Bit of a plodding, slow read. Some interesting insights though.
Some of the insights which struck me: 1. The rhetoric of equality frequently obscures more fundamental problems like poverty, malnutrition and illiteracy 2. Bureaucracy is necessary for modern government, however Indian society is fundamentally rules-based; where new orders of rules do not replace but complement older rules. This is the same with the civil service today. 3. Pluralism (which is communities-based) is not the same as liberalism (emphasis on free individual choice). Indian society may have been pluralist but it was not liberal, as social sanctions were at the community if not the societal level. 4. India is very much today part of and a creation of modernity and overlooking this in an attempt to hearken back to tradition is quite futile. Modernity can function as a necessary, progressive force in India. 5. There is a demand in India to be open and connected at all times, which has led to a strange disapproval of privacy. The complementary aspect of this is a desire for secrecy- where even minor matters become secrets as privacy is a hard-to-find-good as gregariousness is the expected norm: "People who live in each other's pockets develop a secret urge to be secretive." This is a fascinating insight into Indian society! Western man builds an invisible wall around himself (boundaries) whereas in India, the individual is conceived of as open and connected. The individual is also to an unusual extent from a Western standpoint emotionally dependent on an unusual degree to others- on their goodwill, praise, loyalty etc. The demand for gregariousness also means that a lot of Indians simply have trouble being alone, as even intellectuals spend so much time weirdly and constantly surrounded by people. Reading and writing are of course solitary pursuits, but the Indian finds it hard to be solitary by nature 'unless he is a sannyasi or a poet'.