City City Bang Bang
Gandhi in baby steps
SANTOSH DESAI
Munnabhai has done what generations of politicians and legions of text books have been unable to do- make us alive to the ideals of Gandhi once more. Or at least thats what the current buzz around Munnabhai Lagey Raho seems to suggest. And with good reason. For this is a brilliantly original film with its heart in the right place. But enormously charming as the film undoubtedly is, can it carry the burden of the descriptions that it is attracting? Are we looking to Hindi cinema not just for entertainment but for redemption? When a Rang De Basanti came, it was heralded as the return of activism in our lives and now Munnabhai is here to connect us back to the ideals of Gandhi, Mohandas Karamchand. Is this a realistic expectation or are we extrapolating our own wishes on a film, however original it might be?
As we near yet another Gandhi Jayanti, and as we oil our ears for yet another vapid onslaught of inanities about the father of our Nation, inanities that we scarcely even notice, we begin to appreciate the enormity of the effect that Munnabhai has exercised over our consciousness. In this day and age, it has put the Gandhian mode of conflict resolution back on our minds map. And it has done so with deceptive simplicity.
The device of locating the Gandhian urge in a simple minded bhai is a stroke of genius. The notion of Gandhigiri, the rescuing of verb-Gandhi from noun-Gandhi is breathtaking in its audacious simplicity. If we look back at the memory of Gandhi, we can see how it has stiffened with rigor-mortis in the clammy clasp of his symbols. The Charkha, the khadi, the loin cloth, the turn the other cheek prescription, the acts of trenchant frugality all paint a picture of saintliness rooted firmly in the past. Gandhi, patron saint of practical idealism who lived all that he believed in is now saint Gandhi, believer in all things improbable and impractical. The very symbols that amplified his worldview and helped convert an abstract ideology into executable action, now imprison it, for they reek not of the intent behind them but merely of an archaic yesterday. The politicians are only too keen to embalm his memory for his ideas are too original to please any constituency. And Gandhians do him an enormous disservice by clinging to the tattered remains of his symbols.
This is where Gandhigiri is so brilliant. Practical idealism becomes idealistic practice. Gandhi becomes an instrument, not an institution. The gandhian mode is employed not for lofty purposes but as a self-help guide. Gandhi is recast as the street philosopher once more. However, this is also where Gandhigiri is so limited. For because Munnabhai is true to the its audience which lives in the consumerist media democracy of today, it carries with it the unmistakable imprint of the codes that govern our mindset.
For to be a gandhian in action today, you need to be a Munnabhai. You need to be powerful to afford the whimsy of non-violence. The powerful can afford to be weak for the implicit threat of force greases Gandhian conversion like nothing else can. So one turning of the other cheek later, Circuit turns his other palm over in defence of Munnabhai. Violence or its looming threat ensures that an invisible but palpable line is drawn below which one cannot be taken for granted. Even the final resolution is achieved through the barrel of a gun. Non-violence wins at gun point. The reforming of Boman Iraniâs character too happens by way of a transaction in power, rather than through satyagraha. Munnabhai chooses to use the power he has acquired through media in a Gandhian way. The resolution is the peace pipe smoked by two powerful parties; Munnabhai does Lucky a favour he cannot but reciprocate. Like Rang de Basanti, Munnabhai Lagey Raho too sees media as an instrument of instant power; Munnabhai trades in the power of violence for the brute force of media.
Eventually in the world of Gandhigiri too, the ends justify the means. If we can win using gandhian methods, why not try them is the message of the film. Everything is framed through the result; the belief in the righteousness of oneâs path is not crucial. Gandhi is another self-help manual; if he were alive he would be a millionaire.
In a larger sense, we are trying hard to reconcile our new found consumerism with our lost idealism. So it is no surprise that we consume idealism as we would a product, ensuring that it works. Munnabhai Lagey Raho is a product of its times; it helps remove Gandhi from our walls but cannot do more than offer him to us in the form of a squeaky toy. Perhaps we would do well to remember that genuine idealism comes at a price and it is almost always more than the price of a film ticket.
The author can be contacted at santoshdesai1963@indiatimes.com