Colour matters

For the past 2 days, media in India has been extremely busy focusing on an MP and a Minister of State in Union cabinet called Giriraj Singh. That man comes from Bihar, and he usually says and does what appeals to folks from his constituency and his state. I do not think Giriraj really cares about what the rest of the world thinks. He thinks differently and flaunts it.

It is my personal view that what he said reflects reality in India. It is time we in India accept our hypocrisy when it comes to skin colour. Light colour skin is generally valued higher compared to darker skin tones in India. The brand manager of "Fair & Lovely" in Unilever, India must be wondering what all this fuss is about.

I checked out a few minutes of panel debates in our media on this. As always, we had the usual set of known faces on all panels, and they dutifully mouthed some inane.insincere stuff.

I am amused by the sheer hypocrisy of our media and I wonder who would question them ? For instance, yesterday, in Kenya ( a country, which has an entire population of darker skin tone ), a terror group called Al Shabab gunned down 147 to their death mercilessly in a college, and 80 more are seriously injured. The coverage in Indian media on this horrifying incident was pathetic. The sound bytes, and space in print media allotted for this, was far lesser than the space allotted for Deepika Padukone's stupid " My choice" video.

However, when a mad man laid siege to a cafe in Sydney earlier this year, all our channels covered it 24 x 7 and print media practically brought out a supplement on it. The body count in Sydney was 4 - all white. The body count in Kenya is 147..and counting. Both were cases of terrorist incidents. From an Indian perspective, both happened in far away countries.

Precisely, what are the standards our media uses for determining the value of news ? I also remember the pathetic coverage when Boko Haram kidnapped 300 girls about a year ago

I would like to pose a question to all our "super anchors" in India - what, in their opinion made them view a terrorist incident involving the death of 147 black people in Kenya as "less" news worthy compared to the incident involving 3 dead in Sydney?

If they can answer this clearly, I think I will concede that they have a right to grill Giriraj for the next 365 days.

Nirbhaya and Shreya - Story of India

The last few days, a few of my friends from India and overseas have been openly expressing their views, both for and against the BBC documentary on Nirbhaya. I was also a participant in one thread posted by a friend on the subject. The other topic that popped up recently was about Shreya Singhal.

The nation was horror struck when Nirbhaya incident happened, and the nation again reacted when a documentary on her was made by a person and then aired by BBC.

To start with, let me say that I watched the documentary. It is a moving film, absolutely sticking to the facts, and I could not find a single statement denigrating Indians and Indian society as a whole in the documentary.

A constant theme from those who objected to it was that BBC had a “mischievous” motive. I also felt that way for some time initially before I saw the documentary. However, after I saw it, I knew that to allude to such was ridiculous. Another constant theme from those who objected to the documentary was that even Britain has such horrific crimes, and why did the lady not make a documentary about rapists there and interview them etc.

Now, when an independent film producer from Britain came along years ago and made a fine picture on Mahatma Gandhi, we all applauded and watched the movie – it showed historical facts, there was no bias against India. The movie went on to win Oscars. The movie was all about the positives of a man, an Indian, and his greatness. I think many of our parliamentarians and state legislators actually became aware of a man called Mahatma only after that movie. We never asked why the British chap who made the movie, did not first make one about great historical figures in his own country before getting on to Mahatma.

Now, another independent person comes from the UK, makes a documentary sticking to facts on a horrific crime in India that shook the nation for some time. This time around, our Home Minister rejects it. Why? When we, as a nation lapped up with unbridled glee, good stuff that was shown about Mahatma, why are we displaying complete immaturity when a negative incident is also shown truthfully? As for folks who argue that the lady should have made a documentary on rapists in Britain first, I pose a simple question - " would you say that Sir Richard Attenborough should have made a couple of films about legends in his home country, UK, before turning his eyes on Mahatma ?"

Many folks who have seen the documentary, also truly believe that it will bring about a sense of shame in the nation, when it comes to appalling lack of gender equality in India. I am a bit hesitant to accept such simple conclusions quickly.

My view point is that India, as an aspiring modern nation, does not have any sense of shame at all. It suffers from a complete absence of it. This view of mine may appear controversial, and some may not accept it. To such folks, I would say : “kindly pause and consider these” :

- India never showed any sense of shame when 4000 were slaughtered on the streets of Delhi in 1984, when 1000 people were killed in Gujarat in 2002, when 5000 were killed in Nellie in 1983, and when such thousands of numbers included women and children, and in some cases, reportedly even unborn babies.

- A zillion documentaries have been made on such incidents. India shows no sense of shame that barely a handful have been arrested in such crimes, fewer still have been convicted and actually none has been hanged for collectively over 10,000 innocent lives snuffed out in these 3 riots in the recent past. The killers, probably hundreds of them, still roam free. Leaders who “led” the killers have been able to dodge the system for over 30 years now.

How can I ever get convinced that a nation which has shown no sense of shame in such horrific crimes, will suddenly undergo a dramatic turnaround and develop a sense of shame, just because a solitary woman code named “Nirbhaya” was brutally raped and murdered ?

In any case, I believe that a country need not demonstrate a sense of shame – a country should demonstrate a sense of purpose, and that is better than a sense of shame, to progress. 

There is a perception, to a large degree rooted in individual experiences that India is a country that is completely unsafe for women. The country is so vast and complex at many levels, that it is very difficult to discuss with a Western mind, that usually sees a country in a black or white shade. India needs to manage both reality and perception. Reality is within our control - changing laws, imposing strict law and order, exemplary punishment for folks indulging in crimes against women etc. Perception management should start right away.

Now, let me move on to another Delhi girl - Shreya Singhal. She is hardly 21 years old. Coincidentally, she is also a Delhi girl, and a law school student, and a bright one at that, if I may add. This girl, all of 24, took it upon herself, when she was barely 21, to file a "public interest litigation" in the highest court of India, when 2 innocent girls in Mumbai were harassed there by local partymen for some innocuous comments in facebook. The girls were prosecuted under section 66-A of Information technology act, which in many people's view was a draconian act that curbed people's freedom of expression in social media.

This 24 year old law student possessed the courage of conviction, and had the support of her family members to take the case in Supreme Court. To cut a story short, 2 days ago, India's highest court, threw section 66A out, clearly stating that it was against freedom of speech and expression.

This is great news. Rape happens all over the world, and extremely violent rapes happen everywhere. It is a crime, banned by law. There are unfortunate victims of rape everywhere. India treats rape as a crime, and its legal procedure needs to be tightened. It justice system is lethargic and needs to move its wheels much faster. That is for sure.

At the same time, India poses no restriction even to 21 year old girls to fight in the highest court of the land against a law, when it comes into conflict with fundamental rights to both men and women. To my knowledge, there would be very few cases in the world of an apex court of a country treating a public interest litigation filed by a 21 year old girl seriously and rendering a verdict scrapping a law. Probably the first such in the world.

I believe that India need not hang its head in shame over Nirbhaya, but, instead tell the world through words and deeds that it is bringing in radical change in its law and order & judicial mechanism to deal with such cases. Hanging its head in shame will have few takers.

On the other hand, I would say that India can rightfully hold its head high with pride on the way its justice system dealt with a plea by Shreya Singhal. Indian government should hire the same lady who made BBC documentary on Nirbhaya and ask her to produce a documentary on the case won by Shreya and show to the world. I am sure BBC will oblige.

Dim literature

This is written in an entirely lighter vein. Those who continue to take Nobel prize for peace, literature seriously, especially after peace was awarded to Obama, should skip reading this. By the way, a sincere salute and hats off to Kailash Satyarthi, about whom, honestly, I had not heard anything at all before the Nobel announcement .
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Forget the peace prize. I just went through a list of 5 Nobel prize winners in literature over the past 5 years - Mario Vargas, Spain (2010), Tomas Transtomer, Sweden ( 2011 ), Mo Yan, China ( 2012), Alice Munro, Canada ( 2013 ), Patrick Modiano, France ( 2014 ). I have not heard even a single name from this list before they got it, and more importantly never heard of them after. These people could well be very famous in their respective countries and much loved too, but, is that a criteria for Nobel ?

If anyone in India has heard of these folks, or read their stuff ( even translated in english ) BEFORE Nobel was awarded to them, please step forward and reveal thy identity. I will genuflect before thee.

Now that I have got the names, I intend buying 1 book each of these laureates ( translated in english, where applicable ), and leave them prominently on my coffee table. Any visitor who comes home is bound to ask, and I shall, with a smug look educate them that they are books by Nobel laureates. Those among my friends who drop in, may look upon me with awe & trepidation in future, for reading such. A wicked thought that needs to be put into action pronto.

Among 110 Nobel Literature awards till date, 13 have gone collectively to folks from Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Finland. i.e. about 12 % of all Nobel literature so far awarded has gone to Scandinavian nations. All these countries put together have a total population of about 23 million. Current world population is projected at about 7 billion.

Does it strike you as a bit odd that a combined Scandinavian population of about 0.3 % of the world has been awarded 12 % of all Nobels in literature so far? It sure strikes me as odd. 

Works of literature, have a purpose – they need to be read and understood by great many. When that very purpose is not met, I wonder on what basis they decide. If the committee's lofty purpose is to ensure that all languages are viewed equally, then I suppose the committee should announce each year they will choose a specific language, and look for great works within that and award - for instance 2015 – French, 2016 – Tamizh, 2017 – Telugu, 2018 – Burmese and so on and so forth. This will ensure that in about 400 years, practically all countries, and languages will be considered.

Nothing can explain 1 Nobel in literature given to a work of literature in Yiddish (1978). Current estimates of folks who understand Yiddish language in its spoken & written form is about a low number of 50,000 to a high number of 1 million. Let me go by the high estimate – 1 million. This represents 0.01% of world population, and 1% of a Nobel prize awarded. Viewed purely in mathematical terms, it is a 100 fold amplification in importance of that language. For contrast, I want to take Tamizh as an example, and not out of any parochial view. Nearly 1 % of the global population speaks the language and it exists in all its vibrant forms – written, spoken, poetry, drama etc. Very surprising that not a single Tamizh author has ever come to the notice of the committee. Ditto for Telugu, Hindi, Kannada etc.

A Nobel has also been given to someone who has written in Hebrew. This only makes the mathematical odds even more skewed, to make it appear almost laughable.

Now, I think if one were to know the strange tongue of tribals of Car Nicobar, and one were to write 3 poems in that, each poem consisting of 8 words, and somehow attract the committee's attention by shooting arrows at their homes with the poems attached to the arrow tips, probability of getting Nobel for literature is very high.

Docu drama

The last few days, a few of my friends from India and overseas have been openly expressing their views, both for and against the BBC documentary on Nirbhaya. I was also a participant in one thread posted by a friend on the subject.

To start with, let me say that I watched the documentary. It is a moving documentary, absolutely sticking to the facts, and I could not find a single statement denigrating Indians and Indian society as a whole in the documentary.

A constant theme from those who objected to it was that BBC had a “mischievous” motive. I also felt that way for some time initially before I saw the documentary. However, after I saw it, I knew that to allude to such was ridiculous. Another constant theme from those who objected to the documentary was that even Britain has such horrific crimes, and why did the lady not make a documentary about rapists there and interview them etc.

Now, when an independent film producer from Britain came along years ago and made a fine picture on Mahatma Gandhi, we all applauded and watched the movie – it showed historical facts, there was no bias against India. The movie went on to win Oscars. The movie was all about the positives of a man, an Indian, and his greatness. I think many of our parliamentarians and state legislators actually became aware of a man called Mahatma only after that movie. We never asked why the British chap who made the movie, did not first make one about great historical figures in his own country before getting on to Mahatma.

Now, another independent person comes from the UK, makes a documentary sticking to facts on a horrific crime in India that shook the nation for some time. This time around, our Home Minister rejects it. Why? When we, as a nation lapped up with unbridled glee, good stuff that was shown about Mahatma, why are we displaying complete immaturity when a negative incident is also shown truthfully? As for folks who argue that the lady should have made a documentary on rapists in Britain first, I pose a simple question - " would you say that Sir Richard Attenborough should have made a couple of films about greats in the UK, before turning his eyes on Mahatma ?"

Many folks who have seen the documentary, also truly believe that it will bring about a sense of shame in the nation, when it comes to appalling lack of gender equality in India. I am a bit hesitant to accept such simple conclusions quickly.

My view point is that India, as an aspiring modern nation, does not have any sense of shame at all. It suffers from a complete lack of it. Whatever little it had, India abandoned it the day it allowed a borderline illiterate lady from Italy to control a Harvard educated economist. This view of mine may appear controversial, and some may not accept it. To such folks, I would say : “kindly pause and consider these” :

- India never showed any sense of shame when 4000 were slaughtered on the streets of Delhi in 1984, when 1000 people were killed in Gujarat in 2002, when 5000 were killed in Nellie in 1983, and when such thousands of numbers included women and children, and in some cases, reportedly even unborn babies.

- A zillion documentaries have been made on such incidents. India shows no sense of shame that barely a handful have been arrested in such crimes, fewer still have been convicted and actually none has been hanged for collectively over 10,000 innocent lives snuffed out in these 3 riots in the recent past. The killers, probably hundreds and thousands of them, still roam free. Leaders who “led” the killers have been able to dodge the system for over 30 years now.

How can I ever get convinced that a nation which has shown no sense of shame in such horrific crimes, will suddenly undergo a dramatic turnaround, and develop a sense of shame, just because a solitary woman code named “Nirbhaya” was brutally raped and murdered ?

In any case, I believe that a country need not demonstrate a sense of shame – a country should demonstrate a sense of purpose, and that is better than a sense of shame, to progress.

Any man objecting to anything to bring in gender equality should be sent on to a tennis court, to face lightning fast aces, aimed at his unprotected vitals served by Serena Williams from the other side. 10 serves per at minimum 100 mph speed. I think India can hire Serena for the next 5 years for this exclusive job. She will simultaneously serve the purpose of removing gender as well as colour bias.

Lifebuoy moments

Last evening, while watching a 1 hour programme on History channel, I counted 9 ad breaks, each lasting about 3 minutes. Almost all the ads can be classified into 3 groups - mobile phones, women's cosmetics, men's cosmetics. Possibly 1 or 2 ads were outside this, but then exceptions do not make the rule.

My thoughts went back to my school / college days. Back then, at home for men, there was precisely 1 product which can be broadly considered as a cosmetic by a stretch definition - lifebuoy soap. I am referring to the original, un-corrupted version of Lifebuoy which sported a bright red colour, was packaged in a simple white wrapper, and was the size of a brick. Men at home using anything other than Lifebuoy were considered to be profligate in their ways. My grandparents considered Lifebuoy to be a multi purpose soap - for body, clothes as well as shampoo for hair. My grandfather sincerely believed that a bucket of water saturated with lifebuoy soap was a good substitute for fertilizer for coconut trees. That soap mysteriously never used to reduce in size even with vigorous usage, and each cake would last 1 year per person at the minimum, and was considered the best value for money.

Though I studied in a co-ed school, I think the only reason I never had any girl friends in school was because my parents / grandparents ensured that I had a permanent Lifebuoy shied of protection around me - it was a 2 way shield - neither could I step out of it, nor any of the girls could break the defense shield. I think all boys in my class had this defense shield.

Later on, in college, while bravely attempting to expand my intellectual bandwidth to accommodate engineering topics, I considered doing a project on Lifebuoy soap, to figure out its enigmatic chemical bonds - Its aromatic properties can be broadly classified as the exact thin space between deodorant and disinfectant, its longevity that can only be defined by "half life" period, usually reserved for radio active material. Its "multi utility" could have possibly inspired similar concepts in automobile industry. I think Lifebuoy could also have medicinal properties and small pieces of Lifebuoy administered at regular intervals to human beings can function as a broad range anti-biotic - of course, FDA needs to give approval for testing.

Back then, women at home had a choice of soap between Mysore Sandal and Chandrika, and their entire range of cosmetics post bathing was Cuticura or Ponds powder. Period. Mercifully, those were the days when concepts like "gay" were not heard of, and the word "gay" itself retained its original english meaning without any further connotation. Else, I would have been branded "gay", as I used to occasionally escape the tyranny of Lifebuoy, by seeking refuge in a Mysore sandal or Chandrika.

Post bathing, us boys would not even merit a drop of coconut oil on our head, and girls / women used to either use pure coconut oil, or a strange concoction from Kerala called "neelibringadhi" oil. ah...those good old days.

Damn the marketing men, especially from the cosmetics / ad industry who conceive such ads and rudely interrupt a rare good TV programme, by showing a male model with an almost impossible adonis like physique, admiring himself and spraying himself generously with strangely named deodorant called Axe. I curse such ads and models aloud at such moments saying " you pissants...if you call yourself men...show me some guts and try a Lifebuoy ".

My association with lifebuoy continues, with the marketeers of that product having managed to liquify it ( ? ) and selling it as handwash these days. I want to tell them -" you idiots...no need to liquify it. You have a much larger market for the original Lifebuoy - it can substitute poor quality bricks in construction, especially in Chennai."

Temple visit

My mother wanted me to take her to Tiruvalluvar for a darshan of Lord Veera Raghava Swami ( moolavar ) and our Kula deivam yesterday. My wife made it plain that on a Sunday morning, the last thing on her mind was visiting a temple. So, off I went with my mother.

After my trip, I have come to the conclusion that some temples are doing their utmost to make even strong believers loose their interest in visiting temples.

- Car park near the temple tank is either a urinal, or has become one...difficult to decide the order. The stream of guys yanking their dhotis up and letting out their dongs is amazing. Bank opposite the car park is an area where tonsuring is done. I am amazed that in our land, how come men cannot control their bladder, but, women seem to. Is there some biological phenomena behind this ? Or, is it that in India, guys get this sudden urge to empty their bladder, the moment they see a bush or a car park ? One has to decode this urge, and I am willing to sponsor a study on "moothrology" by any interested sociologist or biologist.

- The temple tank ( kulam ) was majestic...it is huge and easily would be 500' x 500 ' ( L x B ). Am sure in the good old days, it must have been a wonderful scene. But now, it is nothing but a huge filthy ditch. There is a belief that if you throw a pack of salt, pepper and jaggery into it, Lord Veeraghavaswamy would cure you of any disease. The amount of plastic covers strewn around must be seen to be believed. Added to this is clumps of hair lying all around. Boy...the mess is inexplicable - nowhere in the world would anyone find plastic covers, with salt, pepper, jaggery and also human hair in the same spot. Since my mother insisted, I walked down the steps to the kulam and threw salt and stuff, and when I turned back, I saw a goat approaching me gently....I think it wanted jaggery from me.

- Without any warning at 0730 in the morning, the temple priests decided to close the doors of the sanctum sanctorum. A priest generally yelled out that the "nadai" will open at 9.30 am. The approach to the santum santorum is through barricades, obviously put up to regulate movement on a crowded festival day. But, on a normal day, when the crowd is thin, I wonder what purpose it serves. Anyway, we had to move through the barricade and wait for about 2 hours. The darshan itself lasted hardly a minute, and then we came out.

- Have you guys thought about the fact that in all the temples, the sannidhanam is kept dark and dingy....I cannot figure out why it should be so ? Why can't they keep it bright and well lit ?

- The moolavar is made out of raw granite stone, and over 100's of years, smeared with variety of stuff, and the quick karpoora arathi helps you see a black mass and nothing else. Also, many devotees close their eyes a few seconds into the arathi, and mutter slokams, and by the time they open their eyes, the arathi is over, and the place is dark. So, I wonder what they would have seen in the few seconds. The paradox, looked at logically is huge - people travel long distance, wait in long queues, and then close their eyes when the time for darshan comes. Why ?

- In the queue for darshan with us were also some newly wedded couples, and some women with babies in their arms. Many women had "manjal" ( turmeric ) smeared all over their face. My mother struck up a conversation with one of the women, and in the 2 hours that we waited in the queue, my mother virtually extracted that lady's entire family history. I do not know when you guys last saw a woman with manjal smeared all over the face....but, I happened to see many of them that day, and I tried to imagine how a manjal smeared naturally yellow chinese face would look ! The worst combination could be a woman with manjal smeared face, with a freshly tonsured head smeared with sandalwood paste. I saw a few like that too. More than its medicinal properties, I think women in the good old days used turmeric primarily to ward off testosterone urges of their men.

- We enquired about prasadams, and we were told that we can buy it from a counter outside the temple, but, after 2 hours ! I told my mother that prasadam from Grand sweets was a better option.

- The army of beggars outside the temple is amazing. I am convinced now that there is a business mind that controls the beggars.

On the way back, I talked to my mother to figure out what she got out of the trip, and whether she noticed the filth and squalor. She replied that 1 minute darshan was worth the pain. My rational mind is unable to accept this logic.

In any case, I think in the years to come, if this is the state in which temples are going to be maintained, the next generation may not go to temples at all. Alternately, perhaps there is a huge opportunity waiting to be tapped in "temple management".

Handwriting

A few days ago, I heard my wife scolding my son on his poor handwriting. My son told her that he was experimenting with his handwriting...and I saw nothing wrong with that, except that his teacher seems averse to such ideas...particularly when he chooses a strange font and size while answering questions in class tests. I advanced a theory to my wife that though he had answered all questions correctly, since his teacher could not figure out the font, she had given him low marks. My son flashed a grateful smile at me, while my wife was clearly wanting to slap me.

Anyway, guys, that brings me to the subject...when was the last time you tried writing about 300 words ( around 40 lines ) on a plain sheet of paper ? I am not able to remember when was the last time my handwriting filled a full sheet of paper - probably the last was sometime in 1989 or 1990, just before computer invasion.

A couple of days ago, while at our company guest house, since I had nothing to do one evening, I decided to fill an A4 size paper with my handwriting ( cursive ). My assessment of my effort that day are as follows :

> Particularly when it came to "r" and "f", literally my fingers stopped moving. My brain was unable to figure out how I used to write out these 2 letters ! Seriously, it took me a few seconds to get my fingers moving again. I still am not sure if I used to write "f" with a bulging bottom or flat and thin. As for "r", I am not sure if I used to make a tiny circle at its top right or top left....

> Having tried this stunt in English, I next switched over to Tamizh...and I wrote down a few sentences. I was left totally confused over which "Ra" to use....I tried out "ha" and "Ottaga - O" and actually got it wrong couple of times while writing fast !

> How many of you have noticed these days that all Tamizh magazines have switched to Periyar script for "Lai" etc. While my brain has got used to reading it, while writing, it still wants to go to the good old way of writing "Lai' and then it becomes a struggle getting it right on paper.

> Am sure that if my son's teacher sees my handwriting, I would get marks lower than his.

I could not believe that something so basic as my handwriting can be so adversely impacted because of computers.

I would encourage each of you to set aside about 15 minutes and try out your handwriting, (don't consciously try to make it neat and clean, just write easy and fast, like we used to in college) ......... ask your children to evaluate it. It may be an interesting dinner table conversation at home.

S