The Imaginary Institution of India

1776 WordsFeb 26, 20187 Pages
The Imaginary institution of Indian: Politics and Ideas Ch5-8 As you dive into the text of Sudipta Kaviraj’s The Imaginary institution of Indian: Politics and Ideas (2010) he begins to already question the sense of Nationalism. Indian’s didn’t really have any sense of nationalism up until the British came to power. Kaviraj states “it is often essential to ask whose history this is, in the sense of history for whom rather than history of whom.”(Page 170) Because it depends on which said the story is told. In earlier periods of India they felt a weaker version of patriotism which was “an ancestor for Indian nationalism”(Page 174) which would be different from today’s patriotism and that there is no connection between being patriotic and being Indian. He says that the consciousness becomes nationalist before it becomes India's only because they happen to realize it later in time. Kaviraj regards India to be “closely parallel” to what Gramsci said about Italian nationalism. There are two conflicts, One of memorialism of Italy’s Roman past to what it is today and, two today’s modernity and the construction of the Italian identity. He compares the two because Italian history had some similar influences to that of colonialism. Gramsci says that there is no concrete line in which Italian culture is connected by, the only “continuity” they have is just propaganda. Each century in India had its own literature. Any time they would summarize a principle of the past they would only
Open Document