Gandhi Now is an essay written by Salman Rushdie.

He is an Indian-
born British writer well-known for his allegorical novels that examine
society's historical and philosophical issues through his characters.
He is known for his humour and dramatic prose style. In "Gandhi
Now," Salman deconstructs Gandhi's image, which is in the minds of
the people within India and abroad. He makes the readers rethink
Gandhi's personality and writes about the great leader from a
different and shocking perspective. Salman begins the essay by
talking about Gandhi's image in Apple's advertisement,
ironically saying Gandhi is modelling for Gandhi. He states that
Apple is making use of Gandhi to convey a message about its
corporate philosophy. Also, claiming that the advertisement is ironic
because Gandhi was a man who hated modernism and technology
and preferred a simple village life. He even would found the term
"word processor" hateful. Now Rushdie asks us to think differently
and says that Gandhi was a modern and westernized lawyer in his
youth. Birla, an industrialist and very close friend of Gandhi, had said
that Gandhi was modern than he was. But he chose to go back to
the life of the middle ages. Now the Apple doesn't want people to
go back in the ages. It intends to use Gandhi to popularize its values
in identifying it with Gandhi's values, which made him a saintly
figure. Rushdie says Apple wanted to compare itself to Gandhi.
Gandhi, a small and puny man, fought against British rule and chased
it out of India. Similarly, Apple, a mal start-up, will overthrow the big
Mac. Here Rushdie refers to the parable of David and Goliath from
the Bible. Rushdie says Gandhi is up for grabs and can be used
anyone wants. He is treated no more as a personality but is
thought to be a concept and a cultural symbol. He values given
importance over his character. Richard Attenborough's movie Gandhi
portrayed him as a great saint, a guru, and a saviour like Jesus Christ.
His philosophy of non-violence made the British ashamed of
themselves and left India. The film suggested that your morality will
inspire the character of the enemy, making him go. This movie had a
significant impact on the contemporary freedom struggles. It made
Gandhi an international personality and a great inspirational force.
Rushdie says the idealized Gandhi is not perfect. He is dull and
boring, lacking humour and intelligence. Further, Rushdie wonders
whether Gandhi can still be called a man because he has been raised
to a saint's status and used as a concept for various purposes. He
says that the personality is full of contradictions. He fought bravely
against the British but was afraid of the dark. Fighting against the
British is a job that requires the utmost level of confidence,
willpower, and courage. But being fearful of the night (no light) is not
possible. Maybe here, the term "dark" means something else instead
of no light; another interpretation might be no hope or no way out
(deadlock). Gandhi insisted on the importance of being united
because being unity brings strength. But he was not united in
thought with Jinnah, which led to the presidency of Congress denied
to Jinnah. This resulted in Jinnah withdrawing from Congress starting
a separatist Muslim League, which eventually led to India's partition.
Gandhi was said to be modest and selfless. But when Jinnah was
attacked for not calling him "Mahatma,". Here 'Mahatma' means
"great-souled". He remained silent, this act of silence shows that he
isn't actually 'Mahatma', if Gandhi is a great soul then he would have
no cared about the title of mahatma and acted to even stop the
attack. He lived the life of an ascetic. But Sarojini Naidu said it cost
the nation a fortune to support Gandhi lead such a life. Gandhi
supported villages over cities and agriculture over industries. But he
was dependent on his friend who was a big industrial magnate, like
G.D Birla. His hunger strikes could not stop violence and deaths, but
he used the same weapon to fight against the workers who were
fighting for their rights against his industrialist friend. Gandhi
proposed to improve the condition of the untouchables now called
Dalit's. But they never accepted him as their leader and chose Dr.
Ambedkar. The rival of Gandhi as their leader, showing a lack of trust
and belief in Gandhi. He wanted the youth to follow Brahmacharya.
It's about providing your mind and body with what it needs – and
enjoys – without going to a place of excess. But he was married at
the age of sixteen and was much into physical pleasures when his
father was breathing his last. He believed the non-violence and
passive resistance could move any force. Later, he accepted that
they worked with the British but would not have worked with other
forces. Further Rushdie states that there were other reasons for the
British to loosen their hold on India, like the tension between Hindu
and Muslim. Further Rushdie states that there were other reasons
for the British to loosen its hold on India. Gandhi visualized India to
be a highly religious country but what emerged after independence
was a secular state. Even the staunch Hindu politicians who are
determined to make India a Hindu country do not consider Gandhi as
their leader or even mention his philosophy in their political agenda.
Rushdie says that people today do not have time to praise the
personality of Gandhi or analyze even the real causes of
independence because they are too busy to worry gather and
assimilate the many-sided truths. He adds that Gandhi has lost
relevance or his importance in the country where he is called the
father of the nation. The author states again that Gandhi has lost his
relevance and the few handfuls of Gandhians who exist now are
called cranks. Rushdie brings the viewpoints of various people who
were with Gandhi to highlight the contradictions in his personality.
Gandhi who gave up cosmopolitan life has become an international
icon and a citizen of the world.

Do you agree with Salman Rushdie's views on Gandhi today? Explain

Author Sir Salman Rushdie suggests that people outside India have
rendered more use of the conceptions of non-violence proposed by
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi than those within his own country.
We have an attitude that 'Gandhi' needs to be successful since it
took place in the west. However, Rushdie was against it, and he
opposed the film. Rushdie states that for decades, the British have
been rubbing elbows with Indian history. In my opinion, there has
been a considerable amount of debate on this film alone; why not
Tagore or Nehru? We all know that Nathuram Godse murdered
Gandhi. But the murderer is not distinguished from the crowd in the
film; he only pushes the group out with a pistol. Misrepresentations
of Attenborough romanticize, but they still lie. In my opinion, I do
agree with Rushdie's views. The 'Gandhi' philosophy was to fight
oppressors without violence, but it was all misinformation. Since
they were more ethical than the British, the leaders in India did
prosper. The British were more crafted and more substantial than
their rivals. Gandhi is shown to be a saint who conquered the
monarchy.

Gandhi becoming irrelevant in India and gaining popularity outside-

Mahatma Gandhi, today is being treated as a cultural symbol rather
than being treated by his own personality. He has been
misinterpreted but will never be forgotten all over the world but in
India, he has become increasingly irrelevant as his visions and what
India turned out to be is completely different.
Gandhi Ji visualized India to be a highly religious country but India
became secular. Even in politics, he has been long forgotten as 1977
was the last Gandhian to be effective in J.P. Narayan at the end of
Indira Gandhi’s emergency period. Today, his ideas have rarely been
mentioned. There are very few Gandhians who still believe in his
ideologies of a simple lifestyle and have been labeled as cranks.
However, Gandhi has gained popularity worldwide as many world
peace movements have followed his ideologies and Gandhi has
received praise from global personalities like Martin Luther King Jr,
Dalai Lama, and Albert Einstein. Gandhi whose beliefs were against
modernism and industrialization has been made an international
icon contradicting his personality and has been made a citizen of the
world.
It would be easy to say that Mahatma Gandhi is as relevant today as
he ever was, he is after all India’s best known person across the
world and was the first Indian global personality. Though he has
been misinterpreted but he will never be forgotten. In India however
his ideas are becoming increasingly irrelevant as what he visualised
and what India eventually turned out to be were miles apart. Gandhi
Ji visualized India to be a highly religious country but India became
secular. Politicians today who hold the same vision for India hardly
mention about him and its been 45 years since the last Gandhian was
in power There are very few Gandhians who still believe in his
ideologies of a simple lifestyle and have been labeled as cranks in the
society. However, Gandhi has indeed gained popularity worldwide as
many world peace movements have followed his ideologies and
Gandhi has received praise from many global personalities. Gandhi
whose beliefs were against modernism and industrialization has
been made an international icon contradicting his personality and
has been made a citizen of the world and lost his relevance in India.