My Life

Quis custodiet ipsos custodies?

2011-04-23T19:52:00.000+05:30

Of late, there’s been a lot of brouhaha on the Lokpal – Jan-Lokpal issue. Many column inches and TV-news-hours have been devoted to it; numerous people have been eulogized, and numerous others demonized, etc. I too have my $0.02 to add to the debate, as always.

I have been tweeting about the issue. I’ve read the Jan Lokpal bill draft (Version 2.2) on the indiaagainstcorruption website. I’ll list my tweets and the points I noted while going through the draft. The appending numbers are the specific clauses in the bill on which I have something to comment, with the comments accompanying. Tweets don’t have numbers appended; they have timestamps.

First, the tweets:

I can't feel anything but cynicism towards the Anna Hazare case; the pervasive corruption in our milieu is too huge for this act. - 6 Apr
As always, @acorn has some excellent insights on the ongoing issue. #JanLokpalBill #GrammarOfAnarchy - 7 Apr
So, finally, Rajkhowa too realises the futility of rising against the Indian state, says he's ready for dialogue. #GrammarOfAnarchy #ULFA - 8 Apr
I support & respect Anna Hazare's intentions - corruption has to be weeded out. It's just that I think his method is unconstitutional. - 8 Apr
Havells fans ads remind me of the extremely proactive 'civil society' in India. #GrammarOfAnarchy - 9 Apr
It's really heartbreaking to see that people are so disappointed in Democracy - the way it works here in India. But, this was coming. - 10 Apr
There is so much anger against the blatant corruption here, so much frustration. No wonder Hazare got such unprecedented a support. - 10 Apr
The proposed Jan Lokpal bill is draconian, or naive at best. It's good that a committee is constituted to look into this matter. - 10 Apr
The Bhushan duo have done some excellent work for the country in the past. Their inclusion in the comm. would only result in something good - 10 Apr
Here's hoping that our society is finally exorcized of corruption. It's a tough ask, but we are up to it. - 10 Apr
Devil's Advocate on CNN-IBN with Kejriwal clarifies a lot of points regarding the Jan Lokpal bill; nice watch. - 10 Apr
Amongst this Jan Lokpal brouhaha, Indian Express retains its voice of logic and sanity. - 13 Apr
It's a classic catch-22. Voting doesn't help as your vote doesn't matter; any other way to voice your dissent/opinion is unconstitutional. - 13 Apr
Frankly, i'm a bit surprised at Open Magazine's stand on the Jan Lokpal case. Also, their articles are unnecessarily provocative. - 15 Apr
It's interesting how no one is criticising Mulayam's antics in that Bhushan CD - shady-dealing on his part are taken for granted! - 21 Apr
It smells of an ugly conspiracy all over, every now and then a new controversy being raised against the Bhushans - 21 Apr

Now the points I noted in the Jan Lokpal bill:

2 (6) ‘Government servants’ excludes Judges; 2 (11d) ‘Public servants’ includes them.
6 (2c) Why this age fixation?
6 (3) How these numbers were reached?
6 (4) Define ‘unimpeachable integrity’?
6 (10b) What ‘public feedback’? How would the majority Indians, the ‘Bharat’ if you may, provide its feedback? And this ‘Bharat’ is he who elects our leaders, due to its sheer numbers. This much for ‘democracy’.
6 (11) In continuation of our glorious tradition, the President is merely ceremonial.
7 (3e) Senior-most judges at the time of removal, junior-most/youngest for appointment?
12 ‘Deemed to be a police officer’? Rank?
12, 13 (4) The Lokpal is, therefore, Police and Judge at the same time?
18 (viii) What if the President rejects the Lokpal’s recommendations?
19A Apropos of the sheer volume of cases in our courts, and in light of the fact that there is the provision of imprisonment, can the bill envisage the chaos it may cause?
19B The Lokpal chairperson is above the Judges? “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes”?
21B Guidelines to be mabe from time to time? Does the definition of ‘integrity’ change with time? And why, after being ambiguous and vague at so many places insofar as definitions are considered (implicit subjectivity), is this allowance of explicit subjectivity?
There is a time limit for everything, and no exception is added; what if there’s a genuine need for one?
As Shekhar Gupta pointed out, Musharraf type ‘impeccable integrity’ references abound. This is highly subjective and vague.
22 (5) Suo moto transfer?
23 (7) Arbitrary salaries?
28A (8) Half of the funds shall lie with the Lokpal! [‘Lokpal Fund’ and the question of incentive for ‘extortion’ (for lack of a better word).]
28B Mentions an ‘ethics committee’ all of a sudden; and is incomplete.

Corruption is indeed a huge problem in India and has to be weeded out for the society and economy to develop to its full potential. But unconstitutional means, which do no more than drumming up jingoism, for/towards the same do only disservice to the cause and the country. A bill which seeks to undermine the basic structure of the constitution - our country is a Parliamentary Democracy, a Democratic Republic, remember - must not be allowed to hold our legislature hostage. Anyone who seeks to be a part of the legislature should come through the proper channel - by fighting elections.

A brief history of Lucknow - I

2011-03-18T11:45:00.000+05:30

Disclaimer: This post is written mainly by compiling pieces from various sources, and for the purpose of serving someone who belongs to Lucknow and is appearing for an interview. I have been reading about the city for the past couple of days, as, in my opinion, it constitutes an integral part of my ‘personality’ – I’ve been living here for the past 22 years. So, this blog post was long overdue, kind of. Anyway, cutting the flab and coming to the point, here’s ‘A brief history of Lucknow’, limited to the period prior to the annexation of Awadh by the British, in 1857.

Lucknow is located in what was historically known as the Awadh (Oudh) region. The name Awadh is derived from Ayodhya; legend has it that after coming back to Ayodhya from Lanka, Rama gave his brother Lakshmana the area which comprises today’s Lucknow to rule, and after him the place came to be called Lakshmanpuri, and later Lakhnau (Lucknow).

Lucknow has always been a multicultural city, and flourished as the cultural and artistic capital of North India in the 18th and 19th centuries. Courtly manners, beautiful gardens, poetry, music, and fine cuisine patronized by the Persian-loving Shia Nawabs of the city are well known amongst Indians and students of South Asian culture and history. Lucknow is popularly known as The City of Nawabs (the plural form of the Arabic word Naib, meaning ‘assistant’; it was the term given by the Mughal emperor to the Governors appointed by him all over India to assist him in ruling). It is also known as the Golden City of the East, Shiraz-i-Hind and The Constantinople of India.

The emblem of the Uttar Pradesh state government depicts two fishes; in fact, fishes were a prominent theme – as a symbol – throughout Awadh’s history. The Nawab’s seal had them, and even after they proclaimed themselves to be kings, they continued with the theme. The fishes trace their roots to Machchhi Bhawan (on the ruins of which stands King George Medical College today), built by Sheik Abdul Rahim, whose descendents, the Sheikhzadas came to rule Lucknow until they were defeated by Saadat Ali Khan I to establish the Nawabi era in 1722.

Muhammad Shah, the Mughal Emperor, made Saadat Ali Khan I the governor of Awadh and the army-in-charge of Gorakhpur on Sep 9, 1722 AD. As mentioned earlier, Sadat Khan tamed the local kings, zamindars and jagirdars, made his own palace near Ayodhya, and founded a new city Faizabad, which became the capital of the new government. Due to his management policy state's income swelled from Rupees 70 lakhs to 2 crores. Later on, when Nadir Shah invaded Delhi, Saadat Khan was called on to fight him; he fought valiantly, but lost. He later instigated Nadir Shah to invade Delhi, and committed suicide the night before the grand massacre at Delhi.

He was succeeded by his nephew and son in law Safdarjung, who apparently paid Nadir Shah two crore Rupees. He was an able administrator. He was soon given governorship of Kashmir as well, and became a central figure at the Delhi court. After Ahmad Shah acceded the throne of Delhi in 1748, he made Sufdarjung his Chief Minister and gave him the charge of ‘Harem’. However, due to corrupt policy of Delhi court and confrontation with Ahmad Shah, Safdarjung came to Awadh in December 1753, where he died in October 1755 at the age of 46. He was buried in Delhi, at Safdarjung's Tomb, now situated on a road known as Safdarjung Road.

Safdarjung was succeeded by Shuja-ud-daula, who is best known for his key roles in two definitive battles in Indian history - the Third Battle of Panipat which ended Maratha domination of India (he sided with Ahmad Shah Abdali), and the Battle of Buxar that definitively established British domination (Robert Clive decisively defeated the trio of Shah Alam II, Mir Qasim, and Shuja-ud-daula). He again fought British with the help of Marathas at Kara Jahanabad and was defeated. On Aug 16, 1765 he signed the Treaty of Allahabad, which said that Kora and Allahabad district will go to Company and Company will get 50 lakh Rupees from Awadh.

After the humiliating defeat at the hands of the British, Shuja-up-daula was reduced to misery and penury. However, his wife, Bahu Beghum, who is the single most important woman in the history of Awadh, stood by him in this crisis and helped him with money and support. She did a lot of work in Faizabad – which was the capital of Awadh at that time – and in Lucknow as well, in the reign of Asaf-ud-daula.

Shuja-ud-dalula was succeeded by his son Asaf-ud-daula, who shifted the capital of Awadh from Faizabad to Lucknow in 1775, ostensibly to escape the domination of his mother, Bahu Beghum. Towards the beginning of Asaf-ud-daula's rule, men of learning and art avoided Lucknow – because Asaf-ud-daula was said to have no regard for such people – and gathered round the Beghums' and their eunuchs' court at Faizabad, but later on Asaf-ud-daula took greater interest in such people and induced most of them to attach themselves to his Court at Lucknow. During the time of Asaf-ud-daula – and also during Shuja-ud-daula’s time – the Mughal Empire was steadily declining and due to this the rulers in Delhi didn’t have the money to support artists, etc. who started coming to the Awadh court. The prominent ones among these artists were poets like Mir Taqui Mir, Sauda, and Mir Siraj-ud-din Khan Arzoo.

Nawab Asaf-ud-daula is considered the architect general of Lucknow. With the ambition to outshine the splendour of Mughal architecture, he built a number of monuments and developed the city of Lucknow into an architectural marvel. Several of the buildings survive today, including the famed Asafi Imambara (Bada Imambara) which boasts of one of the largest domes in the World built without Iron or Wood, and the Qaisar Bagh area of downtown Lucknow.

The Asafi Imambara is a famed vaulted structure surrounded by beautiful gardens, and the Nawab started it as a charitable project to generate employment during the famine of 1784. In that ghastly famine, even the nobles were reduced to penury. It is said that Nawab Asaf employed over 20,000 people for the project (including commoners and noblemen). The Nawab's sensitivity towards preserving the reputation of the upper class is demonstrated in the story of the construction of Imambara. During daytime, common citizens employed on the project would construct the building, whereas, on the night of every fourth day, the noble and upper class people were employed in secret to demolish the structure built, an effort for which they received payment. The Nawab became so famous for his generosity that it is still a well-known saying in Lucknow that "he who does not receive (livelihood) from the Lord, will receive it from Asaf-ud-daula" (Jisko de na Moula, usko de Asaf-ud-daula).

A brief history of Lucknow - II

2011-03-18T11:41:00.002+05:30

Asaf-ud-daula was succeeded by his adopted son Wazir Ali Khan, who ascended to the throne (musnud), with support of the British in September 1797. Within four month they accused him of being unfaithful; Sir John Shore (1751–1834) moved in with 12 battalions and replaced him with his uncle Saadat Ali Khan II in January 1798.

Saadat Ali Khan II was crowned on 21 January 1798 at Bibiyapur Palace in Lucknow, by Sir John Shore after the assurance from Sadat Ali Khan towards acquiescence to the company and carrying out its orders. He was made to sign another treaty by which the annual amount to be paid to the Company was increased by 20 lakhs to 76 lakhs. Forts of Allahabad and Fatehgarh, along with 12 lakhs, were given to the Company for putting him on the throne. The Governor asked him to reduce the force of Awadh (Which was 80,000 at the time of Asaf-ud-daula). His powers – and that of Awadh by extension – got reduced very much within three years of his reign. He became unable to pay the dues to the Company. Finally, on Nov 10, 1801, the Company took half of the Awadh from him, annexing the area of Rohilkhand, Farukhabad, Mainpuri, Etawah, Kanpur, Fatehgarh, Allahabad, Azamgarh, Basti, and Gorakhpur, from where Oudh was getting an income of Rs. 3 crores; again after the assurance from Sadat Ali Khan for acquiescence to the company and to carry out its orders!

Saadat Ali Khan II was succeeded by Ghazi-ud-Din Haider, who became Nawab Wazir of Oudh on July 11, 1814 after the death of his father. In 1818, under the influence of Lord Hastings, the British Governor General, he declared himself as the independent Padshah-i-Awadh (King of Awadh). He died in the Farhat Bakhsh palace in Lucknow in 1827. The Shah Najaf Imambara (1816), his mausoleum, on the bank of the Gomti is a copy of the fourth Caliph Ali’s burial place in Najaf, Iraq. He was succeeded by his son Nasir-ud-Din Haider.

By the time of Nasir-ud-din Haider’s reign, the Awadh government had started deteriorating. The administration of the kingdom was left to the hands of Wazir Hakim Mahdi and later to Raushan-ud-Daula. His administration was so corrupt that it even sabotaged his works for Awadh, like the Haidar canal project, which envisaged connecting Ganga to Gomti, but was a failure due to faulty planning and implementation, and lack of funds at a later stage.

Nasir-ud-din Haider died without an offspring and Ghazi-ud- din Haider's queen 'Padshah Beghum' put forward Munna Jan as a claimant to the throne, though both Ghazi-ud- din Haider and Nasir-ud-din Haider had refused to acknowledge him as belonging to the royal family. The begum forcibly enthroned Munna Jan at Lal baradari. The British intervened and exploited the situation to their interest. They arrested both the beghum and Munna Jan and arranged for the accession of late Nawab Saadat Ali Khan II's son, Nasir-ud-daula, under title of 'Muhammad Ali Shah', who promised to pay a large sum of money to the British for this.

Muhammad Ali Shah was 63 years of age when he ascended the throne. But he was an experienced man and had seen the glorious days of his father. He started to economize and set right the administration. However, by his time, the British hold on Awadh was very much complete. As a result, his administrative, financial and defense powers were reduced very much.

Muhammad Ali Shah built the Husainabad (Chhota) Imambara in 1838 and created Huseinabad Endowment Fund (now Husainabad Trust) to support it. He also built Husainabad Picture Gallery which is adjacent to the Clock Tower; this Gallery contains the life-size portraits of the Nawabs of Oudh. He also started to build an edifice similar to Babylon's minaret or floating garden and named it Satkhanda, but it reached only its fifth storey in 1842 when he died, in 1842, and was succeeded by his son, Amjad Ali Shah.

His father had made every effort to ensure that the heir apparent, Amjad Ali Shah, received an excellent education and had therefore entrusted him to the company of religious scholars, which instead of making him an intelligent ruler made him a devout Muslim. Thus, he became the most deeply religious, circumspect and abstinent ruler of Oudh. So much so, that the system of administration set up by Muhammad Ali Shah became completely disorganized due to the neglect faced on account of Amjad’s religious excursions, whereas the vicious officers had their day. He, nevertheless, took to some construction work as well. He constructed Iron Bridge over river Gomti and constructed metal road from Lucknow to Kanpur which still follows the same route. He also built Hazratganj, the great European style market. The great Aminabad Bazar and a Serai at Kanpur road were constructed by his minister Amin-ud-Daula.

Amjad was succeeded by his son Wajid Ali Shah, who was the fifth and last King of Awadh, holding the position from 13 February 1847 to 7 February 1856. Wajid Ali Shah, along with Asaf-ud-daula, is arguably the most famous ruler of Lucknow. He ascended the throne of Awadh in 1847 and ruled for nine years. His kingdom, long protected by the British under treaty, was eventually annexed peacefully on February 7, 1856 – days before the ninth anniversary of his coronation. The Nawab was exiled to Garden Reach in Metia-burz, then a suburb of Kolkata, where he lived out the rest of his life off a generous pension. He was a poet, playwright, dancer and great patron of the arts. He is widely credited with the revival of Kathak as a major form of classical Indian dance.

Beghum Hazrat Mahal, a wife of Wajid Ali Shah, played the key role in the Lucknow chapter of the great uprising of 1857.

I believe this much of information is okay insofar as an interview is concerned. I’d welcome and encourage readers to offer more, in case something important (for the purpose of an interview/personality-test) has been overlooked by me.

PS. (1) I’m grateful to Mr. Anurag Kumar who suggested me the names of books to read in order to acquaint myself with what amounts to just a minuscule part of the grand History of Lucknow.

(2)The area which is known as Madiaon today derives its name from Mandavya Rishi, who had his ashram in the area known as Kudiya ghat today. The place also had a religiously important Suraj Kund, which was famous for its disease-healing-powers. Adjacent to the area were established colonies such as Aliganj (by Bahu Beghum) and Maah Nagar (today’s Maha Nagar), in the modern era. The old Hanuman Temple of Aliganj was built by Lala Jaatmal in 1783.

(3) Chinhat of today derives its name from Chana Haat, a grain mandi (market) of yore. It was here that Asaf-ud-daula camped finally before entering Lucknow to establish his capital in 1775.

(4) Another important feature of Lucknow is the residency, built in 1800 A.D by the then Nawab of Awadh, Saadat Ali Khan II. It was constructed in order to serve as the residence for the British Resident General who was a representative in the court of Nawab. The palace gained prominence during the siege of Residency, at the time of the rebellion of 1857. Sir Henry Lawrence, who bore the responsibility 3500 human lives, undertook the defense and counter initiative when he was completely surrounded by the 'mutineers'; he died during the last days of the siege, before help arrived under Havelock and Outram.

(5) Suggested further readings: Yogesh Pravin, Anurag Kumar, and Abdul Halim Sharar.

On The Social Network

2010-11-14T14:03:00.000+05:30

I have a thing for Faustian stories; the idea of giving up something precious to obtain some other thing, all the more valuable to me, fascinates me. The relationship goes back at least to the day I watched Company, one of Ramu’s better works – of course, I wasn’t aware of Coppola’s masterpiece then – and only grew further as I came in contact with more of such stuff.

Life is defined by choices. At every point, you have alternate courses available; and it’s the quintessential manifestation of who you really are, nakedly reflected in the paths you chose. Thy way, highway; easy, and difficult way; ‘the road not taken’; foresight, and hindsight; all of what you are, and ever will be, can be captured in your choices. They are the true reflectors of your grit and character.

Fincher’s Zuckerberg is one such character whose life is brimming with such choices; his film, ‘The Social Network’, an inquiry into the decision-zeitgeist. The mood is set in the very first scene where a curtly arrogant Mark is dumped by his girlfriend Erica, who interprets his insecurity and social ineptness mixed arrogance and affinity for elitism as ‘assholery’ (for lack of a better word). Out of courtesy, she offers to be friends, to which he replies that he didn’t need any friend. Ironically, this act sets off a chain of events which leads to Mark establishing the grandest friending tool of our time: Facebook.

One good thing about the movies of this age is that they offer you to interpret the characters, proceedings, situations, etc. on your own. In this increasingly tangled and complex world, there are no absolute truths, only interpretations of facts. These interpretations enable a person to appreciate his own version of the world, which may be the polar opposite to his neighbor’s. The elasticity facilitated by all this enables the society to stick together; this is the reason why fundamentalists and liberals are able to coexist.

And the movie offers a plethora of interpretation-strings. On the one hand, you may feel for Mark, the compulsive nerd, who’s only fighting for what’s his rightfully; after all, “A guy who makes a nice chair doesn't owe money to everyone who has ever built a chair”. And, on the other hand, he may come across as the cunning and vengeful opportunistic hack, who devoured more than his share of luck, making a few enemies in the process of making 500 million friends; whose best friend sued him for 600 million dollars. One can’t naturally like him though; but that doesn’t stop him from craving for the same. And this explains why he is in so much awe of Sean Parker, he yearns to own his suave brilliance. Nevertheless, he’s not a natural here; his efforts are best summed up by Marylin Delphy when she offers him, “You're not an asshole, Mark. You're just trying so hard to be.”

This is what happens when you are too aloof from your surroundings to be able to look at them objectively, so detached that you can’t even mind them sometimes. One may think that it’s carelessness on their part, but that’s, after all, just an excuse. The reel Mark wanted to be forthright, but he was deemed an ‘asshole’; the real Mark may have wanted to make the web a more social and open place, but skeptics always cry foul at what they see as a breach in their privacy. Ultimately, he is not a bad guy, but a lonely guy he sure is. As we see him friending Erica and patiently waiting for a response in the last scene, we can’t help but wonder at this appropriate metaphor – the coming of age. An asshole Mark would never have the subtle squirm insinuated throughout the movie.

After all, everything comes at a price; and Faustian price is too dear, always.

Black

2010-10-01T01:12:00.000+05:30

I took this picture on a cloudy night. The moon is not a full one, and it's seemingly entangled in the clouds. Yet, it's a delight to look at - pristine and glowing. There is darkness everywhere, except for that little zone of luminosity struggling to hold on to dear life.

I've always been obsessed with the color black; and I've noticed that a lot of people are, and each one of them has a different story to tell. I like it because of the fact that it covers every-darn-thing - a sort of blanket facade for anything one wants to conceal; because sometimes you hold a thing so dear that you don't want others to defile it.

Where Merit and Equity Meet

2010-09-25T14:21:00.000+05:30

This is a guest post, written by my brother Samarth, originally written in response to this article. This is intended to be a comment on the 'open letter to Mr. Sibal'.

Dear Bijendar,

Nice article! Great presentation and even better sarcasm. But I fail to agree with the core of your view... This is how I look at it.

I would like to take you back in time, the time when the IITs were getting established. Behind their formation, was the greatest socialist leader our country has ever produced- Pt. Nehru. He had 'social equity' as his core ideology and he sought to achieve it by - I am sure you must be knowing - the trickle down theory of development. This model seeks to achieve growth by first developing what can easily be developed, and then assuming that it will propagate outwards(/downwards). So, they established the IITs as centers of excellence, assuming that they will act as nodes, producing engineers of world class talent who will drive the country into the modern age. Huge funds were put into them, and still are. So the points to note are twin. First- that the IITs are not some private bodies, but are government nurtured institutions. Second- that the IITs were created not just to promote merit, but to use merit for all round development by giving it a chance to realise its potential.

Now the basic fallacy of such a model is that in trying to use merit as a tool for future equity, it creates more inequity. Also, the people who benefit from it - in this case the middle classes - never do what is expected from them. What happened as a result was called brain drain. The "brand" which the IITians have created, although a big achievent of Indian intellectuality, is a big failure of the government. The fault here is not with the people, but with the government policy itself, which somehow assumes action in public interest as something coming naturally to a human being.

How do I see the recent governmental policies vis-a-vis the IITs?
1. on opening up new IITs..NO...not because it will tarnish the image of the IITs, but because it is just an extension of the trickle down theory. The money can be better spent directly on the bottom of our socio-economic pyramid. Infact if you ask me today, I would not support even the creation of those seven in the first place.
2. On reservation...NO more of populism please!...They only benefit those are already well off to support their basic education and have a decent living, not those who have nothing.
3. On a common entrance test... YES!...because it has the obvious benefits of integration, but it should take the varying needs of institutes into account.
4. on taking the board marks into account...please prepare the framework it needs first, then do it. It will give a better idea of the overall personality of the student. But dont try and reach the moon with an autorickshaw.

People who benefit from a government policy start opposing newer policies, even if the newer ones have the same ideology as the ones which benefitted them, if they think that they will negatively affect their self interest. The OBC groups opposing the women reservation is an example, and so are the IITians opposing newer IITs. The basic goal of any government of a country should be to allow people to act in their self interests, and only support those who really cannot, rather than creating distortionist policies based on false assumptions.

It's high time that merit finds its way out (on its own, of course)!

MBIC

2010-09-12T17:03:00.000+05:30

Mahanagar Boys' Inter College [(note the positioning of the apostrophe, you dimwit r-tards!) (now – sadly – Montfort Inter College)] was established in July 1959 by the Society of Montfort Brothers of St. Garbiel (or was it ‘Gabriel’? Someone please confirm) in Lucknow, India.

It originally went by the name of Mahanagar Boys’ High School (until – what else – it could screw kids in the Intermediate too), and received recognition as an intermediate college in 1984. In 2007, in a decision which saw the effigies of a certain effing cobbler being burnt all over Lucknow, the name was changed to ‘Montfort Inter College’. Now there are rumors that it’s being made a co-ed institute. (No, I don’t want any ‘grapes’ jokes flying; so STFU.) Next - LGBT pride marches by the egalitarian students; heck, I can imagine Shaji Joseph salivating at this prospect!

The college runs classes from Class VIth to the intermediate level and prepares students for the High School and Intermediate Examinations of the Uttar Pradesh Board. Teaching is in English medium; however, some people claim to have cheated the fool-proof system and studied in Hindi medium. The current Principal is Bro. Monachan K. K. (However, there are rumors of him getting fired after all. Someone, again, please confirm.)

The school boasts of a rich history, varied heritage, yada yada yada. Sample this: “The Directorate of Education put on record its special appreciation for Mahanagar Boys' School and its management for their willingness to accommodate wards of the Defense personnel of the frontline N.E.F.A, as well as the refugee children from Assam, consequent to China-India war in 1962. However since the war came to a speedy end the situation of the North East normalized early, preventing the migration of students to Uttar Pradesh.” How can you possibly beat that? So, in short, we are awesome; and we like to bask in this awesomeness like Dr R. K. physics-don’t-need-no-a-c-classrooms Mitra in his small-ass teaching room at Ravindrapalli.

I gather that the awesomeness-quotient is waning nowadays. But, hey, everything that goes up comes down some day, only to go up again some other day – yin-yang and stuff. So, in short, Boys’ is awesome, and so it shall remain. Period.

The 90s meme

2010-09-08T17:33:00.003+05:30

There’s a new fb meme doing rounds. It brought upon me a wave of nostalgia, and I could connect to most of the points mentioned therein. So, here, I’m putting it up on ‘My Life’, with some minor modifications:

You Know You Grew Up in India in the 90s when…

1) You know the words to ‘In-pin-safety-pin’ and ‘akkad-bakkad’ by heart. 2) Cricket is almost a religion for you, and you idolize at least one of Rahul Dravid/Sachin Tendulkar/Saurav Ganguly (Who were the bowlers, again?). 3) You have read at least some ‘Chacha Chaudhary’ or ‘Tinkle’ comics; you know that ‘Raj Comics’ heroes have a thing for animals (which means that they can communicate with them, you dirty mind!). 4) You’ve watched ‘Shaktimaan’/’Mowgli’ on TV at least once in your life. And you can immediately recognize the character when you see him. 5) You have some ‘NRI’ relatives. They used to bring you chocolates, ‘real’ chocolates. Speaking of which… 6) You couldn’t wait for it to be December so you could have the Toblerone/Hershey’s chocolates your NRI relatives brought you. 7) You watched Cartoon Network, and then the late night movies on TNT that came after Cartoon Network ended. You remember the ‘bomb explosion’ of 6 p.m. 8) You watched corny dubbed versions of Small Wonder, Dennis the menace, and I Dream of Jeanie 9) You were THRILLED when McDonald’s opened in your neighborhood (or even eight kilometers away) 10) A visit to Pizza Hut/Domino’s used to mean a special treat. 11) You have seen Kuch Kuch Hota Hai and Hum Aapke Hain Kaun at least 5 times each. Ah, parents! And you thought, at that time, that KKHH was cool. 12) You still remember the theme song of Hum Paanch. (Hum Paanch, Pa Pa Pam Pam Paanch!). 13) You have played hours upon hour of running and catching, chor-police, Ice-pice (I spy you), ‘Doctor, doctor, help us!’, ‘Lock and key’. 14) You have seen girls play ‘Amina Super Sina’/’posham pa’ more times than you can remember. (And you still don’t know what it means!). 15) Dog ‘in’ the bone was your favorite co-ed game. 16) Much of your free time in school was spent playing UNO. 17) You collected trump cards of wrestlers, cricketers, and airplanes – hogging up-on shitty bubble-gums for your ‘collection’ – and did not quite understand why your younger siblings were obsessed with Pokemon and the other Japanese trends that followed. Finally, ‘South Park’ came to your rescue. 18) Your summer vacations were often synonymous with visiting your grandparents or cousins. 19) Your parents, at some point, told you ‘Dark Room’ was a bad game to play. But you still loved playing it. 20) Bole mere lips, I love uncle Chips! And Lays’ was Ruffles, and it sucked. 21) You know the song ‘Made in India’ by Alisha Chinai 22) You have seen many many many episodes of ‘Antakshari’ on Zee TV and know the only thing constant in the show is Annu Kapoor. Why was Pallavi Joshi with him again? 23) Many evenings have been spent watching little kids gyrate vulgarly on Boogie Woogie on Sony. And ACP Pradyumna-yahan-pe-to-laash-hai awed you. 24) You were the coolest thing in class if you had a computer in your house while it was still the 90s. 25) You learnt BASIC in school, CHIPPING-IN was the book to have, published by ‘Independent Business Machine’ Pub!! 26) You couldn’t wait to start 4th standard so you could start writing with PENS instead of with pencils! 27) You often used terms and phrases like ‘two-say’, ‘same to you, back to you, with no returns’, and ‘shame shame, puppy shame, all the donkeys know your name’! 28) You most probably saw Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge at the cinema at least once. You also fantasized about singing songs in mustard fields as in the movie. (Admit it, you!) 29) You have seen David Dhawan and Govinda movies and laughed at them, at the jokes, not the way you’d now. 31) You have said ‘haw’ or ‘yuck’ when you saw people kissing in English movies. (now-a-days kids are used to it!) 30) Titanic was, in all probability, your FIRST ‘favorite English movie’. 31) You thought seeing English movies and speaking English made you the coolest thing ever. 32) You remember the Gujarat earthquake very clearly and could possibly tell everyone EXACTLY what you were doing when the earthquake occurred. 33) Barbies for girls, and GI Joes for boys were the ultimate status symbols. You just wanted more, more, more, and more. And how can I forget Hot Wheels, for both boys and girls? 34) You thought ‘imported’ clothes were definitely way better than ‘made in India’ clothes (never mind that a lot of clothes brought from overseas by NRI relatives were actually made in India, before ‘Made in China’ started appearing on EVERY existing thing). 35) "Jungle Jungle Baat Chali Hai Pata Chala Hai! Chaddi Pehen Ke Phool Khila Hai Phool Khila Hai!" You watched "The Jungle Book" every Sunday morning at 9.a.m" and just loved mowgli, bhalu and bagheera. A few years later, you watched Disney Hour, which had cartoons like Aladdin, Gummy Bears, Tail Spin, Uncle Scrooge! 36) At some point or other, cool/kewl was your favorite, and therefore, most overused word. 37) Captain Planet was your first introduction to environmental consciousness. 38) You have tried to convince people around you to not burst crackers on Diwali, and then gone straight back home and burst them yourself. 39) You have had endless packets of Parle Gluco-G biscuits, and of Britannia Little Hearts biscuits. 40) You loved licking off the cream from the centre of Bourbon biscuits. 41) There were no Nike, Reebok, Adidas, Puma. Action, Bata and Liberty was the way to go for your sports shoes. And Kapil Dev convinced you to get ‘Joote-me-hai-light’ Action-Shoes! 42) You have probably consumed more Frooti in your lifetime than there is oil in Iraq. 43) You watched Baywatch/VIP/Silk Stalkings on Star World when nobody was home even though (or because) your parents said you shouldn’t watch it. 44) You bought packets of potato chips for the specific purpose of collecting Tazos. And you had Tazos depicting everyone from Confucius to Daffy Duck to Daffy Duck dressed as Confucius. 45) For the longest time, the Maruti 800, the Premier Padmini, THE Fiat, and THE Ambassador were the only cars you saw on the road, and the Contessa was cool because it was bigger. 46) You would literally jump up in excitement if you ever chanced upon an imported car (Oh my gosh, is that really a MERCEDES?)! 47) You spent a good part of 1998 drooling over the Hyundai Santro and the Daewoo Matiz , debating which one was better. 48) ‘Lucky Ali’ started being cool to you. 49) You sometimes had contests with your classmates about who had more tattoos on their arm, leg, knee, hand, forehead, wherever. 50) You thought Mario and Contra were the coolest things ever invented, especially if you were a boy. 51) You knew that having the latest Hero or Atlas bicycle would make you the coolest kid on the block. 52) You love ‘Mile sur mera tumhara’. 53) You have, at some point of time, worn GAP clothes (real or fake) like SRK in KKHH. 54) Seemingly senseless acronyms like 'SRK', 'DDLJ', 'DTPH', 'KKHH', etc. actually make sense to you.. 55) You have at some point debated who was more beautiful: Aishwarya or Sushmita. 56) Baskin Robbins ice-cream was THE thing to have! 57) You know what Campa Cola is. And you also knew that Coca Cola was THE drink. 58) You would watch WWF keenly every evening/afternoon and loved Bret Hart "Hitman"! really thought Undertaker had seven lives and he made an “actual” appearance in the Akshay Kumar- starrer ‘Khiladiyon ka Khiladi’. 59) When all backpacks (or ’schoolbags’) and water bottles and tiffin boxes had strange cartoon characters that were hybrid versions of seven or eight different characters, and you still bought them, because a green man wih a water pistol, boots, a jet-pack, Johnny bravo hair, a rajasthani mustache, gloves, and underwear (long johns) over his pants, called ‘Mr. X’ was OBVIOUSLY a status symbol. 60) You remember the Nirma tikia jingle. 61) You remember the Nirma girl. 62) You remember the ‘doodh doodh piyo glass full doodh’ ad and also the ‘laal kaala peela, gulabi hara neela classic hai badia bristles wala’ and 'roz khao ande' ads. 63) You grew up reading, if you read at all, some or all of Nancy Drews, Enid Blyton books, Hardy Boys, Babysitters Club, Animorphs, Goosebumps, Sweet Valley series, Judy Blumes, and Tintin, or Archie comics. Because naturally, reading foreign authors made you much cooler than reading Tinkle. 64) Towards the late 90s (1998-99) at least some of us started our Harry Potter obsessions! 65) You absolutely HAD to go to Essel World if you were with cousins! “Essel World mein rahoonga main, ghar nahin nahin jaaonga main!” (I never went but always dreamed of going there!) 66) You watched the Bournvita Quiz contest on TV pretty religiously. The smarter ones amongst you actually took part in it and had your entire school and your entire extended families watch you on it! 67) Maggi 2 Minute Noodles = ultimate snack (and tiffin, lunch, dinner)! 68) If you grew up in the early 90s, you recall the nation’s obsession with Mahabharata on TV. 69) In the later 90s, you religiously followed ‘Hip Hip Hooray’ on Zee… may be ‘Just Mohabbat’ on Sony too. 70) You remember Parzan Dastur saying "JALEBI!!" in the ‘Dhara’ Ad. 71) You eagerly awaited ‘Friendship Day’, so you could give friendship bands to all your friends, and get bands from them in return. Then, of course, those with the most bands loved to show them off. 72) Backstreet Boys' 'Quit Playing Games' was one of the first English songs that you LOVED! 73) 'Andaz Apna Apna' is and most probably will always be your favorite comedy flick! 'Aila Jhakaas!' 74) Cordless phones were ultra-cool. 75) You know what ‘Name, Place, Animal, Thing’ is! 76) Yow owned/dreamed of owning a geared bike, preferably ‘Hercules Top Gear’.

77) You can think of more things to add here!

Fb

2010-08-22T22:23:00.005+05:30

I've been spending quite some time on facebook these days, and have discovered/learnt numerous things. The very first thing - which is the most obvious as well - is that it's so much better than orkut, which I used as my primary social networking site till now. The interface is so much better, easy to understand and use, and easy on the eyes as well. All the people who matter to me - well, almost all - have moved on to fb (or twitter, but more on that later).

But, for all its awesomeness, fb does have its own share of issues. The most important of them is the issue of privacy. As anyone who's been on this site for a while will testify, the privacy settings are pretty cryptic. And in saying that I'm actually being generous! Setting proper safety settings on fb is as tough as its important (take your sweet pick!); and I could find my cuppa, with help from this post, after devoting a considerable amount of time to the stuff.

The most important safety feature on fb is that of lists. Basically, what it means is that you can 'tag' your friends as per your wish, and allow only specific people - a list of them - to be able to view any particular content. Say, for example, you want to post a pic of you flipping the bird to your boss, but you don't want your office people to see it. What you'll do is that you'll put all your office people in a list - effectively tagging them - and then prevent those people from seeing that pic on your wall, by hiding the pic from them, as you upload it. Yes, it is that simple!

You can also enable only a group of people to post on your wall, only for them to see other people's posts, or even hide the whole wall from some people, the combinations are endless! Ideally, one should limit those friends who can access one's info on fb; but that's strictly my own opinion.

One way orkut is better than fb - in my opinion, of course - is that on orkut you can access someone's private album even if you have the direct URL address to it. This isn't so in fb, and that's a dangerous thing. Still, the pros far outweigh the cons, and so, for now, fb it is!

Gloom

2010-07-05T08:40:00.000+05:30

I clicked this one at ‘Fauji ka Dhaba’, or FkD as we used to call it. It sure brings back a lot of memories, this place. And, the colorful ribbons against the evening sky sum up perfectly all what I associate the place with.

Vegetarianism, Ethics

2010-07-05T04:03:00.001+05:30

Should you eat the meat of an animal when a more ethical alternative is present; ethical, here, referring to the convenient fact that the other option – vegetarianism – involves no ostensible pain and suffering as a consequence of your actions?

Since April this year, I’ve been a vegetarian. It has not been easy, as I’ve been an avid meat eater, as this post would testify. In addition to that, I’ve, quite often, found myself grappling with the ethical question. In this post I’ll try to summarize and answer the question(s).

Stripping it down to the very basic, the fact emerges that I’ve opted for vegetarianism as I thought that I shouldn’t unnecessarily – and that’s the most important word: unnecessarily – kill something just to please my taste buds, nor should I be a cause of any such killing. However, modern agricultural practices, such as the use of pesticides and all, cause a huge number of deaths as well. Conversely, the animals also in their lifetime cause a huge number of ‘deaths’, in the plants that they eat and the insects that they kill, etc. Now which of that numbers is greater, I have no means to know!

Then there is the philosophical question. It has been argued that we humans are morally conscious in a way that other animals are not, and therefore the killing of, and causing pain to, animals is wrong. It can be condoned when no other option is available, but indulging in it when you can very well lead a vegetarian life style is plain wrong. And, thinking of it, one can’t help the killing of the ‘pests’ in a farm as well, since not killing them would mean that we’d starve (unless, of course, one is willing to go vegan).

There are environmental and health-related issues as well. Feed crops like corn impact the ecosystem in a negative way; the gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane produced as by-product wreck havoc on the environment; and there is a waste of resources, as the higher in the food pyramid you eat from, the more concentrated bio-mass you eat. Also, meat raises cholesterol, can be unhealthily fatty, and may even cause colon cancer. Now who’d want all that? I wouldn’t. Not anymore.

Ultimately, it’s a question of what convinces you, what you think suits you the best. As is the case with all decisions – bets, in essence they are – you do what makes you happy and content, and that’s all what matters.

I’d conclude with a line by Matthew Scully, “If reason and morality are what set humans apart from animals, then reason and morality must always guide us in how we treat them.”

Book Review: Recalcitrance

2009-12-28T10:16:00.003+05:30

I recently had the opportunity of reading the historical novel ‘Recalcitrance’ by Mr. Anurag Kumar, who was gracious enough to send me a copy of the book. It is, as the author says, “history given a fictional treatment”. He argues that though he could’ve written a plain history-book, he didn’t do that as he wanted to bring forth the prevailing zeitgeist: something which could only be done from the viewpoints of people who were actually present at that time. I couldn’t agree more.

The novel has the story of a certain Chote Bhaiya, who’s the protagonist and is drawn into the struggle after he’s bitterly humiliated by a drunk-on-power British officer. It’s through his viewpoint mainly that we get to know about the ‘mutiny’ and the heroics of numerous valiant patriots – including, among others, a mysterious ‘white turbaned man’ who’s based upon Raja Jailal Singh who was a trusted general of Begum Hazrat Mehel – and the prevailing sentiments of the time. We learn that the commoners were mostly anti-Company; and that though some elites did help the cause, most of them disconnected themselves from the efforts.

One remarkable thing that comes across, as one reads the novel, is the prevailing Hindu-Muslim brotherhood. It is a well known fact now that the British ‘learned’ from the events of the uprising and then adopted the policy of ‘Divide and Rule, something which paid them rich dividends as soon enough they became the virtual masters of the whole of India. However – friendly as they were, one can’t overlook the fact that the two religions are starkly different; hence – some differences were there: like the Hindus not drinking water from the hands of a Muslim, etc. Still, as the author points out and documents in the form of Tek Chand and Karim Khan, the two religions often made tremendously good friends. The Hindu-Muslim contrast is also explored in the subtle love-story sub-plot involving Chote Bhaiya and Farheen.

The novel also talks about the two Lucknows: the one that was prior to the uprising, and the one that became of it after the British recaptured the city. It discusses the character of Nawab Wajid Ali Shah, and tries to explain his position and ventures into the reasons as to why the Nawab became who he was. It also demonstrates that the ordinary citizens of Lucknow did all they could to help the cause, by supporting it via all means. It depicts their anger on the confiscation (annexation) of ‘Oudh’ by the British on the farcical grounds of ‘mismanagement’. It demonstrates rather well the humongous hypocrisy of the British at various places, like when they always were eliciting ‘Cawnpore’ while brutally massacring the ‘natives’, all the while conveniently forgetting their own atrocious acts which surpassed a thousand ‘Cawnpores’.

One learns about the importance of patriotism on reading the book: it's the debt on you of the motherland which made you, pouring her elements into you and nurturing you the best she could. When she's in trouble, as she was in 1857, one ought to stand up for her. The ensuing struggle is brutal, but is completely worth-it; as the author beautifully captures in the words of Narenderlal, “The mother conceives a baby and thanks God for His blessing. She goes through enormous troubles during those nine months and then there is the horrible pain of childbirth but it brings forth a wonderful creation, an image of God Himself. On being shown the face of the infant the mother forgets all her pain and hugs the little creature to her bosom. Also sometimes the baby is still born but the mother does not say to God: do not give me anymore babies, but eagerly looks forward to another birth. Similarly, our country is going through a painful phase but this will end bringing in a new life. However, this struggle must be continued if any such thing is to happen.”

The book is briskly paced and is a pleasant read indeed. However, I feel that it should’ve had some illustrations as well: pictures of the historical monuments as well as some maps explaining the ‘siege’, etc. Nevertheless, it is one book with its heart at the right place: the author being an emotionally-driven passionate historian who truly feels for the subject and his city as well, being so much obsessed with it that he dropped out of a med school to pursue his interest. All of this, and much more, shows in this book which is definitely a must read if you are even a tiny bit interested in the great uprising of 1857: the first war for India’s Independence.

Movie Review: No Smoking (2007)

2009-12-18T04:33:00.002+05:30

NS was a movie which was universally panned by Indian critics: Khalid, Taran, Rajeev, Raja, you name them and they’re on in the lambasting brigade. Some of the anger was justified; it being a highly personal and egoistic movie, which couldn’t be understood by many – well, most – people.

The movie begins with a recurring dream of K, the protagonist played by John Abraham, in which he finds himself somewhere in the middle of Siberia. He gets a call from his wife, Anjali, and disconnects it in want of a cigarette. He goes looking for it; and breaks through the housing he’s in and runs for a pack, with an officer with a Tommy gun in close pursuit. He sees a bathtub, but skips it and reaches for the cigarette; and just as he’s about to have it, he’s shot dead.

The story then cuts to K’s apartment in Bombay, where he’s having a cigarette in his bathtub. We’re given the impression that K is a hardcore addict; and it’s when his wife decides to leave him that he agrees to visit ‘Prayogshala’, an underground rehab centre run by a certain Baba Bengali, who’s a control-freak maniac who adores Hitler. The ‘lab’ claims a 100% success rate; and K’s close friend Abbas, who has himself given up smoking, is a testimony to that claim.

The Baba believes in inducing fear in the mind of the smokers, by using tactics such as kidnapping their relatives, chopping their fingers, and – if nothing else works – separating the ‘greedy’ soul from the body. He believes that the soul corrupts the body in order to satisfy its own petty greed, etc. and the body should be purged of it if the soul refuses to reform itself.

K’s nightmares begin when he signs the contract at the ‘lab’, and we witness his struggle to quench his thirst for a fag – the one thing that is the truest manifestation of his individuality – and in the process falling into the cesspool which the Baba has so wonderfully arranged for him. We witness the treachery of Abbas – a reference to ‘Abbas Tyrewala', who is a writer-director and was Anurag’s lyricist in ‘Paanch’; but he became a sellout later – when he, having lost his 2 fingers with which he holds cigarettes and pens, pushes K into the programme. To a writer, nothing is more important than his pen; and he becomes soulless when that is taken away, feeling nothing even while manipulating his friend. All he wants is to get back his pen holding finger.

This continues throughout the movie, with K’s brother committing suicide, Anjali getting abducted and K becoming a suspect, and many other sequences. And, finally we see K in his Siberia dream again. This time he opts to jump in the tub, and finds himself fully taken over by the Baba thus. He neglected his individuality – denying himself finally by giving in – and his soul paid the price for it.

NS is a movie that challenges you to come and experience it. It does not reveal itself even a bit – with all metaphors remaining unexplained to the end – but expect you to unravel itself; and in that sense it expects a tad too much from the viewer. It mirrors the struggle Anurag had to face in this world to be able to have a say. And its arrogance is just a defense mechanism to protect the pristine protagonist, who lives just with and for himself, from the evil enemy which manifests itself in the form of the society. The movie is not about smoking; rather it’s about the inner turmoil within our souls. The water scenes – in the bathtubs, in the police station, etc. – depict the journey of the soul which is in anguish trying to make a choice: between itself and the society. Here, sadly enough, the enemy wins.

Rating: 8/10

Movie Review: Paanch (2003)

2009-12-16T19:57:00.004+05:30

As you’d probably be knowing, ‘Paanch’ was supposed to be the directorial debut of Director Anurag Kashyap; but it got stuck due to issues involving the censor board. The board thought, inter alia, that the movie didn’t provide ‘healthy entertainment’, and refused to grant it a certificate on multiple occasions.

However, the movie was recently leaked on the internet, and that gave a chance to the Anurag aficionados to finally watch it, after 6 years of delay! Meanwhile, Anurag maintains that he’s got nothing to do with the leak, though he was glad that it happened. Anyway, all I know is that I finally got to see a ‘must watch’; and that seals the argument as far as most people are concerned.

It is the story of a rock band comprising of five members: Luke, Murgi, Joy, PornD, and Shuili. Luke, played by Kay Kay, is the leader here: a highly dominating and impulsive character who reminds one of Tyler Durden. The story is a thriller, the movie falling in the noir genre, and it involves a heist and the resulting complications which arise when the band members find themselves in want of money, for various reasons. The five hatch a simple plan to ‘kidnap’ a friend, with his consent, to extract money from his rich-but miser dad. Things go wrong when Luke murders him in a fit of rage, and what follows is a gory tale of murders, betrayals, and the horrific baring of human soul. The censor board objected that the movie didn’t have any ‘positive characters’; and all I can say is that Anurag couldn’t have incorporated one without killing the soul of ‘Paanch’.

The movie starts to surprise you and raise your expectations as soon as the opening credits – which are themed ‘5’, and set amidst a psychedelic view of Bombay – start rolling. You immediately get hooked to the screen, and the grip that the movie forms on you isn’t loosened at any place.

The acting is top notch, be it Luke’s histrionics, Murgi’s solemness, or PornD’s jealousy and fear, just to mention a few. The atmosphere and the setting are real and haunting, and you can almost smell the ambience through the brilliant work of the crew. It’s a fitting companion to the dark mood and the darker thoughts. And the direction, needless to say, is awesome: you’d find it hard to believe that it’s the debut performance for a director; and even while watching it in 2009, a good 9 years after it was made, one can’t help noticing how much better it is when compared to most – almost all – of the movies of this decade.

The dialogues are crisp; and although some may find them to be profane, it’s only because they’re real, something which would reverberate in your mind a lot. There’re gems like Luke’s graffiti which screams, “Franz Kafka, Van Gogh, Michelangelo were unrecognized geniuses in their life. Recognize me!!” The dialogues hit you well and hard, making you laugh and feel awed in equal measures. And, just to mention, the censor board had a problem with the profanity too.

There were, however, some shortcomings. The ending was not perfect; it left you a bit off: it was the way Luke’s character was written towards the end. And Tejaswini Kolhapure was strictly okay throughout – actually wanting at places. Also, this being a movie with a ‘rock band’ as the central character, the music should’ve been better. There were a few good songs, like ‘Tamas’, ‘Khuda hun mai’, and ‘Kya din kya raat’, but the rest was a pretty ordinary affair. Moreover, when you consider the fact that the music director was Vishal Bhardwaj, you’re sure to be a tad disappointed. The lyricist, Abbas Tyrewala, has done a good job though.

It’s a disappointment that the movie didn’t get the release it so well deserved, a fact which has much to do with the hypocrisy of the censor board. Nevertheless, it was, in one sense, a blessing in disguise: it made Anurag angry enough to make ‘Gulaal’, and arrogant enough to make ‘No Smoking’. And, as many would say, although ‘Paanch’ is a very modest attempt as per Anurag’s standards – considering the technical and overall finesse of ‘Dev D’, ‘Gulaal’, 'No Smoking’, and even ‘Black Friday’ – it’s way better than the regular Bollywood crap.

Rating: 7.5/10

Gulaal

2009-12-11T04:11:00.002+05:30

Post ‘Dev D’, Anurag Kashyap finally found a producer in Zee for his angriest film: ‘Gulaal’, which he was trying to make for the last seven years prior to its release in March 2009. He conceived this movie, with the help of Raja choudhary who plays Dileep in it, after he was denied a censor certificate for ‘Paanch’ in 2001. The censor board felt that ‘Paanch’ wasn’t about ‘healthy entertainment’; something which is pretty ironic considering that the same board okayed movies like ‘Havas’, etc. Anyway, that’s altogether a different issue.

The movie is set in Rajpur, ostensibly in Rajasthan, where in arrives a young student Dileep to study law. He’s a simple, bespectacled, studious person; and the story is all about how he gets entangled in the undercurrent, the ‘Rajputana movement’, propelled by Duki Bana: Kay Kay at his usual best.

The story is about a weak man and how he’s oblivious of all who’re using him; and how he finally realizes this but not before getting callously and slyly used by a brother-sister duo (Karan-Kiran) who’re doing all in their capacity and beyond to gain social legitimacy. It is about the father who’d not grant his children (the aforementioned duo) their rightful due for the fear of social stigma. It’s about the heir apparent (Ransa) who couldn’t care less about ‘his highness’.

It’s about the complex relationship between two brothers, Prithvi and Duki Bana; while the elder is a foreign educated ‘John Lennon’ fan who’s the only voice of sanity caped in the madly frivolous poetry, the younger is the Rajputana fanatic before whom everybody else (except ‘his highness, of course) bows. It’s about the aspiring actress Madhuri who is Duki’s keep and is convinced about her ‘Tabu’ like looks. It’s she who ultimately does Duki in, by provoking Dileep, when he starts neglecting her and falls for Kiran instead.

There’s the fantastic poetry and music by Piyush Mishra, who doubles up as lyricist-composer and acts as Prithvi Bana, voicing the reinterpretation of ‘Sarfaroshi Ki Tamanna’ or the ‘Aarambh’ ode or the ‘Yeh Duniya’ end-song. The subtleties of the interactions between his character and the ‘Ardh-nareeshvar’ leave you all-stirred-up and haunted.

Among all these is set Gulaal, which is all about angst. The feeling is of the type that was reflected in Sahir Ludhianvi’s ‘Yeh duniya agar mil bhi jaaye to kya hai’ (Guru Dutt’s ‘Pyasa’): the song which, according to Anurag, is the inspiration behind this movie.

The movie works because it stuns you, leaving you aghast as the story unfolds, and you find yourself horrified as well as craving for more; it clicks because it’s something you know is true, but you just brush it aside whenever you happen to stumble upon it in the ‘normal course’. At some point in our lives, most of have been coldly used in one way or the other; but we just feign ignorance and covertly pity ourselves; ‘Gulaal’ works as a metaphor here which we put on and try to deceive, the object being ‘us’ eventually.

All praises for Anurag for providing us with such a medium to look into. The movie is one journey which shows Joe that entire he left behind when he deviated from the hard course.

The technical finesse in the movie is no surprise, given that Anurag has proved himself time and again; but to achieve such look and the detailing in what is obviously a low budget feature is highly laudable. Yes, the editing could’ve been crisper; and the character of Jesse Randhawa shouldn’t have been left hanging in the air; but, in sum, the product is brilliant! Anurag has set the bar pretty high for his own convenience this time. Let’s just hope that he over does himself in the next venture.

On Anurag Kashyap

2009-12-07T11:16:00.002+05:30

This year witnessed the phenomenal rise of director Anurag Kashyap, with his two movies – ‘Dev D’ and ‘Gulaal’ – drawing universal accolades.

Anurag first came into limelight in 1998 as a scriptwriter for ‘Satya’, which was also the starting point of RGV’s Bombay-underworld trilogy. That film went on to become a cult classic; and, ironically enough, Anurag was lost in oblivion for some years for following a chimera called ‘Paanch’.

Then came the year 2005, which saw the release of ‘Black Friday’, and suddenly Anurag was the versatile maven yet again. He, however, decided against doing anything similar and went on to adopt Stephen King’s ‘Quitters, Inc’ into a movie. The result was ‘No Smoking’, which was panned by critics and moviegoers alike (though it has a niche following of its own to its credit), and Anurag was branded a spent force.

Then came Dev D in 2009 and everything changed, and how!

Ostensibly a modern age remake of the classic ‘Dev Das’, Dev D is a coming of age movie which redefines every single thing you thought you knew about ‘love’. I thought only Ayn Rand could do that; and whoa, here comes Dev, arrogantly unapologetic, spanking every cliché and taboo, not seeking any pity from the audience … and finally accepting that “we all are sluts”.

The other day I was having this discussion with a friend (Shardul) about the impact of Dev D. He opined that the greatest message in the movie is to ‘move on’, at the right time. For me, it’s about identifying the Dev in us, and treating him as the need is. This person is seeker trying to make sense of the world: holding on to what he can, trying to crawl his way back into a world he can accept and be accepted, but he’s ceremoniously rejected by the circumstance of existence and society at every crossroad. And, being the non-sympathy-seeker that he is, he defies every single ethic and concept imaginable as a result. He sets off on a journey that’s an unending downward spiral, barely aware of what all is happening to and around him; and then, in the end, grabs the second chance that is presented to him in the form of Lenny.

Every single character is so easily identifiable; you may not empathize, but you’re sure to acknowledge. All the lead characters – Dev, Paro, and Lenny – are unapologetically real; Dev is the quintessential example of today’s obsessed lover – confused, passionate, and obfuscated, all rolled in a single drive to ‘get’ Paro; and the two ladies are alive and kicking, so sure of what and how they want.

And then there is the musical score: which, IMO, is the best of them all in 2009. You’d never realize you’re watching a movie with eighteen songs: that’s ‘Dev D, the musical’ for you. The songs, to composer Amit Trivedi’s credit, are mind-fucking-blowing! Even today, I constantly have the songs on my play list.

After Dev D followed Gulaal, and it’d be a gross understatement to say that it was a worthy successor. The performances by Piyush Mishra, both as the composer and as Prithvi Bana, deserve a million bowings. And, to top it, there are the fantabulous performances by Kay Kay Menon and Abhimanyu Singh. The movie simply blows you away! And, here’s an interesting and ironic fact: the movie was ready prior to Dev D, whose success helped found Anurag a buyer in Zee. And now Gulaal, along with Sankat City, Dev D, Love Aaj Kal, and Kaminey, completes the list of my favorite five Hindi movies of 2009.

It’d be interesting to watch Anurag over the course of the next few years. He says, “I like the tag ‘enfant terrible’. As long as you don't call me normal I'm fine with anything”. Here is one filmmaker who dares to be different and doesn’t botch up like RGV. And at 37, he’s very well expected to dish out quite a few masterpieces in times to come.

Some poems

2009-11-25T02:09:00.005+05:30

Here’re a few poems I like, arranged in no particular order:

Emily Dickinson - We never know how high we are:

We never know how high we are, till we are asked to rise

And then if we are true to plan, our statures touch the skies

The Heroism we recite, would be a normal thing

Did not ourselves the Cubits warp, for fear to be a King

Langston Hughes - Dream Deferred:

What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up, like a raisin in the sun?

Or fester like a sore, and then run?

Does it stink like rotten meat?

Or crust and sugar over, like a syrupy sweet?

Maybe it just sags, like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?

Robert Frost - The Road Not Taken:

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,

And sorry I could not travel both

And be one traveler, long I stood

And looked down one as far as I could

To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,

And having perhaps the better claim,

Because it was grassy and wanted wear;

Though as for that the passing there

Had worn them really about the same,

And both that morning equally lay

In leaves no step had trodden black.

Oh, I kept the first for another day!

Yet knowing how way leads on to way,

I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh

Somewhere ages and ages hence:

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

Robert Frost - Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening:

Whose woods these are I think I know.

His house is in the village, though;

He will not see me stopping here

To watch his woods fill up with snow.

My little horse must think it queer

To stop without a farmhouse near

Between the woods and frozen lake

The darkest evening of the year.

He gives his harness bells a shake

To ask if there is some mistake.

The only other sound's the sweep

Of easy wind and downy flake.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep,

But I have promises to keep,

And miles to go before I sleep,

And miles to go before I sleep.

Tundey Kebabi 'franchised'

2009-11-09T05:59:00.002+05:30

I want this to be seen by many of you guys, especially those who’re from Lucknow. It’s so because of the horrifying experience I had, and I don’t want anyone else to undergo the same: I ordered Biryani from the Tunday’s at Picnic Spot Road, the very first franchise outlet, and I’m pained to say that – even if I try to ameliorate it, still – the outlet sucks; and dishing out ‘franchise’ was a bad idea for the ‘legendary Tunday Kebabi’.

The ‘Biryani’ that I got was heavy on salt, and was hideous; and even some novice can make something better. I mean, come on! I got a freaking ‘tail piece’. I never expected that, of all things I paid a freaking 60 Rupees for that man! This sucks in its full glory. And coupled to the ‘high salt experience’, this was a pure disaster. I’d repeat – and no matter how often I do this, it’ll be the same – ‘it sucked’.

So I’d advice all you guys to stay away from ‘Ms. US eating point, Lucknow’. That’s the name of that sucking place. If you really want the Tundey Kebabi experience, go to Chowk (Old Lucknow), and nowhere else.

Another day in Paradise

2009-11-06T04:56:00.001+05:30

Note: I wrote this piece about three months back, and now feel like putting it up here. I was in a negative frame of mind when I wrote this, and the cynical attitude is all-abound.

I’m feeling low, and this had been so for quite some time now, the whole day and even prior to that. I thought some cooking might cheer me up, so went out to grab some chicken breast.

A few minutes later I found myself at Zawar and sons’, looking at the butcher holding the bird by its wings. He slit its throat and left it on a platform, and went back to skin another bird for this gentleman – an anxiously waiting and blabbering whiner who wanted to know the exact weight of the chicken leg he was about to get. Yeah, to shove it up your ass you need to know all the dimensions precise or it may produce undesired adverse effects.

I remembered the last time I was at a butcher’s; I was terrified. This time I was feeling nothing as the bird turned into a lump of healthy-white-meat in front of me. It got objectified, and was turned into something useful, a triumph of man’s intellect.

Anyway, I got my stuff, thanked him, and then all of a sudden decided to have a hair cut. Oh! What an eventful and adventurous life!! I could have been comfortably headed to my home, but here I was now, sitting in front of a man who had a razor against my neck. He started talking and immediately I regretted my decision. The first sentence he spoke was, “I’m from Bombay, served ten years there.” Served what, a prison sentence? I knew I’d be having a great half an hour ahead.

The man spoke of hair care, skin care, politics, Bombay life, and what not. I was thinking about the hair I was giving away. Adjacent to this shop, some time back, a bird also gave away some parts of its body, the parts which I render non-consumable. Can a bird eat my hair?

The chicken is marinating and I’ll cook it in the evening. May be then I’ll feel better.

Utopia

2009-10-31T00:30:00.004+05:30

I was listening to this U2 song, from ‘The Joshua Tree’, and couldn’t help noticing the similarity in spirits between this and that great Tagore poem, “Where the mind is without fear…” However, this song is upbeat, whereas the original Tagore poem is harsh in tone (when you consider the last two lines – which are usually omitted – as well). The album is a lovechild of U2’s fascination with the US; and – in this particular song – Bono was inspired by the notion that it is possible to identify a person's religion and income based on the street on which they lived, particularly in Belfast; whereas he dreamt of a place where it wouldn’t be so.

The poem:

“Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;

Where knowledge is free;

Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls;

Where words come out from the depth of truth;

Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;

Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;

Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought and action...

Into that heaven of freedom, my father, let my country awake.”

And the often omitted last two lines are:

“Lord Father, strike Bharat without mercy;

So that it may awaken into such a heaven.”

The song:

Random thoughts

2009-10-25T06:51:00.003+05:30

In this particular post, all the paragraphs are to be treated as separate entities.

That ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ is one of my favorite movies is a fact which I’ve repeated too often. I was thinking about the scene which I like the most in the movie; and came to the conclusion that it had to be the one when Red confronts the parole officers for the last time, prior to him getting out of the jail. All the things which he said there were so simple and yet so true: how many times I too have wondered as to why I did something which I did, and felt ignominy and, sometimes, exasperation. The problem with learning your lessons in life by doing your own mistakes is that, when you’re all done, you can’t turn back time, and are thus left to feel disgusted with some of your choices and steps.

There is a controversy going on regarding Superfreakonomics – the sequel to Freakonomics. It pertains to its chapter regarding climate change, where the authors have tried to establish that the whole thing is a big hoax, and CC is a natural phenomenon: a view which they share with many a people. High stature guys such as Paul Krugman have taken notice and thus the book has stirred the hornet’s nest - something which it intended to do at the first place.

I read ‘Counterpoint’ today; and it is on the Naxal problem. I sometimes like Vir Sanghvi; and sometimes I don’t, like this time, when all he does is to present the facts and no analysis. It leaves you unhappy, like when the thirst is not quenched. When we all know something, we don’t need your approval on that; what we rather need is a solution. And if you’ve not got that to offer, don’t write just for the sake of writing. This is also the reason why I love ‘Rude food’; that column is so well researched and informative, always.

Speaking of newspapers and all, I’ve always preferred HT over ToI, which someone aptly christened as ‘the Trash of India’! While the former does have - as a face saver - some ethics, the ToI doesn’t appear to have any. It’s simply nonsense, as if we all were nincompoops; which, btw, I believe you are, if you happen to be a ToI fan. Just look at what all they’re doing, their ‘initiatives’, like that stupid ‘Lead India campaign’; or their reports and stories where they want to take us for a ride, always; and what not. Even ‘the Hindu’, with all it’s prejudiced reporting, sucks.

We are approaching the 20th anniversary of the downfall of Communism, an event which comprehensively refuted the Communist claim to represent the people. Yet, strangely, the claim continues; sometimes dazzling a new generation of youngsters with no inkling of why the Berlin Wall fell on November 9, 1989. A letter to a newspaper editor had the answer as to why East Germans blessed with income equality, free social welfare and full employment fleed to the highly unequal West: which bristled with unemployment and social perils. It said, “My daughter’s hamster has food, water, shelter and even medical care, and a cage full of fun curly tubes. The hamster responds by constantly trying to chew his way to freedom. I think we all understand what freedom is, and it is not a gilded cage.”

The BJP is all but finished after what happened in the recent State Assembly Polls. I so want to be able to say RIP to the same.

A friend of mine has almost gone mad, and that too for something which he hush-hushed at the first place. It’s a pity seeing how people change with the course of time, when the change is for worse. But, that’s life for you!

Audio Musings

2009-10-21T03:50:00.004+05:30

It started with me reading a post today at HT Blogs by Poonam Saxena which sought to compare Gulzar and Javed Akhtar. IMHO – and she also concurs – Gulzar sahib wins hands down. And now I find myself listening to this one on a loop.

The song is from the movie ‘Masoom’; awesome lyrics. Everything - every emotion, every thought, every imagery - is brought out so effortlessly; classic Gulzar!

Sometimes life plays such tunes, and so lucratively at that, which can’t be hummed. At times it poses so many questions that can’t be answered. Some tears are just forbidden to roll down the eyes….

“Tujhase naaraaz nahi zindagi, hairaan hoon main;

o hairaan hoon main.

Tere masoom savalon se pareshaan hoon main;

o pareshaan hoon main.

Jeene ke liye socha hi na tha, dard sambhalane honge;

muskuraoon to, muskurane ke karz utaarne honge.

Muskuraoon kabhi to lagata hai

jaise hontonn pe karz rakhaa hai.

Aaj agar bhar ayi hai, boondein baras jaayengi;

kal kya pata inke liye aakhen taras jayengi.

Jaane kahan gum kahan khoya,

ek aansu chhupake rakha tha

Zindagi tere gum ne hamain rishte naye samajhaye;

mile jo hamain dhoop main mile chhaanv ke thande saaye.”

The best policy

2009-10-17T02:19:00.004+05:30

I’ve, over the years, seen Linkin Park grow up and mature. My fixation with them started when I was in 2^nd year in college, when I happened to come across ‘Meteora’ and ‘Hybrid Theory’ simultaneously, with the very first single that I listened to being ‘Numb’. I was completely hooked, and to this day count that song among my personal favorites. In early 2007 came ‘Minutes to Midnight’; and I downloaded the song as soon as I could, even going to the extent of downloading a ‘leaked’ version!

That album had a new sound: Mike was now featured less, and Chester took the songs, and their significances, to new heights. It was a true ‘coming of age’ album, and I loved it! There were cries about the band abandoning their core but, after all, don’t we all change (read ‘grow up’) with time?

This Diwali season I resolve to shun my ‘diplomatic nature’ for good; after all it’s just a euphemism for dilly-dallying and the inclination towards not taking a tough stand at places when required. And it has, all the while, created confusions and landed me in situations no person in his senses would want to be in; and – to top it – I, it would seem, worked for it to happen! So much for trying to avoid ‘unpleasant events’; and I thought irony was dead.

The inner voice, for all its intentions, is never wrong.

I close both locks below the window

I close both blinds and turn away

Sometimes solutions aren't so simple

Sometimes goodbye's the only way

And the sun will set for you

The sun will set for you

And the shadow of the day

Will embrace the world in grey

And the sun will set for you

In cards and flowers on your window

Your friends all plead for you to stay

Sometimes beginnings aren't so simple
Sometimes goodbye's the only way

The biryani quest

2009-10-09T04:30:00.003+05:30

It’s a red lump; and when you wash it, it falls apart: one piece at a time. It still feels warm; the butcher probably killed the animal in the morning. The texture is weird - is this inherent to the shank, I wonder.

The running water washes away all the remaining traces of life from the mutton, something which drifts my thoughts away to the great denuding agent that time is. They call it the greatest healer, and people from Groucho Marx to Nietzsche have acknowledged its powers. Life always keeps throwing up new challenges in front of you to keep you from clinging to any particular moment, no matter how glorious or ignominious it is. Yet, people repeat the same old mistake over and over again. There is this asinine belief that stuffs happening in other peoples’ lives won’t happen to me; not that I’m special or something, it just won’t for the sake of it. I think calling it ‘asinine’ was an understatement.

The oil’s separated from the meat, and this is the time to add that ‘secret mixture of herbs and spices’ to the concoction. And no, spectrometry won’t be of any help in finding the composition! It’s a family secret you see, something which makes us feel special; and that feeling is something which we won’t trade for anything. And India isn’t communist enough for me to give that up for no-effing-thing!

The ‘secret mixture’, when looked at and felt, seems somewhat like marihuana. This, of course, is a conjecture: an intelligent guess, or rather an informed guess. Proving a hypothesis, or a theory, is something I love to do; but that’s true only when I’m not playing blind. So, I can safely assert that this comparison of the two divine mixtures gives me Goosebumps! I and I, in the sky ... so high!

The meat is well-done now, and as in many other places, synchronization is the key here; so it’s time to start working on the rice. What I’m cooking is a ‘dum-pukht biryani’. The dum in it refers to the fact that it will be cooked dum-style – on a slow fire with a hermetic seal of flour; and the pukht implies that the preparation is pure – the meat used was halal. Of course you can debate whether or not it’s a biryani; and technically speaking, it’s of course a pulao. But ‘biryani’ sounds better than pulao; and so we have a huge conspiracy all set in place to somehow pass it as a biryani. And, no, I’m not complaining; it’s just that I like reiterating that I’m a nerd.

To think of it, cooking is much like love: a quest for excellence that is, that lovely ego trip. You should venture into it only if you can take that high and not get blown away by it. It’s a question of balance after all – management, ‘synchronization’ to be precise – something which remains rather elusive. Boy, I’m going to be lampooned and lambasted for that one for sure! And then there are aphrodisiacs: giving the topic a whole new dimension, but I have my doubts.

It’s time to go about the layering, and the final touches. And speaking of finales, when would the curtain draw on the Maoists in India? They’re now experimenting - emulating the Taliban in beheading whosoever they deem fit for that treatment. But I guess that’s too trivial a thing in the greater scheme where people debate whether or not Madhur Bhandarkar should make a movie on the life of Lalit Modi.

The smell is wonderful, of a typical Lucknawi ‘biryani’. This particular quest is now over folks, time to give it yet another name. And yet again I wonder why people sometimes think that life too can be lived by some formula, and why do I also can sometimes count myself in that lot.

Main zindagi ka saath nibhata chala gaya

2009-10-08T00:18:00.004+05:30

Enjoy the journey - every moment of it - and the destination shall follow. In this short life, so very often we miss the wood for the trees, overlooking the joys of life while worrying over apparently humongous - but, all the while useless - trivialities, that we get absorbed in the act: which slowly grows on us. And then we realize that we're in an unbreakable cocoon all of a sudden, one which we merrily spun thinking that it's for our own good… Yes, but did we really want it?

"Main zindagi ka saath nibhata chala gaya;
har fikar ko dhuen mein udata chala gaya.

Barbadiyon ka shok manana fizul tha;

barbadiyon ka jashan manata chala gaya.

Jo mil gaya usi ko muqaddar samajh liya;

jo kho gaya main usko bhulata chala gaya.

Gham aur khushi mein farq na mehsoos ho jahan;

main dil ko us muqaam pe laata chala gaya."

Ten things India should do

2009-10-04T02:49:00.003+05:30

A report (pdf) from Goldman Sachs; and there’s no better time to try to implement it than the birth anniversary of the father of the nation. Here are the key points summarized:

“India could be 40 times bigger by 2050. To achieve this, India needs to implement many changes. It needs to improve its governance, control inflation, introduce credible fiscal policy, liberalize financial markets and increase trade with its neighbors. It also needs both to significantly raise its basic educational standards, and increase the quality and quantity of its universities. India needs to boost agricultural productivity, improve its infrastructure and environmental quality. Delivery of all these would ensure strong, persistent, medium to long-term growth, allowing India to reach its amazing potential.”

The ten points are:

1. Improve governance. Without better governance, delivery systems and effective implementation, India will find it difficult to educate its citizens, build its infrastructure, increase agricultural productivity and ensure that the fruits of economic growth are well established.

2. Raise educational achievement. Among more micro factors, raising India’s educational achievement is a major requirement to help achieve the nation’s potential. According to our basic indicators, a vast number of India’s young people receive no (or only the most basic) education. A major effort to boost basic education is needed. A number of initiatives, such as a continued expansion of Pratham and the introduction of Teach First, for example, should be pursued.

3. Increase quality and quantity of universities. At the other end of the spectrum, India should also have a more defined plan to raise the number and the quality of top universities.

4. Control inflation. Although India has not suffered particularly from dramatic inflation, it is currently experiencing a rise in inflation similar to that seen in a number of emerging economies. We think a formal adoption of Inflation Targeting would be a very sensible move to help India persuade its huge population of the (permanent) benefits of price stability.

5. Introduce a credible fiscal policy. We also believe that India should introduce a more credible medium-term plan for fiscal policy. Targeting low and stable inflation is not easy if fiscal policy is poorly maintained. We think it would be helpful to develop some ‘rules’ for spending over cycles.

6. Liberalize financial markets. To improve further the macro variables within the GES framework, we believe further liberalization of Indian financial markets is necessary.

7. Increase trade with neighbors. In terms of international trade, India continues to be much less ‘open’ than many of its other large emerging nation colleagues, especially China. Given the significant number of nations with large populations on its borders, we would recommend that India target a major increase in trade with China, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

8. Increase agricultural productivity. Agriculture, especially in these times of rising prices, should be a great opportunity for India. Better specific and defined plans for increasing productivity in agriculture are essential, and could allow India to benefit from the BRIC-related global thirst for better quality food.

9. Improve infrastructure. Focus on infrastructure in India is legendary, and tales of woe abound. Improvements are taking place, as any foreign business visitor will be aware, but the need for more is paramount. Without such improvement, development will be limited.

10. Improve Environmental Quality. The final area where greater reforms are needed is the environment. Achieving greater energy efficiencies and boosting the cleanliness of energy and water usage would increase the likelihood of a sustainable stronger growth path for India.

The 2003 version of the same report predicted that India would outrun the US by 2050. However, this report, which came out 5 years later, clearly states that India shall have to work hard to live its potential. It goes on to add that if India could undertake the necessary reforms, it could raise its growth potential annually by as much as 2.8%. That would mean double digit economic growth: something which China has been able to record persistently.

Having the potential and actually achieving it are two separate things, it says curtly. And for India to achieve what all it can, the above steps are an ideal starting point. I couldn’t have put it in a better way.

Indians and the dark orchid

2009-09-29T19:35:00.002+05:30

What’s with our sense of humor: that thing which lets us laugh at stuff? And why are we so – umm, shall I say – insecure? Our ‘sentiments’ get hurt so easily; they’re so darn fragile!

Yes you get the context: that tweet by Shashi Tharoor, saying, “Absolutely, in cattle class out of solidarity with our holy cows”, in reply to a journalist’s query. That was sarcasm; but unfortunately, we Indians – though unknowingly – are in cognizance of sarchasm only. Whatever happened to the glorious tradition of ‘vyangya’ – the vyanjana, top notch satire and sarcasm – in the Hindi belt?

We actually are, quite undeniably and ironically as we consider ourselves ‘the best brains’, a nation which can’t handle humor - far too pretentious and self-righteous to laugh at ourselves. Cut a joke on us, and we’d immediately take the literal meaning and get offended. No human being - and Pakistani, as they’d say - has a right to laugh on us. Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit after all, too down-market and vulgar for us high-brows to indulge in it.

There was one person called Voltaire who said, “I detest what you say, but I'll give my life for your right to say it.” So what? We don’t give an eff. So when Tharoor was just telling the little bird what was on his mind – quite an innocuous thing, and something we, the champions of free thoughts, should have taken in good humor – his own party men took care to flip the bird at him. Don’t you dare desecrate us! There is this unwritten rule of imbecility in politics: if you sound or try sounding too smart – giving ‘complex’ all over – you’d be prosecuted in no time. We sure know how to rub that long line which is bothering us by being, umm, too long. Eventually, Tharoor had to apologize in front of her highness; and was let off with a warning that he should be considerate of the common man’s feelings. Err, did I miss something? Or is Madame implying that the common man can’t handle humor – the most exotic and divine of the arts? Not to mention that some days back, Madame and her coterie were lambasting the BJP for ousting Jaswant Singh.

There have been numerous such occasions: the banning of ‘Satanic Verses’; the fatwa against the Danish cartoonist; opposition of M. F. Hussain; the Tasleema Nasreen controversy; burning of effigies at the slightest pretext; and what not. In fact, we do have this knack of surprising ourselves with each new controversy: transcending the boundaries established every effing time! And we’re hypocrite enough to laugh at the so called ‘barbaric-medieval tribes’ like the Taliban.

And we have this humongous ‘austerity drive’: conspicuous austerity that is, for when one is ‘sacrificing’ a privilege, the whole nation ought to sit up and notice. And if you don’t want to, then you’re not a good sport – and are just another of those wannabes and hypocrites. Tch, shame on you! The ‘first persons’ are giving up on necessities and making poignant sacrifices, and you’re skeptical? Even labeling it ‘blasphemy’ would be an understatement: a benign act so to speak.

I fancy a day when …. Duh! Forget it; that ship has sailed.

P.S.. Crème de la crème: A comment by Janta Party President Dr. Swamy, two years back when the Rama Sethu controversy was at its peak, “Self-declared atheists are systematically debasing our values and are keen on implementing the project ignoring the sentiments of the people.”

Atheism quotes

2009-09-29T01:33:00.004+05:30

I’m an atheist, a non-believer. To say it sarcastically, I believe in non-belief. Yeah, that sentence could’ve been constructed in a better way; but that would’ve undermined my point.

So, stressing my point, I’m posting some quotes and material on the same. They range from parodies and satire to true blood critiques.

“Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man—state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d'honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion. Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.” – Karl Marx

“Invisible Pink Unicorns are beings of great spiritual power. We know this because they are capable of being invisible and pink at the same time. Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.” – Gospel of the IPU, Steve Eley

"As to the gods, I have no means of knowing either that they exist or do not exist." – Plato

“The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, while having existed in secrecy for hundreds of years, only recently came into the mainstream when this letter was published in May 2005. With millions, if not thousands, of devout worshippers, the Church of the FSM is widely considered a legitimate religion, even by its opponents – mostly fundamentalist Christians, who have accepted that our God has larger balls than theirs. Some claim that the church is purely a thought experiment, satire, illustrating that Intelligent Design is not science, but rather a pseudoscience manufactured by Christians to push Creationism into public schools. These people are mistaken. The Church of FSM is real, totally legit, and backed by hard science. Anything that comes across as humor or satire is purely coincidental.” The church of the FSM

“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.” … “An atheist before Darwin could have said, following Hume: "I have no explanation for complex biological design. All I know is that God isn't a good explanation, so we must wait and hope that somebody comes up with a better one." I can't help feeling that such a position, though logically sound, would have left one feeling pretty unsatisfied, and that although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” - Richard Dawkins

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time." - Bertrand Russel

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” - Stephen F. Roberts, in ‘Like Rolling Uphill’

“Some forms of temporal lobe tumours or epilepsy are associated with extreme religiosity. Recent brain imaging of devotees engaging in prayer or transcendental meditation has more precisely identified activation in such sites - God-spots, as Vilayanur Ramachandran calls them. Psilocybin from mushrooms contacts the serotonergic system, with terminals in these and other brain regions, generating a sense of cosmic unity, transcendental meaning and religious ecstasy. Certain physical rituals can generate both these feelings and corresponding serotonergic activity.” - Professor John Bradshaw

“From the study of the development of human intelligence, in all directions, and through all times, the discovery arises of a great fundamental law, to which it is necessarily subject, and which has a solid foundation of proof, both in the facts of our organization and in our historical experience. The law is this: that each of our leading conceptions - each branch of our knowledge - passes successively through three different theoretical conditions: the theological, or fictitious; the metaphysical, or abstract; and the scientific, or positive.” - Auguste Comte

“And as the capacity for believing is strongest in childhood, special care is taken to make sure of this tender age. This has much more to do with the doctrines of belief taking root than threats and reports of miracles. If, in early childhood, certain fundamental views and doctrines are paraded with unusual solemnity, and an air of the greatest earnestness never before visible in anything else; if, at the same time, the possibility of a doubt about them be completely passed over, or touched upon only to indicate that doubt is the first step to eternal perdition, the resulting impression will be so deep that, as a rule, that is, in almost every case, doubt about them will be almost as impossible as doubt about one's own existence.” - Arthur Schopenhauer

“Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” - Steven Weinberg

“This god, this one word: I.” – Ayn Rand

The material doesn’t border Hinduism, the religion I was ‘born into’; but the point is the same and is well put across. Are you listening?

I, Love

2009-09-23T02:58:00.004+05:30

It is any of a number of emotions and experiences related to a sense of strong affection and attachment ranging from generic pleasure to intense interpersonal interaction. But before you start crying foul, I’d like to point out that wikipedia has this amazing ability to transform even the most passionate and interesting topic into some jargon-heavy and pedantic subject matter.

That it’s a highly subjective matter is a well accepted fact. There are many forms to it: the selfless love; the jealous and possessive love; the ‘ideal’ love; the idea of love by Ayn Rand, quintessentially expressed by that line, “To say ‘I love you’ one must first be able to say the ‘I.’”; the masochistic self-immolating love; the materialistic love; the demanding and domineering love; … the list just goes on!

Then there’s the scientific side - the root-cause analysis. According to Helen Fisher, a leading expert on the biology of love and attarction, the experience of love is divided into three partly overlapping stages, viz., lust, attraction, and attachment. And they are interrelated; lust exposes people to others; romantic attraction encourages people to mate; and attachment ensures tolerating the spouse long enough to rear a child into infancy. Sounds too ‘materialistic’, eh?

For me, love is a feeling of extreme attachment. And by that logic I have fallen – and I indeed have ‘fallen’ – in love quite a few times, in those rare moments when I'm not a 'love-atheist'; but that is not the point. There is this chasm which normally keeps insanity away from me - not that it always works - and whenever I have ‘fallen’, the chasm has invariably disappeared. My pragmatic self watched in dejected horror as I gleefully indulged in the Sisyphean task of making a fool of myself over and over again. But, again, that is not the point!

Sometimes when I reflect on a situation or an event, I unearth completely new dimensions of it, changing its meaning altogether. Love can't be different; just a part of the chaos after all, it is. My path crossed with a girl's, and love happened. Or did it? Maybe it was just a cherubic infatuation, or perhaps one of those trysts with the 'I'.

I see a big ‘why’. After all, if it is what I perceive it to be, why did I repeatedly indulge in it? Nietzsche comes to rescue, writing that “There is always some madness in love. But there is also always some reason in madness.” And that reason is precisely what gives me – and to everyone else who ‘fell’ as well – that high: that wonderful realization, the divine discovery that something other than oneself is ‘real’. And again, the reason is highly – and invariably – subjective.

Much has already been said about the traits of love: the pursuit of glimpses; that quest for the smile of the amour; the whimsical tears and the horrendous fears; the endless stupor; those clichédly sleepless nights; the whole experience is – shall I say – magical. Even the most cynical person would salivate at the prospect of experiencing his/her version of love. Oh we are so selfish! And with this comes ‘the most wonderful feeling in the world’: that of being loved!

And that also is the dark side, for nothing gives as much pain as unrequited love. Also there are the associated problems of ‘worldly love’: doubts and suspicions; domination; over-expectations; and what not. But this is one sweet – the laddu – which everyone who eats it, as well as who doesn’t, repents upon. I am too trivial to be an exception to this adage, and hence can’t prove it!

This quote, by Chekhov, best concludes my thoughts towards the necessary evil that love is:

“Perhaps the feelings that we experience when we are in love represent a normal state. Being in love shows a person who he should be.”

The Idea of 'Purity'

2009-09-22T16:28:00.005+05:30

"To understand a man, you must know his memories. The same is true of a nation."

The spine of a nation is an idea: the idea that ties it, which is its raison d'être. People come together on an idea to build a nation and become its body, the soul being that idea.

While that's what a modern nation is, an idea, very few nations are as completely defined by an idea as Pakistan is. There was hardly any political, geographic, economic or military rationale of creating Pakistan but for the idea of an Islamic homeland in South Asia. This, aided by the short term political calculations of some backroom colonialists, created a modern state which must be solely sustained on that singular idea.

There is one thing which is of extreme importance to us all, one which fills the void created and left open by our mechanical-materialistic pursuit. That notion is religion, clichédly described as the "opium of the masses". However, religion does not complement the idea of a nation, for it has rather always been divisive. In that sense it is diametrically opposed to the idea; and no where is this better exemplified than in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

The problem started when Pakistan decided to adopt Urdu as the state language. The idea seemed logical, as Urdu was the language spoken almost all over the subcontinent by the elite Muslims, and was the court language in Oudh. It was written in Arabic script, again consistent with the idea of Pakistan being the homeland of South Asian Muslims.

However, there was a glitch. Over half the population of what was then Pakistan didn't speak Urdu. The East Pakistani people, the Bengali farmers who hailed Pakistan as a symbol of freedom from their greedy Hindu landlords, didn't want to give up on their mother tongue. [A somewhat similar problem exists in India, in the Hindi-as-the-state-language movement] So was created a chasm which eventually led to the secession of East Pakistan from the country and the formation of Bangladesh.

At that very moment, the idea of Pakistan as freedom, for millions of Muslims in South Asia, was irretrievably lost. It returned to the core idea - of that of a Muslim homeland - and struggled with it. It was surely not the Muslim homeland in South Asia when there are more Muslims in India; and Muslims living in Bangladesh under a different flag and a different nationhood. And now it is just another entity which is yet to discover what it stands for.

They could stand for Kashmir, for the Kashmiri Muslim population was oppressed by the privileged Hindu landlords; and for Afghanistan, where the freedom of the Afghans was mutilated by the Red Army. But, inside Pakistan, a great debate raged, often violently, whether freedom is indeed the central idea of Pakistan. It seemed not, as there was no freedom for Pakistanis themselves, and the state thrived on privileges of power and corruption. The two most powerful entities in the country turned out to be - not surprisingly - the military and the Islamic institutions, and the line pursued by them both is an open secret.

Therefore, it was easier for Pakistani rulers to define the state in the hackneyed Islamic line. They got an Islamic homeland, and so they went on to build an Islamic bomb. It pursued Jihad in Kashmir and Afghanistan: the 'holy war' which was a struggle to establish Islam there, and not to free those people from the tyranny of the privileged. It's almost four decades after Bangladesh now, and Pakistani rulers continue to chase the mirage of an Islamic state.

But, they also wanted Pakistan to be a modern state, a la Turkey perhaps. However, the Islamic lines pursued by both are starkly different, and so this was not to happen. Therefore, the idea of the modern state and the core idea of the nation were bound to collide.

Hillary Clinton said, "Pakistani government is abdicating to Taliban". She did not notice that they did so long time back. What can you say of a government which discriminated and terrorized its own citizens, harbored criminals for three decades, fired lawyers en masse, and built a secret service trained to recruit and equip and send terrorists to other countries? The modern-state veil was kept while such barbaric practices were having a free run; and the world watched. Geopolitics is the name of the game, and just like those old backroom colonialists, the policymakers in Western Capitals indulged in their little secret game: of keeping Pakistan burning.

But Pakistan is no remote African country. It's right here and it's nuclear-armed. Can we afford the repercussions?

But do we have what it'd take to fix 'that idea'?

India and the other September-anniversary

2009-09-14T14:40:00.003+05:30

It has been a year since the world economy teetered on the brink of calamity. In the span of three ‘eventful’ days, 15th to 17th September 2008, Lehman Brothers filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy, AIG was taken over by the US government, and Merrill Lynch was absorbed by Bank of America in a deal brokered and financed by the US government.

This resulted in widespread panic and credit stopped circulating; so non-financial companies couldn’t obtain working capital, leave alone any funding for long-term investments. A depression was seemingly imminent, although eventually it was only a deep and prolonged recession.

It was after all a cyclical downturn well due after about five years of very strong growth, which overworked - and thus overheated - the system. Central bankers since mid-2004 were tightening monetary policy in response. But it was the other factor which worsened the wound: the transformation of sub-prime mortgages into securities which were lauded to be as good as treasuries. It was a morbid, and certainly sinister, alchemy of turning brass into gold where a bunch of loans were bundled together and sold to an interested investor. By doing this, the banks struck off that loan from their books and thus they didn’t have any obligation to check the credit-worthiness of the loan seeking party; and the investor, who trusted the bank after all, had no means to check that. This also ensured that the banks could hand out even more loans, and thus no one bothered to check or object. Thus all the previous good practices were abandoned in the slugfest and to this was coupled the unpardonable negligence of the regulating and credit rating agencies.

But, as goes the saying, there ain’t no thing as a free lunch! And then there was chaos: with the crisis culminating in a collapse of asset prices at the end of 2008. Middle-class and wealthy households around the world felt poorer and therefore cut their spending sharply. Enterprises could not sell their output, leading to production cuts and layoffs. Rising unemployment compounded the loss of household wealth, throwing families into deep economic peril and leading to further cutbacks in consumer spending.

Today, in India, we seem contented with our more elementary and unsophisticated financial system: where regulation is very tight, securitization and other complex derivatives are largely not-allowed, and banks behave ‘conservatively’. To give it the due credit, the Indian financial system has done well with its resilience in the crisis, but before we get complacent it is important to note the costs of an unsophisticated financial system, which may outweigh the benefits of conservatism.

Sure our banks are profitable, but how? They park their money in mutual funds and government securities, and have been charging exorbitant interest rates from the average Joe. This attitude and conservatism can carry on to an extent that they may even start getting too cautious, and may even refuse, to lend money to productive sectors of the economy for investment. This is in stark contrast to the Keynesian model, which advocates a reduction in interest rates coupled with government spending. The model is endorsed by all and sundry, including Obama and Paul Krugman, but the Indian Banks and other organizations don’t seem to be heading in that direction. Now how charming does that sound?

And the conservatism also has another downside: due to the oh-so-tight regulations, the used-to-it market doesn’t show responses matching the changes introduced by the central bank and other institutions. For example, the RBI has cut the two policy rates - repo and reverse repo - repeatedly and not insignificantly during the slowdown, but prime lending rates of commercial banks haven’t nearly matched the depth of cuts made by the central bank. This is why, even as the rest of the world today discusses ways to regulate the over-liberal finance, we in India still need to talk about liberalizing the over-regulated finance. The crisis has given many lessons to the world; and here’s another one for us.

We don’t need no religion!

2009-09-10T22:52:00.003+05:30

In ‘Lila’, Robert Pirsig observes, “when one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity; when many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.”

But how did it come to this; and why was god invented?

To answer this, we shall have to go to the dawn of civilization. That was the era of the coming up of human civilization. The pinnacle of evolution, the intelligent man, on observing the various things around him, got curious and started to think. There was the sun, the moon, the mighty mountains, the powerful thunderstorms, lightening, eclipses, etc. So he sought to assign a reason to all this and hence the idea of a supremely powerful - omnipotent - being originated.

Soon, man started living in societies, and with this increased the complexities of everyday life. There were rulers and the ruled: the kings and their subjects. The people had to be kept involved and busy, so that they may not think of anything sinister. And they had to be kept united, for unity was and is strength after all. Also, there had to be a bogeyman - someone to blame for all the mishaps and seek relief in at times of distraught, when you could resort to nothing else. Also, people began to doubt the idea as they saw that certain people were going unpunished even after they committed grave misdeeds. To keep that misgiving in check, the idea of heaven and hell was created. Thus was born the idea of punishments by god and therefore and thereafter of prayers: the fire and the purgation. And so religion became, to quote Karl Marx, “the opium of the masses.”

The people lived under the shadow of god: some of them believing, some of them fearing, and some others fearing the some who believed. Whatever was the reason, this ultimately resulted in a society where everyone lived for one another, accelerating social progress and giving themselves a better standard of living.

That was before science, and ever since Darwin came out with his theory of evolution and natural selection, the creationist’s argument has been debilitated. But, never to be let down by such minor hiccups, they came up with the preposterous concept of ‘Intelligent Design’, which is misleading and gibberish in equal measures. Carl Jung says,

“How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, ‘This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant’? Instead they say, ‘No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.’ A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the Universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths.”

Also, quoting out of context is commonplace. So, you’d read that Einstein said, “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind”, but never will it be told to you that he also said that,

“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it…. I am a deeply religious nonbeliever. This is a somewhat new kind of religion.”

The idea is that there is nothing ‘supernatural’ about the religion Einstein is referring to. Carl Sagan put it well:

“. . . if by ‘God’ one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying . . . it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity.”

The ‘shell-creation’ doesn’t stop, this being just the beginning. A widespread assumption, which nearly everybody in our society accepts - the non-religious included - is that religious faith is especially vulnerable to offence, quite touchy-feely type, and should be protected by an abnormally thick wall of respect, in a different class from the respect that any human being should pay to any other. You're not allowed to say anything bad about it; you're just not. Why not? Because you're not!

Well, I’d place my faith in the FSM or Google instead!

Jokes apart, if god is the supreme power which creates everything, has the capacity to destroy anything, and is the sole force responsible for every physical and emotional activity that takes place, then our own effort to reach god should be in direct proportion to the degree of power we wish to procure. Therefore, the man who gains maximum control, understands the nature of life and the agenda of the society, and has got rid of his conscience is a relative god; and in order to reach god, you must attain his abilities. In other words, we must try to become God ourselves. As Ayn Rand said, “This god, this one word: I.”

Movie review: Love aaj kal

2009-08-27T12:33:00.006+05:30

I’m a fan of Imtiaz Ali, insofar as I admire his vision and storytelling. This fascination started when I was reluctantly drawn into watching ‘Jab We Met’ by Keerti, who has – somehow – always managed to impress me with the movies he dragged me to. JWM was a great movie, and it was also the first Indian rom-com drama I liked.

My respect for Imtiaz grew when he decided against giving us yet another JWM kinda movie, something he could’ve so easily indulged into – and we guys, the ‘mango people’, having already witnessed such feats by film makers like David Dhawan et al, would’ve gleefully devoured that. To resist such a lucrative temptation is indeed commendable.

Here I was watching ‘Love Aaj Kal’ with Karan, who was all the while partly sulking and partly critical and that made the whole experience all the more enjoyable for me! But, in the end, he too confessed to liking the movie and the final stamp, the clincher, towards this was the fact that he was watching it for the second time.

Together with Anurag Kashyap, et al, Imtiaz Ali completes the list of the new-gen film makers I adore. They have, and I can’t put it more bluntly, the guts and panache of RGV minus his propensity to screw up! When these people have a vision, they’ll take great care translating that onto the screen, and the results speak for themselves.

I have a friend in Mani who is a big fan of James Bond flicks. He explains it by saying that Bond flicks are ‘feel good movies’, where nothing can go wrong in sum – the antithesis to Murphy’s laws! That’s his interpretation of the concept that movies are meant to provide you with 2-3 hours of pure entertainment, away from the worries of life and are in fact a journey through Utopia. Yeah, I know that sounds exaggerated!

However, I now have a grasp on what he probably meant. LAK to me is the leave-your-mind-at-your-home flick I would like to watch; where you shouldn’t try to analyze or put into realistic perspective what is shown, but rather enjoy it. Embark on a journey with the director and feel good about it.

Coming to the actual movie, I liked the Veer Singh part played by Saif, hilariously brilliant and strikingly convincing, I can see why Kareena ‘fell in love all over again with Saif’ after she watched the movie. The way he portrays a cupid struck youth who can think of nothing but his muse is just awesome. And you know what I meant by ‘leave-your-mind-at-your-home flick’ when you see how he successfully woos Harleen by following her rickshaw with his cycle. There are many such moments, and to me they constituted the comedy part of the rom-com!

Then there was the picturization and the brilliant incorporation of flash backs in the movie, wherein the two love stories so effortlessly mingle. Added to this is the seasoned acting by Rishi Kapoor who does a brilliant job as the old Veer Singh. And the subtle but adorably believable Harleen, who conveys all while not speaking more than monosyllabic dialogues! Her track is engaging because it’s innocent and simple and never tries too hard. Sample this scene: the one in which she sneaks him a glass of black tea under her dupatta, and he brings her sweets from her favorite sweetshop in Delhi – such cute tenderness!

However, the acting of Deepika was erroneous, and she should know more than just flashing that cute smile every time. And Saif as Jai was a bit over-the-top – the director’s version of ‘larger than life’ perhaps? Silence always conveys so much more than irreverent banter, and nowhere is this more evident than in the interactions between Veer and Harleen, whose romance is conducted almost entirely through their eyes and longing expressions.

Nevertheless, the movie shuns its new age character towards the end and adopts the stance of a traditional Bollywood romance fare, replete with all the melodrama and the other regular stuff. Strangely, I found myself to be a willing rider aboard Imtiaz’s train all through the journey, even through parts like this.

Recently, there was another new age take on romance: Dev.D by Anurag Kashyap. That movie depicted reality with attitude, and is no less than a cult figure now. Same city, similar setting, similar sentiments, but the end result is starkly opposite here. The fact that we appreciate and embrace both is a testimonial to the beauty and the craft of the new-gen film makers. They convince you; they show you their vision and they know that you’d like it, because these kinda things, as they depict, actually happen. You may have a different take and/or opinion, but it’s the same flour that goes in to bake the cake or has meat up in its belly as the meatloaf.

Imtiaz Ali had the vision – he knew what love was like in the yesteryears and what it’s like today. The flour is same and hence the leitmotif: true love. He shows this to us by picking up the characters, setting them in certain conditions and beliefs, making them take some steps and in the end, proving his vision.

The road ahead for the BJP

2009-08-22T15:13:00.004+05:30

The BJP stands at unprecedented crossroads. Two decades back, at the onset of its ‘decade of growth’, the party was living a dream. It had rightly analyzed and captured the nation’s, or at least North India’s, pulse by organizing the ‘Ram Janmabhumi Andolan’.

Two decades and a heapful of failed promises later, the ‘democratic party with a difference’ finds itself facing an unprecedented identity crisis. Its top cadres are revolting, the ideology has gone to the dogs, and in common circuits the name BJP has become a joke. The party finds itself struggling to adopt a secular liberal stance – one that will position it as just a copy of the Congress – whereas trying hard to hold on to its promise of being the true beacon of Hindutva. After much attempts and resulted hand burns, it has only seen its seat share at the Lok Sabha, as well as in the states, go down.

While the scenario is heart wrenching for the saffron brigade – the BJP and its mentor, the RSS – the party believes it still has a chance to get out of the quagmire. In its 3 day ‘Chintan Shivir’ in Shimla, the party is trying to pin down the factors that are holding it back, and hopes to get rid of them. Yeah, optimism always helps!

However, the jinx appears to have taken quite a liking towards the party. For just prior to the commencement of the shivir Jaswant Singh, a senior leader of the party and former external affairs minister of India, came out with a book eulogizing Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan. In the book, Jaswant Singh purported that Jinnah was in fact a secular man who was demonized by the Congress and was left no option by Jawaharlal Nehru and others, other than to demand for a separate nation for the Muslims.

Needless to say, the top agenda of the BJP then changed to condemning the ideology asserted in the book and distancing itself from Jaswant Singh. After all, in this country, it’s blasphemous to utter a word against Nehru or Gandhi. The BJP thus found itself in an ironically queer position defending Nehru, who is the figure head of its arch nemesis – the congress party.

Nevertheless, not all is lost. The party can still come out clean and establish itself as a serious challenger to the congress yet again. It first shall have to do away with its strange practice of rewarding the wrongdoers and should deal with them with a strict hand. The party fared poorly in the recently held Lok Sabha elections and the major strategists therein – the men responsible for the debacle – were awarded top posts in the party cadre. This is one thing which even a die-hard BJP supporter finds hard to digest, let alone justify. The party should – rather than going on with its ‘let it be’ attitude, if it has to challenge the GOP of India – consider serious restructuring and an overhaul of its cadre. And that includes Mr. Adavni as well who should, let’s be honest, hang his cap and let a young and charismatic leader – one who has the panache and credibility of Mr. Vajpayee and the charm and appeal of Rahul Gandhi – take over. But the problem here is that the BJP’s young cadre has no one who can claim to possess even a small fraction of the qualities desired in the leader of a National party like the BJP. And please, Varun Gandhi is not an option!

The party should take a leaf out of Congress’ book, and nurture young leaders and try to form a core group of them like what Rahul Gandhi has done. The spectacular progress and success of the congress, a result of such efforts, is for all to see.

And finally, the party should identify a core ideology and stick to it. Be it a modern conservative force or a flag bearer of Hindutva or any other thing it deems workable for itself, but it has to be something and this should be done quickly. Just plain rhetoric would not work, and the party should accept it as quickly as possible to steer clear of imminent botch ups.

The BJP is a resilient and potent force, comprising of leaders who saw the tough times of the period of the emergency and could, inter alia, take their party from just 2 seat in the 1984 Lok Sabha to leading a government in 1998. it has in it to bounce back again, with full force, and to carry forward the hallowed legacy it possesses; but it will have to act in the proper direction, and quickly so, or there would be no scope for even drastic and frantic attempts to do any good. In the interest of Indian democracy, I pray that it rises to the occasion and reforms itself.

The Monsoon and India – All for one and one for All

2009-08-19T21:02:00.002+05:30

Every year, stock market analysts, company CEOs, government planners and other officials, the average Joe, and even foreign investors eagerly await word on an indicator pivotal to India's economy: the forecast for the big June-September monsoon season. Yes, Indian agriculture – and in turn the Indian economy – is a gamble of the monsoons: a statement which is an unfortunate cliché now.

The word monsoon is derived from the Arabic word ‘mawsim’, literally meaning season, which is now used to refer to any group of winds which changes its direction by at least 120 degrees annually. The Indian monsoon is a complex phenomenon involving jet streams, modified trade winds, Hadley and Walker cell circulations, shifting of the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone, etc. The exact mechanism and the essential elements are known now, but what exactly triggers the onset of the monsoon is not yet known. Many monsoon expeditions and surveys later, we only know that an El Niño would weaken the monsoon and a La Nina would strengthen it. This is a shame, considering that virtually the entire Indian economy – the second fastest growing economy in the world – is dependent on the whims of the monsoon.

Sixty percent of India’s population is dependent on agriculture which, though contributing only about 20 percent to the GDP, affects the service sector oriented-and-driven economy immensely. Growth in the farm sector - a result of a good monsoon - strengthens consumption in the villages, while any slowdown means bad news for rural demand. Rural India - dependent on farm income - is a market with a huge potential and appetite for growth, with a direct correlation between the monsoon and disposable income in the villages. Over the last one year the domestic industry has been somewhat cushioned from the economic downturn due to local demand which can be attributed to what we’ve just discussed. So, if the agricultural output falls, local demand falls too as there is less of disposable income available and that hits the Indian industry. A rise in unemployment rate also can’t be ruled out. Not to forget that in the case of falling of agricultural output, higher inflation shall occur and also India will have to import essential items like sugar, etc.

Call it bad luck or whatever; this year too the deficient monsoon has further dampened the growth prospects of India's economy, already impacted by the global financial crisis. And nothing is clear about the things to come, with people being skeptical regarding the now-hopeful-theory of more rains in September. Even if that happens, one should bear in mind that the distribution of the rainfall in addition to the amount received is important and rains concentrated in September would simply flow into the surrounding seas.

Monsoon forecasting, ironic because we don’t know exactly the trigger mechanism, is therefore a big thing in India, though it has lost some importance of late due to the economy getting services and industries oriented. Officials now rely on high-tech computers and sophisticated models to factor in multiple weather parameters. Some aspects of the monsoon forecast have remained unchanged for decades. The starting date for the monsoon, critical for farmers planting their crops, is still forecast by physically studying cloud patterns and signals from the ocean and atmosphere. If that seems archaic, there are people who’d marry their daughters to a dog in the hopes of pleasing the rain god; but that’s not the point.

Back in the days when India was trying so hard to be self-sufficient in food production, the heralding of a good rainfall was a sign for politicians that all is well with the country. No doubt it’s still a potent force. But whereas in past decades economic growth fell to almost zero during a particularly bad monsoon; more recently, the growth in economic output has dipped to about 4 percent in years of bad monsoons and risen past 8 percent during particularly good years. The situation is improving, and with ideas like interlinking of rivers, etc. there’s hope that a day shall come when monsoon shall no more be a cause of worry for us.

Formula One - Much about the Bike!

2009-08-13T15:03:00.007+05:30

Why do I like Formula One, I ask myself. Of all sport, why this one only; why not cricket - the religion in India, or better still, soccer – the evangelical religion, or any one among the numerous other omnipresent?

F1 is the ultimate sport, combining patience and strategy with nail-biting adventure and split second decision making, mating the acumen of an alligator to the speed of a cheetah. The drivers, the teams, the stakeholders, and the viewers all are at the edge of their seats watching a marvelous piece of machinery race at speeds up to 360 km/hr with its engines revving up to a formula imposed limit of 18,000 RPM. And even then, the teams rely on strategy making; and this reliance on strategy, which is of utmost importance nowadays in the era of almost technically identical cars, is what I like the most about this game. The qualifying strategies – to be low on fuel at the start and gain an advantage or go heavy with fewer breaks, the pit stop strategies – timing it perfectly, the secondary decisions like KERS, etc., all contribute to this.

Of late, people say, the sport has become somewhat dull ever since the dawn of Schumacher. There was never a rush of excitement in the gut, the feeling of blood in your veins, when Schumacher raced. One admired his awesome ability and flair - like when he was stuck in fifth gear and still finished second at Barcelona in 1994 - but he was so busy maximizing the potential of his car that the Schumacher years made us forget that man and machine were not supposed to be so homogeneously interlinked; now that's interesting! F1 was meant to be about three-cornered overtaking maneuvers, breaking later and harder than your pursuer, about raw emotion and not the chassis; and at that level, Schumacher failed to move us. And yet when he retired from the sport, one felt a gap – something was missing: the sport was not the same. He taught all the teams the importance of strategy and all, and yet after him it started seeming bland to some. I’m a big Kimi fan, but he’s no Schumi; and I don’t know exactly as to why I feel so, perhaps because I’m a novice here.

I’ll come to my attitude towards the drivers. I’m a Senna fan, though my nature and attitude is closer to Prost’s. Is this a classic validation of the aphorism “Opposites attract”? May be this has something to do with the fact that Senna stuff is more visible now, and I formed an overwhelmed opinion quite early. These days I like Kimi, because of his flair and talent. “So why not Alonso?” you’d ask – for he’s arguably more talented than Kimi. That’s because he royally did Schumi in 2005 and 2006 alike, and I hate him for that. And before you point that out, I like Schumi because of his strategy stuff and the like, something which I rank the highest. Coming to the British sensation, here’s an interesting insight: Hamilton is like Batman – rigorously trained to do what he does now since he was quite young and now he executes that with panache and chutzpah, almost perfectly. I like Batman the most among all the superheroes, so may be after sometime I too shall convert to become a die hard Hamilton fan; but as of now, I’m neutral towards him.

I don’t know for how long I’ll remain a fan of the game, may be until Ferrari is around. There, I committed blasphemy – I spoke of the withdrawal of Ferrari! But seriously, that may very well happen given the eccentricities of Ecclestone and his ilk. You can only cast a cynical smile when a quintessential racing sport like F1 talks of energy efficiency, budget caps, etc. Where went all those talks of ‘survival of the fittest’ and all? Are we talking genetic engineering?

To end this piece, I have this quote, most apt for the time:

“IF is a very long word in Formula One; in fact, IF is F1 spelled backwards.”

Did I mention that this is what I love about the game?

Democracy in India: beyond the paeans

2009-08-06T18:56:00.002+05:30

“Democracy forever teases us with the contrast between its ideals and its realities, between its heroic possibilities and its sorry achievements.”

Nowhere is the above quote better applicable than in India – the world’s largest democracy. It is democracy which lets India progress the way it is progressing, the second fastest growing economy in the world today; and its democracy only which ironically thwarts the progress in many areas, citing preposterous reasons like ‘will of the majority’ and all. And yet it’s India’s single most important achievement, when it’s almost a wonder that India has retained and preserved the institutions of its democracy even after sixty years of Independence.

The factors responsible for this show are the people, the media, the judiciary, etc. who’ve fought tooth and nail to protect and uphold democracy as we see it today. The people have elected leaders into power and booted them out whenever they didn’t like them, making India a vibrant democracy. The media have championed democracy even if it meant that sometimes they were targeted, lampooned, lynched, and even killed. And the judiciary has time and again come in to rescue Indians whenever there was an attempt to subvert Indian democracy. Mrs. Indira Gandhi would cover them all up, just to give an example.

Yet there are several well placed criticisms of democracy, applicable to India just as well. Since Milton Friedman, economists have criticized democracy, stating that voters are irrational - highly uninformed about many political issues, especially relating to economics, and have a strong bias about the few issues on which they are fairly knowledgeable. In addition, they may not be well educated enough to exercise their democratic right. The notion of democracy as an ‘uncontested good’ also comes under scanner, as the will of ‘the majority’ may lead to some foreseeable and unfavorable consequences to this form of rule. The saying, “Equality may only exist among Equals”, best explains this point.

Looking at it skeptically, India seems to have a cargo cult democracy because it appears to be a democracy only on the surface. Like a movie set, the facade presents a reasonable facsimile of the real thing; but behind it, there is little substance. Hundreds of millions go through the motion of expressing their preference. But uninformed preference expressed haphazardly in a system that is corrupt to the core is not a recipe for a system of governance. It is no wonder that India ends up with ‘leaders’ such as Rabri Devi, Laloo Yadav, Mayawati, et al.

The democracy in India doesn’t produce the desired results because its prerequisites are not met. To put that in perspective, consider the case with ‘market’. It’s the best way to organize economic activities, but will fail if the intricate and essential preconditions are not met; just like what happened pretty recently. The challenge is therefore to ensure that we address the many failures that impede the workings of a democratic system. Installing electronic voting machines will do nothing towards that; nor will the endless exhortation for people to go out and vote change the outcome. Even if every one of us were to vote, it would still be pointless if the choice we have is either Hobson’s or between the Devil and the you-know-which sea. All of a sudden, the accomplishments and virtues of the Indian democracy seem slap-in-the-face ironic.

It is a long and hard road to the place where democracy would have any meaning. The first step along that road is, undoubtedly, education for all, which is a prerequisite for universal adult franchise. Without education, one can’t have a literate and informed adult; and without an informed electorate – the educated adults - one can’t have a meaningful democracy. Speaking of which, that perhaps is the reason for the neglect of education - for that would, down the road, mean that the feudal lords of the ruling families will no longer be able to rule based simply on ‘loyalty’ and may even have to work for a living. So much for democracy....

The state and the pseudo-state

2009-07-29T13:54:00.006+05:30

“There is no squabbling so violent as that between people who accepted an idea yesterday and those who will accept the same idea tomorrow.”

When you’re nurtured to have a certain belief, a definite ideology, then it is indeed difficult to break free from its shackles. The above mentioned quote by Christopher Morley captures the idea in toto, and one begins to see as to why friendly relations between India and Pakistan - twins separated at birth - are nigh impossible.

To put it simply, the two countries just don’t trust each other. This has been so since the partition in 1947, and looking at the recent events it seems that it would continue being so for at least some time. Any relationship, be it among individuals or parties, is founded on trust; and that foundation started withering after the revolt of 1857, after which the British deliberately started sowing seeds of communal disharmony in undivided India. Prior to that too, as early as in the 11^th century, Al Biruni, the Persian polymath, had pointed out to differences in the Hindu and Muslim ways of living. This all culminated in the floating of demands of a separate Muslim nation from India by the All India Muslim League, which was inspired by Allama Iqbal. This demand and other events led to tensions between the Indian National Congress and the All India Muslim League and the trust was eroded severely, so much so that the two seldom saw eye to eye on issues. The bloody carnage at the time of the partition and the cases of Kashmir, Hyderabad, Junagadh, etc. only compounded the problem. The extreme of the botched up relations was the war of 1971, after which Pakistan was partitioned. This was the one thing which was an ignominy, and a tough one to swallow. The relations were hanging by a tenuous thread, threatening to severe off at any moment.

Since then, it has been dilly-dallying only. If you think of it, the basic principles of the two countries are the exact opposite, and this is one big issue. The republic of India was founded on a secular belief that all religions have an equal place in the state, and should be treated alike; whereas the Islamic republic of Pakistan was founded on the theory that Hindus and Muslims can’t exist together peacefully. This is a fundamental conflict of ideas, and it’s these kinds of stuffs which provide food to ideas like the ‘Clash of Civilizations’, etc. Take the Kashmir issue for example: India wants to hold to it to prove that her founding principles are sound, and same is the case with Pakistan, which wants to snatch it to demonstrate that a Muslim majority area can be ‘happy’ in her territory only!

India has always taken pride in her democracy. We’re, after all, the largest democracy in the world! On the other hand, ‘democracy’ in Pakistan has always been a farce. The cause is straightforward: it was a country built on the fear of democracy and remained as such - a stolen dream, where a set of rich and powerful conspirators fooled a hardworking and honest populace into violence, war and ruin, and the history of Pakistan remained that way all these sixty odd years. The first schism in Pakistan showed up when the Bengalis - mostly farmers who loved to secede from India as this meant walking on their corrupt, absentee Hindu landlords and starting a new life of dignity - were horrified to find that the new Pakistani government wanted them to speak in Urdu: a court language which they did not know or cared for. The conflict came to a breaking point when East Pakistan finally seceded after a bloody war and became Bangladesh. Not unexpectedly, this terminal crisis of Pakistan as it was came because of democracy, because the West Pakistani aristocrats refused to accept the verdict of a general election of 1970. The recent examples, the hangings and assassinations, all serve to bolster this point of democracy. And this is yet another ideological difference.

Our colonial masters never wanted the Indian state to succeed. Winston Churchill once quipped, “India is no more a country than the Equator”. Yet we have defied all the reservations against us and are the second fastest growing economy of the world, and, to quote Shashi Tharoor, “India is a thali - a selection of sumptuous dishes in different bowls. Each tastes different, and does not necessarily mix with the next, but they belong together on the same plate, and they complement each other in making the meal a satisfying repast”. The fetters of the bungled up relations are pulling both countries down; and so South Asia, which could’ve been a social, political, and economical powerhouse is grappling with this seemingly perpetual crisis. But then, it is in no one's interest to continue things as they are, least of all India's. Peace with India, a seemingly unfathomable thing, will actually lead to an existential problem in Pakistan, as will any grassroots democratic reform away from the clutches of the army and the usual oligarchs. But, one would hope that whatever comes of it will be a more sustainable state than the current post-colonial aberration of a state.

There are many conceivable and workable solutions – many different ‘ideas’ here. Life, as they say, always completes a full circle. And I find myself looking at the quote at the beginning of this piece….

Exploring the Awadhi food in Lucknow

2009-07-24T19:03:00.008+05:30

George Bernard Shaw once said, “There is no sincerer love than the love of food”. Well, I will not go up to that extent - for I love myself the most - but yes, ‘exploring various culinary types’ is a part and parcel of 'my life'.

Of late I’ve been delving a lot into the non vegetarian food found in Lucknow – the epicenter of Awadhi cuisine, replete with “elaborate dishes like kebabs, kormas, biryani, nahari-kulchas, sheermaals, roomali rotis and warqi parathas.” The richness of Awadhi cuisine, made popular by the likes of Imtiaz Qureshi et al, lies not only in the variety of cuisine but also in the ingredients used like mutton, beef, paneer (cottage cheese), and herbs containing rich spices including cardamom and saffron. A striking thing about the cuisine is the dum style of cooking, i.e., the art of cooking over a slow fire, which you can so well relate to the relaxed outlook and attitude of the Lucknowite. The aforementioned dum style excellently incorporates the subtle flavors and the perfect texture to the food, and this also is one of the reasons that in Awadhi cooking, the secret is not the recipe; rather, it’s the hand. A chef has to know when to add what, which - depending on the water, the quality of the meat, etc, - is never exactly the same process. A great chef will have the confidence to improvise and to extract the maximum flavor from the ingredients at his disposal.

I’ll come to the biryani first. Now there have been debates as to whether or not the Lucknawi biryani is an authentic biryani. Vir Sanghvi, the renowned food writer and journalist, opines that it’s a sort of pulao actually, stating that:

“Lucknow, it turns out, is pulao country. It is also the place for outstanding kebabs and kormas. And it has the best chaat in the entire country. I went to Lucknow as part of the great biryani search. But all controversies about whether Lucknow made a biryani or a pulao were quickly settled. Every single person I met in Lucknow was clear that Lucknow only dealt in pulao, not in biryani.

There is no clear distinction between a biryani and a pulao unless you take the Hyderabadi line that only a biryani made with raw (rather than cooked) meat is the real thing.”

The Lucknawi biryani is a form of Pukki (cooked) biryani, wherein both the meat and rice are cooked separately and then layered and put to dum. The word biryani is of Persian origin, meaning to 'fry before cooking'; and the Lucknawi biryani lives upto the name. Still, purists would go on debating. There have been comparisons with the Hyderabadi biryani, besides the usual rhetoric mentioned above. What the heck! I simply know that I just love it, period. You’d find the best of Lucknawi biryani at Wahid’s in Aminabad, Naushijaan near Tulsi cinema in Hazratganj, and at Rahim’s in Chowk in the old city. Relishing his biryani, one often wonders why Delhi - which is in close proximity of Lucknow and the home of Mughlai cuisine - can't turn out a decent biryani at most places. Speaking of which, same is the case with chaat - which in Delhi is just a pale shadow of what it is in Lucknow.

The next best thing of the Awadhi cuisine is the vast hoard of kebabs: kakori kebabs, gelawat kebabs, shaami kebabs, boti kebabs, pasanda kebabs, patili-ke-kebabs, ghutwa kebabs and seekh kebabs are among the known varieties. I personally like gelawati kebab – so called for its melt-in-the-mouth texture - the best, with boti and seekh kebabs completing the honors. However, the Seekh Kebab has long been considered a pièce de résistance in the Awadhi dastarkhwan. [1] Most of the Awadhi kebabs are prepared on a tawa, which is a large heavy-based metal plate on which the cooking is done with the oils and all. The best place to have kebabs in Lucknow is Chowk where there is the legendary Tunday Kebabi, along with others like Rahim, etc. The traditional way to savour kebab is with sheermaals or paranthas, which is a very popular food item down here. [1] Dastarkhwan, a Persian term, literally means a meticulously laid-out ceremonial dining spread. It is customary in Awadh to sit around and share the Dastarkhwan. Laden with the finest and the most varied repertoire of the khansamas (chefs), the Dastarkhwan of the raeis (the rich) were called Khasa (special). (Source: Wikipedia)

Other good items include the nahari-kulcha at Rahim’s in Chowk, the vegetarian fare at select places, and the awesome Awadhi desserts like gulab jamun, shahi tukda, rabdi, halwas, kulfis, makkhan malai, etc. found everywhere in the city. The people of Lucknow sure have a liking for sweets!

A very interesting thing to note is that in Lucknow, you’re never too far from a good eating joint. The secret is that you should be looking for a mosque, in which’s vicinity you’ll most probably find a lip-smackingly-delicious place to have your loot.

In sum, if you’re a sucker for good non vegetarian food, like I am, Lucknow is the place to be. But be warned that you may be tempted to gorge until the animal fat congeals in your veins and your liver resigns in protest! Lucknow sure can get you to commit atleast one of those deadly sevens! And the charm is not just the food, but the adventures of exploring the city - which boasts of the title of ‘Constantinople of the East' - as well. In fact, to think of it, that merits a whole post in itself.

Argumentum ad populum: The Karma Theory

2009-07-18T20:04:00.006+05:30

Almost all the descriptions of Karma and the like require some kind of supernatural agent, basically a god, to oversee it as well as a continuing soul to receive the karma, destiny, etc. The versions that do not require a god and/or a soul are so vague that they are not at all useful for explaining things or for consoling yourself. The details of one’s particular concepts may make a difference in whether or not he can reconcile them with his disbelief in a god.

The ideas about karma, things happening for a reason, destiny, and an order to the universe, etc. come from the same need that the belief in a god used to take care of. The idea of living in a completely non-conscious universe that has no built-in system of fairness, that only follows patterns we call physical laws but not moral laws, that not only does not care about us but also can not even know that we exist, is a very scary thing to many people. So when their belief in a parent like god crashes, they may still be attracted to the comforting reassurance that there is some kind of order or justice to things; and that we can have some kind of input, however small, to influence the things that happen to us, by virtue of our moral behavior.

So what exactly is karma, and how does it work?

In its new age form, it’s referred to as the ‘law of attraction’, which is an equally preposterous pseudoscience.

A plausible explanation may come from in thinking of karma as just a guide, a way to label things, to navigating the possibilities in quantum spacetime. Whenever we make a choice, that choice affects our future choices. So, when you bring other living beings, who react to our choices, into the situation then our choices start affecting the future choices of others. Thus, in a system of individual beings making choices, a feedback loop is established. It’s kinda like my reactions and choices feeding off of your reactions and choices which feed off of my reactions and choices, and so on so forth - setting a chain of events. If your life, looked at as a whole, is nothing but destructive interactions feeding back on themselves, then – to put it curtly - you being a jerk to other people will result in people being a jerk to you. On the contrary, if you are nice to people and surround yourself with people who react positively to your choices, then you will create positive feedback which means more ‘good’ things will happen to you and happen around you. It can be broadly understood by the tenet ‘as you sow, so shall you reap’, and is manifested in various theories and principles as well: like game theory and all. Truly, the most basic of all the things are often made the most complicated!

Here’s a new insight: Modern Physics can map the concept of karma onto Hugh Everett’s many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. The branches that your reality takes as you move through time are dictated by what is possible - based on all your existing choices. Ergo, if you chose to ill-treat an acquaintance years ago, there are very few possible branches for your timeline where good things will come to you from that person. If you run into each other again, that person is more likely to harbor resentment and treat you coldly. On the other hand, if there are a large number of people in your life who you have treated well, then not only will your timeline easily be able to branch into realities where the people you have done good things for return the favor, but people you don’t know who have seen or heard of your deeds can be inspired as well, which may come back to you if you meet them or their choices and deeds can affect you somehow.

And not to forget the danger of 'believing' in karma which can come to the fatalism of saying “It’s too late now; everything is already determined by my past actions.”

The bottom line is that there is no reason to think that the concept of karma is tied to an intelligent being or purpose. It can be a systematic function of our reality, emerging from the rules that autonomous beings with free will have to follow in order to live. Karma is probability and statistics, not woo. Unfortunately, it has been woo-ed to hell and back by everyone who has ever tried to describe or popularize it. Hopefully, that will change.

A tragic farce?

2009-07-14T12:59:00.004+05:30

India is a ‘Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic’ which strives to secure to all its citizens, inter alia, ‘Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship’*. That the ideology of free thought follows from this naturally is a no brainer. But the government of Gujarat doesn’t seem to agree; for there is a Prohibition on Alcohol, a sumptuary law prohibiting the consumption of alcoholic beverages, in effect in the state.

This law is in limelight again because of the hooch tragedy, where some 130 people – most of them from the poor class – have died after consuming illegal alcohol. Incidentally the epicenter of the tragedy is in chief minister Modi's very own Maninagar area of Ahmedabad.

The law is a tribute to Mahatma Gandhi who hailed from Gujarat and vehemently condemned alcohol, opining that the free flow of liquor would encourage the poor and others to drink excessively resulting in the debilitation of their health - making them incapable of working. These people would then neglect their families which eventually end in shambles. But such tragedies demonstrate that the ban is not serving its purpose and eventually ends up doing more harm than good: the state government loses revenues to the tunes of thousands of crores of rupees per annum due to the illicit trade, which also encourages bootlegging and moonshining and the dangers associated. Also, the illegal alcohol trade is well woven in the state politics now. The biggest gangsters in Gujarat started their careers as bootleggers. Moreover, about 20 years ago, a new trend began when bootleggers, instead of simply playing backroom financiers, began to contest elections, using their money power and the men who worked under them to gain entry into politics.

Now, the Constitution of India mandates in Part Four (carrying the legally unenforceable provisions which should ideally be enforced by governments) ‘to bring about the prohibition of intoxicating drinks and drugs that are injurious to health’. Ergo, if the banning of alcohol puts people in the way of more harmful drinks - as it’s demonstrated by the hooch tragedy - then is the government of Gujarat fulfilling the constitutional mandate?

In the 1990s, Andhra Pradesh took up and abandoned the prohibition policy in less than two years. This is what the state Excise minister said when the ban was being lifted:

“Despite our best efforts, the prohibition-related offences, particularly illicit distillation and smuggling, have been steadily increasing in the state.”

Another case in point is the ‘Noble Experiment’ prohibition policy in the United States of the Great Depression times, repealed just fourteen years after the sale of alcohol was banned. The reasons were the same: loss of excise and other duties, moonshining, bootlegging and illicit trading, and the health related aspects.

Coming back to the Liberty point, it’s the duty of the government to educate people and spread awareness about the harmful effects of something if it is so. It should not go about banning stuff like the way it is doing, especially when the stuff is something which the people imbibe; as it’s beyond the government’s ambit and competence to do so. Even if – for the sake of argument – we assume that the banning of liquor is acceptable, it’s completely unjustified and tantamount to double standards because the same government is doing nothing to curb the consumption of tobacco. So much so for the adherence to the values held dear by our forbearers and the founders of our nation and the constitution. With this sort of ideology, we can next expect a blanket ban on ‘sex’ as it induces corrupt, vulgar, and immoral behavior which leads to violent condemnable crimes like rape, etc. And one can only shudder to fathom what all other such things may follow.

Dystopia anyone?

Don’t fail your Home!

2009-07-08T15:35:00.006+05:30

Global warming and climate change is a threat that has assumed humongous proportions. It is the increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and the oceans since the mid-20th century and its projected continuation. The IPCC asserts that most of the warming observed over the last fifty years is attributable to human activities.

Till this day, the menace continues to be hushed up by the skeptics – the ecofascists – who are hell bent on disregarding any evidence or research which may bolster the theory of global warming. These non peer reviewed scientists and their coterie, the self proclaimed advocators of 'truth', are in fact the real life equivalent of Nick Naylor from the movie ‘Thank you for Smoking’. Theirs is the conspiracy theory that global warming, a 'pseudo-science', is no more than an overblown hoax.

But recent researches have indicated that the change is there and is actually accelerating – the deserts are spreading, ice caps are retreating, and ocean levels are rising at an unprecedented rate. It’s very likely that a rise in temperature which is unimaginable – to the tune of nine degree Celsius by the end of the century – may as well take place. This is happening because the global greenhouse gases emissions are rising faster than expected. To this is coupled the recent discovery that some mitigating factors like the absorption of carbon dioxide by the oceans was overestimated. There is also this newfound evidence that climate change is self re-enforcing: that, for e.g., rising temperatures melt the ice in the Polar Regions thereby unlocking more carbon dioxide – a vicious cycle indeed! The implications:

“include sea level rise of 0.18 to 0.59 meters (0.59 to 1.9 ft) in 2090-2100 relative to 1980-1999, repercussions to agriculture, possible slowing of the thermohaline circulation, reductions in the ozone layer, increasingly intense (but less frequent) hurricanes and extreme weather events, lowering of ocean pH, oxygen depletion in the oceans, and the spread of diseases such as malaria and dengue fever, as well as Lyme disease, hantavirus infections, bubonic plague, and cholera. One study predicts 18% to 35% of a sample of 1,103 animal and plant species would be extinct by 2050, based on future climate projections. However, few mechanistic studies have documented extinctions due to recent climate change and one study suggests that projected rates of extinction are uncertain.”

More here.

The stakes are very high for India too. The economy of the country is still very much dependent on the monsoon which, in turn, is adversely affected by the climate change. This very year is pegged to be an El Nino year, and the devastating results have started pouring in. Other observable effects here are anomalous behaviors of the two seasons, unpredictable rainfall, and - of course - the long dry monsoons. We can’t afford to turn a blind eye towards the issue especially when the fiscal deficit is pegged at 12%.

On the other hand, there may actually be opportunities for India. We have a mammoth potential for non conventional energy resources, viz., wind power, solar power, wave energy, geothermal energy, etc. By utilizing it we can build enough carbon credits to sell them at huge profits, like what the people of Powerguda village in Adilabad district of Andhra Pradesh did.

Whatever your outlook is, there is no gainsaying the fact that global warming is indeed a sword hanging on our heads; and to remain oblivious of it by choice is to live in a fool’s paradise. Sustainable Development and just use of the resources coupled with adherence to the resolutions taken up in meets like the Kyoto will leave us with any chance. Otherwise, the doom is nigh - with the ‘probable’ exemption of another world war, a huge asteroid, or a fatal plague, global warming may be the single largest danger to our planet earth.

The ‘edifice complex’

2009-07-02T11:58:00.009+05:30

Uttar Pradesh’s Chief Minister Mayawati is all set to unveil forty statues of ‘great leaders’, including six of her own, on July the 3^rd. All in all, excursions of this kind have cost the state exchequer dear – involving costs to the tune of INR 3000 Crores. The purported purpose, from the horse’s mouth:

“To create awareness among the people across the country regarding these memorials, parks and statues developed in the memory of Dalit icons, the state government has decided to launch a major publicity campaign. The tourism department had already incorporated these places in its map."

When a PIL was filed in the Allahabad High Court challenging the installation; she 'clarified', appended with the above statement, that:

“It has been decided that later on, income generated from the sales of tickets would be utilized for the welfare of the people living in slums and villages.”

After the recent Lok Sabha elections debacle, Behenji has gone berserk. She first accused the Congress, the BJP, and the SP of forming a covert alliance against her to prevent her from getting her rightful share in the Lok Sabha. After that, when seemingly the reality of the inquiries against her for the Taj Heritage Corridor project and other cases dawned on her, she offered unconditional outside support to the UPA Government. Earlier, she had slandered Rahul Gandhi and other Congress leader by her accusations like that of Rahul undergoing a shuddhikaran (purification) after interacting with Dalits. She even had the guts to call Mahatma Gandhi a ‘natakbaaz’ (fake) recently in a meeting. The next person to face such calumnies from her may well be Dr. Ambedkar or even Kanshiram!

This is in aftermath of her failed ‘social engineering’ adventure. The move paid off well in 2007, when she won an absolute majority in the state assembley. But her acts and policies after that have left many disgruntled and disillusioned. The reason is that while such moves dilute the feeling of bahujan identity within the Dalits, they never help Dalits bond culturally with the 'upper castes'. Essentially, there is a huge gap between the bahujan and the upper castes, which cannot be bridged by mere electoral and political alliances; and can only be bridged when the Dalits obtain the same living standards as upper castes - a situation which exists in the realm of imagination even this day, as a large section of Dalits continue to live on the margins of society. The upper castes were skeptical since the inception of the gambit, and were the first to cry foul at even minor instances. What ultimately happened was that both the strata thought that the other one was benefited more, and were unhappy therefore.

The sculptor of the statues, Mr. Prajapati, captures the dilemma faced by her most aptly:

“In 2003, Kashi Ram asked that we put up statues in their lifetimes. We don't know what will happen after our demise. Now Mayawati is building a statue that is 18ft high and will be placed on a pillar that is 100ft... She wants her memory to be immortalized."

Amour propre approaching megalomania? Nah! This is insecurity, expressing itself as a new phenomenon – the ‘edifice complex’.

P.S.: Just to mention, other great ‘leaders’ who’ve committed the act of installing their statues in their lifetimes include Saddam Hussein and North Korea’s Kim Jong-il.

The last great Minority

2009-06-27T19:28:00.007+05:30

Among the many legacies of the Raj, there is this draconian and preposterous section 377 of the Indian Penal Court. Introduced by Lord Macaulay as a part of the colonial project of regulating and controlling the British and Indian-origin subjects, it criminalizes homosexual activity; stating:

“Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

The ambit of Section 377, which was devised to criminalize and prevent homosexual associations - sodomy in particular, extends to any sexual union other than coitus. Thus even consensual heterosexual acts such as fellatio, cunnilingus, and fingering may well be interpreted as punishable offenses under this law. Now who’s thinking kinky after reading all this? We’re all law abiding citizens after all, aren’t we? But hey, did someone say something about ‘consenting adults’?

It were the British who made this law which we still hold on to, and those were Victorian times. A lot of water has flown since then through the Thames as well as the Yamuna, so much so that sadomy, which was once punishable by death in the UK, is no more so. It’s high time we also realize this and act accordingly and progressively. LGBT is no thing to be looked down upon, and anyone who does so has yet to grow up. Opposing it is plainly poking your nose in someone else’s matters.

The Indian constitution, under Article 21, grants the right to life and liberty for the subjects. By forcing someone to alter his true self just on our whims is sheer decoitry of the said right, and is inhumane and utterly damnable. Homosexuals are, after all, normal people just having a different sexual preference.

Besides Section 377, the sexual minorities in India are subjected to a variety of legally sanctioned and covert forms of discriminations. For instance: The family law structure is based entirely on a ‘heterosexual basis’ and marriages can only be between persons of opposite sex; the succession and property rights, and entitlements to assets are not legally sanctioned in relations between homosexuals. By refusing to legalize homosexual relations between consenting adults on the dubious ground of the demands of ‘public morality (sic)’, a large number of its citizens are denied the right to conduct their lives with dignity. The repeal of Section 377 will be the first step in cutting the ground under the homophobia that afflicts state and society in India.

Homosexuality is a matter of nature and nurture. Which of these two is the dominant factor here is not yet known. Now let’s suppose that the former is dominant and analyze it at the gene level – where all our characteristics are rooted. The gene of homosexuality survives because people have been forced to suppress their homosexual desires and made to lead a ‘normal’ life – by marrying a person of the opposite sex, having children, etc. And so the gene lives on. Left on its own, the gene would perish for the lack of being carried to the next generation, as the homosexuals among themselves can’t reproduce. And can it be a matter of nurture when people with absolutely no homosexual background in their parents turn out to be homosexual? (Exceptions to this nurture factor can be places like prisons though.)

So why the eff are some conservative groups paranoid? Enough of the religious crap now....

Oh My God!

2009-06-25T09:07:00.006+05:30

One of the greatest achievements of mankind is the theory of evolution propounded by the genius of Charles Darwin in his path breaking treatise ‘On the Origin of Species’ – an idea that is remarkably simple yet strikingly astonishing. It was this text which could provide a clinching evidence to solve the greatest mystery of all times – that how we all came to be what we are. Such is its widespread ambit that apart from addressing the issue it takes up, the idea, inter alias, also helped shaping me – and many others as well - in an atheist.

This year marks the 150^th anniversary of the publication of the opus magnum, and also witnesses the publication of a special anniversary edition; an abridged version with a special introduction, which is – for the lack of a better word – blasphemous. It’s a shameless propaganda device of the ‘creationists’, the advocators of ‘Intelligent Design’ (I can’t help laughing at the irony in the name chosen, so well it highlights their insecurity), resorting to libelous accusations, misquoting, fact distortion, and even going to the extent of suggesting that Darwin wanted to use evolution to justify genocide! Here’s a sample. The whole text may be found here. (pdf)

‘Do you think that DNA’s amazing structure could have come together by accident? Or does it point to an intelligent Designer? Even the director of the U.S. National Human Genome Research Institute concluded there is a God based on his study of DNA.

Richard Dawkins, arguably the most famous of atheists, can’t claim the title “atheist,” because he understands that something must have created everything. He said, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.”

Keeping in mind that the most intelligent of human beings can’t create a grain of sand from nothing, do you think that that “something” that made everything was intelligent? It obviously is; and if you do believe the “force” that made the flowers, the birds, the trees, the human eye, and the sun, the moon and the stars was intelligent, you then believe that there was an intelligent designer. You have just become an unscientific knuckle-dragger in the eyes of our learning institutions that embrace Darwinism.’

They even tried misquoting Dawkins! This is the liberal evangelical website from where this gem of a piece was retrieved.

Here is a spot on honest review of the book, a single sentence by PZ Myers:

“It's like a book with multiple personality disorder — two parts that absolutely hate each other; an intro that is the inane product of one of the most stupid minds of our century, and a science text that is the product of one of the greatest minds of the author's century.”

Their diabolic intentions of putting 'a million copies' of this trash in schools, if fulfilled, would defeat the very purpose of science. This is from people who go on and on with the stupid rhetoric of the watchmaker analogy, denying every proof which may refute their claims simply on whims. Simply put, it’s your own problem if you can’t distinguish pseudo-sciences from genuine scientific theories; and the best possible solution here is a psychiatrist.

Taboo?

2009-06-19T12:09:00.004+05:30

We Indians have a propensity towards an ostrich attitude - which is to say that we tend to turn our faces away from a problem, idiotically hoping for it to somehow resolve itself or thinking that in this fashion we won’t be affected by it. Nowhere is this more common than in the issue of sex education, a process considered taboo by many. A hotly debated topic, and denied its well deserved status in the state, it somehow perplexes even the most intellectually elite – who oppose it on utter ridiculous grounds like the ignominy it would bring to our culture and all. This was best exemplified in the Supreme Court’s decision in November 2007 of not incorporating sex education in ‘Right to Education’, stating that it couldn't be made a Fundamental Right.

A few months back, the Committee on Petitions - comprising Rajya Sabha members and headed by BJP’s Venkaiah Naidu, observed:

“There should be no sex education in schools as our country’s social and cultural ethos are such that sex education has absolutely no place in it”.

…

“That children must be given the message that sex before marriage is immoral, unethical and unhealthy”.

And as if that in itself wasn’t enough, the committee - advocating ‘instinct control’ and ‘dignity of restraint’ - called for a new curriculum to include material on lives and teaching of saints, spiritual leaders, freedom fighters and national heroes.

To top it, the committee said that the chapters on Naturopathy, Ayurveda, Unani and Yoga and moral values should be made integral parts of the syllabus to enable ‘total development of the child’. Chapters like ‘Physical and Mental Development in Adolescents’ and ‘HIV/AIDS and other Sexually Transmitted Diseases’ and related topics should be removed from the curriculum and incorporated in biology books only at the 10+2 stage.

So we shouldn’t have sex-ed. It’s unethical, against our virtues, diabolical, unnecessary, and several better alternatives are available. Why they’ve failed to produce any result and why sex related crimes are all but falling isn’t a matter of concern. The only thing that matters here is that the ‘cultural integrity’ should be preserved. It’s altogether a different matter that the ‘cultural integrity’ is a term which is as clear as the conscience of Laden.

We won’t have sex-ed, but stuff such as MTV- arguably the youth’s ‘India TV’ now with programmes like ‘Splitsvilla’ and more - and other such stuff on TV and in print media are welcome. Women mouthing suggestive dialogues - shown to be almost completely dependent on males - in order to ‘cater to the audience’s demand’, is commonplace. Did someone mention ‘hypocrisy’?

The benefits of sex-ed are many. There’s no point in reiterating them. However, this post argues well in favor of the case. More info can be sought here.

It’s high time that the seriousness of the situation gets acknowledged. Sex-ed is essential for a balanced and non skewed viewpoint, non chauvinist mentality, appreciation of the opposite sex, and a healthy body as well. The mystical aura around the topic ought to be busted now. You can’t crack a rock using a feather, however charming and innovative it may seem; the problem can’t be dealt with ‘yoga’ and all.

Ignoring sex education for young adults has done enough damage already. From a burgeoning AIDS crisis to exponential population growth, alongside young folk with repressed sexualities and stunted mentalities, it is bad enough already. It should not be allowed to get any worse.

Flying High

2009-06-12T23:33:00.002+05:30

It has been fifteen years since that unfortunate mishap at Imola, in the San Marino Grand Prix, when Ayrton Senna - one of the greatest drivers in the history of Formula One – died. That event sent shock waves the world over. The sport was not to be same again, with covert and overt changes all abound.

He is one of my inspirations; it’s for his passion, fire, zeal, attitude and audacity that I revere him. Known to deliver the best in adverse circumstances – a quality best exemplified by his unmatched rain driving skills – he inspired me to put in that extra effort when the tides were not in my favor. Going through his videos on YouTube, one notices the passion and the love he had for the game; and that made me his devotee. He had the guts to challenge someone - the case of his rivalry with Alain Prost comes to mind - who would later find himself vanquished. His stint at McLaren, the high point of his rivalry with Prost, clearly showed the world what he was made of. It’s no surprise that the Brazilians don’t find even Massa good enough as the bar is set too high by Senna. Such is his legacy that songwriters have written pieces like:

“Oh! Since Senna doesn't race anymore...it's not Sunday anymore!”

He most definitely is among the few persons I admire and seek inspiration from. I’d end this piece with this quote, by the master himself:

“On a given day, a given circumstance, you think you have a limit. And so you touch this limit, something happens and you suddenly can go a little bit further. With your mind power, your determination, your instinct, and the experience as well, you can fly very high.”

F.R.I.E.N.D.S

2009-06-10T18:40:00.002+05:30

It’s arguably one of the most popular sitcoms, replete with a cult following and all. I too am a fan, and once was very much influenced by it too; so much so that using ‘so’ as a modifier – a phenomenon attributed to the series - has found occurrences in my writings too. Any good piece of art has very solid philosophical foundations, inasmuch as it would creep in your characters even if you’re not deliberately doing so. Same happened to this gem too.

Eulogizing the series any further would be trite; so I’d skip to analyzing the characters and what I think of them.

Ross: The archetype geek, he was one of my favorite characters (the other one being Chandler). He’s the guilty conservative – always shown having bad luck and a victim of situations. Shown to be knowledgeable and religious in equal manners, he’s the ideal character in that sense which people want to see and to be. He always thought himself to be an Ace Science Stud, and turned out to be just that – ASS.
Chandler: Ah! My other favorite. He was shown to be quite intelligent, but who would want to see such a person win (winning as in most of you perceive it to be)? So, to cater to the popular demand, he was insinuating a tacit apology always – which was masked by humour - and was shown to have various character complexities and follies typically associated with such persons. We have this general tendency of trying to rub a line to shorten it, don’t we?
Monica: The typical egotist, individualist and hence was portrayed selfish. She was shown to be somewhat eccentric, as we would like to believe that such persons who are their own world can’t be normal. She was also shown to be pretty caring, apparently a lesson for the egotists insofar as that they can be much happier when loving truly. And this was quite palpable to the audience, who were shedding tears with her!
Rachel: The typical bitch – pampered, rich, beautiful, slutty, arrogant, ignorant, .… She was shown to be the most selfish and manipulative character - the sort who most of the guys would love to show off as their girlfriends, or would dream of bedding. She was also shown to have some shocking weaknesses, apparently to add some mystic nature to her character (supposedly to pass it as credible).
Phoebe: Shown to be irrational and god fearing, at least the writers could make out the connection between the two characteristics. She was also portrayed as hypocrite.
Joey: The character who is the favorite of school-girls, and it’s not hard to see why. He was the stud in the show, the brainless brawny handsome hunk girls love to sleep with. He was depicted a god fearing, emotional, hypocrite yet-somehow-likeable guy.

You must have guessed who all I didn’t like and you’re free to craft your reasons. If you find anything interesting, do leave a comment. This series, by no means a Seinfeld, ran for a socking ten years. This alone says a lot about a lot many among us!