Book Review: Gandhi Before India

The history of mankind, if one skims through, is merely a repetitive record of the violence that one perpetrates upon the other. Each era is punctuated with the leaders who defined the course of such events. The garb of nationalism and other paraphernalia associated with it are merely the tools in the hands of these leaders to gather the masses behind them. It was not until the arrival of Gandhi that morality of neither those tools nor the end that is sought to be achieved mattered much. His methods questioned the very basis upon which power was exercised by one over the other. The history of this man is the history of the mankind and its self-discovery of its moral compass. The invention by Gandhi of his methods did not happen over a single day or over a single incident. It was a gradual process of evolution and a self-discovery, a most important part of which happened in the continent of Africa. Mind that this transformation is from being an abject failure as a lawyer in his homeland to being an undisputed leader of the civil resistance is the story that was carried out of Africa. The man that we know as Gandhi in India was discovered by Gandhi himself only in this sojourn. But this history is a relatively immaterial happening for most of his biographers were blithe loathsome to dedicate time and space to this part of his story. The narrative importance of this part of his life can be better understood when we see that Gandhi himself sees South Africa as the place where he discovered the means to achieve the ultimate end of emancipation for his homeland from the colonial rule. It is a startling journey of a shy man from Kathiawar who cannot even deliver a speech on his own without any assistance to an undisputed leader of Indians. The author himself recognises the narrative importance of this part of the story in the early chapters of this book. The success of this book, more than anything else, depends largely upon the narrative fidelity of the author in taking us through the historical forces of causation that made the man that we saw as 'Mahatma' in India.

Of the Self-Discovery and the Horizons Unraveled

There are not many figures in the world history who has been subject to as much analysis as Gandhi has been. How much ever revered, he was still not without his own eccentricities and blemishes. In fact, he had an unheard of audacity to criticise certain such blemishes on his own in his autobiography. But a third man's account of such how he developed such nuances, which made the man that we know of, is a void that the author seeks to fill in, especially of the time that he spent in Africa. It was an evolutionary process in which his ideals were shaped by his interactions and experiences in one of the most racially prejudiced governments of the world. Of all, his relationship with the native Africans best demonstrates this. He was not free from the prevailing prejudice against the native Africans. This was even overtly visible in the actions of the Gandhi. While he was arguing staunchly for the rights of Indians in Africa and against the racially motivated laws he still abided by the prevailing racial hierarchy. Whites at the top and blacks at the bottom with the Indians floating somewhere in between. Rule be pleaded for equal treatment of Indians, he tried to persuade the authorities by arguing that let not the Indians be treated in the way Africans (Kaffirs) are treated. His petitions to the government to relax some rules specifically targeting the Indians shows a certain degree of apologetic approach that he had in his early days towards the imperial rule. Though justified as an incrementalist approach that he wanted to have in a political struggle, this reminds us again of the Gandhi that we are yet to see. However, what baffles one's mind is when such prejudices, if seen in today's terms, clearly comes in conflict with his ability as a leader. The entry into Transvaal in protest against the racial laws and the demands for equality was only sought for 'educated' and 'cultured' Indians.The struggle that he spearheaded is demonstrative of the very conception of civil liberties that we happen to have today. The recurring use of the qualifiers like 'cultured' and 'educated' to proclaim civil rights just shows that the concept of equality as we see it today was not even thought of then. Even Gandhi himself and his ideas were sequestered to this, confining his activism, at least until then, within these parochial notions of equality. It is baffling by today's standards how he was able to mobilise people cutting across populace regardless of the background. In fact, in the last stages of his struggle for political rights in Africa drew a majority of its support from the lower strata of the Indian populace in Africa, like the indentured labourers. It all, however, ended up as an educative experience for him shaping both him and his ideology with which he landed in India. Rather than dictating outlook towards the world, these encounters along with the extended friendship that he had with people from other races enriched his ideas and provided necessary inputs to forge what he ultimately called as 'Satyagraha'. Either consciously or unconsciously he expanded the horizon of his political views from being a conservative Gujarati baniya to a political leader with worldly views in this two decades worth journey.

Of Gandhi- The Private Man 

All through the book one can see two distinctive personalities of the man. Gandhi- The political leader and Gandhi- The unsuitable family man. Though it has always been my principle not to criticise someone on their actions in personal relationships, I must make a special exception for the likes of Gandhi. I deduce reason thus. I find that all his political proclamations were backed by a strong sense of personal integrity in doing what he says and ask others to do. His political reasoning was entirely built upon his moral construct of self and the discipline in leading a principled life.  It is for this very reason he was able to connect with the masses, unlike any other leader until then. He eased himself into the blurry lines that which political leaders like him unconsciously drew between them and the people that they seek to lead by only preaching what he did. There existed no dividing line between his public and private life when he expected even the members of his family to participate in what he did politically. He was unrelenting in his acts of self-discipline. However, this virtuosity of the man cost him much in his interpersonal relationships. Perhaps he himself realised this, evident from his communications to Kasturba (his wife) where at places he indicates the importance of public work in his life and his inability to dedicate time for the family as much as she would want him to. For a person as important as him it is understandable, however, the real problem arose when he imposed his discipline upon other members around him and it consisted of people outside his family as well. Apart from the relatively difficult relationship that he had with Kasturba the constant struggle that he had with his sons would best demonstrate this. Every single letter that he wrote to his sons reeks of unwanted authoritarian language. He expected them to follow everything he wanted them to till the end. He never seems to have left any legitimate choices for them to make or to discover things for themselves. It would sound paradoxical if one were to see that Gandhi himself was made to be the man that he is because he had the freedom to exercise such choices. If one were to see his history it is the very freedom that he denied his sons which provided him with the means to see the world in his own terms. Had his father been alive, he sure would not have allowed him to travel to London to become a barrister. It is in London that he was exposed to the experiences which came in handy in his ascension to the peak. With his sons, to the contrary, he curtailed any and every means for them explore their abilities in their own terms. His letters are always filled with his exasperation on his unmet expectations, which went even to the extent of asking them to control their carnal instincts. Though a successful leader, he is an abject failure as a father.
His relationship with his wife if seen through the lens of modern standards of women's rights and emancipation Gandhi is an unsurprising failure. All through it is an uneasy civil relationship that they established amongst themselves. The physical attraction played role in their young age (regardless of his later day self-criticism on his inability to be at his father's side on his death due to his carnal desires) but the later day compulsions and Gandhi's exposure to the outside world changed the dynamics of the relationship between them. With his increasing proclivity towards public work his expectations from his wife changed. Being an uneducated and conservative woman, Kasturba at the best could do what he asked her to without any consideration her own sense of self and independent choices. All through, her part in the story of Gandhi is merely a devoted wife standing with her husband's choices, an outcrop of conservative Indian ideals thrust upon a woman. Her sojourn into the gaol in Africa and other participation seems purely out of this devotion, not out of her own intellectual exercise. Gandhi's unilateral decision to practice celibacy is one such decision. Though Kasturba accepted unequivocally it was out of the fact that she did not want to bear any more children. All this is a result his inability to see past his perceptions about the individual that Kasturba was. He grew comfortable in a mechanical role of a 'provider' for his family. One of Gandhi's close friend Millie Polak, who lived in the same house as Gandhis along with her husband, conversation with Gandhi explains this clearly. After being with Gandhi family for a while she told Gandhi that 'the East has made the woman the subject of man, she seems to possess no individual life'. Gandhi characteristically replied that 'The East has given her a position of worship' and went on to quote the story of Satyavan-Savitri. This deification is dangerous reasoning that has been cast upon numerous social institutions of oppression to legitimise it and Gandhi continued to use this reasoning even in the many other beliefs of his own to justify his claims.
Even more unique is the friendship that he cultivated around him. As a person, from what we can see through the history, he might even come across as incorrigible and impracticable due to his eccentricities. But if we want to understand what Gandhi was it is those eccentric reasonings that he professed in his personal life which will give us a peek into it. In fact, his friendship to a great extent grew because of people getting attracted to these eccentricities of his. There was a presence of an overwhelming attraction that transcended such nuances that made the man. Gandhi reciprocally was made to be what he was only with their influence both intellectually and in kind. His friends willingly put themselves in the ways of hardship since they unconditionally believed in what Gandhi did. The strongly knit circle of friends that he fostered in Africa cannot be treated in a conventional sense. They got close to him out of sheer attraction for the principles that he stood for, in that way they were early 'followers' of Gandhian principles.  The very experiment of the Tolstoy farm is an example of how people got influenced by him put themselves to the hardship by willingly abandoning the creature comforts that the modern life offered them.
The most notable of his friends during his time in South Africa was Henry Polak, Hermann Kallenbach and Paranjivan Mehta. Both Polak and Kallenbach attached themselves to Gandhi out of sheer attraction to the principles that he espoused and in fact dedicated their life to those principles. They played a dominant role in Gandhi's political ascension in Africa. Paranjivan Mehta saw Gandhi as the saviour who would emancipate India from its colonial rule. He predicted a greater role that would be played by him in the forthcoming political struggle and wanted him to return to India at the earliest possible. In fact, it was him, who called Gandhi a 'Mahatma' for the first time, not Tagore. He went to great extent to help Gandhi in all mean he could, especially in monetary terms.

Of the Man of Eccentricities

The relationship that Gandhi fostered with people around him had a peculiar flavour to it. Just as it is seen with the relationship that he established with the members of his family he might come across as an eccentric individual who is difficult to deal with in a conventional sense. His beliefs and notions were archaic and are not always grounded in science and logic. Digest this statement of Gandhi, about modern medical facilities, if possible: "modern hospitals perpetuate vice, misery and degradation; had there been no hospitals for cure of venereal diseases, there would be less sexual vice amongst us". I can only imagine the negative impact that a thought which is even remotely influenced by this. He was unnecessarily obsessed with the sexual choices of individuals around him. In many communications that he made with his sons and cousins, he chose to enter into a diatribe on celibacy.

Of Gandhi- The Idea

We often tend to forget that the journey is as important as the destination. Mankind as a whole reached a place where it had to do a moral reevaluation of the progress that it made up until then. It required the directions to lead it somewhere where it can create a just word. It came in the form of Gandhi. Just as Victor Hugo said "You can resist an invading army; you cannot resist an idea whose time has come". Gandhi was an idea whose time had come. He questioned the morality of things that our world took for granted until then. More than the man himself, it is his principles that has endured the passage of time and it is to stay relevant for the future too. We are living in a period where the sense of brotherhood amongst fellow humans has been overtaken by parochial considerations of identity. It is for us to rediscover for our own sake the man that was 'Gandhi'.
A picture is sometimes not a product of an painter's mind. It there present somewhere, to be discovered by the painter. The broad strokes of his brush brings it to life for us to see. Ramchandra Guha has painted this for us to see something as important this. By providing a deep insight into the life the man Ramchandra Guha has done a great service for us all to read. This book is a must read for all who wants to know the man that was Gandhi.