Assignment 202: Theatre as a Site of Resistance: Reading Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions through the Lens of Secularism and Nationalism.

Theatre as a Site of Resistance: Reading Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions through the Lens of Secularism and Nationalism

Assignment 202: Theatre as a Site of Resistance: Reading Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions through the Lens of Secularism and Nationalism. This blog is part of an assignment for paper 202- Indian English Literature – Post-Independence.

Table of contents:

• Personal Information

• Assignment Details

• Abstract

• Keywords

• Introduction

• Theoretical Framework: Secularism, Nationalism, and Performance in Indian Cultural Discourse 

• Theatre as a Political and Ethical Space- Resistance, Humanism, and Audience Engagement 

• Conclusion

• References 

Personal Information:

• Name: Srushtikumari Chaudhari

• Batch: M.A. sem 3 (2024-2026)

• Enrollment number: 5108240011

• E-mail: srushtichaudhari1205@gmail.com

• Roll number: 29

Assignment Details:

• Topic: Theatre as a Site of Resistance: Reading Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions through the Lens of Secularism and Nationalism.

• Paper & subject code: 202 - Indian English Literature – Post- Independence.

• Submitted to: Smt. Sujata Binoy Gardi, Department of English, MKBU, Bhavnagar

• Date of Submission: 08/11/2025

Abstract:

This paper explores Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions as a compelling theatrical response to India’s ongoing conflicts of communalism, nationalism, and secular identity. Written amid growing socio-religious tension, the play transforms theatre into a space of ethical and political reflection. It exposes the fragile boundaries between self and other, faith and reason, and private guilt and public ideology.

By examining the play’s structure, symbolism, and performance, this study situates Final Solutions within debates on Indian secularism and postcolonial nationalism. Drawing on thinkers like Thomas Pantham, Ashis Sengupta, and M.N. Chatterjee, it highlights how Dattani’s stage becomes a democratic arena of dialogue and dissent.

Keywords: 

• Mahesh Dattani, 

• Final Solutions, 

• Secularism, 

• Nationalism, 

• Indian Theatre, 

• Resistance, 

• Communalism, 

• Humanism

Introduction:

Indian English theatre has long mirrored the nation’s moral and political consciousness. Among modern playwrights, Mahesh Dattani stands out for transforming the stage into a space of ethical inquiry and resistance. His play Final Solutions (1993) exposes India’s deep-rooted communal tensions, urging audiences to confront intolerance, prejudice, and the fragility of secular ideals.

Born in Bangalore in 1958, Dattani has explored themes of gender, class, and religion in works like Dance Like a Man, Tara, and Bravely Fought the Queen. In Final Solutions, he portrays communalism as a cultural habit rather than mere politics. Through two families—one Hindu and one Muslim—he reveals inherited mistrust and fear, while the Mob Chorus dramatizes the collective psychology of violence.

Engaging with Thomas Pantham’s plural secularism and Ashis Sengupta’s idea of ‘project nationalism,’ Dattani reimagines theatre as a site of dialogue and moral renewal. Ultimately, Final Solutions becomes a theatre of resistance—exposing social divisions while envisioning empathy and coexistence.

Theoretical Framework: Secularism, Nationalism, and Performance in Indian Cultural Discourse:

To understand Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions as a theatre of resistance, it is essential to ground the discussion in the theoretical contexts of Indian secularism and postcolonial nationalism—two concepts that have defined much of India’s socio-political and cultural narrative since independence. In addition, it is necessary to consider how the performative nature of theatre interacts with these ideological frameworks to produce ethical, aesthetic, and political meaning.

Secularism as an Indian Ideal:

Indian secularism, unlike its Western counterpart, does not separate religion from the state but promotes coexistence among diverse faiths. As Thomas Pantham notes in “Indian Secularism and Its Critics,” it is a dialogic model rooted in moral equality and mutual respect. Yet, in a society where religion defines both private and public life, this balance often collapses, giving rise to fear and mistrust.

Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions captures this tension through characters like Hardika, Smita, Bobby, and Javed, who embody inherited prejudice and the longing for reconciliation. Dattani translates Pantham’s theory into lived experience, presenting secularism as a continuous human struggle rather than a political doctrine.

Echoing M.N. Chatterjee’s idea of going “beyond categories,” Dattani avoids didacticism, emphasizing empathy and dialogue as tools for healing. In Final Solutions, secularism becomes a lived practice—an ethical effort to understand and coexist despite difference.

Nationalism and Its Discontents:

In postcolonial India, nationalism has oscillated between inclusion and exclusion. The early vision of Gandhi and Nehru upheld unity in diversity, but later ideologies often equated national loyalty with cultural and religious uniformity. As Ashis Sengupta notes in “Project Nationalism and Theatre in Contemporary India,” theatre becomes a contested space where dominant ideas of nationalism are questioned and redefined.

Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions engages directly with this contestation. By portraying communal violence and inherited prejudices, Dattani dismantles the illusion of a cohesive national identity. The shifting Mob Chorus—alternating between Hindu and Muslim roles—symbolizes how fanaticism transcends any single community. In doing so, Dattani critiques nationalism rooted in exclusion and fear, showing how it erodes the moral foundation of coexistence.

Through Hardika’s Partition memories and the interfaith friendship of Smita and Bobby, the play exposes both the wounds of history and the hope for reconciliation. Dattani thus reimagines nationalism as an ethical ideal grounded in empathy, dialogue, and plurality rather than dominance. His theatre performs what Sengupta calls a “counter-narrative to project nationalism,” offering a vision of the nation built on compassion and collective healing.

Theatre as Performance and Political Praxis:

Theatre, by nature, is performative—it thrives on embodiment, immediacy, and dialogue with its audience. In Mahesh Dattani’s hands, this performativity becomes a form of political praxis. Through stagecraft and symbolic devices like the Mob Chorus, which alternates between Hindu and Muslim identities, Dattani exposes the instability of communal divisions. This shifting chorus transforms the stage into a mirror, compelling audiences to confront their own role in sustaining prejudice.

Rooted in India’s long tradition of ethical and didactic performance, from Sanskrit theatre to modern street plays, Dattani redefines theatre as a space of civic education. His plays invite what Thomas Pantham terms a “public morality of engagement,” urging spectators to think critically rather than passively consume. The tensions in Final Solutions thus reflect not distant conflicts but the audience’s own moral and social realities.

Theatre’s collaborative and plural nature embodies the very secularism Dattani defends—each performance becomes a temporary community of shared reflection. As Ashis Sengupta notes, the stage remains one of the few arenas where dissent can still be voiced. Dattani uses this freedom to challenge ideological control and to reaffirm theatre’s power as a site of resistance and moral renewal.

From Aesthetics to Ethics:

The intersection of secularism, nationalism, and performance leads to an understanding of Dattani’s theatre as an ethical practice. Following K.R.S. Iyengar’s vision of literature as “an act of moral imagination,” Dattani uses the stage to reawaken empathy and introspection in a society numbed by ideological polarization. As Upadhyay and Verma note in their studies of Iyengar’s literary philosophy, Indian English writers have long viewed art as a medium of moral renewal rather than mere aesthetic pleasure. Dattani inherits this legacy, transforming Iyengar’s humanistic ideal into contemporary social realism.

In Final Solutions, aesthetics and ethics converge through the play’s open-ended structure and emotional intensity. The unresolved conflicts invite viewers to continue the dialogue beyond the stage. The theatre thus becomes a laboratory of secular ethics—a space where art and politics merge in the pursuit of truth and reconciliation.

This theoretical framework positions Final Solutions within a complex network of ideas: the dialogic secularism of Pantham, the critical nationalism of Sengupta, the aesthetic humanism of Iyengar, and the transcendence of categories envisioned by Chatterjee. Together, these perspectives illuminate how Dattani transforms performance into a political and ethical act. His theatre not only critiques the failures of secularism and nationalism but also reimagines them as living ideals that must be constantly performed, questioned, and renewed.

Critical Reading of Final Solutions:

Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions occupies a unique position in Indian English drama as a play that simultaneously examines the psychology of communalism and the possibility of reconciliation. By situating the drama within a domestic space that doubles as a metaphor for the nation, Dattani unpacks how communal tensions are not born merely in political institutions but are cultivated within homes, memories, and inherited beliefs. The play resists simplistic binaries of Hindu versus Muslim, good versus evil, or modern versus traditional, and instead engages with the more difficult terrain of internalized prejudice, moral complicity, and ethical self-awareness.

Domestic Space as a Microcosm of the Nation:

In Final Solutions, the Gandhi household serves as both a physical refuge and a symbolic representation of the Indian nation. When two Muslim youths, Javed and Bobby, seek shelter during a riot, the home becomes a testing ground for secular ideals. Beneath gestures of hospitality lie suspicion, guilt, and inherited prejudice. The family’s interactions reveal how intolerance persists not through overt violence but through everyday domestic attitudes.

As D. Maheswari and J. Julie Prassana note, the Gandhi home “embodies the fragile secular ideal, where civility masks underlying fear.” Aruna’s obsession with ritual purity, her discomfort with Muslim guests, and Smita’s quiet defiance expose how communal divisions are reinforced within private life. The living room—a space meant for harmony—turns into a site of ideological conflict, while the Mob outside mirrors the collective anxiety within.

Through this spatial metaphor, Dattani blurs the line between public and private violence, suggesting that the hatred of the streets begins in homes and conversations. The play thus embodies Thomas Pantham’s concern with the moral failure of Indian secularism: the inability to turn tolerance from an abstract principle into lived compassion.

The Mob and the Chorus: Deconstructing Collective Identity:

One of Mahesh Dattani’s most powerful dramaturgical innovations in Final Solutions is his use of the Mob as a Greek-style chorus. Constantly shifting between Hindu and Muslim identities through changes of masks and chants, the Mob embodies the fluid, interchangeable nature of fanaticism. Its anonymity—neither wholly Hindu nor Muslim—suggests that communal hatred is not tied to one faith but is a shared social pathology.

This device reflects Ashis Sengupta’s insight that contemporary Indian theatre must “deconstruct the myth of fixed identity” to challenge nationalist homogenization. By staging the Mob as a performative construct rather than a realistic crowd, Dattani reveals that violence is not spontaneous—it is staged, rehearsed, and ideologically produced. The chorus thus mirrors the performativity of prejudice itself.

Crucially, the Mob implicates the audience. Its rhythmic chants and shifting allegiances blur the line between spectator and participant, forcing viewers to confront their own complicity in systems of hate. In transforming passive spectators into moral witnesses, Dattani uses theatre as an act of collective self-examination, exposing how easily ordinary individuals can become instruments of ideological violence.

Memory, Guilt, and the Legacy of Partition:

At the heart of Final Solutions is Hardika (Daksha), whose memories of Partition embody the play’s historical and emotional depth. Her youthful friendship with Zarine, a Muslim girl, ends in betrayal during the 1947 riots, revealing how communal wounds become generational legacies. What begins as nostalgia turns into resentment, showing how the trauma of Partition continues to shape India’s social psyche.

Through Hardika, Dattani gives voice to a generation burdened by unhealed memory. Her story affirms Thomas Pantham’s view that Indian secularism must be seen as a historical negotiation between faith and trauma. True reconciliation, the play implies, requires confronting—not erasing—the pain of the past.

Ramnik’s guilt further complicates this moral landscape. His discovery that his family profited from Zarine’s during Partition shatters his liberal self-image. His secularism becomes both sincere and compensatory—a form of moral restitution. As M.N. Chatterjee observes, authentic art transcends ideology; Dattani achieves this by portraying how prejudice and remorse coexist even in those who seek progress. In this way, memory and guilt become central to understanding the fragile ethics of modern Indian secularism.

Smita, Bobby, and Javed: The Younger Voices of Reconciliation:

While Hardika embodies the inherited wounds of Partition, Smita, Bobby, and Javed represent the hope for ethical renewal. They form the play’s generational contrast—questioning the prejudices their elders refuse to confront. Smita, disillusioned by her parents’ hypocrisy, empathizes with her Muslim friends but wrestles with her own ingrained biases. Bobby, a liberal and educated young Muslim, asserts an identity that transcends religion, while Javed carries the scars of manipulation by extremist forces, symbolizing how social anger is exploited in communal politics.

Their encounters mark a shift toward a more humane and inclusive identity. In one powerful moment, Bobby touches Aruna’s Krishna idol, breaking her illusion of ritual purity and redefining what it means to be “pure.” This symbolic act transforms the stage into a site of resistance and empathy, where art becomes a medium of moral awakening.

Through these younger characters, Dattani envisions a secularism rooted in emotion, understanding, and ethical courage rather than dogma or state policy. Theirs is a generation capable of unlearning inherited prejudice—offering reconciliation as the true path forward.

Ritual, Symbolism, and Performance:

The title Final Solutions deliberately echoes Hitler’s genocidal policy, situating Dattani’s play within the broader discourse of historical violence and ideological extremism. By invoking this phrase, Dattani warns that any attempt to enforce a “final” or absolute truth—whether through religion, nationalism, or politics—inevitably leads to moral collapse.

Rituals in the play function as both barriers and bridges. For Aruna, her daily religious routines offer comfort yet also reinforce exclusion; her refusal to let the Muslim boys use her utensils reflects how sanctity can turn into segregation. However, her gradual questioning of these practices marks the first step toward introspection and transformation.

Water recurs as a key symbol of purification and renewal—whether in acts of cleansing, the fall of rain, or tears of remorse. The rain at the play’s conclusion signifies not closure but the washing away of prejudice, an opening toward dialogue. Dattani thus envisions secularism as a living performance—a continuous process of unlearning and reawakening, much like the evolving rhythm of theatre itself.

Dialogues and Dramatic Irony:

Dattani’s dialogue, simple yet layered, reveals how prejudice operates in everyday speech. The language alternates between the intimacy of domestic talk and the aggression of public slogans. Dramatic irony abounds—for instance, when Aruna speaks of moral purity even as she hides her own spiritual insecurity, or when Ramnik proclaims his liberalism while concealing his family’s guilt.

The use of irony aligns Dattani with the modernist techniques of playwrights like Arthur Miller and Tennessee Williams, yet his thematic preoccupations are distinctly Indian. The ironies of secularism, nationalism, and personal morality converge in his characters’ speech patterns, exposing the fissures between what is said and what is meant.

The Open-Ended Ending:

The play concludes without closure. The rain falls, the mob disperses, but no final solution is found. This deliberate ambiguity is Dattani’s ethical statement: communal harmony cannot be legislated; it must be continually performed through acts of empathy and introspection. The unresolved ending invites the audience to carry the moral dialogue beyond the theatre, making the stage a rehearsal ground for civic ethics.

Dattani’s Dramaturgy of Resistance:

Dattani’s theatre resists in multiple ways: it resists the politicization of religion, the homogenizing tendencies of nationalism, and the complacency of bourgeois liberalism. His resistance is not overtly militant but deeply moral—anchored in compassion, dialogue, and human vulnerability.

As Ashis Sengupta notes, resistance in contemporary Indian theatre is often achieved through the “reclaiming of narrative space.” Dattani does this by centering the voices of women, minorities, and youth—those traditionally marginalized in mainstream narratives. His realism is never purely mimetic; it is reflective, psychological, and performative, allowing multiple layers of meaning to unfold through performance.

Theatre as a Political and Ethical Space – Resistance, Humanism, and Audience Engagement:

Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions is not merely a play about communal conflict; it is a theatrical intervention that redefines the function of Indian theatre itself. In the postcolonial Indian context, where identity and ideology are deeply entangled, Dattani transforms the stage into a space of dialogue and dissent—a living forum where social tensions are both represented and critically examined. Theatre, in his hands, becomes a moral and political act of resistance—an art form that exposes the fault lines of nationalism, challenges the misuse of religion, and reclaims the human capacity for empathy.

Theatre as a Political Act:

Theatre has long served as both a mirror and critic of society. As Bharata Muni’s Natyashastra teaches, drama was meant to evoke rasa and awaken moral insight. In modern India, theatre evolved into a politically aware medium—critiquing colonial legacies, social inequality, and communalism.

Mahesh Dattani inherits this dual legacy of aesthetic expression and social responsibility. In Final Solutions, he turns the spotlight on an ordinary Hindu family rather than political leaders, revealing that intolerance begins in everyday interactions, not at the margins. This shift from public politics to private spaces becomes an act of resistance, challenging the nationalist illusion that communalism is caused only by extremists.

As Sudha Shastri notes, Dattani’s stage exposes “the unseen politics of emotion”—fear, guilt, and resentment—that shape Indian identity. By dramatizing these internal conflicts, his theatre converts personal conscience into public reflection. Thus, Final Solutions transforms the stage into a space of ethical witnessing, where performance itself becomes a quiet yet powerful form of political activism.

Resistance through Representation:

Dattani’s mode of resistance lies not in overt protest but in nuanced representation. His realism is fluid and psychological, allowing contradictions within characters to expose deeper social truths. Aruna’s rigidity stems from emotional insecurity, Ramnik’s liberalism hides inherited guilt, and Javed’s aggression transforms into moral awakening. Through such complexity, Dattani resists simplistic binaries of victim and villain.

Rather than presenting ideology as absolute, he creates what Bakhtin calls a “dialogic space,” where diverse voices interact and challenge each other. No character or viewpoint dominates; instead, the play thrives on tension and dialogue. This multiplicity itself becomes an act of resistance against rigid religious, political, or moral hierarchies.

The resistance in Final Solutions is ethical, not militant—it calls for introspection, empathy, and the courage to face discomfort. By staging unresolved differences, Dattani turns theatre into a civic classroom, teaching audiences to coexist through understanding rather than consensus. His art thus redefines resistance as the pursuit of dialogue and moral self-awareness within a fractured nation.

Humanism as an Ethical Framework:

At the core of Dattani’s theatre lies a deep ethical humanism—a belief that moral worth transcends religion, caste, and gender. His characters embody the struggle to connect beyond inherited boundaries, revealing humanism not as sentiment but as an act of courage and moral awakening.

In Final Solutions, this vision unfolds when Bobby challenges Aruna’s ritual purity by touching the idol of Krishna. Rather than destroying faith, he redefines it as inclusive and compassionate. The scene transforms the stage into a space of rehumanization, where the sacred becomes a symbol of empathy rather than exclusion.

Dattani’s approach echoes Tagore’s ideal of Visva-Bharati, a universal fellowship grounded in moral imagination, and Gandhi’s principle of Ahimsa, where true change begins with self-purification. Through Ramnik’s confession, Bobby’s forgiveness, and Smita’s empathy, Dattani dramatizes a humanist nationalism rooted in understanding rather than domination. His theatre thus reclaims the ethical purpose of art—to awaken conscience, affirm shared humanity, and envision a nation bound by compassion instead of fear.

Audience Engagement: Theatre as Ethical Participation:

A defining feature of Dattani’s dramaturgy is his insistence on active spectatorship. His theatre refuses passive entertainment, demanding that audiences confront their own moral positions. The alternating chants of the Mob—“Hindu! Hindu!” / “Muslim! Muslim!”—collapse the distance between performer and spectator, turning the theatre into a mirror of society’s anxieties and biases.

In a media-saturated nation accustomed to witnessing communal conflict through screens, Dattani restores the physical immediacy of violence and emotion. The rhythmic slogans, shifting masks, and claustrophobic domestic setting provoke not observation but recognition. The audience must grapple with the unsettling truth that prejudice begins within ordinary lives.

While echoing Brecht’s epic theatre, Dattani’s approach diverges through emotional engagement rather than intellectual detachment. He cultivates empathy without absolution, encouraging reflection rather than mere analysis. The audience thus becomes a moral collective, bound not by ideology but by introspection. By leaving the play’s resolution open-ended, Dattani transforms spectators into co-creators of ethical meaning, ensuring that the performance continues beyond the stage—as an inner dialogue on complicity, tolerance, and humanity.

Theatre and the Crisis of Indian Secularism:

Post-independence India embraced secularism as a constitutional promise, yet, as T.N. Madan and Ashis Nandy observe, it often remained a top-down ideal, detached from emotional and everyday realities. Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions dramatizes this disjunction by revealing how prejudice thrives beneath the surface of polite liberalism. Ramnik’s self-proclaimed secularism, built on guilt and privilege, exposes the hollowness of mere legal tolerance.

Dattani relocates the crisis of secularism from Parliament to the domestic sphere, showing that intolerance begins within the family—through rituals, habits, and unspoken fears. The home becomes a miniature arena of the nation’s moral struggle. By externalizing these inner conflicts on stage, Dattani transforms theatre into a moral arena, where audiences witness not political debate but ethical awakening.

Nationalism, Identity, and the Question of Belonging:

When nationalism turns culturally or religiously exclusive, it demands conformity at the cost of diversity. Mahesh Dattani resists such uniformity by envisioning a plural and ethical nationalism grounded in empathy. His characters—Smita, Bobby, and Javed—struggle not for dominance but for recognition and moral belonging. Smita’s quiet defiance of orthodoxy and Bobby’s assertion of dignity challenge identity-based divisions, redefining the nation as a space of inclusion rather than exclusion.

This vision resonates with Jawaharlal Nehru’s secular nationalism, which imagined India as a mosaic of cultures. Yet Dattani complicates this ideal by revealing how public tolerance often conceals private prejudice. His realism exposes the emotional contradictions that official rhetoric overlooks.

In this sense, Dattani embodies Partha Chatterjee’s “inner domain” of nationalism—the ethical and cultural sphere where Indians negotiate belonging. Through theatre, he transforms the stage into a moral cartography of the nation, mapping both its fractures and its potential for renewal.

The Ethical Power of Performance:

Theatre’s power lies in its immediacy and shared presence—its ability to bring together bodies, voices, and emotions in real time. For Mahesh Dattani, this immediacy becomes an ethical force. In the space of performance, social hierarchies momentarily dissolve as audience and actors participate in a collective act of witnessing. This shared experience nurtures empathy, turning spectators into moral participants rather than passive observers.

In an era shaped by digital distance and ideological polarization, Dattani’s live theatre reclaims physical presence as a form of resistance. His stage embodies contradictions—faith and doubt, guilt and forgiveness, love and resentment—without resolving them, allowing the audience to experience moral complexity rather than abstract ideas. Each performance thus becomes a ritual of ethical renewal, transforming theatre into a space where human connection momentarily triumphs over division.

Conclusion:

Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions stands as one of the most compelling examples of modern Indian theatre’s capacity to question, resist, and redefine. In an age where nationalism and religion are often wielded as instruments of division, Dattani reclaims theatre as a humanistic space—a site of both resistance and reconciliation. His play transforms the stage into a living dialogue, a moral battleground where silence, memory, and ideology collide to reveal the buried truths of Indian society.

Through his characters and narrative design, Dattani dismantles simplistic binaries of Hindu and Muslim, good and evil, traditional and modern. Instead, he portrays human beings trapped within historical guilt and emotional trauma, yet yearning for understanding. The act of confrontation—whether between Smita and Aruna, Bobby and Ramnik, or the Mob and the Family—becomes a process of moral education, a way of unlearning inherited hatred. In this sense, Dattani’s theatre is not about entertainment but about ethical transformation.

References:

Chatterjee, M. N. “Beyond Categories.” Indian Literature, vol. 53, no. 6 (254), 2009, pp. 237–39. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23348163.

Dattani, Mahesh. Final Solutions. Penguin Group, 2005.

Maheswari, D., and J. Julie Prassana. “Communal Disharmony in Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solution.” Shanlax International Journal of Arts, Science and Humanities, vol. 12, no. S1, 2024, pp. 7–9. ResearchGate, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/392856236_Communal_Disharmony_in_Mahesh_Dattani’s_Final_Solution.

Pantham, Thomas. “Indian Secularism and Its Critics: Some Reflections.” The Review of Politics, vol. 59, no. 3, 1997, pp. 523–40. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/1408550.

Sengupta, Ashis. “Project Nationalism and Theatre in Contemporary India.” Contemporary Theatre Review, vol. 32, no. 1, 2022, pp. 21–45. Taylor & Francis Online, https://doi.org/10.1080/10486801.2021.2007897.

Upadhyay, Suruchi. “K. R. Srinivasa Iyengar: A Poet with Paradigm Shift.” The Criterion: An International Journal in English, vol. 15, no. 2, Apr. 2024, pp. 90–98. The Criterion, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030.

Verma, Charulata. “K.R.S. Iyengar: A Doyen of Indian English Writing.” International Journal of Education, Modern Management, Applied Science & Social Science (IJEMMASSS), vol. 03, no. 02 (II), Apr.–June 2021, pp. 250–258. Inspira Journals, www.inspirajournals.com/uploads/Issues/1165190773.pdf.

Word Count: 4096

Images: 06