Customer Reviews

Indian Summer: The Secret History of the End of an Empire

5 star:		(19)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

It was clear that Britain could not afford empire. The Jewel had to go. Unfortunately, what held it in place was Britain. And Britain didn't have that much of a clue as to how/where to split it up. Thus, diffidence dictated that it be done as close to ethnic/religious lines as possible, and the state of the British economy, as hastily as possible. Indeed they could have borrowed words from Louis XV ".... apres mois, le deluge." Let the natives sort out their mess. No one more diffident to see it through than Lord Mountbatten. But, did it have to be so bloody messy? It seems that Mountbatten's personal haste brought about all that criminal waste. But who knows the extent to which it would have been less so a year later.

This is history from the top down, which probably is at it should be given the events it chronicles. It focuses squarely on the Mountbattens, the Nehrus, Gandhi and Jinnah. The British Parliament may have decided, but these people pulled the triggers that gave us India, a precariously and maladroitly drawn Pakistan (which later begat Bangladesh), and a festering Kashmir (of course, part of India today, but remember the Sikhs?)which to this day hovers perilously between two atomic powers.

This is a most valuable and amusing book about a critical juncture in the history of the modern world, or perhaps one should say, the dissolution of the Old. Alex von Tunzelmann (an attractive young woman, not a Teuton scribe) has navigated treacherous historical waters with clarity, restraint, and even humor. Her text is a delight to read, even when a light touch is called upon, it is never glib but one born from deeply informed judgment. Particularly warm and engaging is the view of Edwina Mountbatten, for me a somewhat melancholy figure. There was just so much she couldn't do. She was quite a lady; learning about her is worth the price of admission. Highly recommended.

I attended a book signing event on the 13th November 2007 in Brighton were the author talked about the complexities of writing such an epic in which she looked at the dynamics that bought about the fall of an Empire and the most unlikely love story ever not to be reported by the press, that of Edwina Mountbatten and Nehru, India's first Prime Minister.

The book is surprisingly good, I have to confess I didn't have high hopes when I purchased it but the subject is of such interest to me I was willing to take a chance and buy it and I am glad I did.

Ms Von Tunzleman has a written a book that has obviously been researched extensively, both here in the UK and also in India and her candid no nonsense approach to all the subjects she touches, such as Hindu and Muslim hostilities, Mahatma Gandhi's strange predilections that made people both love and hate him, to the fate of the dispossessed, the love story between Nehru and Edwina makes it very interesting to read to the point that you can't put it down.

For a historian Ms Von Tunzleman has made this book very accessible to the ordinary reader, she goes into great detail but she is never boring as she explains how India became a British Empire and how when it finally crumbled into dust, it did so, so swiftly that no one, least of all the British were prepared for the backlash that was to follow.

A superb book with many photos of an era that depicts two nations in transition, India the Jewel in the Crown striking out on its own and Great Britain, suddenly realising that its days as the greatest Empire in the world have come to an end, not so much a tragedy as the inevitability of change in a world flinging of the chains of colonial paternalism.

Alex von Tunzelmann, student of history at Oxford and editor of OSU's Cherwell newspaper in 1998, passes this book as "the secret history of the end of an empire".

"Life and times of Mountbattens in India" would have been a more apt title. The book contains no secret and is not about the end of the empire in entirety.

The book places too much importance on the roles of three individuals: Mountbatten, his wife Edwina and Nehru. The long struggle, mostly non violent, to evict an alien rule by a wide and deep political leadership (some meriting reverence for decades after their death) has been trivialized to a vane member of British royal family sent to unwind the empire; his flirting wife and an equally flirting visionary who led India during and after the transition.

However, one must compliment Alex von Tunzelmann for the sheer objectivity she brings into describing the events in the last days of the Raj.

Alex starts with a funny perspective: There were two countries in 1577. One was a vast, mighty and magnificent empire, brilliantly organized and culturally unified, which dominated a massive swathe of the earth; and the other was an underdeveloped semi-feudal realm, riven by religious factionalism and barely able to feed its masses. Guess what! The first is India and the second is England. In 1857 it was the other way about! Now you know what alien rule does to the ruler and the ruled!

However, a country divided by religion, divided by tribe, divided by caste; a society whose equilibrium derives from repulsion and exclusiveness is, as Karl Marx rightly observed, predestined to be a prey of conquest.

Did Britain rule India in discharge of "the white man's burden"? Not really. The Prince of Wales, visiting India in 1921, found the princely states far better than British India! Quite a royal endorsement against the inept colonial rule that kept the GDP stagnating for over 70 years at the time of this observation!

Is the British attitude toward India patronizingly affectionate as reflected by Edwina's kindly love for Nehru? Not really. Winston Churchill astonished everyone in a dinner party by suggesting that he would have "Gandhi bound hand and foot at the gates of Delhi and let the Viceroy sit on the back of a giant elephant and trample the Mahatma into the dirt"! This reflects the kind of thinking that political leadership in India had to face! (Oh yes, I found one opinion I share with Churchill: Gandhi is a Mahatma!)

Did Mountbatten handle his role reasonably well? Mostly no; occasionally yes.

(a) In mid July 1947, while negotiations about partition, defence, finance, future of princely states and the future of 400 million people raged around him, Viceroy Mountbatten was "busy fussing about flags" seeking Union Jack in the upper canton of the flags of India and Pakistan!

(b) Ten days before independence, in the midst of the violence in Punjab, Mountbatten bothered Nehru with a list of dates upon which the Union Jack might continue to be flown in India after independence!

(c) However, he deserves some praise. In less than one year, Patel and Mountbatten achieved a larger and more closely integrated India than what had been achieved in 130 years of Mauryan rule, 180 years of Mughal empire or 90 years of British Raj.

Alex steers clear of bias in her book to an admirable extent.

One reason why, I would recommend a reading of her chapter on Kashmir.

A well written, timely but cursory history of the end of the British Empire in India as told through the lives of Dickie and Edwina Mountbatten concentrating on the love affair between Nehru and Edwina. The author makes little effort to explain away the obvious favoritism of the Mountbattens towards Nehru's India. The uselessness of the British monarchy especially the Prince of Wales and the utter frivolity of the British occupation are manifest. Regrettably, there is sparse detail on the reasons and rationale why Mountbatten announced the end of the Raj on a mere 90 days notice. The political machinations of the Atlee government and the involvement of Winston Churchill are mentioned based on the research into the papers and archives of the Mountbattens. Broad historical overviews are ignored; Jinnah's role and influence is portrayed as obstructive and destructive, the powerful nationalistic, social and religious forces impelling the partition of the county and the establishment of Pakistan are downplayed and little effort is made to explain the forces
at work causing the carnage and slaughter of millions in 1948.

It is appropriate that I finished reading this book at the stroke of midnight 14 August 2007. This first book by the author is a wonderful retelling of the events and personalities ( Gandhi,Nehru, Jinnah,Dickie ,Edwina, Patel) leading to the independence of India and the Partition to India and Pakistan. The book's strength is the retelling of the close relationship between Jawaharlal Nehru and Edwina Mountbatten.According to the book Edwina was born to immense wealth. Her maternal grandfather left her assets of 3 million pounds ( equivalent to 100 million pounds today ). She inherited even more from her father's side.

Edwina forged a close relationship with Nehru while serving as Vicereine of India. She died in bed in Sabah in 1960 a batch of letters by her bedside and a few letters strewn across her bed- she must have been reading them when she died. All the letters were from Nehru. Edwina was buried at sea from HMS Wakeful, escorted by an Indian frigate the Trishul, sent by Nehru to cast a wreath of marigolds into the waves after Edwina's coffin. Nehru died 4 years later in 1964. ( see pages 60, 351& 352 of book)

According to Judith Brown's Nehru- A Political Life © 2003 at page 366 footnote 46, the best life of Edwina is Janet Morgan's Edwina Mountbatten- A Life of Her Own. © 1991.

Focusing mostly on the people -- British and Indian -- who were involved in the Indian drive for independence from Great Britain, "Indian Summer" goes a long way toward explaining the motives and interactions of the prime players in this great political drama. Highly recommended.

This is a light, breezy account of the last days of the British raj in India, seen for the most from the point of view of Lord Mountbatten, the last viceroy of India and his wife Edwina, who seems in this telling, to have been the more dynamic character.

We also get compelling, if sometimes snarky, portraits of Gandh, Nehru and Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the Muslim leader of Pakistan.

The book does not cover as much territory as the title implies. There really is not much "secret" about this history and the end of an empire implies a larger world view than this book provides.

But still it provides an interesting overview of the events for the general reader.

I enjoyed this book a lot. The writing style is excellent and the story is fascinating. I've read a few books about the amazing story of Indian independence. This one is focused on the personalities involved, particularly Dickie and Edwina Mountbatten and Nehru. As a book about people and personalities, it is more approachable than some of the history books; some of it is downright gossipy, although never in a lowbrow way. So it's very pleasurable and easy to read. Enjoy!

The charm of this book is its readability. The author begins with metaphoric images of a backwater England and a rich India... in 1600. What follows is a brief but engrossing anecdotal background to bring the reader up to the dramatic events of the summer of 1947.

The book focuses on the people who brought forth the new India, and helps you to know who they were and to care about them. For instance, the last Viceroy could have been described through a recitation of his long and prestigeous lineage, but the author gives a more personal account of his youth and how his father's losses shaped his goals. The reader learns, not of the celebrated Ghandhi, but of the personal man and his effect on his all too real and abused family. Edwina Mountbatten's life as a playgirl gives way to a woman of strong character and compassion. Nehru's youth is well drawn, but the later years are sketched, and the portrait becomes more mythical than clear. Least described of the key players is Jinnah who stays in the background of this narrative.

The focus on people comes at the cost of other areas. For instance, the pressure from England to act quickly is covered but not in a blow by blow manner, The pressure on England from the US is mentioned but not described. It isn't it clear how all the political subdivisions were courted and won over to the new India. Who did the talking and how did they present their case to the local rulers? The issues of the partition are not expored, such that the vehemence and duration of the subsequent riots is not fully understood.

The book's high interest readability is due to its descriptions of the humanity of the key players. More nuts and bolts of how policy was developed and carried out may have created a less engrossing narrative.

This is just in response to Ms Klausner's review where she says that Nehru was Gandhi's son-in-law.
She says: "Mountbatten thought he was a great diplomat but his issues were flag designs while people died on the streets and his much more capable spouse had a tryst with Nehru, Ghandi's son-in-law and moral heir apparent."
This is, in fact, not correct. Gandhi and Nehru were not related to one another in any way. Nehru's daughter, Indira Nehru, married Feroze Gandhi, a Parsi, not a Hindu, and he was no relation of Mahatma Gandhi's either.