‘How to Date a Fanatic’: Aruni Kashyap’s new novel is hopeful of getting a more tolerant India

How to Date a Fanatic follows Rohit, a young academic from Assam whose life moves between teaching, friendship, desire and loneliness. He teaches English literature first at a Delhi University college and later at a private university outside Delhi. The novel matters because it places intimate relationships inside a hostile social and political climate.

Rohit is closely connected to Minti, a therapist, and Sarfaraz, a model and actor, both also from Assam. He has complicated relationships with Karan, Tarun, Sayan and Dhruv, while trying to recover from unrequited love for Dhruv. These relationships are same-sex, messy and sometimes toxic rather than idealised.

The story begins with humour but becomes increasingly fearful. Rohit and his friends face unsatisfying work, family pressure, loneliness, homophobia and public violence. His private choices cannot stay private because the city’s political upheaval enters ordinary encounters, friendships and relationships.

How to Date a Fanatic is not only a love story because its characters live through a changing and polarised India. Their jobs, friendships and sexual relationships are shaped by public fear, homophobia and political violence. The novel shows that personal life does not remain separate from the country’s conflicts.

A key example comes when Rohit and Karan return from a forgettable first date. In Old Delhi, they watch Kawariyas attack a family’s car because it honked while they blocked traffic. Later, the 2016 Jat agitation brings riots, internet blockades and violence around the capital. These events turn social tension into immediate danger.

The political setting changes how characters understand safety and neutrality. Initial disbelief about the saffron political sweep becomes pervasive fear and trauma. The novel therefore connects desire, friendship and loneliness to wider divisions, showing how public violence can enter ordinary relationships and force private people into political reality.

Two real events bracket the novel’s action. The first is the fateful day in 2014 when a new ruling dispensation came to power in India. The second is the Jats’ agitation for reservation in 2016. Together, they provide the political frame for Rohit’s personal life and relationships.

The 2016 agitation particularly affects the capital and its border areas, which are seared by riots, internet blockades and violence. Earlier, Rohit and Karan encounter another form of public aggression in Old Delhi, where Kawariyas attack a family’s car after it honks at them for blocking traffic. These incidents make political hostility visible in daily life.

The events matter because they undermine the belief that private people can remain untouched by politics. Disbelief after the 2014 political change becomes fear, and fear produces trauma. The novel uses these episodes to show how national divisions can reshape safety, movement, relationships and emotional life.

The novel’s stated political frame stretches from 2014 to 2016, covering roughly two years. The article identifies two major episodes within that span. The first is the arrival of a new ruling dispensation in 2014, and the second is the Jat agitation for reservation in 2016.

These episodes are not distant background details. The 2016 agitation affects Delhi and its border areas through riots, internet blockades and violence. The novel also shows everyday aggression through the attack on a family’s car by Kawariyas after the driver honks at them. Such moments connect large political events with ordinary urban life.

The short timeline gives the novel a sharp sense of escalation. It moves from disbelief about political change toward pervasive fear and trauma. Within those two years and two major episodes, private relationships become harder to protect, and the characters learn that their safety depends on forces beyond their control.

When violence, homophobia and fear become normalised, the characters lose the possibility of feeling fully safe in either public or private life. Their relationships remain emotionally important, but they are often complicated, toxic or shaped by loneliness. The novel asks whether rejecting conventional lives can carry an emotional cost.

Rohit, Minti and Dhruv sometimes arrive unannounced at homes, share wine, cook quietly or stay the night. They may even seek comfort from people responsible for their unhappiness. At the same time, same-sex relationships are rarely safe to announce because society is described as judgmental and homophobic. Public violence adds another layer of danger.

The result is a world where intimacy offers temporary shelter but not lasting security. Commitment-phobic behaviour, unrequited love and fragile bonds coexist with a need for connection. As political fear grows, it becomes trauma, affecting characters in different ways and making their private lives increasingly vulnerable to public hostility.

The characters cannot remain politically neutral because the world around them directly shapes their safety and choices. The novel presents politics not as an abstract debate but as something that enters streets, homes, workplaces and relationships. Private life is therefore implicated even when people do not wish to engage with public events.

Rohit and Karan discover this after their first date, when they witness Kawariyas attacking a family’s car in Old Delhi. The 2016 Jat agitation further brings riots, internet blockades and violence near the capital. These events restrict movement and create fear, while homophobia makes same-sex relationships difficult to disclose.

The mechanism is exposure: public hostility reaches people through ordinary encounters. Initial disbelief about the political shift in 2014 becomes pervasive fear and trauma. The novel suggests that carrying on with love, friendship or work does not create an escape from politics; those activities are already shaped by the surrounding society.

Heteronormativity means treating heterosexual relationships, conventional gender roles and expected family patterns as the normal standard. It shapes LGBTQ people’s choices by pressuring them to fit those patterns or face judgment. In the novel, men and women resist that pressure and refuse to remain in abusive or exploitative relationships.

Most relationships in the story are same-sex, but they are not idealised. They are messy, complicated and sometimes toxic. Characters such as Rohit, Minti and Dhruv seek company through unexpected visits, shared meals or overnight stays. Yet same-sex relationships can rarely be announced because society is filled with homophobia and condemnation. This makes intimacy both necessary and difficult.

The novel presents freedom and loneliness together. Characters reject conventional expectations, but some are commitment-phobic and emotionally isolated. Their relationships can offer comfort without becoming secure. This suggests that escaping heteronormative rules does not automatically remove the need for belonging, stability or protection from social hostility.