By the time you finish writing your first sentence, he is winding up his third sentence and is on to the fourth. It’s difficult to match his pace. The best thing is to listen to him as he unravels the sheafs of history of world’s largest democracy, post Independence.

Ramchandra Guha historian, academician, biographer and orator extraordinaire is unstoppable. His oration is compelling; not tiring. He cleverly takes you through free India’s six-decade old history with anecdotes, wit and humour and leaves you wondering why history was always a matter of dates and periods mummified in records least visited.

Guha’s latest book India after Gandhi, is the “first serious” book on India’s history after 1947. It is voluminous but comprehensive. A work of eight-year-long research that saw him travel through the country and abroad, digging into records and documents has been an arduous and painful journey but well worth it.

Having gone through the length of the history of one of the world’s most complex countries, Guha remains optimistic. “Never before such an extraordinary experiment has taken place in the world and never again will it be. The history of free India is about this unique democracy which was shaped by great leaders like Pundit Nehru, Sardar Patel, Mahatma Gandhi, Dr Ambedkar,” he  said.

Guha spoke to Sunday Herald about India after Gandhi. The book is published by Picador.

Your reasons for writing history after Gandhi?
Well, as I said this is the first serious book of the history of post Independent India. Gandhi was assasinated soon after the country gained freedom.

You based your research on?
Several records, documents in the archives in India, the UK and USA. There’s a huge collection of work in Delhi.

As a historian, was there any new learning while writing the book?
Yes, a lot of new material came up on Kashmir and Naga disputes; also on various other milestones that the country covered in the past years, like the Indo-China and Indo-Pak wars, the Emergency, including details of a forgotten peace mission made by Shekih Abdullah to Pakistan in May 1964 at Nehru’s behest.

There’s also a detailed account of the role played by the Naga leader A Z Phizo. I’ve also drawn the attention of the readers to the fact that Nehru and Patel, despite their differences, were great collaborators. Nehru for instance knew that only Patel could integrate the princely states into the democracy and Patel vice versa knew that Nehru could represent India to the world and that he had an all-India appeal unlike him.

The two submerged their differences to forge a united Indian democracy. One of Nehru’s glaring failures was his inability to resolve the border issue with China but he built the Indian democracy.

What about Indira Gandhi?
Unlike her father, Indira Gandhi undermined the democratic foundation on the whole. She is responsible for starting dynastic rule in the country.
She converted the Congress party into a family firm thereby setting an unhealthy precedent for others like Bal Thackeray, Karunanidhi and Mulayam Singh Yadav etc to follow.

And the later Gandhis?
No, they don’t find enough mention in the book. They are not very important.

What do you think was Gandhi’s impact on free India?
That India is a pluralistic society is because of Gandhi. Nehru and Patel carried forward the tradition. The strength of India is in its pluralism.
There’s an allegation that you haven’t paid much attention to culture.
There’s a lot of popular culture in ‘India after Gandhi.’ I’m aware of the criticism. Some people feel that I should have paid more attention to certain sections and people. Since the book is about recent history there are bound to be reactions. The book is based on facts and research. It’s a non-partisan story of India.

Why did you end it in July 2006, after the Mumbai train blasts?
I had to end it somewhere. The last incident mentioned is the train blast. The book had to go to print.

What are the reasons for the survival of the Indian democracy?
There are six reasons that hold it together. These are the game of cricket; legacy of the British, Hindi films, integrative unity, legitimate state system and an affirmation to religious and linguistic pluralism.
Your parting note..
I find India to be the most exasperating country in the world but the most interesting. The fact that it continues to be a democracy, and has defied the numerous prophets of doom who believed that its poverty and heterogeneity would force India to break up or come under autocratic rule, is a tribute to India’s founding fathers.
I’ve concluded with the paragraph that reads: “So long as the constitution is not amended beyond recognition, so long as elections are held regularly and fairly and the ethos of secularism broadly prevails, so long as the citizens can speak and write in the language of their choosing, so long as there is an integrated market and a moderately efficient civil service and army, and… so long as Hindi films are watched and their songs sung, India will survive.”