Sunil Khilnani, an academic and author, explores the concept of Indian identity in his book 'The Idea of India', published in 1997, tracing its historical evolution from pre-independence times to the neoliberal shifts of the 1990s. He emphasizes the pluralistic nature of Indian identity, shaped by a history of cultural diversity and colonial influence, and critiques the simplistic narratives of nationalism. Khilnani's work highlights the complex interplay between regional and national identities, advocating for an understanding of India that celebrates its rich cultural tapestry.

1. 1/17/2017 1

2. Sunil Khilnani(born,
1/17/2017 2

3. • Sunil Khilnani was born in New Delhi and grew up in India,
the continents of Africa, Europe, and Asia.
• He earned his graduation from Trinity Hall, Cambridge in
1983 and PhD in Social and Political Sciences from King’s
College, Cambridge in 1987.
• He began his career as a lecturer in 1989 and went on to
become a Senior Lecturer, Reader, and then Professor of
Political Science at Birkbeck College, University of London in
2000.
• He is the Governor of the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Trust,
and has been awarded Parvasi Bharatiya Samman by the
Indian Government in 2005. (Prof.Vinod Kumar)
1/17/2017 3

4. Khilnani’s monumental thesis on India, ‘The
Idea of India’ was published in 1997.
• Khilnani’s book is focused on India as an idea
on different stages of history.
• Khilnani writes that the India known to us is
the result of various ideas prevailing at
particular times, and he claims to trace the
history of this idea from pre-independence and
Nehruvian nationalism to the neo-liberal state
of 1990s.1/17/2017 4

5. • The ideological formation of India undergoes a major
transformation in the 1990s as the country’s political
elite rapidly turns away from the socialist past to
embrace neo-liberal capitalism.
• So, this book is the result of present historical and
material conditions of the time. Khilnani provides the
bridge between the nationalist and socialist ideological
formation of India on the one hand and the later neo-
liberal capitalist formations on the other.
• The Book “The Idea of India” is divided into four
Sections/Chapters.
1/17/2017 5

6. • In the first section named 'democracy', Khilnani talks
about how India transformed into a democracy and he
presents a timeline which starts from British Raj.
• In the second section titled "temples of the future",
the discussion is on the economic policies and their
achievements since independence till 1997.
• The third section is devoted to the development of
Indian cities, the seats of colonial power.
• In the fourth section, the author tries to find the
answer to "Who is an Indian."
1/17/2017 6

7. • Khilnani says “Nehru’s
regime was able to install a
layered pluralistic
definition of Indianness,
one which he saw as the
end culmination of a
millennia of historical
mixing and cultural fusion.
Unlike German or Italian
nationalism which saw the
state as the response or
1/17/2017 7

8. result of the struggle
towards a common ethnic
identity, Nehru felt
that Indian
nationalism and an
Indian identity could
only emerge within
the territorial and
institutional
framework of a state.
1/17/2017 8

9. • This Nehruvian model
protected and celebrated
linguistic, religious, and
cultural differences, rather than
imposing a uniform Indianness.
Nehru’s model also saw
colonialism as having added the
layer of modernity to the
ancient Indian palimpsest, as
opposed to other models which
saw colonialism as a defiling of
Indian identity”.(pg.166).
1/17/2017 9

10. • The question of Indian identity or Indian
nationalism is not similar to the general meaning
of the terms. It is a quite unique feature in world
politics.
• India is pluralistic from pre-historic time.
• India became a political state only when the British
colonial rulers passed an Act. in this regard in their
parliament in 1899.
• Prior to that, India was just a cultural identity in the
geographical plane of south-asia.
• For this reason Pt.Nehru called indianness of the
Indians as psychological and cultural entity instead
of being a political one, as envisaged in the rest of
the world.
• “Unity amidst diversity” is the hall-mark of
Indianness of the Indians.
1/17/2017 10

11. • In Nehru’s India, Indianness was
not defined as a singular or
exhaustive identity, but one
which recognized linguistic and
cultural markers. This layered
Indianness meant a single
majoritarian definition of
Indianness couldn’t emerge.
(pg.175)
1/17/2017 11

12. • “She was like ancient palimpsest on
which layer upon layer of thought
and reverie had been inscribed, and
yet no succeeding layer had
completely hidden or erased what
had been written previously. All of
these had existed in our conscious
or subconscious selves, though we
may not have been aware of them.
And they have gone to build up the
complex mysterious personality of
india.”-Nehru, The Discovery of
India.
1/17/2017 12

13. • In India the sense of regional identity
(Bengal, Maharashtra, etc.) only came
into being as Indians tried to define a
national identity.
• Indian nationalism did not unite or
subordinate established regional
identities.
• A sense of nation and region emerged
together, through parallel self-definition.
(Page.153)
1/17/2017 13

14. • What made possible the self-invention of a national
community was the fact of alien conquest and colonial
subjugation.
• It was the British interest in determining geographical
boundaries that by an act of parliament in 1899
converted ‘India’ from the name of a cultural region into a
precise territory.(pg.155)
1/17/2017 14

15. • Nehru’s regime was able to install a layered
pluralistic definition of Indianness, one which he saw
as the end culmination of a millennia of historical
mixing and cultural fusion.
• Unlike German or Italian nationalism which saw the
state as the response or result of the struggle towards
a common ethnic identity, Nehru felt that Indian
nationalism and an Indian identity could only emerge
within the territorial and institutional framework of a
state.1/17/2017 15

16. • This Nehruvian model protected and
celebrated linguistic, religious, and cultural
differences, rather than imposing a uniform
Indianness.
• This Nehru’s model also saw colonialism as
having added the layer of modernity to the
ancient Indian palimpsest, as opposed to other
models which saw colonialism as a defiling of
Indian identity.(pg.166).
1/17/2017 16

17. The possible basis for a common
community was argued with ingenuity
and imagination in the vernacular
languages, especially in regions like
Bengal and Maharashtra that had been
exposed longest to the British, where a
sense of regional identity only came into
being as people tried to define a larger
‘Indian’ community.1/17/2017 17

18. • The belief that Indian nationalism had
subsequently to unite and subordinate these
regional identities is thus a curious misreading of
the relationship between nation and region in
India.
• In fact, a sense of region and nation emerged
together, through parallel self-definitions – and
this point is essential to any understanding of the
distinctive, layered character of Indian-ness.”
(153)1/17/2017 18

19. 1/17/2017 19

20. • The author heaped lavish praise on Jawaharlal Nehru
for his thoughts.
• In the first part of the chapter Khilnani reminds his
readers of Ayodha and goes on to say: “By the
199os,defintions of Indian-ness were in fierce contest
once again: Hindu nationalists struggled to capture
the state and to purge the nationalist imagination,
leaving it homogenous, exclusive and Hindu; others
fought to escape the Indian state altogether and to
create their own smaller, homogenous and equally
exclusive communities.” (152)
•1/17/2017 20

21. • The second section of this Chapter depicts the rise of
‘nationalism’ as a concept.
• Firstly he rejects the “sentimental” view that
nationalism as an ideology began in Bengal in the
nineteenth-century to culminate in the freedom-
struggle and independence itself.
• He asserts rather a more complex rise of nationalism,
depicting multiple points of view that go beyond
Congress and political jargon to the recognition of
regional identities visa vi national identity.
1/17/2017 21

22. • Khilnani says, 'Indian nationalism’ is a
somewhat misleading shorthand phrase to
describe a remarkable era of intellectual and
cultural ferment and experimentation
inaugurated in the late nineteenth century.
• The various, often oblique, currents that
constituted this phase extended well beyond
the confines of a political movement such as
the Congress, with its high political, bilingual
discourse”.
1/17/2017 22

23. 1/17/2017 23

24. 1/17/2017 24

25. 1/17/2017 25

26. • It is a very poetic and well written exploration of the question
of Indian Identity. While Khilnani doesn't offer much in the
form of new theories on what this definition should be, he very
evocatively sets forth the many identities that have and
continue to define the vast nation. The discussion on Nehru and
Gandhi is exceptional in their clarity and the unreserved take on
Hindutva deserves to be read with great attention. The last
chapter rises to a poetic crescendo with Khilnani offering his
own conceptions on how these various identities should be
interpreted and accepted. The stunning bibliographic essay
which lists close to 200 odd books is a treasure trove and may
provide an enormous and intimidating list of books that should
be explored by an interested reader.
1/17/2017 26

27. 1/17/2017 27

28. References & Links:-
i. ‘The idea of India’(1997) by Sunil Khilnani
ii.Introduction to ‘The idea of India’ (2003) edition by Sunil Khilnani
iii.Sunil Khilnani’s Idea of India: an Ideological critique by Prof.Vinod Kumar
published in ‘The Criterion 'an International Journal/ Dated. December2013,Vol.4
Issue-VI.
iv. Images :Google image
v.The Discovery of India by Pt.Jawaharlal Nehru
[All resources are taken from internet public domain contents. C & C modules obliged.
Presenter:-
Indranil Sarkar
Sapatgram,Assam
PIN-783337
1/17/2017 28