Talk:John Masters

Untitled

Given all the autobiorgraphical infromation it seems odd that the where abouts of John Masters at his time of death are not mentioned anywhere on the net I can find.

The U.S. Social Security Death Index says he died at Santa Fe, 87505, Santa Fe, New Mexico. If anyone cares. Wilfred Day (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

His decorations should be added and postnomials added. MWShort 23:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Departure from the army

it has always been my understanding that all the 'anglo-indian' officers in the indian army were rather unceremoniously cashiered in 1947-48.if so, i think 'he decided to leave the army'. doesn't tell quite the whole story.Toyokuni3 (talk) 15:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

No they weren't cashiered though a lot took premature retirement, some were kept on for a while and had to fight against the British officered Pakistani army in Kashmir etc. Dabbler (talk) 20:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

To be "cashiered" is possible only after being found guilty by court-martial of gross negligence or misconduct. Those British officers who were part of the Indian Army in 1948 had a choice between being allowed to resign their commissions, with a "loss of career" gratuity; transferring to one of the four Gurkha regiments which transferred to the British Army; or transferring to the British Army. Most took the first option, and as Masters himself acerbically noted, undertook courses which trained them to be the Secretaries of Golf Clubs.HLGallon (talk) 16:50, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, John Masters himself gives probably the best reason as to why he left the service. He was involved with another man's wife. There were divorce proceedings and he then married her - soon after WW II I believe. Unlike in today's world, this was not considered "acceptable behavior" and was a great "No-No" in the British Indian Army at that time. As a result, he was encouraged to resign his commission. Since he gives this reason, instead of a more acceptable "British officers directed to leave the service," I suspect it is the truth. Of course, if you are familiar with the moral standards of British life in the 19th and 20th centuries, you might wonder what all the fuss was about, as everyone seemed to be sleeping with other people's spouses and not their own. Not that other countries can claim their morals were any better.Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 14:46, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Read The Road past Mandalay and Pilgrim's Son. Masters began the affair some time in 1942, and married Barbara in March or early April 1945. He was asked shortly afterwards why he should not resign his commission, but his commander at the time (Major General Thomas Wynford Rees) refused to hear of it. After the war, he held a variety of appointments at GHQ India before being appointed to the prestigious post of Indian Army Instructor at the Staff College, Camberley, from which he resigned. Divorce was not a factor. HLGallon (talk) 22:46, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Masters felt closest to India but feared like so many others including Jim Corbett that there would be no place for them in the New India. He did not feel at home in war-ravaged England especially as it was unlikely that he would have a suitable military career after the war. The family was poor and positioned low on the social scale. Masters felt that America would provide the best opportunity for him to live a life of dignity and where he could earnn a living. AshLin (talk) 02:27, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Konpara.jpg

Image:Konpara.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Image of Masters

I'm not into all the copyright rules for images found on the internet. Could someone look into using one of the following images for Masters' article? http://www.pollingerltd.com/estates/john_masters.htm --StephanNaro (talk) 20:10, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Treatment of India and the British Raj

Would the originator(s) like to revisit this text ?

Others have detected a greater sophistication in Masters' dealings with the British Empire. Both Nightrunners of Bengal and The Ravi Lancers contain sympathetic portrayals of Indian nationalists, and portray irreconcilable tensions between British and Indian characters that mirror the conflicts of the Raj in a manner comparable to E.M. Forster's A Passage to India. The descendent of the hero of the former novel (who is in practice manifestly the same character) experiences the Partition of India with a resigned detachment and later undergoes a deep personal crisis which ends with his staying on in independent India rather than returning to Britain.

I think we know what you mean, but are not sure we know what you are saying. I suggest the following revision, but might have the wrong book(s) in mind: "The protagonist of Bhowani Junction (descendent of the hero of Nightrunners of Bengal but manifestly the same character) experiences the Partition of India ..." Roop1940 (talk) 11:39, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The paragraph was created by several authors, but the key sentence was written by User:Adam keller, who has not contributed to Wikipedia since 2008, so he's unlikely to reply. If you think you can improve the text, just do it! Paul B (talk) 12:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The following paragraph is unacceptably POV:

"Unsurprisingly, considering the subject, Masters's works are not without their critics, many of whom simply reflect their own thinking about British imperialism rather than addressing the literary quality of Masters' work. Those who are hostile to the Empire criticise his work as revisionist—without specifying what is being "revised"—or as uncritical of the Empire. Typical are the observations of one Ronald Brydon: "For us, the saga of the Savages, heroes and conquistadors of the Raj, was a political pornography in which we savoured the illicit sensualities of imperialism."[1]"

Would someone like to clean this up so that it is non-POV? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.210.60.38 (talk) 16:15, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Citizenship status of John Masters

I seem to remember that because the Masters family had served abroad for many generations they were all born in India and so John Masters was only a British Subject not a British Citizen at the end of the war. He was therefore refused permanent residence in the UK. That was the main reason that he settled first in Spain. Enoch Powell took up his case in Parliament but failed to change the ruling. This has a similarity with the current Windrush scandal.

Can anyone provide more information on this subject ? Robert Thomas.R H L Thomas (talk) 22:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Interesting but Masters makes no reference to this difficulty in his detailed (three volume) autobiography. He simply indicates that after Indian independence he had the option of transferring to the British Army but declined because his experience had been with Gurkha not British soldiers. He also gave brief consideration to seeking an appointment as a police commissioner in the UK. Long-term employment in the new Indian Army was apparently not possible unless he became an Indian citizen. In the end he decided on starting a new life (and eventual citizenship) in the USA, where he did rather well. Buistr (talk) 08:52, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Ironically before he could become a US citizen, he was forced to apply for an Indian passport rather than a British one, as his forebears for three generations had been born in India. (Pages 224-225 of my copy of Pigrim Son, pub. Muchael Joseph 1971.) He was also placed on the Indian, rather than British, quota for immigration to the US. HLGallon (talk) 13:42, 21 June 2020 (UTC)