{"title":"Pandemic India: Coronavirus and the Uses of History.","authors":"David Arnold","doi":"10.1017/S0021911820002272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has produced two different narratives in India. One, here described as \"historical,\" looks back to the pandemics of the colonial past-bubonic plague from 1896, influenza in 1918-19-as a source of comparisons, lessons, and dire warnings for the present. This narrative envisages the reenactment of past scenes, including flight from the cities, victimization of the poor, and the questioning of state authority. The other narrative, here called \"insurgent,\" questions the value of historical analogies, doubts that history ever substantially repeats itself, and stresses the specificity of postcolonial Indian politics and health. While recognizing the validity of both narratives, the author urges caution in employing colonial history to critique contemporary events and, while recognizing the 1890s plague as a watershed moment, questions whether even the most devastating pandemics (such as 1918's influenza) necessarily result in profound social, political, and health care changes.</p>","PeriodicalId":47551,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Asian Studies","volume":"79 3","pages":"569-577"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0021911820002272","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Asian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021911820002272","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18
Abstract
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has produced two different narratives in India. One, here described as "historical," looks back to the pandemics of the colonial past-bubonic plague from 1896, influenza in 1918-19-as a source of comparisons, lessons, and dire warnings for the present. This narrative envisages the reenactment of past scenes, including flight from the cities, victimization of the poor, and the questioning of state authority. The other narrative, here called "insurgent," questions the value of historical analogies, doubts that history ever substantially repeats itself, and stresses the specificity of postcolonial Indian politics and health. While recognizing the validity of both narratives, the author urges caution in employing colonial history to critique contemporary events and, while recognizing the 1890s plague as a watershed moment, questions whether even the most devastating pandemics (such as 1918's influenza) necessarily result in profound social, political, and health care changes.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Asian Studies (JAS) has played a defining role in the field of Asian studies for over 65 years. JAS publishes the very best empirical and multidisciplinary work on Asia, spanning the arts, history, literature, the social sciences, and cultural studies. Experts around the world turn to this quarterly journal for the latest in-depth scholarship on Asia"s past and present, for its extensive book reviews, and for its state-of-the-field essays on established and emerging topics. With coverage reaching from South and Southeast Asia to China, Inner Asia, and Northeast Asia, JAS welcomes broad comparative and transnational studies as well as essays emanating from fine-grained historical, cultural, political, or literary research and interpretation.