LITERATURE-LIGHT AND DELIGHT. 80. RUINS TEACH!

LITERATURE-  LIGHT AND DELIGHT

80. RUINS  TEACH!

Delhi- city of ruins and tombs!


India Gate, Delhi. Photo by Muhammad Mahdi Karim.
GNU Free Documentation Centre.

When I first saw Delhi in 1965, I was overwhelmed by a sense of history. It was actually one big township plus a cluster of villages.  Lutyen's  New Delhi was like a gandharvaloka- sheltering people who led  privileged lives.. They were privileged, and they showed it in their manners. The whole area was peopled and dominated by officialdom. The politicians were only seen periodically, but the officials were all-pervasive.They would move only among themselves.They lived for themselves. Even the peon in an office would behave as if he was a Badshah!

But the Old Delhi area was warm. People were friendly and spontaneous. The contrast was striking. New Delhi was so open, so vast with broad roads, bungalows standing on huge plots separated by compound walls. But more than the walls, they were separated by hearts and minds. The relationship and interface was purely official. Nothing existed for them other than their official role. I thought how people in big places had such small hearts and narrow minds! People in the Old Delhi area lived in crammed streets, old houses, there was not much of privacy for any one. There was so much of movement ,crowding, noise, colours, smell- that was the human touch, sign of flowing life!

And life there was still traditional. Yamuna was still flowing, though the Okhla barrage was there.  I used to shiver in the severe winter in the office, wearing two sweaters and a coat.Local friends used to  laugh at me! One week-end, a friend took me to his home in the Nai Sarak area for stay. In the morning, he made me take  bath in cold water! But it was really warm! The house had a well from which water was drawn and it was warm! He told me that once they took bath like that , they did not feel so cold! Their lifestyle was still old-fashioned, their food was substantial but somewhat rough- thick roti and a  seasonal vegetable and dal, with a raw onion piece and a green chilli to go with it, with a huge glass of lassi with sugar or salt added! This boy remained my friend all 35 years of service, along with two others who did not take promotion as they did not want to leave Delhi. 

This boy took me to all the historical places every week-end. I noticed that Delhi was full of tombs !  The whole city was a memorial.As a student of history, I recalled the very first lesson: empires rise only to fall! Sic transit gloria mundi! And I wondered about the modern Indian govt occupying that very ancient place with so many ruins and tombs: how oblivious these new nabobs and badshahs were of the history of the place! 

Sceptre and Crown
Must tumble down
And in the dust be equal made
With the poor crooked scythe and spade.

- James Shirley

And a contrast struck me: in the South, kings built temples or often, enlarged ancient ones. One could not find a single samadhi of an old king. In Delhi, under Muslim rule, there were only tombs!  Delhi outside the official orbit was still predominantly local, and our bus to Qutab Minar would take us through green fields!  The area surrounding it was still open and that open area with that monument standing there strangely stirred you! Many years later, I experienced a similar but stronger feeling near Bhubaneswar, the site of the Kalinga war!

Toynbee and study of history

Later, I read that such was the magic pull of the old ruins. I read that Arnold Toynbee, who wrote about the decline of 21old civilisations in his monumental 12 volume work " A Study of History", completed over 40 years, was set on his quest by what he saw and felt among the ruins of Greece and Crete. And it made him think: why did they fall? Or did they fail? They fell because they failed to meet the challenges of the day. Despite the word  'history' figuring in the title, the book is not about history, as academics understand and teach but an interpretation of the way the civilisations lived and declined. There were some parts where I did not agree with him- as in his treatment of Buddhism-vis a vis the ancient Dharma of India. But this is a misunderstanding most Westerners have..  The greatest service of Toynbee to humanity is to make the West realise that they were just a small part of humanity. He said: " What I am trying to do is to explain to the West that we are only a small minority in the world." Only a philosopher can have such a basic realisation, during a time when the West was still expanding in power.

Arnold J.Toynbee
See page for author[CC.BY-SA 3.0 nl.creative commons.

During subsequent visits, I found that real estate sharks had gobbled up all the open spaces. The monuments do not raise that awe now.

Sad end to Mughal Empire

Old Delhi area tells its own tale. There were actually 7 small townships in that area, with the Red Fort as the centre. Bahadur Shah 'Zafar' the last Mughal Emperor was made the titular head of the rebels of 1857, both Hindus and Muslims. After their defeat, the British behaved most brutally and killed all the Muslims they could lay their hands on, fishing them out of their homes. Bahadur Shah was also captured, while trying to escape and hiding in Humayun's tomb, which was at that time in a village outside Delhi proper.Two of his sons and a grandson were killed in cold blood by the military commander on his own and he presented their severed heads to Zafar! He could only react with shocked silence; he was a poet, and had already become philosophical. exclaiming, "Who has  ever felt fulfilled in this futile world? My heart does not lie in this despoiled land.". 

Humayun's tomb :ASI

He was exiled to Burma, with his wife and some remnants of his family, kept confined to his cell. He was not given pencil or paper to write, but he kept scribbling on the walls with pieces of charcoal or whatever was available. His tomb was also unmarked- with the intention that no one should be able to find it subsequently. Bahadur Shah lamented in Urdu verse that he could not even get two yards space in his beloved land for his burial!

Umr-e-daraaz maang kar laaye char din

Do aarzoo mein kat gaye, do intezar mein.

Kitna  hai badh-nasib "Zafar" dafn kay liye

Do gaz zamin bhi na mili kuu-e-yaar mein.

I asked for a long life, I received  four days

Two passed in desires, two in waiting.

How unfortunate is "Zafar"- for his burial

Not even two yards of land were to be had

in the land of his beloved.

The irony of it all! In that city of tombs, the last Indian Emperor could not get his tomb! He had desired to be buried along  the tomb of some Sufi saint.


Bahadur Shah Zafar: indpaedia.com

But there is a greater twist in history. The British mercilessly and brutally  chased and killed the Muslims of Delhi in the aftermath of the 1957 rebellion. Yet, in less than 90 years, the same Muslims became  ardent supporters of the British in India, became  true loyalists of the Raj and were rewarded with the creation of Pakistan, at which the British had connived at every stage!  Gandhi and Co could not see through this game and counter it!

The fates of Indira Gandhi and her two sons were bad too, in their own land. But leaders don't seem to learn anything from history!  Delhi makes me sad. It is not always natural death that levels.

The garlands wither on your brow,
Then boast no more your mighty deeds!
Your heads must come
To the cold tomb:
Only the actions of the just
Smell sweet and blossom in their dust.


Every country stands on ruins!


If we think deeply, every country in the world is today is living on old ruins! In the last 2000 years, Christians and Muslims have, in the course of their expansion, destroyed all the ancient civilisations of the world. The Christian nations of Europe nearly destroyed themselves in the two world wars! Now it is the turn of Muslims to kill each other. The European Christians did it in the name of some secular political ideas, the Muslims are doing it in the very name of their religion. Both these Abrahamic religions believed in expansion by the sword. They forgot the Biblical wisdom: All those that take the sword shall perish by the sword! (Often, their own! Krishna got his own powerful and unruly Yadava clan to destroy themselves, before His departure, and thus made the place safe for the people.)


Ruins of a Roman temple, built before 115 AD found in Banias . Source: www.biblewalks.com

But there has been another kind of destruction going on- destruction in the name of development. We are now busy destroying our planet , and rendering it a little less fit to live each day,and call it by the grand name of economic development and scientific advance. Science considered Nature an enemy to be conquered, and even Biblical interpretation helped it do so. But even old civilisations did it, without knowing it!

In his 1957 book, "Which Way Lies Hope?", Richard B. Gregg, American social philosopher and follower of Gandhiji pointed out:

Nearly every empire throughout  history has ended in deserts. What is now denuded Morocco,Tunisia and Algiers was once the wheat-growing area of the Roman Empire. The dreadful erosion in Italy and Sicily is another product of that Empire. The present desiccated lands of Mesopotamia,Syria,Palestine and parts of Arabia were the sites of the great empires of Ur,Babylon,Sumeria,Akkadia and Assyria. Persia was once a great empire. Now it is largely desert. Greece under Alexander was an empire; now its land is mostly barren. The soil of the land of the empire of Tamerlane now only produces a  small fraction of what it did in his day. The three empires of modern times, British,French and Dutch, have not yet produced deserts, but they have done much to help exhaust and despoil the soils and mineral resources of Asia, Africa,Australia, New Zealand and North America. The cutting of timber in Kenya,Uganda and Ethiopia may presently destroy the massive even flow of the Nile. In this, these empires have, of course, been much aided by the modern developments in transportation,mould-board ploughshares, farm tractors,finance,commerce communications.

Richard B.Gregg
Creative Commons 3.0 licence

He quoted W.C.Lowdermilk  from a publication of the United States Soil Conservation Service titled 'Conquest of the Land through 7000 Years' :

If civilization is to avoid a long decline such as has blighted North Africa and the Near East for thirteen centuries and for centuries yet to come, society must be born again out of an economy of exploitation into an economy of conservation.

Yet we have gone on merrily with even more extensive and intensive exploitation. 

I have observed how Bangalore and Madras have completely destroyed their  surrounding villages and their ecology in the last 50 years. Most trees have been cut, all the small streams have disappeared, all the lakes have been converted into bus stations, stadia, commercial areas- the remaining ones are highly polluted and dying. All the agricultural lands have been converted into sickening suburbs with all the modern trappings like tarred roads, in various stages of imperfection and ugliness. Recently, the govt declared that Bangalore Rural district was no more rural- the agricultural office was closed down! This is what has happened to all our towns too! Has any one stopped to count the acreage of good agricultural land thus lost?

Most people are not aware that food security comes not just from the amount of food grains grown, but from how they are grown. People have been led to believe in the magic of mechanical-chemical agriculture by the combined lobby of economists-chemical companies- govt, officials and commercial interests. Yet all impartial scientific studies have been showing that:
as the use of chemical fertilizers increases, the number of beneficial soil organisms decreases,plant diseases increase,insect pests increase, the nutritive and keeping quality of  the yield goes down, and farm expenses for fertilizers and insecticides and fungicides increase.

A recent report (28 January 2015) reveals  "worrisome decline of many pollinator species" like bees, which are responsible for up to 40% of the world's supply of nutrients. This decline is clearly associated with the increasing use of all kinds of chemicals in agriculture- fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides,etc- which curiously the report does not make clear.

Unable to bear the conditions ,farmers simply commit suicide. Yet the govt produces statistics to show that we are 'growing' at some percentage. Who measures the growing misery and decline in real food security?  At this rate, we will all live in sky scrapers and  get our food from Mars or Moon, via the PDS! It is clear to all serious students that our soil is going to rack and ruin- a condition that has preceded the decline and collapse of all civilisations so far! Our agricultural lands are shrinking, yet the govt legislates for easy acquisition of lands! Toynbee showed that 21 civilisations destroyed themselves by habitual resort to warfare!  Richard Gregg has shown that the collapse came through war on the soil! Both resulted in ruins of great old civilisations. What is to prevent our going the same way unless we learn the lessons and reverse our steps before the 29th Day!


Note:

These pictures are shown here purely for educational purposes. No commercial motive is involved. I have acknowledged the sources. No violation of copyright is intended. If any objection is conveyed, I will instantly remove them.

LITERATURE-LIGHT AND DELIGHT. 79.SCIENCE FICTION TO SCIENCE AS FICTION

LITERATURE- LIGHT AND DELIGHT

79. SCIENCE FICTION TO SCIENCE AS FICTION 

Carlyle is said to have remarked that a liar begins by making falsehood appear like truth, and ends by making truth itself appear like falsehood. Often I have thought of the scientists in this vein. In the name of science, they called old insights into question, but now science itself cannot say, with certainty, what it is all about!

Scientists write for each other. What a scientist in one discipline writes is not intelligible to others. Specialisation has become so narrow now. It is wrong to call someone a scientist now: there is a physicist, botanist, biologist, zoologist, yes. Where is a complete scientist who can represent 'science' as such? 

No biologist will dare to lecture on physics or chemistry. Yet he will boldly talk on religion- as if he has understood it! What arrogance!

Science is made popular by some great writers and fascinating literature. It is through their writing that the general reader gets some glimpse into the  world of new discoveries and theories. Because of the halo attached to science and scientists, he comes to believe whatever they write. It has become the new gospel for him. Yet, most of what is written is speculation, theory, hypothetical. Nothing is final. We do not know what is "the truth" in science- any branch of science. We only know some one's view of what he considers truth! Like some gangs ruling some localities of cities, these scientists control some seats of learning and establish networks to perpetuate their hold. The opinion of the dominant group becomes the orthodoxy in the field. 

It is simply impossible for the non-specialist to understand what they talk or write in the name of science. We simply cannot make sense out of it.

On 29 January,2015 , TOI, Bangalore carried the following item:

Scientists led by University of Birmingham astero-seismologists have discovered a .....Sun-like star (Kepler-444) hosting five planets with sizes between Mercury and Venus. Kepler-444 was formed 11.2 billion years ago, when the universe was 20% its current age.

  Tiago Campante, from University of Birmingham said: " There are far-reaching implications for this discovery. We now know that Earth-sized planets have formed throughout most of the universe's 13.8 billion year history, which could provide scope for existence of ancient life in the galaxy."

Another Professor, Bill Chaplin,said that these discoveries have "fuelled efforts to find other worlds like Earth and other terrestrial planets outside our solar system."

Now, how many "educated" people can understand what this means? How many non-asteroseismologists among scientists understand this? How many "scientists" from any other faculty can explain the implications of this new discovery?

Yet, we who are non-scientists but are aware of our traditional lore have been aware that our earth is not the only living planet, that our solar system is not the only one, that creation is a continuous process, etc. These scientists have been ridiculing us as superstitious and are now imposing a more absurd, more stupendous superstition on us in the name of "science" which few scientists themselves can understand, outside the system. How to believe that these scientists observed correctly? How to believe that they are telling the truth?

One thing is clear. Science is a serial story, or like the Mega serials we watch on our TVs. There is no finality: Science cannot discover the final truths! It can neither know the first cause! If you ignore these, you can ride the bandwagon of science! Scientists frown upon old dogmas, but merrily go on imposing new ones!

A generation ago, we had great scientists in the true sense, and they were more humble. I quote from one such scientist, a Nobel Laureate. The name is not important. Let us just read what he wrote, over 65 years ago:

• no one scientist is capable of mastering all the techniques indispensable to the study of a single human being.
• Reality is not necessarily clear and simple.
• A phenomenon does not owe its importance to the facility with which scientific techniques can be applied to its study.
• Today there are many scientific workers but very few real scientists.
• the increased number of scientific workers their being split up into groups whose studies are limited to a small subject and over-specialisation have brought about a shrinking of intelligence.
• Modern life is opposed to the life of the mind.
• Human beings are not good subjects for scientific investigation.One does not easily find people with identical characteristics.
• The effects of a certain diet, of an intellectual or moral discipline, of political or social changes, are felt but slowly. It is only after a lapse of thirty or forty years that the value of an educational method can be estimated. Inventors of new systems of diet,physical culture, hygiene, education, morals,social economy, are always too early in publishing the success of their own inventions.
• Between the two sexes there are irrevocable differences. And it is imperative to take them into account in constructing the civilised world. The same intellectual and physical training, and the same ambitions should not be given to young girls as to  boys.
• Females, at any rate among mammals,  seem only  to attain their full development after one or more pregnancies. Women who have no children are not so well balanced. The importance to her of her generative function has not been sufficiently recognised. Such function is indispensable to her optimum development. It is therefore absurd to turn women against maternity.
• Modern man has rejected all discipline of his appetites.
• Civilisation has not succeeded, so far,in creating an environment suitable to mental activities. The supremacy of matter and the dogmas of industrial religion have destroyed culture,beauty and morals. The small social groups, possessing their own individuality and traditions, have also been broken up.
• The intellectual classes have been debased by the immense spread of newspapers,cheap literature, radios and cinema. Unintelligence is becoming more and more general in spite of the excellence of the courses given in schools, colleges, and universities. School children and students form their minds on the silly programmes of public entertainments.
• It is not certain that the standardised habits of modern life lead to the optimum development of human beings. We have applied to man concepts belonging to the mechanical world.
• We must liberate ourselves from blind technology.
• We now possess such a large amount of information that its very immensity prevents us from using it properly. In order to be of service, our knowledge must be synthetic and concise.

Today, which of our scientists is capable of dealing with such matter? All they can do is attack religion, which they have neither studied properly, nor practised systematically.They do not understand either matter or the universe fully, and yet they have no humility or shame to talk against God, religion and all that! 

Sri Eknath Easwaran, that great teacher, explained beautifully:

Light travels at about 1,86,000 miles per second. We know that fact, yet it is quite another thing to understand it.

Imagine ,as young Einstein did, that you travel at the speed of light. It would take only a second and a quarter to reach the moon.

In eight minutes you would reach the sun.You would take four years to reach the nearest star.

You would travel that way for one hundred thousand years and never get out of the Milky Way.Just imagine the expanse!

Then for two million more years (at the speed of light) it is just empty space, until you reach the nearest neighbouring galaxy. There are believed to be two hundred billion galaxies within the "observable universe", each of them containing perhaps a hundred billion suns.

We still do not get the whole picture- we just cannot absorb what these figures mean.Astronomers are so careful to say "the observable universe" because they never see the whole universe.

Worse still, we are seeing things not as they are but as they were.We are looking quite literally at the past. The Crab nebula represents the remains of a supernova explosion observed by the Chinese astronomers in 1054 AD. But the actual explosion took place about 3000BC! Space and time,bound together,inevitably limit and distort the validity of what we can say about the universe.

In the Hindu scriptures we find the provoking statement that this vast cosmos is one thought of the Lord.That is as long as our universe lasts:one thought!

Adapted from: 1000 Names of Vishnu by Sri Eknath Easwaran. Explanation of the name Bhuta-Bhavana.Indian Edition published by Jaico, 1997.

As modern science developed,  it spread doubt about God and religion. Now it it spreading uncertainty about itself: nothing is final., no one is sure of anything any more!

The problem with scientists is not just that they are not humble but that they are not even honest: they do not openly admit the limitations and conditions to which their observations and theories are subject! 

There used to be a class of literature called science fiction. Considering how science itself is developing, beyond all comprehension, of any but the one pursuing it, I wonder whether it is not itself a huge fiction- just someone's thought!



Note:

Update-1.

Just today (1 Feb 2015) there is a news item in TOI, Bangalore edition (p16) announcing: "SCIENTISTS OVERTURN BIG BANG CLAIM". It is an item reproduced from NYT. It says that scientists "have to wait a while longer to find out what kicked it off". I tried to give a gist here, but I can't. It is beyond my comprehension. All I can understand is that there are two groups of scientists, called Bicep and Planck groups, who have now agreed that what was thought to be the most ancient light in the universe has turned out to be interstellar dust, and that scientists "have been wandering in the wilderness for four decades looking for clues to the Beginning." So, the most famous theory in astrophysics is taught without the scientists knowing the beginning! Who knows it is Big Bang or as we say here,in colloquial, just 'bong'!

LITERATURE- LIGHT AND DELIGHT 78. LITERATURE,LANGUAGE AND VIOLENCE.

LITERATURE- LIGHT AND DELIGHT

78. LITERATURE, LANGUAGE AND VIOLENCE

War without violence or violence without war?

We like to think that we know what violence is- after all we have read about the two world wars, the Korean War, Vietnam war, numerous other conflicts in all parts of the globe. We know something about the cold war- though the violence there was not so open, physical . It was more about contentious political and economic philosophies, competing for supremacy. But it was a war for people's minds, and control over their lives. The world is witnessing violence by Jihadis- of the most brutal kind. Nearer home, we saw violence in Sri Lanka. At home, though Mahatma Gandhi is credited with having got our Independence without violence, we have witnessed violence of every kind, on every possible ground since then- language, state border, water-sharing,reservation in jobs, etc.

Violence  has become such a part of our consciousness that we speak of "war" routinely- war against poverty, illiteracy, corruption, war even for peace! In the 60s, one scholar- Krishnalal Shridharani-  even wrote a book on Gandhiji's philosophy calling it "War Without Violence". But thoughtful people used to point out the hidden violence involved in Gandhiji's methods: when he undertook a fast for some cause, did it not amount to forcing people opposed to his way of thinking to embrace his position? It should really be called "violence without war"!

Unseen violence to mind and spirit

We associate violence with some physical assault, and bloodshed. But what about the damage to mind, heart, self-esteem? To personality? To self-expression?

Years ago, I copied down the following in my notebook:

"Who is to say that robbing a people of its language is less violent than war?"

    

 -  Ray Gwyn Smith.

Sadly, I did not note the source.

Subsequently, we read many reports from international agencies that many ancient languages and dialects are facing extinction. 

But we have experienced other kinds of violence relating to language. Some are happening right now.

In our generation, we completed our secondary education through our mother tongue, with English being taught as second language from the 6th standard. The syllabus was simple, small and uncomplicated and we had so much time to learn, think, dream, and absorb- not just cram. Most of us could read  a novel or newspaper, and write at least a page without glaring grammatical errors. The stress was on the basics- just learning to read and write.

When we entered the University, the medium switched to English, mother tongue becoming the second language, even optional in the big cities! This led to rote learning in the science subjects, but the humanities and social sciences called for some linguistic ability and originality. When a hundred fellows wrote about what Newton's laws were, they wrote the same thing, in the same words. But when ten people wrote about Ashoka's change of heart or Akbar's Din Elahi, you got as many versions! This was the pain, and also the fun, of mastering the humanities- you had to master the subject and English both! I would go a step further and say, such people mastered the art of life too! Economics, Political science, History, Philosophy, Literature- they do give a perspective on life. One can bet their theories are mostly speculative and wrong, but they make men! Science makes technicians, automatons, morons!


From English to English medium!

But soon, the craze for English medium started, even from the lower standards. In the convents ,and the schools run by their local imitators, speaking in mother tongue was prohibited during school hours and some schools even imposed fine on children speaking in their language! Today, there is something called pre-school, pre-nursery even before the Kindergarten. And everywhere, they teach in English! Is this not a form of violence we are practising on children- our own children, as we are preventing them from expressing themselves in the natural manner and forcing an alien language on them?

The scene is so confused. The state govts want to impose their language on everyone in the state, when parents do not want it. Central govt.imposes Hindi on everyone, and fools everyone with a three-language formula, when the Hindiwallahs just have to learn their mother tongue and English, while non-Hindi speakers have to learn three by the sheer force of circumstances and the Constitution. January 26 is Republic Day, but it is the day of Hindi Imposition on the South and other non-Hindi areas! This is constitutional violence!

This process involves another violence- the murder of Sanskrit- which it the mother of Indian languages and the source of all Indian thought in all languages of India in all subjects! If the three language formula simply means Mother tongue plus English plus Sanskrit, all Indians will be constitutionally equal- as English and Sanskrit are nobody's mother tongue- and do not confer any unearned advantage on any one! For all practical purposes, two language formula would do: mother tongue and English!

There is a type of violence even in learning English.Which is correct English- English English or American English? In writing, the computer has solved the problem: it will choose the form given the command! Most people are indifferent; even our newspapers are increasingly adopting American. We are so slavishly American, that we do not even use the Indian words for large numbers- it is all million, billion, trillion dollars now- not lakhs, crores of Indian rupees. Even our economists talk of our national income in terms of dollars. Is this not a violence to our national spirit ?

But speaking English creates its own problems- problems of diction, accent, etc.

I was fortunate to listen to the  speeches of Nehru and Rajaji and the lectures of Dr.Radhakrishnan- he did not give speeches, he only lectured! Even a simple inauguration would be scholarly,studded with quotations. Nehru was educated in England and spoke like an Englishman. Dr. Radhakrishnan and Rajaji were more Indian, but each had his distinctive style. Rajaji spoke in measured words, would build up the argument and he spoke from a moral and ethical framework. He spoke English naturally, like an Indian. It was idiomatic, correct and telling in its effect.His speech was like finely-chiseled sculpture. But he was not an orator. That Dr.Radhakrishnan was! He combined such erudition from the lore and literature of East and West, and his language flow was a pravaham- unstoppable flow of such force and majesty. One always felt sorry that he had to stop!

Dr.S.Radhakrishnan


 But the point is, each one had his own style, each one spoke English like an Indian and there was no conscious attempt to imitate any one! They were natural, and naturally Indian. But today, which top-ranking leader can talk like that? And we have got schools to teach us to talk like Americans or the English.

I often wonder if these people have listened to native speakers ever! There is no one standard way of speaking any language anywhere in the world! I was taught English in college by 3 Englishmen- two of them from Oxford. But each had a distinct style and even pronunciation. I asked one of them about Fowler's 'King's English'. He asked me how many people got to talk to the king! Rules about writing were rather strict, as there should be no ambiguity in the expression of fine thoughts, but cultured speech permitted more variations, without degenerating into slang. When we force one standard way of speech or even writing, we are indulging in another kind of violence! But this is practised now in the school system in Tamil Nad! And the odd thing is that they say the pronunciation of Sri Lankan Tamils is best!

When children were sent to the convents or Christian schools, a funny thing happened. Most of the nuns were Keralites- and they had their distinct pronunciation, in Malayalee accent! So the children naturally imbibed this! I am not saying it is wrong. I am just saying it happened this way! After all, do we not feel this when  Jesudas, the Master that he is, sings Hindi songs? It is quite natural. We are told that even Lata Mangeshkar could not pronounce Urdu words properly, and Naushad and others had to train her. And see how differently Rafi and Talat Mahmood pronounce Urdu words- both natural speakers of the language! Don't we enjoy both!

Language is such a lively thing! The variations in writing styles and pronunciation add richness, depth and variety. It sure can lead to some odd situations, but we can learn to enjoy. We called ground nut as 'Kadalakkai' in Tamil in Salem. My wife came from a different part, and she called it 'mallakottai'; the more popular version would be 'mallatai'. And a standard newspaper like Dinamani would give the market rates for 'manila kottai'. Now which one is the right one? 'Olakkai' in our part meant the long  thick wooden pole with iron-clad ends used to dehusk paddy or make beaten rice at home; but this word meant the small iron tool, about  18" long, used for digging earth in the part my wife came from! This we used to call 'Kadappaarai'!  In high school, our Tamil teacher, who came from Tanjore dist and  was a Saiva scholar would confer the title 'Olakkai' on any boy who could not answer a question but would stand erect and still! ( But in writing, it is always spelt "Ulakkai"! This is a peculiarity in Tamil in respect of many words!)
  "Panam" generally meant money in Tamil, but 'a panam' would mean 2 annas in Trichy, and 2.5 annas in Tanjore! Incidentally, this was the salary Vidura was supposed to have recieved in Mahabharata times! And his house was reported to be in a dilapidated condition! (Poor soul! No Vastu consultants were probably available to tell him how a minister 's  house should be!)

Vidura (left) with Dhritarashtra
Gita Press, Gorakhpur


Language is naturally plastic. Let us not do it violence by straight-jacketing it and preventing its naturally   growing  expression and variety!  

LITERATURE-LIGHT AND DELIGHT. 77. LAXMAN REKHA AND NARAYANEEYAM!

LITERATURE- LIGHT AND DELIGHT

77. LAXMAN REKHA AND NARAYANEEYAM !


We know  poetry, prose, drama as the main forms of literature. How many of us have thought of cartoons as literature?

This thought occurred to me with the news of R.K.Laxman's passing. Imagine someone drawing cartoons daily for over 60 years non-stop! Has the world seen another wonder like this?

The cartoon combines the functions of prose, poetry, drama, painting and photograph and surpasses all of them together! A good cartoonist has to be more talented than the creators of any or all of the other forms of literature. Among verbal forms, poetry requires intelligence and understanding on the part of the reader. It has to be explained, annotated. So does a painting require some explanation. A cartoon achieves all this effortlessly. A good cartoon easily surpasses mounds of writing and verbal explanation. When an emaciated road-sider tells  inquisitive onlookers: "I am not fasting,  I am  starving" we know the state of our society after 60 years of Independence. When a pathetic figure lying inside a huge drum  tells the inspecting policeman that  he is "not hiding, but living" there,

 

we know that it is Hindustan Hamara, as Sahir Ludhianvi wrote in 1957 for which the film was not passed by the censors!  ( Cheen-o-arab hamara, Hindustan hamara, raheneko  ghar nahin hain, sara jagah hamara- sara jagah includes the pipeline, road side, railway platform ,drum, ditch, non-working drainage, etc- why not?) How many pages an economist would have written to get this effect? Yet, how many Gunnar Myrdals would be required to make the point? How many eloquent speeches a politician would have made, to no effect? The cartoonist achieves this by a few strokes of the pen or pencil, and a few words, often taken from the context! 

Not that Laxman could or did not write. He was an effective writer, very good at that. May be 30 years ago, I read a feature of his in The Illustrated Weekly of India, describing his travails in obtaining a Canadian visa for visiting the Niagara Falls ,coming from the American side. I thought if the Canadian officials read it, and knew English and consequently understood it, and if they had any sense, they should have committed suicide, or at least tendered an apology, and mended their ways thereafter. But when did we associate sense with officialdom? or how often have we found officials mending themselves?They are there to suck our money, like the leech sucks our blood, and fattens itself! Such was the effect it had on me! I wondered why he did not write more often? Even the uncharitable thought occurred to me : that he did not write, to avoid competing with his more famous brother! But he did write stories, and parts of his own life story!

Not that it would have mattered. R.K.Narayan had his own style. His writing was deceptively simple. He never took sides in a controversy, or indulge in direct social criticism. He captured the lives lived by a certain class of people at  certain points in their lives, and in the life of the nation. He was basically like a social historian, recording things as they were, without distorting, twisting,adding his own colour as mainstream historians tend to do. His characters only gave concrete shape to social realities.I found him really angry only when he dealt with the way the film people mauled his story of The Guide. He would simply paint the verbal picture, and you could draw your conclusion. He was at his emotional best in The English Teacher, and it revealed the heart of the man behind the author, as it was partly autobiographical. It moves the reader so, and a dry eye at the end would only hide a dead heart.It is such subtle, human touches that endear an author to us, not the number of words they have mastered from the dictionary.

In his cartoons, Lakshman was superbly subtle: he made his point, and did not leave one in doubt where his heart and sympathies lay, but did not state in plain  words.  But his writings packed more punch. Narayan's style was understated; Laxman was more frontal. Narayan grew on your consciousness with time, and reflection. Laxman entered it straight.

 TOI was not always available in every place I lived in and worked. So his cartoons could not be seen as and when they appeared. But seen in collected editions of books, their effect is like that of a bomb. If one wants to read about Indian history since Independence, one could read any number of slanted books; but if one wanted to read and understand events as they happened, there is nothing better than Laxman's cartoons. Common Man beats all the literary characters of all the authors down the ages! Stand in Common Man's shoes ( or is it chappals?) and striped coat- you can go anywhere, see everything and conquer the world!

And catch all the crows he has drawn! I bet no photographer could have done that! The Indian philosophical wisdom is that you can understand a tiger only when you become one. Was Laxman a crow in some previous birth that he got so much of their live expressions in those few lines! This is beyond talent, beyond genius. Laxmans are born, God made them like that- no book, no university, no art school. But even God is not so generous in such matters- he made only one Laxman since he created the world!

Both Laxman and Narayan confirm my belief that only those writers who are rooted in their culture can best represent and serve humanity- like a Dickens, Hardy,Mark Twain, Leo Tolstoy! They live on the local soil, but their mind is pervaded by a universal spirit! The expression is local, the interest universal! Hunger is universal, but is best satisfied by local food!

Both Narayan and Laxman died at 94!

It is heartening that Maharashtra Govt recognised the greatness of this distinguished and unique son of India and accorded  State honours at his funeral. It is heartening that it has said it would raise a memorial for him- an honour denied to his illustrious brother by the Karnataka govt, guided by chauvinist linguistic elements.

I have beautiful hardbound volumes of Narayan's books in Everyman's Library editions- though we grew up with the editions of Indian Thought Publications, which were low-priced but decent. As yet, Laxman's books are only available in flimsy paperbacks- that insult to human intelligence and sensitivity. I hope some sensible and sensitive publisher honours Laxman with nice hardbound volumes, and thus honour themselves,too.

Note:

I have shown these cartoons here purely for information/educational purposes. No profit motive is involved. I do not intend to violate any copyright rules. If there is any objection from any quarters, I will not hesitate to remove them. 

LITERATURE-LIGHT AND DELIGHT 76. LEADERSHIP AND EDUCATION

LITERATURE- LIGHT AND DELIGHT

76. LEADERSHIP AND EDUCATION

Great leaders are educators- not so much in words, as by example.They don't teach formally- their lives do- naturally.

Gandhi and Adam Smith

Mahatma Gandhi taught- both by example and in words. An important aspect of his life was the volume of his writing. He wrote on many things, always clarifying the point and making his approach clear. On Swadeshi, Khadi, Swaraj, evils of drinking, nature cure, education (nayi talim) he kept on writing and educating us all his life. 

The other thing he taught us by his example was that you can really serve the society from wherever you are, even when you do not have official position or power. Just by choosing the ways you spend your money, you can enrich or impoverish your immediate society. This was his definition of Swadeshi.  He said we cannot serve the country- we are small, our capacity limited. But we can serve our neighbour- no one was too small for that. This is the real meaning of swadeshi.He gave us a practical formula for this: Recall the face of the poorest person you saw. Ask yourself whether the money you are about to spend would help him. We have learned all the words, but forgotten the formula, and neglected to follow it in practice.

Just contrast this with the wisdom propounded by Adam Smith as the foundation of a market economy: 

In civilized society he (man) stands at all times in need of the co-operation and assistance of great multitudes, while his whole life is scarce sufficient to gain the friendship of a few persons.......But man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren, and it is in vain for him to expect it out of their benevolence only. He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love in his favour.... It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer,or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity  but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages.

The Wealth of Nations: Book I, Chapter II


Today, we follow neither Adam Smith, nor the Mahatma!

After Gandhi, Rajaji!

After Gandhiji, it is only Rajaji who wrote to educate the public on matters of national importance. And he wrote over many years, week after week, till about a week before he died at 93! He came back from Delhi in 50 and retold the itihasas in Tamil for general readers . But Sri Prakasa as governor brought him back  to  active politics  to steer Madras as CM  in 1952  ( when he was 73),when Kamaraj as TNCC president had felt unequal to deal with the communists and the strong Telugu contingent. 'Malignant stars have brought me into politics again' he said. This proved prophetic as he had to resign in two years in the face of a controversy over his educational policy. Kamaraj had said that he could give up the educational policy and continue as CM, but Rajaji said that he had brought in the policy after careful thought in the interest of the people and he would not cling to the post by giving it up. I personally felt that for once, Rajaji  was not right. He could have introduced the policy, changing the name and some of the explanations he gave. He certainly did not read the signs of the times, in Madras. I wondered whether he had lost his famous foresight. C.Subramaniam, his trusted lieutenant and loyalist , said that Rajaji had also committed a strategic and tactical blunder in introducing the policy without a discussion in the cabinet! Those were the days when parliamentary procedures were respected and followed! ( not the days of Amma, when the  cabinet is a bunch of pages). I really wonder what made Rajaji do it , in that manner! After all, politics is the art of the possible. Diplomacy is necessary even for good things. As a lawyer, surely Rajaji knew that bad advocacy can spoil a good case!

But 1954 also saw the birth of another Rajaji. The man who joined the Mahatma and built up the congress in Madras now rose against it on an all-India basis. He rose against the Avadi resolution of Socialist Pattern. After writing about it individually for some years, he started the Swatantra Party in 59 when some noted all-India figures joined him. He relentlessly analysed and criticised the economic policies of Nehru, his megalomania, the political totalitarianism it was heading into, the absurd foreign policy-  every aspect of the Nehru regime. It was unfortunate that two notable figures of the time- J.P Narayan and J.B Kripalani did not understand him and join him then- it took 15 years more and the Emergency for them to realise the truth of what Rajaji had been writing. They later admitted their fault. Even Lohia the socialist once regretted that he had not joined forces with Rajaji! And it took 30 years and economic bankruptcy for the congress govt to realise the truth of the economic analysis of Rajaji!

In between, Rajaji also opposed the imposition of Hindi in Madras. Here too , there was an irony. In 37,he had himself introduced Hindi in Madras and become unpopular among the general public there, Now, 30 years later, he opposed Hindi and became unpopular in the North! He had opposed the linguistic division of states and the creation of Andhra and also the naming of Madras as its capital! He had given a formula on Pakistan which no one liked. He had opposed Quit  India and become unpopular and congressmen never forgave him for that!  To a casual reader, it would appear that he was contradicting himself and burning his politcal boats periodically! Who would have the patience to understand the evolution of his thoughts in response to changing situations? Who would understand that consistency was the hobgoblin of little minds? But he also got new boats as he burned the old. The opposition to statism, to permit-licence-quota-raj and a turn towards a free economy was the last boat he steered. This was the policy adopted in 1991 in the name of Reforms, though it is still halting and half-hearted and at times looks phoney!

Rajaji wrote regularly on all these current issues. He found time to read other serious literature and wrote about them . He wrote about world issues. He wrote about personalities. A two-volume collection of his writings under the title 'Satyameva Jayate' was brought about some years ago.It is not available now. His writing was not polemical.It was not negative- though criticism and he always made constructive suggestions. Herein lies the educational value  of his writing.

But one caution is necessary. Once, delivering an address in Pune, he said that just as a coal miner did not understand the chemical properties of coal, Gandhian workers had not understood the real value of Gandhian thought! In his own case the thought is there but times have changed. Free enterprise is not today what it was in his days! Market economy does not function on the basis of competition. Technology is such that small and medium enterprises cannot survive today. Govt.-big business nexus is the reality of economic life. Economic independence of nations has been swallowed by the new world economic order. The mega forces controlling the world economy are invisible,not fully understood and beyond the control of national govts. So, even the most ardent admirer of Rajaji cannot advocate an unconditional adoption of his recommendations now, just as many ideas of Gandhi himself are outdated. But we can certainly learn from them. 

Knowledge and responsibility

 Knowledge imposes a burden- of responsibility. In the 70s, the official khadi establishment came up with "polyvastra"- a blend of polyester with cotton, woven in the khadi channels. I had long been a student of Gandhi, and knew his basic definition of Khadi: hand-spun and hand-woven natural cotton (or woollen) fabric. How could the synthetic polyester be brought under  the khadi name? I was in Ahmedabad then, visiting Gandhi's Sabarmati Ashram every alternate day. I could not stomach this. I wrote to Navjivan Trust, and the KVIC that this was a misuse of the khadi name, that they were doing injustice to Gandhiji. Some reply I got from one of them,saying khadi was not getting popular, that it had to be promoted, that polyester was being increasingly used by people and so, using it with cotton under khadi would promote its use! I said that   khadi  had been defined by Gandhiji and we could not fool around with it;he would certainly not have approved of polyester, as it was a chemical product, not a natural fibre, hand spun, as defined by Gandhi. There was no response from them!

Gandhiji had created the entire Khadi movement as a voluntary private initiative of free individuals,without official patronage or support; after Independence, it became a govt. outfit and lost its orientation! We failed to learn from Gandhiji.

Learning on the job

In 35 years of service, I attended many training programs, seminars,workshops, etc on motivation, leadership and so on. I heard so many people speak, some eloquently. But I did not meet managers or bosses or executives who actually were leaders and exhibited leadership qualities- either in the govt or in the PSUs- except two individuals.

Both of them were my bosses- ten years apart. Both of them were not given much to talking. But each action of theirs and interaction with them was a learning situation. The message went in, quietly. They lived their principles.

One was about to retire in a few months. He was only an old matriculate, but with sound knowledge and language. He taught me to treat the employees fairly, never to take advantage of their weakness, never to use office position to settle personal scores,never to use flowery language when simple things would do, be simple and direct in notings.He taught me the meaning of 'effective communication'.

It came about this way.

His youngest son was in the 10th or or standard and daily he would visit him in the office. The boss would give him some work and keep him busy. One day he came with an assignment to write an essay on some subject to submit to school. The boss asked me to write something to help the boy. I took it as an opportunity to impress the boss, and wrote a big essay, giving all the quotations I could bring in, using the choicest language. The boss read it and said: 'you were asked to write something to help a boy in the 10th std, but you tried to show what you knew.. Will the boy understand? What is the point in writing something when the person for whom it is intended cannot understand? Do not use a big or difficult word, when a simple one would do. Address the person and his needs.Do not exhibit your knowledge unnecessarily.' I learned what communication meant. Never again did I repeat the mistake.

This boss  taught me the importance of following correct procedures under all circumstances. Once an employee was found to have committed a grave error. He was a good worker with a clean record of 20 years. His department head wanted to help him and so did not want to report the matter in writing. I was handling personnel matters and so told me his position. I saw the service file of the employee and agreed with the  officer that the employee had good track record and deserved sympathy. We both went to the boss and reported the matter. He did not agree and asked the officer to record the incident and submit the report as required under the rules. After he left, he told me: 'You are young and inexperienced. You are right in pleading for an employee with a good record, over an honest error. But you should do it in the proper manner. Follow the procedure, go through the disciplinary proceedings. But since I am the final authority, submit to me for lenient treatment in the light of past record. On the contrary, if  the matter is not reported, it would set a precedent and even serious cases may be suppressed. It would be cited by the union in other cases, even where leniency was not justified. You would also be compromising your position and become vulnerable.' Over the next 30 years of service I realised the truth of this.There are enough ways to do good and render justice, even while following the rules!

This boss also taught me what was magnanimity-forgiveness, Christian forgiveness. He was a disciplinarian and had initiated some proceedings against some employees. The union took it up and issued circulars against him, some of which were objectionable in language and content. He initiated defamation proceedings in court. The employees' lawyers knew that there was a case, and its consequences. In league with the boss's own lawyers, they managed to drag the proceedings  till the last day of his service! On that day, the judge was to deliver his verdict. In the court, he told the boss that  the charges were proved and enquired what would be the official line if the verdict was delivered. The boss said that it was a criminal case and if the employees were found guilty, they could even be dismissed from service.The lawyers knew it of course, and there was a hush . Then the boss added: 'My lord, I am retiring today. The boys are young and do not know. I don't want the boys to lose their service, but I want them not to do such a thing in future to anyone. If they apologise even now, I am prepared to withdraw the case.' The boys were brash, and adamant but the lawyers persuaded them to realise the consequences and apologise. They did. The judge allowed the case to be withdrawn, with the advice that the union should issue a circular about the apology.

The other boss taught me to groom subordinates, to delegate authority, to be innovative on the job, to exercise judgement and take decisions and face the consequences boldly. 'If you take a hundred decisions some are bound to go wrong- that is how it works; but taking decision is the only way to take correct decisions. Don't fear- the system will protect honest mistakes.' He also taught me that powers should be delegated to subordinates after ascertaining their suitability ,  but once delegated, I should not needlessly interfere and undermine their confidence or authority. He himself demonstrated this in two vital cases.  

Once a delegation of local chamber of commerce came to meet him over a matter which pertained to my dept. He was the boss and could certainly have handled them. Instead, he received them, talked to them nicely  and told them: "Gentleman, so and so is the officer handling this matter. You can meet him and have the thing sorted out'. So he sent them on to me; and before they came, he told me on the intercom about it and also advised me: ' I have sent them to you because you are handling this subject. I have no interest.Handle it your own way, take your own decision.' One can realise how much this would have enhanced my standing in the eyes of the Chamber! And how much it  enhanced by responsibility! How many bosses would do it , when they want to corner all the 'glory'?

The other occasion was when there was a labour problem in my division. The union found that I would not yield, stopped work and nothing moved in the dept. up to 4p.m. The union leaders then went to the boss. He was then leaving for Delhi for official work. The union wanted him to intervene and tell me what to do. He would have nothing of it. 'He is dealing with the matter and settle with him'. He left for the airport, but on the way, he stopped somewhere and telephoned me: 'The union boys came to me as I was leaving. But this is your subject and I do not want to interfere or influence you. You know the matter better and take your decision.' Again, how much this would have boosted my standing in the union! This also made me aware that now I had the added responsibility of the interests of the boss! Above all, while he left the decision to me, he hept his position as the final, appellate authority!

Incidentally, both these bosses were Christians- one Goan, one Mangalorean, from traditional families. They were good, practising Christians, but not  outwardly showy. In 35 years' service, I worked under many bosses, but did not meet others like them. There were many pious and outwardly religious people, but not 'leaders'. They have been my teachers and mentors.

Marrying a ghost!

There is a saying with us that if you marry a ghost, you cannot refuse to climb  the drum-stick tree! May be, we would call it occupational hazard, now.

One aspect ( or problem) of rising in the hierarchy is the duty to entertain and be entertained. It involved groups, and at times individuals.The hardest part was to entertain non-vegetarians, and also those with drinking habits. 

This was particularly hard for me. I had passed up an opportunity to join the private sector soon after college because of this very problem.

I was liked by my college teachers and principals. Once, just as the final M.A exams were over and I was preparing to leave the hostel, the principal, Fr.T.A.Mathias sent for me. As I went to his quarters, I found another person sitting there at the table, and we had tea. Then, father told him : "this is the one I was talking to you about." We then had some discussion for some time on current economic issues and developments. I was a strong advocate of free enterprise (from a theoretical angle), against planning, admirer of constitutional monarchy of the British type, liked English classical poets. I did not know who the person was, and it was impolite to ask; since I was in the presence of the principal, I had to impress him! So, I went on talking on all these subjects, at my argumentative, passionate best! About an hour later, we had another round of tea and I was granted leave to leave. The next morning , the principal sent for me again. He told me: " You idiot, you did not know who he was and went on talking! He had wanted to ask you certain things, but you did not give him much chance! Luckily, he liked the subjects, though not the vehemence and the passion with which you spoke! He is my brother Thomas, General Manager with Hindustan Lever. You may say, he sort of interviewed you! He asked you to apply for a position as executive trainee with them , as soon as your results are out. He is arranging to send you the form. He said he will get you the interview up to the GM level- beyond that will be on your performance. But learn to talk less." Well, I got the form in a few days. But as I went through, I realised I had to develop lot of 'socialising' skills. It also involved adopting certain Westernised ways.I was basically a loner, happy with books and limited company.And I was a nationalist, not withstanding my liking for English Constitution and literature! So I did not apply!I can't say who lost in the bargain- me or Hindustan Lever! It  happened  50 years ago but looks like yesterday!

So, it was now ironical that after 25-30 years, I had to develop those very social skills- partying and all that meant! I missed most parties, attended the unavoidable ones in my official role. In the process I met some remarkable men. 

Once in a Delhi party, I was standing in a corner, with a glass of soft drink. How many  could  one have in that intensely cold AC hall? I had to hold one as long as I could, pretending to sip but not swallowing- so that they would not keep filling! I did not know, but one person had been watching me! He came over, and we fell to talking. I found out that he was also a teetotaller, and had been seeking a kindred spirit! We discovered many common interests. He was heading a management training institute and later gave me opportunities to lecture there!

The other incident was at Bhubaneswar. There was an All-India conference of some trade associations and I was asked to represent my institution. I wanted to avoid, knowing what such things involved, but my boss, who rather liked me,  and whom I respected, said: 'You fellow, you refuse to go abroad. You should at least go here. These are opportunities for you to meet people outside your own field , and also to project a proper image of the organisation. Put up with small inconveniences, but go.'

So I went. It was a grand,gala affair, in the Krishna Oberoi.  The mornings would be taken up with business matters; in the evening there would be cultural programs. One evening, there was a Hindustani flute recital. I went there , but the attendance was rather thin. I sat in a corner. I did not know anything about Hindustani music, but the artist was playing Desh raga- one of the only two or three I could identify! I was enjoying thoroughly, with all the body gestures as I was sitting unobserved- so I thought! I was wrong- some one had been observing me! He came over and started talking about music. I knew he was a delegate to the conference, but nothing more. He was surprised that a South Indian was enjoying Hindustani music.I said it was the only raga I could readily identify and so was enjoying. He then said that Hindustani music gave large scope for improvisation, whereas Carnatic music was lyric-based and restricted the scope. I did not want to leave, though I really did not know much about any music. I gave my impression. I told him, the essence of music was to experience the rasa of bhava; that there was both raga bhava and sahitya bhava; that while Hindustani rasikas could only enjoy the raga, we could enjoy both. Then I told him improvisation consisted in delineating the raga where good artists had their own styles, that even the Sahitya was not interpreted in the same way by all and these gave scope for manodharma and improvisation. Finally, I said as if I had discovered, that Hindustani music was majestic and went up in endless tiers of swara- like a temple tower. But where was the murti? I said the murti was found only in Carnatic music, with its Sahitya! If one followed the lyrics and their meaning, there certainly was a sense of completion or purnam, whereas in Hindustani music it was all swara play and it could go on endlessly, without leaving a sense of completion! He just stared at me , smiled and said I should get some acquaintance with Hindustani music to appreciate its beauty and superiority!

 It was now past dinner time and he asked why I had not gone for dinner. I told him that the food there was mostly non-vegetarian, and I found it difficult to get vegetarian items I liked and so I skipped it. He told me he too was a vegetarian and experienced the same difficulty. But he was a businessman travelling all over the world and so he would always carry something from home! He invited me to his room. There we shared some Gujarati items! All along, we had not introduced ourselves! Now at parting we exchanged cards. His read: Arvind Parikh. And the company name. 

On reaching my place, I found a packet waiting for me. It was an LP record of a Sitar recital by - Arvind Parikh, autographed by him! I got a shock! My God! He was trained Hindustani Pandit, disciple of Ustad Vilayat Khan! and I had been showing my ignorance before him! And he was also chairman of a company! But what humility and greatness on his part! He revealed neither during the conversation! The corporate world hides some great gems!

Networking

One thing is for sure. In service or business, it is good to know  and cultivate people- what is called net-working. It may look silly, but certain things like smoking, having a drink, playing cards together, etc do promote a sense of closeness. A smoker always enjoys the company of another- etiquette requires that one offers a cigarette to the other person first; moderate drinkers always enjoy company of each other. Such associations last. It is only the IAS cadre that is closely knit without any of these- because they have raw power which binds them. I often feel it works like the mafia.

This is the value of sending your children to a famous college. The education standard may be poor ( where is it high, any way?)  but it affords great opportunities to get to know people who will be somebody some day.

One middle-level manager I knew used to tell us that he was career minded, which meant boss-minded. He would manage to handle matters which brought him into frequent contact with the boss  and do things the boss liked. He was sure of himself. He left one organisation and joined another, on a rise. Later he became the chairman of a PSU. I found that he had class-mates who had joined the IAS, and they would somehow ensure that he too got a rise periodically like them! I know how bank chairmen used to cringe before Dy.Secretaries! This is not networking,though! And it used to do rounds in banking circles: those officials of banks posted to Delhi in their regional/zonal offices  as DGMs/AGMs would get selected as EDs faster! But I can say on experience that progress in career in PSU does not depend on merit. Merit cannot be objectively defined or properly assessed. It sure helps to have godfathers in the ministry- as no PSU is really autonomous even in internal matters. Only that helps, or luck or karma! The Indian insight is: Padavi Purvapunyanam! Once we understand this, we will take things in our stride, and have no regrets!