The History Book Club discussion

A Division of the Spoils
This topic is about A Division of the Spoils
17 views
HISTORY OF SOUTHERN ASIA > WE ARE OPEN - WEEK FOURTEEN - A DIVISION OF THE SPOILS - November 30th - December 6th>BOOK ONE: 1945 - Section Five - The Circuit House - Chapter Four (pg 458 - 470) ~ BOOK TWO: 1947 - Section One - Pandora's Box - Chapter One (pg. 473 - 495)

Comments Showing 1-12 of 12 (12 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

Jill Hutchinson (bucs1960) Hello Everyone,

For the week of November 30th - December 6th, we are reading BOOK ONE: 1945 -Section Five - The Circuit House - Chapter Four (pg. 458 - 470) ~ BOOK TWO: 1947 - Section One - Pandora's Box - Chapter One (pg. 473 - 495) ~ A Division of the Spoils -Book IV,(pg. 458 - 395).

The week's reading assignment is:

WEEK FOURTEEN- November 30TH ~ BOOK ONE: Section FIVE ~ The Circuit House (pg. 458 - 470), BOOK TWO - Pandora's Box - Chapter One (pg. 473 - 495)

We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.

This book was kicked off on August 31st.

We look forward to your participation. Amazon, Barnes and Noble and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, local bookstore or on your Kindle. Make sure to pre-order now if you haven't already. This weekly thread will be opened up on November 30th.

There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us. It is never too late to get started and/or to post.

Jill will be leading this discussion and back-up will be Bentley.

Welcome,

~Bentley

TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL

A Division of the Spoils (The Raj Quartet, #4) by Paul Scott by Paul Scott Paul Scott

REMEMBER NO SPOILERS ON THE WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREADS - ON EACH WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREAD - WE ONLY DISCUSS THE PAGES ASSIGNED OR THE PAGES WHICH WERE COVERED IN PREVIOUS WEEKS. IF YOU GO AHEAD OR WANT TO ENGAGE IN MORE EXPANSIVE DISCUSSION - POST THOSE COMMENTS IN ONE OF THE SPOILER THREADS. THESE CHAPTERS HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION SO WHEN IN DOUBT CHECK WITH THE CHAPTER OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY TO RECALL WHETHER YOUR COMMENTS ARE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFIC. EXAMPLES OF SPOILER THREADS ARE THE GLOSSARY, THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE INTRODUCTION AND THE BOOK AS A WHOLE THREADS.

Notes:

It is always a tremendous help when you quote specifically from the book itself and reference the chapter and page numbers when responding. The text itself helps folks know what you are referencing and makes things clear.

Citations:

If an author or book is mentioned other than the book and author being discussed, citations must be included according to our guidelines. Also, when citing other sources, please provide credit where credit is due and/or the link. There is no need to re-cite the author and the book we are discussing however.

If you need help - here is a thread called the Mechanics of the Board which will show you how to cite books:

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/2...

Introduction Thread:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Table of Contents and Syllabus

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Glossary

Remember there is a glossary thread where ancillary information is placed by the moderator. This is also a thread where additional information can be placed by the group members regarding the subject matter being discussed.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

Bibliography

There is a Bibliography where books cited in the text are posted with proper citations and reviews. We also post the books that the author used in his research or in his notes. Please also feel free to add to the Bibliography thread any related books, etc with proper citations. No self promotion, please.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...


Book as a Whole and Final Thoughts - SPOILER THREAD

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

A Division of the Spoils (The Raj Quartet, #4) by Paul Scott by Paul Scott Paul Scott


Jill Hutchinson (bucs1960) Chapter Overview and Summary

Kasim meets with Governor and tells him that he will not be contesting the government and will not stand by the defense of the INA even though his son is going to stand trial for joining that organization. He is not sure his political career will continue but he will not support Jinnah's wishes for partition.

Kasim writes a letter to Gandhi in which he expresses concern for the cause but advises that he will never desert it.

It is now 1947 and the British Viceroy publicly announces that India will be partitioned and it will take place in ten weeks as opposed to a year time-frame.

India's first political cartoonist, Halki becomes very popular as he follows the transition of government from British to Indian and the partition.

We learn the Colonel Grace has died and that Aunt Fenny has gone back to England.


Jill Hutchinson (bucs1960) I have mixed feelings about Kasim's statement that his political career may be over. I think he is too committed to independence stay on the sidelines; however, the powers that may be coming into power do not want him. Which scenario plays better?


message 4: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new) - rated it 5 stars

Bentley | 44167 comments Mod
I think Kasim has been pushed out by the folks who want an separate state of Pakistan.


Jill Hutchinson (bucs1960) Do you think that Kasim is justified in his feelings regarding the INA? It is a conundrum. Are INA members traitors? They are already subjects to the British, therefore representing British India, not an independent India. Surely they were not naive enough to suppose that if the Axis won, India would become independent.They would then be in the sphere of Japan. So are they traitors to Britain or to India? Or just poor souls trying to stay alive?


message 6: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new) - rated it 5 stars

Bentley | 44167 comments Mod
Are they traitors? From the viewpoint of the British they were.


Jill Hutchinson (bucs1960) I was thinking more in the general sense. The United States was a colony of Britain but our founding fathers are not considered traitors when they fought for freedom. If we look at the situation with an unbiased eye, the situation is somewhat the same.....a country that wants freedom from colonization. The problem with the INA was that they aligned themselves with the Axis which certainly smacked of traitorism (is that a word???) But in the overall scheme of things, they were trying to represent the real India, not the British India....or am I off base in that conclusion?


message 8: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new) - rated it 5 stars

Bentley | 44167 comments Mod
I think they were at the time.

However the term terrorist was most likely a term coined later on.

I think the INA could very well considering the circumstances be called traitors.

I think their goals were misplaced and used by the Axis countries and they really were not that concerned with the fate of the Indians or India.


Jill Hutchinson (bucs1960) The Viceroy publicly announces that the plan for government of India has been approved and that the withdrawal of Britain will occur in ten weeks instead of next year. Do you think that Britain wanted out as soon as possible or did the Muslims supporting partition have enough clout to make that much difference?

Re: INA as traitors. I am of two minds on this question I think that many joined when they were POWs in order to avoid being tortured and shot on the spot and the will to live trumps everything. But those in a leadership position were rolling the dice on who was going to win the war with Japan (this was before Hiroshima) and they were hearing Japanese propaganda about eventual victory. Why they thought that being a colony of Japan would be better than one of England escapes me. They were the traitors in my opinion.


message 10: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new) - rated it 5 stars

Bentley | 44167 comments Mod
That could be Jill - the Japanese at the time were not known for their generosity and good treatment of POWs. They must have been quite troubled to believe that the Japanese were going to treat them better than the British.


message 11: by Jill (new) - rated it 4 stars

Jill Hutchinson (bucs1960) The attitudes of Indians were changing as evidenced by the more liberal press. The cartoonist Halki is an example as he went from a somewhat pro-British stance to one of more Indian unity. He may have been the first of the Indian political cartoonists and his work was very clever without being too controversial. Why did the author add these few pages about Halki who is a new character and probably won't show up again in the story?


message 12: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new) - rated it 5 stars

Bentley | 44167 comments Mod
I do not know unless his stance mirrored the author - Paul Scott.


back to top

unread topics | mark unread


Books mentioned in this topic

A Division of the Spoils (other topics)

Authors mentioned in this topic

Paul Scott (other topics)