Before I read this book I had great expectations for it. Looking through its list of people interviewed I expected a good read. It was a good read, though I think the author has overlooked few complex issues, though given the complexities the Indian Subcontinent historians face it is not suprising that a foreign author would face even more questions. Yet his(author) conclusion I find sad, he say that he believe S.C.Bose was 'short sighted ' in supporting British Enemies, but is it really short sight, when the Polish under Germany occupation they supported the British at war with Germans, nobody call them(The Polish) shortsighted, yet S.C.Bose is shortsighted when India under British occupation and he support Germany at war with Britain.One must see the irony, both Poland and India fight for their freedom, they must support the "enemies of their enemies", and if it is alright for one country to support the enemies of its enemies then it is alright for another country(India) to do same. IF not, then I don't know what it is. Apart from this it was okay book.

This is a brave attempt by a western biographer to gauge the life and times of two of the foremost leaders of Bengal. Usually most western biographers tend to 'build' up Subhas Chandra Bose and then in the end 'condemn' him for 'rising' against the British. This author is different. Mr Gordon does, to a certain extent, take a neutral viewpoint when trying to map out the political battles of Subhas and Sarat Bose. To be sure, it is a difficult task, trying to understand their motives and intentions through the 1920s, 1930s, and finally 1940s for Bengal and India. Subhas Chandra Bose naturally takes centre stage as the struggle against British occupation starts to reach new heights during the axis effort against the English. Mr Gordon mentions a reporter's comparison of Subhas Chandra Bose with the Republic of Ireland's leader De Valera, calling Subhas Chandra Bose "the Eaemon de Valera" of India. Although then the question is who was the Indian Subcontinent's "Michael Collins"? We actually come back to Subhas Chandra Bose, because no one else in the whole subcontinent at that time even comtemplated physical force as the only way of removing British despotism in the Subcontinent other than 'Netaji." Subhas Chandra Bose's journeys abroad are described in some detail. Especially the summit meetings with axis leaders in their bid to hammer out a common goal and objective. Mr Gordon begins one chapter with the question Axis collaborator? This is too harsh, Subhas Chandra Bose represented the Subcontinent, a people fighting for their independence against British tyranny. To call this freedom fighter an axis collaborator or even ask such a question would be calling for example, Charles de Gaulle a 'collaborator', if collaborator is used in the negative sense. When mentioning the I.N.A (Indian National Army) in Europe , Mr Gordon says that they didn't fulfill the dream that Netaji had of their (I.N.A) fighting the British. H.N. Pandit, however, in his book "Subhas Chandra Bose: From Kabul to the Battle of Imphal" says that these INA units did infact take part in the Normandy Campaign. I felt that Mr Gordon again didn't go into the campaigns of the INA in Burma with greater detail, and especially their tenacity against British occupation forces despite overwhelming odds. When partition came, and when Bengal was partitioned, a lot of people voted the way they did for various expediencies, our author again, perhaps with diplomatic tact, didn't go very deep into the reasons of the principal actors in that tragedy. The author could have also stressed that eastern Bengal would have inevitably clamoured for independence from a totally alien country to whom she was joined in 1947, with or without western bengal. Today, she rejoices as the independent Republic of Bangladesh. Our author, with great dexterity, presents some of the anguish felt by all the people in 1947. Subhas Chandra Bose was dead before he could return to the Subcontinent, if he had come back, maybe the partition of Bengal would have become doubtful, let alone her being fragmented into pieces. That is unfortunately an academic question. With his death, Sarat Bose lost an illustrious brother and sadly he also died seeing his beloved Bengal divided. At the end, it has to be said that Mr Gordon's work is an important insight into the subcontinent's struggle against British despotism. It deserves applause for its well researched and well balanced view of not only Subcontinental politics, but also for a well balanced picture of those two brothers against the raj, Subhas and Sarat Bose.

Leonard A. Gordon has presented to the Western world a dramatic reexamination of the lives and struggles of two brothers who made a significant impact in the independence movement of their country, India. Gordon masterfully shows how brotherly love can be an unbreakable bond in the face of adversity and overwheming challenges.

This book is really two biographies in one. Sarat and Subhas Bose were brothers who shared a common desire to rid their nation British rule. While the former chose nonviolent struggle and joined Mahatma Gandhi in his campaign of passive resistance, the latter decided that armed struggle could be employed with the assistance of England's two main adversaries during World War 2, Germany and Japan, in driving out foreign occupation.

I would highly recommend this book to people interested in learning about the history of modern India. It is an objective presentation of the lives of two brothers who made a significant contribution to India's freedom struggle, but have not until recently been given their proper recognition.