The History Book Club discussion

Hello Everyone,

For the week of October 26th - November 1st, we are reading BOOK ONE: 1945 -Section Three - The Moghul Room - Chapter One (pg. 296 - 331) ~ A Division of the Spoils -Book IV,(pg. 296-331).

The week's reading assignment is:

WEEK NINE- October 26th ~ PART ONE: Section Three ~ The Moghul Room (pg. 296-331)

We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.

This book was kicked off on August 31st.

We look forward to your participation. Amazon, Barnes and Noble and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, local bookstore or on your Kindle. Make sure to pre-order now if you haven't already. This weekly thread will be opened up on October 26th.

There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us. It is never too late to get started and/or to post.

Jill will be leading this discussion and back-up will be Bentley.

Welcome,

~Bentley

TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL

by Paul Scott

REMEMBER NO SPOILERS ON THE WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREADS - ON EACH WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREAD - WE ONLY DISCUSS THE PAGES ASSIGNED OR THE PAGES WHICH WERE COVERED IN PREVIOUS WEEKS. IF YOU GO AHEAD OR WANT TO ENGAGE IN MORE EXPANSIVE DISCUSSION - POST THOSE COMMENTS IN ONE OF THE SPOILER THREADS. THESE CHAPTERS HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION SO WHEN IN DOUBT CHECK WITH THE CHAPTER OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY TO RECALL WHETHER YOUR COMMENTS ARE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFIC. EXAMPLES OF SPOILER THREADS ARE THE GLOSSARY, THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE INTRODUCTION AND THE BOOK AS A WHOLE THREADS.

Notes:

It is always a tremendous help when you quote specifically from the book itself and reference the chapter and page numbers when responding. The text itself helps folks know what you are referencing and makes things clear.

Citations:

If an author or book is mentioned other than the book and author being discussed, citations must be included according to our guidelines. Also, when citing other sources, please provide credit where credit is due and/or the link. There is no need to re-cite the author and the book we are discussing however.

If you need help - here is a thread called the Mechanics of the Board which will show you how to cite books:

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/2...

Introduction Thread:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Table of Contents and Syllabus

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Glossary

Remember there is a glossary thread where ancillary information is placed by the moderator. This is also a thread where additional information can be placed by the group members regarding the subject matter being discussed.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

Bibliography

There is a Bibliography where books cited in the text are posted with proper citations and reviews. We also post the books that the author used in his research or in his notes. Please also feel free to add to the Bibliography thread any related books, etc with proper citations. No self promotion, please.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...


Book as a Whole and Final Thoughts - SPOILER THREAD

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

by Paul Scott

Chapter Overview and Summary

In this week's read, we find a summary of the Hari Kumar case involving the rape of Daphne Manners and the political subversiveness charges.. Rowan tells Perron about reading the file and feeling that the evidence regarding political activities against the Raj by Kumar were practically non-existent.

This is basically a repetition of the information in the first book of the Quartet regarding the Kumar incident but our hindsight about Merrick puts it in a different light. We see it from Rowan's point of view when he was involved in the prison interview. Both he and Perron think that Kumar was not involved in any anti-British activities and Rowan says that the Governor felt that Merrick badly mishandled the case.

Why do you think Scott repeated the whole Hari Kumar situation and the interview in prison with Rowan and Gopal. Was it to have us look at it through different eyes once we had learned more about Merrick or something else?

Yes.

I think so - different perspectives interpreting the same events - we certainly have learned more about Merrick throughout the series - at first he seemed like a jealous spurned suitor but as the series developed we have learned it is a lot more than that which is interesting how Scott circles back with characters and peels more layers away.

Does "yes" mean we looked at it through different eyes or something else, Martin? You are being enigmatic. (smile)

Perron didn't just notice Mildred's sexuality. There's a line that he noticed Kevin Coley's, too. Something about, "he's no eunuch." Of course, he never puts the two of them together, but it seems that nobody but Barbie did either.

I'm not sure if that was one of those "public secrets" or if indeed others were not aware of that relationship. My guess is the latter.

After revisiting the passage in question, I think while it portrays different perspectives during the interrogation of Hari that the story is being shifted into a higher gear.

Sure, we see Gopal, the Indian interrogator, questioning Hari, whom he sees as an Englishman with dark skin, in such a confrontational manner that a comparison with Merrick is made. At the same time it's Rowan who is trying to limit the scope of the inquiry to the trumped up political charges in what is obviously an attempt to establish Hari's release.

More importantly, I think, is that Hari's story is put in the context of an individual caught between cultures now in conflict. It's interesting to me that a comparison with Merrick is made. In England, Merrick was invisible as a minor police official, where Hari stood out. But in India, Hari is invisible and it is Merrick who is the one not like the others.

An aside: the karmic link between Hari's despondency of being invisible to his former Brit chum, the subsequent drinking spree with his Indian chums, delivery to Sister Ludmilia's home for those down on their karma, and run in with Merrick, and all that followed from that meeting of the visible and invisible is brilliantly done. Look what follows from that moment of nonrecognition: recognition most errant.

But, of course, the most important development is we learn of Hari's freedom, except that if freedom is the ability to choose, the pickings are slim.

The administrator path that Hari was upon before the aforementioned karmic denouement is now closed, with no chance of redemption.

So Hari is back in the story, facing a highly uncertain future, not unlike his emerging country. Is it any wonder that he is Kumar, a play on son/sun. India's son is dawning.

Kumar (About this sound pronunciation (help·info); Sanskrit: कुमार) is a Hindu title, a given name, middle name, or a family name found in India, though not specific to any caste or community. It is a generic title which means unmarried or chaste. It is the 9th most common family name in the world, 3rd most common in India and 2nd most common in Fiji.[1] It is more common in Northern India and the most common family name in Haryana, Delhi, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry

I found that it actually meant prince or youth, unmarried youth, etc.

KUMAR (कुमार): Hindi name derived from Sanskirt kumara, meaning "prince."

HARI (हरि): Hindi name meaning "he who takes away." In Hindu mythology, this is a name borne by Vishnu.

Bentley thanks for that, especially the Vishnu connection. My source is an Indian friend and former colleague named Kumar.

You are welcome

Merrick would not be happy if he knew that his name which is Welsh in origin means...."dark skinned, a Moor". I wonder if Scott did that on purpose or was it just a coincidence.....since Scott's meanings are often open to inference, I wouldn't be surprised if he hid that little gem for the reader to find.

Ha! That's beautiful.

Names are funny things. For instance, the literal translation can seem unrelated to the meaning that is derived from usage. I was wondering if something similar might be at work with Kumar.

What a rabbit hole.

What I learned from Indian friends and colleagues, as well as Wikipedia:

Kumar, indeed is associated with son, more specifically the four sons of Brahma, who dreamed this world into existence.

So, what of Kumar in the listing cited by Bradley, meaning prince?

It also is correct Bradley uses in his post, but is regarded as a title as cited in the Wiki excerpt.

However, it is pronounced differently than Kumar (used as a name), and if spelled phonetically, would be spelled either Kumer, or Kum'r, with the accent on the first syllable, according to the Indians I spoke with today.

I may be remembering incorrectly re: Gopal but I thought that in the Kumar interview he seemed to be contentious with Hari but in Rowan's story of the outcome, he states that Gopal had no problem initialing the rather incomplete report. It appears he made his choice to take the side of an apparently wrongly accused man rather than protect Merrick's reputation. I have loaned the first three books of the Quartet to a friend who is beginning them so I can't go back and check the tone of the interview. How do you remember it?

The name Hari, of course, is associated with Vishnu, one of the three primary Hindu deities. Vishnu is translated as the all pervading one in the preceding Wiki link.

So it seems to me that in Hari Kumar we have the all-pervading son of the birthing India, or India's son at its birth.

To one degree or another, all Indian characters in the quartet are pulling the same oar as Hari. The English influence is pervasive and dates back to trade with Tudor England in 1600, give or take.

Hari is not the only Indian character feeling the gravitational pull of England, which has been in the land now called India since 1600, or so. Even those characters who were not immersed in England as Hari was, are conflicted as they define themselves and their emerging country.

In the back of my mind during two tours through the Raj, has been the question: who is the main character, if there is one?

A strong argument can be made that Hari Kumar is the main character given that his presence, even in his absence, pervades the novels. Even when he is not being discussed, or the rape of the European girl, the reader is left wondering about where he is and what's the latest development in his story?

Hari Kumar I believe (the thread of his life is spun in every book)

Daphne Manners sets the stage for all that happens - a major protagonist.

Update: In fact her rape is the key symbol throughout the book - the rape of Daphne, the rape of Hari, I guess the rape of India (harsh I know)

I actually believe that the British did a stupendous job in many ways contributing to the basic infrastructure that India has today and frankly has not enhanced that much in major parts of their country. Try driving an automobile through India.

Jill - you are correct. Gopal and Rowan even become friends as the inquiry winds down.

That is harsh, Bentley.

You might not be able to drive your Corvette, with it's 1 3/4" ground clearance, across India, but then you can't drive the damn thing across a Walmart parking lot either given the curbs. But you can drive a decent 4 WD pickup truck across either. ; )

Seriously, India is, what, something in the neighborhood of 68 years old? It is an epicenter of the digital age. Ask yourself, where would the US tech sector be without our dependence on the tech skills of the subcontinent?

It's true that there is a disparity between India the emerging and global leading economy and India without electricity and running water, its poverty, it's caste system, disparity in wealth distribution, to say noting of women's rights. But as we frequently say in God Blessed America when confronted with the same imperfections: they're working on it. No one's perfect.

It's true the Brits brought much that is good to the subcontinent that helped, make it possible for the modern nation to emerge - western civil law/regulations and a rail system that made it possible to physically join the many disparate groups of pre-independence India.

But, as Scott makes clear in his Quartet, an argument also can be made that by overstaying in India, much of the blame for the partition and the associated blood bath also can be laid at the feet of the Brits.

If driving a car across a country is a measure of a "stupendous" achievement, let us remember that it took us 190 years before we funded our Interstate system, and it wasn't until 1991 (that's right, 24 years ago) that the originally conceived Interstate System was completed...minus some parts that were never funded. (So, Bradley's counterpart in India could argue that we have yet to complete the system it has taken more than 250 years to bring into being.)

I'm not sure given that it took us 250+ years to build our Interstate system that we can look down our noses at a 68-year-old nation striving to modernize its own infrastructure. Just sayin'. ; )

Trust me I am not alone. I do not have a corvette and I certainly would not have one in India (smile). I think you would find that a 4WD pickup truck would have problems not falling in a big crevice - where the roads actually exist and are not ruts - of course the city proper and large towns are better. (but you know - not that much) But seriously India's infrastructure is in sad disrepair from the time of the Brits.

Can't say that about China. Not that harsh - just the unvarnished truth - having spent time in China as well. They have dealt with these things.

And you hit a sore spot - our own students are being ignored for the cheap labor of India - like Tata which gives them 3 meals a day and housing and pays them practically nothing compared to the US. So please do not go there - I know quite a lot about what I speak.

Please do not go with no one is perfect - my post was not harsh at all - let me know how your driving goes in India when you get there.

I think the Brits did a lot for India and their influence is still felt. Has India developed on its own through the years and have they done well considering the circumstances - Of course they have. Nobody can take that away from them.

And our roads - and driving on them is like driving on clouds compared to India's. I know.

Nobody is doing what you are saying in your post Martin and I think you are flame baiting me in order to poke the lion and gain a response.

My basic response is that you are wrong - but let us just move on. I have posted just a few complaints from the Indian population and its newspapers concerning the deplorable condition of even its National Highways and city streets (check glossary) - bad roads in India is a universal condition - sadly it is not the exception.

Let us go back to Jill's questions which I attempted to answer in 17 and the thread's assignment itself.

Jill what are you thoughts on the possibility that Gopal was just trying to be contentious to Hari because he did not want anybody to accuse him of showing favoritism or not following the law and the procedures because this was a fellow Indian with connections. He was trying to be above board.

Sorry guys, I have been gone. Re: Gopal: I think he was trying to follow the law and probably saw the light too late. He had already been contentious with Hari and couldn't take back those words but did come to realize that the state had no case or at best, an extremely weak one. I'm not sure that he was thinking of being accused of favoritism.....although many Indian would think that in his situation but I think as we learn more about him, I don't think that is in his nature.

And yes, Martin. I would agree that Hari is probably the main character. He went to prison and we hardly have heard much about him since until this weeks read. But we indeed (or at least I) have often wondered about him. He is a representative of both England and India but yet belongs to neither which makes him a very interesting and important part of the whole story of the latter part of the Raj.

Folks, we have devoted a lot of time to India and we are happy to do that because it is a huge presence globally - but discussions about current infrastructure and the state of the roads are factual and complained about by the Indian populace and by the newspapers of India. These were posted in the glossary. We cannot change facts.

Additionally the British did a lot for India. And they also benefitted a great deal from India and some feel they took a lot from the country for a very long time. Scott's view is a comparison to a rape which is the theme of the Raj Quartet - some folks do not have such a harsh view of the British in India (that Scott does) and some folks are in between. Whatever your view you are entitled to them. I personally think that the British did a lot for India at the same time. But everybody is entitled to their opinions on roads, the British in India, technology/labor and the themes of the Raj Quartet.

However the themes of the Quartet are also well known such as they are. The technology discussion began with Martin's post which was also responded to and these are also backed up in the glossary. If anyone has other articles or information that they would like to post in the glossary - it has been available since the beginning of the discussion.

Everybody is entitled to their opinions and frankly we never heard from the poster at any time before. As the late Daniel Moynihan stated - "Everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but not his own facts".

For those of you unfamiliar with flame baiting - we do go over it in our orientation.
Here is a link:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Jill, let the discussion continue and welcome back - as always Martin has stirred the pot.

Rowan became rather irritated when he found that Lady Manners had a statement from Daphne re: Hari and the paternity of her child. But as Malcolm stated, it really had nothing to do with the Kumar case which was based on political "wrong-doings". Do you think it would have made any difference if the statement was released (although Lady Manners would probably have been unwilling to do that without legal nudging from the prosecution).

I think Malcolm was looking at this as a "legal" situation and what difference did that have to do with the whole case - that maybe it would muddy things up a bit and cloud the issues and cause uprisings. Who knows.

But I think that Hari also had the right to know that he was the father of that child. I wondered if Lady Manners really just wanted to leave the matter as it was while she was alive. I am not sure.

It may have cleared up the nature of their relationship or it may have hurt Hari - indicating that he had indeed had relations with the deceased.

Another thought regarding Rowan: This was another instance where I particularly did not like him as much.

Regarding what Britain did or did not do for India is a mixed bag. If they were trying to mold India into a little Britain, they didn't know the people very well or understand the culture. The religious schisms were not addressed and I'm not sure they could be. (Partition partially took care of that). The British also believed in the "white man's burden" and brought that racial/cultural belief to the country, for the most part looking down on the indigenous population.

Colonialism was dying but Britain didn't want to let go of the empire on which the sun never set. But it was in the cards. They probably should have gotten out sooner since there were some strong Indian men emerging who might have sorted out the government of India better than the British could.. I don't think staying on accomplished much since the die was cast and the bloodshed was just waiting in the wings regardless of British presence.

On the other hand, the British partially broke the hold that individual maharajahs had over the particular regions and tried to introduce some type of order. I think through the civil service, police, and other quasi-government agencies, Indians were given a chance to advance themselves. And an education system was introduced to supplement those already set up by missionaries.

Just MHO.

Yes very true Jill and the point I was making that not everything was dismal. A lot of the British influence is still seen in India today - I think that Churchill - a person who I admire - tried the hardest to hold on to India and that was not one of his finest moments - I have to say. There is always a time to leave and move on. I think though there were times even then when they were asked to stay by the Indian leadership - see Freedom at Midnight - a great read and find out why. The Indian leadership could foresee what was about to happen and the civil war that would ensue once the British left. Which of course we all know the story of.

by Larry Collins

In some of the characters - it appeared to me that Scott was writing himself and his own personal experiences into the story line.

But don't you think that the civil war would have broken out even if the British stayed. It may not have been as organized but I feel it was going to happen regardless.

British influence lingers wherever they were. Look at Hong Kong, an exciting city that is much more British than it is Chinese.

Not to the extent that it did - slaughtering people on trains for example almost like pirates or vigilantes. At least the trains would have been adequately manned to put up a fight and make a get away.

Very true - Shanghai and so many others - yes, I was in Hong Kong last a year ago and every time I go there I am amazed but it does have a strong Chinese influence too as an undercurrent.

Jill has a close family member in the hospital and she has been attending to them but will be back in a day or two - so folks please feel free to post to the thread or any Raj thread until she returns.