|
On October 2nd, 2009, MJ Akbar was in Singapore for a book talk at The Tanglin Club. He spoke about Partition, about the idea of Pakistan, about Islam and what it means to be Muslim in India and Muslim in Pakistan, about Gandhi, about Nehru and
Nehru's love affair with Edwina, about Jinnah’s love for Shakespeare, about the idea of Independence, and so much more, all in rhetoric that made the audience crave more.
Rinkoo Bhowmik met firebrand journalist MJ Akbar who was in Singapore
for a book talk
Unafraid to speak his mind, Akbar has
had his fair share of detractors. Very recently (2008) as he was
driving to work on a Saturday morning, his Blackberry began beeping
incessantly with incoming messages asking him to check the morning’s
Asian Age (of which he was editor-in-chief ). His name had been pulled
off the masthead! He had been unceremoniously fired by his publisher
for refusing to kowtow to the government.
Speaking to the firebrand editor in his hotel on the day he arrived in
Singapore, I asked, gingerly, about the recent ‘incident’ with Asian
Age. Pointblank reply: “They threw me out.” There’s unabashed
arrogance in being himself. Which explained his answer to another
question on why he quit politics. “You see, in journalism they don’t
teach you the one thing you need in politics. Humility.”
Another hypothetical question. Suppose we were to revive the brilliant
Telegraph Debates here in Singapore, what topic would you suggest? MJ
almost spluttered over his coffee. “In Singapore? For a debate, you
need to provoke. And that wouldn’t be allowed here.”
So what’s an unprovocative topic he would choose for Singapore? “Why
are Indians honest only when they are out of the country?” Hmm, food
for thought.
Interesting, but back to Nehru and Edwina? So did they?
MJ read an extract from his book on an incident (that Russi Mody had
himself narrated to MJ) of how a young Russi had once opened the door
of a room in the Governor’s House and had seen Jawaharlal and Edwina
in a clinch. “Jawaharlal Nehru looked at Russi Mody and grimaced.
Russi quickly shut the door and walked out.”
(Nehru: The Making of India by M. J. Akbar) Hot stuff! Get your hands on a copy at
www.buzzzar.com
(Exclusive
Offer for buzzar readers)
Add your comments
on this at Buzzar
column :
http://forum.buzzzar.com/viewtopic.php?p=709#p709
(You can even
Read Chapter,
Read the review
NEHRU: THE MAKING OF INDIA and
Buy
here
Here are some responses from members of the audience
that evening:
“MJ remains an unabashed admirer of
Nehru, as he demonstrated through his passionately adulatory biography
two decades ago. That biography emphasized the role of Britain’s
long-standing doctrine of “divide and rule” as being the primary cause
of Partition: starting with the backing of Sir Sayyid Ahmed Khan in
the 1880s, then the creation of the Muslim League explicitly at
Viceroy Minto’s behest in 1906, to accepting Jinnah as “sole
spokesman” for Muslims when there was no electoral basis for this in
1937-40. But in the face of the criticisms now flying from Jaswant
Singh and Stanley Wolpert, MJ is steadfast in defending Nehru and
Patel with a subtly different argument. Accepting the Cabinet Mission
plan of 1946 (which was briefly endorsed by BOTH the Congress and
Muslim League, until Congress president Nehru’s press statement --
that an independent India would not accept all its provisions –
provided a reason for Jinnah to walk away from the brief hope of a
united India), MJ now asserts that the result of accepting the Plan
would have been a hopelessly Balkanized India. In some eyes (including
mine!), that is a bogey that does not stand scrutiny: if Congress (and
secularist Muslims like Sindh’s Allah Bux Soomro and GM Syed, NWFP’s
Ghaffar Khan, Punjab’s Khizr Hayat and Bengal’s Fazlul Huq) had
continued to compete for political power, the Hindu/Muslim fault-line
would have gradually diminished in importance, and the Muslim League
itself would’ve had opportunities to gain power in states as diverse
as Madras and Kerala through alliances with the Dravida, communist and
other parties -- quickly creating the basis of a better-functioning,
competitive democracy.”
– P.K. Basu, President, India Club Singapore
“While the blame game rages on, I
liked MJ’s reasoning that our leaders had no
template to follow. India was the first of Britain’s enslaved
dominions to have the temerity to rise in rebellion. It’s
easy to say in hindsight that we should have done this or
we should have done that.We were blazing a trail with no picture of
where that would lead us.” –
Rinkoo Bhowmik, Media Consultant
“The fact that Jinnah ate pork
or wasn’t personally pious has been noted by other
historians. I enjoyed learning from Akbar, though, that Jinnah wanted
to be a Shakespearean actor when he was young. There is a
theatricality to the whole independence movement in India, a sense of
politicians playing different roles at different times, and this
explains a lot about Jinnah’s strategy and success.”
– Neel Chowdhury, Singapore-based journalist
for TIME Magazine and author of The Inheritors, published in early
2009 by Random House.
“While looking back at
historical events one is tempted to apportion credit and blame to
personalities. MJ rightly pointed out that it is difficult to say as to
who was more responsible for the Partition in 1947 - Jinnah or Nehru
or other leaders of the Indian freedom movement. But at the talk he
didn’t spend any time on exploring the responsibility of the greatest
force of the time - the British - which seems like an omission.”
– Aarti Mehra, Secretary of India Club and
Head of Commodity Structured Finance, Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ.
“Incredibly insightful and well-balanced views from probably one of
the most knowledgeable authorities on political events that shaped
India and Pakistan in the 20th century” –
Atul Gogna
“I liked Akbar’s point about the idea of India. It is a complicated
idea, a mysterious idea, but it exerts a great power over Indians and
non-Indians alike. Akbar is right that it’s one of the main reasons
such a diverse and chaotic country hangs together.”
– Neel Chowdhury, journalist/author
“Akbar is one of the finest
scholars on Islam as it relates to South Asia. He was a compelling
and provocative speaker who handled the questions on India
and Pakistan with refreshing clarity and honesty.”
– Preeti Dawra, Head of External Affairs, LKY School of Public Policy
 Subscribe Feeds
|
|
MJ VOICE ON THE WEB |
|
Pakistan will have to pay a heavy
price |
|
The India Club Book Talk |
|
BBC Ek Mulaquat |
|
Jinnah - Disturbed Spirit |
|
US protectionist policy to hit
India, China |
|
Interview at Manipal Institute
|
|
Sir Syed Memorial Lecture at Aligarh
Muslim University |
| |
“So did they or did they not? Did
Jawaharlal Nehru and Edwina Mountbatten have an affair?”
That was perhaps the lightest of asides that MJ Akbar posed to his
audience at the India Club Book Talk, an evening charged with
political gunfire. It was quintessential MJ – provocative,
scholarly, opinionated, cerebral, witty. The firebrand journalist
and historian tackled prickly issues like who is to blame for
Partition, the idea of Pakistan, the roles of Nehru, Gandhi and
Jinnah, being Muslim in India and being Muslim in Pakistan, gender
equality and more with disarming honesty and conviction.
MJ Akbar is not only one of India’s foremost journalists but also
is most colourful. He dropped into the journalistic stratosphere
like a meteor in the ’70s kick-starting the modern Indian magazine
industry with the current affairs weekly, Sunday. In 1982 he
launched The Telegraph, once again changing the face of the
newspaper industry in India forever. With The Asian Age he founded
India’s first global daily. A one-time Member of Parliament, he
has written several highly acclaimed books like Nehru: The Making
Of India, Kashmir: Behind the Vale, Riot After Riot, India: The
Seige Within, The Shade of Swords and Blood Brothers among others.
 |
|
