Midnight's Descendants

by John Keay

HardCover. Pub Date :2014-01-16 416 English HarperCollins UK An epic narrative history that compares and contrasts the fortunes of all the countries that make up South Asia.If British India had not been partitioned in 1947. its population would today be the world's largest At c1.5 billion. Midnight's Descendants (the offspring of those affected by 'the midnight hour' Partition) already outnumber Europeans and Chinese;. and they are growing faster than either They comprise all the peoples. of what is now called 'South Asia' (the preferred term for the partitioned subcontinent of modern India. Pakistan and Bangladesh. plus Nepal and Sri Lanka). 'Midnight's Descendants' is the first history of the region as a whole. Correlating and contrasting the fortunes of all the constituent nations over the last six decades affords unique insights into what is h...

Genres: History, India, Nonfiction, Pakistan, Asia, Bangladesh, Politics

416 pages, Hardcover

First published September 1, 2012

About the author

John Stanley Melville Keay FRGS is an English journalist and author specialising in writing popular histories about India and the Far East, often with a particular focus on their colonisation and exploration by Europeans.

John Keay is the author of about 20 books, all factual, mostly historical, and largely to do with Asia, exploration or Scotland. His first book stayed in print for thirty years; many others have become classics. His combination of meticulous research, irreverent wit, powerful narrative and lively prose have invariably been complimented by both reviewers and readers.

UK-based and a full-time author since 1973, he also wrote and presented over 100 documentaries for BBC Radios 3 and 4 from 1975-95 and guest-lectured tour groups 1990-2000. He reviews on related subjects, occasionally speaks on them, and travels extensively.

Reviews

[Mikey B. · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author gives us the history of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh (which broke away from Pakistan in 1971) since partition in 1947. There is also some discussion on Sri Lanka and Nepal.

Overall, it is a sad history amidst much turmoil. Many leaders in all these countries have been assassinated and this is certainly indicative of instability.

It is written for a person like me – from a Western point of view.

Sometimes the book can have a distant feel and can be confusing. Perhaps this is because there are so many different languages and ethnicities involved, with each trying to assert their cause. Keep in mind that the countries listed above constitute, by far, the world’s most populous region.

It is indeed complex – just look at the border of Bangladesh. I found the break-up of Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan) from Pakistan to be well documented.

The build-up to the siege and demolition of the Babri mosque in Ayodhya, India by Hindu nationalists in 1992 and its’ severe consequences were well outlined by the author.

There is a delicate balancing act required by the leadership in all these countries, more so now that India and Pakistan have nuclear capabilities.

The author also brings up the vast diaspora spread from the Arabian Gulf to North America and how they influence events in their countries of origin.

The book provided me with many insights into this very large and populated landmass. One comes away overwhelmed by the diversity. As the author suggests from time to time the vast illiteracy, the constant flow of refugees, whether from Afghanistan or Bangladesh, and the domination of religion is always a source of danger and volatility.

[Dmitri · Rating 3 out of 5]

BOOKS:
Midnight's Descendants, John Keay - 2014, 352 pg. text (Three Stars)
Midnight's Furies, Nisid Hijari - 2015, 262 pg. text (Four Stars)
While trying to choose a recent book on the history of the India-Pakistan partition these two came up frequently (along with Yasmin Khan's Great Partition written in 2007). It was difficult for me to determine the differences between them, so I decided to read and review both. I haven't had an opportunity to read the Khan book yet, which looks like a more scholarly alternative. Similarly, Indian historian Ramachandra Guha has written about "India after Gandhi". He is quoted extensively by Keay, and I wonder: why not just read Guha? I am unable to answer that at this time, and will have to find out later.
AUTHORS:
Keay-
- British journalist and long-time popular historian of India, not an academic
- Didn't grow up in India, but has spent time in the region as a reporter, researcher and radio presenter
Hajari-
- Indian-American journalist and foreign affairs analyst, not an academic
- Didn't grow up in India, but has spent time in the region, and has won an award as a first-time author
SOURCES:
Keay-
- All English language, by British as well as Indian/Pakistani authors
- Almost all sources are secondary; little original research seems to be done
Hajari-
- All English language, by British as well as Indian/Pakistani authors
- Secondary and some primary sources: letters, diaries, speeches and reports
CONTENTS:
Keay-
-Only the first hundred pages are about the Partition proper, the rest retells India's history to the present
-Covers events in Punjab, Kashmir and Bengal; afterwards India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka
Hajari-
-Includes history leading to and during the Partition only, with the exception of a brief chapter on the legacy
-Covers the Great Calcutta Killings, the riots in Bengal, and events in the Punjab, Kashmir and Hyderabad
VIEWS:
Keay-
- It was an oversimplified solution to divide Hindus and Muslims by area, arrived at by mutual distrust and in a rush to resolution
- There was no regional homogeneity of the various religious and ethnic groups; large minorities lived side by side with majorities
- Pakistan could have been organized as constituent states with Muslim majorities inside India; Calcutta-Bengal & Delhi-Punjab
- The Princely States were never fully integrated into the Raj and resisted ceding their hereditary rights to the new nation-states
- The responsibility for the Partition falls more or less equally to the founders Nehru and Jinnah who failed to foresee the results
- Gandhi was against it, and the main goal of Mountbatten was to leave as quickly as possible with the least trouble for Britain
Hajari-
- Aims to show how the violence that the Partition created defines the relationship between India and Pakistan until today
- Ongoing conflicts in Kashmir and elsewhere have renewed the relationship of antagonism between Muslims and Hindus
- Responsibility for events is placed on both Nehru and Jinnah for ineptitude, arrogance, prejudice and personal animosity
- Nehru is praised for his later performance as Prime Minister, while Jinnah's successors' after 1948 are criticized as weak leaders
- Internal conflicts and misadventures with India would lead to control of Pakistan by the military and the loss of Bengal in 1971
- The military junta would join with the mullahs to rally around religion, instead of to the secular society envisioned by Jinnah
SUMMARY:
Keay- If you want a general, mostly uncontroversial history of India from events leading into the Partition until recent years this book is a good choice. The writing may not have won any awards, but it is intelligent and entertaining. Keay takes a measured view without prescribing what should have been done in order to have averted the crisis of Partition. While his analysis of South Asia after the events of 1947 is somewhat superficial, it does show that the Partition should not be seen in a time capsule.
Hajari- If you are looking for an exciting account focused only on events shortly before and during the Partition you may prefer this book. It is written in an engaging way, and it almost reads like a dramatization at times. This can feel slightly sensational, depending on your personal preferences. Hajari argues that fear of Indian aggression has lead Pakistan towards authoritarian regimes and covert support of terrorism, and an easing of tensions is needed to avoid future conflicts.

[Arun Divakar · Rating 2 out of 5]

A person I know who has rather fine culinary sensibilities once remarked over lunch that the toughest dish she makes is the south Indian recipe of Sambar.Before I even asked why, she remarked that while she can prepare the dish at any time, there are always a hundred tiny different ways in which it can go wrong. I could not agree more with her for there are very few times when I have tasted this dish to my fill and had a lip smacking time about it. Not everyone gets its tune right I suppose. Now let’s come to perspective, for want of a better analogy I would equate the state of affairs (both intra and international) in any nation state to be equivalent to such preparations. At least a good 80 times out of a 100, things go wrong between nations and within nations for the slightest and smallest of reasons. This book offers a detailed examination of the Sambaric (I just coined that word !) conditions prevalent in the theater of South Asia and why they are what they are today.

John Keay promises an examination of the state of affairs across the five prominent nations of India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and it does start off well. The story begins from the time when India wrests its independence from the hands of a senile British empire reeling from the ravages of WWII. The story is something that has been rehashed countless times with the birth of Pakistan, the never healing scars of the post-partition riots and the birth of the conflict over Kashmir which is still echoing across the World. John Keay writes with a certain dispassion that I found to be truly interesting in the initial stages. He does have the awe and wonderment about this lumbering elephant called India and yet he hides no punches or criticism when it comes to the diplomatic tact which has been used to best effect by the Indians while dealing with Pakistan or China. The nation of Pakistan is also given it’s due importance for there is a detailed view of the factors : religious, political and militaristic that has built and sustained this nation since 1947. Through the eyes of different regimes and military dictatorship, it is a vivid portrayal of how a once promised land became a hotbed for armed insurgency.

In spite of the claims in the back jacket, not much attention is lavished on the other nations. Be it Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal or Bhutan all are polished off within the space of 20 to 30 pages. Behind every one of these stories stands the tall shadow of India. To John Keay, the nation is sometimes a savior and sometimes a villain and sometimes stands by with its arms folded as a house of cards in the guise of a stable government comes tumbling down in its own backyard. Personally, I feel this is more of a history of post-independence India than anything else. In exhaustive detail, the author covers the lives of Nehru and Indira and their effect on the nation, India’s struggle for agricultural independence, the wars with China and Pakistan, the state of emergency, Sikh riots, Rajiv’s ascension, the debacle in Sri Lanka and the later assassination of Rajiv and the opening of gates for globalization at the time of Narasimha Rao and Manmohan Singh. Truth be told, it is a rehash of what countless other authors have written and I did not find much of new material in what Keay has contributed here.

As a primer to India’s history and how it has affected its neighbors, this is a good book. If however, you do know what transpired in India post 1947, you can safely give this a miss.

[Jonathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The consequences of the partition of the Indian Subcontinent (whoops, sorry, we're supposed to call it "South Asia" now) are still reverberating, and John Keay, who has written many well-received books on this contentious region is well-placed to narrate the various fates of the nations that gained their freedom from Great Britain after said partition. Struggles over communal differences, over population, territorial disputes, the maintenance of democracy, the clash of ancient cultures and means of control, and the advent of nuclear weapons are all grist to his thorough mill. I could have done with a bit more about the nations other than India: Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal are under-represented here, in my opinion. Another 100 pages in this well-written and informative book would not have gone amiss. Nonetheless, it is a good introduction to the post-1947 history of these countries, and well worth the time one takes to read it, if you have any interest at all in them.

[E.T. · Rating 2 out of 5]

The flap of the book says that this book is a comparative history of India,Pak,Nepal,Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. The book barely devotes a dozen pages to Sri Lanka and Nepal. Secondly there are multiple glaring factual errors. For eg voter turnout of India in 1952 was not 60%. Thirdly, the book seems a rehash (and a bit clumsy rehash) and a poor cousin of existing books on India's post independence history like India after Gandhi by Guha.
Feel like cheated. Bought this book bcoz I liked India:A history by the same author which is still recommended but will be wary of picking up a book by him again.

[Flora · Rating 4 out of 5]

Informative, especially about India. Great to take this back to back with Blood Telegram (the events of which take up just a few pages, combined). Helpful beginner's guide to the Nehru-Gandhi years, and also blissfully up to date. (I wonder what he'll have to say about the Modi government?)

[Abhi Gupte · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a good attempt at writing a comparative history of South Asia's problems. However, Keay struggles to maintain coherence across time, space and theme. For example, there are many cases of jarring jumps across several decades in the pursuit of explaining a particular trend.
I also got the feeling that Keay glossed over some very important topics (terrorism in India). However, he spent a good bit of time on some topics that I was not familiar with (Indian imperialism).
As with most "combined histories", I would prefer reading books on individual topics.

[Jason Sands · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good overview

This is a great book if you want an overview of South Asia since 1947 that doesn't get bogged down in details. Instead of only focusing on only India and Pakistan, it also covers Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh.

[Abhranil Bhowal · Rating 5 out of 5]

Comprehensive, easy to digest history of the incredibly complex collection of nation-states that took form after British India had ceased to exist. Although centered mainly on the Republic of India, the socio-political identity of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal are discussed and the reader is presented with a narrative that, with all its twists and turns, often reads like a fictional thriller. But that is the nature of politics in the region.
A must-read for anyone with a link to South Asia or an interest in understanding why, despite all odds, the region still marches slowly onward.

[J.M. Hushour · Rating 4 out of 5]

For an overview of South Asian history since the inanity of Partition, this might be your best bet. Keay reins it in a little from his excellent, but wackily hypertopical history of China, and focuses on the salient idiocies and surprising achievements of South Asia. Yes, yes, yes--India and Pakistan don't get along very well, but learn why. Moreso, learn why they're actually remarkably similar in some respects and have their stereotypes reversed somewhat. India kind of sucks, politically, at least, and has long-standing and long-suffering issues stemming from outright Hindu nationalist assholes (kind of like the American Republican party). There's tons of internal dissension and animosities that get short shrift in most current discussion. Pakistan we all know and love, for all its faults and hilarious governments, but you'd be surprised that India falls almost too neatly into a "South Asian" type.
The sections on Nepal and Sri Lanka are fleeting, if neat. Bangladesh, thank god, figures larges in the narrative, as it often gets undeservedly shunted aside.

[Raynald Provost · Rating 4 out of 5]

Cela se lit comme un roman d'action: des meurtres, des massacres, de la violence, de la corruption, de la haine et de la comédie. Je ne sais pas comment les personnes du sous continent indien ont réagi à ce livre. Moi cela m'a éduqué tout en me divertissant.

[Sud666 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having read Tharoor's "Inglorious Empire" which detailed the various crimes of the British Empire towards colonial India. For the most part, I agree with his analysis and facts about the rapacious nature of British colonialism. Where I digress is his, quite normal in many leftist Indian academic's interpretations, linking the various and sundry ills of modern India to colonialism.

As the son of immigrants from India, and having visited it a few times, I've found the argument blaming modern India's ills solely on colonialism to be a bit of a stretch. Thus, I was happy to find this excellent book by John Keay (whose "India: A History" is an excellent background book on India's rich past).

"Midnight's Descendants" is an excellent look and historical analysis of the Indian sub-continent post-colonialism. The picture is actually quite damning. The deeply violent Partition and the various military and political conflicts between India and its erstwhile neighbors show a great deal of corruption, cupidity, religious intolerance, racial/caste divides, and imbecilic socialist policies that condemned hundreds of millions of Indians to abject poverty. Almost NONE of those things had much to do with the British, save their arbitrary lines of sovereignty to exacerbate the religious/cultural troubles that have plagued India for thousands of years.

An excellent look into the politics of both India, Pakistan and Bangladesh in the post-colonial world. Keay's book is an excellent history and political science book and a must-read for anyone interested in the Indian subcontinent.

[Agyani · Rating 2 out of 5]

If I manage to get an electronic copy of this book, I will count the number of times author has referenced Guha, Khilnani and Naipaul. Why did John even bother himself writing this book? There are too many flaws in the book to call out (that includes factual errors). If I had to pick one, it will be the title. No, it is not about South Asia. India captures the imagination of this so called ‘historian’ from Great Britain. Do not be mistaken. This book is primarily about India. Contents on Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh are vis-a-vis India. I am now convinced to remove ‘India: a history’ from my ‘want to read’ list. White man’s ‘flawed’ musings.

[Ben]

Fine as a very readable overview of the politics of South Asia since 1947, or realistically of India, Pakistan and (latterly) Bangladesh, with Sri Lanka and Nepal having somewhat unsatisfying walk-on parts.
‘Partition’ is in the title for a reason; so much of this is a miserable litany of intercommunal violence, during and after the first partition of the old Raj. In fact this outweighs pretty much all other areas, e.g. economic development. There is almost nothing on culture.
So beware that this is not an ‘up to date’ continuation of Keay’s more famous India: A History but more of a journalistic briefing.

[gio!! · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not the most engaging read and mainly focused on India as opposed to South Asia. However, it does alright considering how much content is covered and doesn't shy away from addressing the faults of popular figures such as Indira Gandhi.

[Ka Lo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very very interesting history of Indian sub-continent

[Emily · Rating 5 out of 5]

Long and hard to get through, but worth it. Learned a lot I never would have known otherwise.

[Jason · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good book that suffers from issues of depth and breadth. The book begins at essentially the partition of India in 1947 without much explanation for the antipathy between the schools of thought of Jinnah and Nehru, these schools of thought which would ultimately partition the country of India into two (and later three) nations, in addition to causing massive loss of life and economic uncertainty. More information on the time period before 1947 might be helpful for the reader as to why, outside of Britain wanting to leave India as soon as possible, the two sides could not reconcile.

In addition, this book is ultimately one about India, Pakistan, and their relationship. There is some slight discussion of Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh, but without the depth or clarity of discussions of India or Pakistan.

[Ram Krishnan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wonderful flow and an amazing read spanning the events in the Indian subcontinent since 1940s. The author seems to display some bias against Indian Hindus. Only 3 lines mentions about the forced exodus of Pandits from Kashmir valley ,he even doubts there may be a VHP, Sangh etc hidden hand behind it to get political mileage. He mentions Sonia declined Prime Minister post in 2004 whereas it was due to the then president's APJ Abdul Kalam's rejection of her claim which led her to face saving sacrifice farce and nevertheless he does not mention how she was running the UPA's government behind the scenes. Regarding Gujarat Riots the author mentions that 2000 muslims were killed conveniently not mentioning that 700 hindus too were killed.

[Pip · Rating 5 out of 5]

Most people do not release that the biggest mass migration in history was caused by partition( if you add the subsequent Bangladesh independence war which was a direct result of partition)
Hence on that level alone it was a colossal failure, leaving alone that the two very poor nuclear armed countries born of it are still playing it out.John Keay sets this out in his book very clearly and makes the point that the subcontinent has still not got over partition which is evident today ( Rise of the BJP , Islamisation of Pakistan etc)
The Shia Gujarati non practising (aka Jinnahbhai) instigator of partition must be spinning in his grave.

[Patricia · Rating 5 out of 5]

A superb account that delivers the title's promise: a history of South Asia from partition to the present day. Keay is an outstanding researcher and author and this work reflects his depth of knowledge and understanding of the issues the region has faced post-Partition. It is erudite but not overly academic. William Dalrymple's review summed it up perfect: "fluent, readable, up-to-date, and impartial". I have read many books on this topic--books from India's perspective, Pakistan's, biographies of Nehru, Gandhi, Jinnah, Zia, Wavell and the other critical players of the decades covered--but none have covered the subject so evenly, with the story woven together at key points, so well.

[Sandra A. · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is an easily read follow-up to the epic book, "Freedom at Midnight" and other books such as "India After Ghandi" which describe India's independence from Britain and the establishment of the country Pakistan. It assesses the history of, and current status of, South Asia. A main part of the book describes India-Pakistan relations since Partition. The book also looks at other South Asian nations, like Bangladesh,Tibet and Nepal, since the days of Partition and explores their progress in development and self-government. The lion's share of the book is given over to India and Pakistan.

[Randolph Breschini · Rating 3 out of 5]

An OK read!

[Julie]

This book is a helpful introduction to South Asian history - a history which was never required study, but for which I was completely ignorant. Well-written and fairly comprehensive.