Rahul Read Free Page A

Lines
, Mrs Gandhi has said: ‘Had this been in my father’s mind, surely he would have wanted me to be elected in Parliament. However, whenever the suggestion was made he agreed that I should not go into Parliament.’ I don’t want to join issue with her but Shastri did tell me that Nehru did have his daughter in mind as his successor. We were talking in Hindi and Shastri said, ‘
Unke dil mein siraf unki ladki hai
(He only has his daughter in mind).’
    For the Congress, too, every time it has found itself in need of a successor, a Nehru–Gandhi has been the most desirable and, in fact, the only choice. Rahul, by entering politics, was only following a pattern set by his predecessors and the Party to which he belongs. And herein lies the contradiction: a dynasty flourishing within a democracy. In India, such contradictions have always coexisted and go beyond politics. Their roots lie in the socio-cultural fabric of the Indian subcontinent where the family name takes precedence over almost everything else. Every village, town and city has a few prominent families which are considered the repositories of power in that area. Their wealth and influence compensate for any lack of individual achievement, and the status that members of the family enjoy is often inherited but not necessarily earned. It is not a mere coincidence that in business, too, the family name—Tata, Birla, Ambani, Munjal, Godrej, Jindal, Oberoi—determines how powerful and financially strong the company is perceived to be.
    In public perception, family name and family values matter. The Gandhis realize this and have made sure that they possess both in abundance. Dynasties, like that of the Nehru–Gandhis, are the crème de la crème of the Indian urban élite. Yet, to remain acceptable to the masses, they have to balance contemporaneity with tradition. Sonia’s complete Indianization (she is always seen in a sari or a salwar–kameez); Rahul’s white kurta–pyjama when he’s campaigning, visiting villages or attending Parliament; and Priyanka’s clothes (always a sari) when she is in Amethi or Rae Bareli, are calibrated decisions aimed at making the right impression and living up to the image of being a truly Indian family.
    That Sonia was the ideal bahu in contrast to Maneka, Sanjay Gandhi’s wife, has been widely discussed. Frank uses adjectives like ‘garrulous’, ‘loud’, ‘boisterous’ and ‘uninhibited’ to describe Maneka. In stark contrast to her sister-in-law, Maneka ‘could not and would not adapt to the Gandhi household’ and ‘could also be disrespectful of her mother-in-law’, something that was unthinkable for Sonia. Maneka later confessed that she ‘didn’t know housework and didn’t want to learn cooking’. Sonia was at the other end of the spectrum and is often eulogized as the ideal wife, the ideal daughter-in-law and the ideal mother. Though we have very little access to her private life, her understanding of Indian handicrafts and her cooking abilities are well known. These are precisely the qualities which the ordinary Indian expects in a woman. The Gandhis have to be seen as entirely submitting and ascribing to the values of an Indian family. The relationship between the Gandhi family and Indian culture is a symbiotic one, a two-way process.
    Another reason why dynasties continue to be accepted in the Indian context is the tradition of royalty. At the time of Independence, the country was a cluster of small kingdoms and principalities. The ruling classes of India whether in business or politics—which often interpenetrate each other, with businessmen exercising considerable political clout and successful politicians possessing vast business interests—often aspire to and follow in the footsteps of kings and princes in behaviour and lifestyle. It sets the members of the ruling class apart from the masses, making them attractive to the
aam aadmi
. Though, over the last fifty years or so, a slow revision