Then, his criticism of Gandhiji that he goes by certain religious ideology which has no definite social, economic and revolutionary concepts. So how could he bring about a revolution through a compromi se? This was the thrust of Roy's comments.
I went from my hometown to Poona where he gave three lectures on Marxism and I heard them. He wa not an eloquent speaker. He used to put his points logically. I was deeply impressed by his personality. And I thought that he was the man who was associated with the 1931 resolution, he should have a prominent role in the leadership of the congress so that he could influence the congress leadership, its policies and their formulation in days to come. That is how I came under his influence. It is in this sense that I was part or Roy's gourp. But I can't say that I was a Royist, int the sense V. M. Tarkunde, V. B. Karnik and Lakshman Shastri were. They were deeply and intellectually involved and their commitments were total.
Sharma : In Roy's book India's Message there is a criticism of Gandhiji.
Chavan : He often criticised Gandhiji. That criticism in the earlier stages appealed to me also and seemed to be logical.
Sharma : How was he as a Spekaer ?
Chavan : He was a great conversationalist, but I don't think he was very impressive as a speaker. I heard his three lectures in Poona which were interesting.
Sharma : He could put his ideas across to the audience?
Chavan : He did put his ideas across to the audience in a very clear-cut propositions.
