dailyO
Politics

Embarrassing! Now even the media is mobbing Modi for selfies

Advertisement
Kanika Gahlaut
Kanika GahlautNov 29, 2015 | 20:19

Embarrassing! Now even the media is mobbing Modi for selfies

There are some photos of the prime minister's meeting the press, the day after his "conciliatory" and statesman-like speech, followed by a deadlock in discussions in Parliament and divisive speeches by his colleagues, that are going viral.

The images show swathes of people, mostly men, lunging towards the prime minister, fawning smiles on their faces and adoration in the eyes, offset by the prime minister's own distant, polite smile. It is difficult to gauge what he is thinking.

Advertisement

The pictures are shocking because the gentlemen in the frames are esteemed members of the press. Contrasted with the reception the prime minister got in say the UK just recently, where he was asked uncomfortable questions as is the way of the British press which is not shy to roast even their own politicians, these pictures become even more shocking in that backdrop.

There is no obvious "breach" - no one has been taking any favours, no exchange of money has been alleged or caught on camera. Yet, these images are shocking - for the culture of sycophancy they instantly and undeniably represent. And that, by "objective" members of the media.

The pictures bring the spotlight once again on the press, sycophancy, and Lutyens' Delhi, the seat of power, all of which are seen as having a link in the public's mind.

Sycophancy can be internal and external.

It can be obsequiousness by colleagues in a firm (or party) or an organisation, where dissent is squashed and the top hierarchy controls discourse and direction. Comparing the Sonia Gandhi-led Congress that preceded and the Narendra Modi-led BJP of today, it is difficult to make an assessment in either party's favour. The Congress speaks a lot about "inner party democracy" but the fact that Gandhi is only dynasty that seems to find favour in the party suggests this is more out of defensiveness than anything else. The BJP, on the other hand, is proving to be about Modi, Modi and Modi.

Advertisement

There is a hidden subtext in this voluntary display of sycophancy - anyone who does not show the minimum level of fawning and appreciation for the top boss can count her days numbered in the ranks. From the looks of it, this culture of sycophancy and hero worship is alive and well on both sides, despite what each claims.

The other type of sycophancy is social, whereby you have seemingly nothing to gain, your bread and butter does not directly depend on the level of admiration you display to the object of your attentions. This sycophancy seems more "democratic", seemingly people are just ingratiating themselves to look like fools on their own free will. However, when the love is directed towards the bosses of the ruling political party, there are again hidden subtexts: the promise of patronage, intended or unintended, which can indirectly carry benefits.

Lutyens' Delhi under the Congress thrived under this sort of patronage. Restaurants' prestige rose when Rahul Gandhi visited a bar. A budding fashion designer's rating shot up when Priyanka Gandhi and Robert Vadra graced his front row. An interior designer's entire social life and persona was built around her friendship with Mrs G. Many "friends of Rahul" rose or were seen to rise in the social ranks by association. This by no means suggests that these people may not have had merit, only that others equally meritorious may have been overshadowed. This is the grey area of patronage.

Advertisement

It also leads to a "me too" culture of sycophancy, an anxiety among the social circles, to somehow get access to the people in power, in the hope that the stardust will rub off on them too, heralding a sort of satellite group of social power. For instance, if Rahul Gandhi shows up at person A's party/event/show/drawing room, it puts A on top of the social pyramid. But B can console himself with the fact that he is on social terms with A, and is privy to at least second hand accounts of what "RG" said to A when he attended the said party, at a lower grade party by A at a later time which is for his less influential friends. And so on...

The subculture of seemingly voluntary and unforced sycophancy was also found in the old guard of the BJP, with LK Advani's daughter being a part of the media and social circuit and Ranjan Bhattacharya with his close proximity to forner prime minister AB Vajpayee also finding their way in conversations and drawing rooms of professional name-droppers.

As a scribe covering Page 3 parties in the late 1990s and early 2000s, I found the classifications and discriminations in guest lists slightly cruel, just like some Lutyens' folks sending invites with more expensive sweets to A-list friends, and less expensive to B-list friends. The social anxiety was tangible.

The Gandhis themselves perhaps cannot be blamed - they are a liberal clan, with interests in arts, literature and fashion. Unlike Prime Minister Modi, a bachelor, they are a family, with interests in cuisine, art, fashion, literature, adventure and so on, which informs their social life.

However, whether their being part of the social scene and conversation through patronage helped people get a leg up and build a culture of power by association can be debated, supported and contested in equal measure. It can be equally debated if this was healthy.

In contrast, this sort of patronage of individuals holding soft power is not visible to the same extent in Modi's Lutyens'. Actor Anupam Kher, for instance, showed up in Delhi to hold a "India is Tolerant" march in opposition to writers' cry of "rising intolerance", a hint at the Hindutva politics some members of the BJP had been playing after the general election win. Kher, in what in my opinion was nauseating in its sucking up, publicly invited the prime minister to meet this group of citizens at this march - the response from prime minister was zilch, just like his response to the writers returning awards for rising intolerance. By all accounts, he simply indulged neither.

Similar was the case of Pahlaj Nihalani - the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) chief who in some moment of inspiration best known to him made a fawning video starring the prime minister that was just pure embarrassing to watch for its sycophancy and got called out as such. In a hilarious interview to Mumbai Mirror the CBFC chief tells the journalist he has sent the video to the prime minister, and though he didn't say it, one is sufficiently convinced he was expecting a pat on the back in reply. Instead, there were reports the prime minister was unhappy with the video and wanted him sacked. We are yet to find out whether this actually happens, but even so, the "source-based" leak suggests that artistic sycophancy may not be indulged by the high command in this regime.

The pictures by themselves don't prove much - it's entirely possible that many of the folks wrestling to get ahead for that selfie may well have gone back and bunged a "negative" or non-flattering report on the prime minister or BJP, but they have shocked us so much because they are a reminder of how improper, covert, crude and in your face this social sucking up is.

Last updated: November 30, 2015 | 13:18
IN THIS STORY
Please log in
I agree with DailyO's privacy policy