Sonia Gandhi’s Memoir Sparks Row: Why Did Publisher Penguin India Back Out?
A political controversy has erupted between the BJP and Congress over Penguin Random House India's decision not to publish senior Congress leader Sonia Gandhi's memoir, Belonging: A Journey of Love, in India.
Reports suggested that the publishing deal fell through after Sonia Gandhi allegedly declined to accept certain "editorial changes" proposed by the publisher. The developments prompted the Congress to allege government pressure and describe the episode as a threat to freedom of expression.
The BJP, however, rejected the allegations and questioned the contents of the memoir and the need for editorial and fact-checking processes.
Rahul Gandhi Calls Controversy a "Digression Strategy"
Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, when asked about the controversy surrounding his mother's memoir, sought to shift the focus to another issue.
"I call it a digression strategy. I have absolutely no interest in that right now. My interest lies in the crime that has been committed against Kharge ji," Rahul Gandhi said.
He was referring to an alleged "purification ritual" at the Ramlila Ground in Haldwani, where Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge had addressed a rally.
BJP Questions Whether Memoir Is Fact or Fiction
BJP leader Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said it was ultimately a matter between the author and publisher to determine whether the work should be treated as a memoir or fiction.
"Whether the book is a memoir or fiction is a matter to be decided between the author and the publisher," Naqvi said.
He added that publishers have a responsibility to assess the contents of a work, particularly when a book presented as a memoir contains claims that may require verification.
"If a work labelled as a memoir turns out to be fiction, the publisher will certainly assess that before making a decision. I feel that if you attempt to politicise a work presented as a memoir, questions will inevitably be raised," he said.
BJP Accuses Congress of Creating a "False Narrative"
BJP spokesperson CR Kesavan accused Congress leaders of creating what he described as a "false narrative of fear" over the publishing controversy.
Calling the Congress' response "brazenly hypocritical", Kesavan referred to the 2014 autobiography One Life Is Not Enough by former Union minister K Natwar Singh.
He claimed the book stated that Sonia Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra had met Natwar Singh to discuss what he would write about events surrounding May 2004, shortly before the UPA government was sworn in.
"Why was Sonia Gandhi apprehensive about his autobiography?" Kesavan asked.
He further questioned what portions of Sonia Gandhi's memoir required fact-checking and why, while also raising the issue of Nehru's correspondence.
"Congress leaders should also explain why the Congress family is nervous about making public the 51 cartons of Nehru's correspondence, including his letters to Edwina Mountbatten," he said.
References to PM Modi, RSS and China Reportedly at Centre of Dispute
According to reports, Sonia Gandhi's publishing agreement with Penguin Random House India collapsed after she allegedly refused to make changes or remove references to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the RSS and Chinese intrusions.
The reports sparked allegations from Congress supporters that political pressure may have influenced the publisher's decision.
However, Penguin Random House India has rejected that interpretation.
Publisher Denies Claims Over Editorial Changes
In a statement, Penguin Random House India clarified that it is not the publisher of Belonging in India.
"The Penguin Random House India is not the publisher of 'Belonging' in India. Any suggestion that Penguin Random House India decided not to publish 'Belonging' because the author declined editorial changes does not accurately reflect the circumstances," the publishing house said, according to reports.
The publisher also said it had been "keen to publish the book" and stressed that fact-checking and making editorial recommendations are part of its responsibility as a publishing house.
The statement appeared to indicate that discussions over the manuscript and its contents had taken place between the author and the publisher, although the precise details of those discussions have not been made public.
