04 April,2011 11:36 AM IST | | Paromita Vohra
Well, what do you know? Narendra Modi is first in the race to ban Joseph Lelyveld's book "Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle With India."
He wants the author to apologise, because Gujarat, the state which hosted a manic anti-Muslim pogrom recently while Modi looked busy elsewhere, is naturally going to be wounded by anything but hagiography of its revered role model of peace, fraternal love and non-violence, Mahatma Gandhi. Actually scratch the fraternal love bit. They might think I'm implying something non-normative by that and need group therapy.
Illustrations/ Jishu Dev Malakar
What is the basis of the ban? The book says Gandhi was bisexual and racist. How do they know this? Arre, the papers have said it is so. How do the papers know this? Arre they read it in The Daily Mail, a British tabloid, one of whose standout headlines has been "Britain on alert for deadly new knife with exploding tip that freezes victims' organs." Mr. Modi has not read the book. Why should he read any books? He's the CEO of a state, ok.
But the sentiments of Indian people might be safe because will they have time to read the book either? I mean, aren't they, who also of course worship Gandhi's message of tolerance and peace, too busy fixing their three colour red faces to some cricket match or the other while posting racist, sexist, pro-war, pro-rape status updates? Like, 'We're going to f''' you Pakistan'? I'm pretty sure that's not a consensual proposal. Or "the Indian Vanar Sena is coming to burn up Ravan's Lanka, Jai Shri Ram!" Nothing military in that, I guess.
Gandhi's great-grandson, Tushar Gandhi responded to the ban with, "How does it matter if the Mahatma was straight, gay or bisexual? Every time he would still be the man who led India to freedom." But why pay attention to him - Sanjay Dutt, the spokesman of Congress Party in Maharashtra feels "The government should invoke a law to severely punish anyone who tarnishes the image of the father of the nation." If that sounds too stern, we can maybe ask the opinion of his namesake, the famous political thinker and actor Sanjay Dutt. Everyone knows Munnabhai is an expert on Gandhigiri. That might settle it.
There is no competing with the vulgarity and hypocrisy of bans and censorship.
Supposing Gandhi was gay? Why would that be a slur? Are the people who outlawed Article 377 trying to tell us something about their true attitude to homosexuality? If Gandhi has revealed prejudices in his early letters, doesn't that make his journey into a powerful humanist, his ability to question and change himself, all the more inspiring? Whatever Gandhi's sexual/romantic experiments, they wouldn't lessen his political achievements any more than supposed sexual virtue would lessen Narendra Modi's abetting political crimes of hate.
Meanwhile, the Censor Board is trying to evolve more nuanced categories besides U and A, reflecting that there are discerning people caught between between childhood and adulthood. Why bother? The CBFC's existence has not had an impact on the sexism, racism, casteism, homophobia and violence in our films. It can retire peacefully, because the so-called market is a more effective censor, claiming it cannot profitably make a diversity of films which may unfold worldviews. That's just a lie this market tells to cover up its unimaginativeness and perhaps prejudice. Just like the falsehood of venerating Gandhi that the Narendra Modis tell us when trotting out something totalitarian, like a ban. Just like the hypocrisy of cricket love that some fans use as they heap hateful abuse on other countries.
But, the family that hates together, stays together I guess.
Paromita Vohra is an award-winning Mumbai-based filmmaker, writer and curator working with fiction and non-fiction. Reach her at www.parodevi.com.
The views expressed in this column are the individual's and don't necesarily represent those of the paper.
