The post-independence generations in the subcontinent are, largely unfamiliar with the events that traumatised families and friends not so long ago, or detached from them. Most ignore the epic human tragedy that took place in and soon after August 1947. Most wish to erase the memory of a painful and brutal past. Partition literature in the subcontinent is also inadequate and lacking in scholarly rigour. The frameworks are generally flawed, for they preclude serious examination of the impact of colonial policies, the rise and the impact of Hindu and Muslim revivalist movements, the creation of religious identities, and the intra- class competition for a greater share in the emerging power structures.
Most authors are concerned to fault the other.
Some act as spokesmen and advocates for the Congress or Muslim League creed. Apologists claim that partition has allowed the fulfilment of legitimate aspirations. Critics condemn it for multilating historic national entities. Hence mutually hostile camps are pitched in the arena of historiography. India politicians and on party statements and resolutions has reduced many discussions to mutual accusations and recriminations.