Scan barcode
rkapil7's review against another edition
2.0
Pity those who never got to know about sensible right wing. Our nobel laureate goes on with his center-left position throughout the book, word 'hindutva' occurs at numerous places.
Lets start with secularism, his holiness enumerates many of Hindutva's problems with secularism, all fine but he completely misses the points discuss on what secularism should function like. Leave alone discussing about govt control of hindu temples, HE got a problem with Hindu right wing's patriarchal position w.r.t. Shah Bano but not with the Shah Bano case itself!
About Nuclearization - Again HE got a problem with right wing's philia with the bomb and he argues that the risk has increased because both the countries have nuclearized but he doesn't realize that there has always been a risk when you got a psycho neighbor. HE discusses India's passion for nuclearization made Pakistan also pursue the same path but would he care to discuss the possibility of Pakistan pursuing the path and reaching the goal before India?
About class - The same stupid arguments to reduce inequality without caring for equality of opportunity and shit loaded with intersectionality theme of social 'scientists'. How about shifting focus from inequality to poverty? As he is an 'economist' he could have delved into Economic reforms necessary to reduce poverty and SHOULD have tirated against leftist policies coming in a way to reduce poverty for decades. Oh well 'welfare economists' don't deal with this shit i guess?
In short this book be titled "Arguments against Hindutva from center-left POV" and not "Argumentative 'Indian'"
Lets start with secularism, his holiness enumerates many of Hindutva's problems with secularism, all fine but he completely misses the points discuss on what secularism should function like. Leave alone discussing about govt control of hindu temples, HE got a problem with Hindu right wing's patriarchal position w.r.t. Shah Bano but not with the Shah Bano case itself!
About Nuclearization - Again HE got a problem with right wing's philia with the bomb and he argues that the risk has increased because both the countries have nuclearized but he doesn't realize that there has always been a risk when you got a psycho neighbor. HE discusses India's passion for nuclearization made Pakistan also pursue the same path but would he care to discuss the possibility of Pakistan pursuing the path and reaching the goal before India?
About class - The same stupid arguments to reduce inequality without caring for equality of opportunity and shit loaded with intersectionality theme of social 'scientists'. How about shifting focus from inequality to poverty? As he is an 'economist' he could have delved into Economic reforms necessary to reduce poverty and SHOULD have tirated against leftist policies coming in a way to reduce poverty for decades. Oh well 'welfare economists' don't deal with this shit i guess?
In short this book be titled "Arguments against Hindutva from center-left POV" and not "Argumentative 'Indian'"
sheelal's review against another edition
1.0
** I didn't read the entire book because I just couldn't stomach the thought of finishing a poorly edited and research set of essays. My comments reflect the 1/3 I was able to get through**
1. The essays do not have a cohesive thread throughout. I understand that Sen put them all together in one book, but if he had edited them to reduce redundancy, that would have made it easier to read.
2. The history is basic. He doesn't delve into anything more than what Westerners already know about India - Hinduism, Mughals and Independence. Using the same references to highlight the same points weakens the argument.
3. Regionalism. There is literally NO mention of Southern India in this book that is supposed to reflect the diversity of the country. Rookie mistake. I get that Sen is Bengali, and that Bengali culture obviously impacts the pan-Indian psyche, but it isn't the end all be all. When there are (at least) two chapters exclusively on Bengali figures, it shows how little effort Sen put towards presenting a diverse India
I wasn't impressed and would not recommend this to anyone interested in Indian culture.
1. The essays do not have a cohesive thread throughout. I understand that Sen put them all together in one book, but if he had edited them to reduce redundancy, that would have made it easier to read.
2. The history is basic. He doesn't delve into anything more than what Westerners already know about India - Hinduism, Mughals and Independence. Using the same references to highlight the same points weakens the argument.
3. Regionalism. There is literally NO mention of Southern India in this book that is supposed to reflect the diversity of the country. Rookie mistake. I get that Sen is Bengali, and that Bengali culture obviously impacts the pan-Indian psyche, but it isn't the end all be all. When there are (at least) two chapters exclusively on Bengali figures, it shows how little effort Sen put towards presenting a diverse India
I wasn't impressed and would not recommend this to anyone interested in Indian culture.
shehab's review
5.0
amartya sen is an intellectual giant and this a collection of his essays that ostensibly prove india’s generous argumentative heritage. the book is in fact much more than an orientalism-like rebuttal of western perceptions (appropriated by the indian far-right- the original butt of the book’s rebuttal it would seem) of the indian other. it’s a delightful journey alongside an incredibly learned mind through india’s deep pluralist, rationalist, humanist, agnostic, scientific, artistic roots (and some). and a much more enjoyable read than ed said’s orientalism which set out to do something similar for the middle east. sen starts with:
“Prolixity is not alien to us in India. We are able to talk at some length. Krishna Menon’s record of the longest speech ever delivered at the United Nations (nine hours non-stop), established half a century ago (when Menon was leading the Indian delegation), has not been equalled by anyone from anywhere. Other peaks of loquaciousness have been scaled by other Indians. We do like to speak. This is not a new habit. The ancient Sanskrit epics the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, which are frequently compared with the Iliad and the Odyssey, are colossally longer than the works that the modest Homer could manage. Indeed, the Mahabharata alone is about seven times as long as the Iliad and the Odyssey put together. The Ramayana and the Mahabharata are certainly great epics: I recall with much joy how my own life was vastly enriched when I encountered them first as a restless youngster looking for intellectual stimulation as well as sheer entertainment. But they proceed from stories to stories woven around their principal tales, and are engagingly full of dialogues, dilemmas and alternative perspectives. And we encounter masses of arguments and counterarguments spread over incessant debates and disputations.”
a few key recurring figures star in sen’s history: rabindranath tagore (whose school sen studied at), emperor akbar (a figure that should be made a hero in the islamic world based on this reading) and emperor ashoka all of whom require more reading on. along the way, sen finds time to illuminate the ancient china – india relationship (timely), introduce film maker satyajit ray and show the skeptical side of the ramayana (indeed, sen’s accounts of hinduism where atheism is simply one extreme of the scale are striking).
tagore in particular demands further digging, a wise, universalist, humanist with much to say on nationalism, education, politics spirituality.
riveting. required reading for anyone with even a cursory interest in mother india.
“Prolixity is not alien to us in India. We are able to talk at some length. Krishna Menon’s record of the longest speech ever delivered at the United Nations (nine hours non-stop), established half a century ago (when Menon was leading the Indian delegation), has not been equalled by anyone from anywhere. Other peaks of loquaciousness have been scaled by other Indians. We do like to speak. This is not a new habit. The ancient Sanskrit epics the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, which are frequently compared with the Iliad and the Odyssey, are colossally longer than the works that the modest Homer could manage. Indeed, the Mahabharata alone is about seven times as long as the Iliad and the Odyssey put together. The Ramayana and the Mahabharata are certainly great epics: I recall with much joy how my own life was vastly enriched when I encountered them first as a restless youngster looking for intellectual stimulation as well as sheer entertainment. But they proceed from stories to stories woven around their principal tales, and are engagingly full of dialogues, dilemmas and alternative perspectives. And we encounter masses of arguments and counterarguments spread over incessant debates and disputations.”
a few key recurring figures star in sen’s history: rabindranath tagore (whose school sen studied at), emperor akbar (a figure that should be made a hero in the islamic world based on this reading) and emperor ashoka all of whom require more reading on. along the way, sen finds time to illuminate the ancient china – india relationship (timely), introduce film maker satyajit ray and show the skeptical side of the ramayana (indeed, sen’s accounts of hinduism where atheism is simply one extreme of the scale are striking).
tagore in particular demands further digging, a wise, universalist, humanist with much to say on nationalism, education, politics spirituality.
riveting. required reading for anyone with even a cursory interest in mother india.
More...