Students in Washbrook's class are also appreciative of his expertise. "He doesn't make broad generalizations; he tries to characterize things very precisely. You know that what he's saying is important." says Saul Weiner '88, a student in History 1810. "He doesn't tell jokes--he's not a funny sort of guy. He doesn't try to sell the course. He just gets up there and goes right to it."

Weiner says the course especially focuses on the misconceptions of the British role in India. "One of the major functions of history is to create a cultural identity. The modern Indian identity in large part comes out of the freedom struggle," Washbrook explains.

The Doorway to India

Students didn't bang on the door saying, 'Why aren't there more courses on Indian history?''' recalls Schama, a former head tutor of the history department. "But," he adds, "India did seem to be the one area that was obviously missing."

Although Schama discounts outside pressure, most students agree that the absence of South Asia courses is the result of a significant oversight in Harvard's curriculum. "I was really surprised at the lack of any real offerings in Indian studies, especially history and politcs," says Anupam Chander `89, an Economics concentrator who is minoring in government.

Harish Kavirajan '89, who is planning to take Washbrook's class next semester, says, "Most Indian studies courses at Harvard are literature and language, with a few in religion. The history of India doesn't really exist here, and there is a definite need for the historical perspective."

"South Asia seems quite genuinely neglected at Harvard. There isn't anyone permanent in politics, and as far as I know, there's no one in economics," Washbrook says, adding that while Harvard has committees on Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America, it has no equivalent for India.

MacFarquhar says that he is especially surprised by Harvard's lack of India coverage for two reasons. "First of all, India is a genuine experiment in democracy as we understand it. It's one of the few countries in the developing world in which democracy has actually worked." says the Government professor. "Second, India is a much more open country, and is much easier to study than many other societies in the developing world."

"In a way," Washbrook explains, "Americans' neglect of India is understandable-the South Asian community in the United States is substantially smaller than other Asian communities."

Schama says he feels that courses on South Asia are more natural in the English university curriculum because of England's imperialist connections with that area of the world.

Livelier Than Kings and Queens

"I got interested in India in large part because of a particular teacher I had at Cambridge. He seemed to be the only person studying something that was truly alive," Washbrook explains. "I was very bored with European kings and queens and all that stuff."

"One of the advantages of being in England is that the best historical archive of material on India is in London," says Washbrook. "But Widener has done remarkably well in keeping up, especially given that Harvard hasn't been teaching much on India."

Washbrook added, though, that he was not at Harvard to do research so much as to teach. In fact, he says he plans to take on an even heavier teaching load. "I'm quite keen to teach another, more specialized course next year. Otherwise, it would be rather a letdown if you did happen to get interested in this stuff, and there were only introductory courses available.

But Washbrook admits that his enthusiasm for teaching Harvard students might be tempered before next fall. "Harvard students seem excellent. It may be that I see the best of it, because only those who are sincerely interested in the subject are taking my course this semester. Maybe after the experience of teaching a core course, my views will be very different."