This book addresses the problem of untouchability by providing an overview of the subject as well as penetrating insights into its social and religious origins. The author persuasively demonstrates that untouchability is a deeply ambiguous neither inside nor outside society, reviled yet indispensable, untouchables constitute an original category of social exclusion.. "The situation of untouchables is crucial to the understanding of caste dynamics, especially in contemporary circumstances, but emphasis, particularly within anthropology, has been placed on the dominant aspects of the caste system rather than on those marginalized and excluded from it. This book redresses this problem and represents a vital contribution to studies of India, Hinduism, human rights, sociology, and anthropology.
The book is mainly a repackaging of the ideas of others who have written about caste. There are some interesting points in the repackaged material. It is when the author asserts his own opinions that the book becomes biased and unscholarly.
It begins with the title. The author insists on using the hurtful and outdated term Untouchables despite being told by an Indian scholar that the term was inappropriate. When the author is not using the term Untouchables, he uses the condescending term Harijans while acknowledging that the term is considered paternalistic. He won't use the term Dalit because to him Dalits are all militants. Dalit is a term "that higher castes never use in referring to Untouchables." Just who is this book about? Why are the domineering castes being given control over the language used in the book?
He insists on perpetuating the idea that "caste names are generally considered demeaning or even insulting," again subscribing to the viewpoint of the domineering castes.
If you are interested in the ideas of the authors that have been repackaged in this book, read their original works. The author of this book is an amateur in comparison.
I am no expert on the subject but the author painstakingly works his way through his predecessors to give a sense of where he stands. While heavy going in parts, the care and thoughtful comparative reflection on a vast body of anthropological research has made this a strangely significant touchstone for me, in part because of my own memories of a large part of my childhood spent in India , and in part because of my sense that ‘untouchability’ is both very Indian in the religious and cultural setting outlined here, but also universal in some important respects, with echoes in many epochs and places. The chapter on Ambedkar is particularly valuable since its context has been more fully and better explained than most others on this very important and impressive pioneer statesman.