In this age of instant punditry, its often easier to  arrive at conclusions without even attempting analysis. When the person in question is Narendra Modi, then it becomes even more difficult to have a  dispassionate debate. In the “them” versus “us” syndrome that now increasingly marks the country’s public discourse, you are almost expected to either lionize or demonise the individual, depending on your ideological predilections.

That’s why most of  the comment after Modi’s remarkable election triumph in Gujarat has either been marked by euphoria or consternation. Maybe, its  time to examine some of  the myths that have been manufactured to explain the Modi phenomenon by both sides of  the ideological divide.

For the secular intelligentsia, Modi’s victory in Gujarat ocurred because he was able to successfully polarise the Gujarati  electorate on communal lines. Part of  this myth-making is that Sonia Gandhi’s ‘maut ka saudagar’ statement presented Modi an opportunity to raise the emotional pitch of the campaign, and thereby transformed a “normal” election into a communally surcharged mandate.  

For those who will see Gujarat only through the prism of  the 2002 violence, the fact is that the BJP actually did much better in the non-riot affected areas of Kutch, Saurashtra and South Gujarat than it did five years ago. If anything, the Congress actually staged a comeback of sorts in riot-scarred central Gujarat, where the seats and percentage of votes that the party got is significantly higher than the rest of the state. There are other sobering realities. The BJP won 12 of  the 13 scheduled caste reserved seats, the party performed impressively in the tribal belt of South Gujarat, and while its tally actually went down in Ahmedabad city, it performed strongly across rural Gujarat, including those districts which conventional wisdom suggests have been left out of  the vibrant Gujarat platform.  

2007 is not 2002, and to see Modi’s victory as a continuum of an emotionally driven  election five years ago would  be a complete misreading of  the mandate.This election needs to be seen at  two levels. At one level, it marks yet another milestone in a period of  sustained dominance by the BJP over Gujarat, a consolidation of  support  that first erupted in the early 1990s. With the exception of  the 2004 Lok Sabha election, the BJP has dominated every election in the state over the last 12 years.

At another level, this election must be seen in the context of  the carefully manufactured Modi personality cult, now being projected as brand Moditva. There is little doubt that Modi has been successful in merging muscular Hindutva and Gujarati asmita (self-respect) with a commitment to good governance. The “chappan kee chati” (56 inch chest) that Modi trumpeted gleefully through the campaign was symbolic of  his persona: An authoritarian,  politically incorrect leader, defiant in the face of criticism, unapologetic about his strident rhetoric, flaunting the badge of Gujarati pride and promising a corruption free administration.   

The darker side of  this personality cult had been seen in 2002 when Modi converted a terrible human tragedy into a  personal “gaurav” yatra. He was then the “tough on minority terror”, Hindu Hriday Samrat. In 2007, the propaganda was designed to build Modi’s appeal as a  more inclusive “vikas purush”, a hard working chief minister responsible for pushing Gujarat on the fast track to development, someone at ease in both  corporate gatherings and political rallies.

Contrast his  obvious charisma with his opponents: A Congress party, lacking a clear identity in an increasingly “Hinduised” Gujarat environment and unwilling to truly empower its local leadership; an  octogenarian Keshubhai Patel, a forlorn, tired-looking leader; Pitched against a rag-tag army, Modi appeared an impressive, media-savvy general, someone who didn’t even need  the RSS-VHP soldiers this time to do the job for him.

But if  the secularists have misread the  Modi phenomenon, so too have his cheerleaders. To project him as a future prime minister in waiting is equally mistaken. The claim that Modi represents a new India, yearning to break free from feudal snobbery and liberal  hypocrisies, is to confuse a Gujarat state election verdict with a national  mandate.

With its double digit growth spread evenly across the state, entrepreneurial work force, strong congregational folk Hindu religious groupings, large NRI presence and rapid urbanisation, Gujarat is ideal Moditva territory, a bit like an extended sect in which everyone talks a similar language  of  “dhandho” (business). For the average Gujarati, Brand Modi, in a sense, is a bit like a Reliance scrip, offering the promise of a more prosperous future. 
Ironically, Modi’s position today  is not too different from the original Hindutva posterboy LK Advani a decade ago. Then, it was Advani who was being showcased as the ideological mascot of  a new India, as a leader who would finally rid the country of  its  soft underbelly, a politician who would challenge the old Nehruvian order. And  yet, when it came to the crunch, it was the BJP’s saffron Nehruvian, Atal Behari Vajpayee, who was the most acceptable prime ministerial candidate to the ruling coalition.

Quite clearly, Advani’s national ambitions have remained trapped for years under the debris of the Babri Masjid demolition just as Modi has  been haunted by the ghosts of  post-Godhra. It has required Advani to virtually re-invent himself as a less ideological, and more consensual  politician before he could be formally anointed as a potential prime ministerial  candidate of  a national alliance.

Modi too, will need to re-invent himself  if he is  to be seen as more than just a Gujarat regional satrap. The challenge is to do so without losing his iconic Moditva branding that is his original USP. Modi may have captured the mind of  Gujarat; winning  the soul of  India is a different matter altogether.
(The writer is Editor-in-Chief, CNN-IBN)