Midnight’s grown-ups

In 1967, an Indian film-maker asked 20-year-olds what they thought of their country. Nearly half a century later, Samanth Subramanian goes in search of the same people to see what they make of India now

By Samanth Subramanian

For most of last year, practically every fortnight, I dialled a house in Troy, Michigan, trying to speak to a man I had seen in a film half a century old. Let me admit, up front, that I failed. T.N. Subramaniam was unwell when I first called, his wife told me, and if he ever recovered enough for us to have a conversation, I never learned of it; abruptly, in August, his home turned unreachable, the phone ringing endlessly away. No one called back. After months of searching for Subramaniam and thinking about him, I lost my chance to ask him the questions that had gathered, like giant snowdrifts, in my mind.

My obsession with the film he was in, “I Am 20”, began in the early autumn of 2013—a dispiriting season for India, a season vacant of cheer or promise. There had been a parade of bad news: outsized corruption, a gummed-up economy, politicking of wearying vileness. An uninspiring election was drawing nearer. The nation’s affairs felt soiled and beleaguered, and the very project of India seemed to have gone awry in some profound way. In this troubled climate, I watched “I Am 20” for the first time, and then dozens of times more, spellbound by its characters and by the messages it held.

More from 1843 magazine

1843 magazine | “It’s been a very long two weeks”: how the Gaza protests changed Columbia

The camp has been cleared. But the faculty of the Ivy League university remains deeply divided

1843 magazine | Rahul Gandhi is on the march. But where is he heading?

He wants to be the champion of Indian liberalism. First he needs to save his party from irrelevance


1843 magazine | It began as a rewilding experiment. Now a bear is on trial for murder

The death of a jogger in the Italian Alps has sparked a furious debate about the relationship between humans and nature