Mahatma Gandhi

His full name was Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. He was born on 2nd Oct 1869 and was assasinated on the 30th Jan 1848. He was the head of the Indian National Congress and led India into Independence, out of British Colonialism in 1947. 

He clearly opposed all kinds of violence. The probably best example was the Salt March to Dandi in  1930. It was the first act of non-violent protest against the British Raj after the INC wrote its declaration of Independence. On April 6th in 1930 gandhi bent down and grabbed a handfull of salt. This was seen as civil inobedience against the British rule but nevertheless was an outbursting sign for the rest of India.  

 source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Salt_March.ogg

Furthermore he was married and had four children. His influence in policy and what he worked out in and for India is, still today regarded with a terrible huge amount of respect and reverence.

HIs ground principles were:

nonviolence  “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.”

truth  “God is truth”

vegetarianism

simplicity

faith  “As soon as we lose the moral basis, we cease to be religious. There is no such thing as religion over-riding morality. Man, for instance, cannot be untruthful, cruel or incontinent and claim to have God on his side.”

Besides of independence he fought for the end of intouchability and discrimination in caste systems, as well as he stood for fight against tyranny through civil disobedience.

What probably describes his heritage for today best, is a quote from Martin Luther King jr.

“	Christ gave us the goals and Mahatma Gandhi the tactics.	”

He influenced a lot of other important leaders of political movements, especially with his principle of nonviolence.

film review

In my opinion the film doesn’t fulfill the character of the novel at all.

There are many things which dismatch, like e.g. the Nawab growing, and HArry being fat etc. Besides that there are important scenes for the plot missing and several things seem to be misunderstood by the film maker, like e.g. the importance of Maji for the narrator.

Furthermore the Nawab is depicted as being a kind of these tipical womanizers. In my opinion his charisma, his “being-special” which is often mentionned in the book is totally missing as well. And – what I have to mention – what the hell did Baba Firdau’s Shrine look like?! In the book it is mentionned as a holy, natural place, often visited but still mystic. By the picture given in the film I really was disillusioned…

Nevertheless, this is only my personal opinion. As the screenplay was written by Ruth Prawer Jhabvala as well, I think she knew what she wanted the film to transmit of her novel. But still, personally I’d prefer the book a hundred times from the film.

(and (!) that Chid is the “Silas” from daVinci Code is really, really “schlecht”  ^^ )

review on Heat & Dust, amazon.co.uk

“This is a well-written book that explores Anglo-Indian relations through the power of romance. Set in two distinct eras, colonial India of the nineteen twenties, during the time of the Raj, and the independent, freewheeling India of the seventies, during the time when India was a mecca for disenfranchised youth, it tells the story of two women.

One story is that of Olivia, the wife of a minor district official in colonial India, who in 1923 caused great scandal by running off with the Nawab, a local Indian prince. Divorced by her husband, Douglas, for this scandalous transgression, Olivia remains in India, while Douglas remarries. The second story is that of the narrator, a descendant of Douglas and his second wife. During the nineteen seventies, fascinated by the story of the now deceased Olivia, she goes to India, visiting those locations where Olivia had lived and those which would have been a part of her existence at the time. As did Olivia, she falls under India’s spell. As did Olivia, she, too, has an Anglo-Indian love affair, and picks up where Olivia left off, giving the reader a powerful sense of de-ja vu.

The book is a beguiling story of two women from two different generations who come under the spell of India. The book is evocative of British colonial India, as well as of India of the nineteen seventies. During both eras, Anglo-Indian relations are pivotal to the budding romances. The book is evocative of the rhythms of Indian life in all its richness and tumultuousness, as well as its lingering poverty and superstitions. It is redolent of a time gone by and hopeful of what is to come. It is also an interesting dichotomy of the good and bad in both cultures, Anglo and Indian, and the influence that both cultures have on these two women, who are so different, yet so alike.

This is a book that whets the appetite, leaving the reader wanting more than the author is prepared to give. It is, nonetheless, a book well worth reading. The book was also made into a Merchant Ivory film starring Julie Christie and Greta Scacchi. “

I think especially this review is quite a good one, because it refers also, or mainly on the background and surrounding of the story. It deals with what the book wants to transmitt, not with superficial stuff like only description or an classification into well written/bad style or good story/bad story.

what do we know about Olivia’s life after her elopement?

After Olivia’s abortion, done by Indian midwives, she begins to miscarry and is brought to hospital by Douglas immediately. Dr. Saunders recognizes the influence of the midwives. concerning her “miscarriage” and confronts Olivia with harsh words. (p.155-157) He feels kind of triumphant, he never had a good feeling concerning Olivia. “He had always known, that there was something rotten about Olivia” (p.155, l. 27) He sesses and berates her and finally Olivia doesn’t find the inner strenght to return to Douglas, to look him in the eye and confess what she did. So she immediately runs for the palace, where she is, despite everything picked up warmly. The last thing we know about her is, that she decided to spend the rest of her life in Inida, not to return to England. In some way she eloped with the Nawab in a way, of really running away. He bought a house for her at the steep foothills of the Himalaya, where he came to visit her several times, though he could not stay with her considerable time. We also know, that she has been burried by Indian traditions, not by Chrisian ones. Her body was being burned and her ash was scattered in the wind.

All this permits the conclusion of Olivia, after her elopement fully devoted herself to India and refused all kind of British habits. She became Indian… she stayed in India, she concluded her life here and she was burried in Indian style… 

A passage to India vs. Heat and Dust

  These two stories display many parallels as well as a few complements.

 

First of all both stories play in the same range of time, the 1920’s and they both tell stories from two young women travel to India to marry, to be with their men. They both get to know Indian culture better, though in different ways. While Olivia is not especially interested in the country itself, she gets involved into India by her affectin towards the Nawab and so, by this she somehow establishes strong convictions towards India, strong enough for her to stay. In contrary Mrs. Moore and Miss Quested are from the beginning on very interested in sightseing et cetera, but their affiliation to India never gets so strong. They have some rather frightening encounters with the mysteria Inida has to offer, while Olivia’s experiences are more dominated by interest, harmony and mystery.

Another parallel might be, that the British ‘higher classed’ society lives totally isolated from the Indians. In the film it is depicted by the “Club” all the British are members in, and by the way they act, when this “get-to-know-party” in the Club, for Mrs. Moore and Miss Quested, to get to know India better. The British feel disturbed by the Indians, while the two women are delighted to talk to Indian women, as well as the other way round. In both plots the British society seems somehow disgusted by Inidans and avoids every kind of unnecessary conatct, servants excluded. In the film the two ladies and Mr. Fielding compose the pool willing to have contact to Indians and Dr. Aziz seems to be the only Indian “naive enough” to bear British company. In the book it is Olivia and the Nawab. Though the other ladies like Mrs. Crawford or Mrs. Minnies do some kind of artificial, forced conversation with the Nawab, they probably only talk to higher classed Indians, like the men, their husbands work with or the already mentionned Nawab. But for all that Olivia feels much more close to Indian people. She longs to sit on the floor with the Inidan ladies etc. I think the befriended situation of the narrator with her Inidan fellow men, like Inder Lal, Chid, Maji etc. doesn’t need to be acted out further, because the society is entirely different in the 1970’s.

Another parallel is, the role and appearance of British women. They are depicted almost in the same way. Furthermore I think the character of Mr. Fielding in some parts can be regarded as comparable to the one o Douglas RIvers, for their being respected by Inidans. On the other part the two men comport totally different. While Mr. Fielding is integrated in the Inidan society and gets friends with Dr. Aziz, Douglas refuses to get to know better to the Nawab.

This leads  me to another parallel. Both, the Nawab and Dr. Aziz seem immediately being strongly affected by British women. Both they undertake several efforts to impress the ladies. While the Nawab is instantaneous biased by Olivia, Dr. Aziz fascination seems to focus on British women in general, at first Mrs. Moore, later Miss Quested, and in the end the wife of Dr. Fielding.

The last aspect catching my attention are the tensions and discrepancies shown in the film as well as in the movie. As an example, DR. Aziz deep disappointment, his anger of being inculpably accused, Mr. Fieldings menace to leave India immediately, his resign from the club as a protest agains British society, against his own people, because of Aziz being in danger. Another example would be Olivias strong compassion towards the Indian comity of a Sutee . She passionately feels with the woman, who burned herself with her dead husband. The last example I can think of, without further searching is, the quite clear divafour all British Men seem to cherish against the Nawab and his troup of dacoits , as well as towards the celebration of ‘the Husbands Wedding Day’ , towards all kind of Indish traditions…

 

In general  ’Heat and Dust’ appears much more silent, peaceful than  ‘A passage to India’, at least to me…

‘gender roles’ in the Victorian times

During the Victorian era of the late 19th century (1837-1901) women were expected to stay at home, always quiet, pure, cautious, always perfectly looking, never in a bad mood, a perfect accessoire for their husbands.

Men, in contrary, where expected to be the brave knights, defending their country and their women, standing upright in the society, working hard – the same perfect picture of men, as it always had been.

Feminists would describe it the following way:

The female gender role was constructed as an opposite to an ideal male role, and helps to perpetuate patriarchy.

which, in my opinion, regarding the distribution of roles, seems to be quite right:

Men as the head of the family, responsible for all social contacts, the men as the agressive part: strong, rational, always ready to fight, to defend; also the sexual active part belongs to their characteristics.

Women, on the other hand dependend and subdued to a male protector, only in charge of inner-familiar relationships, weak, emotional, irrational, compensating male aggressions, sexually passive or disinterested.

The uprising feminine movements in the mid-19th century, industrialization and, last but definitely not least both World Wars finally demanded from women, to leave their usual places in a defending position and step out of their passive role and actively support, their men, their country-finally! A task which, dead sure about thar, many women longed for quite a long time already. Instead of sitting at home in boredom actively taking part in the society they live in, they passively always supported, by supporting their men who officially held the society up.

Women’s voting rights in my opinion is one of the most outstanding, the most important step concernig gender roles and their transitions. In the UK full voting right was given to women on the 2nd , July 1928, at least one chance for women to decide what is going to happen, how their society is going to change.

 

All these aspects, boredom, always being pure and proper to represent their husbands,  might have been one of the reasons, for Olivia to run away, though being in India already gave her many more liberties, like for example visiting Khatm, having that many servants etc. , than she would have had if she had stayed in England.

the exposition of ‘Heat & Dust’

In the exposition, we get to know the two main characters Olivia and the narrator, from whoms point of view the story in the two different times (1923, 1970’s ) will be told.  Further more there are the minor characters Douglas Rivers , the Nawab, Tessie and Beth Crawford, Marcia and Harry presented. Their relatioships are roughly outlined.

 Douglas and Tessie Crawford are the narrator’s grandparents whereas Olivia was Dpuglas first wife who eloped with the Nawab and stayed in India.

As already mentioned the novel takes place in two different narrative times. The narrator travels to India in the 70’s because she got to know about some omnious letters, Olivia wrote to her sister Marcia in 1923. Now she wants to reconstruct her life by going to India, she’s going to follow Olivia’s tracks more intensively that she might have planned to…

You nearly could see the exposition as a kind of summary in this case, because actually the whole story is told on two pages, the reader gets curious about why Olivia eloped with the Nawab, wondering what was so distinctly awful about falling in love with someone, though you are already married.

Briefly, in the exposition of Heat and Dust the story and it’s main caracters are shortly presented, further more the reader’s interest is awaken, you want to get to know the story in detail…

Welcome…

… on my reading log about the novel ‘Heat and Dust’ from Ruth Prawer Jhabvala. I structured my blog into five sections:

The reading log will be on the page “contents”.

On the page called “caracters” you will find everything about the different main characters and a constellation will be there, too.

On “landscape and settings” the different settings, as far as they are not fictional, are introduced with images.

Every kind of background information will be found on the page with the same title

Quotations, Predictions etc. will be introduced on “references”

(isn’t that easy to follow? ).