THE COUNTRY OF FIRST BOYS
Amartya Sen
The Little Magazine/Oxford University Press
276 pages; Rs 550
A confession: I became a great admirer of Professor Amartya Sen at the very beginning of my studies of economics half a century ago, when a perspicacious teacher at Cornell University made Choice of Technique (1960) required reading for graduate students. That admiration grew after Growth Economics (1970), then waned, following Professor Sen's increasing preoccupation with welfare economics and his writings in the popular press. It got to a point of my shunning The Argumentative Indian (2005; it is, astonishingly, missing from the list of the author's works at the end of this volume) and An Uncertain Glory (2013).
I nearly declined to review this book; had I done so, I would have lost out on the enormous joy of sharing the workings of one of the finest minds of our times. Professor Sen has woven several strands of thoughts from fields as diverse as Sanskrit classics, hemerology (the study of calendars), mathematics, history, literature and good, solid economics into a most alluring mosaic.
To understand the concept of first boys, one must contrast it with its antonym, last girls. The inequity of this, so prevalent in our society, and the moral imperative of bridging the gulf is the theme Professor Sen has long advanced, but never more compellingly and comprehensively as in this book. He does so in 15 essays that appeared first mostly in The Little Magazine that his daughter Antara Dev Sen (co-editor of this book) runs. The introduction is a full-fledged essay, almost twice as long as the others. Even readers with little time or patience would find themselves hooked to the many themes expressed in scintillating prose in this essay.
Space permits only a few references to the author's use of simple logic to devastating effect. He sets out his credentials at the start. His most logical contention that because he objects to what he considers sectarian views, he does not automatically become a Congress partisan leave alone the architect of its policies, as is alleged, should find traction with many, including this writer.
Professor Sen's assertion that quality universal health care in state-run facilities in Kerala has effectively checked the runaway cost of private medical treatment in that state is timely and pertinent as we see the detritus that passes for public health elsewhere. His critique of high procurement prices as the root cause of hunger in the face of mounting food stocks is far more damning than any other in vogue now. He uses history of early Indian empires and smug colonial attitudes towards "Indian" traits to debunk the thought that Indian nationhood was the creation of the Raj.
My favourites are the essay on calendars and the many allusions to Sanskrit literature and the Vedas. They show the astonishing sweep of Professor Sen's scholarship and his great ability to make a point through powerful and entertaining allusions to myriad facets of folklore and history, much like a traditional proselytiser of the good word.
There are three caveats. The first is not the author's fault. His chosen writer of the foreword, Gopal Krishna Gandhi, is most tendentious and verbose in lauding Professor Sen's persuasiveness. His disquisition on the author's use of the em dash could turn off a potential reader.
Second, Professor Sen asserts twice in the introduction that Kerala has the highest per capita income of any Indian state, higher than that of Gujarat, by implication judging the different approaches of the two states to development. This must be a rare lapse. Government data up to 2013 (later figures are not available) do not support this. Gujarat was fourth, not seventh as the author asserts, among major states ranked on per capita income and Kerala has consistently lagged behind it, in current and constant prices as well as purchasing power parity terms. The editors were perhaps in awe of the illustrious author to catch this. It does not negate the case for alternative strategies, only weakens it somewhat.
Finally, the defence of the tardy progress of the new Nalanda University seven years after its beginning rings hollow. My own limited experience of starting a new institution in the boondocks (Institute of Rural Management, Anand) from scratch and its quick growth into an internationally respected one within a decade, with far fewer resources and greater constraints than those at Nalanda, makes me wary of what appear to be alibis for inaction.
But no matter; Professor Sen's movable feast is informed by one single consideration. He talks of the need "to get rid of...the astonishing smugness and...the widespread ignorance" about India's food mountain, but he may as well be discussing virtually every aspect of India's current reality. He goads us with a smorgasbord of delectable facts, but I doubt if that will reduce our ignorance. Let us hope that this gently persuasive argumentative Indian makes at least a tiny dent in our smugness!
