Author of Controversial Gandhi Book Finally in India

Courtesy Knopf

Salman Rushdie announced he would not make it to the Jaipur Literature Festival after Indian intelligence agencies said he faced the threat of “elimination” in connection with lingering anger over his novel “Satanic Verses.”

But another author, whose 2011 book on Mahatma Gandhi led to a ban in the Indian state of Gujarat and the cancellation of several promotional events for the book, managed to finally speak about his book in India, although very briefly.

“I am a survivor of a fatwa from that great Gandhian, the chief minister of Gujarat, who banned my book,” said Mr. Lelyveld on Saturday, referring to the move last year by Chief Minister Narendra Modi.

“This is the first Indian audience I’ve faced since my book came out and by far the biggest audience I’ve faced so it’s wonderful to be here.”

Hindu groups opposed his book, “Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle With India,” after some reviews highlighted correspondence between Gandhi and a South African friend, and accused the author of suggesting Gandhi was gay. Mr. Lelyveld didn’t shy away from the controversy.

“I am not the Joseph Lelyveld who wrote a book on the secret sex life of Mahatma Gandhi,” he said. “What I attempted to do was write a book about Gandhi’s life as a social reformer.”

Mr. Lelyveld was speaking on a panel about the legacies of Mahatmi Gandhi, who used nonviolent protests to appeal to the sense of morality of the oppressor, and B.R. Ambedkar, father of India’s Constitution and a Dalit, as the caste group formerly known as untouchables is now known, who saw the law as key to fighting oppression.

Historian Sunil Khilnani, who was also on the panel, positioned the Gandhian way of protest as a way to “embarrass the powerful into acting differently,” while Ambedkar, who had little faith that after thousands of years upper-caste Hindus would suddenly treat Dalits as equals because of guilt, put greater confidence in the “impartiality of law.”

But Mr. Khilnani also positioned Gandhi as a person who believed that any person could speak for any community, and he described Ambedkar as someone who held that members of particular groups can be best represented by a member of that group — a notion the historian suggested could be dangerous for India.

“Who can speak for who…that is a  basic confrontation we have in our politics today,” said Mr. Khilnani. “The whole notion of political representation in our democracy has to allow for the fact that anybody who has the right arguments has the right to speak for us.”

The question of the relevance of Gandhi in modern India became especially prominent last year, not only because of Mr. Lelyveld’s book, but because of the rise of anti-corruption activist Anna Hazare, who has been compared to Gandhi because he has been using the threat of self-sacrifice to put pressure on the government. Mr. Hazare’s hunger fasts last year drew many people onto the streets to protest corruption. But some Dalit and Muslim groups have said they felt Mr. Hazare’s movement did not include them or speak for them.

Others have questioned how much Mr. Hazare is really an heir of Gandhi – particularly after the septuagenarian appeared to condone the slapping of a politician.

Mr. Lelyveld could touch only passingly on Mr. Hazare, because of the large number of people on the panel.

“I have a sense that he’s not a Gandhian, that he’s not an Ambedkar, but he’s quite a phenomenon,” said Mr. Lelyveld.

[SOURCE]