I hold that the more helpless a creature, the more entitled it is to protection by man from the cruelty of man. - Mahatma Gandhi
Today, October 2nd is Mahatma Gandhi's Birthday. I never forget this date, because it was always a school holiday - "Gandhi Jayanti" as it is called in India. Gandhi's colourful life and extraordinary impact on the Indian freedom struggle formed a part of every history book in school, back when I was a child and teenager, though this old black and white photo of Mohandas Gandhi as a young boy never made it into any of those books. The Gandhi that I know is the Gandhi that the rest of the world remembers today, the Gandhi portrayed so brilliantly by Sir Ben Kingsley in the 1982 film which also featured Rohini Hattangadi as Kasturba Gandhi (who studied in Pune as well). It was only when I saw the play Mahatma vs Gandhi written by Dinkar Joshi, when I was about 16 years old that I began to question the "Gandhi" that I had looked up to for so long. I guess that was also one of the moments when Gandhi became less of a God-like figure, more of a flawed human being with an inspiring mind and vision.
The play addresses the conflict and tormented relationship between Gandhi and his eldest son Harilal. It delves into all sorts of unsettling sub-plots such as Gandhi's single-minded puritanical way of life and the havoc this plays with the life of his devoted wife Baa (Kasturba Gandhi) and his family. As the eldest son, Harilal could do nothing right - for how can anyone live up to a father like Mahatma Gandhi? A father who is followed by thousands and thousands of people, who is adored, revered and worshipped. I remember feeling particularly overcome with emotion towards the end of the play, when the Mahatma's freedom struggle takes on epic proportions, and a country of a billion people is hanging on to his every word, his every move, while his eldest son is found on the verge of death in Bombay's Forase Road (a notorious red-light district). Harilal was weak, incapable of seeing the world through his father's eyes, incapable of giving everything up in the quest for truth. When Mahatma Gandhi was shot dead by Nathuram Godse (a Pune fellow, ironically!), the entire country mourned the loss of "their father". Millions of people, the poor, the untouchables, world leaders turned up to pay their respect. Yet, when Harilal died just a few days after his father, alone, destroyed by disease, in a penury, only a handful of family members turned up for his cremation. The rest of the country, the world, for that matter would remain oblivious to the fact that the two Gandhis could ever be related, let alone father and son. One was the epitome of purity, truth, "Godliness" - the other was plagued by inadequacy, alchoholism, debauchery and lonliness.
The play addresses the conflict and tormented relationship between Gandhi and his eldest son Harilal. It delves into all sorts of unsettling sub-plots such as Gandhi's single-minded puritanical way of life and the havoc this plays with the life of his devoted wife Baa (Kasturba Gandhi) and his family. As the eldest son, Harilal could do nothing right - for how can anyone live up to a father like Mahatma Gandhi? A father who is followed by thousands and thousands of people, who is adored, revered and worshipped. I remember feeling particularly overcome with emotion towards the end of the play, when the Mahatma's freedom struggle takes on epic proportions, and a country of a billion people is hanging on to his every word, his every move, while his eldest son is found on the verge of death in Bombay's Forase Road (a notorious red-light district). Harilal was weak, incapable of seeing the world through his father's eyes, incapable of giving everything up in the quest for truth. When Mahatma Gandhi was shot dead by Nathuram Godse (a Pune fellow, ironically!), the entire country mourned the loss of "their father". Millions of people, the poor, the untouchables, world leaders turned up to pay their respect. Yet, when Harilal died just a few days after his father, alone, destroyed by disease, in a penury, only a handful of family members turned up for his cremation. The rest of the country, the world, for that matter would remain oblivious to the fact that the two Gandhis could ever be related, let alone father and son. One was the epitome of purity, truth, "Godliness" - the other was plagued by inadequacy, alchoholism, debauchery and lonliness.
Anyway, my intention was not to talk about Harilal Gandhi's tragic life, but to share my thoughts on the similarities between Glenn Gould and Mohandas Gandhi. Astrology aside (both Gould and Gandhi are born in the first week of Libra), I find it fascinating that a man born in Porbandar, India in 1869 would have anything in common with a classical music genius born to a Canadian Presbyterian family in 1932. Gandhi had no connection with Canada, and Gould loathed hot weather! Yet both men were hugely influenced by and extraordinarily devoted to their mothers - Glenn's mother was his first piano teacher, her love and enthusiasm for the instrument and for music played a vital part in the young boy's musical development while Gandhi's mother was a deeply religious, spiritual woman who advocated a life of austerity and celibacy. The young Glenn Gould wrote his own little newspaper "The Daily Woof" devoted to articles and news about his animals and shows how much the young pianist loved animals even when he was still a young child. The eighteen-year old Mohandas Gandhi joined the London Vegetarian Society and continued to speak out against cruelty to innocent creatures for the rest of his life. In fact, both Gould and Gandhi used their fame and status to speak out about this very worthy cause.
Both men were, by all accounts, obsessive about their work, about the search for ecstasy in one's art and one's work, and, in Gandhi's case, the search for truth at all costs. For many years, journalists and fans speculated about Gould's love life, his sexuality and his relationships. Was he asexual, gay, bisexual, or totally devoted to music, so that there was no room for love or sex in his life? The speculation was put to rest once and for all when it was revealed that he had a passionate relationship for four years with Cornelia Foss, wife of pianist/conductor/composer Lukas Foss. Gould never married, nor did he ever reveal any aspect of his private life to the public or the media. The image of Gould as the last puritan, or as this lost genius seeking ecstasy through his music is one we are all familiar with. His relationship with the music of Bach has led many to believe that Gould's own puritanical nature was influenced and strengthened by Bach's deeply spiritual, religious keyboard music. Mohandas Gandhi was married to Kasturba when he was 14 and she a year younger, for arranged child marriages were the custom of the time! And while the couple went on to have children (the first of which was born when Mohandas was only 15 years old), Gandhi's thoughts and writings on celibacy are well documented. There has also been much debate as to whether Gandhi's popularity with women was at least in part due to the fact that he took a vow of Brahmacharya (voluntary celibacy) after 23 years of marriage to Kasturba. And if one delves deeper into the writings, letters and documented books about Gandhi, his radically controversial, fascinating thoughts on love between a man and a woman, sex, relationships and celibacy all stem from a relentless pursuit of truth. And as Cornelia Foss described her relationship with Gould as being passionate and chaotic, but ultimately unstable, so can one sympathise with Kasturba Gandhi - she had to agree to her husband's every whim, and ultimately serve him until his dying day. If her own desires and needs were regarded as secondary, it was for the greater good of the country, for the greater good of mankind.
Which brings me to my last comparison - their perfectionist nature and the mercilessly high standards both men set for themselves and those around them. Even though academia never appealed to either, both men found their calling in life pretty early on. Gould found solace in the music of Gibbons, Byrd, Mozart and Bach while Gandhi realised that he never wanted to practice law, or work as a barrister, opting instead to work with the untouchables, with the poorest of poor to bring change at the grassroots level in his own country. I wonder if the unwavering work-ethic of both men stemmed from some deep rooted insecurity. This would explain why even though Gandhi turned the British Raj on its head without picking up a single weapon, he could not bring himself to accept his own son's weaknesses. Perhaps in his son he saw a little of himself, or the kind of man he could very well have been had he not pursued his work, his mission, his freedom struggle zealously. Similarly, Gould's inability to maintain a stable, loving, long-term relationship could have stemmed from the fact that he was afraid to let any one human being into his inner world, because it would compromise his carefully controlled personal and professional life. I always get the impression when I am reading Gould's letters, or watching him speak, or even hearing his voice, that this is a man who is absolutely terrified of his innermost self being revealed, even subconsciously. No surprise then that he prepared and wrote every script for his radio and television programs diligently and obsessively. As for that famous Gould wit and humour, again sometimes I wonder if that is just a defence mechanism, for at times it feels a bit too scripted, a bit too forced.
At the core, I feel as though both men were driven by the desire to change the world around them (like all great human beings have done) - Gould wanted the classical piano recital to disappear off the face of the earth, he wanted recordings to replace the classical concert, he wanted the world to embrace the music of Schoenberg, Berg, Webern, Krenek, Gibbons and Byrd, he wanted to make films, radio programs and write magazine articles, he wanted to break down musical boundaries on the one hand (expressing a desire to record an album with Barbara Streisand, for instance) but he refused to record much romantic piano music (he only played Chopin in a "weak" moment, for instance!). Gould wanted to change the world's perception of what a classical pianist could be, could do - of what it meant to be a consummate artist. He wanted the rest of the world to share his idea that the purpose of all art, of all music, was to attain a state of ecstasy and wonder. Similarly, Gandhi wanted to change the world around him - he cleaned toilets with the untouchables to show that discrimination between one's fellow man is a sin and must not be tolerated. He believed that animals deserved the same kindness that human beings bestowed to one another. He wanted to free India from the shackles of foreign rule, and to prove that the Indians were not dependent on the British, he spun his own clothes and made salt from the sea. Both men wanted to change the world in very different ways, but both were willing to cut people out of their life if they did not share this vision, and abide by their rules. The world as we know it would be a very different place without the vision of peace, non-violence and equality for all creatures that Gandhi devoted his entire life to. The world as we know it would also be a very different place without the music of J.S.Bach in the hands of Glenn Gould, or the impact of this Torontonian on musicians, music students, animal lovers, people from all walks of life really. At the core, both men were human. They were flawed, and they did make mistakes. They were human, after all! So this week, as the world remembers Mahatma Gandhi's 141st Birthday, let us forget about the mediocre celebrities, the greedy politicians, the evil dictators, and remember the humanity, kindness, commitment and devotion that both Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and Glenn Herbert Gould brought to the world.
© Karishmeh Felfeli 2007
 |
| Glenn Gould, as a young boy |
 |
| Mohandas Gandhi, as a young boy |
