Charlie FordhamHost
Rupert FordhamHost
It's interesting, isn't it? I wonder why it's possible, and people have successfully done it, to write a novel about America.

You could say many American novels are about America, because I suppose a part of America is the American dream, and of course that is the underlying subject of a lot of American literature.

other countries seem to have a sort of awareness of their nationalism in a way that, well, England does too.

And Middlemarch, you're quite right, Charlie, is probably the one that you would say was closest to it.

But it's about a very specific time and place and about provincialism apart from anything else.

It's about the beginning of India, or at least the beginning of the Indian independent state.

There was an extra festival in the calendar, a new myth to celebrate because a nation which had never previously existed was about to win its freedom, catapulting us into a world which, although it had 5,000 years of history, although it had invented the game of chess and traded with Middle Kingdom Egypt, was nevertheless quite imaginary.

into a mythical land, a country which would never exist, except by the efforts of a phenomenal collective will, except in a dream we all agreed to dream, a mass fantasy that would periodically need the sanctification and renewal which can only be provided by rituals of blood.

No, I think that's about the Indians pulling chunks out of each other ever since independence.

And yes, no, I think the phenomenal collective will, I think, is shown not to have been there, to have been a fantasy, like he says in that extract, which is why India is perceived to be disintegrating in this novel.

I think it's worth just saying that Rushd is not taking potshots at the British.

It's interesting, isn't it? I wonder why it's possible, and people have successfully done it, to write a novel about America.

You could say many American novels are about America, because I suppose a part of America is the American dream, and of course that is the underlying subject of a lot of American literature.

other countries seem to have a sort of awareness of their nationalism in a way that, well, England does too.

And Middlemarch, you're quite right, Charlie, is probably the one that you would say was closest to it.

But it's about a very specific time and place and about provincialism apart from anything else.

It's about the beginning of India, or at least the beginning of the Indian independent state.

There was an extra festival in the calendar, a new myth to celebrate because a nation which had never previously existed was about to win its freedom, catapulting us into a world which, although it had 5,000 years of history, although it had invented the game of chess and traded with Middle Kingdom Egypt, was nevertheless quite imaginary.

into a mythical land, a country which would never exist, except by the efforts of a phenomenal collective will, except in a dream we all agreed to dream, a mass fantasy that would periodically need the sanctification and renewal which can only be provided by rituals of blood.

No, I think that's about the Indians pulling chunks out of each other ever since independence.

And yes, no, I think the phenomenal collective will, I think, is shown not to have been there, to have been a fantasy, like he says in that extract, which is why India is perceived to be disintegrating in this novel.

I think it's worth just saying that Rushd is not taking potshots at the British.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.