Freedom at Midnight
[Disclaimer: My thoughts are purely mine and don't represent anyone else. I don't mean to offend anyone or anything by writing what I choose to write.]
Book: Freedom at Midnight
Authors: Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre
About: India
Well, it was more like a history book but never mind. I once met a few Europeans in Ethiopia and we were talking about freedom and kingdom and India's freedom struggle came up. They told me that they had read a few books about the Indian History and to them, the British in India were doing a good deed. They wondered why the Indians had to bicker and bite and struggle so much for freedom when, according to them, they were better off than most countries under the British Rule. I did tell them that was not what my history lessons at school taught me (Thank goodness I opted for science in grade 11 and 12; history was just not my thing). Speaking of those lessons, I was talking with this other friend of mine and he told me something about some kingdoms in India who had quite a nice ripe life while the British were ruling India. Now that was something those lessons didn't teach me so I got interested in knowing more (this is a great big step for me... being interested in history, that too, of India). So he suggested I read "Freedom at Midnight".
It took me more than a month to read and finish this book (I did say history was never an interest of mine). I read a few other books inbetween, just to make reading a lot more fun. I learnt a lot about a whole bunch of things which were very very interesting, and were mind-opening facts as well. Let me try to make a summary of it here.
The history starts with the dawn of 1947 and ends with the assasination of Gandhi in 1948. The authors have written this book based on extensive research of all records, interviews, publications that existed during that time and so on. The book gives a lot of insight into whom I think were the two important people of that era, who were instrumental in the births of two nations, Louis Mountbatten and Mohandas K. Gandhi. Initially, I thought the book was almost like a biography of the two men, and then India got inbetween.
I had never been interested in Indian history before, and so reading this book gave me a picture of a lot of personalities and characters who played their part into bringing India into existence as a nation of its own. The only thing that caught my eye from the beginning was that there wasn't much of a mention of South India, maybe none at all. The book did talk about Hyderabad, and its Nizam, but that was it. So I was wondering, what exactly did the south go through when everyone was talking freedom and Congress and non-violence and fasts?
The leaders sure made quite a difference in the making of India. I found it interesting to know that Mohammed Ali Jinnah couldn't speak a word of Urdu, the Muslim language and yet, he so adamantly wanted a separate Muslim country. He and his Moslem League members infused a few riots and killings to make their point known, and overnight, the whole nation was plunged into the makings of a bloody civil war. What a few powerful people wanted for themselves had turned innocent lives into blood-seeking fanatics. It seemed as though sheep were being lead to a slaughter house by their own master.
And then there was Gandhi. Called "the prophet", "a great man", "a Mahatma", he sure had the British hanging on threads by his fasts. "If you don't listen to me, I will fast to death until you do" - that seemed to be his motto. He sure made his point felt. I somehow don't agree with him or his ideals. He's got this thing about washing his own toilet, eating only enough food to barely sustain himself, using old envelopes for paper, so as to not waste them. Sounds like a bit of an eccentric to me. But then, this is me thinking.
Louis Mountbatten was a personality who intrigued me a lot. He was spoken in the book as someone who truly knew and understood what leadership meant. Whatever he did for India had been in the interest of the country's welfare and progress. Indian leaders wanted their country's freedom, and he was the one who gave it to them as quick as they wanted it. During the course of this, he earned the trust and confidence of the important leaders of the country and helped them run the country a bit after India got it freedom. Nice of him, don't you think?
The book spoke in large about the violence that occured during the times of partition, what with the Muslims and Hindus and Sikhs slitting each other's throats and raping women. This was where reality struck in, for me. I started realising how the ambitions of a few petty leaders had turned the country of brotherhood into a country of bloodshed. Though I could understand how angry and mad people can get when they see their family being cut open and hacked, I couldn't see why a friend turned on another friend. So much blood spilled for a lost cause, so many families ruined in the name of religion, and this is not a count of tens and hundreds, but thousands and tens and tens of thousands.
The book ended with the plot for and the assasination of M. K. Gandhi. To me, this was entirely uncalled for, because apart from killing an old man, and getting death sentences for themselves, those religious fanatics didn't achieve anything else. The book mentioned about the ineffectiveness of the Indian investigation officers and detectives to uncover the plot to assasinate Gandhi.
I haven't read any other book on the Indian freedom struggle or the biographies of the Indian leaders to know how much of this book is true. I do think the authors have placed the facts the way it is... It was interesting for me from the start to read about India because I hardly do that. The writing style of the authors was simple and detailed so it made easy reading, though I did jump ahead to a few different books when the story of India started dragging. And now I know for sure it will be a long long time before I pick up another history book again.
Book: Freedom at Midnight
Authors: Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre
About: India
Well, it was more like a history book but never mind. I once met a few Europeans in Ethiopia and we were talking about freedom and kingdom and India's freedom struggle came up. They told me that they had read a few books about the Indian History and to them, the British in India were doing a good deed. They wondered why the Indians had to bicker and bite and struggle so much for freedom when, according to them, they were better off than most countries under the British Rule. I did tell them that was not what my history lessons at school taught me (Thank goodness I opted for science in grade 11 and 12; history was just not my thing). Speaking of those lessons, I was talking with this other friend of mine and he told me something about some kingdoms in India who had quite a nice ripe life while the British were ruling India. Now that was something those lessons didn't teach me so I got interested in knowing more (this is a great big step for me... being interested in history, that too, of India). So he suggested I read "Freedom at Midnight".
It took me more than a month to read and finish this book (I did say history was never an interest of mine). I read a few other books inbetween, just to make reading a lot more fun. I learnt a lot about a whole bunch of things which were very very interesting, and were mind-opening facts as well. Let me try to make a summary of it here.
The history starts with the dawn of 1947 and ends with the assasination of Gandhi in 1948. The authors have written this book based on extensive research of all records, interviews, publications that existed during that time and so on. The book gives a lot of insight into whom I think were the two important people of that era, who were instrumental in the births of two nations, Louis Mountbatten and Mohandas K. Gandhi. Initially, I thought the book was almost like a biography of the two men, and then India got inbetween.
I had never been interested in Indian history before, and so reading this book gave me a picture of a lot of personalities and characters who played their part into bringing India into existence as a nation of its own. The only thing that caught my eye from the beginning was that there wasn't much of a mention of South India, maybe none at all. The book did talk about Hyderabad, and its Nizam, but that was it. So I was wondering, what exactly did the south go through when everyone was talking freedom and Congress and non-violence and fasts?
The leaders sure made quite a difference in the making of India. I found it interesting to know that Mohammed Ali Jinnah couldn't speak a word of Urdu, the Muslim language and yet, he so adamantly wanted a separate Muslim country. He and his Moslem League members infused a few riots and killings to make their point known, and overnight, the whole nation was plunged into the makings of a bloody civil war. What a few powerful people wanted for themselves had turned innocent lives into blood-seeking fanatics. It seemed as though sheep were being lead to a slaughter house by their own master.
And then there was Gandhi. Called "the prophet", "a great man", "a Mahatma", he sure had the British hanging on threads by his fasts. "If you don't listen to me, I will fast to death until you do" - that seemed to be his motto. He sure made his point felt. I somehow don't agree with him or his ideals. He's got this thing about washing his own toilet, eating only enough food to barely sustain himself, using old envelopes for paper, so as to not waste them. Sounds like a bit of an eccentric to me. But then, this is me thinking.
Louis Mountbatten was a personality who intrigued me a lot. He was spoken in the book as someone who truly knew and understood what leadership meant. Whatever he did for India had been in the interest of the country's welfare and progress. Indian leaders wanted their country's freedom, and he was the one who gave it to them as quick as they wanted it. During the course of this, he earned the trust and confidence of the important leaders of the country and helped them run the country a bit after India got it freedom. Nice of him, don't you think?
The book spoke in large about the violence that occured during the times of partition, what with the Muslims and Hindus and Sikhs slitting each other's throats and raping women. This was where reality struck in, for me. I started realising how the ambitions of a few petty leaders had turned the country of brotherhood into a country of bloodshed. Though I could understand how angry and mad people can get when they see their family being cut open and hacked, I couldn't see why a friend turned on another friend. So much blood spilled for a lost cause, so many families ruined in the name of religion, and this is not a count of tens and hundreds, but thousands and tens and tens of thousands.
The book ended with the plot for and the assasination of M. K. Gandhi. To me, this was entirely uncalled for, because apart from killing an old man, and getting death sentences for themselves, those religious fanatics didn't achieve anything else. The book mentioned about the ineffectiveness of the Indian investigation officers and detectives to uncover the plot to assasinate Gandhi.
I haven't read any other book on the Indian freedom struggle or the biographies of the Indian leaders to know how much of this book is true. I do think the authors have placed the facts the way it is... It was interesting for me from the start to read about India because I hardly do that. The writing style of the authors was simple and detailed so it made easy reading, though I did jump ahead to a few different books when the story of India started dragging. And now I know for sure it will be a long long time before I pick up another history book again.
posted by Grace at 8:27 AM
0 comments
