Emperors'

EMPERORS’ SOLITUDE by David Davidar

Today I completed reading the novel “The Solitude of Emperors” by David Davidar. The story is more like journalistic account of a fictional situation. However the story seemed simple. The narrator Vijay a south Indian Brahmin brought up in a small town in south. Unable to think of a way to get out of the rut associated with life in such surroundings Vijay goes out to Bombay and joins as journalist with Sorabji of Indian Secularist. There is the influence of his father who was not an orthodox person.

While in Bombay he comes across the riots that erupted in 1993 in the aftermath of Babri Masjid demolition. Though he was not able to do anything in the happenings, he tried to get the pictures thru interviews and investigations from the riot affected areas and people. The stress tells on his health and he was given a time to go on holiday to the south in Nilgiries. The main action is in Mehem an area of Nilgiri a tea plantation area. A similar situation analogous to Ayodhya exists in the local. A granite tower is used as the disputed structure the hindutva claiming it to be a Shivalinga while there is already one cross on its top. One Rajan who originally was a local and then a Bombaybusinessman is the leader in organising the hindutva groups. Such efforts at claiming the tower for them was organised from the thirties on. But Vijay feels that this time such a demonstration is intended to displace the cross and install a Shivalinga there. The Bombay businessman was interviewed by Vijay. The man Rajan comes out as a very reasoned personality in defence of the idea that Indiabelonged to the majority i. e. Hindus and the past glory of a Hindu rashtra should be bought back at the latest. He maintains that it is the duty of every thinking person to not just support but work to bring the future even if it involves violence and destructive activities. Most of the important personalities of Mehem perceive Rajan as an amiable social activist who has funded many charitable activities in the area. They try to assure Vijay that the man is only interested in social activities and will not allow himself to be organiser of violence.

When Vijay comes as an active defender of secularism there comes another by name Noah who is a recluse after experiencing a life in cities in his youth. Finally, Vijay gives up his efforts and goes to the location on his own. But the climax is something unexpected by Vijay. On the day and time of demonstrations people find two as dead Rajan and Noah. Since there is no one eyewitness for the scuffle or fight between the two the events are constructed by the journalists including Vijay. Vijay goes back to Bombay and changes his profession. He concludes that the fight between fanatical religionists will go on sporadically and individual action cannot change anything.

The interesting parts of this novel are the discussions conducted between Vijay and the Major. Menon, Noah, Mansukhani and Rajan. They give us a general idea of popular personalities both political and social. Though not completely convincing the episodes are described in precise terms. As I said earlier the writing is journalistic.

Lastly about the manuscript of Sorabji. It is a good essay in looking back in history to find reasons for present day actions to solve social problems. The essay is concise but not all embracing. Does this show that there are only three in our history who could be sited as examples? Why the huge gap between one and the next? There could be answers but Sorabji did not dwell on this and the journalist Vijay did not raise them.

This book could not be included as novel in accepted meaning. It is a journalist’s tract written as fiction. Still good enough. It took a couple of weeks for me to complete it.