Gone with the gold watch: Britain's missing economy and other pub-side mysteries
Britain, billed as the Sceptred Isle, this other Eden, demi-Paradise, is also the haunt of mythical and mysterious bogeys and beasties - things that go bump in the night, or even in daylight. Perhaps the most famous of these is the Loch Ness Monster, the cuddly Nessie, said to lurk in the lake of that name in the Scottish Highlands. Since her first reported sighting in 1933, Nessie continues to attract some 5,00,000 visitors annually, bringing in over £40 mn. In T.H. White's 1958 Arthurian epic, The Once and Future King, a knight of the Round Table, Sir Pellinore, devotes his life to the pursuit of the elusive Questing Beast. Finally, weary of his vain efforts, the ageing knight doffs his armour, stables his steed, and calls it a day. But he's roused from his repose by a snuffling outside his castle. It is the Questing Beast, anxiously waiting to be quested again.
In the true spirit of chivalry and knight-errantry, Sir Pellinore dons his helmet and breastplate and sets off once more, with the Questing Beast merrily leading the chase, leaving behind fewmets for its pursuer to follow. In the unlikely guise of an economist, a latter-day Sir Pellinore might quest in search of a fabled fugitive called the British economy - an enigmatic entity, as seemingly unsusceptible to discovery as the unfathomable Nessie. Hang it all, the blessed thing was here just the other day, wasn't it? It must have been, what with Britain having presided for a couple of centuries over the biggest empire ever known to man - or, Marvel Comics superhero - just one component of which, the Jewel in the Crown that was India, yielded a wealth which, in today's terms, is estimated at over $64 tn. Where did all that lolly go? Like the Questing Beast, the economy leaves a trail of occasional droppings to indicate its passage. A while ago, it was reported that the erstwhile outpost of the British raj, India, has overtaken its former ruler to become the world's 5th largest economy. For the Indian economy to have overtaken Britain, the latter must have had an economy capable of being overtaken, right? Right. Well, sort of.Then again, all the London pubs are always full, with not even standing room. Surely, you need to have an economy to finance all this patronage of public houses, which have never been so prolifically public - even though what, in Cockney rhyming slang, is called a 'gold watch' (=Scotch), costs what a horologe composed of that metal would fetch in a pawn shop.Maybe that's what's happened to the disappeared economy. It's got itself liquidated.However, another reason adduced for this plenitude of pub patronage relates not to Britain's economy, but to the economies of other nations - what with Russian oligarchs and Arab sheikhs having bought up so much real estate in the city that property has turned into unreal estate for many Londoners. This has resulted in a phenomenon known as failure to launch, which refers to the financial inability of those who, unable to afford to leave the parental nest, seek temporary refuge - and spirituous solace - in taverns.Everyone talks about the high, and growing higher, cost of living. To compound the problem, its alternative - the cost of dying - is also pricey, with a typical funeral costing £2,500-plus, nullifying Woody Allen's anodyne definition of death as a radical way to save on expenses.However, the mystery of the absconding British economy might have a simpler explanation: it has been subsumed, secretly, within a much larger one. Attention is so focused on Trumpistan's attempted takeover bid to make Canada the supposed 51st state of America, it's been overlooked that Uncle Sam has had a symbolic extra star on his flag ever since the end of WW2.That was when John Bull surrendered his bowler hat in exchange for a cowboy's Stetson, and Westminster became an annexe - or, in local parlance, a granny flat - of the White House. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of www.economictimes.com.) Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. How Vedanta's Anil Agarwal bettered Warren Buffett in returns
Why Infy's Parekh takes home more than TCS' CEO despite being smaller
Worrying cracks hiding behind MG Motor's own 'house of Windsor'
Rivers are moving more goods than before. But why aren't they making a splash yet?
Central bankers print currency for all, but why do they chase gold?
Stock Radar: This BSE Sensex stock from IT space is now looking attractive after breaking out from ascending triangle pattern; time to buy?
These large- and mid-cap stocks can give more than 25% return in 1 year, according to analysts
Buy, Sell or Hold: Antique recommends buy on Shilpa Medicare; YES SECURITIES initiates coverage on Chalet Hotels
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
Kesari 2 isn't an ‘untold story', it's historical fiction that minimises Sankaran Nair's real-life contributions to the freedom struggle
Kesari Chapter 2, the film starring Akshay Kumar, directed by Karan Singh Tyagi, which released in theatres just a couple of months ago, centered its promotions on this being the 'untold story' of Jallianwala Bagh that had stayed hidden for over 100 years. The makers declared that the film was based on the events that happened after the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh, where thousands of innocent Indians died after Hitler-like General Reginald Dyer ordered his troops to fire at them without any warning. The events at Jallianwala Bagh were undeniably brutal and over 100 years later, Britain is yet to apologise for them. Kesari Chapter 2 reminds the audience that this apology is due but it does something else as well, it tries to rewrite the story of Sankaran Nair and in the process, it diminishes his actual contribution to the Indian freedom struggle. Nair was a hero, and he did fight against the British but there was never a case against General Dyer in any court in Amritsar. Kesari Chapter 2 claims to be the 'untold story of Jallianwala Bagh' but the fact is, that this courtroom battle never took place. Kesari Chapter 2 claims to be based on the book written by Sankaran Nair's third generation, Raghu Palat and Pushpa Palat, titled 'The Case That Shook the Empire' but upon examining this book, and the autobiography of Nair, it is evident that the acclaimed barrister was never in a trial against General Dyer but Kesari Chapter 2 tries to rewrite history as its actors and director go around claiming that history books aren't doing a good enough job. The disclaimer that Kesari 2 is essentially a work of fiction doesn't go far enough given the publicity material has tagged the film as 'the untold story'. Sankaran Nair was a member of the Viceroy's Council, and saw himself as an ally to the then-Viceroy of India, Lord Chelmsford. But soon after the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh, which was not appropriately reported by the press because of the severe press censorship implemented in Amritsar, Nair was shocked to find out the barbaric acts carried out by Dyer and his men. 'If to govern the country, it is necessary that innocent persons should be slaughtered at Jallianwala Bagh and that any Civilian Officer may, at any time, call in the military and the two together may butcher the people as at Jallianwala Bagh, the country is not worth living in,' he wrote in his autobiography. ALSO READ | Kesari Chapter 2: Akshay Kumar's courtroom drama accidentally exposes Bollywood's handling of sexual misconduct Nair expected Lord Chelmsford to criticise this episode but when he saw that no one in the British administration was willing to speak against the brutal massacre, he resigned from his position in the Viceroy's Council. His resignation shocked the British administration as prior to this, they saw Nair as a loyal ally. After his resignation, Lieutenant Governor of Punjab, Michael O'Dwyer, immediately revoked orders for press censorship in the state and martial law was called off. It was Nair's resignation that led to the formation of the Hunter Commission, which looked into the barbaric acts at the Jallianwala Bagh. The Hunter Commission was a seven-member committee composed of four British and three Indians that conducted interviews all over India, met with eyewitnesses of the massacre and also interviewed General Dyer. As per The Case That Shook the Empire, Dyer accepted that he 'planned the shooting at Jallianwala Bagh in advance' and he had no intentions of scattering the crowd because they were violating the curfew. 'More damning was his admission that he would have used machine guns and armoured cars if it had been possible,' it read. Dyer also confessed that he made the conscious choice to leave the wounded to die. This was the only time when Dyer was made to appear in front of a body that was investigating the massacre, and here, he shamelessly admitted his dastardly acts. Kesari Chapter 2 would have you believe that Dyer was made to stand in court while a former ally to the crown, Nair, badgered him with questions, but this never happened. Hunter Commission submitted its findings and declared that Dyer's actions were a 'grave error.' The crown did not wish to punish Dyer as it was seen that he had 'averted another mutiny' and so, he wasn't court-martialled or dismissed. But, they could not have him in India due to the growing resistance against him, and so, he was shipped off to England in April 1920. ALSO READ | Even as Akshay Kumar's Kesari Chapter 2 shows an imagined past, it ends up confronting the present While Reginald Dyer was the man on ground in Jallianwala Bagh, his superior was Michael O'Dwyer, who was the Lieutenant Governor of Punjab at the time. It was O'Dwyer who gave Dyer enough power that he could implement whatever laws he saw fit. At one point, Dyer ordered people to crawl through the streets of Amritsar, and he was empowered to do so by O'Dwyer. The events at Jallianwala Bagh shocked those Indians who, until then, enjoyed British aristocracy and had received knighthood from them. Rabindranth Tagore gave up his knighthood and Nair left his job with the crown and started working as the Diwan of Indore, which was a princely state then. It was here, in 1922, that he wrote a book titled Gandhi and Anarchy. Nair 'did not believe that non-violence, non-cooperation and civil disobedience was the way for India to achieve Home Rule' and he expressed the same in his book. Here, Nair also implied that Michael O'Dwyer was just as responsible as Reginald Dyer for the massacre in Punjab. 'Nair implied the Punjab atrocities were committed with O'Dwyer's full knowledge and approval,' the book read. When O'Dwyer got his hands on this book in England, he decided to sue Nair for defamation, as he had claimed innocence for the atrocities in Punjab. Sardar Udham Singh eventually assassinated Michael O'Dwyer in 1940. But in Kesari Chapter 2, O'Dwyer is reduced to a supporting character who can be seen making backroom deals but is nowhere on Nair's radar. ALSO READ | FIR lodged against film Kesari Chapter 2 for 'distorting historical facts' after police complaint in Bengal The real-life case was no less than a movie, even though the filmmakers chose not to make a movie on this. O'Dwyer claimed innocence and was 'offended' with Nair's accusations. He demanded that Nair withdraw his book, offer him an apology and damages worth £1,000. Nair, obviously, refused to bow down and was ready to go to trial. He weighed his pros and cons before making this decision. The biggest pro here was that the trial would be held in London, and the press would be covering it. With this, Nair had the opportunity of talking about the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh in front of the English press, and this was the only way the higher-ups in the British government and the locals of the country would get to know how Britain was treating its subjects in India. But, there were some major cons as well. The trial would be presided by an English judge and the judgment would be made by an English jury, and chances were, that they would support O'Dwyer because he was one of them. Nair also did not have the opportunity of presenting his witnesses in person, and would only get a chance to read out their testimony, that could be misinterpreted by foreigners. All of his disadvantages would be advantageous for O'Dwyer but he decided to fight this battle anyway. Even though the trial was was held in England, Dyer did not attend a day in court on account of his ill health so Nair never really confronted him in any court, which is the base of Kesari Chapter 2. ALSO READ | Dharma's creative head responds to Kesari 2 director's comments on film blending fact, fiction: 'Masterclass for Philistines' Nair went through many troubles while preparing for this trial. The first barrister he hired to represent him was promoted to Attorney General, so he quit. The second barrister he hired quit just a day prior. And so, in desperate times, he had to hire Sir Walter Schwabe, a former Chief Justice of the Madras High Court. Schwabe was a learned man but wasn't a trial lawyer, and thus, wasn't cut out for such court battles. In the book written by his grandson, it is questioned why Nair didn't represent himself, but there is no explanation provided for the same. 'It is unclear as to why Nair did not choose to defend himself when Simon withdrew. He would have certainly acquitted himself better than Schwabe who was not as experienced, strong or as knowledgeable about the case,' it read. Nair vs O'Dwyer began in April 30, 1924, almost five years after Jallianwala Bagh massacre and the case went on for nearly five and a half weeks, presided by Justice Henry McCardie. Nair's case was about O'Dwyer being aware of Dyer's actions in Amritsar but after the opening remarks, McCardie, who had blind faith in the British Empire and considered himself to be superior, turned it into an evaluation of Dyer's actions, as he repeatedly insisted that Dyer had to shoot at people to avoid a mutiny. The case was no longer about O'Dwyer's involvement but about justifying the barbaric acts of Dyer in the name of saving the Empire. McCardie was supposed to be an impartial judge, but he acted like he was a lawyer for O'Dwyer. Together, they painted a picture where they made the jury believe that Amritsar was in a volatile state when the events at Jallianwala Bagh happened only to avoid a mutiny. All the facts presented by Nair's lawyer fell on deaf ears and they couldn't convince the jury of the truth. But, even at the end, there was a chance that there could be a mistrial as the jury could not come to a unanimous verdict. McCardie did not want this case to go for another trial so he asked both parties if they would be comfortable with a majority vote, which means that the side getting the most votes from the jury would win the case. By this time, Nair was tired. His grandson said in his book, 'Nair was tired. The case had originally been filed in the middle of 1922. Two years had passed and, during this time, the case had entirely consumed him. He wanted it to end and to get on with his life. For Nair, it had never been about the money. He had fought this case because he had been asked to give a public apology for a claim he had made in his book – a claim he believed to be true. He had refused to apologise then and instead had chosen to fight the case in an English court. Now that an apology had not been demanded, he felt vindicated.' The terms of the case were now modified as it was mutually decided that the one who won would get £500 plus legal fees. Nair demanded that if O'Dwyer lost, he would apologise to those he wronged in Punjab, and he agreed. However, Nair lost the case, 11-1. He was now held guilty for defaming O'Dwyer. He was asked that if he gave an apology now, the monetary compensation would be ignored but Nair was ready to pay, and firmly refused to issue an apology. Nair, who had spent years working with the British, was disillusioned by the British justice system after this case. He refused to go to trial again, as he was certain that the British would not let their own people down. While Nair was a vocal critic of Mahatma Gandhi, he wrote about Nair's trial in Young India on June 12, 1924, 'By accepting Sir Michael O'Dwyer's challenge, Sir Sankaran Nair has put the British constitution and the British people on trial. They have been tried and found wanting. Even in this simple matter, a man of Sir Sankaran Nair's proved loyalty could not get justice,' the Mahatma wrote. Sankaran Nair is a man whose story deserves to be known by Indians all over the world for he truly fought an impossible fight and even though he wasn't victorious, he was an important part of India's awakening against the British. Most real-life stories are slightly modified when they are adapted in movies, but if one changes the central conflict and the verdict, then it's not even a real story anymore. Kesari Chapter 2 is historical fiction in the garb of an 'untold story'. Sampada Sharma has been the Copy Editor in the entertainment section at Indian Express Online since 2017. ... Read More
Economic Times
10 hours ago
- Economic Times
Gone with the gold watch: Britain's missing economy and other pub-side mysteries
Britain, billed as the Sceptred Isle, this other Eden, demi-Paradise, is also the haunt of mythical and mysterious bogeys and beasties - things that go bump in the night, or even in daylight. Perhaps the most famous of these is the Loch Ness Monster, the cuddly Nessie, said to lurk in the lake of that name in the Scottish Highlands. Since her first reported sighting in 1933, Nessie continues to attract some 5,00,000 visitors annually, bringing in over £40 mn. In T.H. White's 1958 Arthurian epic, The Once and Future King, a knight of the Round Table, Sir Pellinore, devotes his life to the pursuit of the elusive Questing Beast. Finally, weary of his vain efforts, the ageing knight doffs his armour, stables his steed, and calls it a day. But he's roused from his repose by a snuffling outside his castle. It is the Questing Beast, anxiously waiting to be quested again. In the true spirit of chivalry and knight-errantry, Sir Pellinore dons his helmet and breastplate and sets off once more, with the Questing Beast merrily leading the chase, leaving behind fewmets for its pursuer to follow. In the unlikely guise of an economist, a latter-day Sir Pellinore might quest in search of a fabled fugitive called the British economy - an enigmatic entity, as seemingly unsusceptible to discovery as the unfathomable Nessie. Hang it all, the blessed thing was here just the other day, wasn't it? It must have been, what with Britain having presided for a couple of centuries over the biggest empire ever known to man - or, Marvel Comics superhero - just one component of which, the Jewel in the Crown that was India, yielded a wealth which, in today's terms, is estimated at over $64 tn. Where did all that lolly go? Like the Questing Beast, the economy leaves a trail of occasional droppings to indicate its passage. A while ago, it was reported that the erstwhile outpost of the British raj, India, has overtaken its former ruler to become the world's 5th largest economy. For the Indian economy to have overtaken Britain, the latter must have had an economy capable of being overtaken, right? Right. Well, sort again, all the London pubs are always full, with not even standing room. Surely, you need to have an economy to finance all this patronage of public houses, which have never been so prolifically public - even though what, in Cockney rhyming slang, is called a 'gold watch' (=Scotch), costs what a horologe composed of that metal would fetch in a pawn that's what's happened to the disappeared economy. It's got itself another reason adduced for this plenitude of pub patronage relates not to Britain's economy, but to the economies of other nations - what with Russian oligarchs and Arab sheikhs having bought up so much real estate in the city that property has turned into unreal estate for many Londoners. This has resulted in a phenomenon known as failure to launch, which refers to the financial inability of those who, unable to afford to leave the parental nest, seek temporary refuge - and spirituous solace - in talks about the high, and growing higher, cost of living. To compound the problem, its alternative - the cost of dying - is also pricey, with a typical funeral costing £2,500-plus, nullifying Woody Allen's anodyne definition of death as a radical way to save on the mystery of the absconding British economy might have a simpler explanation: it has been subsumed, secretly, within a much larger one. Attention is so focused on Trumpistan's attempted takeover bid to make Canada the supposed 51st state of America, it's been overlooked that Uncle Sam has had a symbolic extra star on his flag ever since the end of was when John Bull surrendered his bowler hat in exchange for a cowboy's Stetson, and Westminster became an annexe - or, in local parlance, a granny flat - of the White House. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. How Vedanta's Anil Agarwal bettered Warren Buffett in returns Why Infy's Parekh takes home more than TCS' CEO despite being smaller Worrying cracks hiding behind MG Motor's own 'house of Windsor' Rivers are moving more goods than before. But why aren't they making a splash yet? Central bankers print currency for all, but why do they chase gold? Stock Radar: This BSE Sensex stock from IT space is now looking attractive after breaking out from ascending triangle pattern; time to buy? These large- and mid-cap stocks can give more than 25% return in 1 year, according to analysts Buy, Sell or Hold: Antique recommends buy on Shilpa Medicare; YES SECURITIES initiates coverage on Chalet Hotels
Time of India
14 hours ago
- Time of India
Sunjay Kapur's Final Moments Caught on Camera During Polo Match
HRH Controversy Explodes: Meghan Markle Slammed For 'Living a Royal Fantasy' Meghan Markle's royal title drama isn't over. Despite stepping back from senior royal duties years ago, Meghan continues to use the Duchess of Sussex title, and royal watchers say she's holding on to the "Princess fantasy" for influence, branding, and public image. Now, as tensions within the monarchy resurface, experts and insiders are calling out Meghan's ongoing use of royal styling, questioning the authenticity behind her public persona. With growing backlash from the British press and whispers from inside the Palace, the calls for Meghan to "drop the act" are growing louder. 3.6K views | 1 day ago
