Lelyveld's book about Gandhi daringly de-mythologises the deified figure of the Mahatma.
When another book on Gandhi’s life comes to stores, one can’t help wondering what new insight the writer could possibly come up with. As one of the most prominent leaders of the twentieth century, Gandhi did not just influence the events of his time but is acknowledged worldwide as both a unique thinker and a perceptive politician. The vastness of Gandhian scholarship today only affirms his greatness, and his life is no mystery, considering the fact that he has been the subject of numerous biographies. As far as Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle with India is concerned, it is not Gandhi but the writer Joseph Lelyveld that attracts readership at first. Lelyveld, who won the Pulitzer Prize for non-fiction in 1986 and worked as the executive editor of The New York Times from 1994 to 2001, daringly de-mythologises the deified figure of the Mahatma.
Lelyveld delves deep into the many contradictions of Gandhi — his self-aggrandisement and obsession with self-image, his narrow take on ethnic issues like the rights of Untouchables, his unfathomable instructions on combating sexuality, his relationship with a Jew Hermann Kallenbach, his liaison with his niece. The last two, as expected, caused great controversy, leading to the accusation that Lelyveld portrayed Gandhi as a bisexual and a pervert. However, the relationship unveiled in this book is that of platonic love. At the same time, Lelyveld is careful not to belittle or downplay the greatness of Gandhi; his purpose is to uncover the making of a shrewd politician who knew how to bend wills to his liking.
The book constantly questions the facts and ideas that are largely taken for granted. The Gandhi that emerges as a result of this process is more human and believable than the god-like persona that is often attributed to him. By showing the evolution of Gandhi’s ideas regarding issues like Untouchables, the book shows the subtle clash between the idealistic niceties and the practical restrictions that he had to face.
The first part of the book deals with Gandhi’s early life in South Africa and the second focuses on his transformation into Mahatma. The book tends to focus on issues, instead of giving primary importance to historical events. Structure-wise, the book follows a loose chronological order of Gandhi’s life. However, unlike the traditional biography, the goal is not an indisputable conclusion or a final verdict on the enigmatic character of a great leader. It is more of a study of the many contradictory aspects of his early formative years in South Africa and their influence in his later life. Some people might feel uneasy at this individualisation of Gandhi but it is nevertheless intriguing.
Lelyveld discursively constructs a humanised figure that is both historically contextualised and psychologically exposed. Unusual as it is in its approach, the reaction of most readers has either been of pure delight or utter disgust. One simply has to read the book to discover what camp one falls in.
Published in The Express Tribune, Sunday Magazine, July 3rd, 2011.
on Twitter, become a fan on Facebook
Nice book review indeed. Lelyveld sounds extremely innovative in his effort to present Gandhi. But Ammara’s appraisal of Lelyved’s approach is equally impressive. Recommend
like mr jaswanth singh mention in his book gandhi was double minded person.Recommend
I believe Gandhi was essentially a Hindu leader. The main thrust of his policy was to act as a humanist. With this subtle method he wanted to assimilate all other communities–Muslim, Christian, Sikh etc into the fold of “Indian culture” and establish Hindu rule.Recommend
Greatness of this person can be imagined from the fact that how much we discuss about him after his death.Critics will always be there.But see the thinking of some writers like lelyveld.These writes say Alexander was a gay,Gandhi was bisexual.Isn’t it sufficient that world ever had a king like Alexander or a leader like Gandhi who preached us non-violence.If a great king like Alexander was a gay,then shame on us.A gay ruled all over the world.if a married person like Gandhi was bisexual, then in today’s society a married person is not safe from these critics.Those who see Gandhi was a religious leader and make comments against him,then they should change their attitudes towards their father of nations like Mao or Jinnah or Hitler or Castro.Recommend
@John Donne:
I believe you are essentially a Pakistani. The main purpose why you like to see him as a Hindu leader is to justify your two-nation theory. The fact is Gandhi would not have been killed by extremist Hindus, had he been a Hindu leader. It is a fact that Gandhi was a devout Hindu. It is also true was that he was secular in outlook. Recommend
@ Vinayak
I wanted to respond to John Donne but after reading your post I felt that my comment will only be repeatitive.
He said “I believe Gandhi was essentially a Hindu leader”.
I will leave him at that. It his merely his believe and he is entitled to that. Recommend
@anil:
“If a great king like Alexander was a gay,then shame on us.A gay ruled all over the world”
What a strange comment. What the hell does Alexander’s sexuality have to do with his mastery of the battlefield? And why should any of us be ashamed if ‘a gay’ did indeed rule over the entire world? I think you have a very narrow, stereotypical perception of homosexuals. Using your own stupid logic, one could also argue that you should be ashamed of yourself for having such a tiny, shriveled up, simplistic leader in Gandhi. Couldn’t you find someone more dashing, like your bollywood stars?
Fact is, some people are born to be leaders, and nothing stands in their way. Not their looks, not their ability to dress well, not their size. Alexander ruled so much of the world because he was a great leader. His men fought bravely for him, because they were drawn to him for all his qualities. Whether or not he was gay is immaterial to that- and frankly entirely irrelevant.
Similarly, it is of no consequence if Gandhi was straight, gay, or bisexual. To get upset over something so ridiculous is unfortunately a part of being South Asian. We are cursed to be perpetually locked in to this inferiority complex. Recommend
@John Donne:
Rubbish. This is just pure propaganda. Gandhi never uttered a word against any race of people or any background. Remember he was killed by the same kind of fanatic you accuse him of being.
Gandhi was a Human Being but he was a better Human than many can ever be.
Einstein, the greatest Human mind of the modern era, called him the greatest Human to walk the Earth in the 20th Century. Martin Luther King Jr and Nelson Mandela have said that Gandhi was their inspiration. How come such great leaders think so highly of him, if he was a fanatic?Recommend
@Pakistani Canadian:
Absolutlely agree with u. We are a biggest hypocrite society. There was absolutely no necessity to get offended when somebody call Gandhi a bi-sexual. At the end of the day the writer expressed his views on Gandhi, if you like it or not just move on. Gandhi is a human after all, and we all have weaknesses. Similary, people in pakistan cannot accept the fact that Jinnah drinks and he is very secular in his views. We try to idolize our leaders and think that they are perfect. The worst part is how our media stir up the emotions of the entire society instead of presenting things rationally. But a big thumbs up to this blog writer.
@Anil…Gandhi may be a great man, but greatness doesn’t mean flawless.Recommend
@Pakistani Canadian:
Unfortunately even i agree with this Pakistani, what happens inside a persons bedroom shouldn’t matter to us. A persons sexuality is something personal to him and he has the right to keep it that way, lets not poke our noses into things that don’t matter to us Recommend
@Pakistani Canadian:
+1Recommend
The greatness of Gandhi wasn’t that he was faultless. It was that he embraced and was open about his faults. The courage of this man is unparalleled, perhaps is only rivaled by Jesus Christ before him.
There have been many soldiers who fought wars putting their lives on the line, but they fought it with swords with fear or hatred in their hearts. Gandhi did so with just his conviction and but never hating the enemy. His inspiration was Jesus more than anyone else, even though he was a staunch Hindu.
In fact, he was perhaps the last of great Hindu saints (Rishis), who tried to steer Hindus away from caste system, evils of blind faith, while still believing in spirituality of Hinduism.
Was he a Bisexual or whatever… Who cares? As if it matters to the world!! What matters is his message of Non-Violent struggle, self-reliance, equality of people and frugal way of life.
And he lived his message – he wasn’t a hypocrite.Recommend
hey guys dont forget he was a gujrati and his right handed men were nehru.patel so then
how he was so called libral. man can be judge by friends.
Recommend
Its sad to see that people are calling Gandhi a Hindu leader, this is really sad,
Calling Gandhi a Hindu leader is just like calling Jinah sahib a molvi.
This just proves tht we dont read or research on our own.
Recommend
No matter what, we should all be proud of Mr Gandhi as a Great sub continental leader, if this satisfies both nation. Lets not paint him as a Hindu or etc. He was agood man, period.Recommend