“Humans in the Loop: Exploring AI, Invisible Labour, and Digital Culture”

 

This blog presents a critical analysis of the film screening of Humans in the Loop, organized as part of our classroom activity and assigned by Dr. Dilip Barad Sir. The film explores the intricate relationship between artificial intelligence, human labour, and digital culture, focusing on how “humans in the loop” remain central to AI systems despite the appearance of automation. Through its narrative, visual style, and cinematic devices, the film raises pressing questions about algorithmic bias, epistemic hierarchies, the invisibility of labour, and the politics of representation.

In this analysis, the discussion is structured around three key themes: the socio-cultural embeddedness of AI and bias (Task 1), the visualization and political implications of labour under digital capitalism (Task 2), and the role of film form and aesthetic strategies in conveying philosophical concerns about digital culture and human-AI interaction (Task 3). Drawing on film theory, structuralist and formalist perspectives, Marxist critique, and representation studies, this blog aims to unpack how the film not only documents contemporary technological realities but also invites critical reflection on knowledge, power, and human experience in AI-mediated systems.

Task : 1

Critical Analysis: AI, Bias, and Epistemic Representation in Humans in the Loop

Humans in the Loop presents artificial intelligence not as a neutral computational system but as a socially embedded technology shaped by human power, culture, and knowledge hierarchies. Through its narrative of data labor and algorithmic decision-making, the film interrogates how technological systems reproduce ideological structures rather than transcend them. Using concepts from film studies—representation, ideology, and power relations—alongside Apparatus Theory, the film reveals that AI operates within existing social orders rather than outside them.

Algorithmic Bias as Culturally Situated

The narrative exposes algorithmic bias not as a technical malfunction but as a product of cultural and social positioning. The AI systems depicted in the film rely on human-labeled datasets generated by workers whose socioeconomic conditions shape the content and interpretation of knowledge. Rather than presenting bias as a glitch that engineers can simply fix, the film frames it as structurally embedded in the pipeline of data production.

From a representational standpoint, the film emphasizes that AI “sees” the world through mediated human perspectives. Scenes showing repetitive annotation work demonstrate how subjective judgments become codified into supposedly objective systems. This aligns with ideological critique in film theory: technology appears neutral while invisibly carrying dominant cultural assumptions. The narrative therefore reframes bias as an outcome of who produces knowledge, under what conditions, and for whose benefit.

The film’s visual style reinforces this argument. The framing of workers behind screens, often isolated and anonymized, contrasts with the authoritative presence of technological outputs. This cinematic contrast mirrors Apparatus Theory’s claim that technological systems naturalize ideology by concealing the mechanisms of production. Just as cinema positions viewers within ideological frameworks through its apparatus, AI systems in the film position users within prestructured categories shaped by unseen labor.

Epistemic Hierarchies and the Politics of Knowledge

A central theme in the film is epistemic hierarchy—whose knowledge is recognized as authoritative within technological systems. The narrative foregrounds a stark division between those who design and deploy AI systems and those who produce the knowledge that trains them. Data workers generate the interpretive labor necessary for AI functionality, yet their knowledge is rendered invisible or subordinate.

This dynamic illustrates a hierarchy between institutional knowledge (engineers, corporations, technological infrastructures) and embodied or localized knowledge (workers’ interpretations, cultural experience, and lived realities). The film suggests that technological systems privilege formalized, codified knowledge while marginalizing experiential insight. This reflects broader power relations in knowledge production: those who control technological frameworks determine what counts as truth.

From an ideological perspective, the film portrays AI as a mechanism that legitimizes dominant epistemologies while erasing the labor that sustains them. Workers’ contributions become abstracted into data points, transforming subjective interpretation into “objective” machine output. The invisibility of this process reinforces what film theory identifies as ideological naturalization—the presentation of historically produced structures as inevitable or neutral.

Apparatus Theory and Technological Ideology

Applying Apparatus Theory deepens this analysis. In classical film theory, the cinematic apparatus shapes perception by positioning viewers within a structured field of meaning that reproduces dominant ideology. Humans in the Loop extends this logic to digital technology: AI systems function as ideological apparatuses that organize knowledge, perception, and authority.

The film visually parallels cinematic spectatorship and algorithmic processing. Screens, interfaces, and data flows become framing devices that mediate reality. Just as cinema constructs meaning through selective representation, AI constructs knowledge through selective data interpretation. Both systems produce what appears as objective truth while embedding ideological assumptions within their structure.

By foregrounding labor conditions and knowledge production processes, the film disrupts the illusion of technological neutrality. It reveals that AI systems do not merely process information—they shape epistemic reality by determining what is visible, legible, and actionable. This mirrors Apparatus Theory’s central insight: technology is never purely technical but always ideological.

Power Relations and the Politics of Representation

The film ultimately situates AI within broader power relations. Representation becomes a site of control: those who design technological frameworks define categories, norms, and standards. Workers contribute knowledge but lack authority over how it is used or interpreted. This asymmetry reflects structural inequalities in global technological production.

By linking technological processes to labor, the narrative reframes AI as a social system rather than a computational tool. The film suggests that bias persists because power persists. Technology does not escape ideology; it operationalizes it.

Conclusion :

Through its depiction of data labor and algorithmic decision-making, Humans in the Loop challenges the myth of AI objectivity. The film reveals bias as culturally situated, exposes epistemic hierarchies embedded in technological systems, and frames AI as an ideological apparatus that reproduces power relations. By aligning cinematic representation with technological mediation, the narrative demonstrates that knowledge within AI is not discovered but constructed—shaped by social structures, labor conditions, and ideological frameworks.

Task : 2

Labor & the Politics of Cinematic Visibility in Humans in the Loop

The film offers a striking meditation on invisible labour under digital capitalism by foregrounding the human effort that sustains artificial intelligence systems while simultaneously showing how that labour is obscured, undervalued, and structurally constrained. Through its visual language and narrative framing, the film situates data annotation as a form of contemporary industrial work—fragmented, precarious, and emotionally taxing—while inviting viewers to critically reassess whose labour powers technological modernity.

Visualizing Invisible Labour

The film’s visual strategy makes the unseen visible. Repetitive framing of workers seated before screens emphasizes the mechanical rhythm of labelling tasks. The mise-en-scène—rows of workstations, sterile interiors, dim lighting—constructs an environment that mirrors industrial production lines, even though the labour is cognitive rather than physical. This aesthetic choice aligns with Marxist film theory’s understanding of cinema as a site where relations of production can be made perceptible.

Close shots of screens and cursor movements translate abstract computational processes into embodied human action. By lingering on gestures such as clicking, highlighting, and categorizing, the film foregrounds micro-decisions that collectively shape AI outputs. These visual repetitions convey both monotony and intensity, transforming what is typically imagined as automated efficiency into visible human strain.

Equally significant is the emotional register of labour. Workers’ expressions—fatigue, detachment, quiet frustration—suggest affective labour alongside cognitive work. The film depicts not only the extraction of time and skill but also the management of emotional endurance. From a cultural film theory perspective, this portrayal emphasizes labour as lived experience rather than abstract economic activity.

Cultural Valuation of Marginalized Work

The film suggests that digital capitalism systematically devalues the labour that makes technological systems possible. Workers perform essential interpretive tasks, yet their contributions remain structurally invisible. Their knowledge is absorbed into data infrastructures without recognition, authorship, or authority.

Marxist analysis helps clarify this dynamic: labour produces value, but that value is appropriated by institutions that control technological platforms. The film visually encodes this hierarchy through spatial separation between workers and technological outputs. Screens dominate the frame, while human figures appear small, repetitive, and interchangeable. This composition communicates commodification—the reduction of human interpretation into standardized units of production.

Representation and identity studies deepen this reading. The workers depicted belong to social positions typically excluded from narratives of technological innovation. By centering their labour, the film challenges dominant cultural assumptions that technological progress is driven solely by engineers or corporate actors. Instead, it reveals a stratified knowledge economy in which marginalized identities sustain systems from which they are excluded symbolically and materially.

Empathy, Critique, and Transformative Perception

The film does more than document labour conditions—it reorients perception. Through sustained attention to workers’ routines and subjectivities, it invites empathy by humanizing processes often imagined as automated. However, this empathy is not purely sentimental; it functions as a critical device that exposes structural inequalities.

Cinematic pacing plays a crucial role. The slow rhythm of repetitive work contrasts sharply with the ideological promise of technological acceleration. This temporal disjunction encourages viewers to question narratives of efficiency and innovation that obscure labour exploitation. The film thus produces what cultural theorists describe as critical spectatorship: an awareness of the social structures embedded in representation.

Ultimately, the film gestures toward transformation by destabilizing dominant perceptions of digital labour. By revealing that AI systems depend on undervalued human effort, it reframes technological advancement as a social process shaped by class relations and global inequalities. The act of making labour visible becomes itself a political intervention.

Labour, Representation, and Power Under Digital Capitalism

Through Marxist and cultural film theory lenses, the film portrays digital capitalism as a system that commodifies not only physical effort but also perception, judgment, and emotion. Labour becomes fragmented into micro-tasks, while representation functions as a mechanism of ideological concealment: viewers and users encounter seamless technological outputs rather than the human labour behind them.

By reversing this concealment, the film challenges dominant narratives of automation and technological neutrality. It reveals that digital infrastructures are sustained by human bodies, cultural interpretations, and unequal power relations. The politics of cinematic visibility therefore mirrors the politics of labour itself—what is seen, valued, and recognized within systems of production.

Conclusion:

The film visualizes invisible labour by transforming data annotation into a cinematic subject, exposing its emotional intensity and structural marginalization. Through its representational strategies, it critiques the cultural devaluation of labour under digital capitalism while fostering critical empathy in viewers. By making hidden work perceptible, the film not only documents labour but also reshapes how technological systems—and the human effort behind them—are understood.

Task : 3

Film Form, Structure, and Digital Culture in Humans in the Loop

Humans in the Loop uses cinematic form as a critical lens to examine the philosophical and social implications of digital culture and human-AI interaction. Through camera work, editing, sequencing, sound, and the contrast between natural and digital spaces, the film communicates the complexities of labour, identity, and technological mediation.

Natural Imagery vs. Digital Spaces

One of the most striking formal choices in the film is its juxtaposition of natural and digital environments. Wide shots of open landscapes, human gestures, and organic spaces contrast sharply with claustrophobic frames of data labs, screens, and artificial interfaces.

This visual opposition operates as a system of signification (film semiotics) that conveys the tension between human experience and technologically mediated perception. Natural imagery symbolizes embodied, contextual knowledge—experience grounded in the physical and social world—while digital spaces represent abstraction, codification, and algorithmic control.

For example, scenes of workers annotating images of natural phenomena highlight how human interpretation translates the richness of lived reality into discrete data points. This contrast raises broader philosophical concerns about the limits of AI in capturing subjective experience and underscores how human knowledge remains essential within digital systems.

Camera Techniques and Editing

The film employs a combination of close-ups, over-the-shoulder shots, and high-angle perspectives to communicate the immersive and isolating aspects of digital labour. Close-ups of workers’ hands and screens emphasize precision, repetition, and embodied labour, while high-angle shots of the lab create a sense of surveillance and systematization.

Editing choices—rhythmic cuts between workers, AI interfaces, and outcomes—highlight temporal fragmentation. The pace of editing mirrors the repetitive, segmented nature of annotation work, reinforcing viewers’ awareness of labour as both cognitively and emotionally demanding. Cross-cutting between human gestures and algorithmic outputs semiotically links labour to the consequences of technological action, showing that human interpretation is inseparable from machine “intelligence.”

Sound and Aesthetic Choices

Sound design in Humans in the Loop also plays a critical role in shaping perception. Ambient office noises—clicks, keystrokes, murmured conversations—contrast with digital sound cues like notification pings or AI-generated voiceovers. This sonic layering represents the coexistence and tension between human and machine activity, emphasizing the human presence that underpins technological systems.

The absence of music in some sequences amplifies the monotony of labour, creating an immersive, almost meditative experience for the viewer. This aesthetic strategy aligns with formalist theory, showing how sound—or silence—constructs meaning and emotional resonance without explicit exposition.

Labour, Identity, and Digital Culture

The interplay of visual and auditory codes communicates philosophical questions about the human condition in a digital age. By situating embodied labour within highly mediated digital spaces, the film semiotically encodes identity as relational and contingent: the worker’s knowledge, judgment, and affective engagement are central to AI functionality yet rendered invisible within broader technological narratives.

Natural imagery and spatial contrast remind viewers of the human scale of work and knowledge, challenging assumptions of automation and technological neutrality. Cinematic techniques emphasize that digital culture is not simply a technical domain but a sociocultural system shaped by human effort, interpretation, and positionality.

Structuralist and Narrative Implications

From a structuralist perspective, the film constructs meaning through recurring motifs and oppositions: nature vs. technology, visibility vs. invisibility, labour vs. automation. Narrative sequencing highlights cause-effect relationships between human annotation, AI decision-making, and social consequences, creating a semiotic chain that exposes the interdependence of humans and machines.

By analyzing these codes, it becomes clear that film form itself functions as an argument: it visually and aurally demonstrates that digital culture is socially mediated, morally contingent, and epistemically situated.

Conclusion:

Humans in the Loop leverages cinematic form to communicate deep philosophical concerns about digital culture, human labour, and AI. Through the interplay of natural and digital spaces, strategic camera work, editing rhythms, and layered sound, the film conveys the embodied, interpretive, and relational nature of knowledge in technological systems. Structuralist and formalist analysis reveals that these aesthetic choices are not merely stylistic but essential to understanding how labour, identity, and digital culture intersect, making the invisible visible and the abstract concrete.

References : 

 Barad, Dilip. (2026). WORKSHEET FILM SCREENING ARANYA SAHAY'S HUMANS IN THE LOOP. 10.13140/RG.2.2.11775.06568. 

 Shorts Now. “Artificial Intelligence Explained: Human in the Loop Movie in Hindi | AI Aur Human Ka Future.” YouTube, 9 Nov. 2025, www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-vVMk-rytM.

Thinking Activity:- Plagiarism and Academic Integrity

This blog about plagiarism and academic integrity. 

Thinking Activity:- Research and Writing

Hello Everyone. 

National Workshop on Academic Writing – 2026

 Hello Everyone...! 

This blog is about my participation in the National Workshop on Academic Writing organised by the Department of English, Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University (MKBU), under the Promotion of Higher Education Knowledge Consortium (KCG), Government of Gujarat. Conducted over five intensive days, the workshop brought together eminent scholars and academic experts to deliberate on academic writing, ethical engagement with artificial intelligence, research methodology, publication standards, UGC NET preparation, and academic career development. Through plenary lectures, interactive discussions, and practical demonstrations, the programme provided valuable insights into the production, communication, and validation of scholarly knowledge. The sessions not only deepened my understanding of research writing and academic ethics but also enhanced my critical awareness of contemporary academic practices. Overall, the workshop proved to be intellectually stimulating and significantly contributed to my academic development.

🔷 Inaugural Ceremony :

The Department of English at Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University organised the National Workshop on Academic Writing under the aegis of the Promotion of Higher Education Knowledge Consortium (KCG), Government of Gujarat. The inaugural ceremony was attended by university authorities, invited scholars, faculty members, research scholars, and students. The programme was effectively anchored by Ms. Prakruti Bhatt, Research Scholar and Visiting Faculty in the Department of English.

The ceremony opened with a formal welcome, followed by the University Song and prayer. As a symbolic gesture honouring the pursuit of knowledge, the dignitaries were welcomed on stage through the ceremonial presentation of books.

Among the distinguished dignitaries present were the Honourable Vice-Chancellor Prof. (Dr.) B. B. Ramanuj, In-Charge Registrar Dr. Bhavesh Jani, Dean of the Faculty of Arts Dr. Kishor Joshi, and invited resource persons Prof. (Dr.) Paresh Joshi and Dr. Kalyan Chattopaadhyaay.

The welcome address was delivered by Prof. (Dr.) Dilip Barad, who outlined the objectives and structure of the workshop. He addressed the contemporary academic need to balance human intelligence with artificial intelligence and explained that the workshop would focus on academic writing skills, responsible AI use, research aptitude, NET/JRF preparation, and the creation of a digital resource hub for English studies.

In his plenary address, Prof. (Dr.) Paresh Joshi discussed the historical development of writing practices and emphasised the need to preserve human creativity and critical thinking in the era of generative AI. He highlighted the foundational role of academic writing for scholars in language and literature.

Dr. Kalyan Chattopaadhyaay, in his plenary lecture, traced the tradition of academic writing in India from ancient knowledge systems to contemporary educational frameworks such as NEP 2020 and NCF 2023. He emphasised the importance of multilingualism, indigenous knowledge traditions, and inclusive academic practices.

Dr. Kishor Joshi presented statistical insights related to research productivity, publication standards, and funding trends in India. He underscored the responsibility of educators and researchers to strengthen academic writing and improve research quality.

The ceremony concluded with the presentation of tokens of appreciation to the invited speakers by the Honourable Vice-Chancellor, followed by a formal vote of thanks acknowledging dignitaries, organisers, participants, and volunteers.

1 Day : 1 Session

Session Title: Academic Writing and Prompt Engineering

Resource Person: Prof. (Dr.) Paresh Joshi, Professor, Veer Narmad South Gujarat University

The session began with a formal introduction of the resource person, highlighting his extensive academic experience and significant contributions to English Language Teaching, Applied Linguistics, Phonetics, and academic writing.

In the opening segment, Prof. Joshi explained the essential nature of academic writing by distinguishing it from creative or literary writing. Using illustrative examples, he clarified that academic writing belongs to the domain of knowledge production and therefore must remain objective, evidence-based, logical, and structured, unlike literary writing, which is often expressive and imaginative.

He described academic writing as an ongoing scholarly conversation in which a researcher first engages with existing literature, interprets established perspectives, and then contributes original insights supported by evidence. The writing process was explained as a systematic progression involving planning, drafting, peer review, revision, proofreading, submission, and feedback.

The session emphasised several fundamental principles of effective academic writing, including the use of formal language, clarity of expression, conciseness, precision in argumentation, logical organisation of ideas, careful formulation of claims, and the development of clear thesis statements.

In the latter part of the session, Prof. Joshi introduced prompt engineering as an emerging skill in the context of AI-assisted academic work. He explained that prompt engineering involves crafting clear and specific instructions to obtain accurate and relevant responses from AI tools. Various prompting strategies were discussed, including zero-shot, one-shot, few-shot, role-based, and audience-oriented prompting techniques.

He also addressed the ethical dimensions of AI use in academic contexts, cautioning against excessive dependence on AI-generated content. Participants were advised to verify AI outputs critically, as such tools may produce inaccurate or misleading information. AI was recommended as a supportive aid for tasks such as language editing, idea generation, and structural refinement, but never as a replacement for human reasoning or originality.

The session concluded with participant feedback, where students appreciated the clarity of explanation, practical illustrations, and balanced perspective on integrating AI responsibly into academic writing practices. 

1 Day :– 2 Session & 2 Day  :– 1 Session

Session Title: Academic Writing in English for Advanced Learners – I & II
Resource Person: Dr. Kalyan Chattopadhyay, ELT Specialist and UGC Master Trainer, Bankim Sardar College

These two sessions provided a comprehensive and methodologically grounded exploration of academic writing as both a structured and rhetorical scholarly practice. The resource person examined how academic knowledge is constructed, articulated, and validated through disciplined writing.

At the beginning of the sessions, the defining characteristics of academic writing—formality, objectivity, clarity, and precision—were discussed in detail. Participants were shown how these features operate within research papers through appropriate tone, vocabulary selection, sentence structure, and citation practices. Emphasis was placed on framing clear research questions, formulating hypotheses, and interpreting evidence rather than relying on personal opinion or unsupported assertions.

A detailed explanation of research paper structure followed, highlighting the distinction between presenting findings and interpreting them. The importance of methodological clarity, evidence-based argumentation, and systematic organisation of ideas was strongly emphasised. Participants were guided to present research procedures, data, and analysis transparently while maintaining logical coherence throughout their writing.

A major focus of the sessions was authorial identity in academic writing. Drawing on theoretical perspectives, the speaker explained that academic writing is not entirely impersonal; rather, researchers must make conscious decisions about how visible they wish to be in their texts. Strategic use of first-person expressions was discussed as a means of establishing clarity, responsibility, and scholarly authority without compromising academic formality. Participants were encouraged to reflect on how authorial presence varies across disciplines and rhetorical contexts.

The sessions also devoted considerable attention to hedging as a crucial feature of scholarly discourse. Through examples from published research, participants learned how cautious language—such as “may,” “suggests,” and “appears to”—allows scholars to present claims responsibly, acknowledge limitations, and respect alternative interpretations. The role of hedging in maintaining intellectual balance and credibility was carefully explained.

Another key component was academic attribution and citation practice. Citation was presented not merely as a technical requirement but as a rhetorical strategy for positioning research within existing scholarly conversations. The sessions clarified the distinction between integral and non-integral citations, the function of reporting verbs, and the importance of synthesising multiple sources rather than listing them separately. Participants were guided to identify research gaps and scholarly debates through structured literature review practices.

In the concluding segment, attention was given to writing effective research conclusions that summarise findings, highlight significance, and responsibly articulate scholarly contributions. Participants were encouraged to adapt their writing style according to disciplinary expectations while maintaining a consistent academic voice.

Overall, the sessions provided a deeper understanding of academic writing as a disciplined intellectual practice. They strengthened participants’ ability to manage authorial voice, apply hedging effectively, and employ citation strategies that enhance both clarity and credibility in scholarly communication. 

2 Day :- 2 Session & 3 Day :– 2 Session

Session Title: Academic Writing and BAWE Corpus – I & II

Mode: Online

Resource Person: Dr. Clement Ndoricimpa, Teacher-Researcher and Lecturer, École Normale Supérieure du Burundi

These sessions offered detailed and practice-oriented guidance on preparing research papers suitable for publication in internationally indexed journals. The resource person addressed both the technical requirements of academic writing and the ethical responsibilities associated with scholarly publication.

The sessions began with an explanation of the importance of publishing in Scopus- and Web of Science–indexed journals. These indexing platforms were presented as major global databases that enhance the visibility, credibility, and impact of academic research. Participants were informed that publication in indexed journals contributes to professional recognition, citation impact, funding opportunities, and academic career advancement. Emphasis was placed on the rigorous standards maintained by such journals and the need for researchers to align their work with these expectations.

A major portion of the sessions focused on the structure of a well-developed research paper. While acknowledging disciplinary variation, the speaker explained that most strong research articles follow the IMRD structure—Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion. Particular attention was given to writing an effective introduction, described as the most decisive component of a research paper. The introduction was explained through a three-move model: establishing the research area, identifying gaps or unresolved issues in existing scholarship, and clearly presenting the purpose of the present study. Participants were guided to maintain logical continuity across these moves.

The sessions strongly emphasised the importance of references in academic writing. The speaker repeatedly noted that unsupported claims weaken scholarly credibility. Participants were encouraged to support all generalisations with relevant and recent sources, as outdated or insufficient references reduce the academic value of research.

Attention was also given to academic language use. Participants learned that formal tone, coherence, clarity, and precision are essential for effective scholarly communication. Logical connectors and discipline-appropriate vocabulary were discussed as tools for strengthening argumentative flow and conceptual clarity.

Ethical issues formed a central component of the sessions. The responsible use of artificial intelligence in academic writing was discussed alongside the serious implications of plagiarism. Plagiarism was defined as the misappropriation of another person’s ideas or language and was presented as a major violation of academic integrity that can lead to rejection from indexed journals. Participants were encouraged to maintain intellectual ownership and apply careful judgment when using digital tools.

The sessions also introduced reference management practices. The speaker demonstrated the use of Mendeley as a tool for organising references and maintaining citation consistency. Major citation styles such as APA, MLA, Chicago, and Vancouver were explained, along with guidance on verifying bibliographic accuracy.

Overall, the sessions provided comprehensive instruction on writing publishable research papers, meeting international journal standards, avoiding plagiarism, using AI responsibly, and managing references effectively. They offered both technical clarity and ethical orientation, strengthening participants’ preparedness for scholarly publication.

3 Day Three  :- 1 Session

Session Title: Detecting AI Hallucination and Using AI with Integrity

Resource Person: Prof. (Dr.) Nigam Dave, Professor, School of Liberal Studies, Pandit Deendayal Energy University

This session critically examined the capabilities, limitations, and ethical implications of Artificial Intelligence in academic research and writing. The resource person focused on how AI functions, why it can produce unreliable information, and how scholars can employ it responsibly within academic practice.

The lecture began by emphasising that although AI offers powerful assistance, it cannot replace scholarly judgment. Participants were reminded that academic knowledge requires verification, reflection, and critical evaluation rather than unquestioned acceptance of generated information. The session situated contemporary AI use within the broader historical evolution of knowledge transmission, from oral traditions and print culture to the digital information age.

A central theme of the lecture was AI hallucination, defined as the production of plausible but inaccurate or fabricated information. The speaker explained that AI systems generate responses based on statistical prediction rather than factual verification, which makes them capable of producing confident yet unreliable academic content. Particular caution was advised for qualitative disciplines, where interpretive language can be easily imitated without factual grounding.

The session identified common indicators of unreliable AI-generated content, including vague claims without references, fabricated citations, and inaccurate attribution of ideas. Participants were encouraged to verify sources independently and maintain intellectual responsibility for all academic work.

The lecture also addressed bias in AI systems, explaining that algorithmic outputs reflect patterns present in training data and therefore may reproduce cultural, historical, or conceptual bias. This reinforced the necessity of critical engagement when using AI in scholarly contexts.

Despite these concerns, the speaker emphasised that AI should not be rejected but used strategically. Appropriate academic applications were demonstrated, including proofreading, formatting, preliminary idea evaluation, and procedural support in research tasks. AI was presented as an assistive tool that enhances efficiency while leaving interpretation, argumentation, and intellectual ownership to the researcher.

The session concluded with the reminder that technology must remain subordinate to human judgment. Responsible academic practice requires verification, ethical awareness, and sustained critical thinking, ensuring that AI supports rather than undermines scholarly integrity.

4 Day :- 1 session & 2 session  

5 Day :- 3 Session & 4 Session 

Session Title: From Classroom to an Academic Career

Resource Person: Dr. Kalyani Vallath, CEO and Founder, Vallath Education

The sessions conducted over two days provided an integrated perspective on academic writing, UGC NET preparation, literary studies, and long-term academic career development. The resource person presented a comprehensive framework that combined intellectual training with personal and professional growth.

The sessions began by emphasising that education should inspire curiosity and intellectual engagement rather than merely transmit information. Academic writing was presented as a learned skill developed through sustained practice, reflective thinking, and structured planning. Participants were encouraged to view writing as a process that evolves through questioning, drafting, revision, and refinement.

Several practical writing strategies were introduced, including free writing, mind mapping, reverse planning, and goal-oriented study methods. These techniques were presented as tools to help learners organise ideas, overcome hesitation, and develop clarity in academic expression. Artificial Intelligence was discussed as a supportive resource for outlining and reviewing work, while intellectual responsibility was firmly retained by the writer.

A significant portion of the sessions focused on UGC NET preparation. The examination was explained as an assessment of reasoning ability, conceptual clarity, and analytical thinking rather than memorisation alone. Participants were trained to analyse question patterns, identify distractor options, and apply logical inference while answering. Emphasis was placed on maintaining composure and approaching questions with pedagogical understanding.

The sessions also provided a structured overview of English literary history, literary criticism, and major theoretical approaches. Key literary periods were discussed alongside influential critics and theoretical movements, offering participants a conceptual map of the discipline. The importance of connecting literary knowledge with analytical interpretation was highlighted throughout.

Career planning formed another important component of the sessions. Participants were encouraged to cultivate a growth-oriented academic mindset, manage time and resources effectively, and develop a distinctive scholarly voice. The concept of the Zone of Proximal Development was introduced to emphasise continuous learning beyond one’s comfort zone.

Overall, the sessions offered both practical guidance and motivational direction. They strengthened participants’ confidence in academic writing, clarified strategies for competitive examinations, and provided a coherent vision for sustained academic development.

I would like to convey my sincere appreciation to everyone whose dedication and hard work contributed to the success of this event. I am deeply grateful to Prof. (Dr.) Dilip Barad, Head of the Department of English and Workshop Convenor at Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University, for his inspiring leadership, academic mentorship, and careful planning. I also extend my heartfelt thanks to the Co-convenors, Ms. Megha Trivedi and Ms. Prakruti Bhatt, PhD Scholars and Visiting Faculty in the Department of English, for their dedicated coordination, continuous support, and committed organisational efforts throughout the workshop.

I gratefully acknowledge the support and patronage of the Promotion of Higher Education Knowledge Consortium, Government of Gujarat, whose assistance made this academic programme possible. Finally, I sincerely appreciate the valuable help and enthusiastic cooperation of the students of the Department of English, whose involvement greatly contributed to the smooth conduct of the programme.

References:

DoE-MKBU. (2026a, January 27). Kalyan Chattopadhyay | Session 1 & 2 | National Workshop on Academic Writing | English -MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJ6cCYj709Q

DoE-MKBU. (2026b, January 27). Paresh Joshi | Session 1 & 2 | National Workshop on Academic Writing | English - MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7VXzNSys38

DoE-MKBU. (2026c, January 28). Dr. Clement Ndoricimpa | Academic Writing Workshop | English - MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7ii6l_MBZs

DoE-MKBU. (2026d, January 28). Dr. Kalyan Chattopadhyay | Session 3 & 4 | National Workshop on Academic Writing | English - MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuOouQx_adM

DoE-MKBU. (2026e, January 29). Dr. Clement Ndoricimpa - 2 | National Workshop on Academic Writing | English - MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4IHwdT2kdk

DoE-MKBU. (2026f, January 29). Dr Nigam Dave | Session 1 & 2 | National Workshop on Academic Writing | English - MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJPlO9i96AM

DoE-MKBU. (2026g, January 30). Dr Kalyani Vallath - Part 1/4 | National Workshop on Academic Writing | English - MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E79dIfx0IgI

DoE-MKBU. (2026h, January 30). Dr Kalyani Vallath - Part 2/4 | English - MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCVs8nN3qBQ

DoE-MKBU. (2026i, January 31). Dr Kalyani Vallath - Part 3/4 | English - MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNAAMzD3OwQ

DoE-MKBU. (2026j, January 31). Dr Kalyani Vallath - Part 4/4 | English - MKBU [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HUyFI4Eh7Y

Thank you. 

Thematic Exploration of Love, Corruption, Ambition, and Revolution in Revolution 2020 by Chetan Bhagat

Hello Everyone!

This blog presents a thematic reflection on Revolution 2020 by Chetan Bhagat, prepared as part of a thinking activity assigned by Dr. Dilip Barad. The analysis explores the novel’s major themes—love, corruption, ambition, and revolution—by examining character development, moral conflicts, and social realities portrayed in the story. Through the journeys of Gopal, Raghav, and Aarti, the study highlights how personal choices are shaped by societal pressures and ethical dilemmas. The purpose of this work is to deepen understanding of the novel’s message about integrity, sacrifice, and the possibility of change within a flawed system.

On this task you want to more clarity so visit sir's blog Revolution 2020 and worksheet. 

1. Theme of Love :

Relationship Development of Gopal, Raghav, and Aarti

The relationship between Gopal, Raghav, and Aarti develops from simple childhood affection into a complex emotional conflict shaped by ambition and morality. In the beginning, Gopal and Aarti share an innocent bond formed during their school years, where friendship gradually transforms into love. However, this harmony changes when academic competition enters their lives. Raghav’s success and confidence attract Aarti, creating emotional distance between her and Gopal and introducing rivalry between the two friends. Later, when Gopal gains wealth and status, Aarti reconnects with him, which creates a deeper emotional conflict because she is now torn between moral integrity and material stability. Ultimately, the relationship reaches resolution through sacrifice when Gopal steps aside for Aarti’s happiness with Raghav. Thus, the evolution of their relationship shows that love in the novel is shaped by social status, personal ambition, and moral awareness, rather than emotion alone.

Key elements visible in this development include

• transformation from friendship to romantic love

• rivalry caused by ambition and success

• emotional conflict between morality and security

• final resolution through sacrifice. 

Nature of Gopal’s Sacrifice

Gopal’s decision to sacrifice his love reflects both nobility and guilt, making it one of the most significant moral moments in the novel. His choice is noble because he prioritizes Aarti’s happiness over his own desires, demonstrating emotional maturity and selflessness. At the same time, his decision is deeply influenced by guilt arising from his corrupt path to success. He recognizes that his achievements are built on unethical practices and therefore considers himself unworthy of true love. This realization transforms his love from possessive desire into moral responsibility. His sacrifice becomes an act of redemption, allowing him to regain inner peace even though he loses personal happiness. Through this decision, the novel presents love as a force capable of producing ethical transformation.

Important aspects of this sacrifice include

• realization of moral failure

• prioritizing another’s happiness

• transformation from selfish to selfless love

• redemption through emotional loss. 

Aarti’s Changing Feelings

Aarti’s shifting affection reflects both societal influence and personal emotional confusion. Her attraction to Raghav is partly based on admiration for his intelligence, ideals, and sense of purpose, which represent moral strength. However, her closeness to Gopal later in the story is influenced by his financial success and stability, reflecting the social value placed on security and status. This dual attraction shows how individuals often struggle between emotional attachment and practical considerations. Aarti’s character therefore represents the pressures faced by ordinary people in a competitive society where relationships are shaped by success, expectations, and uncertainty. Her emotional indecision highlights the human tendency to seek both comfort and meaning in love.

This portrayal reveals

• influence of social expectations on relationships

• conflict between idealism and stability

• emotional vulnerability and confusion

• realistic representation of human choice

Diary Entry from Gopal’s Perspective

Date: The day I let her go

Today I made the hardest decision of my life. I have always loved Aarti, from the days when we were children sharing dreams that felt simple and pure. But somewhere along the way, I lost myself. I chased success, power, and respect — and in doing so, I lost the right to love her honestly.

When I looked at Raghav, I saw a man who still had integrity. He may struggle, but his heart is clean. Mine is not. I built my success on corruption, and every achievement reminds me of what I sacrificed to gain it.

Aarti deserves peace, not a life shadowed by my compromises. If love means wanting happiness for the person you love, then letting her go is the only truth I can offer.

Tonight my heart is broken, but for the first time in years, my conscience is quiet.

— Gopal

When Gopal decides to let Aarti marry Raghav, his emotional state reflects conflict, guilt, and moral awakening. He experiences deep sorrow because he loses the person he loves most, yet he also feels a sense of ethical clarity for the first time in his life. He understands that love cannot exist honestly when it is supported by corruption and compromise. His decision is guided by the belief that true love seeks the happiness of the beloved rather than personal possession. Through this moment, Gopal moves from emotional attachment to moral responsibility, showing that sacrifice can lead to inner transformation even when it results in personal loss.

His emotional condition can be understood through

• grief caused by separation

• guilt for unethical success

• desire for Aarti’s happiness

• moral awakening and acceptance. 

Possibility of Love in a Corrupt Society

The novel presents a critical view of love in a society dominated by corruption and ambition. When success is measured by wealth and power, relationships become influenced by material values rather than emotional sincerity. Corruption weakens trust, while ambition creates rivalry and competition, both of which damage emotional bonds. However, the story also suggests that genuine love can survive if it is grounded in integrity and sacrifice. Gopal’s final decision demonstrates that love becomes meaningful only when guided by moral awareness. Therefore, the novel does not reject love entirely but redefines it as an ethical choice rather than a romantic achievement.

This idea is supported by

• conflict between material success and emotional truth

• importance of integrity in relationships

• role of sacrifice in sustaining love

• moral definition of genuine affection. 

Meaning of True Love in the Novel

The novel portrays true love as selfless, morally conscious, and sacrificial rather than possessive or emotional alone. True love is defined by the willingness to prioritize another person’s well-being even at the cost of personal happiness. Gopal’s decision to step aside becomes the clearest representation of this idea because his love is expressed through renunciation rather than union. In this way, the novel suggests that true love is not about gaining someone but about acting ethically toward them. Love becomes a measure of character and integrity, linking emotional experience with moral responsibility.

Characteristics of true love shown in the novel include

• selflessness and sacrifice

• moral awareness

• emotional maturity

• prioritizing another’s happiness

2. Theme of Corruption :

Nature of Corruption in the Novel

The novel presents corruption as a powerful and deeply rooted social system that shapes success, opportunity, and personal morality. It portrays a world in which dishonest practices are normalized and ethical behavior is often punished. Through the contrasting journeys of Gopal and Raghav, corruption is shown not merely as individual wrongdoing but as a structural force operating within education, politics, and business. Success becomes closely linked to manipulation, influence, and financial power, while integrity results in struggle and sacrifice. The narrative therefore critiques a social order where moral values are overshadowed by material gain and survival pressures.

This portrayal emphasizes

• corruption as systemic rather than personal

• success tied to unethical practices

• conflict between morality and survival

• social acceptance of dishonest behavior

Comparison of Gopal and Raghav’s Paths to Success

The novel sharply contrasts Gopal’s acceptance of corruption with Raghav’s resistance to it, presenting two opposing responses to an unjust system. Gopal turns toward corruption after repeated academic failures and economic hardship, believing that survival and social respect require compromise. With political support and bribery, he establishes a private college and gains wealth, status, and influence. In contrast, Raghav chooses an idealistic path based on honesty and social responsibility. He pursues journalism to expose corruption and promote reform, but this choice leads to professional obstacles, financial instability, and personal risk. Through these opposing trajectories, the novel highlights the ethical cost of success and the personal cost of integrity.

The comparison reveals

• Gopal’s success through manipulation and power

• Raghav’s struggle through honesty and resistance

• material reward versus moral fulfillment

• pragmatic ambition versus ethical idealism

Systemic Nature of Corruption in Education and Politics

The novel depicts corruption as embedded within institutions rather than limited to individual behavior. In the education sector, bribery, donations, and political influence determine opportunities, turning learning into a commercial enterprise. In politics, leaders misuse power for personal gain, protect illegal practices, and silence opposition. These interconnected systems create an environment where corruption sustains itself through networks of influence and mutual benefit. Individuals who attempt to challenge the system face threats, exclusion, or failure, demonstrating how corruption becomes self-perpetuating. By presenting corruption as institutionalized, the novel suggests that moral change requires structural reform rather than individual effort alone.

This systemic portrayal includes

• commercialization of education

• misuse of political authority

• protection of corrupt networks

• difficulty of individual resistance

Meaning of Gopal’s Disillusionment

Gopal’s eventual dissatisfaction with his corrupt success reveals the psychological consequences of unethical achievement. Although he gains wealth and social recognition, he experiences emotional emptiness and moral conflict. His realization that material success cannot provide inner peace marks a turning point in his character development. This disillusionment indicates that corruption may offer external rewards but cannot resolve inner ethical tension. His awareness of moral failure prepares him for transformation, showing that recognition of wrongdoing is the first step toward redemption. Through Gopal’s experience, the novel argues that corruption ultimately damages personal identity and emotional fulfillment.

His disillusionment reflects

• conflict between wealth and conscience

• awareness of moral compromise

• emotional emptiness despite success

• potential for ethical transformation

Debate Perspective — “Corruption is the only way to succeed”

The novel presents arguments both supporting and challenging the claim that corruption is necessary for success in a flawed system. On one hand, Gopal’s rise demonstrates how manipulation and influence provide rapid advancement and social power. The system appears structured to reward those who adapt to its unethical norms. On the other hand, Raghav’s resistance shows that integrity, though difficult, offers moral legitimacy and long-term social value. The narrative does not fully justify corruption but exposes the pressures that make it appear inevitable. It ultimately encourages critical reflection on whether success without ethics can truly be considered success.

Debate perspectives include

• corruption as practical survival strategy

• integrity as moral resistance

• short-term gain versus long-term values

• success defined materially versus ethically

Reflection of Real-World Issues

The portrayal of corruption in the novel mirrors real societal challenges where education, governance, and economic opportunity are influenced by power and wealth. By showing how institutions enable unethical practices, the story reflects public concerns about inequality, commercialization, and misuse of authority. The narrative’s realism lies in its depiction of ordinary individuals navigating a system that pressures them to compromise their values. Through this reflection, the novel connects personal stories with broader social realities, making corruption not only a narrative theme but also a social critique.

Real-world relevance appears through

• inequality in access to opportunity

• commercialization of public institutions

• political misuse of power

• moral dilemmas faced by individuals

Possibility of Fighting Corruption

Through Raghav’s journey, the novel presents both the difficulty and necessity of resisting systemic corruption. His efforts to expose wrongdoing demonstrate courage and ethical commitment, yet his struggles show that individual resistance faces strong institutional opposition. The narrative suggests that while complete victory may be difficult, resistance remains meaningful because it preserves moral values and inspires future change. Success in fighting corruption is therefore portrayed not only as structural transformation but also as moral perseverance.

This perspective highlights

• difficulty of challenging entrenched systems

• importance of ethical courage

• value of persistence despite obstacles

• moral success beyond material outcomes

3. Theme of Ambition :

Nature of Ambition in the Novel

Ambition is a central force that drives the actions and life paths of both Gopal and Raghav, yet it manifests in contrasting forms that reveal the ethical complexity of success. The novel presents ambition not simply as a desire to achieve goals but as a moral test shaped by personal background, social pressure, and opportunity. Gopal’s ambition is directed toward wealth, power, and social mobility, while Raghav’s ambition focuses on justice, reform, and social responsibility. Through this contrast, the narrative examines whether ambition should prioritize personal advancement or collective good. The story suggests that ambition becomes ethically meaningful only when balanced with integrity and moral awareness.

This thematic presentation emphasizes

• ambition as a driving force of character development

• conflict between material success and ethical responsibility

• influence of society on personal goals

• ambition as a test of moral character

Motivation Behind Gopal and Raghav’s Ambitions

The ambitions of Gopal and Raghav arise from different emotional and social motivations, shaping the direction of their lives. Gopal’s ambition grows from insecurity, poverty, and repeated academic failure, leading him to equate success with financial power and social respect. His desire for recognition and stability pushes him toward pragmatic choices that prioritize results over ethics. In contrast, Raghav’s ambition is motivated by moral conviction and a desire to challenge injustice. His commitment to social change emerges from a belief that individuals have responsibility toward society. Thus, their ambitions reflect two distinct responses to the same social environment: adaptation through compromise and resistance through integrity.

Their motivations reveal

• Gopal’s ambition driven by insecurity and survival

• Raghav’s ambition driven by ideals and responsibility

• pursuit of status versus pursuit of justice

• personal advancement contrasted with social commitment

Influence of Ambition on Relationships and Decisions

Ambition significantly shapes both characters’ relationships and life decisions, demonstrating how goals influence emotional bonds and moral choices. Gopal’s pursuit of wealth leads him to accept corruption, which ultimately distances him from genuine emotional fulfillment and affects his relationship with Aarti. His decisions prioritize success even when they conflict with ethical values. Conversely, Raghav’s dedication to reform causes him to sacrifice personal comfort and emotional stability, influencing his relationship with Aarti by placing social duty above personal life. Through these consequences, the novel shows that ambition not only determines external achievements but also reshapes personal identity and relationships.

This influence is visible through

• ambition guiding major life decisions

• tension between personal relationships and goals

• emotional consequences of ethical choices

• transformation of identity through pursuit of success

Is Ambition Positive or Negative?

The novel presents ambition as morally neutral, suggesting that its value depends on purpose and method rather than existence itself. Ambition becomes constructive when guided by ethical principles and social responsibility, as seen in Raghav’s commitment to reform. However, it becomes destructive when driven solely by personal gain without regard for morality, as illustrated by Gopal’s corrupt path. By presenting both outcomes, the narrative avoids simple judgment and instead encourages reflection on the ethical boundaries of aspiration. Ambition is therefore portrayed as a powerful force that can either elevate character or compromise it.

This balanced portrayal highlights

• ambition as neither inherently good nor bad

• ethical guidance determining its impact

• potential for growth or moral decline

• importance of purpose in defining success

Character Map Comparison — Gopal and Raghav

A comparison of Gopal and Raghav demonstrates how different forms of ambition produce contrasting outcomes and moral consequences. Gopal’s ambition leads to material success but emotional dissatisfaction, while Raghav’s ambition leads to struggle but moral fulfillment. Their journeys illustrate two models of success defined by different value systems.

Comparative understanding includes

• Gopal pursuing wealth and power

• Raghav pursuing social change

• external success versus internal fulfillment

• pragmatic ambition versus ethical ambition

Does Gopal’s Ambition Make Him a Tragic Hero?

Gopal can be interpreted as a tragic hero because his ambition leads him to success at the cost of moral integrity and emotional happiness. His journey follows a pattern of rise, realization, and loss. He achieves wealth and status but ultimately recognizes the emptiness of his accomplishments and sacrifices personal love. This combination of ambition, error, awareness, and suffering aligns with the classical idea of tragedy, where a character’s own choices lead to downfall and moral insight. His transformation from self-interest to self-awareness gives his character depth and moral significance.

This interpretation is supported by

• rise through flawed ambition

• recognition of moral failure

• emotional loss and suffering

• redemption through realization

Relationship Between Ambition, Love, and Corruption

The theme of ambition intersects closely with love and corruption, forming the moral framework of the novel. Gopal’s ambition leads him toward corruption, which ultimately damages his personal relationships and emotional fulfillment. Raghav’s ambition, grounded in integrity, shapes his understanding of love as responsibility rather than possession. Through these interactions, the narrative suggests that ambition influences both moral behavior and emotional experience. Love becomes a measure of ethical worth, while corruption represents the distortion of ambition without moral restraint.

This intersection reveals

• ambition influencing moral choices

• corruption emerging from unchecked desire

• love reflecting ethical character

• success defined by values rather than outcomes. 

4. Theme of Revolution :

The theme of revolution in the novel represents the desire for systemic change in a society affected by corruption, inequality, and misuse of power. Through Raghav’s character, the story presents revolution as a process based on truth, awareness, and moral responsibility rather than violence. At the same time, the novel shows that revolutionary ideals are often weakened by personal ambition, social distractions, and the struggle for survival. Thus, revolution is portrayed both as a hopeful vision and a difficult reality.

Difference Between Raghav’s Vision and Gopal’s Approach

Raghav’s vision of revolution is based on idealism, social responsibility, and ethical courage. He believes that real success lies in transforming unjust systems and creating a fair society. His work in journalism reflects his faith in public awareness as a force for change. In contrast, Gopal follows a practical and materialistic path shaped by insecurity and social pressure. He accepts the existing system and seeks personal advancement within it rather than challenging it. This contrast between idealism and pragmatism highlights the central conflict between moral values and survival.

Key ideas reflected here include

• success defined as social reform versus personal gain

• commitment to truth versus adaptation to corrupt systems

• sacrifice for change versus pursuit of stability

Revolutionary Spirit in the Novel

The novel presents a revolutionary spirit that is sincere yet limited by social reality. Raghav’s persistence, dedication, and willingness to suffer for his beliefs represent genuine activism and moral conviction. However, the narrative also shows how revolutionary energy is overshadowed by love, ambition, and societal indifference. As a result, revolution appears not as an immediate transformation but as an ongoing struggle shaped by resistance and compromise. The story therefore portrays revolution as both inspiring and challenging, emphasizing effort rather than achievement.

Important elements of this portrayal include

• revolution as a continuous process

• conflict between personal life and social duty

• influence of societal priorities on reform

Meaning of the Title “Revolution 2020”

The title symbolizes both aspiration and critique. The word “revolution” represents the dream of a transformed society based on justice and equality, while the reference to a specific time suggests urgency and expectation. However, the narrative reveals that true transformation cannot occur within a fixed deadline or slogan. The title therefore reflects the gap between ideal vision and practical reality, reinforcing the idea that change requires long-term commitment rather than symbolic promises.

Significance of Raghav’s Editorial

Raghav’s editorial “Because Enough is Enough” expresses the belief that social change begins when individuals refuse to accept injustice. It emphasizes awareness, responsibility, and collective action as essential forces of transformation. The message remains relevant to contemporary issues such as corruption, inequality, and misuse of authority because it calls for citizens to demand transparency and accountability. The editorial demonstrates that revolution begins with moral awakening rather than dramatic action.

Core ideas expressed in the editorial include

• rejection of injustice as normal

• importance of public participation

• change through ethical courage

Revolution Beginning in Small Cities

Raghav believes revolution must begin in smaller cities such as Varanasi because these communities experience the direct impact of systemic problems. He sees local environments as places where individuals can clearly observe injustice and therefore become motivated to demand change. This perspective highlights the importance of grassroots action and suggests that national transformation grows from local awareness and community responsibility.

Realism or Romanticism in the Portrayal

The portrayal of revolution combines realism and idealism. It is realistic because it shows resistance, failure, and social inertia that hinder reform. At the same time, it contains optimism by presenting moral courage and persistence as meaningful even without immediate success. The novel ultimately suggests that revolution is not a sudden event but a gradual process shaped by ethical awareness, individual responsibility, and collective effort. 

References :

   Barad, D. (2025). Thematic Study of Chetan Bhagat’s “Revolution 2020.” ResearchGate. https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.16765.88807

  Barad, D. (n.d.). Revolution2020. Retrieved February 19, 2026, from https://blog.dilipbarad.com/2021/12/revolution2020.html?m=1

Thank you!