India harbors a planet’s worth of diversity. Rare are the unifying symbols in a country shared by over a billion inhabitants, professing myriad religions, speaking over 1,000 languages. One of these symbols is Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, revered as the Mahatma (“Great Soul”).
For Gandhi is more than India’s Founding Father; his method of non-violent resistance against the British colonial power meant that India’s eventual independence – although marred by the violent trauma of Pakistan’s separation – also was a moral victory. His example provided inspiration to subsequent emancipation movements, such as the Civil Rights movement in the US. Gandhi (b. 1869 in Gujarat) was assassinated in 1948, immediately after independence.
This stamp was issued by India in the year 2000, showing Gandhi’s flowing cape taking on the shape of India. Gandhi, a firm believer in self-reliance as well as non-violence, would have spun that cape himself. His choice of weaving by the masses as an act of non-violent resistance wasn’t as curious as it seems: it required discipline, involved women and inspired his countrymen and -women to spurn British-made textiles.
Gandhi’s birthday, October 2, is celebrated worldwide as International Day of Non-Violence. How about holding that thought for the other 364 days?
A link to this map was sent in by Pranay Manocha. Thanks!
Gandhi was born in 1869, not 1896.
Comment by sexbeer — February 18, 2009 @ 8:24 pm
The rendition of Gandhi reminds me of a Japanese zen ink drawing.
Comment by David — February 18, 2009 @ 8:35 pm
“marred by the seperation of pakistan?” Over a MILLION people were killed in a little over two months. That’s a little more than a “marr” don’tcha think?
Comment by Messy — February 18, 2009 @ 8:38 pm
More Nosferatu than Gandhi, alas.
Comment by Vinny Burgoo — February 18, 2009 @ 8:54 pm
I read Gandhi’s head as a subtle reference to India’s claim on Kashmir.
Comment by Roberto Bonvallet — February 18, 2009 @ 9:59 pm
And where the hell is Bangladesh?
Comment by lukas — February 18, 2009 @ 10:28 pm
That’s got to be the most abstract rendering of a head of state I’ve ever seen. I suppose it’s a testament to Gandhi’s iconic status that it only takes like 4 brushstrokes to make him recognizable.
Comment by Chachy — February 18, 2009 @ 11:35 pm
Sorry for being a spoilsport, but the displayed reproduction of the stamp above is considered copyright infringement under Indian Law.
India’s Postage department website states that:
“Re-production of stamps is allowed for illustration purposes in Philatelic Publication or in an article relating wholly on postage stamps which may appear in any magazine, newspaper or publication of a general character. Such reproduction should however, be only in black. If stamps are to be produced in colour for publicity purposes, prior permission of the Director General of Posts must be obtained. To avoid similarity with the postage , such reproduction must be distinctively in smaller or larger sizes than the actual stamp and must be without perforation on the edges. Further, across bar will also be placed on one- corner of the stamp, obliterating the denomination. It must be noted that reproduction of the stamp in colour of the actual size of the stamp with perforation of the edges may be deemed to be taken as production of the actual stamp”
–
Source: http://www.indiapost.gov.in/Netscape/Philately.html#Conditions%20for%20reproduction
Comment by Ambuj Saxena — February 18, 2009 @ 11:47 pm
@ sexbeer (#1):
stupid mistake, will correct immediately.
@ Messy (#3):
No one-word description will do that horror justice. But the exact quote is slightly longer: “marred by the violent trauma of Pakistan’s separation”. Still inadequate, but keep in mind that this is an oblique reference in a brief piece on another subject.
@ Ambuj Saxena (#8):
I appreciate your effort in digging up the exact quote pertaining to the copyright attached to this particular image. This might be a good time to explain my general, but unspoken rule regarding how I use images.
Unfortunately, as this blog is a strictly after-hours operation, obtaining prior permission for all potentially copyrighted material on Strange Maps would take up so much time that it would effectively end this blog.
My only option is to presume the tacit benevolence of all copyright holders. I try to reciprocate by attributing all pictures to where they were found. However, if those copyright holders send me a takedown notice, I will remove the relevant image immediately.
It speaks for people’s magnanimity and benevolence that no one has ever asked me to remove their picture. I hope the same goes for the Indian postal services.
Comment by strangemaps — February 19, 2009 @ 12:24 am
@ 5 and 6…Gandhi’s vision was of a united subcontinent. The concept of Partition was anathema to him. The motivation of his assassin was retribution for his attempts to reconcile the two countries during and after the first Kashmir War.
So you’ll pardon me for saying, I hope, that to depict it otherwise is to give power to the forces that killed him. The image on his stamp reflects his beliefs and not the lesser political reality he worked against for much of his life.
@Strangemaps…Unless I’m mis-guessing that you’re an American, you’re in the clear here for copyright in any case. As a general rule your country protects reproduction of images for the purposes of discussing them in the context of politics…which, look at that, we’re doing. Indian law may say differently, but unless you’re actually in India that’s a mere curiosity.
Comment by pauldrye — February 19, 2009 @ 1:11 am
Here’s the search result for Mother India. She is always shown to fit in the map. Her shape forms the country’s political borders:
http://images.google.co.in/images?hl=en&rlz=1C1CHMA_en-GBIN312IN312&ei=I_qcScKeGZKwkAWV26SbBQ&resnum=0&q=bharat+mata&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=JPqcSdGYNoT06QOx7qjTAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&resnum=1&ct=title
Comment by Which Main? What Cross? — February 19, 2009 @ 6:21 am
And here’s some art where Mother India (Bharat mata) is nude and poses like a map.
http://www.4to40.com/images/music_art_news/2008/bharat_mata_by_husain.jpg
Comment by Which Main? What Cross? — February 19, 2009 @ 6:23 am
@ pauldrye (#10):
Sure, that was his vision. But making that vision into a map today (on a stamp that says “Republic of India” on the side, produced by a government agency!) can be misunderstood as an irredentist claim on those territories. It’s political TNT.
Comment by lukas — February 19, 2009 @ 7:03 am
I sure like the part about having Nonviolence Day the whole year round. If only it were possible… :(
Comment by Watson Waterstone — February 19, 2009 @ 12:27 pm
The limits of Gandhian non-violence were demonstrated by his advice to the Jews suffering murderous persecution by the Nazis: the Jews should commit mass suicide as a protest.
Hmmmm…pass that by me again…
And Hitler would have thanked them for doing the job for him.
Couple of points you wouldn’t glean from the original post:
1. Gandhi was assassinated by a fellow Indian, a Hindu. He was not considered the father of the nation by all Hindus. Some clearly considered him a traitor for allowing its dismemberment. There was substantial support for the Indian National Army that fought with the Japanese against the British. Not all Indians supported a pacifist approach.
2. Gandhi, the great Indian patriot, spent 21 years abroad, in South Africa.
Comment by marisbo — February 20, 2009 @ 12:16 am
Off topic, but our Attorney General has just declared the USA to be a land of Racist Cowards. Can you find a map correlating the location of Racist Cowards and Bitter Clingers?
Comment by Cappy — February 20, 2009 @ 1:48 am
thank you very much
Comment by اس ام اس عید نوروز — February 20, 2009 @ 9:13 am
You never know, marisbo; maybe they should have also asked Hitler to “unclench his fist”…
Comment by Alex — February 20, 2009 @ 3:55 pm
ALex – They did – in the 30s – they called it “Appeasement”.
It didn’t work then and it won’t work now.
Comment by marisbo — February 21, 2009 @ 2:51 am
Does anyone know what philosophers helped shape Gandhi’s view of nonviolence?
Comment by coralsbey — February 21, 2009 @ 10:54 am
Firstly, thanks Stranegmaps for posting this. I think this is a powerful piece of art and also cartographic ingenuity.
I’m slightly surprised that many commenters have chosen to ignore the beauty of this representation and would rather discuss points that are tangential to this stamp’s purpose. So perhaps I will respond to some of these comments and hopefully also explain (as an Indian) the objective and simplicty that this piece of art represents.
@ Messy (#3)
You are right – it was more than just a blip in India/Pakistan’s history. My grandparents, uncles and aunts were hindu and were forced to migrate from Pakistan to India. My family feels the effects of that to this day.
At the same time, I think strangegmaps’ reference to that event was fair and just and in context.
@ Roberto Bonvallet (#5)
Absolutely. It has always been (even at the time of independence) one of India’s professed principles that it is a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic democracy. That, in no small part, also fits with Gandhi’s ideologies of all people living in harmony. So it is essential to the idea of India, that Kashmir, as a primarily muslim state, stays with it and prospers within its borders. Its not only a test of democracy but a test of India. It is for the same reason that Gandhi was opposed to the idea of partition – for him it was a loss of faith and against all principles, that the Muslim League was so adamant on having their own country and the Congress stuck up on their obsession with power.
@ Chachy (#7)
Exactly – this is one of the reasons I sent this link to strangemaps. 4 brushstrokes not only signify Gandhi – but also his principles of non-violence, his humility and the idea of India. His ideas were powerful enough to bring down the british empire, free India and were prime motivators for both Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela.
@ Marisbo (#15)
You are trivializing a powerful thought. Suicide is the greatest protest a person can make. So this was a powerful idea. Gandhi did not mean that the Jews should kill themselves in the privacy of their homes – but to use the expression of suicide as a statement against one of the most horrific persecutions of all time.
Of course not all Indians supported a pacifist approach, but Gandhi considered himself neither Hindu nor Muslim, so for you to specifically point out Hindu connections is not representative of facts.
@ coralsbey (#20)
Gandhi’s view was shaped mainly by the non-violent ideals held in Buddhism and Hinduism (also why most Hindus are vegetarian) to not harm life in any shape or form. As both Hinduism and Buddhism were religions that were born in India, it can be argued that non-violence is an intrinsic Indian ideal – although clearly that has degraded in recent decades.
Comment by Pranay Manocha — February 22, 2009 @ 12:55 am
Marisbo: I know – I was being ironic. Asking dictators to “unclench their fist,” as in a much-quoted line from the festivities of Jan. 20, doesn’t work any better in 2009 than it did in 1939.
Comment by Alex — February 22, 2009 @ 1:13 am
Alex –
I thought you were but I took the opportunity to ram home the point for others! Sorry.
Pranay Manocha –
I do think Gandhi was a great man, but as with all persons involved in politics, religion and philosophy he is not immune to criticism.
Whether you commit suicide in private or public it is still suicide.
Are you familiar with how Hitler advised the British government to deal with Gandhi?
Hitler advised Lord Halifax in 1937 to ’shoot Gandhi and if that does not suffice to reduce them to submission, shoot a dozen leading members of Congress; and if that does not suffice, shoot two hundred and so on until order is established. You will see how quickly they will collapse as soon as you make it clear that you mean business.’
It is quite clear that faced with something like Hitler’s regime Gandhi would have been dead with a few days of starting his campaign for independence.
Comment by marisbo — February 22, 2009 @ 9:24 pm
Marisbo – You’re clearly ignorant of the philosophy of non-violence.
Gandhi was the power holding the hundred of millions of people in India back. Removing him would have guaranteed the most violent storm in history.
Gandhi’s power didn’t come as much from what he did, but more so from he didn’t do.
Anyway, unfortunately there will always be some people who remain convinced of the power of aggression over non-aggression. I don’t think a couple of comments by me are going to change that, so I will stop.
Comment by Pranay Manocha — February 22, 2009 @ 9:41 pm
“Asking dictators to “unclench their fist,” as in a much-quoted line from the festivities of Jan. 20, doesn’t work any better in 2009 than it did in 1939.”
“Festivities”? What exactly are you referring to?
Comment by AJ — February 22, 2009 @ 9:41 pm
AJ: the festivities for the inauguration of President of the United States Barack H. Obama. You might have heard about it; it was in all of the papers.
Comment by Alex — February 23, 2009 @ 4:27 am
Pranay –
I think it’s a bit intolerant to assume people don’t understand what is being said just because they don’t agree with you.
The problem of injustice and how to react it is an old one and a very difficult ethical issue – as we see in Zimbabwe now. Were the MDC right to join the vile dictator’s government? On balance I’d say yes, but it was a close call.
The Tibetans, like Ghandi’s followers, have pursued a path of non-violence. They, unlike India, have not regained their independence. The reason? China is ruled by a ruthless dictatorship prepared to pull down religious shrines, import millions of foreigners in a demographic war and use mass torture and execution of rebels – things that Britain was reluctant to attempt.
There are no easy answers here.
The fact that between 500,000 and 1 million died at partition suggests to me that Gandhi was not exactly successful in promoting non-violence on the sub-continent. Maybe if he had promoted a Maoist style peasant guerilla army fewer people would have died. Who knows? Who can say? We can all play the might have been game.
By the way I don’t absolve the UK or Mountbatten in particular in any way from their dereliction of duty moral responsibility for the partition deaths and the many crimes of Imperialism.
Comment by marisbo — February 23, 2009 @ 1:36 pm
What is there in your background that gives you the ability to work with cartographic, sociological and historical data and meld it all together with signs, symbols, metaphor and the like?
Or have I just answered my own question by shoving all of the inhabitants into the same sentence?
Beautifully done, as usual. Copyrights be damned.
Comment by rationalpsychic — February 25, 2009 @ 6:04 am
[...] Strange Maps Publicado el Febrero 28, 2009 por Claudio Martignoni Ver explicación en Gandhi As India [...]
Pingback by Strange Maps « Claudio Martignoni Blog — February 28, 2009 @ 8:11 am
@ messy- Yes a million people perished. And that was ‘divide and rule’ policy being implemented which was initiated in the Morley-minto ‘reforms’ of 190 for having communal electorates and later on having Jinnah(harldy a pious muslim who drank, smoked heavily along with having a linking for pork). Gandhi had nothing to do with it. To think that a man could control each individual is illogical. And just to let you know, when India and Pakistan gained independence, he was in Calcutta – fasting over the lives lost in the violence.
@Marisbo- You seem to betray a elementary understanding of the Gandhi’s non cooperation and civil disobedience movement-something which is understood by most 7th graders when they study international history.
1. Gandhi was in a British territory and not a german territory and used the somewhat better rule of law established by them to his advantage. No matter how much you wish to speculate, it WASN’T Germany…we know it, the people know it, you apparently do not.
2. non cooperation and civil disobedience meant exactly that. Show restraint in every form not just while facing violence but also when being ordered to do something against your dignity. hitler did not kill all jews, gypsies.. He used the able bodied to work in unbearable conditions and yet contribute in a MAJOR way to the Nazi war effort. With Gandhi, almost every Indian didn’t cooperate in the illl conceived British endeavours leading to a loss in British productivity, exports,and gargantuan amounts of foregone revenue. Beating up and taking the task of achieving the massacre 300 million people takes resources no matter how easy it is to kill them and when they are not going to work it harrdly worth the cost not to mention not the most intelligent way of getting the people back to work. So had Gandhi’s words been adopted in totality all over Europe, the war would’ve been over earlier. Same applies to the Japanese who neede the Chinese in their war effort.
Comment by Someone rightly — March 2, 2009 @ 7:01 am
I didnt complete the reply to Messy in my previous post. So here goes the reply
@ messy- Yes a million people perished. And that was ‘divide and rule’ policy being implemented which was initiated in the Morley-Minto ‘reforms’ of 1909 for having communal electorates and later on having Jinnah do a volte-face in March 1940 by demanding a Pan-Islamic state (Jinnah was hardly a pious muslim who drank and smoked heavily along with having a liking for pork). Gandhi had nothing to do with it. And when India and Pakistan gained independence, he was in Calcutta – fasting over the lives lost in the violence. He did not attend the ceremonies at all. later when he was assasinated, he was on his way to pakistan to spend time there to oversee and end to the Hindu Muslim clashed. The short sightedness of the Muslim League, Jinnah’s ambition and the cynicism of Britian made partition written into the logic of Indian history by the 1940s.
@Marisbo- You seem to betray a elementary understanding of the Gandhi’s non cooperation and civil disobedience movement-something which is understood by most 7th graders when they study international history.
1. Gandhi was in a British territory and not a german territory and used the somewhat better rule of law established by them to his advantage. No matter how much you wish to speculate, it WASN’T Germany…we know it, the people know it, you apparently do not. So GET OVER IT.
2. non cooperation and civil disobedience meant exactly that. Show restraint in every form not just while facing violence but also when being ordered to do something against your dignity. hitler did not kill all jews, gypsies.. He used the able bodied to work in unbearable conditions and yet contribute in a MAJOR way to the Nazi war effort. With Gandhi, almost every Indian didn’t cooperate in the illl conceived British endeavours leading to a loss in British productivity, exports,and gargantuan amounts of foregone revenue. Beating up and taking the task of achieving the massacre 300 million people takes resources no matter how easy it is to kill them and when they are not going to work it harrdly worth the cost not to mention not the most intelligent way of getting the people back to work. So had Gandhi’s words been adopted in totality all over Europe, the war would’ve been over earlier. Hitler was cruel but not an idiot as his success in conquering territories displayed his tactical genius. The massacre of each labourer wouldnt have sufficed. Having only the Germans contribute in the war effort without additional labour (whether forced and consented to) would hardly have gotten his troops all over Europe the way it eventually did. Same applies to the Japanese who needed the Chinese in their war effort.
Comment by Someone rightly — March 2, 2009 @ 7:13 am
@messy: It was certainly a more than a blip but it was the britishers who were responsible for the consequences due to their divide and rule governance.
@5: You may read Gandhi’s head as claim to Kashmir. I would firstly advise you to get the facts right. Kashmir is an state of India. The King of Kashmir acceded to India in 1947 which Pakistan could not allow to happen and invaded Kashmir. They have been the illegal occupants of certain parts in Kashmir known as POK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir). India has full rights and authority over Kashmir.
Comment by Chirag Vadgama — March 25, 2009 @ 2:00 pm
Successfull article
Comment by Deltaweb, tr.gg, html kodları — July 5, 2009 @ 8:59 pm
This looks more like a logo design than a map of India or Ghandi walking away.
Comment by Brian — July 11, 2009 @ 3:05 pm
[...] on Strange Maps (also in blogroll on right.) Simplicity is the epitome of design. Great design is often a simple [...]
Pingback by Graphic Gandhi « sandy beaches — July 21, 2009 @ 3:02 pm