Freedom at Midnight - an Indian History Textbook?

'Freedom at Midnight' by Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre, is an intriguing book on Indian Independence. Detailed character outlines make the book a good read- an insight is gained on the various leaders and rebels who contributed in important and trivial ways to the forming of the Indian nation. However, the assumption that this book can be substituted for a history text book is absurd.

Beginning with Louis Mountbatten's appointment as 'Viceroy of India' in 1947 and ending with Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi's death in 1948, Collins and Lapierre have managed to retell India's freedom struggle in a way that is both informational and interesting. One learns of the British's early involvement in India, the rise of Sikhism and the decline of the Mughal Empire and the influence of each of these happenings on each other. 'Freedom at midnight' gives great insight to conflicts that arose in the name of religion¹ and to the intimate details of the life of Gandhi in a way that has not been done before, including his assassination by Nathuram Godse. The book also describes India's first steps as a new nation, the shakiness with which it emerged, and the problems that the new nation, under Jawaharlal Nehru, faced. One is faced with new information in this novel that is quite interesting like the person² who drew the division between India and Pakistan had never been to India in his life.

However, Collins and Lapierre's account seems like it is written from Lord Mountbatten's point of view, with Mountbatten portrayed as a “dashing” individual, Mohammed Ali Jinnah a “cold and austere man” and Britain a “parent” to India. The authors lay the blame for Partition on Jinnah, who (rightfully) feared that Muslim representation in a largely Hindu nation would be minimal. The authors failed to mention the fact that the Congress was not willing to share power with Muslims in areas where there was a Hindu majority.

The era of the British Raj is glorified, with beautiful images of lives that were probably lived only by the British. There is not much mention of the overworked, overtaxed Indians, who were cheated of their wealth apart from the repeatedly highlighted notion that most Indians were 'ignorant, illiterate and incompetent', and their “Rajas” eccentric characters. Even after independence, the authors mention that India's leaders were not capable of leading the nation and their call to the British for help. Mountbatten's work, however is praised and he is seen of as the 'hero' of the book - the reason for this is that the authors depended very heavily on interviews with Mountbatten and information from his personal papers and thus present a very biased view of Indian Independence. The authors have chosen to side with Nehru on the Partition issue, describing Nehru is an idealized way while almost spitting at Jinnah and the Muslim League. For a history text-book to be complete there should be some mention of literature, art and technology- which is missing in 'Freedom at Midnight'.

The book is also not accurate in its pre- independence facts. The authors say that Islam was introduced to India “after the cohorts of Genghis Khan and Tamerlane had battered their way down the Khyber Pass to weaken the Hindus' hold on the Gangetic plain.” Lapierre and Collins have confused the Mughals with Islam, for Tamerlane was not Muslim³. Even though there lines are not vital in understanding India's Independence, it leaves the book an untrustworthy source; for one cannot be sure of other facts mentioned either.

In conclusion, although the book is very well written, the authors have made their primary source Mountbatten- relying on their interview with him for most of their facts. Because of this prejudice, 'Freedom at Midnight' cannot be taken as an accurate source for Indian History. For an Indian History student, this book will provide a balance to other accounts of the war of Independence, but at the same time, solely, it will not give the reader a complete picture of India's Independence.