Why Untouchable by Mulk Raj Anand Should Not Be Taught as “Truth” in Indian Universities - Hari

Why Untouchable by Mulk Raj Anand Should Not Be Taught as “Truth” in Indian Universities

Universities are supposed to be centres of truth, inquiry, and balanced knowledge. But when literature is taught not as art, but as historical or sociological fact, it becomes a weapon of propaganda. This is exactly what happens with Mulk Raj Anand’s Untouchable (1935), a novel which is repeatedly prescribed in Indian English literature syllabi.

The problem is not just that the book deals with caste discrimination, but that it is taught as if it is an authentic documentary of Hindu society, when in reality it is a politically motivated, fictionalized caricature. By putting it at the centre of English literature studies, universities are teaching students to hate their own civilization on the basis of distortion.

1. Anand’s Marxist Background: Ideology Over Truth

Mulk Raj Anand was deeply influenced by Fabian socialism and Marxist ideology during his stay in England. He was part of leftist circles with George Orwell, T.S. Eliot, and others, and used his novels not just as stories but as political tracts.

• Untouchable was written with the explicit agenda of exposing Indian society to the West as “barbaric and cruel.”

• Anand himself admitted that his goal was to write of India’s “social evils” in a way that pleased his English socialist patrons.

• The language, narrative style, and tone reflect Western gaze + Marxist vocabulary, not an insider’s balanced account of dharmic society.

Thus, the novel is less about the “truth” of Indian life and more about feeding colonial stereotypes to justify both Western superiority and socialist solutions.

2. Fiction Presented as Fact

In universities, Untouchable is rarely taught as just a novel. Instead, it is treated as:

• Sociological truth: Professors present Bakha’s life as if it represents the “average Dalit experience” in Hindu society.

• Historical document: Students are told this is how India “really was,” ignoring the immense diversity of caste experiences across regions and communities.

• Unquestionable authenticity: No alternative voices are brought in (e.g., reformist saints like Narayana Guru, Vivekananda, or real historical accounts of Dalit kings, warriors, and reformers).

This academic misuse of fiction is dangerous, it tells young minds that Hindu civilization is nothing but oppression, based on one English-language novel written in 1935 by a Marxist intellectual for a British audience.

3. The Novel’s Distortions

• Exaggeration of cruelty: While untouchability did exist, Anand magnifies it into the sole defining feature of Indian society. Every character except Bakha is shown as cruel, hypocritical, or corrupt.

• Absence of reformist voices: By 1935, temple entry movements, Arya Samaj campaigns, and Gandhian reform programmes were widespread. Anand completely ignores this.

• One-dimensional Hinduism: Dharma, spirituality, and the Bhakti traditions (which produced hundreds of saints from “lower castes”) are absent. Instead, Hindu society is reduced to “Brahmins vs Untouchables.”

• Western solution: The novel ends with the suggestion that modern technology (flush toilets) will “solve” untouchability showing Anand’s faith in Western materialism, not Indian reform.

This is not truth it is literary propaganda, serving both Marxism and colonial attitudes.

4. Why Teaching Untouchable Harms Students

1. Civilizational Shame: Hindu students grow up believing their ancestors were barbaric, while Western colonial crimes (famines, massacres, racism) are whitewashed.

2. Selective Memory: Students are not told about positive examples Dalit rulers like Maharaja Suheldev, saints like Ravidas, reformers like Narayana Guru.

3. Identity Politics: By centering oppression narratives, the novel fuels campus radicalism and caste-based fragmentation, rather than harmony.

4. Inferiority Complex: English literature classes become training grounds for self-hatred, not appreciation of India’s civilizational depth.

Conclusion

Mulk Raj Anand’s Untouchable is not a mirror of Indian society it is a political mirror designed for a Western-Marxist audience. By teaching it as truth, universities are misleading students, spreading civilizational shame, and turning literature into propaganda.

The question we must ask is not “how to interpret Untouchable,” but rather: why should it occupy such a privileged place in our curriculum at all? Unless our universities decolonize their syllabi and present balanced voices, they will continue producing students alienated from their own roots.