JNU in all its facets, with some exceptions

Shajahan Madampat

Advertisement

Jawaharlal Nehru University, according to the long, highly informative and rigorously footnoted introduction by historians Neeladri Bhattacharya and Janaki Nair to the book under review, was founded on these ideals — criticality, secularism, inclusivity, interdisciplinarity, and ‘love and trust’. The current Vice Chancellor seems to have understood this well long before the book was even conceived, for it is precisely these ideals that he has so meticulously and vengefully sought to banish from the campus.

In spite of the heroic efforts to decimate the varsity, JNU has retained its status as India’s premier research centre and teaching institution. “JNU contributes a disproportionately large number of research articles and books in the social sciences compared with most Indian research institutions and universities put together,” say the two historians.

They also point out that the uniqueness of the campus is due to not just its innovative pedagogy, but also because of its ‘culture of intellection, the forms of sociality, the spirit and energy, the excitement and passion that permeates the institution’. The stories narrated in this volume exude so much nostalgia and poignancy because their authors penned their contributions in the context of concerted efforts on the part of the Central government to raze to the ground the lofty edifice built over five momentous decades. “How long it takes to build institutions, and how little time to destroy them,” the editors lament.

The book contains 75 pieces by a wide array of former and current faculty members, students and alumni. These cover many salient aspects of the campus, ranging from landscape, nature and architecture to academics, student politics, and dissent. Many of the authors are doyens in their respective areas of scholarship; and have played stellar roles as faculty, students, or both in shaping JNU as a site of cerebral adventures and socio-political imaginations. What is common between them all is a commitment to intellectual rigor, democratic sensibilities, the idea of India as an idyll of pluralism, and JNU as its exemplary microcosm.

Although the title of the book says it is about the first 50 years of JNU, yet it is too heavily tilted in favour of the first 10 years, the 1970s. The pieces, or their authors, seem to have been selected either casually and randomly, or based solely on personal considerations. One can think of so many individuals who could have enriched the book with their reminiscences, and several incidents which could have sharpened our understanding of JNU. YK Alagh, KN Panikkar, Pranay Krishna Srivastava, Sitaram Yechury, Prakash Karat are among the numerous names that are conspicuous by their absence.

A piece by political sociologist Imtiaz Ahmed, who remained under suspension from JNU during much of his otherwise brilliant academic career, would have added a critical dimension to the book because of his experience with the university. If people were reluctant to write, interviews with them would have sufficed. ‘Invisibilisation’ of the massive presence of JNU alumni in India’s civil services and civil society movements is another major shortcoming in the book. Inclusion of a few pieces by people from these two spheres narrating their experiences would have made the book less monochromatic.

In short, the book could have been more inclusive and less incestuous. An article by sociologist Anand Kumar, for instance, on how he survived or thrived in a predominantly Marxist intellectual milieu for decades would have thrown up a fascinating contrast to the overall tone of the book. Inside the world of JNU, a non-Marxist would represent true dissent and rebellion! More importantly, the book fails in providing a historical narrative on how JNU has reached where it is today, capturing the subtle and not-so-subtle transformations that were set in motion since the 1990s. This reviewer can relate to the book intimately because he was a student in JNU, but will this book succeed in communicating to someone with no exposure to the campus is another uncomfortable question.

If we forget such glaring shortcomings, there is no doubt that the volume contains some exceptionally good pieces, each of which provides great reading experience.