Where symbolism & mystery take precedence over matters of strategy
“It was …18 February 1946 ... An English officer in a sparkling white naval uniform arrived...at the Commissariat building [on the Bazaar Gate Street of then Bombay]...'Where are the stairs to the terrace?' he bellowed...someone pointed to the rear of the office...the curious crowd swelled, their eyes on the officer as he clattered up the stairs. Suddenly, there was a crashing sound followed by silence...The English officer lay sprawled at an ungainly angle, his arms and legs still flailing in their final throes...”
The officer's death, says the author of the book under review, “symbolised a new beginning for an old nation.” Or, as he puts it more explicitly, “As the significant events of 18 February 1946 unfolded, [Vinayak Damodar] Savarkar's primary goal of liberating the country was achieved...”
The preface opens with the assertion: “History is always written with an agenda.” The proposition is true. Even if the word “agenda” is avoided for its objectionable associations, history is certainly written from a certain viewpoint and Operation Red Lotus itself provides an example. It is a viewpoint that runs counter to the vision of India's freedom struggle, from 1857 to its fruition, however flawed, on August 15, 1947. Parag Topé makes no secret of the fact that he shares V.D. (or ‘Veer') Savarkar's viewpoint or “agenda:” The Maharashtrian founder of the Hindutva ideology was surely the first to present a non-colonial account of 1857 and his The History of the War of Independence (published in Marathi in 1909) did serve to question the simplified and/or motivated view of the revolt as a Sepoy Mutiny.
Full report here Hindu
No comments:
Post a Comment