IntImate enemy Book RevIew

Ashish Nandy is a person, who tries to investigate in the epistemology of success of Colonies in India. Book gives a broad idea of how the colonization was not just on land but it was on head and heart. It talks about the psychology of Indians and Britain in specific, which made them rule in India. It is also talking about Impact it leaves on the cognitive levels of people and not just physical. It makes us dive into ocean of thoughts at that point of time. It talks about intimacy with colonial ideas and though protesting against it as enemy.

In the First Chapter of Book, named Psychology of Colonialism, the author uses social structure and the psychological structure of both colonizers and colonized as an instrument in explaining the nature of colonialism in the era of British India. He explains the way British who had mere intention of Trade and commerce developed instruments of dominance. According to the Book, it shows that in the earlier phases of establishment of colonies, there used to be mutual respect of each others cultural distinctness, for example in book it is cited that missionary activities were banned and Indian laws dominated in the courts and system of education in India. It was the middle class British and the new generation of Colonizers who bind the colonialism with the cultural and the political aspects acc to book. The book demonstrates that how hard the impact of colonialism was in sense people started observing their salvation in being friend or enemy of British. Book is constantly raising the concept of Indian martial races and concept of Kshatriyahood which matched the hegemonic structure of British which saw manliness as ultimate superior race and therefore they were considered loyal Indian castes. Even the Indians saw them as extremely powerful race which could interface with British and even for the Indians it was a race which could gather the strength to revolt against the British. It also depicts the way the colonizers defended their act by acting as an adult(superior) to the recessive race in order to train them, which would further intrude the ideology of dominance at both ends. Book cites example of Madhusudhan Dutt , who in his book Meghnathvadh tries to justify meghnad(ravans son) in his act, as loyalty to his kingdom and being a true kshatriya by fighting for his father and for the nation. Women which traditionally was seen as a symbol of love and feelings was slowly getting materialized by thoughts of dominated, tolerant race. In this way colonizers had succedded in imbibing their way of looking towards society in Indians, which proved to be their strength, and a point of success to the civilizing mission. Book gives an excellent insight view of thinking pattern of various stratas of society. It talks about three major concepts on basis of generalization of sexual orientation of a person. First is Purusatva, of manliness which is characterized by dominance, violence and confidently argumentativeness, while on other hand Naritva characterized by dominated, tolerant and morally bound nature, the third and rather most tabooed is the Klimbatva which is the femininity possessed by a man. This became the nature of colonialism in India which had moral setback on both ends, because of its ultimate denial of giving importance to Naritva which talks of morality of dominance (Motherly dominance) and shows that the phenomenon in India was less of morality driven and more of dominance driven in later stages. The

other major Psychological aspect that the author drives to is the analogy drawn with childishness, the way child defends yet knows the superior nature of the dominating adult. This changed some aspects of traditional social hierarchy which had Brahmins as the most superior who followed the way of abstaining from sexuality in some or other form and violence to show their dominance. Part of book also talks about the lasting impact of Colonialism on minds of colonizers who lost their bounds of dominance facing severe moral crisis, some started beating family members, others expressed their state of mind by getting internally conflicted by idea of dominance as a true picture of Western culture. Book talks of Kiplings way and Orwells way of looking at colonialism. Kipling, on one hand found colonialism as necessary to civilize the Indians and his great fears of becoming like Indian babus, lived like Indian in childhood. He sought to redeem his roots and wanted revenge for what had happened with him. While on other end Orwells felt that colonialism created seclusion and so loneliness to colonizers (in his book : Shooting the elephant) and hence it is not necessary. They both shared one thing in common, which was oppressing childhood, which made them to defy the conventional social structure at that point of time to justify themselves as an act a victim does to come out of the stigma. Oscar Wilde and CF Andrews were also two obverse personalities. Oscar Wilde was a homosexual (gay) by his orientation and defied the very moral basis of colonialism. He gave a strong message of marginalized person in the society by defending the stigmatized presence in world by rebelling (most of his plays didnt have parents) while Andrews represented the non-modern West in led to mutual respect for ethnic identity of India too. Both Orwell and Andrews grew in Feminine dominant structure of family which describes the nature of beliefs had and therefore surged against the materialist and hegemonic social structure. Book indicates that how colonialism consciously and subconsciously victimized both colonizers and colonized.Book also bridges the Gandhian Ideology with anthropological studies done pertaining to colonialism. It shows how the new structure proposed by Gandhi, Naritva>Purusatva>Kapurusatva best describes his methodologies used. He gave priority to the moral aspects of society. Instead of secluding colonialism, he proposed inclusive humanitarianism and self realization. He was able to practically demonstrated power of earlier considered mystical ideas, such as of Ahimsa and Satyacharan. He was able to generate certain level of self respect in minds and hearts of Indians as well as influenced the colonizers in sense making them understand the importance of abstainance, spirituality, Maternity (symbolizing unconditional love). His ideology stood as a pillar to those men who admired the concept of Naritva and Purusatva both yet were bound to act according Purush now replaced by totally different concept of accepting the self and different drives rather than being kapurush of coward and defeated and hiding it from self and the world. Gandhi differed from Marx in sense he carved out a new past of present strongly rooting to the cultural aspects, while Marx created a new present which had not to do with past realization and building upon it a newer past by adopting certain parts of it and accepting it. His vision of India gave choice to people to live in a way the former weakness of diversity was made strength through binding diversity by common force of spirituality and morality. Gandhi though living in

a very simplistic way generated a lot of compassion for himself through his shrewd and courageous act of living the way he thought. Aurobindo Ackroyd Ghoses life description in book showed another paradigm of spirituality along with that of Modernity where in contrast to Kipling, he was culturally Western but following Indian Ideology. He had same depressing childhood, followed by monitory problem, followed by getting influenced by group of expatriates. One peculiar thing to notice is that India was characterized by Mother(Source of Sakti) and acc to their ideology, it had to be protected by dominant colonizers by giving flesh and blood whenever needed. When he was in jail, his experiences of Shrimad Bhagwad Gita and Levitation (rise above ground) along with influence of Swami Vivekananda made him totally an Indian from head and heart. He then abstained himself from further violence against British and used Indian way(Yogic power and spirituality) to drive away British colonizers. Mira Paul Richard, French women, leaving her family apart joined Aurobindo ashram at Pondicherry and became an integral part of same. After death of Aurobindo, Mira( Ma ) institutionalized the system in modern way and gave modern representations of Indian spiritual Aspects. These sections showed to and fro movements of ideology at that point of time. Apadharma and Monism were central ideas which linked somehow modernity and traditional knowledge and showed the rational approach telling people to treat everyone equally for everyone is the same. Nature of Indianness was its essence of universality which also had a part of Westernness but reverse didnt hold true. Book also shares idea of orient and occident by Edward Said and described how colonies had excluded their own orient which they used to have and moved towards ideology called occident. It is not just about India and colonialism, but it brings life to day to day internal and external experiences of dominance and one must learn to trust his/her weakness in a resurging violent world.