{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018500486854917234, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004868549172346641, 'mean_word_length': 5.362229102167182, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
History and Romance: Interchangeability of Genres in the Representation of History

In this paper, 1 have analyzed Bankimchandra Chatterjee's role as a nationalist primarily by focusing on the contradictions in his political agenda, which I will categorize as the conflict between the intuitive and the deliberative by taking Anandamath as my chief focus. The analysis is organized through a study of three related aspects of Bankim's writing: his agenda for self-representation in urging his countrymen to write histories, the equivocal conclusion of his novel Anandamath (1882), and the women's question in the novel. 1 I am interested here in focusing on Bankim's nationalist vision and its inherent contradictions in the larger governing framework of history and fiction. His switching between genres and the inconsistency therein will be discussed towards the end of the essay. Within the literature that I examine, his concerns are historical, but the orientation given to history by reaching out to myth and memory tends to dissolve the genres. Such a view of history, nevertheless, must not be judged only from the parameters of a western understanding of historiography, but allied also with how itihaas (history) is written within Chatterjee's own intellectual and cultural traditions. Despite the influence of the West, forms of writing in 19thcentury India scarcely correspond to western generic forms. The content of this paper is speculative and ideological: my purpose is to set up the ideological framework underlying historical fiction written in the context of Indian nationalism, and prepare the ground for the easy interchangeability between fiction and history for the purpose of fixing identity. I have attempted to show through the example ofBankimchandra Chatterjee's Anandamath that history-writing in the period of nationbuilding-in this case, 19th century Bengal-is largely a selfrepresentation arising from the encounter between the colonizer and the colonized and has proximity to the writing of fiction owing to the author's