I refer to your columnist M Bakri Musa's review of my book which appeared under the heading No Eton of the East .

Bakri has written a very sharp review of the book I wrote at the behest of several Old Boys of the Malay College on the occasion of the college's centenary. Many of Bakri's comments would be valid if the book were primarily intended as a contribution to the scholarly analysis of the history of education in Malaysia.

While hopefully not totally without value for future scholars, the book is intended as a popular history in celebration of the Malay College and a nostalgic record of the journey through the institution of its Old Boys. As such, it is an account seen to a large extent through the eyes of former pupils of the college during the period of 1945 to 1975.

The brief given to me by the book's sponsors was that it should tell the post-war story of the Malay College up to 1975 and that it should not be cluttered with academic citations and footnotes. This explains 'the glaring deficiency' of the book identified by Bakri. He regards the lack of academic references as 'sloppy scholarship, lack of diligence, or sheer laziness'.

Specifically, he particularly regrets my failure to provide 'due credit and referencing' for Bakri's own book. As for the more substantial sources Bakri expected to find, all I can say here is that I wish him better luck than I had if he ever tries to locate them.

I make no apology for my approach even if it falls far short of Bakri's expectation of an 'academic' book. To my mind, the book has to be seen in the context of its purpose. Despite my academic training, I had no qualms in writing it because I thought I understood its objectives. Nevertheless, in doing so, I did not feel that I had to summon a greater generosity of spirit towards the subject than was warranted.

Whatever its shortcomings, and there are quite a few as noted in the book, it was still an important part of the history of 20th century Malaysia and to dismiss it as having the "dubious distinction" of achieving "excellence in an environment sans competition" when "even a dim candle would look bright in a dark room if it were the only candle" is to miss the point.

The title of the book - which is rather different to the one proposed by the author - does promise more than what it delivers. But this title was the choice of the Old Boys who sponsored its writing. It should be noted that the period discussed ends in 1975 and that, as perceived by not a few Old Boys who are passionate about their alma mater, the Malay College was on the decline in the 1970s. This perception was supported by comments made in the Malay College magazine in those years by students who were still at the institution, as cited in the book.

The 'racist' tag given by Bakri to the book's observation that the Malay College did not fare too well under Malay headmasters suggests that he did not read the book carefully. Oddly, given his charge against me of 'racism of the worst kind', he accuses me of 'conveniently' overlooking the fact that 'those Malay headmasters were never given a chance'. Their tenures were indeed short and their appointments were stepping stones to promotion within the ministry. Perhaps Bakri should re-read the chapter in the book where these 'overlooked' points are elaborated.

Bakri also complains that I provide no 'prescription' to overcome the college's current ailments. I do not see myself as the person most suited to tell the college what should be done and what should not. The book, despite its somewhat misleading title, is concerned with the period up to 1975 and does not examine contemporary problems and challenges.

Finally, Bakri refers somewhat bewilderingly to the Universiti Malaya, 'an institution that has been mired in its own controversy recently', as if this is relevant to my book on the Malay College. After all, I was teaching at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, not Universiti Malaya.