Review: The Great Indian Novel

The ugly snake raises its head again after a year long hiatus in the golden bubble. In fact it did come out once, during that month which definitely wasn’t My December, in the form of a few random rumblings.

Yes, ideally book reviews come out pretty shortly after a book is released; but I couldn’t help the fact that The Great Indian Novel was released only on my 2^nd birthday.  So here I am, penning down my thoughts on our Minister Sahab’s concoction of the Mahabharata and Indian politics.

To start with, The Mahabharata remains a personal favourite of mine. The way multiple stories blend into the great battle of Kurukshetra, makes the Mahabharata an enthralling experience everytime I come across a story from the Great Epic. Dr. Tharoor weaves a story by mixing characters from The Mahabharata and the Indian politics of the last 100 years. Not just the characters, but he also co-relates a number of events from both time periods. Initially, it does seem a bit weird to read a story from the early 19^th century with characters called Ved Vyas, Pandu, Vidur etc. But the story does start settling in once the similarities between the characters are explained better. Dr. Tharoor does a brilliant job giving subtle but strong hints to relate his characters to each other. Not to forget, the modification in their names depicts a lot about his personal views as well. For instance, Lahore being called Laslut; Zulfikar Ali Bhutto being called Zaleel Singh Jhootha… never knew Dr. Tharoor’s sarcastic views about the 66 year old offspring of our country. For further details about the references, our good old friend works best: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Indian_Novel

A few favourite lines from the book:

1.       There is no point in trying to judge a mighty river by its source. (oh, someone kill the caste based reservation system)

2.       You learn something about a man from the kind of stories people make up about him.

3.       The clash was as inevitable as its outcome was uncertain.

4.       Not every story is meant to end; often the essence of the tale lies in the telling.

5.       In life one must for ever choose between being one who tells stories and one about who stories are told.

6.       The roots of division must be traced deep in the soil.

7.       I do not reject you; rather I measure the years that I have grown;

I worship your grey hairs father, But- I must comb my own.

8.       It is always dangerous to mistake the enthusiasm of a select few for the support of the broad mass.

9.       No great man ever achieved greatness by sincerity of purpose alone. Truth is always individual.

10.   I am torn between the must and the ought.

11.   You should not give up your seat until you know how much standing room there is.

12.   You quote the letter of the Constitution while I cite its spirit.

13.   In India opinions are rarely founded on any sense of responsibility or any realistic expectation of action. (precisely what the ARNABS are doing right now)

14.   You cannot derive your cosmogony from a single birth.

15.   Only democrats presume to represent entire people, monarchs and oligarchs have no such pretensions.

16.   The Kamasutra is the only Indian book to have been read by more foreigners than Indians.

17.   India has too many Krishnas.

One analogy that I liked a lot was the assassination of Jarasandh being compared to the 1971 War. The assassination of Jarasandh by Bhim by splitting him into two into 2 opposite directions is wonderfully compared to the splitting up of Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh. Not to forget, Bhim too was used to denote the Indian Army.

What I missed in the book:

1.       KRISHNA !!!- Yes, Krishna does make an entry in the last phases of the book, but there isn’t any analogy drawn with an Indian politician. Come on Dr. Tharoor .. Shri Krishna was one of the most powerful and unarguably the most interesting character from the Mahabharata; he did deserve a better deal. He being the kingmaker that he was, an allusion could very well have been drawn to Mahatma Gandhi. Probably Dr. Tharoor found Bhishma’s austerity, penance and hardships sustained more familiar than Krishna’s political prowess and female company.

2.       Sanjay Gandhi- One of the most enigmatic characters from post Independence Indian politics. Probably an analogy with child prodigy Abhimanyu could have added more colour to the novel, or Dr. Tharoor would have found that to be too much of a compliment for the first family’s dictator son.

3.       Doordarshan- The first TV channel from India that actually lifts its name from Sanjay’s gift from Mahabharata, and goes without even a mention. Not done !!

4.       A better allusion to the Emergency- Dr. Tharoor takes imagination to an altogether new level by drawing references as follows:

Yudhishtira as Judiciary; Bhim as Army; Arjun as Media; Nakul as Civil Service and Sahdev as Foreign Service. The part about Emergency could have actually mentioned Arjun getting arrested as the media rights did get suppressed during the 21 month Indian exile.

Apart from the above, a few of Ved Vyas’s dream sequences towards the end seem highly unnecessary and seem to be mentioned just because Dr. Tharoor did not want them to be missed from his novel. The poetry is brilliant, though seems to be too long in places. Throughout the novel, Shashi Tharoor effectively communicates what his background is, convent educated, the British connection does result into a mastery of the language and the use of numerous words that sent me running after the Mr. Oxfords and Mr. Cambridges. Dr. Tharoor also shows signs of suffering from the habit that most widely acclaimed Indian authors suffer from- over emphasis on scene descriptions and less focus on the narrative. It’s often forgotten that it is eventually a good narrative that keeps the reader hooked on to the book.

Dr. Tharoor reserves his best for the last. Towards the end, he changes the very end of Mahabharata and with it the definition of Dharma. It reminds me a lot of Anurag Kashyap’s Dev D where the protagonist doesn’t die in the end, unlike the previous Devdas movies, but goes on to start a new life, depicting the modern day psychologies. Yudhishthira’s following lines brilliantly showcase the essence of modern thinking:

“Accept doubt and diversity. Let each man live by his own code of conduct, so long as he has one. Derive your standards from the world around you and not from a heritage whose relevance must be constantly tested. Admit that there is more than one Truth, more than one Right, more than one DHARMA….”

To conclude, a highly recommended read. Signing off with a hope that what is preached here surely gets practiced by our author in power.