Let the mahatma monopoly remain

Let the mahatma monopoly remain

There is news that the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) may be considering carrying the watermarked portraits of Rabindranath Tagore and A P J Abdul Kalam on currency notes, along with the existing one of Mohandas Gandhi. This is a terrible idea. In a country where disagreements over who should be honoured and who should not have a knack of spilling over into ideological-aesthetic fisticuffs, another platform for yet another excuse to get into a scrap is not only a distraction, but also a distraction that should be avoided.

Tagore and Kalam are undoubtedly worthy figures to be adorned on rupee notes. Most other countries depict famous people and personages to mark their currencies, giving its citizens and outsiders a symbolic pointer to their greatness. It is seen as a celebration of the great assortment of people a country has produced. In India, however, awarding the tag of 'greatness' can, in too many cases, become a competitive scrum that can end up in a tu-tu main-main - or, more accurately, a no-no yes-yes - - involving figures that start serving an ulterior motive not foreseen by those wishing to broaden the roster of great men and women who should adorn currency notes.

The function of Gandhi's image currently on all notes is two-fold: one, the obvious one of celebrating the 'father of the nation'; two, less obviously, to ensure that this 'Mahatma monopoly' blocks the lobbying and counter-lobbying that would ensue if the floodgates were opened. On the face of it, the plurality of greatness that a country's currency notes display is a billboard for its scientists, artists, writers, statesmen, industrialists, etc. But, in India, such plurality, as we have come to know all too well, usually descends into spats that we can do without.