Partition in Fiction: An Analysis of Train to Pakistan

There is a lot of debate on whose fault was the Partition of India. There are essays, scholarly
articles, and even books dedicated to it, with varying points from blames on Jinnah and the
Muslim League, to Gandhi and the Indian National Congress, to the nave blames on
Mountbatten, and the British Government. The attribution rests around three vital causes
which include the British policy of divide and rule on the basis of religion, races, caste and
creed, the relationship of Muslim League and Indian National Congress; and the demand of
Muslim league for a separate country for the Muslims living in India. There could be no
correct answer. However, as Kushwant Singh points out in his novel, Train to Pakistan,:

The fact is, both sides killed. Both shot and stabbed and speared
and clubbed. Both tortured, both raped.

The partition is both the foreground and the background to the novels vision. The action of
the novel centres around a tiny fictitious village called Mano Majra on the Indo-Pak border
during the partition, making the village a microcosm representing a larger world. One may
say that the chief protagonist of the novel is the village itself. The four sections of the novel
are variations on a single theme and become a metaphor. The first part Dacoity symbolizes
that humanity itself has been looted of its human attributes, and deprived of its values. The
second part Kalyug symbolizes the inner blackness of human heart and that of the whole of
Pakistan and India. The third part Mano Majra takes the action to its further intensity, built
around the image of village transformation. As Mano Majra loses its healthy seclusion and
gets embroiled in the national cataclysm, the action of the novel moves into the surreal. The
last part Karma gives it a metaphysical symbol, in that it denotes the totality of a persons
action in one of the successive cycles of his existence.

Apart from the depiction of the trauma of partition, the crisis of values suffered by people
during this period of unprecedented human tragedy is conveyed through the satirical portrayal
of three characters: Hukum Chand, the higher officer in the Government administration; Bhai
Meet Singh, the Sikh priest, and Iqbal Singh, the rationalistic and idealistic non-communal
political worker. Hukum Chand is a worldy wise man of easy morals, who has an affair with
a Muslim girl, he muses to be of his daughters age, who he later in the novel is shown to
have cared deeply for. He was of the view that bloodshed would not be of benefit to anybody,
but his official responsibilities compel him to save the lives of people under his charge.
Through him, Singh shows

how the much maligned Indian bureaucracy was itself caught

between the hatred of a people and the bungling of
politions.(Cowasjee, 1982)

Bhai Meet Singh takes to religion as an escape from work. When it comes to taking steps to
avert the imminenet danger to Muslims, he recoild in timidy. He says:

My duty is to tell people what is right and what is not. If they insist
and do evil, I ask God to forgive them. I can only pray; the rest is for
the police and the magistrate.

Iqbal Singh has all the theories but lacks the courage to put them into action in times of
crisis.. He is very forthright, rational and logical in his criticism of social evils in the country.
But the protagonist is Juggat, who rises from the role of an anti-hero to saving a train full of
Muslims, from his village, showing courage, fearlessness, loyalty, roughness and bluntness,
and becoming what should be called an unsung hero of the village. The end of the novel is
very ironic as Juggat Singhs sacrifice for Nooran represents the sacrifice of millions of
people in the movement, the fate of who still remain uncertain.

Train becomes a crucial symbol in the life of Mano Majra, and by extension, of the novel
itself. It sets everything in routine within the village and the sudden irregularity of trains
changes the course of events and sets the action into motion- the sleepy, dull village suddenly
awakes itself to the horrors of Partition and faces communal violence, thus symbolizing
mobility. The train in itself signifies groups or multitudes of people who are on the move,
implying movement of vast communities. It indicates the process of change, and the awful
and ghastly experiences.

The Ghost Train, in particular has been given a ghostly, blood curdling description of the
massacre. It brings dead bodies of Sikhs and Hindus from Pakistan:

There were women and children huddled in a corner, their eyes

dilated with horror, their mouths still open as if their shrieks had just
then become voiceless.

Mano Majra represents the spirit of India, as a picture of non-violence and of unity in
diversity. It represents staticity, immobility, and passivity. The villagers remain unruffled by
the fanatic acts of murder, plunder, arson, abduction, and rape.
Sex also plays a major role in the entire novel and Singh doesnt shy from describing it. Its
importance lies in portraying two kinds of relationships: forced and caring. On the one hand
he portrays the love of Nooran and Juggat, which is primarily born out of sexual attraction,
and the affair of Hukum Chand with Hasseena, which is similar, and on the other hand
forced, brutal sex is also described, like that of Sundari, who dreams of consummating her
marriage, but is brutally gang raped by some Muslim men, on the streets.

Religion, in the novel plays as much of a role as it did in the real Partition. The Sikhs and the
Muslims coexisted since time immemorial before and in a sudden turn of events, the Sikhs
were plotting to kill them, because of manipulation from unknown sources.

Research by Social Psychologists like Milgram shows that many people readily obey orders
from a relatively powerless source of authority, even if these orders require them to harm
another innocent person. The real life evidence of such destructive obedience is seen in the
Nazi Concentration Camps. The same can be said for the Partition of India, as an event, as we
see in Train to Pakistan. The Sikhs of the village are brain-washed into trying to kill the very
same people they were sad about parting with. Thus, the general confusion is a very
important force which resulted in mass destruction. Khushwant Singh portrayed holocaust,
hatred, agony and trauma of the whole country at the time of partition through the novel. As
Harish Raizada points out:

Khushwant Singhs treatment of brutal atrocities committed on

either side of the border is characterized by artistic objectivity and
detachment. He exaggerates nothing, he leaves nothing.

The Partition of India is undoubtedly the single most traumatic experience in our recent
history. But as Kushwant Singh often says,

''The wounds of partition have healed. The poison is still in our system.''

Contemporary India has been reminded of the bloodshed of partition many times over its 67
years of independence by further episodes of violence such as the 1984 Sikh Riots in Delhi,
the Babri Masjid Demolition and the resultant riots in Bombay in 1992-93, and the Gujarat
Riots of 2002.

Thus, it can be reemphasized that Partition in itself was inevitable, and hence it was not a
blunder in itself, but a well-choreographed move by the British to enforce Discipline, through
slow poisoning of the minds of India and its citizens. Partition is a brilliant example of how
Foucaults idea of Governmentality leads to the birth of two nations, and the worlds largest
forced migration. The violence was characterized as a mass violence, although not as a
genocide, since there is no clear distinction of a right or a wrong side. It was called by the
natives, and those who went through it as Gaddar, which roughly translates to madness. It
is surprising that the Partition tore apart an entire civilization, but it was not a blunder. It tore
apart the lives of hundreds of millions of people, the repercussions of which we still bear- like
an innocent stone thrown into water, leaving out ripples- the trauma of Partition still haunts
us.