Nehru: The Invention of India

by Shashi Tharoor

A portrait of the Indian secularist and spiritual companion of Mahatma Gandhi discusses his childhood as a member of a politically influential family, the Enlightenment philosophies that marked his education, his decision to become an activist, his contributions to India's non-violent struggle for independence, and his witness to the violence of partition. Reprint. 10,000 first printing.

Genres: History, India, Nonfiction, Biography, Politics, Indian Literature, Asia

304 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2003

About the author

Shashi Tharoor is a member of the Indian Parliament from the Thiruvananthapuram constituency in Kerala. He previously served as the United Nations Under-Secretary General for Communications and Public Information and as the Indian Minister of State for External Affairs.

He is also a prolific author, columnist, journalist and a human rights advocate.

He has served on the Board of Overseers of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. He is also an adviser to the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva and a Fellow of the New York Institute of the Humanities at New York University. He has also served as a trustee of the Aspen Institute, and the Advisory of the Indo-American Arts Council, the American India Foundation, the World Policy Journal, the Virtue Foundation and the human rights organization Breakthrough He is also a Patron of the Dubai Modern High School and the managing trustee of the Chandran Tharoor Foundation which he founded with his family and friends in the name of his late father, Chandran Tharoor.

Tharoor has written numerous books in English. Most of his literary creations are centred on Indian themes and they are markedly “Indo-nostalgic.” Perhaps his most famous work is The Great Indian Novel, published in 1989, in which he uses the narrative and theme of the famous Indian epic Mahabharata to weave a satirical story of Indian life in a non-linear mode with the characters drawn from the Indian Independence Movement. His novel Show Business (1992) was made into the film 'Bollywood'(1994). The late Ismail Merchant had announced his wish to make a film of Tharoor’s novel Riot shortly before Merchant’s death in 2005.

Tharoor has been a highly-regarded columnist in each of India's three best-known English-language newspapers, most recently for The Hindu newspaper (2001–2008) and in a weekly column, “Shashi on Sunday,” in the Times of India (January 2007 – December 2008). Following his resignation as Minister of State for External Affairs, he began a fortnightly column on foreign policy issues in the "Deccan Chronicle". Previously he was a columnist for the Gentleman magazine and the Indian Express newspaper, as well as a frequent contributor to Newsweek International and the International Herald Tribune. His Op-Eds and book reviews have appeared in the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, amongst other papers.

Tharoor began writing at the age of 6 and his first published story appeared in the “Bharat Jyoti”, the Sunday edition of the "Free press Journal", in Mumbai at age 10. His World War II adventure novel Operation Bellows, inspired by the Biggles books, was serialized in the Junior Statesman starting a week before his 11th birthday. Each of his books has been a best-seller in India. The Great Indian Novel is currently in its 28th edition in India and his newest volume. The Elephant, the Tiger and the Cellphone has undergone seven hardback re-printings there.

Tharoor has lectured widely on India, and is often quoted for his observations, including, "India is not, as people keep calling it, an underdeveloped country, but rather, in the context of its history and cultural heritage, a highly developed one in an advanced state of decay.". He has also coined a memorable comparison of India's "thali" to the American "melting pot": "If America is a melting pot, then to me India is a thali--a selection of sumptuous dishes in different bowls. Each tastes different, and does not necessarily mix with the next, but they belong together on the same plate, and they complement each other in making the meal a satisfying repast."

Reviews

[Sukanta Kumar Hazra · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another well written book on Nehru. A man about whom there is much misunderstanding in India, or at least an attempt is being made (unfairly) at present to show him in worse light than he deserves. Surely he made some blunders, but his passion and achievements to keep India united and to modernise it can't and shouldn't be overlooked.

[Riddhi Shah · Rating 2 out of 5]

A very very biased biography trying to paint the character of Nehru with the whitest and brightest colours. From the very first chapter, you can see the author's support to the centre-left Indian national Congress. And at certain stages it's hypocritic as well. For example, motilal is shown to be this advanced and modern man who encourages Nehru to bring out the best of him but at the same time he believes that his daughters belong in the house. The two stars are only for the eloquent language and poetic description. The author builds a vivid storyline which makes it easier to imagine the era and the characters. But it's a disappointment when it comes to actually knowing the character of Nehru or the personality that Nehru was!

[Jyotsna Batra · Rating 2 out of 5]

Nehru has been an exceptionally important figure in Indian History, and he has been seen as a controversial figure as well. I had the curiosity to know more about his life and thoughts that I began reading this book. It is a well-written insight into the life of Nehru. The description of his father's influence on him, his relationship with his daughter, Indira, and his reverence towards Mahatma Gandhi are quite interesting. Also, his moderation, handling of differences of opinions, his foreign policy approach along with the course of India's independence struggle and thereafter has been discussed well. However, the book falls a bit short in providing a truly objective view. It seems so appreciative of him that it fails to provide any sort of criticism when required. To a questioning mind, this book increases the eagerness to know the flip side of Nehru. It is a good read to know about his life events but it doesn't provide a sound analysis for shaping an objective opinion.

[Muthu Raj · Rating 5 out of 5]

5 stars. A third entry to the classy shelf.

TLDR; A must read that puts the people involved in Nationalist movement and Nehru's role in it as well as the feelings and ideals of Nehru in perspective. Excellent language.

This is a magisterial work on Nehru. I was squirming in shame at some points in the book that I didn't know some very basic things about the architects of my country. I am not going to attempt to comment about Nehru himself. I know too little and have too much adulation for him, to provide any unbiased summary of the man and what he stood for. However, at the end of the book, this is what I told myself, Nehru ji was a great idealist, nationalist, and a statesman. A very good writer, a true secularist, wannabe socialist and a terrible politician, and a terrible judge of people.

Shashi Tharoor has become my most favorite author right now, in this genre at least. The book is genuine attempt at distilling the great and varied life of Nehru. The book in the first half, portrays Nehru as someone beyond repudiation by mere mortals. One even suspects that this is a hagiography at a point. But the doubt is easily dispelled, once we get to the second half. The author is unapologetic when portraying the faults of the great man, and doesn't try to deify him at any point. He draws from a variety of sources, is critical of some nehruvian policies and makes a very good case when he says that Nehru put political horse before the economic cart.

The Author laments reservations, stagnant economic policies, and the non pragmatism of Nehruvian foreign policies including non alignment.

The Author's analysis of some of the policies as well as habits of Nehru, shows his depth of knowledge. Throughout the book, the author doesn't hide the fact that he admires Nehru, but doesn't allow that to compromise the work in any sort. The shortcomings of the book, can be safely ignored, since this kind of distillation very much warrants such negligible side effects. The book is really dense at some points, but I suspect it is due to the subject of the book and not the Author's fault.

The exploration of the relationship between Motilal and his son, as well as Gandhi and Nehru, though cursorial, is a very important constituent of the book. The fact that Sardar replaced Gandhi as a father figure albeit for a short time and that Nehru desperately needed someone to keep him in check, is telling in Nehru's some later spectacular failures in policy issues. For some reason, I am unable to shake the feeling that Modern Review attack on Nehru by himself was nothing short of a premonition that proved to be true after departing of Sardar and sidelining of Rajaji.

The author doesn't lean on condescension towards readers and is very content to present just the facts at important junctures and leaves the reader to draw his conclusions. The "show, don't tell" has been meticulously followed by the Author. He is incisive in his refutation of unfounded vilification of Nehru.

Though primarily about Nehru, the author explores in sufficient detail the mood of the country, whenever Nehru is in jail, or otherwise incapable of being physically present for the Nationalist movement. The focus on Jinnah is most welcome. The fact that he started learning Urdu only in late 1938 disillusions even the most stubborn Muslim loyalist to see that Jinnah was not a saint without any vested interests.

Similarly, throughout the book, the author marks important happenings and doesn't fail to follow to link them to Nehru, even if the connection isn't apparent to the layman reader easily.

Highly recommended.

[Anthony Ambruso · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well-written but boring

I thoroughly enjoy history and biography - just not this one. The subject just failed to grab me. Indian history is just not that exciting. It's all about deals and mind-changing and recharging. Got about 20% through it but had to stop.

[S.Ach · Rating 4 out of 5]

My knowledge on the life and contributions of Nehru as the architect of modern India, could be just sufficient for me to probably participate in Class 5 debate competition. Not more.
Having read before Nehru's "The Discovery of India" and parts of "Glimpses of World History", I had huge appreciation for the learning and culture of Nehru. However, in the present times, the amount of dirt that has been hurled at Nehru and his legacy ( interesting essay in Outlook)that, it prompted me to read more about Nehru.

A book by the current Congress MP and Nehruvian Sashi Tharoor is not expected to be objective in its assessment. As the author admits himself, "I started the book as divided between admiration and criticism as when I finished it, but the more I delved in Nehru's life, it was the admiration which deepened." And I don't entirely blame the author.

The book presents the accounts of Nehru's life chronologically and focuses more on the freedom fighter and revolutionary Nehru than the Statesman Nehru, which I expected to read more about. The well-presented chronicles are pretty informative and definitely presents Nehru in a pretty bright light. It seemed that Tharoor has deliberately omitted the more controversial actions, inactions and interactions.

Whether, we appreciate Nehru or call him a villain, but his contributions to the nation, cannot be undermined. In the concluding essay, Tharoor summarizes Nehru's legacy as -

Nehru’s impact on India rested on four major pillars — democratic institution-building, staunch pan-Indian secularism, socialist economics at home, and a foreign policy of nonalignment. ……Of the four major pillars of his system, two — democratic institution-building and staunch secularism — were indispensable to the country’s survival as a pluralist land; a third, nonalignment, preserved its self respect and enhanced its international standing without bringing any concrete benefits to the Indian people; the fourth, socialist economics, was disastrous, condemning the Indian people to poverty and stagnation and engendering inefficiency, red-tapism, and corruption on a scale rarely rivaled elsewhere.


Despite lacking depth and structural analysis, there is little doubt that it is most beautifully written with "Tharoorian English" and could act as a nice introduction to the life and works of one of the prominent makers of modern India.
I need to pick up a thicker biography.

[Abhishek · Rating 4 out of 5]

Even the harshest critic has to admit that Dr. Tharoor in spite of his fair share of controversies is an impeccable painter with words. The short & witty biography of literally a legacy is by no means an easy task. There is always a risk of misrepresentation or even worst omission of certain facts.

But, this book like a river once starts flowing, only gains speed. In our country almost everyone has an opinion about chacha nehru, but the way Dr. Tharoor has articulated his entire journey of life in a crisp & concise manner without leaving out any facts or being judgmental about it. It is this objectivity in his writing which differs from the other writers & their work on Jawaharlal Nehru.

If you have any interest in History or politics of India, you might be missing an angle if you haven't read this book.

[Deepak P · Rating 2 out of 5]

quite an interesting book, but was a let down in many ways. some of the aspects of nehru's life which have been quite consequential to india have not found enough of a mention. for example, things like the NAM and movements of co-operation in the global south, and several other domestic things. one thing that finds more than enough presence is sashi tharoor's orientation towards the free market and liberalism. the protectionist policies and strong public institutions built by nehru cannot be appreciated when viewing from a neo-liberal lens, and it seems that the author likes nehru for his secularism and democracy, and his views about the economic policies are at the other end.

[Shadin Pranto · Rating 3 out of 5]

আজকের ভারতে নেহেরুকেন্দ্রিক রাজনৈতিক বয়ান অত্যন্ত গুরুত্বপূর্ণ হাতিয়ার হয়ে উঠেছে। বিজেপিসহ হিন্দুত্ববাদীদের চোখে ভারতের সকল মন্দত্বের দায় পণ্ডিত জওহরলাল নেহেরুর। অপরদিকে কংগ্রেসের পুঁজি নেহেরুর পর্বতপ্রমাণ কীর্তি। বইটি ২০০৩ সালে লেখা। তখনো শশী থারুর আজকের মতো কংগ্রেসের নেতা হয়ে ওঠেননি। নেহেরু মানুষটি সত্যিই কেমন ছিলেন তা জানতে বইটি পড়ি। সংক্ষিপ্ত অথচ তথ্যসমৃদ্ধ হলেও নেহেরুকে নিয়ে বহুমাত্রিক আলোচনা করতে ব্যর্থ হয়েছেন শশী থারুর। এই বইটি দলীয় প্রোপাগাণ্ডাকে শক্তিশালী করবে এবং নিরপেক্ষভাবে নেহেরুর মতো মহীরূহকে জানার পথে হবে বড়ো প্রতিবন্ধকতা।

'নেহেরু' শব্দের উৎসমূল নিয়ে দ্বিমত রয়েছে। কেউ কেউ মনে করেন, নহর তথা খাল শব্দটি থেকে নেহেরু শব্দের উদ্ভব। কেউ-বা বলেন নাহরু নামের গ্রামের অপভ্রংশ হলো নেহেরু।

কাশ্মিরি পণ্ডিত মতিলাল নেহেরু বসবাস করতেন এলাহাবাদে। সেখানে আইনজীবী হিসেবে ভালো পসার থাকলেও মনে শান্তি ছিল না। কারণ তার সন্তান হওয়ার পরপ���ই মারা যাচ্ছিল। সেই প্রতিকূল সময়ে এক বন্ধুর পরামর্শে হরিদ্বারের একজন ঋষির কাছে যান। সাধু তাকে বলেন পুত্রভাগ্য তার লেখা নেই। একথা শুনে অত্যন্ত মর্মাহত মতিলালকে দেখে সেই সাধু দয়া হয়। তিনি দোয়া করেন এবং তার ঠিক দশমাস বাদে জওহরলালের জন্ম ও সাধুর মৃত্যু হয়। এই জওহরলালের জন্ম ও সাধুর মৃত্যু হয়তো কাকতালীয়। অতিলৌকিকতায় বিশ্বাসীদের এই ভূখণ্ডে আমরা অসাধারণদের ওপর দেবত্ব আরোপ করে তাদেরকে মহামহিম করে তুলতে চাই। শশী থারুরের এই বয়ান পড়ে আমারও এমনই হয়ে হচ্ছিল।

অজ্ঞেয়বাদী নেহেরুকে ছোটোবেলায় তার মা ধর্ম-কর্মে মতি আনতে সর্বদাই ব্যস্ত থাকতেন। কেউ যেন আদরের পুত্রকে কুনজর না দিতে পারে সেজন্য জওহরলালের কপালে মস্ত এক টিপ দেওয়া থাকতো। এমন পরিবেশে বেড়ে ওঠা নেহেরু ষোল বছর বয়সে বিলতে পড়তে গেলেন। তিনি হ্যারোর মতো স্বনামধন্য প্রতিষ্ঠানে পড়তেন, যেখানে একসময় পড়েছেন তার অন্যতম বড়ো সমালোচক উইনস্টন চার্চিল।

সুবক্তা ও অসাধারণ পাণ্ডিত্যের অধিকারী নেহেরু প্রাতিষ্ঠানিক বিদ্যায় 'মেধাবী' শিক্ষার্থী ছিলেন না। তাই স্কুল-কলেজ ও বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ে নেহেরু সতীর্থ ও শিক্ষকগণ তাকে নিয়ে বিশদ বলতে অপারগ। গড়পরতা ফলাফল নিয়ে স্নাতক সমাপ্ত করে দেশে ফিরে এসেছিলেন। বাবা মতিলাল চাইতেন ছেলে তার মতো নামজাদা আইনজীবী হোক। প্রথমে তিনিও আইনপেশায় যুক্ত হয়েছেন বটে, তবে পসার জমেনি। তার মনোযোগ চলে যায় কংগ্রেসের রাজনীতিতে।

মতিলালের পুত্র না হলে হয়তো কংগ্রেস এত তাড়াতাড়ি উচ্চপদে 'ব্রেক' পেতেন না নেহেরু। তবে নেহেরু মানুষ চিনতেন। তাই প্রথম থেকেই নিজের পিতার চাইতে মহত্মা গান্ধিকে নিজের রাজনৈতিক গুরু মেনে নেন। নেহেরুর উত্থানের পেছনে সবচেয়ে বেশি ভূমিকা গান্ধির। নেহেরুর মতাদর্শ বোঝা কঠিন। কখনো তিনি সমাজতন্ত্রী, কখনো-বা তার গুরু গান্ধির স্বরাজের বিরোধিতা করে চাইছেন পূর্ণ স্বাধীনতা ; আবার এই নেহেরুই গান্ধির আদেশ মোতাবেক সমাজতন্ত্রী বাদ দিয়ে পূর্ণ গান্ধিপন্থি। এম কে গান্ধি নিজের শিষ্যের জন্য করেননি এমনই কিছুই নেই। গান্ধির পর রক্ষণশীল প্যাটেল কংগ্রেস সভাপতি হয়ে চাইলে বাদ সাধেন গান্ধি। তিনি তার পুত্রসম জওহরের বিপক্ষে প্যাটেলকে দাঁড়াতে দেননি। তাই বিনা প্রতিদ্বন্দ্বিতায় জওহর সভাপতি হয়েছে। আবার, মওলানা আজাদের পর প্যাটেল ও রাজেন্দ্রপ্রসাদ সভাপতি হওয়ার ইচ্ছা পোষণ করলে তাতেও কলকাঠি নাড়েন গান্ধিজি। সেবারও সভাপতি নির্বাচিত হয় তার জওহর। জওহরলালের চাইতে পনের বছরের বড়ো বল্লভভাই প্যাটেল রাজনীতির অন্ধিসন্ধি ভালো বুঝতো। কট্টরপন্থি প্যাটেল ও রাজেন্দ্রপ্রসাদদের গ্রহণযোগ্যতা কংগ্রেস ওয়ার্কিং কমিটিতে নেহেরুর চাইতে কম ছিল না। কিন্তু তাদের মাথার ওপর গান্ধির আশির্বাদের ঘাটতি ছিল। নেহেরুর উত্থানের গান্ধির ভূমিকাকে আরও বিশ্লেষণী দৃষ্টিতে দেখা যেত। শশী থারুর তা করেননি। গৎবাঁধা লিখে গিয়েছেন।

প্যাটেল গ্রুপের বাইরে মাত্র একজন বড়ো ব্যক্তিত্ব মিত্র হতে পারত নেহেরুর। তিনি হলেন নেতাজি সুভাষচন্দ্র বসু। সুভাষ ও নেহেরুর লক্ষ্য একটাই ইংরেজ বিতাড়ন। অত্যন্ত আশ্চর্যে নিয়ে লক্ষ করি সুভাষকে পছন্দ করতেন না নেহেরু। সুভাষ যেন কংগ্রেস সভাপতি হতে না পারেন তার সকল চেষ্টাই করেছিলেন গান্ধিজি। দ্বিতীয়বার সুভাষ দলের সভাপতি হন গান্ধির প্রার্থী সীতারামাইয়াকে পরাজিত করে। এই পরাজয় গান্ধি ব্যক্তিগত পরাজয় হিসেবে গ্রহণ করেন এবং সুভাষকে দল পরিচালনায় পদে পদে বিপদে ফেলেন। তখন সুভাষের সুহৃদ হিসেবে আবির্ভূত হতে পারতেন নেহেরু। তিনি তা করলেন না, উল্টো অন্য সকলের মতো সুভাষের নেতৃত্বের ওয়ার্কিং কমিটি থেকে পদত্যাগ করে সুভাষকে কংগ্রেস ত্যাগ করার পথ বেছে নিতে বাধ্য করেন। এই ঘটনার ব্যাখা নেহেরুর জীবনীকার দেননি। নেহেরু কী সুভাষকে তার ক্ষমতার প্রতিদ্বন্দ্বী মনে করতেন? গান্ধিজি কী শুধু রাজনৈতিক মতপার্থক্যের কারণেই সুভাষকে পদত্যাগ করতে বাধ্য করেছিলেন না কি এর রসদ জুগিয়েছে জওহরের প্রতি অপত্য স্নেহ? সেই প্রশ্নগুলোর উত্তর না দিয়ে সুভাষকে 'ফ্যাসিবাদ-পছন্দ' ব্যক্তি হিসেবে চিহ্নিত করার চেষ্টা করেছেন শশী থারুর।

'৩৭ সালের নির্বাচনে বড়ো জয় পায় কংগ্রেস। বেশির ভাগ প্রদেশে সরকার গঠন করে। তখন দলের প্রধান নেহেরু। কংগ্রেসি প্রাদেশিক সরকারগুলোর মুসলমানদের প্রতি বিমাতাসুলভ আচরণের জন্য নেহেরু বিরক্ত ছিলেন বলে শশী থারুর লিখেছেন। এটা লেখেননি দলীয়প্রধান হিসেবে কংগ্রেসি সরকারগুলোর এই মনোভাব রুখতে তিনি কোনো পদক্ষেপ নিয়েছিলেন কিনা।

আবুল হাশিমের আত্মকথা থেকে জানা যায়, শরৎ বসু-আবুল হাশিম ও সোহরাওয়ার্দী অবিভক্ত বাংলার পক্ষে জোর প্রচারণা চালাচ্ছিলেন। জিন্নাহ বাংলাকে অবিভক্ত রাখতে রাজি হলেও গান্ধিজি অবিভক্ত বাংলার বিপক্ষে ছিলেন। তাই পাঞ্জাবের মতো বাংলাকে ভাগ করা হয়। অথচ শশী থারুর লিখেছেন পাঞ্জাব ও বাংলা দুটো প্রদেশ ভাগের জন্য দায়ী মুসলিম লীগ। দাঙ্গা নিয়ে শশী থারুরের বয়ান পড়লে ধারণা হবে অবিভক্ত ভারতের সকল দাঙ্গার জন্য একটি দল ও সম্প্রদায়ের মানুষ দায়ী ছিল। এমন একচোখামি নিয়ে ইতিহাস লেখা যায় না তা কংগ্রেসের সাংসদ শশী থারুরের বোঝা উচিত।

সবাইকে অবাক করে দিয়ে ক্যাবিনেট মিশনের দেশভাগ পরিকল্পনা জিন্নাহ মেনে নেন৷ কিন্তু তৎকালীন কংগ্রেস সভাপতি নেহেরু সেই প্রস্তাব একবাক্যে গ্রহণ করতে রাজি হননি। মওলানা আজাদ তার আত্মকথায় এই বিধ্বংসী সিদ্ধান্তের জন্য নেহেরুকে দায়ী করেন। নেহেরুর জীবনীকার এত বড়ো দায় থেকে খুব সহজেই তাকে দায়মুক্তি দেন। নেহেরুর সপক্ষে এমন বালখিল্য যুক্তি দিয়েছেন তাতে হাসি পায়।

ঔপনিবেশিক শেকলমুক্ত আফ্রো-এশিয়ার বেশির ভাগ দেশ সামরিক শাসনের কবলে পড়েছে। গণতন্ত্র সেখানে পায়নি প্রাতিষ্ঠানিকতা। শত প্রতিবন্ধকতা সত্ত্বেও ভারতে কখনো সামরিক শাসন আসেনি। এই কৃতিত্বের বড়ো দাবিদার পণ্ডিত নেহেরু। স্বাধীন ভারতের মন্ত্রিসভায় সকল মতবাদের মানুষকে তিনি স্থান দিয়ে গণতন্ত্রের পথকে মসৃণ হতে ঐতিহাসিক উদ্যােগ নিয়েছিলেন। প্রথম এই মন্ত্রিপরিষদে কট্টরপন্থি প্যাটেল ও শ্যামাপ্রসাদ যেমন ছিল, তেমনি ছিলেন কংগ্রেসবিরোধী ভীমরাও আম্বেদকরের মতো মানুষ। স্বল্পতম সময়ে সংবিধান প্রনয়ণ করতে্র পারলেও দলের মধ্যকার বিভেদকে মোচন করতে পারছিলেন না নেহেরু। উদারপন্থি রাজা গোপালাচারিকে দলীয়প্রধান হিসেবে চাইছিলেন নেহেরু। কিন্তু প্যাটেলপন্থি রাজেন্দ্রপ্রসাদ রাষ্ট্রপতি ও দলীয়প্রধান হয়ে নেহেরুকে বুঝিয়ে দেয় দলে রক্ষণশীলদের ক্ষমতা। এই সময়েই নেহেরু ও প্যাটেল নীতির প্রশ্নে মুখোমুখি হয়ে পড়েন৷ দু'জনের একসাথে কাজ করা সম্ভব নয় - এমনটি নেহেরু বুঝতে পারছিলেন। উপরন্তু দলে রক্ষণশীলদের উপদ্রুব তা সহ্য হচ্ছিল না। প্যাটেল বনাম নেহেরুর দ্বন্দ্বে দলের ভাঙন অবশ্যম্ভাবী হয়ে ওঠার আগেই মারা যান প্যাটেল। প্যাটেলের মৃত্যু নেহেরুর রাজনৈতিক ক্যারিয়ারের জন্য অবশ্যই ইতিবাচক ছিল। প্যাটেলের পর এমন এক মানুষ রইল না যে নেহেরুকে কোনো সিদ্ধান্ত নিতে বাঁধা দিতে পারে। এই সময় সম্ভবত নেহেরু অসহিষ্ণু হয়ে উঠছিলেন দলীয় ভিন্নমতাবলম্বীদের প্রতি। প্যাটেলের মৃত্যুর পর রাজেন্দ্রপ্রসাদসহ কট্টরপন্থিরা একসময় কংগ্রেস ছেড়ে যেতে বাধ্য হন। মূলত নেহেরু এটাই চাইছিলেন। তখন থেকে মৃত্যুর আগপর্যন্ত নেহেরুকে চ্যালেঞ্জ করার সামর্থ্য রাখে এমন দ্বিতীয় কোনো ব্যক্তিত্ব দলে রইল না। জীবনীকার নেহেরুর এমন 'একনায়কসুলভ' মনোভাবকে হালকা করে বিচার করেছেন। অথচ এই ঘটনা থেকে নেহেরুর ভিন্নমতবিদ্বেষ স্পষ্ট হয়ে ওঠে।

বাংলাদেশ ও পাকিস্তানের চাইতে বেশি মুসলমান বসবাস করে ভারতে৷ এই ক���রেডিট অবশ্যই নেহেরু পাবেন৷ দেশভাগের পর কঠোর হাতে সাম্প্রদায়িক দাঙ্গা নিধন করার চেষ্টা করেছেন নেহেরু। নিজে সজ্ঞানে কোনোদিন সাম্প্রদায়িকতাকে লালন করেননি৷ দিল্লির একবার দাঙ্গার খবর শুনে প্রধানমন্ত্রী নেহেরু নিজে লাঠি হাতে দাঙ্গাবাজদের ধাওয়া দিয়েছিলেন। তিনি বলতেন ও দৃঢ়ভাবে বিশ্বাস করতেন, আমি সরকারপ্রধান ও একজন মানুষ হয়েও কোনোদিন সংখ্যালঘুর ওপর নির্যাতন বরদাস্ত করব না। ���সাম্প্রদায়িক নেহেরু শুধু ভারতের গর্ব না পুরো পৃথিবীর জন্য অনুকরণীয়।

সমাজতন্ত্রের প্রতি নেহেরু মহব্বত সর্বজনবিদিত। পুঁজিবাদী ব্যবস্থার ঘোরতর বিরোধী এই মানুষটি বামপন্থি ও ডানপন্থিদের রেষারেষির সময়ে তৃতীয় বিশ্বের গরিব দেশগুলোকে নিয়ে তুলনামূলক নিরপেক্ষ থাকতে চেয়েছেন। পাশে দাঁড়ানোর সর্বাত্মক চেষ্টা করেছেন তৃতীয় বিশ্বের দেশগুলোর। হ্যাঁ, নিরপেক্ষতা তিনি ধরে রাখতে পারেননি। পশ্চিমাদেশগুলোর আগ্রাসনের বিরোধিতা করলেও সোভিয়েট ইউনিয়ন হাঙ্গরি দখল করে নিলে নেহেরু প্রশংসনীয় ভূমিকা পালন করতে পারেননি। ঔপনিবেশিক শাসনে বারবার কারারুদ্ধ নেহেরু পুঁজিবাদী রাষ্ট্রগুলোকে সবসময় ঘৃণার চোখে দেখেছেন। চীনসহ বামপন্থি সকল রাষ্ট্রের সঙ্গে সদ্ভাব রেখেছেন রাজনৈতিক ও অর্থনৈতিকভাবে। নেহেরুর সমাজতন্ত্রঘেঁষা অর্থনৈতিক নীতির কারণে দীর্ঘদিন ভারতের কাঙ্ক্ষিত অর্থনৈতিক উন্নয়ন হয়নি।

তৃতীয় বিশ্বের অবিসংবাদিত নেতা হিসেবে নেহেরুকে মাটির নামিয়ে আনে চীন। নেহেরু ও কৃষ্ণমেনন দু'জনই চীনের সাথে সীমান্ত বিরোধকে গুরুত্ব দেননি। শান্তির বানী প্রচার করা নেহেরু প্রতিরক্ষাখাতে ব্যয় বৃদ্ধির তাৎপর্য বুঝতে সক্ষম ছিলেন না। কারণ পাকিস্তানব্যতীত ভারতের কোনো প্রতিবেশী দেশ ভারতকে কখনো আক্রমণ করতে পারে তা নেহেরুর মতো শান্তিবাদীর অচিন্তনীয় ছিল। ১৯৬২ সালে যুদ্ধে ভারতের শোচনীয় পরাজয় নেহেরুর জীবনের সবচেয়ে বড়ো ব্যর্থতা। এই পরাজয় আজন্মলালিত মতবাদকে বিসর্জন দিতে বাধ্য করে নেহেরুকে। ধনতন্ত্রের কট্টর সমালোচক নেহেরু বাধ্য হন যুক্তরাষ্ট্রের কাছে প্রতিরক্ষাসামগ্রী সাহায্য চাইতে। শশী থারুর নেহেরুর জীবনের এই ঘটনাকে আরও বিশ্লেষণ করতে পারতেন। তাতে নেহেরুর মনস্তাত্ত্বিক দ্বন্দ্বের জায়গাটি পরিষ্কার হতো।

ভারতকে শিক্ষা দিয়ে গিয়ে চীন নেহেরুকেও শিক্ষা দিয়ে ছাড়ে। এই শিক্ষার পর নেহেরু হঠাৎই যেন বুড়িয়ে গেলেন। মৃত্যু টেনে নিল বীরপূজারিদের ভূখণ্ডের মহাবীর পণ্ডিত জওহরলাল নেহেরুকে।

শশী থারুরের গদ্য সবসময় ধ্রুপদ। এবারও ব্যতিক্রম হয়নি। তবে জীবনীগ্রন্থের যথার্থতা ব্যক্তির জীবনকে ধারাবাহিক বর্ণনায় করতে পারলেই বিচার হয় না। ব্যক্তি যে সময়ে বেঁচে ছিলেন সেই সময়ের অর্থনৈতিক, সামাজিক ও রাজনৈতিক পরিবেশের সামঞ্জস্যপূর্ণ বয়ান জীবনীগ্রন্থকে প্রামাণ্য করে তোলে। নেহেরুর রাজনৈতিক প্রতিদ্বন্দ্বী মুসলিম লীগের কর্মকাণ্ড নিয়ে ধারণা পাওয়া যায় না, এমনকি নেহেরুর সমসাময়িক নিজ দলের প্যাটেল ও জিন্নাহ কী করছেন তার প্রতিআলোচনা থাকলে বইটি সমৃদ্ধ হতো। শশী থারুর নেহেরুকে সর্বাঙ্গসুন্দরভাবে চিত্রিত করতে পারেননি। জীবনীগ্রন্থ হিসেবে এটি একেবারেই সাধারণ মানের।

[Prasenjit Basu · Rating 2 out of 5]

Starting from the title, this book is a transparent attempt by Tharoor to regain the Nehru-Gandhi family’s favours, after having cast Indira as the villain (Priya-Duryodhani) and Jawaharlal as the blind idealist Dhritarashtra in the Great Indian Novel. Pleasant enough to read, but clawing in its paeans to Nehru, whose many abject failures are a mild add-on at the end.

[Raghu Nathan · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is not easy to write a biography of a towering and complex personality like Nehru and not end up short. Everyone interested in India and its history has an opinion on Nehru and often they are diametrically opposite to one another. Tharoor, like me, is an admirer of Nehru and believes that his contribution to India is immense. This naturally, has its effect on his portrayal of Nehru and so this book should not be viewed as a comprehensive study of the man or of all his achievements and failures. I see this book as another perspective on Nehru and a well-written one.

Nowadays, in India and particularly in the Indian diaspora, it is fashionable to denounce Nehru as the 'lotus-eater' from Kashmir and as one who ruined India's economic development and also as one who encouraged a pseudo-secular culture in India. Tharoor challenges this well in his book and shows the legacy of Nehru and the India that he tried to build on the pillars of democratic institution-building, staunch pan-Indian secularism, socialist economics at home and a foreign policy of non-alignment. In addition, I found that Tharoor brings out certain aspects of the past which are generally not highlighted in the teaching of history in our schools in India.

For example, it was his father Motilal Nehru whose liberal and rationalist temperament that gave the son his scientific inclinations and agnosticism. Motilal had no time for the self-appointed guardians of any faith, abhorred bigotry and had contempt for Hindu communalism which mirrored the Muslim League. Motilal was also moderate and believed in compromise to find common ground. One can see that Jawaharlal Nehru imbibed all these qualities. I had never known that Motilal was such a significant personality.
For all those Indians who talk ill of Nehru's independent thought process, Tharoor gives some interesting snippets. Nehru wrote in 1927, "England, in order to save herself from extinction, will become a satellite of the US and incite American imperialism to fight by her side". On China in the 1940s, he writes that a communist victory would not necessarily mean a rule by the principles of Marx; the role of the 'small peasant' would ensure a departure from 'pure communism'. He also speculates in the 1940s that Britain and the US will join together to create a powerful Anglo-Saxon bloc to dominate the world.
Tharoor writes about another little-known and interesting snippet about Nehru's democratic instincts. Nehru himself penned an pseudonymous essay in the Modern Review in the late 1930s, warning the countrymen to put a check on Nehru and stop him from becoming a Caesar as he has all the makings of a dictator in him! This was because he was conscious of the risk that power, and in particular mass adulation, could turn one's head.

There have been many who denounce on his conduct of foreign policy. Still, I am in agreement with Shashi Tharoor when he says: " Nehru projected a different ideal for India on the world stage. The force of example, the nobility of aspiration and the articulation of India's interests as those of a humanistic universalism, all served to give Nehru's India stature. India did not speak in terms of nation-state rivalry or patriotic chauvinism ; Nehru sought a loftier place for India on the world stage. For all its flaws, this credibility was not easily achieved.". Such idealism obviously does not pay much dividends nor is it possible for any nation to sustain it consistently. But it shows Nehru's vision of an India, inspired by his tutelage under Gandhi and at the dawn of India's independence in the late 1940s, there was a case for such idealism.

The book brings out Tharoor's passion for India through Nehru. Tharoor himself is a citizen of the world and was an UN official and through his literary abilities, he paints a composite picture of Jawaharlal Nehru. With the rising middle-class in India, which like elsewhere, tends to be more right-wing, sectarian and parochial, this book is a good balancer for the young of India to understand the ideals of the 'Nehru-Gandhi' vision of India.

[Palahalli Rajesh · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book is a fascinating journey through the life of Pt. Nehru, without being in any sort of biased bigots. It is an honest approach to bring into light Nehru’s legacies; there are good, bad, and ugly sides of it. One needs to accept Nehru with all his glaring failures, which will no doubt torment his soul, not only till his death; but continues even today. Along with it comes his stupendous success too! In a Hindu majority India he established a secular state which stood the storms of religious fanatics; a fact testament, months earlier, in India as his grandson's Italian born, Christian, widow lead her party to a tremendous victory, giving them second straight term in office, against staunch Hindu party.
Shashi Tharoor has exhaled readers with vivid picture of India’s freedom struggle to its earlier days. The narrations at time not so impressive; this one should expect while reading History!

[Bharath Kumar · Rating 5 out of 5]

A Great book which takes you through the life of a person known for his diplomacy written by an equally matched diplomat,who writes a sentence as long as a page and still you will be able to read it with excellent fluency.

[Mariana · Rating 4 out of 5]

A quick read, a thoughtful appraisal of Nehru.

[Vik · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not very well researched but written with sophisticated style

[Sivasothi N. · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a riveting account of Nehru, which explores his background and contributions to Indian independence, which were truly remarkable! And then scrutiny of his struggle to govern based on pillars which are fading. Democratic institutions and secularism established India, along with non-alignment. But his socialist economics took its toil and may only now be overcome.

It’s a respectful but not a doting account. A good read!

[Razi Shaikh · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is not so much a biography as a timely reflection on Pandit Nehru, the country's first Prime Minister, indeed the man who made his countrymen realize what it meant to be Indians. Shashi Tharoor does full justice to the man, in his crowning glories, in all his tarnishing flaws. It's a humanistic picture, neither overly critical nor degenerating into flattery. Nehru comes across as a man both bound by destiny and enamoured of it, a man of deep contemplation and a man in perennial hurry, a person who decorated the past while aligning it with the future. Poetic, picturesque, this is a recommended reading for all those who would like to know what Jawaharlal Nehru was, of the nation that made him and the nation he made.

[Rimjhim Saxena · Rating 4 out of 5]

What a world we live in where appreciating & understanding India’s first prime minister is an unpopular opinion. However, few men have made me think, contemplate and learn as much as JL Nehru has. This is a decent book which captures an overview of JL nehru’s life and legacy. It at times is doting but overall a nice read.

[Booxoul · Rating 3 out of 5]

Jawaharlal Nehru has been an important part of me growing up.

In fact, he is part of every child in India, isn’t he?

We as a kid use to wait for his birthday with excitement and furor.

He has also been an integral part of India’s struggle for freedom.

Jawaharlal Nehru was also free India’s first Prime Minister, who laid foundations on which today’s India stands proud.

In Jawaharlal Nehru’s biography ‘Nehru: The Invention of India’, noted critic and columnist and numerous literary award winner Shashi Tharoor examines the life of Nehru.

With unsparing objectivity and wit, Shashi Tharoor in his elegant writing re-examines Nehru as a person and the impact he had on India. And how his modern principles had favorable and adverse effects on India.

This book takes its readers on vestiges of Nehru’s life through many events that made him a freedom fighter to the political leader of Congress and then a PM.

Unlike his father, Nehru turned out to be a lousy husband and a father, whereas his father Motilal Nehru was a dedicated father.

In this book, Shashi Tharoor far from singing praises for Nehru, he unsparingly unravels the layers of Nehru, replete with paradoxes and vainglory. Maybe, because of this very nature of his, he failed in his leadership in Post Independence era.

The written Language of Shashi Tharoor is unquestionable.

This engaging short by Tharoor is a quick and easy read.

Although at some places I found the narration to be dragging a bit. A bit of a dull moment here and there.

This book has earned a 3 star for Tharoor’s unbiased and beautiful writing style, but the book kind of failed to impress me.

[Nandini Chakravorty · Rating 4 out of 5]

As someone who has little knowledge about Indian history, I found this novel incredibly educational as well as engaging. Though I did read it in installments, the tone throughout the novel kept me from giving up on it. The story took me on a journey that I found both moving and exciting. I also appreciated the analysis of the facts presented throughout which allowed me to gain insight into the existence of the range of perspectives that exist regarding the man's policies and legacy. Definitely going to try to learn more about Nehru and hopefully understand the controversy that surrounds him.

[Parth Agrawal · Rating 4 out of 5]

A revelation. A lot is misunderstood, misinformed and misinterpreted as far as the protagonist of the story is concerned. Popular stories that I had heard of Mr Nehru since my childhood includes:

1) He was a freedom fighter
2) He sacrificed a lot for the independence of our country
3) His birthday is celebrated as children's day because he had so many illegitimate children
4) He has had love affairs with plenty of women
5) Edwina Mountbatten was the woman who was responsible for the partition of our country as she convinced him to accede to this demand by sleeping with him
6) He never really agreed with Gandhi instead he only followed him because he wanted to the rule the independent India

I'm not going to argue as to whether or not these stories are true or are apocryphal but what I understood after reading this book is that these stories magnify the failures and belittle the achievements. He took rein of our country when it was at its most difficult phase. Simultaneously, he had to juggle amongst the following matters: Foreign Affairs, economic condition, maintaining law and order, convincing princely states to join Union of India, maintain National security especially at border, upholding secularism, rehabilitation of refugees who had moved to India due to partition. I don't know how many of you would agree with me but that JD is pretty demanding and anyone who would've been up for the job would've made some or the other mistakes. There are many stories in book which will help you to empathize with the leader as to how multiple responsibilities along-with mammoth expectations can lead to a cocktail of unrest

Let's reflect upon the particular allegation of partition for which Mr Nehru is blamed. Congress came into existence in 1885 by A O Hume and Muslim League came into existence in 1906. Before 1906, there was no communal difference between Hindus and Muslims as both representatives were from Congress. When Britishers began to divide Indians in the name of religion, there was an aristocratic group of Muslims who formed the league which was led by Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Now until the elections of provincial legislatures of 1930s (as per the regulations of GOI act of 1935), out of all the Muslim votes that were cast, the league only got 4.4% of them. Until now, the idea of secession was nowhere on the table and Muslim League's claim of the sole representative of all the Muslims of India rang hollow

World war 2 started after these elections and Britishers started to loose power and wealth at an alarming rate. At this time, all the prominent leaders of Congress including Nehru and Gandhi were in jail and since they were not allowed any contact with the outside world, they were largely unaware of the happenings of outside world. During this period, Muslim league strengthened its communal position across India. They were provided with pelf and patronage from the Britishers for their campaigns which finally resulted into their sole representation of Muslims of India. After partition, the picture got cleared through Lord Mountbatten as to why was Britishers encouraging Muslims of India to form their independent state

Until the Independence of our country, Western world's(which includes UK as well) image in the Islamic population was very negative because of imperialism and the specific case of supporting Israel over Palestine. So, through this man-oeuvre they wanted to win an Islamic state in their favor which would further their causes in the group of gulf countries

What is the lesson that we get here? Irrespective of what the global powers say regarding peace keeping, every country almost always tries to subtly further their own cause

Do read this one as it is required to set the record straight of a lot of Indians who are libing in a mirage

[Sneha Bollepalli · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a concise and comprehensive account on the life Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru covering almost every major part of his life, right from a small legend related to his birth to the legacy left by him to India after his death. The book was written by Shashi Tharoor, a former Member of Parliament of India and a member of Indian National Congress, the same political party to which Nehru belonged, so I was naturally afraid this might be a biased book glorifying Nehru and being a lesser critique about Nehru’s mistakes. But, I was quite surprised, in a good way, by the balanced approach Tharoor has in depicting and interpreting Nehru and his ‘Invention of India’. It’s the most balanced book about the life of Jawaharlal Nehru I read yet, and I’m glad I read this book. The book gives a fair detail of Nehru, his idea of ‘Invention of India’, his dreams about India and his efforts to achieve that dream without shying away from mentioning and being critique about his failures in the process. If you are interested in getting a non-biased glimpse of Nehru and his ideologies without actually making an extensive research about the man, this book could be a great starting point.


Personal Note:
Life of the first Prime Minister of India, has always been intriguing and fascinating story. Though I never studied extensively about my country’s first Prime Minister other than learning about him along with other freedom fighters in school, I knew enough to understand that his life story and he himself was a fascinating figure. Even though I did read a collection of his letters to his daughter Indira (Letters from a Father to his Daughter), I’ve always wanted to make an extensive read on him since a long time because he has laid strong foundations to the country in his tenure as a Prime Minister which even after nearly six decades after his demise (still in office) continue to have their effect directly and indirectly in the country’s current social, economical and political scenarios. Letters from a Father to his Daughter was a good start into knowing his life, but it did not really intrigue me into reading more about him. This book did the opposite.

[Sai Kanth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Much of Nehru, his policies, his socialism, his contribution to building a united India, and even his legacy, is grossly misinterpreted and misunderstood by the politicians, analysts and the general public of today. This book puts into perspective how the best and worst of India as we know it today find their roots in the best and worst of Nehru and his government. Imperfect as he was, few statesmen have had a more dramatic impact on India's international standing than Nehru.

In a period where political dialogue is defined by name calling and branding people who disagree with your views as anti-national, Tharoor does an exceptional job of portraying Jawaharlal Nehru not as a left-wing politician but as a human being: imperfect yet consistent, (some times) dated yet visionary, and emotional yet calculating. Through this book, Tharoor also reminds us of what Gandhi, Nehru, Patel and others had fought for, the ideas that independent India was built on, and the values and principles that are important to remember today more than ever.

[Sulav Rayamajhi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tharoor ascribes four pillaring Legacy of Nehru to India viz, Democratic institution building, Pan Indian Secualrism, Peculiar Socialist economy and contribution in Indian Foreign Policy and Non-Aligned Ideology. Among the four first two flourished successfully ( Both of them are under onslaught by ruling government of India), the socialist economy failed whereas the NAM which was reaction to Cold War era is no more relevant. Tharoor being member of INC might have hyperbolized it (even though he points out the weakness of Nehru).
However his syncretic upbringing, reflective behavior, sense of wonderness (philosophical musings) and writings are what lures me. Nevertheless like all human he is also fallible (no he is not a Demigod) and he has couple of sort comings to. Hope I'll get to read more of book on Nehru, his original writings and History of India.

[Catiana Cartwright · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was interesting to read about this period of history, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend this book as your go-to source. The author did make the topic accessible and pretty effectively explained the various parties involved (at least in the first half). But I was distracted by annoying biases and a kinda forced narrative around Nehru's life. Every time the book referenced Nehru's official biography, I had to wonder, "why am I not reading that?"

[Darshan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Shashi Tharoor is well articulated and here, he writes coherently about Nehru's life in an easy to follow along manner. He gives an objective view of his successes, his shortcomings and also touches on the relationship that he shared with Gandhi. This books acts as a good backbone to understanding how the Gandhi family continues in Indian politics.

[Nayan · Rating 3 out of 5]

A short essay on the life of India's first Prime Minister would be the perfect way to describe this book.

[Aditya · Rating 3 out of 5]

My writing has no structure: just a few random thoughts.

1 Honestly, picked this up just for Tharoor (and because it was on sale) and wasn't disappointed. It's simply written, doesn't burden you with sources and citations, and explains the man and his life, and his evolving beliefs through his life. Having read other books which go a little deeper into the subject like Alex Vonn Tunselmann's Indian Summer, this one is light on history but a good pleasant time pass read for a lazy Sunday.

2. Coming to the man himself, I've always found it ironic that a man like Nehru, who was in so many ways elite and unrepresentative to the masses of his time, would be immensely relatable to the upper middle class/elite sections of society even post liberalisation generation because of his liberal values and outlook on many contentious social issues of his day.

3. He was progressive, rationalistic, deferent to cultural norms but not uncritically. He believed in personal freedoms, and certainly enjoyed them, though it is another matter altogether that he later also played a huge part in the stifling of the same for his political opponents by way of introducing the restrictions on fundamental rights (excellently written about by Tripurdaman Singh).

4.Basically Nehru was the quintessential left liberal- privileged, outspoken, and vociferous about saying, and being seen as saying the right things, and taking a moral high ground over issues based on his secularised, socialistic outlook but at the same time, doing more to co-opt the masses into the nationalistic movement and prevent them from taking refuge in Communism while siding with the landlord's on most issues. All this while constantly relying on secularism to counter the Hindu Right. Sounds familiar?

5.It's a credit to Tharoor that he doesn't at any point allow the book to become a hagiography. He's objective and critical in bringing out his subject's numerous flaws- his poor and undistinguished performance in studies, his mediocre practice at law, his reliance on his wealthy father to fund his socialist existence, his reliance on contacts and influence within the colonial government which regularly gave him certain benefits not offered to other freedom fighters. His blunders on the international front because of his impetuousness and naivete. All of these are touched upon in deft strokes and it isn't insulting to the reader's intelligence in that regard.

[SUBRATA DATTA · Rating 4 out of 5]

Whenever I have to cross the Ganga (and, that is quite often, say, going to Howrah Station, Kolkata's principal rail terminal, over the Howrah bridge, or going to the State Secretariat over the Second Hooghly Bridge [Vidyasagar Setu] or going by a motorized launch from Dakshineswar to the Belur Math), somewhere deep inside me few words keep ringing. Like the tunes of a much-loved song whose lyrics you have long forgotten: "... ever-changing, ever-flowing, and yet ever the same Ganga."

No, this write-up is not a paean to the River of Bharat. Every time I cross the Ganga, I am reminded of the author of these exquisitively beautiful lines.

I do not remember when I first read those lines. Or where. But they have remained with me since, and will remain with me forever. This is part of Jawaharlal Nehru's last will and testament, written in 1954, at the age of sixty-five: "... [the Ganga] has been a symbol of India's age-long culture and civilization, ever-changing, ever-flowing, and yet ever the same Ganga. ... [She] has been to me a symbol and a memory of the past of India, running into the present, and flowing on to the great ocean of the future." (p. 206)

For me, Nehru, the author of incredibly beautiful English prose, has taken precedence over Nehru, the freedom fighter, or Nehru, the Prime Minister.

Is that unfair? May be. Shashi Tharoor would say, yes. And he has reasons to.

Make no mistake. Nehru: The Invention of India is written by an admirer.

And, make no mistake, either, that that admiration has in no way diminished the wonderful readability of the book. Only, it has been written more than twenty years ago, in 2003. Now, two decades later, with s-o much having changed around us, you have to occasionally pause reading, to place Nehru in the Bharat of 2024.

Did Nehru make mistakes?

Of course he did.

Many.

Stopping the Army from driving out the invaders and referring Kashmir to the United Nations. Silently watching when China gobbled up an independent country whole. (Offering Dalai Lama asylum is poor atonement). Enomoured of his beloved USSR, foisting on the country "planned" economy. Dreaming of internationalism that was clearly beyond the reach of a country just emerging out of the shadow of colonialism.

But to focus on Nehru's failings without taking into account the time he lived and worked in is the job of a vote-seeking politician.

The historian plays by a different rule book.

Two parts of the country have been chopped off in the name of religion. Over five hundred areas of the subcontinent are dithering whether to join India or Pakistan or to remain "independent." Refugees, bereft of everything except their memories, are pouring in in their millions. And, a millennia-old civilization was clearly in danger of descending into primordial anarchy.

And you are to piece together a country out of that physical, psychological, and emotional wreckage.

Easy?

NO.

Could there have been a better Prime Minister? May be. May be not. This is one of history's those unanswerable "what-ifs".

Sixty years after the man passed away, why should we focus only on his shortcomings, and not, at the same time, his achievements also, which are not insignificant?

You will find yourself agreeing with one of the best tributes paid on Nehru's death by one of his great critics and one of his great successors. Atal Behari Vajpayee mourned in May 1964, "that vibrancy, and independence of mind, that quality of being able to befriend the opponent and enemy, that gentlemanliness, that greatness" (p. 236)

Today's politicians - all of us, really - have a lot to learn, both from the mourner and the mourned.

Nehru: The Invention of India has not necessarily made me a Nehru bkakt; but it came dangerously close to making me a Shashi Tharoor bhakt!!

To be an admirer of the subject and to write an unbiased, clear-eyed biography is no mean feat.

As I am writing this, I have already taken up my next book.

Why I am a Hindu written by ...

... well, eh...

... by Shashi Tharoor!

I would love to know.

The next time I am cruising over the Ganga from Belur Math to Dakshineswar, I know, over the constant humming of the motor of the creaking launch, like the refrain of a long-forgotton song, the words will keep ringing somewhere deep inside me:

"...ever-changing, ever-flowing, and yet ever the same Ganga..."

[Rajdeep Chauhan · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked up this book with a slight sense of scepticism and a natural fear of it being adulatory, like most biographies authored by people belonging to the same ideological sect as their subject (here the biographer being one of the frontline leaders of the party led by Nehru's descendants) tend to be. But, to my surprise it was far from being the case.
In this short biography running about 250 pages, Tharoor tries and to a large extent succeeds in maintaining his reverence for Nehru while retaining his ability to critically analyse the follies of his subject. It is a very compact account of Nehru's prince-like western upbringing, his early radicalism, rise to fame, ideological disagreements with his peers, rise as an international leader, blind idealism and declining efficiency among other such things with Tharoor's commentary on how the leader's life shaped the life of India.The book also sheds light on his much debated private life but it is certainly more political than personal.

Shashi Tharoor states in the preface - "This book involved no original research into the archives,it is a reinterpretation of material largely in the public domain".
Nonetheless, the book proves to be a very insightful overview on life and legacy of the man without whom independent India was inconceivable in its formative years. It is certainly not the best biography on Nehru but it is great in the sense that it serves its purpose of offering a vivid portrait of Nehru for the general reader in a short slim book.

The current shift in the Indian politics towards Hindutva ideology and its contrast to the Nehruvian idea of India makes the book even more compelling.

(The book is perfect for someone who is just starting out and is looking for a basic introduction to the life and legacy of Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru)