May 6, 2008 Humanities Core Course

Today's Plan

1) House-Keeping

2) Savarkar

3) Preparation for Research Paper

Returning Things:

I'll return your essays on Thursday.

I'll return your midterms next Tuesday.

1. Which historical event (or events) is Savarkar writing about in his book? Why does it matter to Savarkar that the events of 1857 be classified as a war of independence?

The “Selections” really do not provide a solid answer to these questions, especially for individuals who may not be aware of the rebellions of 1857 in India. Chaturvedi discussed these rebellions, as part of Lecture 2 last week, to highlight the resistance to British rule in the nineteenth century. Think about the political processes involved in classifying historical events. REmember that the first events of 1857 were called a “mutiny.” Later, they were identified as “rebellions” or “revolts”. Savarkar’s intervention then introduces the terms “war,” “revolutionary war,” and “war of independence.”

As an aside, Karl Marx also wrote about these revolts (the term that he used) in the New York Daily Tribune from 1857-1859. In 1959, Progress Publishers in Moscow compiled a volume of Marx’s writings on the revolts with the title, “The First Indian War of Independence.” It isn’t clear if some Russians/Soviets were influenced by Savarkar’s writings, or if some Indian sympathizers to Savarkar’s writings were based in Moscow when the volume was published (or both). However, what is evident is that Savarkar’s title was maintained, with the small modification of “First” into the title.

• 2. (151) Why has Savarkar written this book?

• Think about writing as an active political process—in the spirit of DOING for this quarter. Savarkar places an emphasis on writing from a “national” perspective, which opens up new research questions. Think about how different perspectives allow us to ask specific types of research questions.

3. (151) Who is the intended audience of Savarkar’s book?

Savarkar states that he has written the book for “Indian readers.” He states, “I thought that my countrymen will be most agreeably disappointed, even as I was, at this deep-buried spectacle in one of the most neglected corners of our history.” Further, the purpose in addressing “Indian readers” is to create a national consciousness of the past, so that Indians are masters of the past and no longer the slaves.

However, it is clear from the discussions in the text that there were other individuals who were very keen on reading the book, especially British intelligence officials. The book also travels to places where the book had a wide reception, beyond what Savarkar expected. The point is that Savarkar writes the book for the specific purpose of participating in a counterpublic made up of Indian revolutionaries and nationalists. He publishes the book anonymously and circulates it through—what we might call—global underground networks.

4. (152, also 154) According to the Publisher’s Preface, why was Savarkar’s book translated into English? Who translated the book?

At one level, the answer to the first question can be summarized in the following sentence: “To let them (Indians) know how their nation fought for its Independence and how their ancestors died for the ashes of their fathers and the temples of their Gods.” The Publisher’s Preface implicitly opens the discussion that English would allow educated Indians from different parts of India to read the text, whereas, if the book was in the vernacular (Marathi, in this case), the book would only be read in that one region. Further, the English translation would also allow for a global circulation of the book to “sympathetic” revolutionaries.

Members of Savarkar’s revolutionary group called the Abhinav Bharat Society, or the Young India Society, translated the book. (Savarkar is evoking various European, especially Italian, revolutionary organizations in giving the group its name.)

5. (153) According to G.M. Joshi and Bal Savarkar, the authors of “The Story of this History,” why does Savarkar write the book?

The authors (Bal Savarkar is V.D. Savarkar’s brother) state that Savarkar simply would not have been able to call for an armed revolution against the British empire, without being arrested. Writing a history of a revolution war was meant to inspire Indians to start another revolutionary war. History as a genre of writing was more acceptable than a declaration of independence, despite the fact the book was banned.

6. (153) In the following sentence, who are the moralists?

“The very mention of [armed national revolt] was brushed aside as chimerical by the then extremists, was denounced as criminal by the loyal moderates and was even anathematized as immoral by the half-witted moralists!”

The authors have a specific critique of both Extremists and Moderate members of the Indian National Congress. Their critique about the Extremists is that they call for “extra-constitutional” methods (violence, assassination, bombings, etc.) for the cause of swaraj, but they do not promote the idea of a revolutionary war. Not surprisingly, the Moderates are viewed as loyalists to the empire, given the fact that they do not call for the end of empire. The “Moralists” is a reference to Gandhi and his disciples. See the nature of debate within the public sphere. However, the authors really do not provide a counterargument to Gandhi, but are simply dismiss him and his disciples. Perhaps this could even be used to illustrate what makes a bad counterargument. Savarkar’s own writings do something very different. Consider: “Is Savarkar providing a counterargument to Gandhi in his book, or is Gandhi providing a counterargument to Savarkar in HS?”

7. (154) Savarkar originally wrote his book in which language?

Savarkar originally wrote the book in Marathi. Consider the point that Savarkar knew at least 5-6 languages, but his first language was Marathi. He wrote his first book on Giuseppe Mazzini in Marathi, which was banned and had limited circulation in India. His second book manuscript was lost and never recovered. The Indian War of Independence was his third book, and it seems that he wanted to make sure that it had wider circulation. Think about the incredible difficulty of writing in any language, the publication process in an imperial context, and the difficulty of circulating a book that is banned.

8. (155) Why is it significant the book was proscribed even before it was published?

Think about the importance of having writings denounced, condemned, banned before they even appear in public. Also, the process of making something illegal, especially within an imperial context, is important to consider in the making of a counterpublic.

9. (161) What is Savarkar’s problem with English historians?

He states that English historians are “misleading” and “unjust” in their discussions of the “Revolutionary War.” (They never identify it as a revolution or war.) He states that they have written histories that are “wicked” and “partial.” The following sentences further help to illustrate this point:

“Their prejudiced eye could not or would not see the root principle of that Revolution.”

“…because it is against their interests to admit the truth.” (206)

10. (161-62) What is Savarkar’s problem with Indian historians?

He says that some Indian historians are “sycophants,” who replicate the interpretations of the events of 1857 given by English historians. He states that they provide “misleading” causal explanations for the revolution and in the process do not reveal the “real” reasons or causes.

11. (163) What were the “real” causes of the revolution?

The real causes were “Swaraj” and “Swadharma.” To put it differently, Savarkar is arguing that people participated in the “revolution” to protect their own country and their own religion.

Sample Final Question: What were the claimed causes of the war of 1857 in India? Explain the divergence between these causes and relate them to those who provide them as answers.

Answer: According to British historians (those British historians highlighted by Savarkar), the start of the war of 1857 in India occurred from either the reaction that Indians had to the fact the claim that the British coated their ammunition in animal fat, or from the British annexation of Oudh. According to Savarkar, it was Indian desire for Swadharma (self-religion) and Swaraj (self-rule) that started the war of 1857 in India. According to Savarkar, the British answer to the cause of the war was meant to show how irrational the Indians were, and this is why Savarkar brings up his own causal analysis of the war.

Think about causal analysis

Okay, now I want to talk about research projects. We need to switch into "high gear" and get going on this. We have two assignments coming up, and both assignments require you to have at least a vague notion of a topic.

If you do not have a topic approved by me, you need to email me every day until you have one. This is essential. This cannot be done last minute. If it is done last minute, you will likely fail the writing portion of the course. How's that for doom and gloom?

Let's go over the prompt together:

Research Paper

And now, let's consider topics:

Anyone not have a topic and want to have one? Any volunteers?

Anyone have a topic and want to share it with us?

And now, let's consider topics.

If you were doing the Psychology of Advertisments, you could consider this cover of Vogue. Has anyone seen it?