I have recently taken fancy to Ved Mehta's writings. He has a way of writing 'it'. Did you know that Ved Mehta is blind? Each time I read one of his books, or for that matter any page where he builds his character or narrates the grandiose of a moment, I wonder, how on earth can a blind man met out such penmanship that can only be articulated by people who can not just feel, but see the moment, atleast as per my perception. Ved, in one of his books, (I think its in his first book, Face to Face) goes on to explain how he develops an heightened level of facial vision or human echolocation that helps him 'see'.
My limited research on facial vision makes me understand that it does help a blind person to sometimes identify the location and size of a nearby object and use this information to steer around obstacles and travel from place to place. Definitely a boon and Ved through the portryal of his life through his various writings, seems to have mastered this science or technique. But how on earth does he describe facial demeanours, the mood swings, the decoration of a room, the beauty of a photograph and the subject(s) in it, the narration of physical features of a lady friend when she was alone with him, among other vivid descriptions. Yes, he did employ readers to read his books to him. Mainly study materials and the occasional letters he received. But he definitely didnt have a reader, to his beck and call, to explain every moment of his life, which he captures so well in this books.
I am sure, many who have read his literature, would have similar thoughts. I for one, dont deny the pleasure his writings have given me. I would have read, probably six of his books, and each one of them has been a treat. Its only after reading so much about him, his family, his life, his years at Dadar school for the blind, Arkansas school of the blind, his time at Oxford and Harvard, his complilations and analysis about Mahatma Gandhi and the pre and post emergency era, and his synposis on Rajeev Gandhi and the ram rajya, do I feel that I know him well. And hence, the urge to question. Was he completely blind? Completely blind, all the time? Did he regain some vision, some ray of hope, which he failed to disclose? Remember, Ved, literally completed all his education through one grant or another.At any point of time, did he feel, that acknowledging any partial sight blessings from the almighty, might actually ruin his chances of acquiring the elite erudition that he and his father always seeked? He was not born blind, but at the age of three, to his doctor father's utter dismay, succummed to a severe bout of meningitis, and lost his vision.