'Toba Tek Singh' remains a chilling reminder of the tragedy of 1947
Out beyond the shifting boundaries of sanity, madness and one's search for identity, Saadat Hasan Manto's words truly hold a mirror to the troubled fate of two countries, which have yet to achieve true liberation in thought and conscience.
What remains daunting about Manto's stories is the uncanny resemblance between the past and the present, revealing how little things have actually changed. The craft of revealing the truth—a genre crafted and skillfully mastered by the resilient voice of Manto:
"Hindustan had become free. Pakistan had become independent soon after its inception but man was still slave in both these countries — slave of prejudice — slave of religious fanaticism — slave of barbarity and inhumanity."
Manto, in his notable short story Toba Tek Singh, delves into the interplay of memory, trauma and displacement across the timeline of 1947 Partition.
The motif of madness plays as a guiding metaphor in Manto's narrative to deconstruct the absurd narrative of Partition, hinting towards the signs of madness projected by the two countries, and in turn, set the tragedy in the lives of the people, residing on both sides of the border.
Amidst years of collective grief and generational trauma, the 1947 Partition becomes, perhaps, an unsettling memory.
Along similar lines, Ritika Singh notes,'Trauma lies not in the shock of the occurrence of the event but in its reception.'
Manto's works explore the nature of trauma within the people of 1947. The unresolved nature of trauma and denied grief persist in the years-long endurance to seek meaning and redemption in their lives.
Caught in a recurring cycle, it is the constant shift between the past and the present that aggravates the tragedy of man in Manto's Toba Tek Singh.
In Toba Tek Singh, Manto pens the dilemma of the protagonist Bishan Singh, an inmate of this asylum, whose internal conflict centers around his search for home following the Partition.
Manto satirically comments on the aftermath of Partition through the narrative of mental asylums, followed by an exchange of psychiatric patients between Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims across the two countries, India and Pakistan.
Such was the gravity of the situation that even individuals in mental asylums were being relocated or one could say, partitioned between the two nations, reflecting the absurdity of it all.
Manto, in the satirical piece, constantly touches upon the paradigm of sanity and insanity for today's readers. Manto reimagines the perspective of borders as a weakening factor which divided the people of India and tore the two countries apart.
He redefines 'borders' as not arbitrary lines drawn to solidify the national identity of the countries. If truth be told, these borders unveil the grave intentions behind the British divide-and-rule policy, one of the pivotal instruments of colonial rule, which thrived on partitioning the subcontinent into two separate countries.
Manto goes on to question the 'mad' and the 'partially mad' and signifies the inability of both to comprehend the partitioned identity of Pakistan and India.
He frames the consciousness of the characters in such a poignant manner; their stories mirror the personal dilemma of Manto who could never come to terms with the occurrence of Partition. Manto employs the character of Bishan Singh to voice the stories of those who almost died, without losing their lives during the turmoil.
"As to where Pakistan was located, the inmates knew nothing. That was why both the mad and the partially mad were unable to decide whether they were now in India or in Pakistan. If they were in India, where on earth was Pakistan? And if they were in Pakistan, then how come that until only the other day it was India?"
Manto projects the identity crisis of Bishan Singh's character whose sense of self shatters completely; he loses himself in an unsettling state of chaos and utter confusion when he begins to think of home, where he truly belongs.
The protagonist's home is located in Toba Tek Singh, which now resides in Pakistan. Tracing his character arc, Manto's reader resonates with the underlying feelings of displacement, carefully examining the relationship between an individual's home and his identity.
It is not merely Bishan Singh's home that seems to be displaced, but his identity too, the fragments of which lie in the heart of India and Pakistan.
Bishan Singh's life story, much like those of countless others, stands as a moving testament to collective memory, trauma, and identity crisis buried within the overarching narrative of Partition. Manto builds on the nuanced relationship between a person's home and personal identity, by a conscious attempt to confuse his reader between the identity of Bishan Singh and the identity of the place, Toba Tek Singh.
Throughout the narrative, the writer decides to use the two names interchangeably to draw upon a familial connection between a person's home and their identity.
The internal rhyme embedded within the two names 'Toba Tek Singh' and 'Bishan Singh' mirrors the protagonist's disoriented state of mind which alters his reality. Through the absurd landscape of the asylum, Manto exemplifies his deep resentment towards the incompetency of national politics and the political nature of Partition.
He recounts the madness, the uncertainty, the mass migrations, and his people reluctantly abandoning their homes, their loved ones and hurriedly boarding trains for survival.
Leaving a life, they lived and loved, Manto knows nothing but the tragedy of his people.
Reaching the final lines of Toba Tek Singh, Manto reveals the wretched fate of his loved character, Bishan Singh and his beloved home 'Toba Tek Singh':
"There behind barbed wire, one side lay India and behind more barbed wire lay Pakistan. In between, on a bit of earth which had no name, lay Toba Tek Singh."
The recurring motif of the barbed wire symbolically conveys the dilemma of a 'no man's land' grounded in the physical and ideological division between the separated countries. Manto's search for a no man's land manifests the tragedy of Bishan Singh who ultimately takes his last breath on the border, one that unites and divides India and Pakistan.
Carrying the conversation on Partition Literature forward, Faiz Ahmed Faiz and Manto employ the poetics of resistance to demonstrate how unresolved grief and intergenerational trauma collectively stem from the absence of closure attached to people of the past; many of whom continue to grapple with sentiments of loss, dislocation and fragmented identity, still strongly felt among us today.
Remembering Faiz, his poetry reverberates with anguish for the unfulfilled promises of freedom that birthed with the 1947 Partition of India. His widely celebrated poem 'Subh-e-Azadi' – Dawn of Independence draws parallels to Manto's Toba Tek Singh, weaving the intricate themes of nostalgia, hopelessness and disillusionment together.
The living memory of Partition seems to be almost rooted in the words of both writers, a tragedy which disintegrated all hope in people for a land that is their own to a no man's land.
Yeh daagh daagh ujaala yeh shab-gazida seher
Woh intezaar tha jiska, yeh woh seher to nahin
Yeh woh seher to nahin, jis ki aarzoo le kar
Chale the yaar ki mil jaayegi kahin na kahin
In the writings of Faiz Ahmed Faiz and Saadat Hasan Manto, the common man of 1947 seems almost broken, stranded within the confines of a no man's land, searching for the Dawn of Independence once promised.
The tragedy of Partition lies in knowing that the sense of longing is here to stay and this Dawn of Independence was never meant to set, in the eyes of the people who lived and almost survived Partition in its entirety.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
30-07-2025
- Express Tribune
Azealia Banks sparks outrage over gay and trans comments
Azealia Banks, who is African American, used epithets directed at Muslims against Zayn. PHOTO: thesource Rapper Azealia Banks is once again at the center of controversy after making new statements about gay and transgender identities, triggering backlash across social media platforms. In a recent series of posts on X (formerly Twitter), Banks shared her views on LGBTQ+ identity, questioning the legitimacy of both sexuality and gender identity in language that many found inflammatory. Well being gay and transgender is not actually a natural thing. At all, it's a trauma response. Science lied to you all and told you , you were normal but being homosexual and on the more extreme end - transgender in any regard is in fact - a trauma response. No one is born… — Azealia Banks (@azealiaslacewig) July 27, 2025 Though the posts avoided outright slurs, they drew intense criticism for what some described as demeaning and dismissive framing of queer experiences. The artist's remarks quickly gained traction, with users condemning them as harmful and misinformed. LGBTQ+ advocates responded by emphasizing the dangers of such narratives, especially when shared by high-profile voices. Social media platforms lit up with calls for accountability, and hashtags related to the controversy began trending in several regions. Banks, who has previously identified as bisexual and collaborated with LGBTQ+ figures, has a history of erratic online behavior and contentious public statements. While some fans have defended her right to speak openly, others pointed to her long record of divisive rhetoric toward marginalized communities. As of now, Banks has not issued any clarification or apology for her remarks.
Express Tribune
28-07-2025
- Express Tribune
Azealia Banks defends Trump over teen relationship allegations, sparks outrage
Azealia Banks, who is African American, used epithets directed at Muslims against Zayn. PHOTO: thesource Rapper Azealia Banks has sparked widespread outrage after defending former President Donald Trump against allegations of past sexual involvement with underage girls. In a series of controversial tweets, Banks claimed such relationships were once socially acceptable, drawing sharp criticism across social media. Azealia Banks has taken a break from defending Israel's genocide to come out in staunch defense of pre-2000s pedophilia — Fifty Shades of Whey (@davenewworld_2) July 26, 2025 Banks argued that relationships between adult men and teenage girls were culturally normalized in earlier decades, writing, *"I'm honestly not surprised or mad at Trump for getting some 15-year-old p***y because those were the times."* She referenced her own experiences, stating she was "old enough to choose" to engage with older men at age 15. While clarifying she wasn't endorsing such behavior today, her comments were met with immediate backlash. Girl my dad was 47 and my mom was 14 when they got together …. Cry somewhere else loser — Azealia Banks (@azealiaslacewig) July 27, 2025 The controversy escalated when Banks dismissed the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, tweeting, "FORGET ABOUT THE EPSTEIN FILES WHO CARES." She also used offensive language toward young Latina girls and the LGBTQ+ community, accusing gay men of hypocrisy for criticizing her views. This is not the first time Banks has faced backlash for inflammatory remarks, but critics argue this incident is among her most troubling. Advocates and social media users have condemned her statements as dangerous, particularly given the sensitive nature of underage exploitation allegations. The backlash has reignited discussions about celebrity accountability and the influence of public figures in shaping discourse on abuse and consent. Banks' comments remain under heavy scrutiny as the debate continues.
Express Tribune
22-05-2025
- Express Tribune
Ben Affleck, Islamophobia and global stakes of speaking up
Listen to article In an era when celebrity commentary often seems either performative or superficial, a rare moment of sincerity can stand out — especially when it affirms dignity over division. That's exactly what happened last month when I had a brief but meaningful encounter with Ben Affleck. While walking together, my wife spotted Affleck in the distance. To her horror, I walked straight up to him before she could stop me. "Hey Ben," I said. He looked up, clearly caught off guard — likely expecting a selfie request or a comment about The Accountant 2. But instead, I told him, "You probably don't remember, but I want to thank you for standing up for Muslims and calling out Islamophobia years ago on " Before I could finish, he smiled and said, "On Bill Maher show?" I nodded. Without missing a beat, he replied: "It should be obvious. There's no place for hate." My wife had caught up by then and instinctively recorded the tail end of our chat — a brief handshake, but a powerful moment of moral clarity. A moment that reminded me — and clearly millions of others, given how widely the story resonated online — that Hollywood, at its best, can push back against harmful narratives. That exchange brought me back to 2014, when Affleck famously challenged Bill Maher and Sam Harris on HBO's Real Time. Harris, a neuroscientist and prominent atheist, had declared that "Islam is the mother lode of bad ideas" and argued that liberals fail to confront theocratic extremism. Maher backed him, claiming that Muslim societies broadly lack liberal values. Affleck didn't let it slide. "It's gross. It's racist," he said, comparing the generalisations to saying, "Oh, you shifty Jew." He reminded the panel — and the audience — that there are more than a billion Muslims who are not fanatics, who "just want to go to school, have some sandwiches." In the years since, Harris has doubled down, blaming Hamas entirely for Gaza's suffering, suggesting that Western civilisation alone represents "civilisation", and arguing that liberal institutions are being infiltrated by "stealth Islamists". Meanwhile, Bill Maher has continued to use his platform to attack Muslims. He has said Islam has "too much in common with ISIS", joked that he's afraid of people named "Muhammad", and mocked a Muslim teenager arrested for bringing a homemade clock to school. This is not principled critique. It's a pattern. And it's a pattern we see repeated in more respectable tones, too. In a recent op-ed for Newsweek, Dr Qanta Ahmed warned of the dangers of "radical Islamism" in the US, citing a Muslim housing development in Texas and its spiritual leader, Dr Yasir Qadhi, as causes for concern. But her argument rested on associations, not evidence. The implication was clear: visibly devout or politically engaged Muslims are to be viewed with suspicion. As someone who has spent years in both academic and legal circles defending religious freedom and civil liberties, I find this shift troubling. We are watching liberal ideals — free expression, equal protection and due process — increasingly applied selectively. Critique of extremism is necessary. But when that critique becomes a vehicle for collective blame, it ceases to be liberal. It becomes a form of ideological tribalism. Affleck's words that day stayed with me: "There's no place for hate." Not against Muslims. Not against Palestinians. Not against anyone. If liberalism is to mean anything at all, it must mean a consistent defence of human dignity, regardless of who is speaking, praying or resisting. We must challenge extremism wherever it arises. But we must also challenge the quiet, polite, professional Islamophobia that too often hides behind the mask of rationalism. In a world where celebrity voices are often louder than policy papers, Affleck's moment of moral clarity matters. And as the viral reaction to our brief encounter suggests, people are hungry for voices that speak up — not just for themselves, but for fairness. And this matters just as much in Pakistan as it does in the US. Those in the Global South are often on the receiving end of these narratives — through media, foreign policy, or biased gatekeeping in global discourse. When someone like Affleck uses his platform to push back against lazy stereotypes, it ripples far beyond Hollywood. Because there is, indeed, no place for hate.
