Congress under Sonia-Rahul is all about bland speeches

By Shiv Visvanathan Dynastic parties create their own creative style. The Congress of Nehru and Indira Gandhi was much more rhetorical. Under Sanjay it was almost monosyllabic. Under Rajiv Gandhi it was tentative. Now under the mother-son duo of Sonia and Rahul, the speeches are too bland to really merit an archive. Instead it’s the silences that speak volumes or at least we read volumes into it. But the same silence sends out different messages when it comes to mother versus son. Consider Sonia first. She has little access to Hindi as the rhetorical carrier of Indian politics. She speaks it as if it is a laboured exercise in table manners. Her hybrid Hindi evokes derision and sympathy in equal measure. Her tailor-made speech is a sign of labour. It establishes her as the outsider perpetually working to be an insider. Because her access to language is limited, Sonia has to depend on dress, body and manners to outline her native authenticity. It is here that she shows a level of comfort. Sonia appears to be a creature of few words. She realises she is the final stamp of approval. She can be sparse with words because she has the last word. Contrast her with our PM. His silence indicates diffidence, a sense of unease, of not being quite at home. His silence adds to the sense of scandal, where gossip substitutes for fact. Sonia’s silence indicates power. Her silence is her presence. It embodies her complete control of the party especially because it contrasts with the raucous sycophancy of her colleagues who wax eloquent while begging for attention. A sigh, a nod, a whisper from Sonia is met with an epidemic of enthusiastic interpretations. The fact she hardly says anything significant is glossed over. Unfortunately, Rahul Gandhi has not reached the comfort level of a Sonia. His speech is tentative. One gets a sense of watching a boy walking gingerly in a new costume uttering words to acquire a sense of familiarity with his role. There is something of a prince in waiting about him. The irony is that the audience has got tired of waiting. Every scandal, every election is a wait for him to do something meaningful but he prefers restraint and silence. His tentative forays into speech indicate that he is still uncooked, still waiting to be ordained. Compare the political economy of the two performances. Sonia’s silence conveys comfort with power. It is virtually immune to the factional politics of the Congress. She signals that all sides need her imprimatur. She is an oracle who speaks through her various loyal deputies. The entire economy of speech reflects the true ecology of power in the Congress. [caption id=“attachment_49816” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“Why is Rahul the perpetual prince in waiting. Is it because Sonia is afraid to expose him? Is it because she feels her presence is more than adequate? Is she converting a thing of beauty into a toy forever? Pawan Kumar/Reuters”] [/caption] Rahul’s silence, on the other hand, almost makes him appear like a spectator. It is almost as if he prefers watching, and listening to acting. He has converted listening to an art form. The press has to work hard to elicit quotes from him and their very inanity makes for silence. Rumour has it that Digvijaya Singh is one of Rahul’s mentors. In an odd way, Singh has become loquacious, garrulous in his comments baiting the opposition. Its almost as if Singh’s verbal outbursts are compensations for his student’s silence. Rahul Gandhi’s occasional comments about Nitish Kumar during the Bihar elections or on Mayawati are flicked aside. Nitish almost sounded like a headmaster reprimanding a student when he told Rahul to become a minister or a CM and handle problems for a year if he wished to be taken seriously. One cannot blame Nitish. Often when Rahul talks of poverty he almost sounds like a boy scout out on a picnic who discovered poverty instead of nature. Except for one phase, when he outsmarted the Shiv Sena, Rahul’s performances have been forgettable. The question is why is Rahul the perpetual prince in waiting. Is it because Sonia is afraid to expose him? Is it because she feels her presence is more than adequate? Is she converting a thing of beauty into a toy forever? Rahul’s tentativeness seems misplaced now. One senses a clear thinker, a doer and yet his tacit silences reveal his lack of sensitivity to politics as a performance. Indian politicians from Vajpayee and Jairam Ramesh to Jayalalithaa and Karunanidhi are all excellent actors. I think it is the fear of mistakes that destroys a major career. All Rahul has to do is speak, enact politics and something new and interesting might appear. The sheer relief would be invigorating. Rahul Gandhi represents youth, the confidence of a new demography where 75 percent of our population is young. India is presented as a space for youthful innovation. Yet by being the perpetual prince in waiting Rahul parodies his own position caught between the Congress of seniority and the new Congress of change. The Congress is facing a crisis of trust. Scandals cling to it like fungus to a bark of wood. The party’s current spokesmen represent clichéd Congress-speak. One wishes Rahul would become spokesman and articulate, explain and debate his vision. The sadness lies in the silence. It has gone on too long to rank even as a ritual. One wishes someone could fast forward the politics of Rahul Gandhi. Shiv Visvanathan is a social science nomad.