The 'Indian triumph' at the recent auction of some of Gandhi's personaleffects was greeted with great cheer in the media. Ignoring the manner of itsdenouement, it was pronounced that 'All is well that ends well' since an Indianhad purchased the items. However, thanks to the controversy generated, theseller of the items now wants them back. Amidst the welter of confusion thatsurrounds this entire episode, one wonders what the Mahatma himself would havemade of it.
Gandhi was no stranger to auctions--even those involving his own belongings.Auctions were a common feature at the innumerable events and meetings headdressed throughout his long public life. Such auctions were often used toraise funds for the many social causes he championed over an eventful period ofthree decades. In every village and town he visited, Gandhi was presented with avariety of memorabilia. Ever practical, he promptly auctioned them off andspared himself the trouble of accumulating such gifts. In turn, the auctionsthemselves served as vehicles to raise awareness of poverty, untouchability andother social inequalities that plagued India. In challenging Indians to partwith as much money as they could, Gandhi was reminding them of a collectiveresponsibility towards their own people and society.
Gandhi did not have much that he called his own. However, this did notprevent him from lavishing what he had on others. His affectionate care for themany people whom he encountered on a daily basis is legendary. Indeed, thepairing of his gifts and their recipients was done with a refined sensibilityand utmost attention to their appropriateness. The current brouhaha surroundingarticles Gandhi had originally gifted to various people reminds one of acharming anecdote recounted by his long-time secretary, Pyarelal, in the 1956BBC radio documentary, Talking of Gandhiji.
In 1931, Gandhi had visited England for an extended period to attend theSecond Round Table Conference that was to discuss the political future of India.While the conference itself was a disaster, the trip was eventful for Gandhi whomemorably used this opportunity to present his case for India’s freedomdirectly to the British people. During this trip the British Government deputedtwo detectives to accompany the greatest enemy of the Empire as he wanderedaround London.
Such forced intimacy led Gandhi to develop a fondness for the two detectives.On his return to India, he wanted to send them a British-made watch each as agift. Pyarelal 'ransacked the whole of Bombay and returned with two crates fullof watches'. Despite having more than a hundred excellent watches to choosefrom, Gandhi refused to make a selection as the watches were all Swiss-made!
Here, as with everything in Gandhi’s life, his insistence on British-madewatches was no empty gesture. At the time, Gandhi was getting the nation readyto boycott British goods as a mark of political protest. In insisting on theBritish-make of his gifts, Gandhi wanted to send a message that he had noanimosity against the English people as such. He was not boycotting their goodsmerely because they were British.
During the buildup of the current controversy and in his recent commentsasking for the auction to be retracted, the seller reportedly offered to donatethe items to India if the Government vastly increased its spending on the poor.In this, he has done well in drawing our attention to India’s shameful neglectof its own citizens. Gandhi would certainly have appreciated the point beingmade. However, it’s doubtful if he would have approved of the manner in whichthe seller placed his bargaining chips on the table.
If such bargaining is undesirable, what actually transpired in the auctionroom is even more problematic. As a life- long advocate of temperance andprohibition, Gandhi would have been absolutely distraught at the idea of anIndian liquor baron bidding for, and winning the items on sale. Despite thechest-thumping about national pride being saved, the final bid represents alow-point in our public life. Throughout his life, even at the risk ofalienating his own people, Gandhi had insisted that the right ends could only beachieved by using the right means. In this, both the seller and, most certainly,those ‘representing India’ have failed.
