum wage at that time

was five rupees for women and nine for men. The aim of

Maoists was to create enmity between workers and the

landlords. (275)

The economic disparity thus becomes the cause of social unrest.

Naipaul describes his meeting with Chindana Dass Gupta, an employee of the

Imperial Tobacco Company. Chindana was ―one of the select and envied group of Indians

known as ―‗boxwallahas‘‖ (283). The boxwallahas ―represented in their own eyes a synthesis

of Indian and European culture‖ (283). In their way of life they acted just like the British but

they were actually supposed to further the interests of the Empire. Due to their loyalty they

got facilities like company cars and apartments. Chindana describes to Naipaul how the

British rule ―separated a handful of Indians from the rest and made them into an integral part

Bhupinder 203

of system of governance‖ (291). The motive of the colonizers was to identify them ―with

British interests than with Indian interests‖ (291). Rakesh Sinha in the book Secular India

Politics of Minoritism airs his views on the British policy of ‗Divide and Rule‘. He says that

the main aim of the colonizers was ―to locate ‗identities‘ within the country, strengthen them

and to encourage unhealthy and bitter competition between them, in order to divide them‖

(Sinha, 1). Naipaul‘s narrative exemplifies the above through the story of Chindana.

Naipaul aptly notes that the class and caste distinctions continue to divide society

during the post- independence period. Even people engaged in the noble profession of

teaching show biased attitude towards the people of the lower class. Mr. Gopalkrishnan, the

proprietor of Emerald Publishers talks about the biased attitude of certain teachers. He

describes this to Naipaul: ―They thought that non-Brahmins shouldn‘t study, and the words

they oft repeated were; ‗Go and Graze the cattle‘‖ (226). Indian society thus continues to be

divided into haves and have nots.

Naipaul examines the role of the D.M.K, a political party based in Kerala and its

brand of politics on the issue of caste. Non-Brahmins being in the majority in Kerala, the

Periyar movement was anti Brahmin and anti Hindu. Naipaul describes the anti-Brahmin

stance of Periyar: ―And what Periyar offered, with his ‗rationalism‘ and his rejection of God,

was his rejection of the brahmins‖ (217). Naipaul relates how Mr Karunanidhi, the D.M.K.

Chief Minister introduced a law that permitted non-Brahmins to become priests. There was a

sharp reaction from the Brahmins who took the matter to the Supreme Court. The Supreme

Court struck down the law on the grounds ―that Hindu law as it is today required priests to be

brahmins‖ (234). The political interference and manipulation of religious affairs thus

continues to be embedded within the dynamics of politics in India.

Bhupinder 204

The anti Brahmins movement of Periyar had its impact on the social set up. Hatred developed

against the Brahmins, even among school going children. Naipaul portrays the sufferings of

Kakusthan, a poor Brahmin boy. Periyar‘s ―anti-brahmin ideas had gone right down to the

children of Madras, and Kakushthan had been so tormented at school and in the streets that

he had broken faith with his past‖ (244). Naipaul thus records how communal politics affects

the psyche of even the school going children.

The acts of breaking of idol, rubbing religious marks from the forehead and erasing

the word ‗Brahmin‘ from the restaurant were intended to intimidate and marginalize the

Brahmins. This encouragement of majority against the minority (Brahmins) was the game of

power politics of D.M.K. It may be said that the politics based on caste by the political

players and the political parties is a dangerous trend. It surely has a negative impact on the

overall progress of the country as Jawahar Lal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of independent

India also wrote about it in his book The Discovery of India: ―In the context of society of to-

day, the caste system and much that goes with it are wholly incompatible, reactionary,

restrictive and barriers to progress‖ (Nehru, 257). Sadly the caste-based practice refuses to

die down.

Naipaul is of the view that instead of bringing transformation, the successive political

leaders chose to toe the party line and follow same ideologies and practices of their

predecessors in running the affairs of the political party. Veermani, Periyer‘s protégée

continued to propagate the policies of his mentor. This anti Brahmin stance thus remained

and the formation of Kerala state was the result of anti - Brahminik stance of Periyar

movement. The political parties thus raise the issues of misrule and oppression to capture

power, but the oppression and suppression continues even after their party comes to power.

The D.M.K party won the elections in 1967. The party had made the issue of oppression of

Bhupinder 205

the lower castes an election issue. However the situation was no different when D.M.K

assumed power. Naipaul refers to the tragic incident that happened in 1969. In one of the

most brutal attacks on the schedule castes, ―40 harijans were burnt in a hut‖ (226). The

practice thus continued, the protectors on assuming power themselves became oppressors.

With the regional interest of parties like D.M.K coming to focus, the national interests

and concerns take the back seat. The regional parties concentrate on issues related to their

own states in the election campaigns. They allege that the central governments from time to

time have overlooked the interests and concerns with regard to political autonomy, language

and cultural identity of the people of their state. The D.M.K party advocated more autonomy

to the states as opposed to the national policy. Mr. Palani describes to Naipaul how the

D.M.K which was known for secessionist movement had ―become a party looking for

regional autonomy‖ (232). The resistance offered or mutinies at regional level in different

states depicts how that the people living in different regions of the nation have become aware

of their rights and pose a challenge to the powerful controlling center. Naipaul sees it as a

positive sign for the development of the country.

It may be said that in independent India, the central government has been powerful

enough to make things work according to its own policies in states. Paratha Chatterji while

examining the question about how much of the structure of the Indian state after

independence was inherited from late colonial times, notes, that the Indian constitution

provides a parliamentary form of government in which the executive is responsible to the

parliament. With the federal constitution, the state governments are directly responsible to the

state assemblies, ―but with a distribution of powers between the union and the states that was

heavily inclined towards the union. As a federal system, the Indian state was more centralized

than most federations elsewhere‖ (Chatterji, 3). Chatterji thus concludes that the basic

Bhupinder 206

apparatus of government administration in independent India was same as inherited from the

colonial period. Naipaul through his narratives examines the consequences of the system in

various states. The D.M. K. Government in spite of their raising of regional issues had to

make a compromise with the central government in order to remain in power and get

concessions for the state. Palani describes:

The DMK government was very good at the beginning. But

power corrupts, and the Brahmins are intelligent people.

They have their own means of diluting the devotion of these

people to social reforms. They promise things from the

center in Delhi - in return of which they want concessions

locally. (235)

Under the prevalent Indian political system, power rests with the government at the center.

Hence it becomes imperative for state governments to seek economic or political aid from the

central government. The politics of compromise by the regional parties/ state governments

with powerful central government may be seen in this context. Naipaul however also

acknowledges the good work done by the D.M.K. for the people of Kerala.

In the struggle between the centre and the states, the role of media assumes special

importance. Naipaul points out the importance of media in politics. Naipaul refers to the

significant role played by Bal Thakeray‘s magazine Marmik in highlighting the issues which

Shiv Sena wanted to raise for the people of Maharashtra. Print media played a decisive role

for political organizations as it could mould the public opinion in their favor. The elections in

Madras also showed how the political parties used posters, advertisements to popularise the

political personalities. Alongside, the film media also was utilized to mould public opinion in

one‘s favor. The domination of film stars as political leaders in D.M.K. politics could be

taken as an apt example. All leaders were expected to be good orators too.

Naipaul describes his visit to Madras at the time when the Tamil Nadu state went for

elections in 1967 and the D.M.K emerged victorious. Naipaul observes ―Only 33 or 34

Bhupinder 207

percent of the voters had voted for the victorious D.M.K. party; but the red – and - black flags

of the party so multiplied in the city, it began to seem that nearly everyone had voted for the

D.M.K‖ (216). Naipaul thus makes fun of the common tendency of the people to project

themselves with the winning side. This also indicates that the Indian masses believe that their

stature is enhanced if they have connections with the men currently in power. Naipaul also

describes the great celebration on the D.M.K party‘s win in elections which takes place in a

hotel. He terms the celebration as ―colonial style celebration,‖ (209), as he writes, ―... the

atmosphere in the Woodlands Hotel on the day of my arrival was like the atmosphere in the

colonial territory after the election of the party that was going to rule after independence‖

(209). Naipaul thus juxtaposes the twin strains in the emerging political and social milieu

where the opulence of the past exists with the present democratic process. Edward Said

correctly points out in another context: ―In our time, direct colonialism has largely ended;

imperialism as we shall see, lingers where it has always been, in a kind of general cultural

sphere as well as in specific, political ideological, economic, and social practices‖ (Said, 8).

In the chapter ―After the Battle‖, Naipaul shows how the effects of the colonial

powers have remained with Indians after independence. The political domination of the

British has changed the life-style of Indians. They spend a huge amount of money to

construct modern houses in an attempt to show their power and superiority in society. It

seems that the Indians believe that a traditional house depicts simplicity which they link with

poverty. Knowledge of English, the colonial language, helped Debu to rise in the party it was

considered an asset. Indians consider their own language and culture to be inferior because of

country‘s subjection to long foreign rule. Naipaul explains, ―Debu found that being a foreign-

returned person and an English speaker was helping him up even in the communist party

(Marxist)‖ (335). Oratory skills matter a lot to attain prominence in the political arena.

Mazumbadar, the Naxalite leader is described as a man dressed in simple dress but he

Bhupinder 208

exhibited clarity in his speech. Debu describes to Naipaul thus: ―He had enormous energy,

his movements were swift. And, by God, he could inspire. He never ever raised his voice,

but could speak with great emphasis‖ (338).

Debu was perturbed over the sufferings of Indian masses due to poverty. He tells to

Naipaul that while he worked with firm Calcutta boxwallah, he read ―a book about President

Kennedy.‖ After a discussion with his accountants, he decided to work for the people who

lived in slums. Debu‘s idea was that ―India had to be country one could be proud of‖ (334).

After serving for three or four years with the firm, Debu went to U.S on ―a one year business

fellowship‖ (334). He delivered business lectures over there but he had unpleasant

experience. At the end of his lecture there were questions from the audience as ――How come

you‘re starving and begging for food, if you‘re so great?‖‖ (334) This made Debu decide to

join the radical communists after his return to India. When Debu joined the movement, India

was facing severe food crisis. Debu describes how the Indian government was supplying

maize through ration shops to the poor. The maize distributed was sent by America as

charity. This was used to feed the pigs in America. Debu felt ashamed and anguished as he

thought that it ―wasn‘t the poor who were eating it. It was Indians and Bengalis‖ (335). He

was so moved by the plight of the poor people that he decided to work for the welfare of the

masses, especially the villagers. He started living in the villages and as a Marxist worker and

tried to put an end to the black marketing of rice by stopping the flow of rice from out of the

villages. He along with others also worked for the prevention of the ―eviction of the

sharecroppers‖ (335). By working for the cause of the peasants Debu became a popular figure

in the party. Debu for Naipaul is the face of new India, concerned about the people and

committed to work for common people of the country.

Bhupinder 209

Naipaul gets knowledge about the Naxalite movement from Dipanjan. Dipanjan and

his wife Arati both worked as college lecturers. Both came from highly educated families.

During their college life as students they had actively worked for the Naxalite movement

started by the peasants against the landlords. At the end of the movement, Dipanjan

described the movement as the one that failed to bring the desired results. The movement

had turned violent as leaders like Charu Mazumdar advocated individual killings. Naipaul

points out the serious differences that erupted among the leadership over the issue of use of

violence. Debu, the activist is shocked by the idea of using violent means to achieve the

political targets. According to him all the ―gurus of Marxism had warned against terrorism‖

(339). Naipaul describes the violent Naxalite movement which ended with the killing of the

Naxalites in fake encounters. The constitutional machinery had failed and college dropouts

had joined the Naxalite movement without knowing about the aims of the movement. It was a

directionless movement which resulted in loss of intellect. The Naxalites quoted from

Rabindra Nath and Vivekanand to mobilize support in their favor even as they followed a

violent path. The movement however created awareness among people about their rights.

Ironically at a later stage, the Naxalites started destroying the statues of social visionaries

such as Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Vivekanand, the very persons they used to quote. The

Naxalite organization thus proved to be full of fickle minded and disgruntled youth. However

leaders like Debu, who put service before politics, indicated positive development in the

dynamics of politics.

The chapter entitled ―The end of the Line‖ focuses on the contentious issue related to

conflict between Hindus and Muslims in India. Naipaul begins with a mention of Satyajit

Ray‘s film ―The Chess Players.‖ The film set in the 19th

century India is a satire on the Indian

Muslim rulers who continued to play chess and pass time in other such petty affairs even as

the British went about the task of annexation of Oude. This annexation became one of the

Bhupinder 210

factors leading to Indian mutiny of 1957. Naipaul however believes that the incident

continues to haunt the present day Muslims as a reminder of their historic humiliation at the

hands of the British. Naipaul in this chapter attempts to understand the issues that have kept

the conflict between Muslims and Hindus simmering even so many years after independence.

Through various narrators, Naipaul shows how the Muslims feel alienated. The religious

identity of the minority Muslim community felt threatened in the nation. Naipaul relates what

he learnt from Rashid, whom, he had met at Lucknow. A Shia Muslim, Rashid and his father

ran a successful business of photography. Rashid‘s father wanted to move to Pakistan after

the partition. After his father‘s death, Rashid first went to England and then to Pakistan.

Rashid expresses how he feels alien in the country of his birth. The political divisions have

created a sense of homelessness among the Muslims in India as well as Pakistan. Namrata

Mahanta Rathore rightly points out,

Naipaul notes the violence caused to the Muslim psyche

as a result of the partition of India. The Muslims, so far

rooted in India were doubly displaced. In India, they

strove to get away to a place that promised to reinstate

their pride and position as rulers. In Pakistan they could

not be integrated into the mainstream and were

marginalized as mohajirs. (Mahanta, 87)

This then was the tragedy of Indian Muslims. In both India and Pakistan they felt as if they

were the outsiders.

Naipaul brings out the alienation and sufferings of the Muslim community through the

narrative of Rashid. Naipaul concludes that it is more because of their minority status that

they feel alienated; ―In a purely Muslim country people might have been less tense about the

faith, and nerves might have been less raw‖ (361). Now however slights experienced at

personal level also become an indicator of their community‘s subordinate status. So there are

many such incidents related where threats have been received from the majority community.

One such threat came when one petitioner from Bangalore filed a petition in the court seeking

Bhupinder 211

ban on Koran. The woman Judge admitted the petition which led to subsequent riots. Rashid

describes how another Judge rejected the petition and ruled that the ―Koran like the Bible,

was a basic document‘, and couldn‘t be the subject of that kind of legal petition‖ (361).

Another threat to Muslim community, as Rashid narrates to Naipaul, is due to the contentious

issue of Ayodhya. The incident of the Mosque demolition at Ayodhya has become a crucial

cause of conflict between the Hindus and the Muslim. It has remained a serious issue that

created ripples in society leading to Hindu-Muslim infightings. Rashid explains how there

was a tussle between the two communities over the issue of possession of the site. The

Hindus considered it as their sacred place-the birth place of Lord Rama and laid their claim

over it. The site now had a mosque over there and was closed in 1949 for fear of riots. Rashid

describes that the petition moved by the Hindus was allowed and ―The locks of the place

were opened; Hindus took possession, and were still in possession. There had been riots;

people had been killed; the bitter squabble was still going on‖ (362). Once again, religion

had become a tool aimed at inciting the emotions of two communities. Instead of bridging the

gap between the communities it led to riots. The politicians watched their own interests

without bothering about the havoc that they brought in the lives of the common people. The

self centered politics of Indian leaders thus adversely affect the nation. Bishnu N. Mohapatra

in his article ―Minorities and Politics,‖ comments on the politicization of the ‗minority/

majority‘ question in India and how the political leaders claim to present their community as

a homogeneous entity. Constantly setting one community against the other is in their political

interest, the effects on the nation as a whole however are extreme dangerous and anti-

democracy. About the incident Mohapatra specifically notes that it,

shook the secular foundations of the Indian polity.

Undoubtedly, with this the relationship between the

religious minorities (particularly the Muslims) and the

Hindu majority hit its lowest point. (Mohapatra, 222)

Bhupinder 212

While Naipaul reproduces what he is told by Rashid, he however refrains from making any

comment, thus side-stepping a controversial issue. Instead, Naipaul shifts attention to what

Rashid terms as an interference of the Muslim personal law, another issue feeding the Hindu

Muslim conflict. Rashid relates the instance of a Muslim lawyer who married another woman

after divorce. The divorced lady demanded monthly allowance and for that she went to the

court. The judge ruled in favour of the woman ruling that the Muslim personal law had flaws

in it. The Muslims protested against the verdict and the judge and as a result, the Indian

government passed legislation in favour of the Muslims.

Thus it may be concluded that politics as practiced in India thrives on controversies. First,

problems are created and while seemingly trying to solve them, in reality, further

controversies are created, thus leading to a never-ending process. Political leaders indulge in

a game of one-upmanship even as the common people, Hindus as well as Muslims, are the

ones who suffer.

The threats to the Muslim community notwithstanding, Naipaul sees the secularism

as practiced by the government of India as a sign of positivity. The minorities have an

opportunity to propagate and flourish their traditions, beliefs and culture. It is pertinent to

mention here that the politics acts as supreme. The Muslims who form a size-able part of the

Indian population are able to get their own Muslim personal law. The central government

follows the policy of appeasement for the minorities. The national parties in India try to

assume a secular image so that they remain acceptable to the minorities. Rakesh Sinha aptly

points out in another context, ―In the ‗80‘s as the role of mass vote banks became vital; the

policy of Muslim appeasement became more pronounced. In 1983, a 15- point programme

was announced by the Prime Minister which was basically a programme for Muslims‖

(Sinha, 11). Naipaul‘s narrative thus reinforces the role religion plays within the dynamics of

politics in India.

Bhupinder 213

Through another Muslim character Amir, son of Raja of Mahmudabad, Naipaul elaborates on

the Shia Suni division within the Muslim community. Amir became a political sufferer as his

father had joined the Muslim league which demanded separate Muslim nation. After

partition, the Raja moved to Pakistan and he wanted to be active in politics. However since he

belonged to Shia community, he was not acceptable to Sunnis who were in the majority over

there. In contrast to the failure in politics of his father in Pakistan, Amir successfully climbs

the ladder of politics in India. Amir got the nomination for state assembly by way of his

connections with Rajiv Gandhi and was able to win the election from Mahmudabad. This was

in spite of the fact that 80% population of that constituency was Hindu. The Hindus had

voted in his favour ignoring his father‘s politics. Naipaul gives the example as a positive sign

indicating development and progression of the minorities. This also shows that the men who

are born and brought up in a political environment, seek power, as Naipaul in another chapter

refers to his meeting with Amarinder Singh, grandson of Maharaja of Patiala. Amarinder told

Naipaul that he was brought up in independent India and got his education in famous Indian

schools. First he joined the army and then politics. Amarinder Singh‘s joining of politics

indicates that a family having once tasted power, can not remain without it.

With Parveen, a Muslim lady, Naipaul projects another positive image of the

minority community. Naipaul depicts how Parveen became active in politics. She wanted to

climb the ladder of state politics by way of her secular approach. She proves to be a

successful organiser who leads a group of Muslim ladies for a meeting with the Prime

Minister. Naipaul portrays Parveen as a guiding force, a Muslim politician educating and

creating a sense of awareness among the community. In her case, her religious identity

becomes a source of strength, as Naipaul notes,

Women enjoyed many rights under Islam... They enjoyed

the right, for instance, of inheriting property from their

parents; Hindu women had no such right. Whatever was

Bhupinder 214

given to a Muslim wife during her marriage was hers to

keep; that wasn‘t with western women. (363)

Naipaul thus subverts the conventional view of Islam as being autocratic and anti-woman.

Rather, as he portrays, Parveen is able to achieve political success and respect due to her

service to society. She is also a symbol of Muslims who have moved on in comparison to

people like Rashid who choose to stay depressed as they are not able to forget how Muslims

were once rulers of the land.

In the chapter ‗The Shadow of the Guru‘, Naipaul takes up the case of another

minority community in the country. Here Naipaul focuses on the issues concerning the Sikh

community. Traditionally a community celebrated for valour, uprightness and sincerity, Sikhs

in India went through great turmoil during the 1980s. Naipaul attempts to unravel the reasons

behind the secessionist movement led by the Sikh preacher, Sant Bhinderanwale. Naipaul

begins by recalling the secular ideology, the militant outfits claimed to be followers of Guru

Nanak, the first Guru who believed in the blending of all faiths. He peacefully rebelled

against the political system and the horrors caused by the Muslim invasions of the times.

The tenth Guru of the Sikhs, Guru Gobind Singh also fought against the oppression of the

Mogul rulers and gave a separate identity to the Sikhs by imparting ‗Amrit‘ or holy nectaor to

his followers. Naipaul also gives a brief description of Maharaja Ranjit Singh‘s rule who

maintained secular image during his tenure. Throughout history thus, the Sikhs have been

known to fight against injustice and oppression, always protecting the weak irrespective of

caste or religion. Yet Bhinderanwale and his companions waged a war against the state which

continued for some years. Encouraged initially, as Naipaul notes, ―by the congress politicians

in Delhi, who wished to use him to undo their rivals in the state,‖ (423), Bhinderanwale,

eventually came to be considered a monster. His misadventures led to numerous killings of

the police personnel as well as the ordinary citizens. The press was also under threat as there

were attacks on journalists. The law and order situation in the state deteriorated and

Bhupinder 215

ultimately the Indian Governmen‘s Blue Star Operation resulted in the elimination of

terrorists who had taken refuge in the Golden Temple. The Operation resulted in deaths of

thousands of army men, devotees and terrorists. To avenge the attack, the Sikh bodyguards

murdered Mrs. Indira Gandhi, the Indian Prime Minister. Her murder was followed by riots

in New Delhi and other parts of the country in which thousands of Sikhs were brutally

murdered. Naipaul narrates the stories of wide spread violence in a matter of fact tone. He

does not offer his personal views on the matter. Rather he is content to argue that it was a

―pure tragedy, and not easy to understand.‖ He goes on to elaborate, saying,

From the outside , it seemed that the Sikhs had brought

this tragedy on themselves, manufacturing grievances out

of their great success in independent India . It was as

if there was some intellectual or emotional flaw in the

community, as if in their fast, unbroken rise over the

last century there had developed lack of balance between

their material achievement and their internal life, so that,

though in one way so adventurous and forward- looking,

in another way remained close to their tribal and country

origins.(424)

Naipaul tries to know from Gurtej Singh the real cause of the terrorist movement in Punjab.

Gurtej singh comes across as a man rooted in his culture, history and religion. Belonging to

a devout Sikh family, Gurtej Singh recalls the training he received from his parents and

grandparents; how they taught him the significance of daily prayers wishing good of entire

humanity. Gurtej Singh relates learning about the atrocities committed by the Mogul rulers on

the eigth Guru, Guru Tegh Bahadur and His aides and about the martyrdom of the tenth Guru

and his four sons. He also talks about how for the Sikhs, liberty, freedom to practice religion,

service to humanity, willingness to suffer and sacrifice for justice etc. are the basic principles

of faith. Yet all such values got twisted as more and more disgruntled people came to

dominate the scene. Persons like Kapur Singh ICS, Major General Shahbeg Singh, Inderjeet

Singh etc. faced what they believed was injustice due to their religious identity. Individually

they felt revenge was justified.

Bhupinder 216

Gurtej Singh informs Naipaul that the Sikh movement was a consequence of the

clash between the Sikhs and the Nirankaris. It was on April 13, 1978 that thirteen Sikhs had

lost their lives which further led to a violent movement by the Sikh militants. The Sikhs

raised the issue of separate identity as they claimed to be under attack from the Arya Samajis.

According to Gurtej, Bhinderanwale gained inspiration from the life of Guru Gobind Singh

who fought against the Mogul rulers. He gives a detailed description of discriminations by

central government against the Sikhs. According to him river water dispute has been the crux

of the Punjab problem as Punjab ―depended on the water of its rivers; it didn‘t like sharing its

water with other states‖ (427). Gurtej Singh justifies his support for the Sikh agitation in

Punjab. It must be said that the Akalis started Punjabi Suba agitation to get a new state with

Sikhs as majority. The move may be seen, as a move to remain in power in a new, Sikh

dominated state as they considered themselves as the representatives of Sikhs. Gutej Singh

gives religious discrimination of the Sikhs as the main reason for his support to this agitation.

He did not have any political aspirations, as he says,

Consciously or unconsciously, a Sikh is all the time

trying to avert a situation like this‘. Religious

persecution. ‗And this is what made me support this

agitation for justice in the Punjab. It was more of an

emotional identification with my people - in the days of

Punjabi Suba , 1957 to 1960. (429-30)

Naipaul gets to know about the Khalistan movement from men actively involved in it and

also from journalists such as Sanjeev Guar and Dalip. Dalip points out how Sikhs blamed the

center for all the ills in Punjab. At the same time, a majority of Sikhs did not support the

violent incidents in which innocent people were killed. Naipaul terms Bhinderanwale and his

followers as disturbed men affected by communal madness. Naipaul observes that the Sikhs

because of their community affiliations failed to become part of a unified Indian identity. He

points out that the people who led the Khalistan movement lacked political exposure as he

describes that the ―Sikh cause had been entrusted to people who were not representative of

Bhupinder 217

the Sikh achievement‖ (448). Thus once again the narrative indicates the inherent dangers in

the political practice whereby a few proclaim to speak for the entire community.

Naipaul rightly condemns the violence in Punjab during the dark days of militancy as

he describes how to ―serve Bhinderanwale and the faith, men now went with the mission of

killing Hindus‖ (423-424). Though Naipaul observes that not ―all of these killings were done

with Bhinderanwale‘s knowledge; there would have been a number of free lance actions: the

seeds of chaos were right there‖ (446). At a later stage of the movement after the Operation

Bluestar, the innocent killings continued as men like Buta who belonged to Sikh religion

were killed by the terrorists. This confirms that the terrorists did not have any consideration

for any religion. The killing of innocent persons for achieving political targets kills the very

purpose of the democratic polity. Nor were the fake encounters by police to kill militants

justifiable as it disrupted the established norms and laws of the democratic state.

Naipaul comes to know from Gurtej Singh instances which he claims are examples of Sikhs‘

discrimination by the Indian government. First he talks about Nawab Kapur Singh, his

mentor and a former I.C.S officer. Dismissed from job on alleged mis-utilization of funds

meant for rehabilitation of the refugees, Kapur Singh blamed the government‘s

discriminatory policy for his fate. ―The Trial of Sikh Civil Servant in Secular India,‖ an oft

quoted pamphlet by Kapur Singh gave an account of his fight against injustice. Kapur Singh

claimed that he was victimised due to his opposition to the directive issued by the

government to all Deputy Commissioners that ―Sikhs in general...must be treated as a

criminal tribe. Harsh treatment must be meted out to them to the extent of shooting them

dead, so that they wake up to political realities‖ (433). Kapur Singh termed his political battle

as a fight between good and evil. According to him, Nehru in particular, was poisoned

against him for his ‗Sikh oriented politics‘. Kapur Singh perceived his persecution as ―the

Bhupinder 218

destiny of a Sikh in consequence of power into Hindu hands‖ (434). As such he linked his

sufferings to the sufferings of the Gurus at the hands of the Mogul rulers.

Next Gurtej Singh refers to his paper entitled ―The Genesis of The Sikh Problem in

India‖ presented at a seminar. The paper reiterated that the Sikhs were a separate community

having a separate identity. According to him, Brahmanism is antagonistic to Sikhism. Gurtej

Singh subsequently associated himself with Bhinderanwale as he felt suffocated serving as an

officer in what he perceived to be a corrupt and unjust political system. Gurtej even helped

Sant Longowal in his movement on the water issue. Gurtej Singh‘s resignation from the I.A.S

was to protest against injustice of all kinds by the central government.

Naipaul finds strange how Bhinderanwale was able to woo educated persons such as

Gurtej Singh and Shahbeg Singh, a former army officer to associate with his movement.

Eleanor Nesbitt projects Bhinderanwale as a ―charismatic leader of the Damdami Taksal‖

(Nesbitt, 81). Cynthia Keppley Mahmood writes that the ―interesting thing about the growing

extremism of Bhinderanwale and others was that it was supported by a wide range of people

in significant government and particularly, police and military posts‖ (Mahmood, 81). From

the foregoing discussion, it becomes clear how Bhinderanwale was able to tap the feelings of

discontentment against the system to feed his movement. As a result, many well placed and

educated persons got involved in the ill-fated movement.

Naipaul has a brief interaction with Kuldip, a close associate of Bhinderanwale who

managed to survive the army attack. Naipaul notes that the educated youth like Kuldeep

joined the secessionist movement without any conviction. He believes unemployment was the

main reason which misled youth to join. Naipaul rightly observes that this movement too

like Naxalite movement was directionless and it harmed the interests of Punjab and Sikhs in

particular.

Bhupinder 219

To conclude, it may be said that Naipaul presents a large canvas filled with

numerous images of India. The work under focus is much different from Naipaul‘s earlier

works, such as An Area of Darkness (1964) and India: A Wounded Civilization (1977), which

depicted bleakness, cynicism and despair of the Indian society and the political system and

as such earned the ire of readers. India:A Million MutiniesNow on the other hand, expresses

and projects a changed outlook of the land of his ancestors. Naipaul presents India as

experienced through the interviews with characters from all walks of Indian society. These

characters narrate their stories and experiences experiences reflecting the remarkable progress

made by them and the nation as a whole over the years. In contrast to his tight-fisted attitude

reflected in the earlier works, the present work adopts a generous and compassionate tone and

helps Naipaul display an in-depth knowledge of India. He no longer dismisses India as a land

of barbarians even as he agrees that there is room for further development. The various

conflicts and clashes on the basis of language, caste, religion and region are perceived as

neverthless strengthening the fabric of democracy. After all democracy is built on an

accommodation of multiple voices and opinions, it can never function as per the imposition

of a single idea.

Naipaul thus views what he terms as source of development an acknowledgement of

dissent. The chaotic resultants of multiple rebellions are signs of positivity for betterment and

development of the nation. Rebellions and mutinies in India against corruption, against

prejudice with regards to ethnicity/religion/region/ caste and against the prevalent political

system that favours rich is an indicator of heightened awareness of the Indian masses.

The voices of dissent are raised by different sections/ communities and heard by the

government and issues/ problems resolved through dialogue between the aggrieved parties.

Naipaul reflects upon a variety of viewpoints regarding Indian democracy, tracing its history,

multiple issues pertaining to princely states, common people, majority/minority, and religious

Bhupinder 220

and ethnic clashes. Naipaul thus records his experiences of the nation in all its diversity. He

lets the characters speak about their social, political, religious, and other contentious issues,

without ever passing judgement. As such Naipaul does not take sides, merely letting the

narrators have their say. His strength lies in his observation, perception and empathy, but

then he leaves it to the readers to pass judgements or form opinions.

Naipaul finds that Indian secularism and federal polity works to bind the warring

sections of the society. Competing/ fighting/ mutinying characteristic of Indian people,

according to Naipaul, is a sign of growth and progression, as he writes:

What the Mutinies were also helping to define was the

strength of the general intellectual life and the

wholeness and humanism of the values to which all

Indians now they felt they could appeal. And –strange

irony- the- mutinies were not to be wished away. They

were the part of the beginning of a new way for many

millions, part of India‘s growth, part of its restoration

(518).

Naipaul believes that mutinies are a positive step for restoration and growth, at the same

time however, he does not ignore their negative effects. He rightly points out that the issues

of caste, religion, language, and region form the basis of politics in India. The political parties

employ these as tools to garner support for attaining power. They generally watch the

interests of the majority in order to obtain their votes. The clash of majority and minority is

due to the divisive politics of the parties. Society remains divided on the basis of caste, creed

and religion. The ruling class considers themselves as superior and enjoys political power at

the expense of deprivation of even basic amenities to the poor and the needy.

Naipaul considers corruption as the biggest menace in India. The issue of corruption

has been a burning question in the Independent India. Politics involves massive investment.

The use of media, film stars and sportspersons by the political parties has made it difficult for

an honest man to contest elections. He describes how the politicians have become the patrons

Bhupinder 221

of corruption. The political funding is a common practice as corrupt officers and businessmen

give funds to the candidates of the main political parties. It is obvious that on coming to

power, these parties act to further grant protection to the fund contributors. Naipaul portrays

that political leaders groom their sons and daughters as their successors in politics. The

political parties take help of the underworld mafia as well as the police to achieve their

political target. Instead of principles and issues, the personalities occupy centre stage. The

rebellion or struggle of the different sections of society comes into existence due to the

economic problems of the people. The unrest among the youth due to the problem of

unemployment leads to movements such as Naxalalism and militancy. Naipaul has also tried

to analyse the contentious issues surrounding the issue of the identity of Muslims and Sikhs

who form the minority communities. At the same time he attempts an in-depth analysis of

their issues in relation with the majority community.

Naipaul thus presents a view which may be taken as that of an outsider. However, his

sensitive understanding of multiple issues regarding India could not have been possible

without his having the ability to be one with the people. At the same time the fact that he uses

Eurocentric language to describe narratives of conflict as mutinies indicates his positioning of

self at a distance. He has his gaze at India even if mostly it is of sympathy, insight and

optimism. Naipaul in the final analysis is writing for the West only even as, at the same time,

he expects the reader to possess a familiarity with the subject.

Bhupinder 222

WORKS CITED

Ashcroft, Bill, Gareth Griffiths and Helen Tiffin. (2nd

ed) Eds. The Postcolonial Reader.

London and New York: Routledge, 2006. Print.

Bhabha Homi K. ―Signs Taken for Wonders.‖ The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. (2nd

ed.

Eds. Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, Helen Tiffin. London and New York: Routledge,

2006. 38-43. Print.

Bhatia, Shayam. ―India needs to come to terms with its past, says Naipaul.‖ Times of India

30 October 2000. Print.

Chatterji, Paratha. ―The State.‖ The Oxford Companion to Politics in India. Eds. Niraja

Gopal Jayal and Pratap Bhanu Mehta. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2010.

3-14. Print.

Feder, Lillian. Naipaul’s Truth: The making of a writer. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield

Publishers, 2001.Print.

Fanon,Frantz. The Wretched of the Earth. Trans. Constance Farrington, New York: Grove,

1963. Print.

Jodhka, Surinder Singh ―Caste and Politics.‖ The Oxford Companion to Politics in India.

Eds. Niraja Gopal Jayal and Pratap Bhanu Mehta. New Delhi: Oxford University

Press, 2010. 153-165. Print.

Khilnani, Sunil. The Idea of India. New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1998. Print.

King, Bruce. V.S. Naipaul. 2nd

ed. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2003. Print.

Bhupinder 223

.... ―Finding the Center, The Engima of Arrival, A Turn in the South and India: A Million

Mutinies Now.‖ 2nd

ed. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2003. 136-151. Print.

Lelyveld, Joseph. The New York Times Book Review, The back cover jacket of V.S Naipaul‘s

India: A Million Mutinies Now. London: Heinemann, 1990. Print.

Macaulay, T.B. ―Minute on Indian Education.‖ Ashcroft, Bill, Gareth Griffiths and Helen

Tiffin. Eds. The Postcolonial Reader. (2nd

ed.) London and New York: Routledge,

2006. 374-375. Print.

Mahanta, Namrata Rathore. The Indian Trilogy. New Delhi: Atlantic, 2004. Print.

Mahmood, Cynthia Keppley. Fighting for Faith and Nation: Dialogues with Sikh Militants,

Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania, 1996. Print.

Mishra, Pankaj. “A New Nuclear, India?‖ The New York Review of Books (June 25, 1998):

55-64 Print.

Mohan, Champa Rao. Postcolonial Situation in The Novels of V.S Naipaul. New Delhi:

Atlantic, 2004 Print.

Mohapatra, Bishnu N. ―Minorities and Politics.‖ The Oxford Companion to Politics in

India. Eds. Niraja Gopal Jayal and Pratap Bhanu Mehta. New Delhi: Oxford

University Press, 2010. 219-235. Print.

Naipaul, V.S. India: A Million Mutinies Now. London: Vintage, 1998. Print.

Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1946

[1992] Print.

Nesbitt, Eleanor. Sikhism:A Very ShortIntroduction. New York: Oxford University Press

INC, 2005. Print.

Bhupinder 224

....―Questions Of Marginality.‖ Namrata Rathore Mahanta. The Indian Trilogy. New Delhi:

Atlantic, 2004. 70-91. Print.

Said, Edward. Culture and Imperialism. London: Vintage, 1994. Print.

Rushdie, Salman. Imaginary Homelands: Essays and Criticism 1981-1991. London:

Granata Books, 1991.Print.

Singh, Manmohan ―Marxian view of the British Raj in Anand.‖Colonial Consciousness in

Black American Fiction in English. Ed. Ramesk K. Srivastva. Jalandhar: ABS

Publications, 1991. 95-106. Print.

Sivaraman, Shanthi. ―V.S. Naipaul‘s India: A Million Mutinies Now---A Celebration.‖ Ed.

Mohit K. Ray. V.S Naipaul. Critical Essays -2. New Delhi: Atlantic, 2002.Print. 135-

141.

Sinha, Rakesh. Ed. Secular India Politics of Minoritism. New Delhi: Vitasta, 2012.Print.

.... ―A Social Philosophy Based On Two-Identity Theory.‖ Rakesh Sinha. Ed. Secular India

Politics of Minoritism, New Delhi: Vitasta 2012. 1-14. Print.

Srivastva, Ramesk K. Colonial Consciousness in Black American Fiction in English. Ed.

Jalandhar: ABS Publications, 1991. Print.

Thiongo, Ngugi Wa. ―The Language of African Literature.‖ The Post - Colonial Studies

Reader.(2nd

ed.) Eds. Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin. London and

New York: Routledge, 2006. Print. 263-267.