First published in 1936, and now available in a centenary edition, this book was written by Nehru almost entirely in prison from June 1934 to February 1935. His account, though replete with autobiographical details, is much more than a personal document; in the words of Rabindranath Tagore, "Through all its details there runs a deep current of humanity which overpasses the
First published in 1936, and now available in a centenary edition, this book was written by Nehru almost entirely in prison from June 1934 to February 1935. His account, though replete with autobiographical details, is much more than a personal document; in the words of Rabindranath Tagore, "Through all its details there runs a deep current of humanity which overpasses the tangles of facts and leads us to the person who is greater than his deeds, and truer than his surroundings."
...more
Paperback
,
648 pages
Published
September 27th 1989
by Bodley Head
(first published 1940)
Jawaharlal Nehru, a man I shall always be sorry I never met, wrote a desperately fascinating book! Arguably the most under-rated book of the twentieth century.
Jawaharlal Nehru can only be described as
Plato's philosopher king
. He was an extraordinary writer, incredible reader, incorruptible statesman, and a technology lover who had romantic relationship with environment, democracy and justice. So it would be impossible to write about him without romantic manner. As Introduction goes, "What is t
Jawaharlal Nehru, a man I shall always be sorry I never met, wrote a desperately fascinating book! Arguably the most under-rated book of the twentieth century.
Jawaharlal Nehru can only be described as
Plato's philosopher king
. He was an extraordinary writer, incredible reader, incorruptible statesman, and a technology lover who had romantic relationship with environment, democracy and justice. So it would be impossible to write about him without romantic manner. As Introduction goes, "What is the one salient thing to say about Nehru?", there has been too much talk of East and West can never meet, 'Nehru is proof that they have already met.'
It is strange, a man of his stature has been reduced to Nehru-dynasty( which he did not create ) and China war. It reflects our intellectual bankruptcy that a man who did more than any other Indian freedom fighter in political struggle(spent almost 10 years in jail and organised endless protests) and then went on as PM to serve us for 17 long years in the most difficult circumstances. In return, we reduced his legacy to one event. We forgot incredible things he did, to name a few- how he nurtured industrialization, gave voting rights to women, crushed caste system, preserved democracy, advance scientific temper, fought against religious bigotry, implemented constitutional rights not just in letter but also in spirit.
Most humane thing for us to do, just as we have forgiven Thomas Jefferson for keeping slaves, Dr King for plagiarism, and Gandhi for preaching nonsense about earth quake as a punishment of our sin of untouchibility. With same gravity and respect, Instead of reducing him to China war crisis, we can acknowledge his invaluable contribution without-which India would have not reached to its present form of being a free democracy. It is pity how little we know about him and rely on uneducated stupid politicians to supply us inaccurate opinion on his legacy.
For me there will always be a Jawaharlal Nehru. Canadian journalist was right, "
Jawaharlal is Jefferson, Washington and Churchill rolled into one; that is why, we call him the light of Asia
"
In the end, a man who had most advanced education of England and product of most aristocratic family of India, gave up comfortable road and spent 10 years in prison cell, where rats used to run through his face at least twice a night. I think I owe this man a great deal for my freedom, perhaps for such a debt there can be no such thing as repayment but I hope one day I will become his biographer.
Whenever I read Pandit Nehru I feel like my father is writing to me. The quality of prose is exquisite and seldom other writer match this skill. Nehru's first book I read is 'Discovery of India'. But after reading 'Glimpses of world history 'I became staunch admirer of Nehru. When I was reading 'Glimpses of world history' I decided to read his autobiography. This is long book of 650 pages but book flows with the masterly prose of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. You can find plenty of quotable quotes in
Whenever I read Pandit Nehru I feel like my father is writing to me. The quality of prose is exquisite and seldom other writer match this skill. Nehru's first book I read is 'Discovery of India'. But after reading 'Glimpses of world history 'I became staunch admirer of Nehru. When I was reading 'Glimpses of world history' I decided to read his autobiography. This is long book of 650 pages but book flows with the masterly prose of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. You can find plenty of quotable quotes in this book. This book was written in 1936 so it doesn't contains events of his after life. The basic thought process of this remarkable leader can be understood by reading this tome. Major portion of this book is related to working of congress and major events of freedom struggle between 1910-35. After a brief description of his lineage and childhood Nehru writes about the major events of freedom struggle. He writes in detail about Gandhi and their difference of opinion.
Here are some beautiful lines which I marked while reading this book:-
1. Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich by promising to protect each from other.
2. Conceit, like fat on human body, grows imperceptibly, layer upon layer, and the person whom it affects is unconscious of the daily accretion.
3. One extravagance which I have kept up will be hard to give up, and this is the buying of books.
...more
A bright, thoughtful, lively, insightful and passionate individual, not presented with all the answers in life, but with a strong curiosity to learn. I was moved by his reflections on marriage, religion, colonialism, nature and life.
"I am afraid our veneer of civilized conduct is thin enough, and, when passions are aroused, it rubs off and reveals something that is not good to look at."
"To me these years have brought one rich gift among many others. More and more I have looked upon life as an ad
A bright, thoughtful, lively, insightful and passionate individual, not presented with all the answers in life, but with a strong curiosity to learn. I was moved by his reflections on marriage, religion, colonialism, nature and life.
"I am afraid our veneer of civilized conduct is thin enough, and, when passions are aroused, it rubs off and reveals something that is not good to look at."
"To me these years have brought one rich gift among many others. More and more I have looked upon life as an adventure of absorbing interest, where there is so much to learn, so much to do. I have continually had a feeling of growing up, and that feeling is still with me and gives a zest to my activities as well as to the reading of books, and generally makes life worth while."
"Perhaps it is the struggle that gives value to life, not so much the ultimate result. Often it is difficult to know which is the right path; it is easier sometimes to know what is not right, and to avoid that is something after all.
...more
The first 400 pages were just like I felt in India: a mess. It looked like all the Congress activity was chaotic and pointless and all those politicians seemed a bit ridiculous - or maybe absurd? But it was fluently written and in a way it all came together, so I went 'til the end. And amazingly enough I enjoyed the last part: the analysis of a number of social, political and national aspects was a lot deeper than the first part had shown him capable of. Indeed his thoughts were bigger than his
The first 400 pages were just like I felt in India: a mess. It looked like all the Congress activity was chaotic and pointless and all those politicians seemed a bit ridiculous - or maybe absurd? But it was fluently written and in a way it all came together, so I went 'til the end. And amazingly enough I enjoyed the last part: the analysis of a number of social, political and national aspects was a lot deeper than the first part had shown him capable of. Indeed his thoughts were bigger than his deeds. Amazingly enough, I appreciated and approved of his criticsm towards Gandhi - a few years back I would have definitely been on the other side, the 'metaphysical' one. In fact a few years back this book would have bore me to death. I guess I'm getting old by now...
As of the ideas themselves - most of them made sense: disaproval of the nazy/fascist regimes, the agrarian problematics and approach. However, where he was definitely wrong (but only the history which had not happened by then tought us that) was in his admiration of the Soviet Union and his communist ideas. To his defence, his admiration for USSR was not total, so he must have sensed that something was not turning round there. Another idea to which I could not subscribe was the principle that public administration personnel should receive very small salaries if any salary at all, the argument being that only people determined to work for the public good expecting nothing in return should do that kind of jobs. There are a few obvious problems with that: only a certain class of people would afford to take to such jobs, this would open wide the doors of corruption, etc. But that logical aspect is not what bothered me most. What bothered me most was the naivity of believing something like that could work. I guess it's correlated to the belief that the communism could work. It cannot, for the human nature is such, that it just cannot....
...more
I started this book, with great anticipation to look at the pieces of Indo Pak history and condition of India (Pre Partitioned), though it give a great deal of light on the personality and life of Mr. Nehru, yet it seized to give a account of the situation.
It shows how hollow the thinking of those leaders of Congress. They were split and they all were having different dimensions, yet the course of history made them hero. I do give respect to the suffering they went into due to the cause of indep
I started this book, with great anticipation to look at the pieces of Indo Pak history and condition of India (Pre Partitioned), though it give a great deal of light on the personality and life of Mr. Nehru, yet it seized to give a account of the situation.
It shows how hollow the thinking of those leaders of Congress. They were split and they all were having different dimensions, yet the course of history made them hero. I do give respect to the suffering they went into due to the cause of independence, but yet I am force to conclude that there were confused, and that is the reason still India and Pakistan are copping up with the situation.
...more
Its more on the history of India. beautifully written and Nehru has clearly mentioned the conflicts in ideology he had with Gandhi at times. A better way to learn history of India during the independence struggle.
Really felt like i should have been living during the time. JLN tends to bring out a lot of soul of the pre independence era, his own likes, dislikes, shortcomings, besides his time during his jail terms. I personally felt very near JLN whenever the mentions of his life in jail came up. the book is essentially unputdownable. Tends to bring out the human element of great people.
Nehru as a politician, or more precisely as Prime Minister, may not be held in esteem by one and all. But the ideas in this book are definitely worthy of admiration. I would recommend this book to everybody; the richness of his ideas make this book worth a read!
In just two word, i think , it is a 'Tremendous book'. Got familiar with Nehru ji modern thinking about life, Nation, society, economy, politics etc. Very worthily book to read if you have some ideas about modern history of India.
He's quite frank here. Sometimes, I couldn't help thinking "this guy is not THAT brilliant a leader". In that sense, this book gives good insights into the minds of those involved in indian freedom struggle.
First prime minister of independent India (1947 – 64). Son of the independence advocate Motilal Nehru (1861 – 1931), Nehru was educated at home and in Britain and became a lawyer in 1912. More interested in politics than law, he was impressed by Mohandas K. Gandhi's approach to Indian independence. His close association with the Indian National Congress began in 1919; in 1929 he became its preside
First prime minister of independent India (1947 – 64). Son of the independence advocate Motilal Nehru (1861 – 1931), Nehru was educated at home and in Britain and became a lawyer in 1912. More interested in politics than law, he was impressed by Mohandas K. Gandhi's approach to Indian independence. His close association with the Indian National Congress began in 1919; in 1929 he became its president, presiding over the historic Lahore session that proclaimed complete independence (rather than dominion status) as India's political goal. He was imprisoned nine times between 1921 and 1945 for his political activity. When India was granted limited self-government in 1935, the Congress Party under Nehru refused to form coalition governments with the Muslim League in some provinces; the hardening of relations between Hindus and Muslims that followed ultimately led to the partition of India and the creation of Pakistan. Shortly before Gandhi's assassination in 1948, Nehru became the first prime minister of independent India. He attempted a foreign policy of nonalignment during the Cold War, drawing harsh criticism if he appeared to favour either camp. During his tenure, India clashed with Pakistan over the Kashmir region and with China over the Brahmaputra River valley. He wrested Goa from the Portuguese. Domestically, he promoted democracy, socialism, secularism, and unity, adapting modern values to Indian conditions. His daughter, Indira Gandhi, became prime minister two years after his death.
...more
“What the mysterious is I do not know. I do not call it God because God has come to mean much that I do not believe in. I find myself incapable of thinking of a deity or of any unknown supreme power in anthropomorphic terms, and the fact that many people think so is continually a source of surprise to me. Any idea of a personal God seems very odd to me.”
—
11 likes