Nationalism in Indian CitiesS. Gopal BUSSINESSMEN AND POLITICS: RISING NATIONALISM AND A MODERNIZING ECONOMY IN BOMBAY-1918-1933 By A.D.D. Gordon Manohar Publication, New Delhi, 1978, pp. 316 index, Rs. 50.00 By Rajat K. Ray Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi, 1979, pp. 233 index, Rs. 60.00 VOLUME IV NUMBER 4 January-February 1980 A national movement requires
organization, funds, leadership and popular support. If one or the other is
lacking or weak, the movement becomes not only lop-sided but ineffective. It
was Gandhi's great achievement in India that he ensured all four basic
elements, even though he left to others the reconciling of the contradiction in
the manner in which he provided these essential ingredients. The two
well-researched studies of politics in Bombay and Calcutta during the years of
the freedom movement throw light on both the spread of nationalism as well as
on the contradictions of the Gandhian phase.
It is
worth taking these two books together, so as to draw attention to the
similarities as well as the contrasts between Bombay and Calcutta. They were
the key cities of the raj, with vast economic and communal interests. But then
the differences start. In Calcutta the European businessman was predominant and
the non-official British communities exercised a powerful influence. While the Permanent
Settlement gave the Indian landlords a position in society, there was no Indian
commercial
class carrying much weight for a long time, and it was the educated Bengali who
made his voice heard. The situation was further complicated by the Muslim
section of the population, which was numerically strong but whose leadership,
especially in business, was drawn to a large extent from outside the State. In
Bombay on the other hand, the mills were owned by Indians and the nonofficial
British community enjoyed far less influence than in Bengal. So, while there
were differences between the mill-owners, the merchants who worked the markets
and whom Gordon terms ‘marketeers’, the agents, the city landlords, the
nationalists and the government and the relations between these various
elements were constantly overlapping and fluctuating yet the atmosphere was
healthier in Bombay than in Calcutta. The commercial tension was less marked
and Indian opinion was more homogeneous. Ray tells us a little more than Gordon
about the industrial worker and growth of trade unionism; but in both books
these remain on the margin. Gordon places developments in Bombay in the wider
context of Indian nationalism than Ray, who concentrates on conflicts in the
municipal arena. But this is part of the pattern; the businessmen of Bombay had
broader horizons than the politicians of Calcutta. For Ray to argue that the
politics of Calcutta Corporation is central to the explanation ... Table of Contents >> |