Overall it is a pretty good book. It provides an insight into the decades leading upto the Indian and Pakistani Independence and into the personalities who were involved in the independence movement.
For an Indian it provides a different point of view than the ones provided by text books in schools.

A fascinating tale of exactly what happened, politically, socially and economically, during the summer India gained her independence from Britain, focused on the lives (and loves) of Dickie and Edwina Mountbatten, Nehru, Gandhi, and Jinnah. Readable, although detaile, the author could have delved more deeply into the complex personalities of the leading characters.

I enjoyed this book a lot. The writing style is excellent and the story is fascinating. I've read a few books about the amazing story of Indian independence. This one is focused on the personalities involved, particularly Dickie and Edwina Mountbatten and Nehru. As a book about people and personalities, it is more approachable than some of the history books; some of it is downright gossipy, although never in a lowbrow way. So it's very pleasurable and easy to read. Enjoy!

This surprising history of modern India tells several stories in one: How, over centuries, ruthless profit-seeking by the British East India Company, aided by greed and rivalry among local rulers, caused the devolution of the vastly wealthy and religiously tolerant Mogul empire. How the 1947 partitioning of India by the British, and Palestine by the UN, got us into the current troubles in the Middle East. How, ironically, the UN came to be seen by the Islamic world as a creature of the United States. Many who have been writing history for years might wish to have Alex von Tunzelmann's narrative skills. She dedicates Indian Summer, her first book, to her parents for their "unfailing support, wit, generosity, guidance and love." Good humor and good sense are apparently heritable. In recounting national tragedies, von Tunzelmann has a dramatist's eye for farce. She also has a great novelist's generosity of spirit. She understands that a person's character is not unitary, and that false rumors and gossip sometimes shape political options. [...]

i found this book very interesting in providing readers with the insights of the transfer of power from the british to the indian government and prior to the transfer of power, the author was able to bring us to the time of the maharajas before the europeans came. there's certainly no innocent party with what happened in india at that time and what resulted today.

The charm of this book is its readability. The author begins with metaphoric images of a backwater England and a rich India... in 1600. What follows is a brief but engrossing anecdotal background to bring the reader up to the dramatic events of the summer of 1947.

The book focuses on the people who brought forth the new India, and helps you to know who they were and to care about them. For instance, the last Viceroy could have been described through a recitation of his long and prestigeous lineage, but the author gives a more personal account of his youth and how his father's losses shaped his goals. The reader learns, not of the celebrated Ghandhi, but of the personal man and his effect on his all too real and abused family. Edwina Mountbatten's life as a playgirl gives way to a woman of strong character and compassion. Nehru's youth is well drawn, but the later years are sketched, and the portrait becomes more mythical than clear. Least described of the key players is Jinnah who stays in the background of this narrative.

The focus on people comes at the cost of other areas. For instance, the pressure from England to act quickly is covered but not in a blow by blow manner, The pressure on England from the US is mentioned but not described. It isn't it clear how all the political subdivisions were courted and won over to the new India. Who did the talking and how did they present their case to the local rulers? The issues of the partition are not expored, such that the vehemence and duration of the subsequent riots is not fully understood.

The book's high interest readability is due to its descriptions of the humanity of the key players. More nuts and bolts of how policy was developed and carried out may have created a less engrossing narrative.

The charm of this book is its readability. The author begins with metaphoric images of a backwater England and a rich India... in 1600. It provides anecdotal background to bring the reader up to the dramatic events of the summer of 1947.

The book focuses on the people who brought forth the new India, and helps you to know who they were and care about them. For instance, the last Viceroy could have been described through his long and prestigeous lineage, but the author gives a more personal account of his youth and how his father's losses shaped his goals. The reader learns, not of the mythical Ghandhi, but the real man in his all too real and abused family. Edwina's Mountbatten's life as a playgirl gives way to a woman of strong character and compassion. Nehru's youth is well drawn, but the later years are sketched, and the portrait becomes more mythical than clear. Least described is Jinnah who seems to be in the background.

The focus on people comes at the cost of other areas. For instance, the pressure from England to act quickly is covered but not in a blow by blow manner, The pressure on England from the US is mentioned but not described. It isn't it clear how all the political subdivisions were courted and won over to the new India. Who did the talking and how did they present their case to the local rulers? The issues of the partition are not expored, such that the vehemence and duration of the subsequent riots is not fully understood.

The book's high interest readability is due to its descriptions of the humanity of the key players. More nuts and bolts of how policy was developed and carried out may have created a less engrossing narrative.

This is just in response to Ms Klausner's review where she says that Nehru was Gandhi's son-in-law.
She says: "Mountbatten thought he was a great diplomat but his issues were flag designs while people died on the streets and his much more capable spouse had a tryst with Nehru, Ghandi's son-in-law and moral heir apparent."
This is, in fact, not correct. Gandhi and Nehru were not related to one another in any way. Nehru's daughter, Indira Nehru, married Feroze Gandhi, a Parsi, not a Hindu, and he was no relation of Mahatma Gandhi's either.

A well written, timely but cursory history of the end of the British Empire in India as told through the lives of Dickie and Edwina Mountbatten concentrating on the love affair between Nehru and Edwina. The author makes little effort to explain away the obvious favoritism of the Mountbattens towards Nehru's India. The uselessness of the British monarchy especially the Prince of Wales and the utter frivolity of the British occupation are manifest. Regrettably, there is sparse detail on the reasons and rationale why Mountbatten announced the end of the Raj on a mere 90 days notice. The political machinations of the Atlee government and the involvement of Winston Churchill are mentioned based on the research into the papers and archives of the Mountbattens. Broad historical overviews are ignored; Jinnah's role and influence is portrayed as obstructive and destructive, the powerful nationalistic, social and religious forces impelling the partition of the county and the establishment of Pakistan are downplayed and little effort is made to explain the forces
at work causing the carnage and slaughter of millions in 1948.

Before you read this book, understand that it is not an history in the normal sense (actions, dates, etc.) but a travelogue though the lives of those who were involved. There are no real secrets revealed except those related to the personal lives of Gandi, Nehru, Montbatten, et al. Parts of it read like the 'names' page in People or the Boston Globe, in that we are told about every rumor of who was sleeping with whom and whether it was true or not. A lot of the narrative is written in a biased manner, but not necessarily either good or bad.

Two examples should give you a flavor of the book:
First, all of the main characters are referred to at one point by their nicknames or their initials. So that King Edward VIII (the Duke of Windsor) is called 'David', King George VI as 'Bertie', Lord Louis Montbatten as 'Dickie' or DM, Gandi as MKG and Churchill as WSC. It gets a little wearisome after a while.
Second, she will mention that a certain fact, that is supposed to be known, is in fact false, but then use it anyway. Chapter 10 is titled "Operation Madhouse", but in the chapter she maintains that there never was a British operation in India with this name. So why use it?

The book is well written and does flow better than most histories but again is very 'breezy' when it comes to basic history. She does also have the habit of 'bouncing' around with her dates and times. At one point she mentions that Lady Montbatten was visiting in America and had met with Eleanor Roosevelt in 1944, and then says LM (ugh!) had dinner at the White House with President Harry S Truman. Truman was VP in 1944 and didn't become President until 1945 after the death of FDR; the book could use some better editing.

Much of the book reminds me of Eric Idles' character from 'Monty Python' who is constantly going 'wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know what I mean?' Even her name "Alex" von Tunzelmann (which would belong to an ennobled Austrian family) and the almost 'Mona Lisa-ish' author photo, make you wonder if the book is supposed to be a spoof.

Easy to be brief: A great story well told. It starts as near comedy, becomes a love story, and ends as tragedy as India and Pakistan split.

Fascinating book full of details about the last days of the British Empire in India. The historical details about the formation of Pakistan, the British position about a free India, the Constituent Assembly of India, Ghandi and Jawaharlal Nehru, are told from many perspectives. The book focuses a bit too much on the Mountbattens.

Indian summer by Alex Von Tunzelmann does a great service by shedding light on the facts and factors that led to India's independence and its subsequent partition that made that dreadful concept a reality. High school history books anywhere in the world with their politically correct, black-ink-on-white-paper analysis fail to edify and in India they absolutely refuse to pass any judgment in the name of fairness. So I am grateful for Ms. Tunzelmann's merciless and nuanced analysis that has shed light on people and events that shaped India's - and my own family's - history.

The book is full of gems. How identity politics used by British then to govern -- whether for bureaucratic convenience or political machination -- have continued to define our world and how its consequences have reverberated to this day is enlightening.

Mounting evidence for why Gandhi was at best a mixed bag and at worst a criminally deranged Luddite is much needed in India where he's still, for the most part, mindlessly revered. In modern society he would be put away, for good reason, on a variety of charges: indecent behavior at the very least (many of the girls he exploited for his celibacy experiments and frequently slept naked with were not even eighteen), criminal negligence in the death of his wife who died of pneumonia because he refused to let doctors administer antibiotics (was she even asked?), etc. He was also against a separation of religion and politics and favored a Hindu state, albeit a tolerant one. On the positive side he was uncompromising in his call for non-violence and was instrumental in calming India down post-partition. The latter is perhaps the only useful legacy he deserves credit for; ironically he was murdered for it.

Nehru turns out to be much better than expected. Previously, he's been justly criticized for being responsible for the establishment of a socialist economy in India. As we know, Nehru's infatuation with Fabian socialism with its ill-advised notions of central planning and statist wisdom - which his daughter only made worse - left a legacy that held free India back for nearly 50 years.

However this book sheds light on Nehru's role in preventing India from becoming a theocratic Hindu state - having to keep even stalwarts like Vallabhai Patel , Rajendra Prasad and of course Gandhi in check - and should earn him new and properly placed respect. India owes him a lot for this contribution. One need only look at where Pakistan is even 60 years later to realize what a boon this was. This is an enlightenment value one which is perhaps even more important in India today. Even today India's extraordinary rate of progress is threatened only by a few factors, one of them being resurgence in communal conflict.

Also one cannot help but wonder how a man like Nehru could have been the father of a midget like Indira Gandhi who shamelessly used identity politics for political advantage; perhaps that needs to be the subject of another book. Indira also did India the disservice of taking her father's bad ideas on the economic front to a new level - nationalizing and consequently ruining just about every major industry in the Indian economy.

The other person whose motivations we understand better is M. A. Jinnah - creator of Pakistan - although the book deals with him more peripherally vs. Indian leaders. It's not entirely clear how Jinnah reconciled - if he ever did - his personal, genuinely secular ideals with his demand for a Pakistan based on religion. His use of religion as a means led to a foreseeable end - as it always does - and Pakistan was left beholden to religious fanatics who had been instrumental in its creation. While Jinnah was driven by power no more than Nehru - and the responsibility for partition lies squarely with both - he's been commonly misjudged as a religious fanatic. Ironically, it is rumored that on his death bed Jinnah lamented that Pakistan was the "biggest blunder of his life". Sad - and much too late!

Ms. Tunzelmann is an excellent historian - and eminently readable - and I am thrilled she's written such a book. She errs only when she ventures into domains she does not understand. She mindlessly takes jabs the ills of capitalism at every step. The problem is not that she does this - perhaps her arguments may even have some merit - the greater problem is that her criticisms use terrible examples. For example she uses the East India Company as an example of capitalism. If there was ever a company completely in bed with its government it was the East India Company. This was a creature created as a monopoly, aided and abetted every step of the way with government force. Even in India it used the local royalty to further its economic interests; it never had to pay attention to or be hindered by market forces of any kind. It was an example of mercantilism at best. Corporate welfare is not capitalism - and this was a lot worse. Capitalism has never existed in India - and for that matter in Britain - in any recognizable form. Perhaps that's the cause of Ms. Tunzelmann's definition problem.

Nevertheless, Ms. Tunzelmann should stick to History and continue to bestow upon us gems like Indian Summer.

--Reena Kapoor
Dec 14th 2007

I attended a book signing event on the 13th November 2007 in Brighton were the author talked about the complexities of writing such an epic in which she looked at the dynamics that bought about the fall of an Empire and the most unlikely love story ever not to be reported by the press, that of Edwina Mountbatten and Nehru, India's first Prime Minister.

The book is surprisingly good, I have to confess I didn't have high hopes when I purchased it but the subject is of such interest to me I was willing to take a chance and buy it and I am glad I did.

Ms Von Tunzleman has a written a book that has obviously been researched extensively, both here in the UK and also in India and her candid no nonsense approach to all the subjects she touches, such as Hindu and Muslim hostilities, Mahatma Gandhi's strange predilections that made people both love and hate him, to the fate of the dispossessed, the love story between Nehru and Edwina makes it very interesting to read to the point that you can't put it down.

For a historian Ms Von Tunzleman has made this book very accessible to the ordinary reader, she goes into great detail but she is never boring as she explains how India became a British Empire and how when it finally crumbled into dust, it did so, so swiftly that no one, least of all the British were prepared for the backlash that was to follow.

A superb book with many photos of an era that depicts two nations in transition, India the Jewel in the Crown striking out on its own and Great Britain, suddenly realising that its days as the greatest Empire in the world have come to an end, not so much a tragedy as the inevitability of change in a world flinging of the chains of colonial paternalism.

This is an extremely well-written and interesting account of the years preceding Indian Independence. I wish I had read it prior to visiting the country. The Mountbattens were an interesting couple and seeing their relationship with Nehru was eye-opening. Also I gained considerable insight into the character of Gandhi of which I hadn't been aware . I highly recommend this book.

Having lived in India and Pakistan INDIAN SUMMER appears to be well written about the split of the continent. I heard first hand from people who had to make the horrific move across boundaries. Unless one lives there for a time, it is impossible to grasp the culture,wealth and poverty. This author has enlightened those of us who are interested of what happened after the Raj and impact on current events. A worth while read.

Beautifully written and extensively researched, Indian Summer is a must read for those interested in Indian and British colonial histories. Though based largely on British sources, including some not earlier tapped, the author has put together a compelling and fascinating story of the era leading to Indian independence and the years immediately thereafter.

I truly enjoyed reading this assessment of British India' partition. The author provides an unbiased portrayal of the Nehrus, the Jinnas, Gandhi, and of course, the Mountbatten. I have actually several new facts about Gandhi, something I've never heard about him before. I really appreciate the author including Gandhi's and Nehru's perspectives on Hitler's Germany, the Holocaust, and India's relations with other British colonies.

However, I'd really to see the author discuss more George VI policies towards colonialism? Did the King have any influence on his parliament's stance in Indian affairs? What was his relations with all the major players?

Moreover, the author scarcely mentions the relationship of Indira Gandhi and Lord Mountbatten.

In my opinion it is a very well written book, easy to read and from which can be learned a lot of history that explains a situation prevalent today (Kashmir).

Indian Summer can be viewed as both a history with emphasis on 5 very important characters who were instrumental in the decolonization of the Indian subcontinent and the very contemporary war in Iraq. Brilliance,love, incompetence,villainy and well meaning in equal parts mixed with caste, clan, class & religion. Some things don't change. The miracle is that India still exists and is not more fractured.

Alex Von Tunzelmann seemed to present her characters fairly with their warts and good qualities. It's a great read and very prescient.

Focusing mostly on the people -- British and Indian -- who were involved in the Indian drive for independence from Great Britain, "Indian Summer" goes a long way toward explaining the motives and interactions of the prime players in this great political drama. Highly recommended.

It was clear that Britain could not afford empire. The Jewel had to go. Unfortunately, what held it in place was Britain. And Britain didn't have that much of a clue as to how/where to split it up. Thus, diffidence dictated that it be done as close to ethnic/religious lines as possible, and the state of the British economy, as hastily as possible. Indeed they could have borrowed words from Louis XV ".... apres mois, le deluge." Let the natives sort out their mess. No one more diffident to see it through than Lord Mountbatten. But, did it have to be so bloody messy? It seems that Mountbatten's personal haste brought about all that criminal waste. But who knows the extent to which it would have been less so a year later.

This is history from the top down, which probably is at it should be given the events it chronicles. It focuses squarely on the Mountbattens, the Nehrus, Gandhi and Jinnah. The British Parliament may have decided, but these people pulled the triggers that gave us India, a precariously and maladroitly drawn Pakistan (which later begat Bangladesh), and a festering Kashmir (of course, part of India today, but remember the Sikhs?)which to this day hovers perilously between two atomic powers.

This is a most valuable and amusing book about a critical juncture in the history of the modern world, or perhaps one should say, the dissolution of the Old. Alex von Tunzelmann (an attractive young woman, not a Teuton scribe) has navigated treacherous historical waters with clarity, restraint, and even humor. Her text is a delight to read, even when a light touch is called upon, it is never glib but one born from deeply informed judgment. Particularly warm and engaging is the view of Edwina Mountbatten, for me a somewhat melancholy figure. There was just so much she couldn't do. She was quite a lady; learning about her is worth the price of admission. Highly recommended.

The discussion in "Indian Summer" of the separation of India from the UK presents an almost opposite view from the book "Freedom at Midnight", published in 1975. Having read both I prefer the latter. Indian Summer tends to denigrate everything done during his lifetime by Mountbatten, while presenting a quite unflattering, if unsubstantiated, picture of his wife.

Alex von Tunzelmann, student of history at Oxford and editor of OSU's Cherwell newspaper in 1998, passes this book as "the secret history of the end of an empire".

"Life and times of Mountbattens in India" would have been a more apt title. The book contains no secret and is not about the end of the empire in entirety.

The book places too much importance on the roles of three individuals: Mountbatten, his wife Edwina and Nehru. The long struggle, mostly non violent, to evict an alien rule by a wide and deep political leadership (some meriting reverence for decades after their death) has been trivialized to a vane member of British royal family sent to unwind the empire; his flirting wife and an equally flirting visionary who led India during and after the transition.

However, one must compliment Alex von Tunzelmann for the sheer objectivity she brings into describing the events in the last days of the Raj.

Alex starts with a funny perspective: There were two countries in 1577. One was a vast, mighty and magnificent empire, brilliantly organized and culturally unified, which dominated a massive swathe of the earth; and the other was an underdeveloped semi-feudal realm, riven by religious factionalism and barely able to feed its masses. Guess what! The first is India and the second is England. In 1857 it was the other way about! Now you know what alien rule does to the ruler and the ruled!

However, a country divided by religion, divided by tribe, divided by caste; a society whose equilibrium derives from repulsion and exclusiveness is, as Karl Marx rightly observed, predestined to be a prey of conquest.

Did Britain rule India in discharge of "the white man's burden"? Not really. The Prince of Wales, visiting India in 1921, found the princely states far better than British India! Quite a royal endorsement against the inept colonial rule that kept the GDP stagnating for over 70 years at the time of this observation!

Is the British attitude toward India patronizingly affectionate as reflected by Edwina's kindly love for Nehru? Not really. Winston Churchill astonished everyone in a dinner party by suggesting that he would have "Gandhi bound hand and foot at the gates of Delhi and let the Viceroy sit on the back of a giant elephant and trample the Mahatma into the dirt"! This reflects the kind of thinking that political leadership in India had to face! (Oh yes, I found one opinion I share with Churchill: Gandhi is a Mahatma!)

Did Mountbatten handle his role reasonably well? Mostly no; occasionally yes.

(a) In mid July 1947, while negotiations about partition, defence, finance, future of princely states and the future of 400 million people raged around him, Viceroy Mountbatten was "busy fussing about flags" seeking Union Jack in the upper canton of the flags of India and Pakistan!

(b) Ten days before independence, in the midst of the violence in Punjab, Mountbatten bothered Nehru with a list of dates upon which the Union Jack might continue to be flown in India after independence!

(c) However, he deserves some praise. In less than one year, Patel and Mountbatten achieved a larger and more closely integrated India than what had been achieved in 130 years of Mauryan rule, 180 years of Mughal empire or 90 years of British Raj.

Alex steers clear of bias in her book to an admirable extent.

One reason why, I would recommend a reading of her chapter on Kashmir.

It is appropriate that I finished reading this book at the stroke of midnight 14 August 2007. This first book by the author is a wonderful retelling of the events and personalities ( Gandhi,Nehru, Jinnah,Dickie ,Edwina, Patel) leading to the independence of India and the Partition to India and Pakistan. The book's strength is the retelling of the close relationship between Jawaharlal Nehru and Edwina Mountbatten.According to the book Edwina was born to immense wealth. Her maternal grandfather left her assets of 3 million pounds ( equivalent to 100 million pounds today ). She inherited even more from her father's side.

Edwina forged a close relationship with Nehru while serving as Vicereine of India. She died in bed in Sabah in 1960 a batch of letters by her bedside and a few letters strewn across her bed- she must have been reading them when she died. All the letters were from Nehru. Edwina was buried at sea from HMS Wakeful, escorted by an Indian frigate the Trishul, sent by Nehru to cast a wreath of marigolds into the waves after Edwina's coffin. Nehru died 4 years later in 1964. ( see pages 60, 351& 352 of book)

According to Judith Brown's Nehru- A Political Life © 2003 at page 366 footnote 46, the best life of Edwina is Janet Morgan's Edwina Mountbatten- A Life of Her Own. © 1991.

The aftermath of WW II reverberated around the globe at midnight on August 15, 1947, when the British Empire for practical purposes ended. Although some colonies remained in the fold, the crown jewel India was freed. Four hundred million people gained their liberty, but perhaps one million died in the ensuing fighting to carve out segments of the subcontinent and many more millions were exiled as ethnic cleansing took hold from Kashmir to Pakistan to India to the Sikh region.

The key players on the world stage were English diplomat Louis Mountbatten, Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, Islamic League leader Mohammed Ali Jinnah and the ever presence of the mythical Mohandas Gandhi. Alex von Tunzelmann provides the epic picture, but uses that as background to enable readers to get inside and personal with those critical leaders who history books paint heroically, but the author places them under a microscope revealing their flaws as well as their more known strengths. Whereas Gandhi served as a moral example to emulate, he allowed no grays or compromise as the Moslems and Sikhs learn first hand. Whereas Jinnah helped create East and West Pakistan as a viable but geographically split nation, he wanted nothing to do with the British or the Hindi so he also ignored the poverty of what would later become independent Bangladesh. Mountbatten thought he was a great diplomat but his issues were flag designs while people died on the streets and his much more capable spouse had a tryst with Nehru, Ghandi's son-in-law and moral heir apparent. Historical readers will enjoy this deep look at "The Secret History of the End of an Empire" as those placed on pedestals find their statues somewhat crumbling under Ms. Von Tunzelmann's somewhat titillating review.

Harriet Klausner