Does Gandhi need another statue?

Tristram Hunt, an eminent historian who teaches at Queen Mary College, London, in a recent article in The Guardian, has made a strong plea f...

Tristram Hunt, an eminent historian who teaches at Queen Mary College, London, in a recent article in The Guardian, has made a strong plea for installing a statue of Mahatma Gandhi at Trafalgar Square, the heart of London. He wants the man who fought against British imperialism and gained political freedom for India, the Jewel of the British Empire, to join the band of heroes of Britain, many of whom played major roles in conquering the seas and establishing the might of Britain. The professor feels that 8216;8216;the Mahatma8217;s statue would also allow us Englishmen to celebrate maturely our Anglo-Indian heritage,8221;. He argues that 8216;8216;Gandhi was the student of London, the supporter of the Allies in the First World War and the critical friend who realised that Britain8217;s long-term interests demanded a withdrawal from the sub-continent.8221;

We in India are surely impressed by the balanced approach that the professor brings to the study of men and events, subordinating the prejudices and predilections of their politics and origins. Especially engaging is his argument that Gandhi, while leading India to freedom, helped the 8216;8216;long-term interests of Britain8217;8217; and hence deserves recognition in Britain. But how effectively will this objective be served by installing yet another statue in his honour?

The question evokes in our minds scenes from another place, another context 8212; the frenzy that marked the downing of Saddam Hussein8217;s statue in Iraq after he was driven out of power by the combined might of the US and Britain. The victorious army could not lay their hands on the 8216;8216;most wanted man.8217;8217; The poor statue, a lifeless look-alike, provided an outlet for the people8217;s fury. It was hit by iron rods, poked and pushed by sharp instruments, lifted bodily by a crane and downed, dragged, quartered and broken to smithereens.

Is being a ready outlet for pent-up fury the central purpose served by statues? This is not a false note. How often do we read reports of mutilation of statues of the one-time darlings of the masses? Admittedly, not all statues suffer such indignities. But the plight of all statues is nonetheless unenviable. Statues, at least in our country, hardly ever get a decent sprucing. A few, of course, are cleaned up and garlanded by VIPs, on birth and death anniversaries. On other days, they provide ideal spots for birds to perch and litter. Just look at the statues of British monarchs and their representatives, the viceroys of India, now collecting dust in museums, shuffled recklessly around and, in the process, subjected to indignities best left unsaid.

Does the Mahatma need another statue? He does. But not at Trafalgar Square or at India Gate complex. His image needs to be installed in men8217;s hearts, his ideals embedded in the human mind. So if Hunt is earnest about commemorating the memory of the Mahatma, why can8217;t the funds be used to promote one of the causes dear to the Mahatma? Or is such a memorial harder to install than a statue?