By C S Venkiteswaran

The announcement of the candidature of APJ Abdul Kalam for the Presidential post evoked a spate of reports in the print media. All of them wallow on his spartan lifestyle simplicity and commitment to his profession.

The media churned out a number of stories about the early years of his career in Thiruvananthapuram in the late sixties and early seventies. There were reports about his places of stay, eating and working habits, and interviews with colleagues and acquaintances. All of them reminisce about him on the same lines: simplicity in life (and importantly, food habits), dedication to work and his unassuming character. (While one remembers him eating just a ghee-roast, vada and coffee, another says he relished rice gruel and tapioca; in yet anothers memory it is a regular poori-masala and coffee from the railway canteen every morning and evening! Another recounts an image of him running for cover from rain holding his slippers over his head!)

It is not unusual for reports on personalities to dwell upon the mundane and quaint details of their life and habits. But here, mere descriptions take the colour of characteristics and qualities qualities that are exceptional and so, surprising to be found in Abdul Kalam. Obviously some prejudices are at work here, an extra effort to explain him.

On the one hand, there are the unquestionable facts about his professional achievement (something everyone admires), and his proclaimed and now-famous national dreams (something we, our NRIs and our rulers share with him) of making India a super power at least in missile terms. On the other is his religious identity, which we can never imagine as ours and dont want to coincide with the above qualities. The only way one can accommodate him and imagine/absorb him as Our President is to turn him into an exception. And this can be done only by shearing him of all the attributes that are associated with the stereotypical images of his community. Only by focusing and harping on his exceptional qualities (which are so innocently brahminical), can we distance him from the stereotype (the normal state of the Other). Only then would we be able to accept him as the President of our Nation.

Hence in all the descriptions, he is a strict vegetarian, a teetotaler, a non-smoker, a poet, a Vainik, a music lover, and even a brahmachari, all so naturally brahminical' qualities! And naturally, if he were so like us, he must be an exception, a rare mussalman who happened to be one only by accident.

Look at the epithets: Kalam Iyer, Muslim Brahmin, Gandhian Missileman It is no coincidence that all are oxymoron, for how can an Iyer be a Kalam, a Muslim be a Brahmin, a Missile-man a Gandhian ? They are irreconcilables, the polar opposites that can never meet. So by merely emphasizing certain qualities, the bearer turns into an exception that once again proves the rule.

A photograph that appeared in some newspapers says it all. In the photograph we find a mundu-clad Kalam squatting (significantly on crossed legs) on the floor. He has a shawl around his neck. He is leaning on a cot on which we can see a Veena, a tape recorder and the idols of Buddha, Nataraja and Saraswati (?). He has an open book on his lap; another book Aurobindos Life Divine is on the floor to his side. The very personification of a Tamil Brahmin!

When will we ever be able to imagine a devout, beef-eating muslim also as one among us ?

C S Venkiteswaran wrote these thoughts in 'Rumble Strip' appearing in the New Indian Express.

This article was first published in New Indian Express.