The Spicy Lives of the Leaders
Tuesday, 13. October 2009 - 1:23 AM
What happens when a Westerner decides to write a book or make a movie on somebody belonging to the Dynasty? The outcome depends on what truth the said book or movie purports to reveal. If the truth even as much as hinges on the door of discomfort to the Dynasty, rest assured the book is never going to get written/published, or the movie is never going to be made/screened. So seems the case with Indian Summer.
The production of Hollywood movie Indian Summer has reportedly been put on hold and the reason is said to be the portrayal of the relationship between Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister, and Lady Edwina Mountbatten, wife of the last British viceroy of India.
According to reports, India government officials have asked to scrutinise the script to review how the Nehru-Edwina affair will be played out.
However, not all is lost. There’s a happy update of sorts–conditions apply*
* I&B ministry asked for certain scenes to be deleted from the film
* a government official will oversee the shoot to ensure that there are no diversions from the script.
* the film will also have to be cleared by the government before its release.
* If the producers choose to shoot in India, a liaison officer will be attached to the film shooting team. The officer will ensure that there are no deviations from the approved script. “In case there are any changes in the script at a later stage, they will have to be approved by the ministry…”
* the completed film have to be shown to a government representative.
* the ministry has reportedly suggested be knocked off include intimate scenes between Nehru and Edwina
* a disclaimer that the film was a work of fiction be added at the beginning
I consciously used the word Westerner. No Indian will ever write a book or make a movie critical of the Dynasty. The Indian male (with the highest respect for Indian women) is a rapdily dying species and whatever remains is engaged in a desperate battle for survival.
This is not the first time the Dynasty has unleashed its soldiers. In numerous instances the First Family has obturated attempts to reveal the truth about its past (we know the present anyway). The last such attempt that I can recall was when Katherine Frank found herself in a bit of a spot when she wrote Indira Gandhi’s biography.
And if you’re wondering if RTI and similar “reforms” somehow meant “freedom,” rest assured. Nehru’s India still, firmly retains its socialistic fetters–at least insofar as His Dynasty is concerned. You can only imagine the kind of delicate jugglery that Universal Studios would have had to do with the Guardians of the Dynasty’s Secrets to get this…err..”clearance (sic).” You can argue that our freedom fighters, leaders, and heroes should be accurately portrayed–their contributions, image, and respect intact, etcetra. I agree with that. However, this needs to meet two important criteria: first, nobody is above critical scrutiny, and more importantly the same degree of rigour–Control is the appropriate word–that is applied to any attempt to examine a member of the Nehru family must be applied to other, similar figures of the past. We have enough evidence to know otherwise.
While Nehru the politician has come under critical fire enough times especially after the Congress party’s steady decline over the years, I believe that a definitive, comprehensive, and objective account of the man, the politician is yet to be written. Our views of Nehru are mostly views formed by reading various facets of his life and work. And this comprehensive account won’t come–in the near future at least–from someone in India. If it hasn’t been written in 62 years, we wonder when it will be written. So while an excellent assessment by Michael Edwardes is in the right order–it is out of print now–it still views Nehru through Western eyes and biases. Even more revealing are the successive books about the man by Indian authors. Every new book on Nehru by these eminences has turned out to be a better hagiography than its predecessor. The definitive book thus won’t probably get written or allowed to be published as long as the Dynasty retains even a remote influence over the power center. It’s secure that way. However, the Dynasty doesn’t believe in taking even the smallest chance. Which is why it tries to throttle every single–even seemingly insignificant–attempt at critical examination. An entire ministry is dedicated to protecting the lusty secrets of one Family–whose contribution to the nation is mostly suspect–at taxpayer expense.
The current generation of Indians really doesn’t care about the sexual escapades of its leaders: as a mere example, the unhealthy link between the world of glamour and politics is too well-known for people to hold that as a vote-casting factor. It cost Jagjivan Ram his stab at Prime Ministership but that was an exception–it didn’t dent his image very seriously. However, the Dynasty continues to cover the Nehru-Edwina Mountbatten affair under an impenetrable shroud. Which only heightens unhealthy suspicions. That which is covered is more alluring, etc. The reason for this suspicion is further bolstered by a rather spicy piece that lengthily dwells on Edwina’s notriously amorous appetite.
But the fact is the couple shared an extraordinary love. Their deep attachment lasted from the moment they met in 1947 in New Delhi until the day Edwina died 13 years later. It was such a meaningful relationship that even Lord Mountbatten himself found it best to turn a blind eye.
Perhaps he even encouraged it, so that he could benefit from any insight into the Indian mind that his wife could pass him at this pivotal time in their history.
The underlined sentence stands to reason that the issue isn’t purely about the morality of their affair but something more. If Mountbatten was using his wife to gain an insight into the Indian mind, he was using the wrong instrument (crude as it may sound). Additionally, if he used even Nehru to gain the said insight, he was still using the wrong instrument. Nehru was as far away from the real Indian masses as Edwina or Mountbatten himself was. In the absence of concrete evidence, let’s grant the benefit of doubt to the couple-in-deep-spiritual-love. They were entitled to their lusts spirituality.
However, that is not the real issue. The Daily Mail dirt (linked above) on Edwina, Nehru, and Mountbatten repeats a phrase, which is as old as the Nehru-Edwina affair:
Whatever went on in the bedroom, the Mountbattens joined Nehru in a very public romance with India.
13. October 2009 - 1:49 AM
I think the other more important point was the fact that Nehru sought Edwina’s advise on matters of state.
This is the sole reason even foreign wives of diplomats and politicians are looked at suspiciously, not to speak of mistresses.
13. October 2009 - 7:21 AM
Who cares about whether Nehru had an affair or not–the Mountbattens had a weird marrige according to biographies–anyway that couple seems very sleazy to me–and Mountbatten was not very bright but just supposedly looked good strutting about in his medals and military decorations–
Its true that India still suffers for the mistakes of Nehru–I fail to see why Indians are so focused on his descendants? George Bernard Shaw called him the most civilized man he met—interesting–I think Nehru was very divorced from the “real” India–his Discovery of India is shows what a superficial understanding he had of India–he was born into a rich family and strikes me as a dandy–
13. October 2009 - 7:24 AM
Who cares about whether Nehru had an affair or not–the Mountbattens had a weird marrige according to biographies–anyway that couple seems very sleazy to me–and Mountbatten was not very bright but just supposedly looked good strutting about in his medals and military decorations–
Its true that India still suffers for the mistakes of Nehru–I fail to see why Indians are so focused on his descendants? George Bernard Shaw called him the most civilized man he met—interesting–I think Nehru was very divorced from the “real” India–his Discovery of India shows what a superficial understanding he had of India–he was born into a rich family and strikes me as a dandy with naive ideals–
13. October 2009 - 7:32 AM
Very well written Sandeep! especially towards the end.
The whole idea of the movie could be to tell indians – “Look, this is how your first PM behaved. See how he discarded the value of integrity and self-respect when in presence of white skins ? But he was very forceful towards native indians. So he was a grrrreat man.”
The message being, “follow his lead, suck up to foreigners, accept sonia maino as Her Majesty and always look upto whiteskins for directions. You indians are no good. Better to let white skins rule over you”.
13. October 2009 - 10:29 AM
What about M.O.Mathai’s banned books, Sandeep?
Any comments on below article from http://www.krishna.org:
Prabhupada And Nehru’s Incarnation
June 20, 2008 by the-truth-detector
Filed under India
9 Comments
The incident that we are going to recount took place in mid-sixties. It took place soon after Nehru’s death when Prabhupada was still alive. I was then working in an office in downtown Broadway in New York City, not too far from Brooklyn.
There at Brooklyn, in Henry Street, Prabhupada used to preach in a small house, which served, at the time, as some kind of a head-quarters of the Hare Krishna people. I used to go and attend their services, now and then, mostly after office and before returning to my apartment in Flushing, Queens.
Prabhupada, whenever he visited New York at the time, put up there and his sermons were attended in the evenings by a big crowd. Not only were there the usual chantings and eventual prasadam but there was a serious question and answer period. And the subjects varied from Varnashram Dharma to Reincarnation and many other similar topics. They were naturally of great interest to the local boys and girls, men and women of America but for us Hindus of India too, the question & answer period was of extreme interest and enlightenment. Those who have had the good fortune of hearing, first hand, Prabhupada’s sermons could easily imagine how charged the discussions were.
Nehru had died only a few weeks ago in India. Ashes from his funeral pyre had been strewn from airplanes, all over India. Every-where in India, the dead man’s eulogy was being sung and this was the man who was at the root of India’s unpreparedness when China attacked, the Kashmir imbroglio, the minority (or Mohammedan) problems in India and so on. It was amazing that many of the American disciples of Prabhupada were better informed of problems in India, generated by Nehru and his incompetence. However, the man had died only recently and out of a sense of propriety, no one spoke ill of Nehru in that congregation at the time.
Then a youngman asked Prabhupada a question on re-imcarnation. Was it true that most dead were reborn and passed through the cycle of life and death once again, except those few good men who attained nirvaana and were not born again but blended with Brahman or the Almighty? If so, could Prabhupada (who was considered to be a reincarnation of the sage Vyasa, the writer of the Mahabharatam) throw some light on the current status of Nehru. Did he obtain nirvaana or was he reborn; if so what kind of a body did he receive on his next birth?
The question was a loaded one, I thought. In fact, I had the misgiving that Prabhupada might refuse to answer. But then, I was wrong. I had not yet known Prabhupada so well. He was undaunted by any question and his reply came forth instantly. Quite clearly Prabhupada knew Nehru like the palm of his hand; it was us who knew so little of the man, thanks to all the well executed suppression of details of Nehru’s private and personal life by the GoI and the Indian media. For instance, even today, some half a century after Nehru and his family took over the reins of Indian government, we do not know who indeed was Indira’s father-in-law!
Prabhupada started his discourse. He said that Nehru was re-born almost immediately after his death, a thing that happens only to the most sinful people. He did not even have a short-lived taste of heaven before he was born again. What was worse, is that Nehru was born this time in the form of a dog. He was a dog in a small town of Sweden. His master had another dog before the dog-Nehru was acquired by him and so the dog-Nehru had to share the love of his master with another dog.
Prabhupada explained that to be born as a dog, after having been born as a Kashmiri Brahmin in India, is a big fall. It indicated that Nehru had led a vile life, a very vile life, during his existence as a man in India. Also, Nehru’s hatred for anything vaishnava did not make things any easier for him.
That Nehru was a meat-eater, specially beef-eater, a regular wine-drinker, made things even worse for him. On top of that, Nehru was (a fact which we did not know then and learnt later, much later, only after having read M.O. Mathai’s treatises on Nehru; Mathai should know for he was the Catholic private secretary for Nehru for a decade or so) a notorious womanizer. It was not only Mrs. Mountbatten that he slept with on a regular basis while our jawans were dying on battle fields in the north-east and in Kashmir; he used to sleep with each and every woman he could lay his hands on. Thus, he had left a chain of bastards one of whom had been delivered in a Catholic nunnery in Bangalore. In the mean time, his sidekick, one Krishna Menon, became the Minister of Defense. First thing he did was dismantle the Ichhapore Gun Factory and turned it into a coffee making machine factory. He was a communist and he loved the Chinese more than he loved Indians.
Prabhupada was quite discreet; we know now, for he did not divulge to us at the time that Nehru finally died of syphilis (exactly like the communist leader Lenin of Russia) and not a bullet wound on the battle front. Prabhupada, however, told us in detail all the harms Nehru did to the Hindus of India, all the insults that he had heaped on them during his reign.
Nehru used to brag of his non-Hindu upbringing. He used to say openly that he was brought up as a Mohammedan, educated as a westerner; it was only by accident that he was born a Hindu. It is now known that he was born in a house in the red-light district of Allahabad, where his father Motilal used to ply a brothel-keeper’s trade. No one wants to talk of this dark side of Nehru’s upbringing. On the other hand, it is said openly, wrongly of course, that he was born in the Anand Bhavan, which was not even owned by Moti Lal at the time Nehru was born.
However, the few little details that we learnt from Prabhupada opened our eyes and I returned home very depressed. I was even more depressed to think that our people in India were singing all kinds of fulsome obituaries for this man who was worse than a traitor to the Hindus, the overwhelming majority of India. What was wrong? The next few years showed us all that was wrong! His daughter, in order to create differences between the Hindus and the Sikhs, the fighting arm of the Hindus since generations, attacked the sacred temple at Hari-Mandir Sahib in Amritsar. She had to pay for the crime with her life and event-ually, as we have all seen, our gods saw to it that the dynasty was totally destroyed for the sins of Nehru, now a dog in Sweden! -
13. October 2009 - 10:43 AM
There is already a Hindi movie which I saw a few years ago. It was about Sardar V Patel. It wasnt a big hit though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trx0AUOgaPw
13. October 2009 - 1:31 PM
“Nehru’s India still, firmly retains its socialistic fetters–at least insofar as His Dynasty is concerned.”
While talking about the Dynasty currently, “socialism” is too benign a word. In fact, we might even be mis-diagnosing the disease afflicting us, thereby leading to a wrong subscription.
The Dynasty is a power-hungry autocracy, that no loner even pretends to be socialistic.
13. October 2009 - 5:04 PM
Why are they even called a “Dynasty”–that makes it sound as if these people are something when they are a bunch of mediocrities used by Congress to keep a hold on power and itself unified (India and Rajiv did not even have college degrees and neither does the current Congress leader–at least Nehru was capable of writing a book in India–even if his understanding might appear superficial) Can you imagine any other advanced country where some literally “illiterate” people lead parties and make policies regarding the lives of millions? Is that not an embarassment?–I also do not like the fact that they are called “first” family–how are they a first family? Up until Nehru and Indira I can see a heritage but after that?
Even in America many opposed Kennedy’s daughter as governor saying she was not qualified–the voting population is at least critical—if a people constantly “elects” members of the same family to lead them, then that says something about the voters who do not demand something better…
13. October 2009 - 7:44 PM
For more of Nehru, S.R. Goel’s take on him in the last chap of ‘How I became a Hindu?’ is also worth reading..
Link: http://voiceofdharma.org/books/hibh/ch9.htm
13. October 2009 - 10:11 PM
How far are we from a Kim-Jong II in India? Can we cut the suspense already and aoint the “prince” to his rightful place on 7-Race course road?
14. October 2009 - 9:44 AM
Who cares whom he slept with and for how long? Its only common who lacks such opportunities
. The man in consideration is just a politician and we should not be much concerned about his personal life.
As politician and leader he was a disaster, if there is any politician I hate the most, its him.
He was a product of inferiority complex and opportunism.British gave control to a man who represented them in fullest form, and foreign rule continues to date through his heir.
WAKE UP HINDUS…
14. October 2009 - 9:29 PM
First things first. At the time of his affair with Edwina, Nehru was a widower. And Mountbatten didn’t give a flying fornication to his own wife’s with Nehru. So there’sn’t a transgression of a moral boundary by any of the actors involved. Their relationship doesn’t make either Nehru or Edwina a person of “loose character” or of “low morals” in my eyes. I know this statement would get the goat of purists and moralists who, like the Catholic Church, are always worried that somebody somewhere is having a good time, but I state it because I want to make sure it is clearly understood as to what’s my beef with this Indian Summer episode and what isn’t.
My issue is with the complete silence of Indian “liberals” on the government’s action against the film. Did cat get these jokers’ tongues? They are supposed to be out on the streets protesting the Indian government’s stalinist diktats restricting the creative freedom of film-makers. But they are silent. Especially the Padmasri and Padmabhushan winning types. The reason is not diffuclt to see; the subject matter involves one of those Great Indian Holy Cows, Nehru. It is not just that a protest would displease the Nehru family. There’s a bigger vested interest at stake: any lowering of Nehru’s prestige in the public’s eye diminishes that of the liberals as well.
A closing comment on Daily Mail’s cliched remark about the “very public romance” of Nehru and the Mountbattens with India: Generally, a successful romance leads to some action under the sheets. In this case, it most likely did. They screwed India.
14. October 2009 - 10:23 PM
OT bhai:
“I know this statement would get the goat of purists and moralists who, like the Catholic Church, are always worried that somebody somewhere is having a good time…”
Nice touch with that inclusion of Catholic Church
I saw a similar comment from you on Rajeev’s blog as well.
Your statement does two things if I dont agree with what you say –
1) It either makes me a moralist and a purist,
2) Or I would be automatically put alongside (Oh Horrors of Horrors!) the Catholic Church.
You have been battling autocratic ideologies like Communism and Abrahamism, but ironically, this statement uses the same kind of rhetoric as these ideologies do, to silence any naysayers to your statement.
By the way, it can be proven that your statement is wrong from a Sanaatana point of view.
15. October 2009 - 1:30 AM
I hope it is not forgotten that Nehru sought Edwina’s advise on matters of State. There is also the strongest possibility that Mounbatten *wisely* used his wife to mould Nehru.
This seems to be at the core of the issue. Not the fact of him having had an affair.
Let’s look at it this way; No one would have complained if Nehru had been a Nationalist securer of Hindusthan’s self interests.
But then, given his proclivities one may well ask if “Nationalist self-interest” was ever in his sights?
15. October 2009 - 8:00 PM
I hope it is not forgotten that Nehru sought Edwina’s advise on matters of State. There is also the strongest possibility that Mounbatten *wisely* used his wife to mould Nehru.
Oh Please!!! Mountbattan was not very intelligent–I doubt he would have been interested in “moulding” Nehru–now we are getting close to a Bollywood style analysis. Mountbatten alghough not very smart looked good in his military attire and he had the trappings of wealth and power–hence he could create an “effect” strutting around in his military decorations…
As for Nehru he certainly had certain qualities–they just were not the correct ones to lead a nation–he was the victim of his very naive ideals–people like the great playwright George Bernard Shaw thought he was the most “civilized” man he had enountered–so he was certainly not mediocre–perhaps should have been a diplomat and not someone to lead a major political party–
15. October 2009 - 9:00 PM
Larissa, “moulding” can mean *using* too.
Moreover Nehru’s letters to Edwina prove beyond doubt that he took issues of State to her for advise or to find solace or to confide or whatever. It was information he shared with a foreigner and worse, former colonial, freely.
Mountbatten need not have been very intelligent to use this free information in terms of accessing it and feeding it to his colleagues.
Nehru was a disaster as a politician, he would have been a monumental disaster as a diplomat.
Prima-donnas belong in the theater not in politics or diplomacy.
15. October 2009 - 9:41 PM
I don’t think Mountbatten had the intelligence to “use” anyone–to me it seems he was happy strutting in his military uniform…Anyway the affairs of politicians do not interest me (or the private lives of anyone)–Nehru was disastrous to India because of his misguided ideals–they could have found use elsewhere–such as in the person of an armchair academic–I think the most disastrous legacy was that of the daughter who insisted on following her father’s misguided policies despite their apparent failures…
15. October 2009 - 10:35 PM
Larissa, you still seem to not see that a man who was so enamoured of a foreign wife of a former colonial ruler; and shared his political thinking with her freely – could have been influenced by what that lady advised him.
You also don’t seem to see that this lady could have been speaking with her husband about political problems Nehru wrote her. Your “thinking” about Mountbatten’s intelligence or the lack of it is immaterial. All Mountbatten had to do was to take these notes to someone in power.
When it comes to affairs of politicians, morality is secondary. What is primary is the potential damage it may cause. Perhaps the reason for being morally correct itself is the fact that it avoids such errors of judgement.
16. October 2009 - 12:09 AM
You also don’t seem to see that this lady could have been speaking with her husband about political problems Nehru wrote her. Your “thinking” about Mountbatten’s intelligence or the lack of it is immaterial. All Mountbatten had to do was to take these notes to someone in power.
Its not my “thinking” but well known to all. Read the daughter’s bio about her mother –they certainly were not what you would call “smart” people–just wealthy and had power –I just can’t see her talking about “political” problems “seriously” and then conveying it to her husband–I think you give these people way too much credit…Nehru’s faults lie elsewhere, not because he wrote letters to this lady…This sounds more like a Bollywood movie…
16. October 2009 - 1:46 PM
Your just not getting the point. I give up.
16. October 2009 - 5:35 PM
Well you should read the biography written by Mountbatten’s daughter–its one of those large print type books books–you know, the kind that is written by someone not too intelligent…you’ll see what a sleazy couple the Mountbattens were.
He was not very intelligent, nor was his wife, he just looked good in military uniform and people were impressed because of the “image” and because the couple had the trappings of wealth and power…
16. October 2009 - 5:41 PM
As to what relation Nehru had to this lady who cares–except perhaps the Daily Mail. We should be more concerned with why exactly Nehru was not a good leader of India–personal lives of politicians are just diversions from the real issues.
16. October 2009 - 6:07 PM
Also there is something called “constructive” criticism, and not criticism that caters to the LCD…When I hear from Hindus hear why Nehru was not a good leader, I want to hear things such as his policy towards China was a disaster, his take on Kashmir was a disaster, his educational policies which favored only the creation of elite institutions such as the IIT’s and neglected mass education were a failure etc., etc. I do not want to hear he had some relations with another man’s wife or as one absurd commentator above claimed his parentage was uncertain–this is mud slinging and makes people lose any credibility they might otherwise have. I am sure if someone were to examine our personal lives to the minutest details, they would see we are not all perfect. So lets leave criticism of a dead man to his failures in public life–anything else just amounts to the level of Bollywood gossip.
16. October 2009 - 9:32 PM
Larissa, when a nation’s leader sleeps with the enemy’s wife and shares his political views with her – discussing why is “bollywood gossip”?
So tell me how dumb Mountbatten was? Was he dumb enough to have Gandhi, Patel and Nehru accept him as free Hindusthan’s first Governor General with all its consequent consequences?
That kind of dumbness is what should bother intelligent Hindus.
16. October 2009 - 10:50 PM
Well Mountbatten was who he was because he was the grandchild of Victoria. His becoming Governor General has nothing to do with individual intelligence or excellence–he was just representative of the country ruling India–nothing more. So whats your point? Who cares about Nehru’s relationship with his wife? Who cares?
16. October 2009 - 10:55 PM
And even if he did talk politics to her, I doubt she “understood” much–
17. October 2009 - 12:30 AM
*sigh*
I’m talking about his Governor Generalship post 1947.
17. October 2009 - 5:45 PM
Will there a film about the love affair of uma bharti and govindacharya ?
17. October 2009 - 7:46 PM
http://www.livemint.com/2009/09/10210732/Why-Hindus-should-weed-out-Git.html?d=1
I wonder what your views are on this…
18. October 2009 - 12:22 AM
@pankaj,
Ya sure if they produce bas_turds who will screw up India, then we will have a film for sure to show why people with loose values and bas_turds are dangerous to society, nation and civilization.
19. October 2009 - 11:48 PM
Slightly off topic but isnt it fascinating how we lost 3 gandhis within a span of 15 years (sanjay, Indira and Rajeev) and after that all has been quiet (for 18 years now). I guess they acheived their goal
20. October 2009 - 10:08 PM
Waiting for a well written piece from you on the treachery of UPA 2. No one has clearly articulated it although Bharat Rakshak folks have mentioned it.
As for the UPA-2, they are a bunch of traitors. Period. Every act of theirs has been towards damaging India’s strategic interests. Be it the sell out of a nuke deal, the covering up of Pok-2 tests, the sell out at S-e-S, the sell out post 26/11, the acquiesing to China over border incursions, Tibet, Dalai Lama and god knows what else & not to forget to forthcoming sell out by MMS on NPT, CTBT. No act of theirs can ever been in national interests. Period.
3. January 2010 - 3:59 AM
You can see some really spicy photos of Edwina-Nehru in this Tamil language page – http://uyirmmai.com/Uyirosai/Contentdetails.aspx?cid=2353