Ruhe has valued my father’s work: Upen Mehta

The original negatives of photographs of Mahatma Gandhi taken by my father are in my possession. Peter Ruhe doesn’t have any of them. But, at the same time, I can’t disprove whatever he has written in his letter to the Sabarmati Ashram or say that he doesn’t have negatives of my father’s work. I have never met Peter personally, but I’ve talked to him several times on the phone or through friends. When he approached us, I said that we are open to share my father’s work with him, provided he gets good offers. In fact, we are ready to share and provide the photographs to anyone with a good offer. So, when I say that I can’t refute him, I mean that though he doesn’t posses any original negatives, he can approach people and institutions saying that he has these in his possession and is open to sell them. After that, he would contact us regarding the details of the offer, and make the deal on our behalf.

Ruhe may not have written that letter only to the Sabarmati Ashram, but to other interested institutions too. I do not see anything wrong in this. My father’s work has not been recognised or valued by any Gandhian institutions or museums. The Gandhi Museum in Delhi had bought original prints of photographs of Gandhiji in 1948, but only for Rs1.5 per copy. These were used in the first volume of a book on Gandhi. There were a number of reprints of the book and the photographs, but my father was never paid any royalty. At the Gandhi Ashram museum, there is a photograph of Mahatma Gandhi credited to Chandulal C Shah, who had made one photograph out of three taken by my father, by cutting and pasting, and refusing to pay him royalty. There was a legal battle, and despite having full knowledge of the matter, the Sabarmati Ashram authorities did not give credit to my father.

There is also the example of Narayan Desai’s book Maru Jivan Ej Mari Vani, in which he used photographs taken by father but did not give him credit or pay royalty for their use. When I talked to Desai and brought the issue to his notice, he said he had got the photographs from the Sabarmati Ashram.

Though I have never met Peter Ruhe, I would say that he respects and recognises my father’s works and values it properly. I had heard about him for the first time from my late father; I was working in a bank in Mumbai at that time. It was probably around 1992-93. My father had told me that a German fellow had come to meet him and had given him $300 as royalty for using three photographs of Mahatma Gandhi in his book, which he had been preparing at that time. He had come to know that those photographs were taken by my father when he found in them in Vitthalbhai Zaveri’s collection. He had taken the pains to find my father’s address and come down to pay him royalty.

Since my father’s death, without meeting us, he has regularly sent us payment as royalty. The amount may be only Rs25,000, which could have been more. But he is the only one who has paid royalty for the use of my father’s photographs. Many others are using my father’s photographs without recognising his contribution or giving him credit.

My father was a very noble and gentle person. He did not bother to retain his work. In fact, he had given away many of his photographs as gifts. But I am a banker and I know the value of his work. I do not want to sell my father’s work for commercial interest. But, at the same time, I would not let people take away them away just like that. I am open to offer not only through Peter, but from anyone.

If the Indian government or any Gandhian institution in India approaches me seeking to buy my father’s photographs of Mahatma Gandhi, of which there are 102 negatives, I would prefer to give them priority over any other international agency. I would prefer that the works remain in India, provided that they are valued correctly. The value of these 102 photographs was estimated at nearly Rs35 lakh in 1985. Today, the value would be more than double, and I would consider anyone who is ready to pay at least Rs60 lakh.