The Waking Of A Nation Review: A Reverent But Uneven Dissection Of The Jallianwala Bagh Massacre

If history were a tapestry, The Waking of a Nation would be the unravelling thread, pulling apart the neatness of the past to expose the chaos and conspiracy woven beneath. 

Ram Madhvani, a director known for his subtle yet sharp storytelling -having proven his skill in films like Neerja and the series Aarya – takes a unique and calculated approach to the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in his latest six-part drama. 

Madhvani, instead of bombastically showcasing a single event, uses the massacre as the culmination of a broader story of political manipulation, colonial ambition and personal awakening. The Waking of a Nation doesn’t just revisit an atrocity, it examines the hidden gears behind the imperial machine that made such an event inevitable.

The show is set in 1919, a time when India’s simmering resentment towards British colonial rule was reaching its boiling point. 

Kantilal Sahni, a London-returned lawyer with a soft spot for colonial institutions, finds himself at the center of this national reckoning. 

Portrayed by Taaruk Raina, Kantilal is initially a character who believes in the benevolent superiority of the British Raj, viewing the empire’s rule through the rose-coloured lens of a well-educated, English-speaking elite. 

However, his beliefs are tested and ultimately shattered as he witnesses firsthand the cruelty of the British response to the Rowlatt Act – an imperial law allowing for the arbitrary arrest of Indians without trial. 

The Act, which empowered the colonial government to imprison anyone suspected of sedition without evidence, becomes the catalyst for the bloody massacre that would forever alter India’s struggle for independence. The pivotal moment occurs during the Baisakhi celebrations in Amritsar, when General Reginald Dyer orders the ruthless killing of hundreds of unarmed Indian civilians protesting against the Act at Jallianwala Bagh.

Madhvani crafts his narrative in a manner that’s both sweeping and intimate, using Kantilal’s journey as the thread that connects the personal with the political. 

The story unfolds with Kantilal’s role in presenting the case before the Hunter Commission, a body appointed by the British government to investigate the massacre. 

However, the inquiry is a farce, meant to obscure the true nature of the atrocity. As Kantilal tries to expose the deep-seated colonial conspiracy, his personal transformation mirrors the awakening of a nation. 

The show subtly delves into the mechanics of power, showing how the British, led by Punjab’s Governor Michael O’Dwyer (played by Paul McEwan), manipulated the law to justify the massacre. The narrative is, however, more about what happened before and after the event -about the machinations of the empire that made such a tragedy not just possible but planned.

At the heart of the drama are the relationships between Kantilal and his friends – Ali Allahbaksh (Sahil Mehta), Hari Singh Aulakh (Bhawsheel Singh) and Poonam (Nikita Dutta), who also bear witness to the atrocities and experience the shifting dynamics of their friendship as the weight of history changes their lives. 

These personal narratives are woven into the larger political drama, showing the emotional toll of colonial oppression. The show’s success lies in the portrayal of this tension: how relationships fray under the strain of ideological conflict, loss and betrayal. 

The friends’ ideological differences – Kantilal’s initial Anglophile tendencies versus the rising nationalism embodied by Ali Allahbaksh-serve as a microcosm of the larger political divide in the country at the time. 

Poonam’s character is particularly notable for how she balances personal grief with her role in the broader resistance. Her poignant courtroom scene, where she recounts the brutal loss of a loved one during the massacre, is a rare moment of emotional clarity in an otherwise dense narrative.

However, The Waking of a Nation is not without its flaws. The pacing of the series is uneven, often dragging as it focuses heavily on the courtroom drama that unfolds during the Hunter Commission hearings. 

While these scenes hold potential to be powerful, they frequently become bogged down in lengthy speeches and legal deliberations, which, though historically accurate, do little to propel the emotional core of the story. 

The flashbacks – used to provide context and deepen the political drama – can feel disjointed and overused, detracting from the impact of the present-day proceedings. Madhvani’s decision to move back and forth between timelines sometimes creates a sense of narrative fatigue, particularly when these transitions are not as fluid as they could be.

The show’s attempt to avoid gratuitous violence, particularly when depicting the massacre, is a notable creative choice. Unlike other portrayals of this historical event – such as Sardar Udham or Rang De Basanti – Madhvani does not dwell on the bloodshed itself. 

Instead, the camera lingers on Dyer’s cold calculation as he orders his men to fire on the helpless crowd. The horror is felt not through visceral images, but through the psychological unraveling of characters like Dyer, who rationalise their cruelty. This restraint, while effective in maintaining the dignity of the scene, leaves the emotional weight of the massacre somewhat muted. 

In a way, this choice reflects the larger theme of the series: colonialism is not only violent in action but insidious in its power to dehumanise, both the oppressed and the oppressors.

In the end, The Waking of a Nation is not just a retelling of a massacre; it is a reminder of how history is written, how it is manipulated, and how, despite the efforts of those in power, the truth has a way of coming to light. 

Madhvani’s vision is a somber one, rejecting the idea of glorifying the past in favour of examining its complexities and contradictions. The series succeeds in making the viewer confront the uncomfortable truths about colonialism and its enduring impact on the psyche of a nation. While not without its flaws, it is a bold and thought-provoking portrayal of a pivotal moment in history.