Category: A Passage to India

The tale An Passage to India by E.M.Forster investigates the issues in old cultures times of India. The two people looked to see one another and the universe in India when English was the administration around then. The creator E.M.Forster does not simply investigate the (issues, delays) individuals confronted or getting India however man’s quest for absolute best truth. Entry to India portrays the existence Indians had under English principles and how they needed a change. It isn’t only a novel dependent on Indian versus English yet besides portrays the connection among Indians and Muslims. E.M. Forster through his novel needs to show us the stunning and horrendous truth of (a more grounded nation controlling and exploiting a more fragile one) and how such political issues and social battles/differs can become individual and separate a solid fellowship. The book-related/composing related gadget that portrays this novel entry to India by E.M.Forster is enthusiasm for what’s similar and genuine. In the novel of A Passage to India by E.M.Forster the creator appears/speaks to three primary concentrations all through the novel are Kinship, Battling/differing in the Way of life and Religion.

Right off the bat, Companionship in A section to India can be portrayed as enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine. The companionship between the Indians and English was not up to stamp back in days which can be known as enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine because the kinship among Indians and English is as yet the equivalent. Dr.Aziz who is Indian Muslim men meets an English woman Mrs. Moore. The two of them meet at a Muslim sanctuary in Chandarpore in India; Where Mrs. Moore visited the sanctuary. The two before long find that they share much for all intents and purpose and they quickly become companions. Dr.Aziz and Mrs. Moore feel at comfort with each other and uncovered their spirits while their (things in like manner) may unite them, however, their race and foundation just split them separated, this is likewise genuine case of why fellowship is enthusiasm for what’s similar and genuine because in the present (network of individuals/every great individual on the planet) the Indians and English kinship is as yet split because of foundation. ‘You get me, you recognize what others feel. Gracious, if others appear as though you!’ Rather amazed, she answered: ‘I don’t think I comprehend individuals well indeed. I just know whether I like or abhorrence them’. ‘At that point, you are an Oriental.'(Pg. 121, Forster). Right now tells Mrs. Moore that she is ‘Oriental’ since she puts together her companionship concerning affectability instead of information. Dr.Aziz not just has an English companion Mrs. Moore yet additionally has a nearby and individual relationship with Cyril Handling who is an increasingly significant character and progressively imperative to Dr. Aziz in the novel. Handling regards Indians as a gathering of Individuals who can interface through to and fro/equivalent between individuals regards, generosity/obligingness and insight, another case of why companionship could be portrayed as enthusiasm for what’s similar and genuine because back in days the English respected Indians as we perceive how Handling treated them and this can be enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine because there are still some English that regards the Indian in the present (network of individuals/every great individual on the planet). Both Dr. Aziz and Handling treat each other as commendable individuals who interface through, Genuineness, insight and positive attitude. Aziz fellowship is demonstrated when he shows Handling his better half picture, with this demonstration he makes sure about/ensures his trust and trust in Handling. ‘I have faith in the purdah, however I ought to have disclosed to her you are my sibling, and she would have seen you, all men are my siblings and when one carries on thusly he may see my significant other,’ said my Dr. Aziz. ( *last name* 128). This statement clarifies how Aziz and Handling’s companionship is fixed by Aziz sharing his better half’s image. The creator ties the trust and fellowship among Aziz and Handling to enthusiasm for what’s similar and genuine because a few Indians and English have trust and great companionship between them till now.

Also, in the novel, a section to India, Culture Battle/difference can be portrayed as enthusiasm for what’s similar and genuine because today Hindus and Muslims don’t regard each other’s societies. Culture battle/difference is additionally a significant subject in the novel a section to India. The creator ties culture battle/difference to enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine subject because till now the Hindus and Muslims don’t regard each other religion. The fight is between two unique societies east and west. ‘East will be east and west will be west, and never the two will meet ” said by Rudyard Kipling, who was conceived in India. This statement clarifies how the two societies didn’t care for one other. The west is spoken to by (white American)- Indians in Chandrapore. (white American)- Indians are the English bosses while the easts are the Indians. The west culture goes hard in the east since they do not need to comprehend the Indians however are just acceptable to those Indians who serve the east culture. The way of life battle/difference isn’t simply between the east and west battle/contradiction yet besides among Hindus and Muslims. The Hindus are more grounded in Muslim societies as there are more Hindus in India. The Hindus culture doesn’t fix up with both English culture and Muslim culture and needs both to leave India. Dr. Aziz who is a glad Muslim contemplates/trusts Hindus as new. The creator attaches this section to enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine because a cultural impact is as yet an issue in India which is among Hindus and Muslims.

Thirdly, religion in a section to India is likewise enthusiasm for what’s similar and genuine. For instance, battles occurred among Hindus and Muslims because of the distinctive religion both cultures have, which can be known as enthusiasm for what’s similar and genuine subject since religion is as yet an issue and both the Hindus and Muslims don’t regard each other religion. Anyway in the novel, a section to India religion battle/contradiction isn’t simply among Hindus and Muslims yet besides among Hindus and Christians. The three pieces of the book ‘Mosque’, ‘Sanctuary’ and ‘Cavern ” oblige/coordinate to these religions; Where Mosque is for Muslims, Sanctuary for Hindus and Cavern for Christians. The creator attaches this section to enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine topic since Mosque, Sanctuary Cavern despite everything exits and is in reality.Dr. Aziz who is Muslim loves his religion a great deal and feels exceptional each time he goes to Mosque. For instance in section 2 when Dr. Aziz goes to the mosque there he feels reestablished. His body and soul are joined in Mosque and he is trustier to Islam then to his nation India. This passage additionally ties the enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine because Muslims in India are increasingly faithful to Islam then to their nation India.’A mosque by winning his endorsement let free his creative mind, Islam a (point of view/method for carrying on) towards life both wonderful and (ready to last through intense conditions), where his body and his considerations balance their home’ said by Dr. Aziz((pg.165, Forster 165). This unmistakably shows Aziz’s relationship with Islam. The (white American)- Indians are the Christians, who in the book follow their religion not so much but rather Mrs. Moore is a strict lady. As a Christian, she feels that god adores everybody. There are a few Christians that follow their religion and feel that god adores everybody and Christian is a serene religion and that identifies with enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine subjects since some English have a similar preference for Christian as how Mrs. Moore had. For instance, in section 5 she informs Ronny concerning how awful English treats the Hindu’s as they ought not because Christian doesn’t do that and reveals to him that ‘god adores everybody and since India is a piece of earth, god cherishes them as well.’ This clarifies she adores her religion as well as cherishes the Indian religion too. ‘India is a piece of the earth, and God has put us on the earth to be charming to one another, God is love. God has put us on earth to cherish our neighbors and to show it, and god is general, even in India to perceive how we are succeeding’ said Mr. Moore (Forster 302). This statement clarifies that Mrs. Moore is Christian and that god adores all things. The creator fits this passage to the topic of enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine because those English who are strict as Mrs. Moore has regard for Indian the nation and their religion.

At the end/final product, an entry to India by E.M.Forster fits into the topic of enthusiasm for what’s exact and genuine because of companionship between the Indians and English, culture battle/difference and religion between the Hindus and Muslims. The creator E.M.Forster does well to portray the relationship, culture, and religion between the Indians, English, and Muslims in India.

Colonialism has often been regarded as the struggle, policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another country, occupying it and exploiting it economically. E.M Forster’s novel A Passage to India reveals the true picture of colonialism in the subcontinent. The discussion of the representation of the colonial rule has been carried out since ages. This novel is one of his masterpieces and a subject of literary criticism from many perspectives. As it is a highly controversial subject matter, the question that is upraised is that whether it is a genuine image of India under the colonization written from an un-biased perspective or something that is written just to let out the grudges of the author, and moreover, is it a failed or a successful representation of the Indians. This book has several major themes but the one that outstands amongst all is the vast difference between the British colonial elite and the native people of India. Forster challenges the belief of the British that they had a right to rule and colonize the Indians. For them it was “White Man’s Burden” to educate the low and the inferior. By analyzing the novel, one can apprehend that the colonialists had full command over the locals. The novel is a critique on the British imperialism and its rule over India.

The image of the British as the ruling heads and masters is shown very favorable. They are portrayed as sophisticated, superior and high status beings whereas Indians are represented as meek, uncivilized and superstitious nation. They are stereotyped as the inferior race and therefore, they need a power from above to rule them and civilize them in a proper manner. Forster describes India as an incomprehensible, foreign and an exotic land just as Edward Said has explained it to be in his book Orientalism. Said too focuses on the supremacy of the Occident over the Orient. Englishmen are not presented as tyrants or dictators rather Forster describes them as superior and believing in the need to civilize the natives who cannot progress on their own.

In the 5th chapter, Ronny says, “[British] are out here to do justice and keep the peace […]. India isn’t a drawing room.” By reading this, we can have the idea of the British mindset that the idea of colonialism and justice and having control over the natives is a means maintaining peaceful environment.

As in most of the colonization, the practice of “bleeding the country out” by taking all its raw materials is witnessed, similar case can be deduced in this novel. The mentioning of mangoes found in England as well is a direct reference of it. “Even mangoes can be got in England now. They ship them in ice-cold rooms. You can make India in England now apparently …” (Forster 31).

A Passage to India also portrays colonialism and imperialism as an obstacle between the friendship of the English and the Indians by referring to the status and position of the colonizers and the colonized. Right in the beginning of the novel, Aziz overhears the conversation of his uncle and his friend that if it is possible that an Indian and an Englishman become friends. Aziz’s friend, Mahmout Ali is of the view that it is impossible whereas his uncle, Hamidullah believes it to be possible, but only in England. By reading this, we can clearly highlight the irony of the time in that area.

Forster, without any shame and guilt, condemns British colonialism and believes that it victimizes not only the natives (Indians) but the British as well especially women. For instance, Adela causes much distress to Aziz but she is the victim of patriarchy and the colonial officials treat her as a tool for battle between men.

He also narrates more ironic examples in the novel. The instance of the collar stud of Aziz can be enumerated. Prior to the Bridge Party, which itself was a critique on the system of bridging up the gap between the nations. Fielding lost his collar stud and Aziz offered him his own stud as a token of friendship. But when Ronny sees Aziz without one and collar hanging up his neck, he points him (Aziz) to be dressed poorly in an Indian fashion and criticizes his race. It can be noted that the prejudgment of Ronny about Aziz’s collar stud and the entire Indian community seems to just flow out of his narrow-minded suppositions without doing any investigations or revealing the facts. Forster satirizes the racial arrogance of the British colonizers.

From the beginning of the novel, Forster claims that the Englishmen go through a corrupt change in their attitudes towards the Indians as soon as they gain official positions and supremacy in the colonial system. This can be notified through the noble character of Fielding in the novel as he is first portrayed as a good-hearted person who cares about others and has friendly relations but is soon corrupted when he becomes an inspector in the British educational administration.

Moreover, when Adela Quested rejects the proposal of Ronny, it can be seen as the rejection of his racial values. Adela states that his character flaws became more prominent and outwards in India than they were when they met in England. This indicates that India and the authorial position has contributed to Ronny’s colonialist arrogance and build his superiority complex.

Furthermore, this change of attitude is also notable in the Indians. In the beginning, they seem to be interested in becoming friends with the Englishmen but they soon realize that this friendship cannot be achieved as it is a relation of Mastery and Slavery and the two races have totally different social, political and official boundaries.

The novel has played significant role in giving a critique on the colonial empire. The colonial regime declare the natives as the inferior “Others” but remain at loss as they intend to replicate England as the Indian land not knowing that all the customs would not be transferred.

However, Forster’s argument has two main drawbacks to it. He draws least attention to the economic exploitation of India as the wealth was allowed to escape overseas. He also fails to justify the fact that why the British went to India in the first place whereas Edward Said has remarkably clarified this viewpoint. Said told that British found Indians as mysterious creatures, objectified them and made them an object of study to rule and govern them. Furthermore, Forster’s second drawback counts as his arguments are skeptical in nature. The novel illustrates many other notions as obstacles between the two nations other than imperialism, i.e., the differences among their culture and the selfishness in human nature.

To sum up, the novel is a critique of British colonial and imperialistic rule but it does not reject that system completely as West has gained numerable advantages just because of the East. Moreover, the relationship between the Indians and British cannot be strengthened because both are way divergent in all cases. It can only be made possible when the colonizers leave the homeland of the Indians and they gain independence as friendship is only possible when the individuals are equal in theory and practice.

Rudyard Kipling in his poem The White Man’s Burden(1899) says,

“Take up the White Man’s burden–

Send forth the best ye breed—

“Go bind your sons to exile

To serve your captives’ need;

To wait in heavy harness,

On fluttered folk and wild—

Your new-caught, sullen people,

Half-devil and half-child” (1-6).

Kipling, here hails imperialism by proposing the idea of a moral burden that have been destined upon the Whites to refine and civilize the uncouth and brutish oriental world. The poem has ingrained the prominent belief about the British being superior to the colonised “Other”. This misconception was communicated chiefly through the literature of the time. While there is quite a large number of works, which explicitly promote this belief, an equal number of works exist where this idea isn’t explicit. Though not coined by Edward Said, he employs the word orientalism to define this popular belief in his work Orientalism. Edward Morgan Forster’s A Passage to India, popular as an anti-imperialist text exhibits orientalist ideologies in a subdued manner. This paper aims to scrutinize the novel A Passage to India to prove this.

The clever concealment of orientalist ideologies in the novel A Passage to India problematizes the dominant notion of the novel being an anti-imperialistic one. The method used in this research is meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. A thorough analysis of the text A Passage of India is made to pick out instances to prove the subdued presence of orientalist ideologies. Several papers, which support and oppose the primary aim of this research were read and evaluated. The postcolonial theory of Orientalism and the work Culture and Imperialism by Edward Said is used as the source texts to base the analysis on.

Orientalism, according to Said can be defined at three levels. The first designation for Orientalism is an academic one. Said says “Anyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the Orient—and this applies whether the person is an anthropologist, sociologist, historian, or philologist—either in its specific or its general aspects, is an Orientalist, and what he or she does is Orientalism”( Orientalism 2). Another designation is “as a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between the orient and the occident” (Orientalism 2). The third one is a practical action upon the Orient by “dominating, restructuring, and having authority” (Orientalism 3). While Said speaks of the orientalising of the people of the Middle Easts or the Arabs, recent studies like that Jukka Jhouki’s Orientalism and India paves for the analysis of colonized India through Said’s lens. In order to meet the objectives of the paper, here the concept of orientalism is taken as the sum total of its definitions at three levels. Hence, orientalism is the theory employed in this paper to trace the existence of orientalist thoughts and ideologies in the Forster’s work A Passage to India, analyze orientalism as a practical action justified by the colonizers and to find its manifestation in the novel.

Said’s work Culture and Imperialism, published after Orientalism is about the relationship between imperialism and culture in the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth century. Here, Said traces the formation of the British Empire and also analyses the effect of the mainstream literature on colonization and the effect of the resistance to colonialism on mainstream literature.

Edward Said rightfully notes in the chapter “Jane Austen and Empires” in his work Culture and Imperialism that the colonial domination of almost all the nations sprout from the major “assumption of native backwardness and general inadequacy to be independent, ‘equal,’ and fit” (80). A postcolonial analysis of E M Forster’s A Passage to India summarises the novel to be an apt manifestation of Rudyard Kipling’s lines “East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet”, in the poem The Ballad of the East and West(1889). While truly conforming to the above said conclusion by tracing orientalist ideologies, this paper also aims to extend the study by tracing references from to novel to depict its vindication of the imperialist objectives.

Forster through his novel A Passage to India stresses on the Orientalist notions further. Written with an aim to eradicate the darkness attributed to India by the Englishmen, the novel in turn exoticises India to a large extent. He evaluates the ‘Other’in a myriad ways and quite unknowingly reiterates the Orientalist ideology of the ‘Other’ (here India) being primitive, irrational, violent and being inferior to the colonizer.

The idea of the mystery associated with India first gets discussed during the tea party at Fielding’s house:

“I do so hate mysteries,” Adele announced.

“We English do.”

“I dislike them not because I’m English, but from my own personal point of view,” she corrected.

“I like mysteries but I rather dislike muddles,” said Mrs. Moore

“A mystery is a muddle”

“Oh, do you think so Mr. Fielding?”

“A mystery is only a high-sounding term for a muddle.”(Forster 28)

V.G. Kiernan’s comment about the association of mystery and muddle with East as “Europe’s collective day dream of the Orient” has been restated by Edward Said, in his work Orientalism(52). This idea can be incorportated into an Indian context to explain the fixation of the British with the exoticisation of India. Orientalist writings on India perpetuate the image of India being a land of mystery, muddle and strange people. The above statements from A Passage to India illustrates this.

Forster employs Mr. Fielding to put forward his opinion about treating India and Indians fairly throughout the novel. But Forster’s love for India is cynical to a certain extent. Here, Mr. Fielding, the spokesperson for Forster in the novel conveys his hatred for anything that is mysterious This in turn reveals his superficial love for India and the Indians. Unlike other British officials, Mr. Fielding tries hard to love India despite its queerness, a characteristic attribution to India from the part of the West. Yet, another instance where the veil of superficiality associated with his love for India gets ripped off is his visit to Venice.

“The buildings of Venice, like the mountains of Crete and the fields of Egypt, stood in the right place, whereas in poor India everything was placed wrong. He had forgotten the beauty of form among idol temples and lumpy hills; indeed, without form, how can there be beauty?” (Forster 124).

Here, Mr. Fielding who claimed to love India admires the buildings of Venice and at the same time shows his disgust at the haphazard placing of buildings in India. The air of superiority surrounding the British officials who walked through the lanes of India, seem to be sumptuously breathed in by Mr. Fielding too.

Forster’s “A Passage to India” known for its anti-imperialist strain contains instances, which prove otherwise. Said, in his work Orientalism says, “the orient has helped to define Europe(or the west) as its contrasting image, idea, personality, experience”( Orientalism 1 ). The orientalist idea of India being a muddle, mystery and full of chaos finds its expression in Forster’s description of the Indian landscape and its people. The descriptions about how Dr. Azis lets his bicycle fall to ground, goes to a dinner past the time and how his bicycle gets a puncture depicts the chaotic and unruly life of an Indian through the eye of a baffled colonizer who finds all this mess incomprehensible.

Forster says, “He raised his voice suddenly, and shouted for dinner. Servants shouted back that it was ready. They meant that they wished it was ready, and were so understood, for nobody moved” (Forster 2)

The description of the above-mentioned situation comes from a narrator who tries to contrast the ‘unruly and orderless’ nature of Indians from the ‘neat and ordered’ nature of the Britishers. The degree of ironic strain in the above-mentioned statement is high and hence never fails to create an impression of a’ non-chaotic and decipherable’ life as the opposite side of Indianess. These descriptions automatically attach the adjectives lazy, irrational, crude and unruly to Indians and adjectives like productive, civilized and organized to the British, creating a clear dichotomy between the two. This is proof of the deep-rooted orientalist ideology that has been instilled in the minds of the colonizers through various records, which documented life in India.

In the first chapter of the novel, Forster describes the civil station as “sensibly planned, with a red-brick club on its brow” (10). He says “it has nothing hideous in it, and only the view is beautiful; it shares nothing with the city except the overarching sky” (1). The use of the expression ‘nothing hideous’ gives an impression that the ‘civil station’ is the only place in the district of Chandrapore that is free of ‘mystery and muddle’.

To Forster,the “Marabar Caves” is the epitome of Indian “muddledom”. The air of mystery that surrounds the cave from the moment its name is uttered gives a chill down the spines of the readers. The description of the Marabar Caves creates a sense of terror in the minds of the newly arrived Britishers and readers alike. Forster fails bitterly to create a sense of awe in them. His evasive description of Adele’s experience in the novel creates further confusion. Said’s idea of “Latent Orientalism” finds its expression here. Ronald.L.Iverson in his article Latent Orientalism opines that latent orientalism is a collection of “underlying attitudes and assumptions about the Orient which have remained essentially constant and unchanging through the years”. Here, the caves becomes a medium exploited by Forster to further exoticise India and recapitulate the idea of binary. Galsworthy Lowes Dickinson wrote to Forster in 1924 explaining the need for him to be more explicit about the cave incident. To this Forster wrote, “It’s a particular trick I felt justified in trying because my theme was India. It sprang from my subject matter. I wouldn’t have attempted it in other countries, which though they contain mysteries or muddles, manage to draw rings round them” (Furbank 2:125). This statement, from the part of a writer who wrote against the prevalent ‘orientalist strain ‘employed by writers of the time, is indeed paradoxical. Thus, this proves the plight of a writer who finds it impossible to unlearn certain ideologies imbibed in his early years despite his determination to change the dichotomized discourses about India.

Peter Burra, in his work “The Novels of E M Forster” regards “A Passage to India” as ‘a book which no student of the Indian question can disregard”.This dominant notion about Forster’s “A Passage to India” being a novel which treated the subject of “Anglo-India” with a sympathetic eye is indeed problematic. Forster himself admits this when he says “the sense of racial tension, of incompatibility, never left me” (Ganguly, 45).

Mr. Cyril Fielding appears to be the only man in the novel who treats Indians with the respect that they ought to get. Mr. Fielding acts as a spokesperson for Forster throughout the novel. As a result, he also becomes the bearer of Forster’s orientalist ideologies. There are many instances in the novel where one gets to see his sugar-coated love for India getting bitter.

During the ride Fielding and Azis took before they parted, they talk about the British rule of India. Mr. Fielding says: “Away from us, Indians go to seed at once. Look at the King-Emperor High School! Look at your poems… Free our women and India will be free. Try it, my lad” ( Forster 141).

Here, Mr. Fielding sheds all forms of politeness that has been carried off by him for too long and shows his true colours. The above statement divulges his ‘quasi-love’ for India and Indians. Like any other colonizer, Mr. Fielding too firmly believes that India will perish without the aid of England. He becomes a patronizing father who informs Aziz of his and his countrymen’s’ inferiority and incapability for proper administration. His statement about the present condition of King-Emperor High School and the possible return of Azis to charms makes him no less of a cruel colonizer. Anil Seal, in his work “The Emergence of Indian Nationalism: Competition and Collaboration in the Later Nineteenth Century” mentions how the British dealt with “activities inconvenient” to them by pronouncing them to be “self-interested mechanisations rather than genuine nationalisms” (191). The above statemen testifies this. These statements by Fielding also recapitulates Jukka Jhouki’s opinion that the colonizers considered “Occidents as problems, not as citizens”(4). Hence, for the colonizers, orients were those burden carried by them for the welfare of the ‘inefficient colonized’.

Fielding claims India to be a country belonging to nobody. Like any other British official, he believes that a country like India with myriad of religions will disintegrate and crumble without the administration of a powerful and capable force like Britain. According to Said, for the colonizers, “the oriental was a member of a subject race” and hence “he had to be subjected” (92). This elucidates colonizers’ idea about the inability of the natives to rule themselves and maintain peace. Forster’s want to continue ruling over India gets conveyed through Fielding’s statement. Such kinds of statements force the Indians to accept subjugation and fuels the act of orientalising. Forster wanted British to rule over India and worked ardently to extinguish the fire of nationalism in the minds of Indians.

On one side Forster shows the hollowness associated with the British idea of knowing India through the statements made by Rony Healesop. Rony claims about him knowing naturally about the distance to Marabar Caves, even if he had not been to it. On scrutinizing this statement, the underlying orientalist idea of attributing stereotypical features to a particular land and its people becomes evident.Forster also expresses his concern over the over-dependence of British officials on the records of Indian life, kept by the preceding officials in ruling India. He mentions this through the conversation between McBrydes and Mr.Fielding. McBrydes says “Read any of the Mutiny records; which, rather than the Bhagavad Gita, should be your Bible in this country” (Foster 73). Despite all this, Forster’s aim of analyzing the “Anglo-Indian” problem through the lens of an unprejudiced observer of India, fails in certain ways. Even though he tries to rebuke the dominant Orientalist ideologies like the dichotomy of the colonizer and colonized, that have been in circulation, he fails to see his own assimilation of these ideologies and his exploitation of these in the novel “A Passage to India”. Forster through the novel presents certain newcomers who want to see the ‘real India’. The course of narrative in which the newcomers visit a cave called Marabar in hope of seeing and understanding ‘real India’ is indeed problematic. Forster’s use of the caves of Marabar to extend his idea of mystery and muddledom to whole of India needs to be problematized. He depicts a certain set of characters eager to know and understand the real India but becomes baffled and disillusioned once a minute portion of the so called India is introduced to them. Hence, knowingly or unknowingly, Forster creates an impression of mystery, chaos and muddledom as having close association with India when his real aim was to remove the haziness associated with the life of Indians in the life of Britishers and hence bridge the gap between them.

Forster’s flaw or rather his objective is accurately identified by Edward Said, in his work, “Culture and Imperialism”, but in a more positive light. Said says, “Of course Forster was a novelist, not a political officer or theorist or prophet. Yet he found a way to use the mechanism of the novel to elaborate on the already existing structure of attitude and reference without changing it” (205). This implies how Forster’s “A Passage to India” becomes a text that perpetuates orientalist ideologies despite its attempt to view India through an indological perspective. A fact that becomes explicit on analyzing this novel is Forster’s belief about the inefficiency of the Indians to rule themselves. This kind of portrayal of India and its citizens through a translucent lens that depicts Indians as someone who ought to be respected but not be set free contains the very essence of orientalist ideology. This justifies Said’s comment in “Culture and Imperialism”, about the prevalent notion about “Indian politics as the charge of the British”, and about how it “culturally refused a privilege to Indian nationalism” (205).

WORKS CITED

1. Al,Huri, Ibrahim. “A Summary of” Orientalism” by Edward Said 1978. Researchgate.researchgate.2016.Web.27 Feb.2019.
2. Burra, Peter.”The Novels of E.M.Forster”.Nineteenth Century and After.CXVI.Nov.1934.pg583.
3. Dhara, Chandra shekhar. “British Representation of Indians as Oriental ‘other’ in Forster’s Passage to India. http;//www.joell.in. Journal of Englisj Language and Literature.2018.Web. 23 Feb 2019.
4. Forster,Edward Morgan. A Passage to India.Edward Arnold.1924.http;//archieve.org.Web.19 Feb 2019.
5. Furbank, P.N.E .M. Foster:A Life.Houghton Mifflin.1994.Print.
6. Joukhi,Jukka. “Orientalism and India”. J@rgonia J@rgonia.2009.Web.24 Feb 2019.
7. Hunt, John Dixon. “Muddle and Mystery in A Passage to India”. hhtp;//www.jstor.org/stable/2872204. The John Hopkins University Press.Dec 1996.Web.24 Feb 2019.
8. Said, Edward W.Culture and Imperialism.New York.Vintage Books.1994.Print
9. Said,Edward W. Orientalism.London.Penguin Books.2003.Print.
10. Seal, Anil. The Emergence of Indian Nationalism.London.Cambridge University Press.2009.Print.
11. White,Gertrude M. “A Passage to India: Analysis and Revaluation”. https://www.jstor.org/stable/459789. Modern Language Association, Sept.1953.Web.23 Feb 2019.

A Passage to India by E. M. Forster is one piece of literary work that questions the possibility of an Indian and an Englishman ever becoming friends. From the beginning to the end of the novel, the central theme is relationships and friendship in light with British colonialism. On a more personal level, Forster explores the British colonial rule using the friendship theme. The main relationship in the novel is centered on Aziz (and Indian) and Fielding (English). The first half of the story presents what can only be classified as liberal humanism between Aziz and Fielding characterized by a connection based on good will, intelligence and frankness. However, the aftermath of the story’s climax brings the friendship to a sudden halt. Aziz and Fielding’s relationship is evidently strained by external forces influenced by the tendencies of their individual cultures as well as the prevailing political circumstances. The mutual stereotyping of the English and Indian culture continually pulls their friendship apart. Evidently, although friendship may be possible, colonialism, religious differences and the role of human nature make it “not yet.”

Colonialism, as the prevailing political circumstances, in many ways, thwarts any possibility of friendship. Apparently, from only reading the A Passage to India, one could easily tell that Forster’s work is profoundly mystical or symbolic. However, it is a realistic documentation of the attitudes that British colonial official had in India. There negative, unwelcoming, standoffish and unreceptive attitude towards Indians creates two opposite worlds that can rarely be brought together in the name of friendship. Forster spends lots of time especially using satire to harshly condemn British women who are self-righteous, overwhelmingly racist and viciously condescending to the Indians. Forster criticizes the British rule suggesting that they should be kinder and sympathetic to the Indians to create a society that largely depends on one another.

The harsh colonial rule is characterized by myths and misconceptions between the Indians and the Englishmen. For instance, The Englishmen presume that they are better-off, above and more important than their Indian counterparts. According to Forster, the superiority of Englishmen puts them above Indians which makes them more trusted (10). For instance, Adela accuses Aziz of assault. She goes ahead to disavow the accusation at the trial which brings the friendship and relationship between Aziz and Fielding to an end. The end of the novel is a clear indicator that the political landscape of India had a hand at the end of the friendship. Forster’s ultimate vision in the possibility of any friendship between an Indian and an Englishman is pessimistic. However, there is the possibility of friendship after India has been liberated or on the English soil. The implication is that, under the colonial rule, a friendship between the two sides is a dream. The mere fact that one side is in control while the other remains subject to the control eliminates any possibility or chances of friendship.

Religious differences are characteristic of the tendencies of the individual cultures as well as mutual stereotyping which evidently pulls a relationship apart. In this novel, Forster establishes characters that are mainly Muslim and Christian. However, Hinduism also has a major thematic role in the story. Forster brings out the Hindu religion as defined by the ideal of all living things, whether small or large, united as one in love. Forster’s establishment is presented though Professor Godbole who happens to advocate for the unity of all living creatures. Mrs. Moore buys into this idea and is quite dissatisfied by the “smallness of Christianity. Nevertheless, the values and principles of each religion have a daunting effect on any possibility of friendship. Indians happen to be open and ready to unite with everyone in love and harmony. This is evident when Godbole refuses to take any sides during the conflict. However, Christianity, the main religion of the Englishman does not accommodate any aspects of Hinduism or Islam.

Differences in religious values, beliefs, systems, and principles are negatively consequential to the possibility of friendship especially when the parties are not in harmony with one another. Aziz is a Muslim while Fielding is a strong Christian. Fielding even laments that his Indian counterparts do not recognize or appreciate Western architecture. Christianity in the novel is presented as inclusive. Those who embrace it, though, use it to silence the other people (Forster 5). Although tolerance is the primary element preached by Islam and Hinduism, the followers use it to separate themselves from each other. In other words, religion happens to be the baseline of exclusion. It means that there cannot be any chances of friendship when parties of different religions are always trying to exclude each other. Aziz and Fielding’s relationship is destroyed by the different religious belief system. Remarkably, if people are separated or accepted basing on their spirituality, there cannot be a single chance of friendship. Religion, according to Forster, is like the sky; although it embraces everyone, individuals always use it to support their own courses and hence, keep others out, which, destroys friendships and relationships.

Apart from cultural and political dominion in the novel, Forster emphasizes that the co-existence of nature with human life has an influence on the relationships that people have with one another. Evidently, Forster knows, understands and appreciates the many beauties of India’s landscape including the architecture of both Eastern and Western cultures. Forster uses nature to describe and delineate not only the setting of the story but also the relationship between Aziz and Fieldman. There is mud, there are buzzing flies, there are evil caves, the sky is dun-colored, there are floods and even relentless and fierce heat. All these characteristics and elements of nature signify a harsh, unyielding and unreceptive atmosphere that negatively influences the existence of friendship between humans. Forster describes Chandrapore as a place of cheerless plains and lumpy hills (1). The place, according to him, contains fists and fingers of the Marabar and there is nothing which fits. In essence, man is absolutely out of harmony with nature.

Plainly, Forster intentionally chose an obnoxious and detestable location in India to depict the disharmony and lack of friendship among the residents. In the entire novel, Forster explores and delineates the extremes of malevolence and benevolence while using nature to help with both. For instance, the beauty of the moon depicts and characterizes the beautiful friendship between Aziz and Mrs. Moore. However, the incident at the cave is forecasted by the pale sun in the insipid sky. Furthermore, the wasp in Moore’s room illuminates the concept of God’s love and the need for unity and love among His creations. While the bee sting brings Aziz and Ralph together; the rocks force Aziz and Fielding apart. In other words, Forster tries to imply that nature has a say in human friendship and affairs. It is what determines the kind of relationship that exists between people.

Conclusively, from the beginning to the end of the novel A Passage to India, the theme of friendship is greatly explored. Several influencing factors come into play throughout the entire story. Cultural stereotyping and political dominion are the main factors that affect how people interrelate in the novel. Friendship in the story is depicted through Aziz’s relationship to Fielding. Colonialism defined by political control negatively impacts friendship. Similarly, different religious values and belief systems are also negatively consequential to human-friendly relations. Nature, however, as depicted by Forster in the novel, seems to have a unique role in influencing human relationships.

Work Cited

1. Forster, E. Morgan. A passage to India. Pearson Education India, 1929. Print.

Albert Memmi was born in 1925 of a Berber mother and an Italian father, who passed on his Jewish identity, Memmi was able to observe the turbulent process of de-colonization when Algeria and Tunisia gained independence from the French in 1956. Memmi’s contribution to the Post-Colonial conversation was that he lived within colonialism, unsure of his place: as a native of Tunisia he was colonized, as a Jew he identified with his fellow Europeans, the French.

Memmi’s The Colonizer and the Colonized (1974) is specifically in response to the decolonization of North Africa in 1956, when his home nation Tunisia, as well as its neighbor Algeria, gained independence from the French. Memmi describes this work as ‘portraits of the two protagonists of the colonial drama and the relationship that binds them.’ (145). The British and the native peoples are both encouraged to view the imperialistic relationship as good for everyone. Yet, at the same time, a system of cultural assumptions is put forth based on emphasizing and exaggerating the differences between the colonized and colonizer and citing these differences as evidence that the colonizer is ‘naturally suited to govern as the colonized is to be governed’ (71). The Colonizer and the Colonized proves to be highly influential, as well as highly controversial work, “citing colonization as a variant of fascism’ (63). Memmi states that the dynamics of colonization are similar in any colonial system. In his view, under colonial governments, ‘once the colonizers gain political and economic power, they become the exploiters’ (37). Memmi’s primary argument is that the collapse of colonialism is inevitable and that the only mean for this eventual collapse will come through revolt. Memmi defines the colonizer as ‘a person who imposes his culture a way of life that includes government, education and socioeconomic system on another in total disregard of the latter’s culture’ (25). Memmi considers colonizers to be ‘ exploiters’ and imposing his culture , way of living upon the colonized which is apt in the scenario of the novel as colonizers tend to use the subjugated for their own gains inconsiderate about the feelings of them. A Passage to India presents ‘India’ more like a Britain i-e through Chandrapore club and Bridge Party which clearly reflects how colonizers culture is practiced.

In the process of colonization, the colonizer becomes an illegitimately privileged usurper. Memmi believes that there are three factors that specify the colonizer (any European in a colony): profit, privilege, and usurpation. Europeans living in colonies often consider themselves to be in exile. They are not inclined to leave the colony for their mother country because they are able to live a more comfortable life in the colony. For the colonizer, ‘a colony is a place where one earns more and spends less’ (5). Throughout A Passage to India, the barriers to inter-racial friendship in a colonial context are explored, and personally experienced by Fielding and Aziz. Forster reveals this point in the novel; when Aziz and other characters were discussing Indian education. Aziz asks if it is fair that an Englishman holds a teaching position when qualified Indians are available. Fielding cannot present the proper answer for this conversation which is that England holds India for her own good. Fielding, instead, says that he is delighted to be in India. So, for him, and other Britaish, India is a comfortable place to enjoy. The main motive in colonization for England is wealth that is gained through the exploitation of the natives; the British justify their actions to the world and to themselves and question one’s cultural and personal identity.

Memmi believes that the colonial system is fundamentally unstable and will lead to its own destruction due to the mere rigidity of the system: ‘the colonized have ultimately two answers to the colonial system’ (126). The first is assimilation, which is to change his condition by changing his skin, and this is impossible since it is never desired by the colonizer, and all those colonized who have attempted it are deluded. The other option is revolt, which, according to Memmi, is as inevitable as the failure of assimilation. Being unable to change his condition in harmony and communion with the colonizer, the colonized tries to become free (127). Subsequently, the only tool left to the colonized is to reclaim their liberty by force, so revolt is the only effective solution that Memmi puts emphasis on. Having established that the relationship between the colonizer and colonized is unstable by virtue of its consequences, Memmi then seeks to show why colonialism can only end through revolt. This issue is shown clearly in the novel which begins and ends with a question: can the English and the Indian races be friends? At the end of the novel, the answer appears to be no; ‘No, not yet’ (289). This is clear evidence showing that the only redeem for colonization is through revolting and getting the colonizers out. In the last scene of the novel, the people of Chandrapore make riots after Aziz’s arrest asking the colonizers to leave India. That gives Mrs. Moore a good reason to return to Britain.

Homi K. Bhabha has been a profoundly original voice in the study of colonial, postcolonial, and globalized cultures. He is often regarded as part of the ‘Holy Trinity’ in the field of postcolonial studies with the two other figures being Edward Said and Gayatri Spivak. He is the author of numerous works exploring postcolonial theory, cultural change and power, including; Nation and Narration and The Location of Culture. He has developed a number of postcolonial studies’ key concepts such as; ’hybridity, mimicry, ambivalence and binarism’, that describe ways in which the colonized peoples have resisted the power of the colonizer.

Homi Bhabha builds up the term of ‘otherness’, in which, according to Jacques Lacan and Frantz Fanon ,this term refers to the binary opposition between white and black, colonizer and colonized. Ashcroft, Griffiths & Tiffin(2007) noted that: ‘The colonized subject is characterized as ‘other’ through discourses such as primitivism and cannibalism, as a means of establishing the binary separation of the colonizer and colonized and asserting the naturalness and primacy of the colonizing culture and world view’(p.154-5) In the novel ‘otherness’ is demonstrated in many ways .From the first chapter of the novel, Forster revealed that India and Indians are inferior to Europeans. He makes himself clear that he belongs to the colonialists, with his inappropriate select of words in describing the city of Chandrapore. He says: .’.by the river Ganges, it trails for a couple of miles along the bank, scarcely distinguishable from the rubbish it deposits so freely […] The streets are mean, the temples ineffective, and though a few fine exists they are hidden away in gardens whose filth deters all […] Chandrapore was never large or beautiful’…(A.P.T.I,p.9) He added that the city is devoid of any work of art. India is considered as an ‘evil’ and ‘barbarous’ land. Forster ,also ,had described the Indian people in bad manner: ‘people are drowned and left rotting’’. Everything Indian is ‘abased’ and ‘monotonous’ .Then ,he compared the Anglo-Indian city station which is so different than the Native one ‘’Houses belonging to Eurasians stand on the high ground…Chandrapore appears to be a totally different place […] it is no city but forest…’’ ,so, his comparison between the Eastern and Western landscape, it shows the The Westerners showed no respect towards the Orientals. The Major Callendar called Aziz to his house. Aziz says: ‘’Old Callendar wants to see me at his bungalow .He might have the politeness to say why […]He has found out our dinner hour, and chooses to interrupt us every time, in order to show his power’’(A.P.T.I,p.17) ,but Aziz found neither the Major nor a message. It is a kind of power and authority of the Colonizer over the Colonized. Superiority of the British colonizer, and the inferiority of the Indian colonized. Ronny was upset when he knew his mother’s talk with a Native, as he called him ‘Mohammedan’. While he thought that she is speaking and describing an English doctor, he found that the English doctor is one of the Indian Natives. He said: ‘Oh, good gracious! Not a Mohammedan? Why ever did not you tell me you had been talking to a native?’ (A.P.T.I,p.31)

The Bridge Party that was suggested by Mr.Turton, it is ‘’…was not the game, but a party to bridge the gulf between the East and the West’’(A.P.T.I,p.28) It shows the high-rank of the English people. Forster had described the Indians as uncivilized and anxious people, when he says: ‘’…most of the Indian guests had arrived even earlier, and stood massed at the farther side of the tennis lawns, doing nothing’’(A.P.T.I,p.39) Ronny and Mrs. Turton spoke about the attendance of the Natives at the club in stereotype manner: ‘’It is the first time we have ever given a party like this at the club. Mr. Heaslop, when I am dead and gone, will you give parties like this?…The great point to remember is that no one who is here matters; those who matter do not come…’’(A.P.T.I,p.39) It is a mockery from Indians. Because ,the British people treated them not as humans, and considered them as objects and lesser than them. Likewise, Ronny judged the Indian guests who attended the party as ‘seditious at heart’.

Another Bhabha’s concept is ‘ambivalence’; it describes the complex mix of attraction and repulsion that characterizes the relationship between colonizer and colonized. The relationship is ‘ambivalent’ because the colonized subject is never simply and completely opposed to the colonizer. The colonizer sees the colonized as inferior, and the colonized sees the colonizer as corrupt. ‘Ambivalence’ also characterizes the way in which colonial discourse relates to the colonized subject, for it may be both exploitative and nurturing, or represent itself as nurturing, at the same time(Ashcroft, Griffiths &Tiffin,2007)

In the novel, the colonized is ‘ambivalent’ towards the colonizer in his treatment. Aziz, for example, liked some Britishers and disliked others. From one side, he likes Mrs. Moore. He says: ‘…your mother was my best friend in all the world’(A.P.T.I,p.307)From another side, he criticized other ‘Westerners’. Aziz argues: ‘I wish no Englishman or Englishwoman to be my friend’(A.P.T.I,p.298) He also disliked Callendars, and he discussed this issue with Mrs. Moore. He comments: She[Mrs.Callendar] has just taken my Tonga without my permissiondo you call that charming? and Major Callendar interrupts me night after night from where I am dining with my friends and I go at once, breaking up a most pleasant entertainment, and he is not there and not even a message. Is this charming, pray?(A.P.T.I,p.24) On the other hand, the colonizer too was ambivalent. Miss Adela came to India to see the ‘real India’, ‘I want to see the real India’(A.P.T.I,p.25) which was impossible without meeting the Indians who she denied. Miss Quested states: ‘I’ve avoided, excepting my own servant, I’ve scarcely spoken to an Indian since landing’(A.P.T.I,p.27)

Discovering the spirit of colonialism in the novel:

• Various incidents refer to the spirit of colonialism in the novel as in the very beginning of the novel ,during the conversation between Ms. Moore and Dr. Aziz, it is revealed that Indians are not allowed to go into the Chandrapore Club inferring the distant relations between the English and Indians.
• “Indians are not allowed into the Chandrapore Club even as guests,’ he said simply”
• The Bridge party was organized to bridge the gulf between the English and Indians and to reduce the gap between the two but ironically it only served to intensify the gap i-e the proud behavior of English ladies towards the Indians. Through out the novel we see the immense protocol given to Britishers as if they were Gods as the quote of Ms. Moore suggests

‘And the Englishman like posing as Gods’.

The essence of colonialism and being a colonizer is shown by the character of Ronny Heaslop when Ms. Moore remarks about the purpose of our existence.

God has put us on earth , in order to be pleasant to each other’. (Ms. Moore) ‘we are not here for the purpose of behaving pleasantly’ (Ronny)

Ronny remark shows that he is a typical imperialist for whom India is nothing beyond a career. He has no sympathy with the Indians and is rather rude to them. Mr. Turton also has the same point of view towards Indians and he thinks that English and Indians should remain distant from each other, i-e

”I have had twenty five years experience of this country- and twenty five years seemed to fill the waiting room with their staleness and ungenerosity and during those twenty five years, I have never been known anything but disaster results when English people and Indians attempt to be intimate socially’.

However the characters of Ms. Moore and Miss Quested were different, they were not the typical racists but friendly beings. Ms. Moore believes the reason of putting into the world is to be’ pleasant to each other’. Miss Quested wanted to ‘ see the real India ‘ and Indians and these too never behaved as colonizers.

If colonialism is considered from the perspective of the Indians (colonized), we see that they were not happy serving the Britishers. Mahmoud Ali , a close friend of Dr. Aziz believes that English and Indians cannot be friends. He also states at point that that ‘how is England justified in holding India?’.

A quote of Hamid Ullah expresses his discontentment from Britishers as ‘They all become exactly the same, not worse, not better. I give any Englishman two years, be he Turton or Burton. It is only the difference of a letter. And I give any English woman six months. All are exactly alike. …’

Mr. Amrit Rao, a notoriously anti British character was assigned to defend Dr. Aziz in the case of sexual assault of Miss. Quested and he expressed his hatred for the Britishers openly in the court room to which Indians were happy and cheering him up.

This novel, being a colonial text is full of impacts of how colonialism is and what it means . From the civil station,’ the town appears to be totally different place. The civil station shares nothing with the city except the overarching sky’ and the sky said ‘ no not there’ , this quote shows the sky is the only common thing between the Britishers and the Indians’. White supremacy in the subcontinent is also prominent as ‘ we are superior to everyone in India’.

Englishmen seemed to be feelingless towards Indians as ‘ ‘For it is not that the Englishman can’t feel—it is that he is afraid to feel. He has been taught at his public school that feeling is bad form. He must not express great joy or sorrow, or even open his mouth too wide when he talks—his pipe might fall out if he did. He must bottle up his emotions, or let them out only on a very special occasion. ‘

Aziz informs Fielding that their friendship is only possible once the British leave India. This scene clearly exposes the land’s rejection of such a friendship under the colonizer/colonized status-quo. Fielding asks: ‘Why can’t we be friends now?’ …. ‘It’s what I want. It’s what you want.’ But the horses didn’t want it – they swerved apart; the earth didn’t want it, sending up rocks through which riders must pass single-file; the temples, the tank, the jail, the palace, the birds, the carrion, the Guest House, that came into view as they issued from the gap and saw Mau beneath: they didn’t want it, they said in their hundred voices, ‘No, not yet,’ and the sky said, ‘No, not there’

Forster highlights the relationship between the colonizer/colonized. The novel begins emphatically with Dr Aziz, Mahmoud Ali and Hamidullah discussing “whether or not it is possible to be friends with an Englishman” (p.33). The three characters agree that it is impossible for this to happen in India. The novel ends with Fielding and Aziz leaving each other because such a friendship is not possible under British rule. It unwinds itself and reaches point zero once more. The English and the Indians can become more intimate, but the problems of cultural differences, stereotyping, and colonization prevent the possibility of having a real