In recent weeks, the writers William Dalrymple and Patrick French, among others, have come before a fusillade of criticism in India, much of it questioning not their facts, not their interpretations, but their foreignness.
“Who gets to write about India?” The Wall Street Journal asked on Wednesday in its own report on this Indian literary feuding. It is a complicated question, not least because to decide who gets to write about India, you would need to decide who gets to decide who gets to write about India. Rather than conjecturing some Committee for the Deciding of Who Gets to Write about India, it might be easier to let writers write what they please and readers read what they wish.
The accusations pouring forth from a section of the Indian commentariat are varied. Some criticism is of a genuine literary nature, fair game, customary, expected. But lately a good amount of the reproaching has been about identity.
In the case of Mr. Dalrymple, a Briton who lives in New Delhi, it is — in the critics’ view — that his writing is an act of re-colonization. In the case of Mr. French, it is that he belongs to a group of foreign writers who use business class lounges and see some merit in capitalism and therefore do not know the real India, which only the commentariat member in question does.
What is most interesting about these appraisals is their essential nature makes reading the book superfluous, as one of my Indian reviewers openly admitted. (His review was not about the book but about his refusal to read the book.) The book is not necessary in these cases, for the argument is about who can write about India, not what has been written.
For critics of this persuasion, India surely seems a lonely land. A country with a millennial history of Hindus, Christians, Jews, Muslims and Buddhists living peaceably together; a country of hundreds of dialects in which so many Indians are linguistic foreigners to each other, and happily, tolerantly so; a country that welcomes foreign seekers (of yoga poses, of spiritual wisdom, of ancestral roots) with open arms; a country where, outside the elite world of South Delhi and South Bombay, I have not heard an Indian ask whether outsiders have a right to write, think or exist on their soil.
But it is not just this deep in the bones pluralism that challenges the who-gets-to-write-about-India contingent. It is also that at the very heart of India’s multifarious changes today is this glimmering idea: that Indians must be rewarded for what they do, not who they are.
Identities you never chose — caste, gender, birth order — are becoming less important determinants of fate. Your deeds — how hard you work, what risk you take — are becoming more important.
It is this idea, which I have found pulsating throughout the Indian layers, that leaves a certain portion of the intelligentsia out of sync with the surrounding country. As Mr. French has observed, there is tendency in some of these writers to value social mobility only for themselves. When the new economy lifts up the huddled masses, then it becomes tawdry capitalism and rapacious imperialism and soulless globalization.
Fortunately for those without Indian passports, the nativists’ vision of India is under demographic siege. The young and the relentless are India’s future. They could not think more differently from these literatis.
They savour the freedom they are gaining to seek their own level in the society and to find their voice; and they tend to be delighted at the thought that some foreigners do the same in India and love their country as much as they do.
Which of the following statements is least likely to be inferred from the passage?
Show Hint
- Younger generations of Indians are more tolerant of foreign scribes who write about their country.
- The writer believes that a section of Indian intelligentsia is very hostile to upward economic mobility.
- Mr. William Dalrymple has been accused of recolonising India through his writings.
- Most of the criticism that has been recently directed at Patrick French has emphasized mainly on the writer’s underwhelming literary style.
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
The passage explicitly states that the criticism is focused more on “identity” and “foreignness” rather than on the literary style.
In fact, one critic even refused to read the book at all.
Step 2: Evaluate the options
(a) Supported – young Indians welcome foreign writers.
(b) Supported – some elites oppose social mobility.
(c) Directly stated – Dalrymple was accused of re-colonization.
(d) Incorrect – this misrepresents the passage; criticism was *not* about literary style. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(d)} \]
Which of the following would be the best substitute for the word ‘Fusillade’ in the passage?
Show Hint
- Barrage
- Breach
- Temper
- Row
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The passage says the writers came under a “fusillade of criticism” – meaning a sudden, intense burst of criticism.
Step 2: Match with closest synonym
(a) Barrage – matches perfectly: an overwhelming attack.
(b) Breach – means gap or break.
(c) Temper – irrelevant to criticism.
(d) Row – means argument, but not a barrage. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(a)} \]
The writer uses the phrase, ‘who-gets-to-write-about-India contingent’ in this passage to refer to:
Show Hint
- Foreign writers who have written books on India
- Critics who have attacked foreign writers writing on India for their mere foreignness.
- Elite residents of South Delhi and South Bombay.
- Cultural pluralists.
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
The passage explicitly discusses criticism focused on “who gets to write” – targeting writers like Dalrymple and French for being foreign, not for content.
Step 2: Evaluate options
(a) Incorrect – the writers themselves are not being described.
(b) Correct – this refers to the critics questioning foreigners’ right to write.
(c) Partly correct – mentioned in context, but not the full meaning.
(d) Incorrect – cultural pluralists are described positively. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(b)} \]
The writer believes that the most peculiar aspect of the criticisms that Patrick French and William Dalrymple have received is that:
Show Hint
- Most such condemnation has emerged from elite Indians.
- Such critics are hostile to upward immobility.
- These censures are not centered on the books of such writers or their literary styles but are targeted at their identity instead.
- These critics ignore the plural ethos of India.
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The passage says: “What is most interesting… is their essential nature makes reading the book superfluous.”
That is, critics attack identity, not writing. Step 2: Evaluate options
(a) Partially true but not the “most peculiar” part.
(b) Stated but not as the main critique.
(c) Correct – central theme: criticism is about identity.
(d) Mentioned, but not the most peculiar aspect. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(c)} \]
Which of the following statements can be inferred from the passage?
Show Hint
- Ascriptive identities like caste, tribe, etc. are becoming more and more important with the passage of time.
- Patrick French believes that the new market friendly economic policies followed for the last decades have resulted in the rise of tawdry capitalism and rapacious imperialism.
- The writer is of the opinion that a section of the intelligentsia is divorced from the views of their compatriots.
- While India has historically been very hospitable to a variety of religions, it has not been equally open to linguistic foreigners.
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The writer states that “a certain portion of the intelligentsia” is out of sync with India’s changing ethos — where deeds matter more than identities.
Step 2: Evaluate options
(a) Opposite – the passage says caste and other identities are becoming *less* important.
(b) False – French supports those policies; the critics call them imperialist.
(c) Correct – this is directly stated.
(d) Incorrect – passage highlights linguistic pluralism and tolerance. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(c)} \]
According to the information available in the passage, the writer is of the opinion that:
Show Hint
- Writers like Patrick French do not know the real India.
- Most of the condemnation heaped on Dalrymple, French and himself has been on expected lines.
- India’s reputation of pluralism is cosmetic at best, one that hides deep rooted hatred towards foreigners.
- The new generation of Indians have internalized the idea that people should be rewarded for what they do and not who they are.
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
The passage clearly praises young Indians as “the future” and says they’ve embraced the “glimmering idea” that merit and deeds, not identity, should define worth.
Step 2: Eliminate incorrect options
(a) False – French is criticized by others, not by the author.
(b) Not mentioned as “expected”; criticism is described as identity-focused, not predicted.
(c) False – the author defends India’s deep pluralism.
(d) Correct – it’s the central hopeful idea in the last paragraph. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(d)} \]
The writer refers to the history of Hindu, Christian, Jews, Muslims and Buddhists living peaceably together in India for millions of years in order to:
Show Hint
- Show India’s openness to foreigners who have visited India in the quest for yoga.
- Argue that India is a country of hundred of dialects.
- Demonstrate the religiosity pervading in an average Indian.
- India’s deep in the bones pluralism.
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
The passage says: “But it is not just this deep in the bones pluralism…”
This directly follows the list of religious diversity and linguistic tolerance in India.
Step 2: Eliminate the incorrect choices
(a) Partial – yoga is mentioned, but it’s not the reason for the historical religious reference.
(b) Dialects are mentioned, but not the point here.
(c) Not supported – religiosity is not the focus.
(d) Correct – “deep in the bones pluralism” is a direct quote and intended idea. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(d)} \]
The writer argues that the nature of criticism he, Dalrymple and French have received for their books renders reading their books superfluous because:
Show Hint
- Such criticism has been limited to a very small minority of Indians.
- These writers are popular among Indian youth, even among those who have not read their books.
- The literary styles of these writers are not the sole focus of such criticism.
- Such literary styles is less about what has been written in their books than about who can write on India.
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
The author states that some critics “refuse to read the book” and focus instead on **who wrote** it. The debate is about “who gets to write,” not the **content** of the book. Step 2: Eliminate incorrect options
(a) Not stated – no mention of the size of the critic population.
(b) Irrelevant – popularity among youth not discussed here.
(c) Partially true, but not main reason for “superfluous reading.”
(d) Correct – criticism is about identity, not literary style. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(d)} \]
According to the passage, the question ‘who gets to write about India’ is complicated because:
Show Hint
- India has been historically open to and tolerant of foreign writers and artists.
- This issue can be satisfactorily resolved only if we can decide who gets to decide who gets to write about India.
- Ascriptive identities are becoming more and more important in a globalised world.
- This world results in a shift of attention from what has been written to who has written.
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
The passage humorously states that to decide “who gets to write” we’d need to decide “who gets to decide” — illustrating the complication. Step 2: Evaluate all options
(a) True but not the **reason** it’s complicated.
(b) Correct – captures the essence of why the issue is difficult.
(c) False – the passage argues **deeds matter more**, so ascriptive identities are less important.
(d) This is a **result**, not the reason for complication. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(b)} \]
“But with many outsiders’ India-related books recently hitting bookstores there, the sensitivity – flared into a bout of vigorous literary nativism, with equally vigorous counterpunches.”
Select the most appropriate choice to fill in the blank in the above sentence:
Show Hint
- Has
- Have
- Was
- Did
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The subject is “sensitivity” (singular). The verb must match it. Step 2: Match tense and number
“Has flared” is present perfect, agrees with singular subject.
“Have” is plural, incorrect. “Was” is past, but does not match “flared into...” in the sentence. “Did” is simple past, but inappropriate here. % Final Answer \[ \boxed{(a)} \]
Top Questions on Reading Comprehension
- Shown below are letters ‘e’ taken from four popular logos, arranged in a sequence. Which of the options is the correct sequence?
- UCEED - 2026
- English Language Comprehension
- Reading Comprehension
- Shown below are four options, each showing consecutive frames representing the movement of a pendulum of an old-style wall clock for an animation movie. Which is the correct option?
- UCEED - 2026
- English Language Comprehension
- Reading Comprehension
- Acrucial moderating factor in how people experience comparisons is self-esteem. Individuals with high self-esteem are more likely to interpret upward comparison as informative rather than threatening. They are more resilient in the face of others’ success and more likely to believe they can reach their own goals. In contrast, people with low self-esteem are more prone to interpret comparison as judgment, reinforcing negative self-views and triggering feelings of inadequacy.
This dynamic creates a self-reinforcing loop. People with high self-esteem are less vulnerable to upward comparison, which intensifies those doubts. Those with a secure sense of self are more likely to use comparison as a learning tool. The same external stimulus—a colleague’s achievements, a friend’s popularity—can have radically different effects depending on internal stability.
Self-esteem also influences how people choose their comparison targets. Research has found that individuals often engage in “selective comparison,” seeking out those who confirm their existing beliefs about themselves. This can become a subtle form of self-sabotage. Someone who feels unworthy may subconsciously seek out targets that reinforce that sense, perpetuating a narrative of inferiority. One of the most promising antidotes to social comparison is temporal comparison—evaluating oneself not against others, but against one’s own past. This method has been shown to increase motivation and satisfaction, especially when individuals can see concrete progress. Temporal comparison activates the same reward circuits as social comparison but avoids the threat systems associated with social ranking. It also reinforces agency: individuals focus on what they can control and improve rather than what others control. In therapeutic and coaching settings, temporal comparison is used to help clients build self-efficacy and track growth over time.
Moreover, people who focus on self-improvement rather than social dominance are less likely to fall into cycles of envy or self-pity. They can still use others as inspiration, but they do so without attaching their self-worth to the outcome. This is not to say they never compare—but that they focus on learning, rather than judgment. The most skilful approach to comparison may lie in eliminating it, but in reframing it as feedback. When we interpret comparison as information rather than a verdict, we can ask, “What can I learn from this?” This shift turns comparison into a growth tool. Teachers mentor their students, not as rivals. Psychologists emphasize that the key variable here is mindset.
A fixed mindset sees comparison as a threat. If someone else is better, it means we are worse. A growth mindset sees comparison as a map. If someone else has reached a certain level, it means the path exists. This reframing is not just a cognitive trick. It changes the emotional tone of comparison, making it more likely to inspire than to wound. Reframing also requires emotional regulation—the ability to notice an initial pang of envy or shame without reacting impulsively. With practice, individuals can learn to pause, reflect, and reinterpret their emotional responses. Over time, this builds resilience and self-trust, allowing comparison to become a learning tool rather than a cage.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
When people who are talking don’t share the same culture, knowledge, values, and assumptions, mutual understanding can be especially difficult. Such understanding is possible through the negotiation of meaning. To negotiate meaning with someone, you have to become aware of and respect both the differences in your backgrounds and when these differences are important. You need enough diversity of cultural and personal experience to be aware that divergent world views exist and what they might be like. You also need the flexibility in world view, and a generous tolerance for mistakes, as well as a talent for finding the right metaphor to communicate the relevant parts of unshared experiences or to highlight the shared experiences while demphasizing the others. Metaphorical imagination is a crucial skill in creating rapport and in communicating the nature of unshared experience. This skill consists, in large measure, of the ability to bend your world view and adjust the way you categorize your experiences. Problems of mutual understanding are not exotic; they arise in all extended conversations where understanding is important.
When it really counts, meaning is almost never communicated according to the CONDUIT metaphor, that is, where one person transmits a fixed, clear proposition to another by means of expressions in a common language, where both parties have all the relevant common knowledge, assumptions, values, etc. When the chips are down, meaning is negotiated: you slowly figure out what you have in common, what it is safe to talk about, how you can communicate unshared experience or create a shared vision. With enough flexibility in bending your world view and with luck and charity, you may achieve some mutual understanding.
Communication theories based on the CONDUIT metaphor turn from the pathetic to the evil when they are applied indiscriminately on a large scale, say, in government surveillance or computerized files. There, what is most crucial for real understanding is almost never included, and it is assumed that the words in the file have meaning in themselves—disembodied, objective, understandable meaning. When a society lives by the CONDUITmetaphor on a large scale, misunderstanding, persecution, and much worse are the likely products.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
Later, I realized that reviewing the history of nuclear physics served another purpose as well: It gave the lie to the naive belief that the physicists could have come together when nuclear fission was discovered (in Nazi Germany!) and agreed to keep the discovery a secret, thereby sparing humanity such a burden. No. Given the development of nuclear physics up to 1938, development that physicists throughout the world pursued in all innocence of any intention of finding the engine of a new weapon of mass destruction—only one of them, the remarkable Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard, took that possibility seriously—the discovery of nuclear fission was inevitable. To stop it, you would have had to stop physics. If German scientists hadn’t made the discovery when they did, French, American, Russian, Italian, or Danish scientists would have done so, almost certainly within days or weeks. They were all working at the same cutting edge, trying to understand the strange results of a simple experiment bombarding uranium with neutrons. Here was no Faustian bargain, as movie directors and other naifs still find it intellectually challenging to imagine. Here was no evil machinery that the noble scientists might hide from the problems and the generals. To the contrary, there was a high insight into how the world works, an energetic reaction, older than the earth, that science had finally devised the instruments and arrangements to coart forth. “Make it seem inevitable,” Louis Pasteur used to advise his students when they prepared to write up their discoveries. But it was. To wish that it might have been ignored or suppressed is barbarous. “Knowledge,” Niels Bohr once noted, “is itself the basis for civilization.” You cannot have the one without the other; the one depends upon the other. Nor can you have only benevolent knowledge; the scientific method doesn’t filter for benevolence. Knowledge has consequences, not always intended, not always comfortable, but always welcome. The earth revolves around the sun, not the sun around the earth. “It is a profound and necessary truth,” Robert Oppenheimer would say, “that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them.”
...Bohr proposed once that the goal of science is not universal truth. Rather, he argued, the modest but relentless goal of science is “the gradual removal of prejudices.” The discovery that the earth revolves around the sun has gradually removed the prejudice that the earth is the center of the universe. The discovery of microbes is gradually removing the prejudice that disease is a punishment from God. The discovery of evolution is gradually removing the prejudice that Homo sapiens is a separate and special creation.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
Questions Asked in CLAT exam
- In a language laboratory, students were given an interesting puzzle involving the word "ELECTROCARDIOGRAPH." The teacher explained that such exercises not only test logical skills but also sharpen attention to detail. According to the challenge, the word had to undergo a series of transformations. First, the class was asked to take the first half of the letters, reverse their order and make the arrangement of letters look quite different from the original. Next, the students were told to identify the last but one letter of the original word and place it at the very beginning, a step that changed the opening appearance of the sequence completely. Finally, as a finishing touch, they had to add the letter 'S' at the end. Following these steps carefully would lead them to the correct transformed word, and only those who adhered to each condition in the exact order could solve the puzzle successfully. (150 words)
- CLAT - 2026
- Coding Decoding
On the night of October 12th, the "Sunburst Medallion" was stolen from the highly secured display case in the city museum. The theft occurred sometime between the museum closing at 10:00 PM and the night guard, Mr. Hemant, completing his final round at 1:00 AM. Three primary suspects were identified, all of whom had recently been dismissed from their museum positions: Anjali, the former curator; Bharat, the former security expert; and Chitra, the former exhibits designer.
Here are the established facts and their alibis:
- The security system logs show that the display case was opened using a specific five-digit code, which only Anjali and the museum director (who was out of the country) knew.
- Bharat's alibi is that he was at a distant relative's birthday party from 8:00 PM to 1:30 AM. Multiple independent witnesses confirmed his presence throughout the entire period.
- Chitra's alibi is that she was working late at a downtown graphic design studio. A time-stamped security camera from the studio's entrance shows her entering at 7:00 PM and exiting at 11:45 PM. The studio is a 20-minute drive from the museum.
- Mr. Hemant, the night guard, stated he checked the medallion at 10:30 PM, and it was still there.
Further investigation revealed that a small, distinctive silver button was found near the display case. Anjali is known to frequently wear a coat with similar unique silver buttons. The security expert, Bharat, had previously boasted that he could remotely disable a certain type of magnetic lock—the same type used on the medallion's case—without needing the code, though the log suggests the code was used. (269 words)
- CLAT - 2026
- Assertion and Reason
In a small town lived a close-knit family where every relation could be expressed through simple symbols. For instance, when they said \( A \times B \), it meant \( A \) is the father of \( B \), while \( A \div B \) meant \( A \) is the mother of \( B \). The younger ones were often introduced with \( A + B \), meaning \( A \) was the daughter of \( B \), and the bond of brotherhood was shown by \( A - B \) (A is brother of B).
One day, the children in the family turned these symbols into a playful code. Instead of introducing their parents and siblings in words, they spoke only in symbols. “Look,” giggled little Meena, “\( M + N \div O \)!” Everyone laughed, because they knew it meant Meena was the daughter of \( N \), and \( N \) was the mother of \( O \), making her \( O \)’s sister. What started as a code soon became a family game, making the bonds of father, mother, daughter, and brother not just relations, but symbols of love and togetherness. (165 words)
- CLAT - 2026
- Blood Relations
Four teams – Red (R), Blue (B), Green (G), and Yellow (Y) – are competing in the final four rounds of the Inter-School Science Olympiad, labeled Round A, Round B, Round C, and Round D. Each round consists of one match between two teams, and every team plays exactly two matches. No team plays the same opponent more than once.
The final schedule must adhere to the following rules:
- Rule 1 (Consecutive Play): The Green team (G) must play their two matches in consecutive rounds.
- Rule 2 (Fixed Appearance): The Yellow team (Y) must play in Round B.
- Rule 3 (Positional Constraint): The Red team (R) must play against the Blue team (B) in a round that is immediately before a round in which neither R nor B is playing.
- Rule 4 (Timing): The Blue team's (B) first match must occur in an earlier round than the Green team's (G) first match.
- Rule 5 (Opponent Link): The team that plays against the Red team (R) in the round that is not against the Blue team (B), is the same team that plays in Round D.
(193 words)
- CLAT - 2026
- Seating Arrangement
Health insurance plays a vital role in ensuring financial protection and access to quality healthcare. In India, however, the extent and nature of health insurance coverage vary significantly between urban and rural areas. While urban populations often have better access to organized insurance schemes, employer-provided coverage, and awareness about health policies, rural populations face challenges such as limited outreach of insurance schemes, inadequate infrastructure, and lower awareness levels. This urban-rural divide in health insurance coverage highlights the broader issue of healthcare inequality, making it essential to analyze the factors contributing to this gap and explore strategies for more inclusive health protection. A state-level health survey was conducted.
The survey covered 1,80,000 adults across urban and rural areas. Urban residents formed 55% of the sample (that is, 99,000 people) while rural residents made up 45% (that is, 81,000 people). In each area, coverage was classified under four heads – Public schemes, Private insurance, Employer-provided coverage, and Uninsured. In urban areas, Public coverage accounted for 28% of the urban population, Private for 22%, Employer for 18%, and the remaining 32% were Uninsured. In rural areas, where formal coverage is generally lower, Public coverage stood at 35%, Private at 10%, Employer at 8%, while 47% were Uninsured.
For this survey, “Insured” includes everyone covered by Public + Private + Employer schemes, and “Uninsured” indicates those with no coverage at all. Officials noted that public schemes remain the backbone of rural coverage, while employer and private plans are relatively more prevalent in urban centres. (250 words)
- CLAT - 2026
- Ratio and Proportion