The Fractured Body of the Nation: Narrative Authority, Political Mythmaking, and the Crisis of Democratic Citizenship in Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children
Table of Contents
Academic Details
Name: Mulrajsinh S. Gohil
Roll No: 17
Enrollment No.: 5108250016
Sem: 3
Batch: 2025-27
E-mail: mulrajsinhgohi100@gmail.com
Assignment Details
Paper Name: Indian English Literature – Post-Independence
Paper No: 202
Paper Code: 22407
Unit 2: Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children (1981)
Topic: The Fractured Body of the Nation: Narrative Authority, Political Mythmaking, and the Crisis of Democratic Citizenship in Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children
Submitted To: Smt. Sujata Binoy Gardi, Department of English, Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University
Submitted Date:
Document Statistics
Words: 4,783
Characters: 35,817
Characters without spaces: 31,149
Sentences: 284
Paragraphs: 118
Reading time: 19m 8s
Abstract
Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children (1981) examines the contradictions of postcolonial India through a narrative that repeatedly destabilises the distinction between individual experience and national history. Rather than presenting independence as the culmination of a unified historical process, the novel represents the nation as a contested formation shaped by political violence, competing cultural traditions, ideological myths, and the unequal distribution of power. This assignment investigates how Rushdie’s unreliable narrator, magical realist episodes, fragmented bodily imagery, and representations of the Emergency challenge the idea that India can be adequately understood through a single authoritative national narrative. Drawing on Jackson D. Fogel’s study of magical realism and revolution, Manav Ratti’s account of religious and ideological mythologies, V. Jayalakshmi, R. Subha, and G. Immanuel’s examination of historical representation, Rekha Tiwari’s analysis of myth and magic, and Ashutosh Varshney’s discussion of contested national identity, the study argues that the novel’s formal instability is inseparable from its political criticism. Saleem Sinai’s body becomes a metaphor for a nation whose internal differences cannot be eliminated without violence. However, the novel also questions the reliability of Saleem’s alternative history, preventing his personal memories from becoming an unquestionable substitute for official accounts. Ultimately, Midnight’s Children presents democratic citizenship as a continuing negotiation among competing histories rather than the achievement of cultural or political uniformity.
Keywords
Postcolonial fiction; narrative authority; political mythmaking; democratic citizenship; magical realism; historical representation; Emergency; Salman Rushdie.
Research Question
How does Salman Rushdie use unreliable narration, magical realism, and bodily fragmentation in Midnight’s Children to expose the contradictions of national unity and the political consequences of suppressing social and historical plurality?
Hypothesis
This assignment argues that Midnight’s Children challenges the ideal of a unified postcolonial nation by making narrative fragmentation the formal expression of political and cultural division. Saleem’s unreliable autobiography reveals both the limitations of official historiography and the impossibility of replacing it with a completely authoritative personal account. Through the Midnight’s Children, the destruction of their collective potential, and the Emergency’s assault on bodily autonomy, Rushdie demonstrates that national unity becomes authoritarian when it demands the elimination of difference. Nevertheless, the novel’s own dependence on Saleem’s selective memory complicates its alternative history and requires readers to distinguish historical criticism from historical certainty.
1. Introduction
The emergence of independent India in 1947 created the possibility of a political community no longer governed by British colonial authority. Yet independence did not eliminate the social, cultural, linguistic, and religious differences that shaped the subcontinent. Partition, communal violence, linguistic conflicts, regional movements, and the concentration of political power exposed the difficulties of constructing a unified national identity. Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children addresses these contradictions by connecting the life of its protagonist, Saleem Sinai, with the history of modern India.
Born at the precise moment of independence, Saleem becomes symbolically linked to the nation’s historical development. His unusual abilities, his relationship with the other children born during the first hour of independence, and his subsequent physical disintegration establish a connection between individual experience and collective political change (Rushdie). However, the novel does not present this connection as a stable allegory in which Saleem simply represents India. His memories are selective, his explanations are frequently exaggerated, and his attempts to reconstruct the past reveal the instability of the very history he seeks to preserve.
Jackson D. Fogel identifies the relationship between magical realism and political revolution as a significant dimension of the novel. His study connects Rushdie’s narrative experimentation with the historical and ideological conflicts of postcolonial India, demonstrating that magical elements cannot be separated from the novel’s political concerns (Fogel). Rekha Tiwari similarly argues that myth, fantasy, oral storytelling, and historical reference contribute to the novel’s criticism of reductive national histories. For Tiwari, the coexistence of myth and history enables Rushdie to represent the contradictory experiences of post-independence India rather than reducing them to a single explanatory framework (Tiwari).
Manav Ratti’s distinction between religious and ideological mythologies provides another useful framework. His analysis shows how inherited narratives and idealised political beliefs can shape collective identity, while Jayalakshmi, Subha, and Immanuel examine the problem of historical authenticity in Saleem’s reconstruction of major political events. Ashutosh Varshney’s discussion of contested Indian national identity further contextualises the tensions between pluralism, political anxiety, and Hindu nationalism (Ratti; Jayalakshmi et al.; Varshney).
Building on these approaches, this assignment argues that the novel’s fragmented form exposes the political dangers of treating national unity as a condition that requires the suppression of difference. Its unreliable narrator, magical realist structure, and recurring bodily imagery reveal the tension between collective belonging and individual autonomy. At the same time, Saleem’s fallibility prevents his autobiography from becoming a final authority. The novel consequently presents historical understanding and democratic citizenship as unfinished processes that require the coexistence of competing perspectives.
2. Saleem Sinai and the Instability of Narrative Authority
Saleem Sinai’s position as the narrator of Midnight’s Children establishes a central problem: the person who claims to preserve history is also someone whose memory, body, and identity are unstable. His autobiographical project attempts to connect personal experience with the major events of modern India. Yet the more insistently he explains the relationship between his life and the nation, the more apparent the limitations of his account become.
Saleem’s birth at midnight on 15 August 1947 establishes the foundational connection between his biography and Indian independence. The coincidence gives his life symbolic significance, allowing him to understand personal events as reflections of national developments. Nevertheless, the connection depends on an interpretative act rather than an objectively demonstrable correspondence between every private experience and political event (Rushdie).
Jayalakshmi, Subha, and Immanuel examine this relationship between personal narration and historical authenticity. Their discussion emphasises that historical knowledge is not simply a neutral collection of facts; it also depends on the selection, organisation, and interpretation of events. They argue that Rushdie’s use of an alternative historical perspective draws attention to experiences and consequences that conventional historical accounts may neglect (Jayalakshmi et al.).
This argument requires an important qualification. A literary reconstruction does not automatically become more factually accurate than an official historical account merely because it questions established authority. Saleem’s memories are shaped by his desire to make himself central to the history of India. His narrative therefore contains both critical insight and self-aggrandising tendencies.
Fogel’s study of magical realism and revolution helps explain why this unreliability matters politically. Rushdie does not merely use Saleem’s unusual experiences to decorate a conventional historical narrative. Instead, the mixture of extraordinary events, historical references, exaggeration, and personal recollection makes the process of historical interpretation visible (Fogel).
Saleem’s narrative repeatedly encourages readers to recognise the difference between an event and the story constructed around it. His explanations may reveal neglected relationships, but they can also impose patterns upon events that do not necessarily possess a single underlying meaning. The result is a form of narrative authority that remains necessary yet perpetually questionable.
This distinction is essential to the novel’s political argument. Official histories may marginalise ordinary lives or justify the actions of powerful institutions, but replacing them with an individual’s autobiography does not resolve the problem of representation. Saleem’s perspective is limited by his position, his memory, and his desire to understand himself through national history.
The novel therefore refuses two equally problematic assumptions: that official history is always impartial and that personal testimony is automatically authentic. Historical understanding requires the examination of competing accounts, including the motives and limitations of those who produce them. By making Saleem both the principal witness and an unreliable interpreter, Rushdie transforms narrative authority into a question that readers must continually reconsider.
3. Magical Realism as a Critique of Political Explanation
The magical elements of Midnight’s Children are integral to its representation of political history. Saleem’s extraordinary sense of smell and his telepathic connection with the other Midnight’s Children establish a narrative world in which the boundaries between ordinary experience and supernatural possibility remain unstable. These elements create a framework for exploring collective identity, political communication, and the unrealised possibilities of independence (Rushdie).
Fogel argues that magical realism in the novel interacts directly with its political context. His study connects the literary mode with the revolutionary and postcolonial concerns of Rushdie’s narrative, demonstrating that magical events can challenge established explanations of historical change rather than simply provide an escape from reality (Fogel).
The Midnight’s Children Conference exemplifies this function. Saleem’s ability to communicate with children born during the first hour of independence gives imaginative form to India’s cultural and linguistic diversity. The children possess different abilities and perspectives, suggesting that the new nation contains numerous potential futures rather than a single predetermined identity (Rushdie).
Their collective gathering also raises the problem of political organisation. The children do not automatically form a harmonious community simply because they share a birth period. Differences in language, religion, social background, ambition, and temperament complicate their attempts to cooperate. The conference consequently becomes an imaginative representation of democratic pluralism: the existence of multiple voices creates possibilities for collective understanding, but it also makes consensus difficult.
Tiwari interprets the novel’s use of fantasy, myth, and oral storytelling as part of its resistance to linear and reductionist historiography. Her analysis emphasises that magical and historical elements coexist in a narrative that seeks to represent the contradictory conditions of postcolonial India (Tiwari). This approach clarifies why the novel’s fantastic events should not be treated as literal historical evidence. Their significance lies in the political relationships they make visible.
The supernatural premise of the children’s collective consciousness also exposes the limits of idealised unity. Their powers create the possibility of communication across differences, but they cannot remove competition, ideological conflict, or unequal authority. Saleem’s own attempt to direct the conference illustrates how a desire to coordinate a diverse community can become an effort to control it.
Ratti’s analysis of religious and ideological mythologies provides a complementary perspective. He distinguishes traditional religious narratives from ideological myths that present idealised or distorted understandings of social and political reality. In Rushdie’s fiction, these forms of mythology may overlap, allowing inherited cultural narratives to interact with modern political ideologies (Ratti 147–48).
Read through this framework, the Midnight’s Children can be understood as an imaginative challenge to political myths that present the nation as naturally homogeneous. Their supernatural diversity makes visible the plurality already present within Indian society. The failure to sustain their collective potential reveals that political unity cannot be guaranteed by a shared origin or an appealing national story.
Magical realism thus performs a critical rather than merely decorative function. It expands the range of what the narrative can represent while exposing the inadequacy of explanations that reduce a diverse society to one identity, one destiny, or one political voice.
4. The Body as a Political Metaphor: Fragmentation, Vulnerability, and National Unity
Saleem’s body functions as one of the novel’s most important political metaphors. Its physical instability reflects the difficulties of maintaining a coherent relationship between individual identity and national history. As Saleem repeatedly connects bodily experiences with political events, his body becomes a site where the promises and failures of postcolonial India are imaginatively registered (Rushdie).
This relationship is not simply a claim that every physical change corresponds directly to a historical event. Rather, the body provides a narrative language through which large-scale political processes become personal and tangible. National history is no longer represented exclusively through institutions, leaders, and official declarations; it is experienced through vulnerability, illness, fear, memory, and physical transformation.
Tiwari’s discussion of Saleem’s fractured body and fragmented narration supports this interpretation. Her analysis connects the protagonist’s bodily condition with the instability of the nation-state and the plurality of experiences that cannot be contained within a unified historical account (Tiwari).
The novel’s physical imagery becomes particularly significant when considered alongside the fate of the Midnight’s Children. Their extraordinary abilities suggest that independence has created an unprecedented range of possibilities. However, the children’s collective potential is progressively undermined by political conflict, personal rivalry, and the violence of the historical world in which they live (Rushdie).
The contrast between possibility and destruction complicates celebratory narratives of independence. Political freedom may create the conditions for new forms of citizenship, but those possibilities remain vulnerable when institutions cannot accommodate diversity or when political authority becomes increasingly coercive.
Saleem’s physical deterioration intensifies this criticism. His body does not provide a stable foundation from which he can interpret history. Instead, its fragmentation reflects the impossibility of maintaining an entirely unified identity within a world marked by conflicting demands and historical pressures.
The body also complicates the idea that national unity is necessarily desirable. If unity means the elimination of internal differences, then the attempt to create a coherent national whole can become destructive. The novel suggests that a nation composed of many communities cannot be made stable merely by suppressing the elements that resist a dominant narrative.
Varshney’s discussion of contested national identity is relevant here because it examines the tensions surrounding competing definitions of Indian nationhood and the political anxieties associated with religious nationalism (Varshney). His framework helps contextualise the novel’s resistance to a singular conception of belonging. National identity is contested because citizens and political movements do not necessarily agree on the cultural principles through which the nation should be defined.
Saleem’s body consequently becomes a metaphor for the political importance of preserving difference. Fragmentation may signify injury and vulnerability, but it also challenges the assumption that wholeness must be achieved through uniformity. The novel’s political alternative is not a perfectly harmonious nation. It is a community capable of accommodating conflicting histories and identities without treating their differences as reasons for exclusion.
5. Historical Violence and the Problem of Authenticity
The relationship between fiction and history becomes particularly significant when Midnight’s Children represents events such as the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, Partition, linguistic reorganisation, wars, and the Emergency. These historical references establish that the novel is deeply engaged with the political transformation of the subcontinent. However, its account of these events is filtered through Saleem’s memory and narrative imagination rather than presented as an impersonal chronology (Rushdie).
Jayalakshmi, Subha, and Immanuel examine Rushdie’s reconstruction of historical events, arguing that the novel questions the reliability and completeness of established historical narratives. Their discussion of Jallianwala Bagh, for example, emphasises the significance of representing the human consequences of colonial violence rather than limiting historical understanding to official descriptions of political action (Jayalakshmi et al.).
The distinction between recording an event and representing its consequences is important. Official records can establish dates, institutions, decisions, and casualty figures, but they may not fully communicate the lived experience of those affected. Literary fiction can explore this experiential dimension by representing fear, confusion, memory, and the psychological aftermath of violence.
Nevertheless, fiction and historical scholarship serve different evidentiary purposes. A novelist’s imaginative reconstruction can illuminate the moral significance of an event, but it cannot independently establish the factual accuracy of every detail. Jayalakshmi and her co-authors’ emphasis on historical authenticity is therefore most productive when understood as a question about the relationship between historical evidence and narrative interpretation rather than as a claim that fiction can replace documentary research (Jayalakshmi et al.).
Rushdie’s self-conscious narrative form reinforces this distinction. Saleem openly presents his account as a personal reconstruction, and his errors and exaggerations prevent readers from accepting his story as a transparent record of the past. The narrative invites scrutiny of both the events represented and the methods through which they are organised.
Tiwari similarly argues that the novel’s combination of myth, fantasy, and historical reference creates a form of representation capable of registering the contradictions of post-independence India (Tiwari). Historical truth, within this literary framework, is not abandoned; rather, the narrative challenges the assumption that it can be conveyed adequately through a single, uncontested perspective.
This approach is especially significant in a postcolonial context. Colonial administrations frequently claimed authority over the interpretation of colonised societies, while postcolonial governments could also use official narratives to legitimise their own political priorities. The replacement of colonial rulers does not automatically eliminate the unequal power relations through which history is selected and communicated.
The novel therefore requires readers to distinguish between challenging official authority and rejecting factual accountability. Its alternative history becomes valuable not because every element is literally reliable, but because it exposes the limitations of historical narratives that omit personal experience, suppress disagreement, or present political outcomes as inevitable.
6. The Emergency and the Destruction of Democratic Possibility
The Emergency of 1975–77 provides the most direct political test of the novel’s concern with national unity and individual autonomy. During this period, the Indian government imposed extraordinary restrictions on civil liberties and political opposition. Rushdie represents the Emergency as a moment when the state’s claim to preserve order becomes inseparable from the coercive regulation of citizens’ lives (Rushdie).
The Midnight’s Children, initially associated with the expansive possibilities of independence, become vulnerable to the authoritarian power of the state. Their collective potential is threatened by a political order that treats independent capacities and plural forms of existence as obstacles to administrative control.
Fogel’s analysis of magical realism and revolution situates the novel’s fantastic elements within its political criticism, providing a framework for understanding the destruction of the children as more than an isolated narrative tragedy (Fogel). Their fate demonstrates how a state can transform the promise of collective participation into an effort to regulate or eliminate forms of life that cannot be accommodated within its preferred political order.
Tiwari also identifies the Emergency as a crucial dimension of the novel’s critique of unitary nationalism. Her analysis connects the destruction of political possibilities with the dangers of an ideology that privileges a singular national narrative over the plurality of social experience (Tiwari).
The sterilisation campaign represented in the novel makes the relationship between political power and bodily autonomy particularly stark. The state’s intervention in reproduction converts the human body into an object of administrative management. Individuals are no longer treated primarily as citizens possessing rights and agency; they become targets of a programme designed to produce a particular social and political outcome (Rushdie).
The significance of this episode extends beyond the immediate violence of state intervention. Reproductive control exposes the contradiction between a government’s claim to act in the public interest and its willingness to violate the autonomy of the people who constitute that public. The state’s pursuit of order becomes incompatible with the freedom of the individuals it claims to govern.
Ratti’s distinction between religious and ideological mythologies helps illuminate the broader logic of such political authority. Ideological narratives can acquire the status of unquestionable truths when they present particular political objectives as necessary for the survival or improvement of the collective (Ratti 147–48). Once a government identifies its preferred vision of society with the national interest itself, opposition can be represented as a threat to the nation rather than a legitimate expression of democratic disagreement.
Varshney’s analysis of contested national identity provides a wider framework for examining the relationship between political anxiety and competing definitions of the nation (Varshney). In Midnight’s Children, the Emergency demonstrates the dangers of allowing one political authority to determine which forms of identity, participation, and bodily existence are acceptable.
The episode also complicates any simple claim that national unity is inherently oppressive. A functioning political community requires institutions and some degree of collective coordination. The novel’s objection is directed instead at a form of unity that treats dissent and difference as conditions to be eradicated. Democratic citizenship requires the protection of disagreement because citizens cannot exercise meaningful political agency if the state controls the terms under which they are permitted to exist.
The Emergency thus represents the destruction of an alternative political future. The Midnight’s Children embody possibilities that the independent nation might have developed, but authoritarian power narrows those possibilities by treating plurality as a problem to be solved through coercion.
7. Mythmaking, Religious Identity, and the Limits of a Singular Nation
The construction of national identity depends partly on stories through which a community explains its origins, values, and historical purpose. These narratives can provide continuity and collective meaning, but they can also legitimise exclusion when a particular cultural or religious tradition is presented as the sole authentic expression of national belonging.
Ratti’s chapter on religious and ideological mythologies establishes a useful distinction between myth as a culturally inherited narrative and myth as an idealised or misleading political belief. He argues that these forms can overlap in Rushdie’s fiction, where religious traditions and ideological constructions interact within broader narratives of identity and authority (Ratti 147–48).
In Midnight’s Children, the association between Saleem’s biography and the birth of India makes the construction of national identity visible. His story is not merely a record of individual development; it also becomes an attempt to explain the emergence and transformation of a political community. Yet the novel repeatedly disrupts the possibility that one individual or narrative can encompass the entire nation.
The Midnight’s Children represent a plurality of backgrounds, abilities, and perspectives. Their differences make them difficult to organise under a single political programme, but those same differences constitute the source of their collective richness. The failure of their community demonstrates the consequences of political conditions that privilege uniformity over meaningful participation (Rushdie).
Varshney’s discussion of Hindu nationalism and contested national identity is relevant to this problem because it examines competing interpretations of what constitutes the Indian nation and the anxieties that accompany those disputes (Varshney). His work offers a contextual framework for understanding why definitions of national belonging are politically consequential. However, his analysis should not be treated as a direct interpretation of Rushdie’s novel; rather, it helps situate the novel’s concerns within broader debates about pluralism and majoritarian conceptions of identity.
The novel’s treatment of cultural diversity also resists the assumption that a shared national origin necessarily produces common interests. Citizens may inhabit the same political community while differing in language, religion, class position, historical memory, and expectations of the state. A national narrative that ignores these differences risks converting cultural plurality into a hierarchy in which some identities are treated as more representative than others.
Tiwari’s discussion of myth and oral storytelling further suggests that narrative plurality is essential to the novel’s representation of India. Its combination of cultural traditions and conflicting accounts challenges attempts to establish a single explanatory model for the nation’s historical experience (Tiwari).
The novel’s alternative is therefore not a society without shared narratives. It is a society in which collective narratives remain open to revision and disagreement. Political belonging becomes more defensible when no single group can claim exclusive authority to define the nation’s identity or determine which histories deserve recognition.
8. Critical Limitations: Can Saleem’s Fragmented Narrative Offer a Democratic Alternative?
Although Midnight’s Children challenges authoritarian national narratives, its own narrative strategy is not beyond criticism. Saleem’s claim to connect his life with the history of India frequently places him at the centre of events that exceed his personal experience. His autobiography risks reproducing the very centralisation of authority that the novel otherwise questions.
The problem becomes particularly apparent in his treatment of the Midnight’s Children. Their collective potential is often narrated through Saleem’s perspective, which means that their identities and experiences are filtered through his priorities. The conference may represent plurality, but the narrative does not give every participant an equally developed or independent voice (Rushdie).
Fogel’s discussion of the novel’s relationship between magical realism and political history helps identify the critical possibilities of this narrative form, but it also directs attention to the political implications of the relationship between individual narration and collective experience (Fogel). Saleem’s imaginative authority enables him to construct a broad historical vision, yet it also limits the perspectives through which that vision is produced.
Jayalakshmi, Subha, and Immanuel’s discussion of historical authenticity makes this limitation especially important. Their analysis raises the question of how a narrative can challenge omissions in official historiography while remaining accountable for its own selections and distortions (Jayalakshmi et al.).
The novel does not resolve this problem by providing an entirely objective narrator. Instead, it requires readers to evaluate the difference between a narrative’s capacity to reveal historical contradictions and its claim to represent those contradictions comprehensively.
A similar qualification applies to the novel’s critique of political unity. Fragmentation can preserve diversity, but it can also signify disorganisation, vulnerability, and the inability to develop effective collective action. The novel does not establish that all forms of political coordination are authoritarian or that social pluralism automatically produces justice.
Rather, its political argument concerns the conditions under which collective organisation becomes coercive. Democratic institutions must negotiate differences without erasing them, while individual narratives must remain open to perspectives that exceed their own explanatory frameworks.
This critical tension strengthens rather than weakens the novel’s significance. Saleem’s fallibility prevents the narrative from presenting an uncomplicated solution to the problem of national identity. His autobiography demonstrates that no single perspective can fully contain the experiences of a diverse society, including the perspective of someone who has made the nation the organising principle of his own life.
The novel’s most defensible democratic implication is therefore methodological as well as political: national histories must remain open to scrutiny, individual testimonies must be interpreted critically, and collective identity must not depend upon the silencing of competing experiences.
9. Conclusion
Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children challenges the idea that postcolonial India can be represented as a unified historical and political entity. Through Saleem Sinai’s unreliable autobiography, the magical possibilities of the Midnight’s Children, the fragmentation of the protagonist’s body, and the violence of the Emergency, the novel exposes the contradictions that emerge when political authority demands uniformity from a diverse society.
Fogel’s study of magical realism and revolution, Tiwari’s examination of myth and magic, Ratti’s account of religious and ideological mythologies, and Jayalakshmi, Subha, and Immanuel’s discussion of historical authenticity illuminate different dimensions of this critique. Varshney’s analysis of contested national identity further situates the novel within wider debates concerning pluralism, political anxiety, and competing definitions of Indian belonging.
The novel’s central achievement lies in connecting its formal experimentation with its political argument. Fragmented narration reflects the instability of historical knowledge, while magical realism makes visible the possibilities and limitations of collective life. Saleem’s body reveals the vulnerability of individual identity within national history, and the Emergency demonstrates the destructive consequences of a state that treats bodily autonomy and political disagreement as obstacles to national order.
Nevertheless, Saleem’s narrative cannot be accepted as an entirely reliable alternative to official historiography. His selectivity and self-centred perspective expose the limitations of personal testimony even as they challenge established accounts of the past. The novel therefore refuses to replace one absolute historical authority with another.
Ultimately, Midnight’s Children presents democratic citizenship as an ongoing negotiation among competing histories, identities, and experiences. Its critique is not directed against collective belonging itself but against the demand that belonging must require cultural uniformity or political submission. A nation becomes more democratic not by eliminating its internal differences, but by developing institutions and narratives capable of acknowledging them without turning them into grounds for exclusion.
Works Cited
Desai, Anita. “Indian Fiction Today.” Daedalus, vol. 118, no. 4, 1989, pp. 206–31. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20025270. Accessed 13 Oct. 2026.
Fogel, Jackson D., et al. Magical Realism and Revolution in Postcolonial Literature : A Study of Salman Rushdie’s “Midnight’s Children” / by Jackson D. Fogel. 2023, Theses, Dissertations, and Final Projects. Millersville University of Pennsylvania. JSTOR, https://jstor.org/stable/community.39483104. Accessed 13 Oct. 2026.
Jayalakshmi, V., et al. “Salman Rushdie’s Novel Midnight’s Children: An Account of Retracing Historical Events for Authenticity.” International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, vol. 24, no. 4, 2020, pp. 10245–55, https://www.psychosocial.com/index.php/ijpr/article/view/6678.
Ratti, Manav. “Religious and Ideological Mythologies in Salman Rushdie’s Novels.” Salman Rushdie in Context, edited by Florian Stadtler, Cambridge University Press, 2023, pp. 147–58, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009082624.015.
Tiwari, Rekha. “The Fabric of Myth and Magic in Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children.” The Context: Journal of English Studies, vol. 12, no. 5, Aug. 2025, pp. 54–61. Zenodo, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16745059.
Varshney, Ashutosh. “Contested Meanings: India’s National Identity, Hindu Nationalism, and the Politics of Anxiety.” Daedalus, vol. 122, no. 3, 1993, pp. 227–61. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20027190. Accessed 13 Oct. 2026.
0 Comments