Talk:Freedom at Midnight
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class. | ||
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article needs an infobox template! - see Novels InfoboxCode or Short Story InfoboxCode for a pattern | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
the real things happen before indian independence.pls read this book becos this is one of the indispensable one...
abi
The book is great, but do take it with a little pinch of salt, most of the comments are from Lord Mountbatten and his perspective of things, he does try to colour things to show the Brits being in the right. Haphar 12:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] language
The article does not state what the book's orignal language is, I believe it to be French (Cette nuit la liberté). Sephia karta 17:59, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
It's English. Haphar 14:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Aadhi Raat Ki Aazadi
What a superb translation, it is a realy good piece. Person who intersterd in Indian Independence and History Student should read this book. Hats Off! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rajeshroshan (talk • contribs) 06:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] A great romanticised epic of modern Indian history
This book made me fall in love with my country, India all over again when I read it in high school. Its almost like reading a romantic novel except that the protagonist here is the great idea that is India. It maybe be a bit inaccurate in parts but it more than makes it up with its stylized writing and powerful portrayal.
[edit] novel?
The book is described in the article as a nonfiction book, based on research done from primary sources. As such, it is not a novel. It is obviously a work of popular nonfiction, and appears to be written in a novelistic style, but so far as I can gather, is not actually a novel. If it is a work of historical fiction, rather than a work of popular non-fiction, this needs to be clarified - are there, for instance, fictional scenes presented as fact, or are the thoughts of personages presented by the authors as though they are omniscient when, in fact, they could not possibly know what the person was thinking (although even this latter might not be sufficient - Bob Woodward does this all the time, and is still considered to write non-fiction)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by John Kenney (talk • contribs) 18:44, August 25, 2007 (UTC)
