Writing, Is? Fun!

Garvam - Tamil Short Story

2012-01-12T19:22:00.001-08:00

This was written back in 2004. It was published in a short story collection called Vaanavil Koottam.

கர்வம்
----------
இரா.இராமையா

"திருநாவுக்கரசரை மன்னன் சுண்ணாம்புக் காளவாயில்
தூக்கிப் போட்ட போது அவர் 'மாசில் வீணையும் மாலை மதியமும்'",
என்று அந்தப் பெண் ராகம் போட்டுப் பாடுவதை நான் வெறுப்புடன்
கேட்டுக் கொண்டிருந்தேன்.
இரவு எட்டரை மணிக்கு 'நீங்கள் கேட்ட பாடல்' கேட்கத்
தயாராக வந்து ரிமோட்டைக் கையில் எடுத்த போது இந்தப் பெண்
வீட்டுக்குள் வந்தது. அப்பொழுதே எனக்குத் தெரியும்.. தலைவலி
தொடங்கி விட்டது.
ஒவ்வொரு வருடமும் ஆகஸ்ட், செப்டம்பர் மாதங்களில்
பள்ளிக் கூடங்கள் நிறையப் பேச்சுப் போட்டிகள் நடத்துகின்றன. எங்கள்
வீட்டுக்குப் பின்னால் உள்ள பள்ளியில் திருநாவுக்கரசர் என்னும் அப்பர்
பெருமானைப் பற்றி ஒவ்வொரு வருடமும் பேச்சுப் போட்டி நடக்கிறது.
ஒவ்வொரு வருடமும் என் மனைவியிடம் பள்ளி மாணவிகள் யாராவது
வருவார்கள். முக்கால் வாசி அந்த மாணவிகளின் தாய்மார்கள் அவர்களைத்
தரதரவென்று இழுத்து வருவார்கள். அந்த மாணவிகள் யாருக்கும் பேச்சுப்
போட்டியில் பெயர் பெற வேண்டும் என்ற ஆசை இருப்பதாகத் தெரியவில்லை.
பெயரைக் கேட்டால் கூடத் தொண்டைக்குள் முணுமுணுக்கும். அம்மா பின்னால்
ஒளிந்து கொண்டு வரும் இந்த மாணவிகளை அவர்கள் தாய்மார்கள் அறிமுகம்
செய்விப்பதே எனக்குச் சிரிப்பு வரும்.
"நல்லா பேசுவா..கொஞ்சம் டிரெயினிங் மட்டும் இருந்தா."
"உம் பெயர் என்னம்மா?" என்று கேட்பாள் என் மனைவி.
அந்தப் பெண் சும்மா இருக்கும்.
"பேரு என்னன்னு கேக்குறாங்கள்ள..சொல்லேன்" என்று அந்தத்
தாய் கண்ணை உருட்டிப் பல்லைக் கடித்தவாறே சொல்வாள்.
"சுவாதி" என்று அந்தப் பெண் முனகும்.
நானாக இருந்தால் 'நீச்சல் போட்டி, ஓட்டப் பந்தயம் வேறு
எதுவும் இல்லையா?' என்று கேட்டிருப்பேன். ஆனால் என் மனைவியோ
புன்னகை மாறாமல் பேசுவாள். சில நாட்கள் சென்ற பிறகு அந்தப் பெண்
கையை ஆட்டிக் காலை ஆட்டி ஒரு சிறு நடனமே ஆடிப் பேசும்படிச்
செய்து விடுவாள்.
திருநாவுக்கரசரின் வாழ்க்கையில் ஒவ்வொரு சுவை மிகு
திருப்பமும் எனக்கு இப்போது மனப்பாடம். சில சமயங்களில் இந்தப்
பேச்சுப் போட்டிகளில் நானே கலந்து கொண்டு வெற்றி பெறலாம்
என்று தோன்றும்.
நான் சற்று அந்தப் பெண்ணின் நடவடிக்கைகளில் கவனம்
செலுத்த முயற்சி செய்தேன்.
ஒன்பதாம் வகுப்புப் படிக்கும் மாணவி அவள். அவள்
கண்களில் கூச்சம் தெரிந்தது. நான் கவனிப்பதைப் பார்த்து இன்னும்
சிறிது கூச்சப்பட்டாள். அவள் குரல் கீச், மூச்சென்று இருந்தது. சிறிது
நேரம் கேட்டால் தலை வலித்தது. என்னத்தைப் பேசி ஜெயிக்கப்
போகிறதோ.
எனக்கு என் மனைவி மேல் சிறிது இரக்கம் வந்தது.
அப்பரையும் தேவாரத்தையும் சுந்தரமூர்த்திப் பெருமானையும் பற்றி
இவளுக்கு என்ன தெரியும். எட்டாம் வகுப்புக்கு மேல் படிக்கவில்லை.
அவள் எழுதும் பேச்சுக்கள் எப்படித் தான் பரிசு பெறுகின்றனவோ.
அவளது தமிழ் சிறிது கொச்சையாக இருந்தது. அவளின் மொத்தத்
தமிழறிவும் சாண்டில்யன் மற்றும் லஷ்மியின் நாவல்களை நிறையப்
படித்ததன் விளைவு தான் என்பது என் அபிப்ராயம்.
இதையெல்லாம் பற்றி இந்தப் பேச்சுப் போட்டிகளில்
நீதிபதிகள் கவலைப்பட்ட மாதிரி தெரியவில்லை. மீண்டும்
மீண்டும் முதல் பரிசை என் மனைவியின் சிஷ்யைகளுக்கே
அளித்தார்கள்.
அந்தப் பெண் மிலிட்டரி போல அட்டென்ஷனில்
விறைப்பாக நின்றபடிப் பேசியது. "இறைவனுக்கு ஒரு நண்பன்
தேவைப்பட்டான். நாவுக்கரசரை ஆட்கொண்டான்."
'நீங்கள் கேட்ட பாடல்' முடிந்திருக்கும்.
********************************
செப்டம்பர் மாதம் முடியும் சமயம். என் மனைவியின்
தம்பி சென்னையில் எங்கள் வீட்டிற்கு வந்திருந்தான்.
அருமையாகச் சாப்பிட்டு விட்டு எல்லோரும் மொட்டை
மாடியில் காற்று வாங்கிக் கொண்டும் கொசுக்களை அடித்துக் கொண்டும்
உட்கார்ந்திருந்தோம். மற்ற ஃபிளாட்களில் இருந்து டி.வியின் அலறலும்
கீழே இருட்டு நேர கிரிக்கெட் விளையாட்டின் பல்வேறு கூக்குரல்களும் கலந்து
கேட்டன. நுங்கம்பாக்கத்தில் நகரச் சத்தங்கள் அதிகமாக இருக்கிறது என்று
தாம்பரத்திற்கு ஃபிளாட் வாங்கிக் கொண்டு வந்தோம். மற்றவர்களும் இதே
நினைப்புடன் இங்கு வருவார்கள் என்று அப்போது எனக்குத் தெரியாமல்
போயிற்று.
"கலா, நீ என்ன பண்ற பொழுது போக?" என்று என் மனைவியைக்
கேட்டான் அவள் தம்பி.
"எங்க ரெண்டு பேருக்கும் என்ன? டி.வி. பார்ப்போம்; பேசிட்டு
இருப்போம்", என்றாள் கலா.
"நான் இல்ல; அவ தான் பேசுவா", என்றேன் நான்.
தூரத்தில் எங்கிருந்தோ சீர்காழி கோவிந்தராஜன் பாடுவது
கேட்டது.
"ரெண்டு பேரும் ரெண்டாவது ஹனிமூன் போயிட்டு வரது தான
எங்கயாவது?"
"நானும் யோசிச்சிட்டிருக்கேன். ரொம்ப நாளா ராஜஸ்தான்லாம்
பாக்கணும்னு ஆசை", என்றாள் கலா.
இதற்குப் பிறகு துவாரகை, காசி, தில்லி என்று பார்க்க வேண்டிய
இடங்களைப் பற்றி அக்காவும் தம்பியும் மாறி மாறிப் பட்டியலிட்டார்கள்.
கடைசியாக காக்ஷ்மீர் போகலாம் என்று முடிவெடுத்து விட்டு என்னைப்
பார்த்தார்கள்.
"நான் வரலை", என்றேன்.
"என்ன இப்பிடிச் சொல்றீங்க? தனியா கலா மட்டும் எப்பிடி
ஹனிமூன் போவா?" என்று கேட்டான் தம்பி.
கலா என்னையே பார்த்தாள்.
"எனக்குக் கொஞ்ச நாள் தனியா இருக்கணும் போல இருக்கு."
தம்பி கலகலவென்று சிரித்தான். நாங்கள் இருவரும்
சிரிக்கவில்லை.
"எனக்கும் கூடத் தான் தனியா இருக்கணும் போல இருக்கு",
என்றாள் கலா.
"எனக்கு ஓ.கே", என்றேன் நான்.
கலா தம்பியைப் பார்த்து, "நான் உன் வீட்டுக்கு வந்து இருக்கேனே",
என்றாள்.
"சும்மா இரு கலா. இந்த வயசுல பாத்ரூமுக்கே ரெண்டு பேரும்
சேர்ந்து தான் போகணும்..", என்றான் தம்பி.
நான் சற்று சமாதானமாக, "கலா, நான் சும்மா தான் சொன்னேன்",
என்றேன்.
"நான் நிஜமாத் தான் சொல்றேன்", என்றாள் கலா.
தம்பி தமிழர்களின் வழக்கமான கவலையுடன், "நீங்க சாப்பாட்டுக்கு
என்ன செய்யப் போறீங்க?", என்று என்னிடம் கேட்டான்.
"எனக்கு சந்நியாச ராசின்னு சின்ன வயசுல ஜோசியர் சொல்லிருக்கார்.
என்க்குத் தனியா இருக்கப் பிடிக்கும்; முடியும். கல்கத்தால இருந்த போது.."
"கல்கத்தா கதை வேண்டாமே.." என்றாள் கலா.
*********************************************

ஒரு வாரத்தில் கலா கிளம்பிப் போய் விட, நான் பாச்சலர் வாழ்க்கையைத்
துவக்கினேன்.
பல நாட்களாக இந்த வாழ்க்கையைப் பற்றிக் கற்பனை செய்திருக்கிறேன்.
என் மனக் கனவுகளில் நான் இஷ்டம் போல வெளியே சுற்றுவேன். நிறைய வாக்கிங்
போவேன். சத்தமாகப் பாட்டுக் கேட்பேன். செகண்ட் ஷோ படம் பார்ப்பேன். பெசண்ட்
நகர் பீச்சில் இரவு ஒரு மணி வரை அலைகள் அலசும் மணலில் அமர்ந்து தியானம்
செய்வேன்.
இதைத் தவிர நிம்மதியாக 'நீங்கள் கேட்ட பாடல்' பார்ப்பேன்.
சமையல் செய்வது உற்சாகமாக இருந்தது. கலா போவதற்கு முன்னால்
எல்லா டப்பாக்களிலும் 'அரிசி','உப்பு','புளி' என்று எழுதி ஒட்டி விட்டுப்
போயிருந்தாள். முதல் நாள் முனைப்பாக பொரியல், கூட்டு, அப்பளம், குழம்பு,
ரசம் என்று விஸ்தாரமாக சமைத்தேன். பிறகு குழம்பு, பொரியல் என்று இறங்கி
வந்து கடைசியில் மூன்று நாட்கள் தொடர்ந்து மோர் சாதமும் ஊறுகாயும் சாப்பிட்டு
நாக்கு உணர்விழந்து போயிற்று. பக்கத்து வீட்டில் தாளிக்கும் சத்தம் கேட்டாலே
இரைக்க இரைக்க ஓடி அவர்கள் வீட்டு வாசலில் நிற்க வேண்டும் என்று
தோன்றியது.
முதலில் அக்கம் பக்கத்து வீடுகளில் 'பாவம் கிழவர் தனியாக
இருக்கிறாரே' என்று சாப்பாடு கொடுத்தனுப்ப முயற்சி செய்தார்கள். வீராப்பாக
'வேண்டாம்' என்று மறுத்தேன். யாராவது ஒருவராவது மறுபடி கேட்கக் கூடாதா?
செகண்ட் ஷோ சினிமா பார்க்கச் செல்ல நினைத்த போதே திரும்ப
வர பஸ் கிடைக்குமா என்பதில் இருந்து சாப்பிட வேண்டிய மாத்திரைகளை
எடுத்துக் கொள்வது வரை எல்லாமே கவலை மயம். கடைசியில் தேவி
தியேட்டரில் நான் பார்க்க விரும்பிய படங்கள் எதுவும் ஓடவில்லை என்பதை
அறிந்து நிம்மதிப் பெருமூச்சு விட்டேன்.
பெசண்ட் நகர் பீச் போனால் வாடைக் காற்று ஒத்துக் கொள்ளாது
என்று தோன்றியது.

******************************************

பக்கத்து வீட்டுச் சிறுவர்கள் விளையாடுவதை ஆவலுடன்
பார்த்துக் கொண்டிருந்தேன். திண்ணைகளில் பெண்கள் அமர்ந்து பேசிக்
கொண்டிருந்தார்கள். அவர்களுடன் பொதுவாகக் கலாவும் அமர்ந்திருப்பாள்.
ஒவ்வொரு நாளும் என்ன தான் பேசுவார்களோ என்று தோன்றும். இன்று
எனக்கும் அவர்களுடன் உட்கார வேண்டும் என்று தோன்றியது. கலாவுடன்
எதைப் பற்றி வேண்டுமானாலும் பேசலாம். எல்லாவற்றைப் பற்றியும்
அவளுக்கு ஒரு கருத்து உண்டு.
எதிர் வீட்டுப் பையன் வீட்டை விட்டு விடுவிடுவென்று வெளியே
வந்தான்.
"டேய் என்ன..ஸ்கூல்லாம் எப்பிடிப் போவுது?" என்று கேட்டேன்.
"நல்லாப் போவுது தாத்தா", என்று விட்டுத் திரும்பினான்.
"டேய்..நில்லுடா.."
அவன் சலிப்புடன் திரும்பிப் பார்த்தான். கிரிக்கெட்டிற்கு டீம்
பிரிப்பதற்குள் போக வேண்டும்.
"நல்ல மார்க் வாங்குறியா?"
"ம்"
"எதாவது சினிமா பாத்தியா?"
"ம்"
"என்ன படம் பாத்த?"
"ராத்திரி வீட்டுக்கு வரேன் தாத்தா..எல்லாம் நிறையப் பேசலாம்",
என்று ஓடி விட்டான்.
நிஜமாகவே சொல்கிறான் என்று நினைத்து இரவு பத்து மணி
வரை காத்திருந்தேன். அவன் வரவேயில்லை.
மறு நாள் அகிலா வந்து சேர்ந்தாள்.

**********************************

"கலா மேடம் இருக்காங்களா?"
நான் பேப்பர் படித்துக் கொண்டிருந்தேன். நிமிர்ந்து பார்த்தேன்.
வாசலில் ஒரு நடுத்தர வயதுப் பெண் நின்று கொண்டிருந்தாள். அவள் அருகே
ஒரு பதினைந்து வயது மதிக்கத்தக்க பள்ளி மாணவி.
"நீங்க யாரு? என்ன விஷயம்?"
"என் பேரு சரோஜா. பக்கத்துல கம்பர் தெருல இருக்கேன். கலா மேடம்
இல்லையா?"
"கலா இல்லை. என்ன விஷயம் சொல்லுங்க. உள்ள வந்து
உட்காருங்களேன்."
நான் இருந்த மூடில் அவர்களைச் சாப்பிடக் கூப்பிடலாமா என்று
கூட யோசித்தேன்.
அவர்கள் தயக்கத்துடன் வீட்டிற்குள் வந்தார்கள். அந்த மாணவி
இரட்டைப் பின்னல் பின்னியிருந்தாள். தைரியமாக வீட்டைச் சுற்றிப் பார்த்து
அளவிட்டாள்.
"இவளுக்கு ஸ்கூல்ல ஒரு பேச்சுப் போட்டி. இன்டர்-ஸ்கூல்.நல்லாப்
பேசுவா. கலா மேடம் கிட்ட கொஞ்சம் டிரெயினிங் எடுத்தா நல்லாயிருக்கும்..."
என்று இழுத்தாள் சரோஜா. அவளுக்குக் கலாவை நான் வீட்டிற்குள்
ஒளித்து வைத்திருக்கிறேன் என்று தோன்றியிருக்க வேண்டும். உள்ளே உற்று
உற்றுப் பார்த்தாள்.
எனக்குள் ஒரு மின்னல் அடித்தது.
"கலா ஊருக்குப் போயிருக்கா", என்றேன்.
"அப்படியா...", சரோஜாவின் முகத்தில் ஏமாற்றம் தெரிந்தது.
"அதுனால என்ன..நான் ஹெல்ப் பண்றேனே...", என்றேன்.
அவர்கள் இருவரும் என்னை சந்தேகத்துடன் பார்த்தார்கள்.
"உங்களுக்கு எதுக்கு சிரமம்.."
எனக்கு எழுந்து நின்று "ப்ளீஸ்...ப்ளீஸ்.." என்று கெஞ்ச வேண்டும்
போலிருந்தது.
"ஒரு சிரமும் இல்லை. இன்ஃபாக்ட் இட் இஸ் மை ப்ளஷர்", என்றேன்.
"உனக்கு ஓகேயாடி?" என்று சரோஜா அந்தப் பெண்ணிடம் கேட்டாள்.
அவள் தலையாட்டினாள்.
"உன் பேரென்னம்மா?" என்று கேட்டேன்.
"அகிலா."
"போட்டிக்குத் தலைப்பு என்ன?"
"விவேகானந்தர் இன்று இருந்தால்.."
***************************

நாலு நாட்கள் கழித்து வரச் சொல்லி விட்டு நான் விவேகானந்தரைத்
தெரிந்து கொள்ள முயற்சி செய்தேன்.
எனக்கு விவேகானந்தர் அமெரிக்கா சென்று, "Brothers and Sisters
of America", என்று சொன்னார் என்று தெரியும். அதற்கு அமெரிக்கர்கள் மிகவும்
மகிழ்ந்து கை தட்டினார்கள் என்று தெரியும். இதைத் தவிர அவர் என்ன சொன்னார்..
வேறு ஏதாவது சொன்னாரா இல்லையா என்று சரியாகத் தெரியாது.
ஹிக்கின்பாதம்ஸ் போய்ச் சில புத்தகங்களைப் பார்த்தேன். தடிமனாக
"Vivekanada: The Complete Works" என்கிற புத்தகத்தை வாங்கி வந்தேன்.
விவேகானந்தர் ராமகிருஷ்ணரைப் பார்ப்பதற்கு முன்னால் வேறு பலரைச்
சந்தித்து "நீங்கள் கடவுளைக் கண்டதுண்டா?" என்று கேட்டிருக்கிறார் தெரியுமா?
எனக்குத் தெரியாது. "நீங்கள் கடவுளைக் கண்டதுண்டா?" என்கிற கேள்வியை
பெங்காலியில் எப்படிச் சொல்வார்கள் என்று கண்டுபிடித்தேன். சொல்லிப் பார்த்தேன்.
இனிமையாக இருந்தது.
ராஜ யோகத்தைப் பற்றிய அவரது பேச்சுக்களைப் படித்தேன். வேதாந்தம்
எவ்வளவு பெரிய கடல்? நமது முன்னோர்கள் எவ்வளவு அறிவாளிகள் என்ற கர்வம்
மிகுந்தது. அந்த கர்வத்துடன் அமர்ந்து விவேகானந்தரே பேசுவது போல பாவித்து
ஒரு கட்டுரையை எழுதி முடித்தேன்.
*************************************************

குறிப்பிட்ட மாலையில் அகிலா வந்தாள்.
"இதைக் கத்திப் படி", என்று அவள் கையில் கட்டுரையைக் கொடுத்தேன்.
அழகான ப்ரிண்டர் பேப்பரில் முத்துமுத்தாக எழுதியிருந்தேன். பிற்காலத்தில்
பேரப் பிள்ளைகளுக்குக் காட்ட வேண்டுமே.
அகிலா அதை வாங்கிக் கையில் வைத்து முதல் வரிகளை மனதிற்குள்
படித்தாள். அவள் முகத்தில் சிறு குழப்பம் பரவியது. பாவம்..சிறு பெண் தானே..
"படி" என்று ஊக்குவித்தேன்.
அவள் மெதுவாகப் படிக்கத் தொடங்கினாள். "நான் நரேன்
பேசுகிறேன். சிருஷ்டி சுயாரம்பமான இந்த அகண்ட பிரபஞ்சத்தில், நிர்குணப்
பிரம்மம் சகுணமாக ஆவிர்ப்பித்த தருணத்தில்.."
அவள் நிறுத்தி விட்டு என்னைப் பரிதாபமாகப் பார்த்தாள்.
"என்னம்மா? மேல படி.." என்றேன் எரிச்சலுடன்.
"விவேகானந்தர் பத்தி எதுவும் இல்லையே.."
நான் அலுத்துக் கொண்டேன். "விவேகானந்தர் பத்தி உனக்கு என்ன
தெரியும்..சொல்லு.."
"Brothers and Sisters of America", என்று அவள் தொடங்கினாள்.
"அகிலா..அதுல்லாம் அவரோட வெளித் தோற்றம்..பேச்சு. உண்மையில
விவேகானந்தர் யாரு?"
"பெங்காலி."
நான் பெருமூச்சு விட்டேன். இந்தக் காலத்தில் குழந்தைகள் பள்ளியில்
என்ன தான் படிக்குமோ.
அகிலாவை முழுவதுமாகப் படிக்க வைப்பதற்குள் போதும் போதுமென்றாகி
விட்டது. சில வார்த்தைகள் படித்ததும் அவளுக்கு சந்தேகம் வரும். சில சொற்கள்
வாயிலேயே நுழையாது. சிலவற்றைச் சொல்லும் போது சிரிப்பு வரும்.
கடைசியாக "துமீ கி ஈஷ்வர் தேகோஷோ" என்று கட்டுரையின்
கடைசி வரியைப் படித்து விட்டு விழுந்து விழுந்து சிரித்தாள்.
நான் பொறுமையுடன், "அப்படின்னா பெங்காலில 'நீங்கள் கடவுளைப்
பாத்திருக்கீங்களா'னு அர்த்தம்", என்றேன்.
அவள் அடக்க முடியாமல் சிரித்துக் கொண்டிருந்தாள்.

*********************************************

கட்டுரையை மனப்பாடம் செய்ய அகிலாவிற்குச் சில நாளாயிற்று.
ஒரு நாள் அகிலாவின் அம்மா சரோஜா வந்தாள்.
"ஸார்..கட்டுரையைப் படிச்சேன். இவளுக்குக் கொஞ்சம் ஹையர் லெவல்
மாதிரி இருக்கு."
நான் கண்டிப்புடன் பேசினேன். "இத பாரும்மா..அகிலா இந்தப்
போட்டியில மட்டும் ஜெயிச்சா போதாது. வாழ்க்கையில ஜெயிக்க வேண்டாமா?"
சரோஜா சற்றுத் தயங்கினாள்.
"வாழ்க்கையில ஜெயிக்கிறது முக்கியமா இல்லையா?" என்று அதட்டினேன்.
"முக்கியம் தான். ஆனா..."
"விவேகானந்தர் பத்தி இவ பேசுறது அந்த ஜட்ஜஸுக்கே ஒரு பாடமா
அமையணும். அவர் எப்படிப்பட்ட மனிதர். இந்தக் காலத்துல எவன் அவரைப் பத்தி
தெரிஞ்சு வச்சிருக்கான்? அவர் மட்டும் இப்ப இருந்தா நாட்டுல இந்தச்
சீர்கேடெல்லாம் உண்டா?"
"உண்மை தான் ஸார் இருந்தாலும்.."
"ஃபர்ஸ்ட் ப்ரைஸ் வாங்குவாளோன்னு உங்களுக்கு சந்தேகமா இருக்கா?
கவலைப்படாதீங்க. இவளுக்குப் ப்ரைஸ் கொடுக்காட்டி அந்த ஜட்ஜ் ஒரு ஞான
சூன்யம்."
சரோஜா இதற்குப் பரிதாபமாகத் தலையாட்டி விட்டுச் சென்றாள்.

************************************************************
ஒரு நாள் அகிலா வரும் போது இரவு மணி எட்டு. கணக்கு ட்யூஷன்,
ஹிந்தி ட்யூஷன் போன்ற சில்லறை விஷயங்களை முடித்து விட்டு வேதாந்தப்
பாடம் கேட்க வந்தாள்.
ஆம், என்னைப் பொறுத்த வரை நான் பேச்சுப் போட்டியைக் கடந்து
விவேகானந்தரையும் தாண்டி ஆன்மிகத்தில் ஆழ்ந்து வேதாந்த முத்தெடுக்கும்
பணியில் இறங்கியிருந்தேன். அகிலாவைக் கடைத்தேற்றுவது என் பொறுப்பு
என்று கருதினேன்.
எட்டு மணிக்கு அவள் வந்தாள். எனக்கோ 'நீங்கள் கேட்ட பாடல்'
கேட்க வேண்டும். அரை மணியில் முடித்து விடலாம் என்று அவளைப் படிக்கச்
சொன்னேன்.
அகிலா பாதி தூரம் முன்னேறியிருந்தாள். 'ஸ்வாதிஷ்டானாம்புஜகஜம்'
என்கிற சொல்லை ஒருவாறு சொல்லக் கற்றிருந்தாள்.
என் கண்கள் கடிகாரத்தை நோக்கியவாறு இருந்தன. அகிலாவோ அன்று
பார்த்து மிகவும் சிரமப்பட்டாள். கடைசியில் எட்டரை மணிக்கு பக்கத்து வீட்டில்
டைட்டில் பாட்டுப் போட்டார்கள். ஆத்மா பரமாத்மாவைத் தேடுவது போல என்
கைகள் ரிமோட்டைத் தேடின.
அகிலாவும் பக்கத்து வீட்டுலிருந்து வரும் சத்தத்தைக் கவனித்து
நிறுத்தினாள். இருவரும் ஒருவரை ஒருவர் பார்த்துக் கொண்டோம்.
"உனக்கு டி.வி பாக்கணும்ினு இருந்தா போடறேன்", என்றேன் நான்.
அவள் யோசித்தாள். முதல் பாட்டுத் தொடங்கி விடுமே என்ற
கவலையுடன் அவளைப் பார்த்தேன்.
"பரவாயில்லை ஸார்", என்றாள்.
எனக்குக் கோபம் வந்தது. அப்படி என்ன பேச்சுப் போட்டி வேண்டி
இருக்கிறது?
"நீ அந்த ஞாபகமாவே இருப்ப. டி.வி பாத்துட்டு அப்புறம் கன்டின்யூ
பண்ணலாம்", என்று விட்டு அவள் பதில் சொல்வதற்குள் அவசர அவசரமாக
ரிமோட்டை எடுத்து டி.வியைப் போட்டேன். அப்பாடா, முதல் பாட்டு இப்போது
தான் தொடங்குகிறது. நான் பாடலில் ஆழ்ந்தேன்.
இரண்டு நிமிடம் கழித்து விளம்பரங்கள் தொடங்கியதும் தியான
நிலையில் இருந்து மீண்டேன். அகிலா வசதியாகச் சோபாவில் சாய்ந்து
உட்கார்ந்திருந்தாள்.
"என்ன ஸார் சாவித்ரி சரோஜாதேவி பாட்டு தான் பாப்பீங்கனு
நினைச்சேன்", என்றாள்.
நான் அசடு வழிந்தேன்.
"எல்லா காலத்திலயும் நல்லத எடுத்துக்கணும்", என்றேன்.
சிறிது நேரம் கழித்து எனக்குப் பல நாட்களாக்க் கேட்க
வேண்டும் என்று இருந்த கேள்வியை அகிலாவிடம் கேட்டேன்.
"அகிலா, இந்தக் கட்டுரை ஒண்ணும் கஷ்டமாயில்லையே?"
என்று தொடங்கினேன்.
"அப்படில்லாம் ஒண்ணும் இல்ல ஸார்."
"நீ நிறைய போட்டிலல்லாம் கலந்திருக்கியே."
"ஆமா ஸார்."
"நான் எழுதின கட்டுரை ரொம்ப வித்தியாசமா இருக்கு இல்ல?"
அவள் யோசித்தாள். அடுத்த பாட்டுத் தொடங்கியது. நான் அவள்
பதிலை எதிர்பார்த்துக் காத்திருந்தேன்.
"வித்தியாசமானு இல்ல. கொஞ்சம் டிஃபரண்டா இருக்கு."
நான் புரிந்த மாதிரி தலையாட்டினேன்.
"நிறைய கருத்துக்கள் இருக்கு இல்ல?"
"எனக்குத் தெரியலை ஸார். வார்த்தைல்லாம் கொஞ்சம் கஷ்டமா
இருக்கு."
எனக்குக் கோபம் வந்தது.
"நான் எவ்வளவு ரிஸர்ச் பண்ணி எழுதியிருக்கேன் தெரியுமா?"
என்றேன்.
"ஆமா ஸார்."
"ஒரு பெரிய லெவல்ல இருக்கு இல்ல?"
"ஆமா ஸார். ஆனா..."
சே..ஒரு அலுவலகத்தில் அதிகாரியாக இருந்த என்னை இந்தப்
பெண் குறைத்து மதிப்பிடுகிறதே என்று தோன்றியது.
அவள் தொடர்ந்து, "ஆடியன்ஸ் கொஞ்சம் புரியாம
தவிப்பாங்களோன்னு.."
என்னைப் போன்ற ஒரு கலைஞன் ஆடியன்ஸூக்காகத் தரத்தைத்
தாழ்த்திக் கொள்வதா?
டி.வியில் நிகழ்ச்சி முடிந்தது.

**********************************************

போட்டி நாள் வந்தது.
நான் போட்டி நடக்கும் பள்ளியில் நுழைந்தேன். கல்யாண வீட்டைப்
போல கலகலப்பாக இருந்தது. ஆறாவது வகுப்பில் இருந்து ப்ளஸ் டூ வரையில் மாணவ
மாணவியர்கள் இருந்தார்கள். எல்லோர் முகத்திலும் ஒரு பதட்டம் தெரிந்தது. சிலர்
அங்கங்கே காலி வகுப்புகளில் பேசிப் பழகிக் கொண்டிருந்தார்கள்.
டீச்சர்களும் நின்று கொண்டு தங்களுக்குள் பேசுவதைப் பார்த்தேன்.
வழக்கம் போல அவர்களை எளிதில் கண்டுபிடிக்க முடிந்தது. பதட்டமே
இல்லாமல் இருந்தது அவர்கள் மட்டும் தான். மற்ற பள்ளி டீச்சர்களுடன்
போனஸ், அலவன்ஸ் என்று பேசிப் பொழுதைப் போக்கினார்கள்.
அகிலா தன் தோழிகள் சிலருடன் பேசிக் கொண்டிருந்தாள். சற்றுத்
தள்ளி சில மாணவர்களும் நின்று பேசிக் கொண்டிருந்தார்கள். அவ்வப்போது
இந்த இரு கூட்டங்களுக்கு இடையிலும் மின்னல் வெட்டுவது போலப் பார்வைகள்
பறந்து பறந்து முட்டிக் கொண்டன.
அகிலா என்னைப் பார்த்தாள். சற்று விலகி என்னிடம் வந்தாள்.
"என்ன ஸார்..இங்கியே வந்திட்டீங்க?"
"நீ ஜெயிக்கிறதைப் பாக்க வேண்டாமா?" என்றேன்.
"நான் ஜெயிக்கிறதையா நீங்க ஜெயிக்கிறதையா.." என்று விட்டுச்
சிரித்தாள்.
"நல்லா ப்ராக்டீஸ் பண்ணிட்டியா?"
"பண்ணிட்டேன் ஸார். கவலைப்படாதீங்க. ஏன் இவ்வளவு டென்ஷனா
இருக்கீங்க.."
எனக்கு அப்போது தான் எல்லோரையும் போல எனக்கும் பதற்றம்
தொற்றிக் கொண்டது தெரிந்தது.

********************************************

பேச்சுப் போட்டி ஆரம்பமாயிற்று. முதலில் ஆறாம் வகுப்பு முதல்
எட்டாம் வகுப்பு வரை உள்ள மாணவர்கள் பேசினார்கள். அந்த வயதிலேயே
குதித்துக் குதித்து மேசையைத் தட்டி ஆவேசமாய்ப் பேசினார்கள். அவர்கள்
பேசுவதைக் கேட்டால் விவேகானந்தர் வீரவாள் ஏந்திப் பேரரசுகள் பல
வென்றாரோ என்று தோன்றியது.
ஒரு பையன் பேச்சை நடுவே மறந்து போய் முழித்தான். இன்னொருவன்
பேசும் போது மைக் கட்டாகி மௌனப் படம் பார்ப்பது போலிருந்தது. இது போன்ற
விபத்துகள் அகிலா பேசும் போது நடக்காமல் இருக்க நிர்குணப் பிரம்மத்தை
வேண்டிக் கொண்டேன்.
அடுத்து ஒன்பதாவது, பத்தாவது படிக்கும் மாணவர்களுக்குப் போட்டி
தொடங்கியது. அகிலா பேசச் சிறிது நேரம் ஆகும்.
நான் பெரிய ஹாலில் ஒரு ஓரமாக நின்று கொண்டிருந்தேன். சற்று
மூச்சடைப்பது போல இருக்கவே வெளியே வந்தேன்.
"என்ன ஸார் டென்ஷன் தாங்கலையா?" என்று ஒரு குரல் கேட்டது.
திரும்பிப் பார்த்தேன். அகிலாவும் வெளியே நின்று கொண்டிருந்தாள்.
"நீ எப்பிடி இவ்வளவு கூலா இருக்க?" என்று கேட்டேன்.
"பழகிப் போச்சு ஸார். போன மாசம் மட்டும் நாலு போட்டி
போனேன்."
"எனக்கு இது தான் ஃபர்ஸ்ட்", என்றேன்.
சற்று நேரம் இருவரும் மௌனமாக நின்றோம். உள்ளிருந்து ஒரு
பெண், "எழுமின்! விழிமின்", என்று கத்துவது கேட்டது.
"கலா ஆன்ட்டி ஏன் ஸார் இவ்வளவு நாளா ஊர்லயே இருக்காங்க?
உங்களப் பாத்தா பாவமா இருக்கு."
நான் சிரித்தேன். "எனக்குத் தனியா இருக்கறது பிடிக்கும்மா", என்றேன்.
அவள் "ப்ச்..சுத்த போர்", என்றாள்.
"தனியா இருந்தாத் தான் நிறைய சாதிக்க முடியும். விவேகானந்தரைப்
பாரு", என்றேன்.
அவள், "அவருக்கும் நிறைய ஃபிரெண்ட்ஸ் இருந்தாங்களே ஸார்.
என்னால ஃபிரெண்ட்ஸ் இல்லாம ஒரு நிமிஷம் கூட இருக்க முடியாது", என்றாள்.
நான் யோசித்தேன். உண்மை தான். கலா இல்லாமல் மிகவும் தனிமையாகத்
தான் இருக்கிறது.
"அகிலா, நீ தான் அடுத்தது", என்று யாரோ சொன்னார்கள்.
அவள் உள்ளே போனாள். நான் கதவோரத்தில் நின்று பார்த்தேன்.
விவேகானந்தரின் உண்மையான தத்துவத்தை உலகுக்கு எடுத்துச் சொல்லும்
நேரம் வந்து விட்டது.
"நான் நரேன் பேசுகிறேன். சிருஷ்டி சுயாரம்பமான இந்த அகண்ட
பிரபஞ்சத்தில் நிர்குணப் பிரம்மம்.."
அகிலா சாந்தமாகப் பேசினாள். கையைக் காலை ஆட்டாமல்
பேசினாள். சற்றுப் புரிந்து கூடப் பேசினாள் என்று தோன்றியது.
கூட்டத்தில் சிறு சலசலப்புப் பரவியது. சிலர் லேசாகச்
சிரித்தார்கள்.
"பாம்புமாகிப் பழுதுமாகும் அந்தர்யாமியின் சொரூபத்தை
மூலாதாரத்தில் நிறுத்தி.."
இன்னும் சிறிது சிரிப்பு அதிகரித்தது.
எனக்கு முன்னால் ஓடிச் சென்று "நிறுத்துங்களடா ஞான
சூன்யங்களா", என்று கத்த வேண்டும் போல இருந்தது.
முடிவில், "துமீ கி ஈஷ்வர் தேகோஷோ", என்று முடித்ததும்
நீதிபதிகளில் ஒரு பெண்மணி கர்சீப்பால் முகத்தை மறைத்துக் கொண்டு
சிரிப்பது தெரிந்தது. அகிலா மேடையிலிருந்து இறங்கினாள். யாரோ இரண்டு
பேர் கை தட்டினார்கள். அவர்களுக்கு என் ஆசீர்வாதங்கள்.

***************************************

பேச்சுப் போட்டி முடிந்து நீதிபதிகள் ஒரு அறைக்குள் சென்றார்கள்.
சிரித்துப் பேசிக் கொண்டே போனார்கள். என்னைப் பற்றித் தான் சிரித்தார்கள்
என்று எனக்குத் தோன்றியது.
எல்லோரும் அங்கங்கே குழுமி நின்று கொண்டிருந்தார்கள். நான்
அகிலாவைத் தேடினேன்.
அவள் ஒரு ஓரத்தில் நின்று ஒரு டீச்சருடன் பேசிக் கொண்டிருந்தாள்.
முடித்து விட்டு அவள் விலகி வரும் போது யாரோ "தும் குஷ் புஷ்" என்று
கத்தினார்கள். நாலைந்து பேர் சிரித்தார்கள்.
அகிலாவும் சேர்ந்து சிரித்தபடி என்னைப் பார்த்து வந்தாள்.
"என்ன ஸார்..எப்பிடி இருந்தது பேச்சு"
"ஸாரிம்மா", என்றேன்.
"ரிஸல்ட் இன்னும் தெரியலையே. ஜட்ஜே விழுந்து விழுந்து சிரிச்சாங்க.
ப்ரைஸ் எனக்குத் தான்", என்றாள்.
எனக்கு என்ன சொல்வது என்று தெரியவில்லை.
"கவலப்படாதீங்க ஸார். வீட்டுல ஏகப்பட்ட கப் இருக்கு. இது போனாப்
பரவாயில்ல. குண்டலினி பத்திக் கத்துக்கிட்ட மாதிரியாவது ஆச்சே"
"அடுத்த முறை..", என்றேன்.
"அடுத்த மாசம் காந்தி பத்தி ஒரு போட்டி இருக்கு", என்றாள்..
எனக்கு உடனே சத்தியாக்கிரகத்தைப் பற்றிக் கட்டுரை எழுத
வேண்டும் என்று தோன்றியது.
அகிலா திரும்பிப் போனாள்.
நான் வீட்டுக்குக் கிளம்பினேன். கலாவுடன் வேதாந்தம் பற்றி
நிறைய வாதிட இருக்கிறது.

********************************************************

My Tamil Screenplay - Updates and a snippet

2011-12-13T00:52:00.000-08:00

In line with my previous post on my Tamil screenplay writing, I went about trying to get it read. This post is an update on my brief efforts; it will hopefully be useful for other writers. The end of this post summarizes what I learned. It also has a scene from the script.

Initial Approaches

I was not sure who to approach first. A contact gave me an opening with Director Radha Mohan (Mozhi, Azhagiya Theeye). I had a long conversation with him.
The director said that he wrote his own scripts. He did not really need a scriptwriter, as such. He asked me about the kind of story. He said period films need star power for budget - someone like Surya or Vikram. I said my story did not have much heroic scope built in.

After this, I approached UTV, the production house. Their movie wing has a creative person, Ramya, who reviews scripts. I called her.
Ramya said first that they were currently full with releases. But she also asked me who I was working with. I said that I was just a writer, and want my script to be reviewed. Ramya said that this was not the way things worked. They work with directors, not writers. She said an assistant director or director would come to them with a story and then she would review it. She could not simply take a script and go look for a director.
This confused me. In Hollywood, usually the process starts with a scriptwriter. The writer sends the script through an agent to a production house (such as Columbia or 20th Century Fox). The production house, if interested, concludes a deal with the writer; and then they go looking for directors.

I also heard about FoxStar movies, a new formation between 20th century Fox and Star Movies, located in Mumbai. They were the producers of the recent hit, "Engeyum Eppozhudhum". I read an interview by the director of that movie, and decided to call them.
Fox Star's head of development is Neerja Narayanan. I could reach her directly (she is on LinkedIn, by the way; These are pretty corporate people).
They asked me to send a English synopsis. They also wanted my biodata. I sent it to them, but there has not been any response.

Clarity

After this, I realized there must be something fundamentally wrong in my understanding. I got clarity after having two discussions.
The first one was with a young actor, who is also a relative (He was in the movie Enthiran).
He asked me to go get the movie industry directory, called Variety. It is available in Landmark, in the Cinema section. It has a list of the contacts of all directors, producers, actors, and technicians and so on.
He said that the "writer" did not exist in the Tamil film industry. There were directors, and all of them had their own stories. He had heard that M.Sasikumar (Subramaniapuram) and Samuthirakkani were known to look at raw stories, but that was it. All assistant directors generally had five or six stories.
He said I could contact the directors, and work with them on dialog. There was really only two ways a pure writer could get their script made into a film - if they were close friends with a director, and the director decided to give them credit. The second was if the story had a lot of heroism and a big star wanted to use it. Then they could get a director to make a movie out of it.

My second conversation was with Madhan Karkky, the young dialog writer and lyricist for Enthiran and Shankar's upcoming Nanbargal.
We met in a coffee shop and talked about the scope for script writing for half an hour.
Madhan said that the Tamil industry had no "pure" scriptwriters, as such. If you had a script, you usually wanted to direct it yourself. No director in this industry directs other people's scripts. That kind of process just did not exist.
If I wanted to be a writer, he suggested that there were a couple of options to consider. one was to contact Malayalam film directors, who used scriptwriters. (For example K.Hariharan uses M.T.Vasudevan Nair). The second was to become a dialog writer for directors. This can be done if I had a portfolio, in which I could have a few different scenes sketched out. I could seek appointments with directors. He said they did not like recommendations. So, this process could take many months.
Even if I became a dialog writer, I cannot really make a movie out of my script, unless I became a director.

Summary and Future
It is, thus, weird, that I am a scriptwriter in an industry that does not really use scriptwriters. Hindi and malayalam industries use scriptwriters extensively. But not Tamil. That is how the industry has evolved.
I am not very sure what to do at this point. I already have my next story in mind, but what is the point of writing it if nobody ever makes a movie out of it? I am pretty sure I do not want to be a director.
A tiny part of me tells me that this is how things are for beginners. After all, every director, and every technician out there has seen so many disappointments. Radha Mohan struggled for 15 years to direct his first movie. In fact, his first movie "Smile Please" never saw the light of the day.
If anyone has better information for me or any aspiring writer, please post in comments.
I have below a brief snippet from my script:

வெளிப்புறம் - சாத்தூர் கிராமத்து தெரு - பகல்
வழுதியும் பெருமாளும் மெதுவாக குதிரையில் அந்த வீதியைத் தாண்டித் திரும்புகிறார்கள். பக்கத்து வீதியில் சிறு வீடுகள். சுற்றித் தோட்டங்கள். வீடுகளின் இடையே மரக் குச்சியால் வேலிகள் வைத்து இருக்கிறார்கள்.
தெருவில் போகிற வருகிறவர்கள் நின்று குதிரை வீரர்களை நிமிர்ந்து பார்க்கிறார்கள்.
அந்தத் தெருவின் முடிவில், ஒரு வீடு தெரிகிறது. அதன் தோட்டத்தில் தருமன் குழி தோண்டிக் கொண்டிருக்கிறான். வீரர்கள் இருவரும் சற்று நேரம் நின்று அவனைப் பார்க்கிறார்கள்.
உள்ளிருந்து நாகை வெளியே வருகிறாள்.
பெருமாள்
என்னப்பா செய்கிறாய்? இவ்வளவு பெரிய குழி தோண்டி இருக்கிறாய்?

தருமன் அவர்களை நிமிர்ந்து பார்க்கிறான். பிறகு, மண்வெட்டியை பக்கத்தில் வைத்து விட்டு நிற்கிறான்.
தருமன்
பெரிய கதை அய்யா. என் தாத்தா ஒரு அருமையான நூல் எழுதினாராம். அதை எங்கோ புதைத்து விட்டதாகக் கேள்வி. அது தான் தேடுகிறேன்.
வழுதி
அப்படி என்ன நூல் எழுதினார்? காம சாத்திரமோ?

தருமன் சிரிக்கிறான்.

தருமன்
காம சாத்திரமாக இருந்தால் இந்நேரம் இந்தத் தெரு முழுவதும் தோண்டி இருப்பேன்.

பெருமாள் சிரிக்கிறான்.

நாகை

நீங்கள் அரசரின் படை வீரர்களா?

பெருமாள்
மெய்காப்பாளர்கள். ஆபத்துதவிகள் என்று கேட்டிருக்கிறீர்கள?

நாகை

ஆமாம். அரசருக்காக உயிரையே கொடுப்பவர்கள்.

வழுதி
அதே தான்.

நாகை

இவருக்கு கூட அரசாங்க வேலை கிடைத்தால் நன்றாக இருக்கும்

பெருமாள்
ஏன்? இப்போது உன் தொழில் என்ன?

தருமன் நாகையை முறைக்கிறான்.

நாகை
இவர் சோதிடர்

பெருமாள்
அட..பிரமாதம்.
(வழுதியைக் காட்டி)
இவனுக்கு எப்போது கல்யாணம் ஆகும் சொல்லேன்? எங்கே போனாலும் பெண்களைப் பார்த்து விழிக்கிறான்.

தருமன் சிரித்து விட்டுச் சும்மா இருக்கிறான்.

வழுதி
இரு. அதை விட ஒரு சோதனை. நான் எந்த ஊர்க்காரன் என்று சொல் பார்க்கலாம்?

தருமன் கண்ணை மூடி ஒரு வினாடி யோசிக்கிறான். பிறகு,
தருமன்
தென்காசி, அல்லது அதற்கு அருகில்.

வழுதியும் பெருமாளும் அவனை ஆச்சரியத்துடன் பார்க்கிறார்கள்.

நாகை
அவர் சொல்வது சரியா?

பெருமாள்
சரி தான். குற்றாலத்தில் குரங்குகளுடன் திரிந்து கொண்டிருந்தான்.

வழுதி
சோதிடா, நீ சரியான ஆள் தான். நெல்வேலிக்கு வா. அரசர் சபையில் இடம் இருக்கிறது.

இருவரும் குதிரையை நகர்த்திச் செல்கிறார்கள்.

Tamil Screenplay writing - my experience

2011-09-20T09:45:00.000-07:00

I just finished a feature-length Tamil screenplay. I could not find many resources for Tamil screen writing in the web. So here goes, for people like me, looking to write feature-length screenplays.
Note: I have just started approaching people with the screenplay. I have very little knowledge of marketing a screenplay - informed commenters can help here.

Note 2: I am not going into the details of how to form a film-worth story or how to use imagination. I assume that you can form stories and break it into scenes, with drama and dialog.

Screenplays in general
Screenwriters usually write a "Spec" screenplay (for "speculative"). These scripts are not numbered and do not include production information. We are only talking about spec screenplays here.
Spec screenplays are stories - but they are written in a different format than novels or dramas.
At a high level, a screenplay is narrated in scenes that the viewer sees. Each scene has a heading, "action" and dialog.
At a lower level, these elements of a screenplay have to formatted very specifically (at least in Hollywood).
As an example, take a look at the following scene in one of short stories in this blog:

நானும், ராமனும், ரிஷியும் அடர்ந்த வனத்துக்குள் புகுந்த ஓரிரு நாட்களிலேயே சற்றே பயமுறுத்தும் காட்சிகளைக் கண்டோம்.
பாழடைந்த ஒரு பிரதேசம். பாறைகள் அங்குமிங்கும் உருண்டிருந்தன. செம்மண்ணில் வெயில் தகித்தது. அங்கங்கே பெரிய மரங்கள். சில இடங்களில் முள் காடுகள்.
இரண்டு மூன்று இடங்களில் சில மண்டை ஓடுகள் கிடந்தன. ரிஷி சுற்றுமுற்றும் பார்த்தவாறே நடந்தார். நான் ஆவலுடன், "ஏதோ யுத்தம் நடந்த மாதிரி இருக்கிறது?" என்றேன்.
"இலக்குவா, தாடகை என்னும் அரக்கியின் உறைவிடம் இது",என்றார் ரிஷி. அந்த மண்டை ஓடுகளைச் சுட்டிக் காட்டி, "அவளுடைய இரை ", என்றார்.
என் உடம்பு நடுங்கியது. "மிதிலைக்கு இந்த வழியாகத் தான் சென்றாக வேண்டுமா?" என்றேன்.
சற்றுத் தள்ளி கோணல் மாணலாக ஒரு எலும்புக் கூடு கிடந்தது. அதைக் காட்டி, "என் சிஷ்யன் பிங்கலன்", என்றார் ரிஷி.
அன்று இரவு ஒரு பெரிய மரத்தின் மேல் ஏறி படுத்துத் தூங்கினோம்.
மரத்தின் கடினமான கிளையில் படுத்தவாறே நான் வாழ்க்கையைப் பற்றி யோசித்தேன். பல நாட்களுக்கு முன்னால் அயோத்தியில் வில்லையும், அம்பையும் வைத்துக் கொண்டு மாங்காய் அடித்துத் தின்று கொண்டிருந்தோம். இந்த ரிஷி வந்து அழைத்துப் போனார். எனக்கு என் தந்தை தசரத மன்னர் என்னை அனுப்பி வைத்ததில் ஆச்சரியமில்லை. அவருக்குப் பாதி நேரம் எனக்கும் என் இரட்டைச் சகோதரன் சத்ருக்னனுக்கும் வித்தியாசமே தெரியாது. இன்னும் யாரை அனுப்பினோம் என்று அவருக்குத் தெரிந்திருக்காது.
ஆனால் ராமனை, பட்டத்து இளவரசனை எப்படி இந்த தாடி மீசை முனிவருடன் காட்டுக்கு அனுப்பி வைத்தார்? ராமன் மேல் அவருக்கு அடங்காத பாசம். மிகவும் நல்லவன் என்று ஒரு நினைப்பு.

This same scene, in a screenplay will look like this:

FADE IN:
வெளிப்புறம் - ஒரு காட்டுப் பகுதி - பகல்
பாழடைந்த ஒரு பிரதேசம். பாறைகள் அங்குமிங்கும் உருண்டிருகின்றன. செம்மண்ணில் வெயில் தகிக்கிறது. அங்கங்கே பெரிய மரங்கள். சில இடங்களில் முள் காடுகள்.
இரண்டு மூன்று இடங்களில் சில மண்டை ஓடுகள் கிடக்கின்றன.
காட்டுப் பாதையில் மூன்று பேர் நடந்து வருகிறார்கள். முதலில் ஐம்பது வயது மதிக்கத்தக்க முனிவர், விஸ்வாமித்ரர், வருகிறார். அவர் பின்னால் இளம் வாலிபன் ராமன், கையில் வில்லுடன் வருகிறான். அவன் முதுகில் அம்புகள் வைக்கும் தூணி தெரிகிறது.
கடைசியில் நம் கதாநாயகன், இலக்குவன், வருகிறான். இலக்குவனுக்கு பதினாறு வயதிருக்கும். அவனும் கையில் வில்லும், அம்புகளும் வைத்திருக்கிறான்.
ரிஷி சுற்றுமுற்றும் பார்த்தவாறே வருகிறார்.

இலக்குவன்

ஏதோ யுத்தம் நடந்த மாதிரி இருக்கிறது?

விஸ்வாமித்திரர்

இலக்குவா, தாடகை என்னும் அரக்கியின் உறைவிடம் இது.

இலக்குவன் மண்டை ஓடுகளைப் பார்க்கிறான். அவன் உடம்பு நடுங்குகிறது.

இலக்குவன்

மிதிலைக்கு இந்த வழியாகத் தான் செல்ல வேண்டுமா?

சற்றுத் தள்ளி கோணல்மாணலாக ஒரு எலும்புக் கூடு கிடக்கிறது.

விஸ்வாமித்திரர்

(அதைக் காட்டி)

என் சிஷ்யன் பிங்கலன்.

வெளிப்புறம் - காடு – இரவு
ஒரு பெரிய மரத்தின் கிளைகள் தெரிகின்றன. அதன் மேல் கிளைகளில், ராமன், இலக்குவன், விஸ்வாமித்திரர் மூவரும் படுத்திருக்கிறார்கள்.

You can see the following about this screenplay format:
1. We are only allowed to narrate what is visible on the screen. Thus Ilakkuvan's "thoughts" go away.
2. We need to narrate whatever is relevant to the story and setting.
3. You can also see the distinct elements here - character names (like Ilakkuvan, Viswamiththirar); action, scene headings (வெளிப்புறம் - காடு – இரவு ), and a paranthetical ( அதைக் காட்டி).

We will understand this weird format better, if we know who the screenplay is meant for.
A screenplay is meant for a director's eye. It is NOT meant for a general audience. Although screenplays should be interesting to read and should follow all correct conventions, it is really a communication from the author to the key production staff.
If you understand this, a lot of the specific requirements for formatting make sense. There are very specific rules on how to write, for example,
1. A Series of Shots
2. Flashback
3. Voice Overs
4. Continuous Action and so on.
Please take a moment now to browse through the excellent Internet Movie Script Database. Look through these scripts:
Terminator 2: Judgement Day
The Sixth Sense

(Script writing rules even include the number of inches of margin for the dialog or paranthetical.)
While writing my screenplay, whenever I have questions about writing (say) Flashbacks or even showing Superimposed text, I would think about some movie where such a feature is shown, and then refer to the actual script in imsdb.com.

There are also websites available for screen writing format. Please refer to:
How To Format a Screenplay
How To Write a Screenplay

The following items should be avoided in screenplays:
1. Camera Angles (This is for the director to decide); you can refer to POVs (Point-of-Views) though.
2. Acting guidelines (such as - his shoulders shake while crying; that is for the actor to decide)
3. Specific actors (in the Indian context)
4. Songs or song lyrics (in the Indian context)
5. Music suggestions (such as - a lone violin plays in the background; that is for the music composer to decide)

So the idea is to stick to the story and narrate it visually.
An average Hollywood script has 80-100 scenes. An average Hollywood scripts has around a 100 pages. In Tamil, of course, our movies are longer. The thumb rule is that a page of script is a minute's running time. The actual running time, of course, depends on the mix of action and dialog.

Tamil scriptwriting - Technicalities
In Hollywood, because of the specific scriptwriting requirements, many screen writers use software such as Final Draft. These make the writer's job easier. They take care of the formatting. They even prompt character names when you type the first letter. Some such software are so advanced that they can play a line of dialog back to you as a voice (male/female; tenor etc are adjustable). In other words, you can actually have a "staged reading" right in front of your computer.
Unfortunately, none of these work with Indian languages.
I used Microsoft Word. But I also downloaded Google IME from here. Google IME lets you choose Tamil for input into any editor. All that you have to do is choose Tamil in the toolbar and type in Word. When you type, you type in English and it transliterates into Tamil. The Thaadakaa screenplay above was typed using this method. It has some quirks, but is easy to learn.
Now that we have solved typing in Tamil, how do we manage the screenplay format? The correct way is to use a Microsoft Word Template file. There is a file used by English writers called Screenplay.dot, available for download here. Download this file and make it the template for your script, BEFORE starting to write the script. It has to be adjusted for Tamil.
Make this file your template in Microsoft Word (Tools->Templates and Add-Ins).
When typing the screenplay, keep Format->Styles and Formatting panel open and you can easily use the different formats such as Dialog, Character, Action, Paranthetical and so on.

My method
Of course, this was my first screenplay, but I may as well document the method I used.
I first wrote screen summaries on paper; these were sketches of each scene, with some dialog and description. These summaries were for my purpose and so were not formatted.
Then I expanded these and used Word to type in the scenes in some detail.
Finally I rewrote the scenes and formatting to fit what I wanted. The final action scenes were entirely written in Word.
I must have rewritten different scenes several times.
I faced a problem with dialogs; my story was a historical, set in 500 AD. I had to incorporate both humor and a natural flow in such a setting. I found it took much effort to do that.
Action scenes were very interesting to write. I followed the advice of screen writing gurus - I wrote detailed action with very specific settings, including sword fights.

Copyrighting the Script
First, note that when you write something in paper, it is copyrighted to you automatically, by Indian law. In other words, nobody can take that work and claim that you did NOT copyright it; and therefore they are free to take it. The moment you have a work on paper you get copyright.
But, you still need to get a legal copyright in case someone takes your work and claims THEY wrote it. You can read about the details in this website.
There are three methods of copyrighting. I did two of them. The third one is available only after you are actually part of the film industry.
1. Register with Copyright Authority of India. You have to contact a lawyer or law firm for this. They ask for four printed, spiral-bound copies of the actual work. It costs around Rs.5000. The authority sits in New Delhi and it takes them more than an year to deliver a copyright to you. BUT, you will get a temporary ID within 20 days. That is enough for our purposes.
2. Self-Registration - Go to the post office with a sealed envelope containing a single spiral-bound copy of your work. Send it to yourself by registered post. When you receive the envelope, do NOT open it. Keep it somewhere safe. If you get challenged at some point, you can open the envelope in court and prove that you own the copyright earlier.
3. Registering with the South Indian Film Writers Association - The association performs registrations for members ONLY. You cannot become a member unless you are a part of the film industry. But once you become a part of the industry, this registration is useful.
Do NOT share your work without copyrighting - that is the advice given to me by some contacts.

Marketing in Tamil
As I said initially, I am not really familiar with the methods to get attention on a script in the Tamil film industry.
In Hollywood, the agents take care of marketing your script - therefore you first need to impress the agents. Hollywood production houses rely on effective scripts.
The Tamil industry is getting corporatised right now. Usually that is good for screenwriters. But Tamil directors seem to write their own scripts.
Producers do buy scripts, but the original writer rarely gets credits.
In other words, it is not really clear whom to approach - directors? actors? producers?
Only writers of fame, like Sujatha, Jeyamohan, S.Ramakrishnan - who were already famous fiction writers - seem to be engaged by directors for screenplay writing, with credits. I am sure there are many writers out there, but the industry seems to revolve around directors and actors.
I am planning to approach a couple of directors. Let us see how that goes.

Blaming Victims in a Just World

2011-07-16T12:17:00.000-07:00

An year back, there was an accident in Adyar, Chennai. A couple traveling by bike at 10:30 in the night were run over by a speeding lorry.
The couple were married just over an year earlier; and had left their baby at the parents and gone to visit a temple or church.
The next morning I was in the waiting area of a local hospital when I overheard an young doctor and a nurse talking about this. The doctor said, "So they went at 10 in the night to a temple, leaving the baby. How stupid are they?"
The nurse agreed.
Do we expect people to be run over after 10 PM in the night? Of course not. But this pattern was familiar to me. The doctor and nurse were blaming the victim.
I have come across the blame-the-victim characteristic a lot when discussing politics; but also more generally in life in India. I have also come across it, to a lesser extent, in conservative writing in the United States.
A couple of years back, when race attacks were going on in Australia, against Indians, I frequently saw this play out. A letter in the magazine "Week" blamed Indians for not "assimilating" in Australian culture. Some blamed Indians for talking in local language in public. I wrote a detailed analysis of this behavior here.

Of course, blaming the victim is not new to women all over the world. They almost always get blamed for eve-teasing or rapes. Usually they are accused of having provoked men into such behavior.

Why is there a tendency to blame the victim when something bad happens to people? This is particularly important in India. In our road accidents, pedestrians get blamed almost all the time. Plus we have the "aren't we all corrupt?", "aren't we all racists?" crowd always blaming the victim implicitly.

The Just World Theory

In the 1960s, Melvin J.Lerner, professor of Social Psychology at the University of Waterloo, performed a set of experiments out of which came the "Just World Hyposthesis" or the "Just World Theory".
Lerner's findings, later expanded, show that human beings have the "need to believe in a just world" in-built into their psyche. It develops as a part of normal child rearing and every human being will have it.
What does this mean?
While growing up, we are taught good and bad behavior. We are taught to distinguish between them by a system of rewards and punishments. This enforces a belief in us, as we grow into adulthood, that the world is an environment full of justice. People get what they deserve and deserve what they get. That idea permeates into us.

But, of course, the real world is far from just. Just the number of varieties of personalities precludes a guarantee of justice.
Therefore, when we see something that violates our belief (in a just world), we can only resolve the conflict between
a) what is reality and
b) what is our innate belief
by looking for some way to justify the unjust scene before us.
For example, when we hear about a child getting hit while crossing a road, our trust in a just world is violated. Our mind resolves that by one of the following methods:
a) Blaming the child's parents or the child herself for crossing without proper attention
b) Trying to imagine how we can stop such traffic accidents and thus building an assurance in our mind that we can create a just world
c) By the "separated world" mechanism - we tell ourselves that this happens in some kind of parallel world.

(There are actually 9 different ways in which we try to resolve the conflict, as listed by Lerner)

Now option b, if we act on it, is of course, the healthiest. It improves society overall.
But most people who are conservative or authoritarian or over-religious have been found to go with option a - blaming the victim.
In other words, the predominant tendency in conservative societies such as India is to blame the victim.

Thus the doctor and nurse who were discussing the accident of an young couple were actually shocked by the injustice of happy lives extinguished by a careless driver. But they had the need to believe in a just world. They resolved this by blaming the couple's choice of taking a bike at 10:30 PM.

This has implications for a lot of our public debates in India. We hear about unjust accidents caused by badly designed roads and neighborhoods. Almost every person who drives a bike in India must have met with some accident, minor to serious. We hear about normal people, who are killed or maimed by drunken driving or just reckless driving
Every time, we have to be careful never to blame the victim - for traveling without a helmet, or crossing a city road, or going out in the night. The real villains are the people who drive without respect for pedestrians; and the people who designed these killer roads with no spaces for pedestrians.

P.Sainath is wrong on Jan Lokpal

2011-07-06T11:58:00.000-07:00

(Edited to fix link to Sainath's article, on Debojyoti's comment below)
This post addresses a few wrong arguments against the Lokpal process. Many of these are talking points I found circulating in the web. Some of these are also opinions of P.Sainath - the Magsaysay award winner and The Hindu rural affairs editor - who has criticised the Jan Lokpal process in speeches and in an article in The Hindu.

My first article on Lokpal and the IAC movement is here. It has some commentary on Sainath's video speech.

Have Anna Hazare and others worked outside the legislative process?
Argument:Anna Hazare, by his tactics such as fasting, have worked against the electoral process. They have blackmailed the government to include themselves in the legislative process

My response: Nobody has taken away the role of Parliament in passing legislation. The IAC movement or Mr.Hazare himself have not said that they will pass a bill and that should be the law of the land.
Parliament should pass a bill on Lokpal - what Mr.Hazare and others have argued is that Parliament should not pass the draft bill submitted in 2010. Instead they have suggested a different set of provisions for a Jan Lokpal bill.
Is this entirely unnatural or unprecedented? In other words, is it unprecedented for Parliament to consider a law that takes input from non-elected people?
The answer is no. It is neither unprecedented nor unnatural. The much-celebrated Right To Information (RTI) bill was actually lobbied and pushed for by activists. Just last year, the government shelved the plans for GM (Genetically Modified) crops based on feedback from "self-appointed" activists and lobby groups.
This is why the hue and cry about Anna Hazare and others "bypassing" the process is surprising. Do people seriously believe that the laws passed by Parliament on regulating healthcare, education or mining are exclusively created by legislators - without major input from industry leaders or activists? Every law that deals with industry regulation IS being written in consultation with industry leaders.
Thus, the controversy about Anna and IAC creating their own process is ill-founded.

Are Anna Hazare and others self-appointed?
Argument: Who said civil society can be represented by Anna Hazare and the India Against Corruption movement? Who decides that these people are representatives of the common people? Only the elected legislators in Parliament are representatives of the people - not self-appointed leaders such as Anna Hazare.
My Response: This question is a very critical one. It is not an attack on Anna or IAC. The general idea seems to be that the electorate has chosen their legislators. Given that, what authority do Anna and others have to "represent the people"?
The answer is, of course, that feedback on legislation in a Parliamentary democracy can come throughout the law making process. Anna and others need not represent everyone, or even a majority in the nation - all that matters is that they have the right to organize a protest and make their voices heard. Nobody can deny them that right. They have the right to lobby for their cause.
Secondly, they actually did have an alternative bill; and legitimate criticism of the
government bill. Therefore, their "interference" in the law-making process was a pretty serious, legitimate effort.
Thirdly, let us not forget that Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., or Aan Suu Kyi are all "self-appointed" representatives. It is not as if they were elected figures.

Why have a law when people can vote out corrupt administrations
Argument: Sainath says that people have now voted in the recent state elections. That is the real way to influence policy
My Response:
In any society there needs to be a way to influence (non-violently) the course of laws towards justice. Voting in elections is just ONE way of such influence.
Sainath, in his Hindu article, says that the people in different states voted in the recent elections, and that is how people can influence policy or take action against corruption. This is a profoundly misguided way of thinking about a democracy, both theoretically and practically.
Even in theory, a democracy allows free speech and free association precisely to encourage political activity at all times. People have different non-violent tools to choose and to engage in political activity. Should we all vote once in 5 years and then forget about whatever our representatives do in those 5 years? That is a pretty useless view of democracy. I would say this even if our representatives are all doing their jobs well.
Practically, of course, what Sainath says is laughable. He has been spending the past 10 years challenging the government on farmers' suicides. His whole point was that
governments in the state and center were actively adopting policies that CAUSED the suicides. How did these policies happen when people continued to vote in elections?
The answer is that no country in the world has the kind of perfect political system where we can leave our elected representatives without vigilance. Definitely not India.
The Indian Parliament gave us TADA; POTA; the constitutional amendment that has now lead to forcing everyone to be fingerprinted(Aadhaar or UID scheme). The Parliament gave us the very regressive Information Technology Act of 2010.
People should pay more attention to what the legislators are upto; and protest in case they try to pass a regressive law. That is a vital role - in fact, it is a much more vital role than voting. Voting is over-hyped.

Why should the Prime Minister be brought under Lokpal? He will get subjected to frivolous charges
Argument: The IAC movement and the government now differ on bringing the PM under the Lokpal. Bringing the PM under Lokpal will lead to filing frivolous charges against him/her. It will also lead to influencing foreign policy and national security issues
My Response: I frankly do not understand this argument. We are a British-style parliamentary democracy, with a Prime Minister. We are not an American style democracy. The Prime Minister does not have any special powers that other ministers lack. In other words, if we are ok with having a cabinet rank minister being investigated by Lokpal, then how is the PM any different?
The above argument may make sense in the United States, where the President is the Head of State. In India, the PM is not the Head of State. There is no special theoretical reason why a PM should be excluded, while a central cabinet minster is included.
If people said that ALL cabinet ministers should be excluded, then that we can argue about. But that is not what people are saying. They seem to think the PM has some special status.

By the way, I just want to remind people reading this blog - Around 2003, a young PWD engineer named Sathyendra Dubey was killed when he wrote about corruption to higher authorities. Sathyendra was afraid of getting killed, so he sent the letter directly to which office?
Yes, he sent it ONLY to the PM's Office (PMO). Vajpayee was PM at that time. That single letter to the PMO pinpointed Sathyendra for murder. In other words, the letter was leaked from the PMO and made its way to Bihar; and led to Sathyendra's murder.

Existing laws are enough to tackle corruption
Argument: The Prevention of Corruption Act and other such acts are adequate to prosecute corrupt public officials. Why do we need new laws? We need existing laws to be implemented well
My Response:This argument is very well addressed in the IAC website.
First, the Lokpal is about a process; not just punishment details.
Secondly, existing laws ARE inadequate. There are several reasons for this - one is that CBI's anti-corruption wing actually reports to the Prime Minister. Therefore it has no way to investigate corruption against the ruling party's wishes.
What the Lokpal bill does is, it sets up an independently funded co-equal branch of government. It makes political influence much more unlikely.

The government, its interlocutors and even some well-meaning citizens have muddied the waters about the Jan Lokpal bill. I urge everyone to go through the IAC website and read the actual draft law. It is a critical first move to control corruption.

English and Tamil Rhymes

2011-06-26T01:09:00.000-07:00

There is a dilemma in my home. Prasanna is two now; and we should be putting him in school in an year.
As a part of his fun education we have been buying cds of rhymes.
The Tamil rhymes are a lot of fun. Buzzers' "Kuzhandhai Paattu" - I is one of the best CDs I have listened. Very good songs and animation. You can watch a couple of them at the end of this post.
Me and my wife like the Tamil rhymes - they are very innocent; takes us back to our own childhood.

தோசை அம்மா தோசை
அம்மா சுட்ட தோசை
அரிசி மாவும் உளுந்து மாவும் கலந்து வைத்த தோசை
அப்பாவுக்கு நாலு, அம்மாவுக்கு மூணு,
அண்ணாவுக்கு ரெண்டு, பாப்பாவுக்கு ஒண்ணு
தின்ன தின்ன ஆசை
திருப்பிக் கேட்டா பூசை!

குருவி பறந்து வந்ததாம்
குழந்தை அருகில் நின்றதாம்
பாவம் அதற்குப் பசித்ததாம்
பாப்பா நெல்லைக் கொடுத்ததாம்
குருவி அந்த நெல்லையே
கொத்திக் கொத்தித் தின்றதாம்
பசியும் நீங்கிப் பறந்ததாம்
பாப்பா இன்பம் கொண்டதாம்

குவா குவா வாத்து
குள்ள மணி வாத்து
மெல்ல உடலைச் சாய்த்து
மேலும் கீழும் பார்த்து
மெல்லமாக நடக்கும்
சின்ன மணி வாத்து

These are, of course, written recently. When I was growing up, my mom had a set of older rhymes:

தங்கப் பொன்னே தாராவே
தட்டான் வீட்டுக்குப் போகாதே
தட்டான் கண்டா பொன் என்பான்
தட்டிக் கொட்டி,
தராசில் வைத்து,
நிருப்பான்!

We all love these, but we have a problem - the schools have interviews while admitting to KG. The interviews may involve reciting rhymes. Apparently, English rhymes are preferred.
So we got a cd full of English rhymes.
I am sure these all have meaning going back to Queen Elizabeth I, but they make no sense to an Indian and his kid.

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall
Humpty Dumpty had a big fall
All the kings horses and all the kings men
could not put together Humpty Dumpty again

I am sure this has some meaning for English men, but you should watch the video. It shows Humpty Dumpty, with a human face, falling down and just breaking apart into pieces. The king's mean try to piece him together again. It looks like a horror movie.

Jack and Jill went up the hill
To fetch a pail of water
Jack fell down and broke his crown
and Jill came tumbling after

The complicated interpretation is in wikipedia here.

In the 17th century, King Charles I tried to reform the taxes on liquid measures. He was blocked by Parliament, so subsequently ordered that the volume of a Jack (1/2 pint) be reduced, but the tax remained the same. This meant that he still received more tax, despite Parliament's veto. Hence "Jack fell down and broke his crown" (many pint glasses in the UK still have a line marking the 1/2 pint level with a crown above it) "and Jill came tumbling after". The reference to "Jill", (actually a "gill", or 1/4 pint) is an indication that the gill dropped in volume as a consequence. A variant of this is that liquids (specifically alcoholic beverages) were watered down, hence, "fetch a pail of water."

I cannot be teaching my kid about tax policy in 17th century England. All that he sees is Jack breaking his "crown" whatever that means.

Then some of the rhymes are plain nonsensical:

Little Jack Connor, sat in a corner,
Eating his christmas pie
He put in his thumb, and pulled out a plum,
and said "what a good boy am I?"

WTF??

Ding Dong Bell
Pussy's in the well
Who put her in? Little Tommy Thin
Who pulled her out? Little Tommy Stout
What a naughty boy was that to drown a pussy cat?

Ok, that is a new way to kill a cat.

Goosy Goosy Gander, where shall I wander?
Upstairs and Downstairs, and in my lady's chamber
There I met an old man, who would not say his prayers
I took him by the left leg and threw him down the stairs

Cruelty to senior citizens

I am not comparing the "West" and the "East". These obviously make a lot of sense for them. But, why should my kid be learning these? Of all the things, why should my kid learn:

Chubby Cheeks, Dimple Chin
Rosy Lips, Teeth within,
Eyes are Blue, Curly hair,
Lovely too, teacher's pet,
Is that you?
Yes, yes, yes!

I have never seen any blue eyed kid in India.

I am not nit-picking. It is annoying that the schools push us in a direction of meaningless English worship.
I do not like "Sloka" classes in schools either. Making the kids talk in English all day and then having them attend sloka classes seems pretty stupid.
But it seems like I have no choice. I am trying to teach the kid "Humpty Dumpty" without being scared myself.

Did TN swing away from the DMK or not?

2011-05-30T10:58:00.000-07:00

There was an article in rediff.com here, a few days back. Titled "Tamizh voter did not punish the DMK. Here is why", it was written by Mr.N.Gopalaswami (a former Election Commissioner of Tamil Nadu) and Praveen Chakravarty.
The article got a lot of comments and I realized its popularity when a friend mentioned it to me in a meeting. I had myself written a comment to that article, buried somewhere - I had argued that the authors were wrong.

This is an important talking point - and we have to be careful about it. What the authors purport to prove is that in spite of the coverage of the corruption cases against A.Raja and evidence of DMK involvement in the 2G scam, the people who vote for DMK continue to do so. But from that, they jump to the conclusion that the TN electorate has not punished the DMK. In other words, corruption is not a big issue in people's minds. Implicitly, being corrupt does not seem to be punished by the electorate.
This is a very serious result, if true.
I decided to do check the numbers myself and analyze the results. This post is a description of that.

The Authors' argument

In 2006 TN assembly elections, the authors say, of every 100 people in a constituency that had a DMK candidate, 46 voted for the DMK.
In 2011, 42 voted for the DMK.
Therefore only 3 people swung away from the DMK; and this is a very small percentage. The authors argue that the election results wound up the way they did, with a massive ADMK win, only because of the alliance between DMDK and ADMK.

Adjusted Vote Share vs Total Vote Share

Here are the links to the wikipedia pages on 2006 TN assembly elections and 2011 assembly elections.

You will see in the bottom of the page, a table with the final breakup of votes. You will see a column called "Vote %" and another called "Adj Vote %".
The DMK's vote percent in 2006 was 26.5%. In other words, out of 100 people who voted in that elections, only 26 voted for DMK.
The DMK's vote percent in 2011 was 22.4%. Out of 100 people, 22 voted for DMK.
This means that 4 voters swung away from DMK in 2011. But what is more important, this 4 as a percentage of DMK voters is 20%.
So 20% of former DMK voters did not vote again for DMK. That is a pretty significant percentage.

But where did the authors of that article come up with the numbers 46 and 42?
They used the NEXT column called "Adj vote %". They used the adjusted vote share, which is the average of the vote shares per constituency.
I think the total vote share is more important than the adjusted vote share. By the total vote share 20% of DMK voters swung away. By Adjusted, less than 10% swung away. I think this is a pretty significant difference.

But let us assume we use adjusted vote shares. All that it means is that the voters of DMK continued to vote for it. That does NOT mean (as the authors imply) that Tamil Nadu electorate had not punished the DMK - people who did not vote the last time, and new voters may have opted for the opposite party, as I will show below.

Swing in favor of ADMK

In 2006, the total vote share of the ADMK was 32.6%.
In 2011, it was 38.4%.
In other words, 6 voters out of 100 swung towards ADMK. The authors have simply not counted this as a reaction against DMK. But, in an almost two party system like Tamil Nadu, the swing in favor matters.

Absolute Numbers
Most importantly, the voting percentage in 2006 was 70%. In 2011 it was 78%. This jump means that the total number of voters who voted for ADMK went up from 10.7 lakhs to 14.1 lakhs. While those who voted for DMK went down from 8.7 lakhs to 8.2 lakhs. Part of this has to do with lesser number of constituencies the DMK competed in (130 in 2006; 119 in 2011). But the difference is just 11 seats. That cannot account for their voters number not even going up with the increased electorate's size (Total votes were 32.9 lakhs in 2006;36.7 lakhs in 2011).

In conclusion, I would say the DMK WAS punished by the Tamil Nadu electorate. I think people are smart enough to realize when they are being conned.

The India Against Corruption movement

2011-05-15T12:26:00.000-07:00

(Updated below)
Anna Hazare and team are now working on the draft Lokpal Bill. I wanted to address some of the arguments raised against the India Against Corruption(IAC) movement.
Primarily, Corruption is a systemic problem. It is not something that we have in our blood. The below arguments, instead, address corruption as a kind of individual mind-level thing. That is wrong. It is also counter-productive, because it tries to make citizens feel powerless. That is the goal of these arguments - to make citizens feel cynical and powerless and just give up - while a few people on top can loot the country.

Anna Hazare's tactics

First, Anna Hazare's fast was not a fast to eliminate corruption.
A lot of scorn and disbelief was poured on Anna, because he was apparently trying to end corruption suddenly. The media represented it as a fast against corruption.
But in reality, the GOAL of the fast was very specific - it was to get a few "civil society" members to participate in the drafting of the new Lokpal Bill; and to scrap the government proposed Lokpal bill.
This goal was clearly achievable and they did manage to win it.
The goal was never to "eliminate" corruption with a fast; Anna or the Bhushans or India Against Corruption are not idiots. They did not expect that suddenly all public servants would reform with a fast.
Gandhians are fairly intelligent. They understand how Gandhi used non-violent tactics. Each one of Gandhi's fasts or marches were planned to achieve a very SPECIFIC goal (such as repealing the tax on salt). He never fasted saying he wanted independence.
But thanks to the way we learn history; and the way our media dumbs down issues; Anna's fast was called a fast to eliminate corruption. I think that was a disservice to his fast.

Can we eliminate corruption with a bill?

My short answer would be yes. The long answer is that it depends on what the bill is trying to do.
If the Lokpal bill simply said, "We hereby declare corruption to be a crime. Be gone, corruption" then the above question is valid. But that is not the content of the bill. The bill is neither about outlawing corruption (existing laws do that) or prescribing punishments for corruption (existing laws do that).
The primary purpose of the Jan Lokpal bill is to set up an independent authority on par with the Supreme Court or the Election Commission (This requires an amendment to the Constitution). The bill goes on to specify the powers of that authority; its funding sources and the organizational structure.
Thus the Lokpal Bill is not a "law" in the sense it is commonly understood in India. It is more about setting up a process.
Does the Election Commission eliminate voting irregularities? No, but it brings them down considerably.
This same way setting up a Lokpal structure will REDUCE corruption, over time. That is what the bill tries to do - create Lokpal.
The opponents of Lokpal simply set an impossible standard by asking the question "Will it eliminate corruption". No, it won't - but it will bring it down over time. And that is fine, and better than having no Lokpal at all.

Aren't we all corrupt?

One English magazine ran a story about how we are all corrupt ourselves and so on.
Before I address that specific argument, I want to point out a couple of things:
1. When we had the race attacks in Australia an year back, Outlook magazine ran a cover story saying "Aren't we all racists?". I read through the story; and they were basically comparing the use of fairness creams in India with actual race-based murders in Australia. I wrote a detailed rebuttal of that here.
Whenever someone says "Aren't we all guilty of X?", they are blaming everyone except themselves. The "we" in that question is simply a trick. They are really saying, "I am a nice guy/girl and not guilty, but look at all those other Indians"
It is a feature of predominantly conservative societies (such as India) to either blame the victim or assign guilt to society in a way that is unsolvable.

2. We also have to remember that currently there is a class war going on in India. That fact was laid out in the open from the 2G-scam; the Radia tapes; and Wikileaks exposures. The upper 1% of the country, including corporate media, politicians, and big industrialists are in an alliance to divide the country into pieces and sell all of it.
Thus, whoever asks the question "Aren't we all corrupt" is actually engaged in action AGAINST addressing the corruption problem. The introduction of this "talking point" is a deliberate attempt to divert attention from the criminals.

Now, for the actual argument: No, all of us are not corrupt. I have certainly held no public office, and so I cannot be blamed for corruption. I think that is true for 95% of Indians.
The Lokpal Bill is an effort to address corruption by PUBLIC officials. Because they have the most power, this is the correct focus of the bill. Let us say my apartment complex has a secretary and that person is diverting funds. That is NOT the purview of the Lokpal Bill.
We are not trying to become a saintly nation - we are simply trying to control corruption by public officials.
Again, this argument sets an impossible standard. The pundits are saying this - since we are all guilty of some thought crimes at some point, we should not pass the Lokpal Bill because none of us are pure.
If that is the standard, why have the Indian Penal Code at all? Since we have all stolen laddus from Mom's kitchen at some point, we should not have any laws against theft. That is what this argument boils down to.

The Jan Lokpal activists set up an alternative government

The concern was that civil society members "blackmailed" the government to include themselves. Thus they were described as setting up an alternate power center.
I thought this claim is fine in the abstract, but it makes no sense in current India. The Radia tapes and Wikileaks exposures clearly show that we ALREADY have an alternate government in India - it is really the Tatas, Ambanis, a few other industrialists, media persons and then some political families running the country.
Given this situation, I do not see a problem with another power center.

At this point corruption defines India. A few days back I read about pilots getting fake licenses - one of them landed a plane nose first. Corruption is so deep that we cannot trust ANY regulator of the government. Every regulatory authority is an opportunity to make more money and thwart the basic purpose of the regulation. On top of this, we are going to be setting up nuclear plants! And we are going to force all citizens to have Unique IDs! How is this whole system supposed to work when the government is so deeply corrupt?
I would call corruption and criminalization of politics as the worst problems facing India.
It need not be this way. We have strong enough institutions that we could be a nation without any corruption.
Punishment has to start from the top. That is the only way we can clear this mess.

Update:
In response to Sayan's comment citing P.Sainath's criticism of the Lokpal:

The "appointment" problem or who forms the collegium in Lokpal is a question not specific to Lokpal itself. It is a problem with creating checks and balances in any "co-equal" branch.
The Constitution sets this process up for the Supreme Court. The President of India appoints SC judges. By all accounts the SC has a lot of power - and its justices are not appointed by an elected official. The President of India is not elected directly by the people.
For the Election Commission, it is the same case. The CEC is appointed by the President.
The Lokpal creation faces the same problem - how do you choose "independent" people who are not elected directly by the people? You have 3 choices:
1. Have a separate election across India to choose Lokpal appointees. There are countries that do this kind of separate elections for co-equal branches. The United States, for example, has elections for state level judges. Federal judges are appointed.
Is this feasible? Can we afford to implement an alternate representational system? And, I think the biggest fear - will that system be dominated by political parties again?
2. Have the President of India appoint the officers to Lokpal. Again, the fear here is that we open ourselves to manipulation by the elected representatives.
3. Arrive at some other way to determine the collegium. This is the approach the current Jan Lokpal team has taken. They have tried to choose a collegium that is "untainted" by politics; and yet provides the correct checks and balances.
The third approach is similar to creating an "independent" investigative commission by appointing retired HC or SC judges. That happens right now.
There are precedents to the above approach. The National Police Commission recommendations 30 years back suggested a collegium that consists of retired judges, eminent people and an equal set of representatives from both ruling and opposition.

Thus, I want to look at the Lokpal collegium problem as a general problem with establishing ANY independent body. I don't think it has anything specific to do with the arrogance of Jan Lokpal writers.
Given that the bill is being written in conjunction with politicians, I hope that a compromise solution will be found that involves more elected representatives. What we will get is an engineered solution. And that is fine.

Ideally, of course, we should not be so afraid of political parties and people's elected repesentatives. But that is how things have evolved. I understand the ideal that people's representatives should ultimately have real power - but as I cited above, that ideal is already broken by having other co-equal branches such as the SC and EC.

The Warriors at Home

2011-04-19T11:15:00.000-07:00

I live in an apartment in Chennai these days. The residents usually keep to themselves. We don't hear a lot of noises from outside. It is a good community, with some common facilities.
One of these facilities is a Gym. I can see people sneaking in and out some times. At times I walk around the complex listening to the birds. But otherwise I strain to hear a snatch of conversation from any other house.
You see, when I was growing up, we did not have Gyms in our flats. Instead families lost calories by having loud fights in their homes. Everyone could listen in and they usually did. I remember during one of my family fights, the entire neighborhood was standing outside, sometimes cheering. They all had broad smiles in their faces.
I keep saying this - while television saved our nation from itself, it messed up some old-fashioned entertainment and exercise.
People were healthier in olden days because they would have a lot of exercise at home; most of this came from fighting within joint families. This is why the joint family was a great idea. You put together two guys in a room, with a transistor radio in between. They will soon be fighting over the channel to turn to. Now imagine three different families with that same radio.

Our family issues were usually long running epic wars. At any point we may be engaged in a small battle and one or the other may lose. But we were focussed on long term victory and total domination. We even had epic battles, in which the location of the fight kept changing from room to room. One such battle with my brother started in the kitchen; and then my mother joined in and the action went from kitchen to hall to even the toilet.
My brother and me were having lunch. It is a small kitchen, so my brother reached out to get something. It stuck me that he deliberately dropped a bit of his food on my plate.
I yelled at him and we went back and forth. Finally I dumped my plate's content - not on his plate, but on him.
Brother did not expect this and before he could react my mother joined in and asked me what the hell I was doing. She took the plate from my brother's head, and dumped more food into it. And she wanted me to eat it. (Both of us ignored my brother who was sitting with Sambar dripping from his hair)
I ran to the toilet and tried to close the door. Mother follows me in and asks me to eat it right there. I push mother and mother falls on cement tank; cement tank breaks. Mother is fine.
I feel sorry for her. I feel more sorry for myself, because I know that Father will come in the evening; and he may not understand my perspective about the cement tank. In fact I am sure I won't have time to explain my perspective, before the beating started.
I sit at the dining room and was saying abject apologies to my mom, when my brother walks in. He has by now removed the food stuff from his person. He takes a metal pot and bangs it on my head.
There ended the battle of the cement tank.

I had seen some other families - they did not fight. But they also ended up being fat. In our family you have to be nimble. My brother was very nimble, but he also had the knack of saying the exact wrong thing to my Father.
One day we were all eating together. Joking to each other; Enjoying the meal. I remember now that I had a eerie sense of foreboding - the whole setting was unnatural.
Then my Father asked the Family a question - what was his first job?
I stayed quiet. My brother could not. He jumped in and started counting down from Senior Clerk, Upper Division Clerk etc. Father kept smiling and saying no.
Then my brother had a brain wave. He said, "Were you a peon?"
Soon he was running from cupboard to cupboard seeking sanctuary. His idea seemed to be that he could get in a closet and close the door; and Father will then abandon the "battle". Alas, none of our closets had doors. He only got himself wedged in a narrow closet, unable to move, while Father pummeled him.

One of our neighbor families had a different problem. Doordarshan telecast the movie "Mudhal Mariyadhai" in the usual Sunday afternoon slot. In that movie, Shivaji Ganesan plays a middle-aged man who is ill-treated by his wife. He falls in love with a young fisher-woman and they become very close.
This movie fulfilled the fantasy of every family man in Tamil Nadu at that time. Since the actress Radha played the young woman, these guys imagined that they all had their own Radhas waiting for them. They also imagined that they were all being ill-treated by their wives. It helped them feel like Shivaji Ganesan. More importantly, it made them find Radha in every younger woman they saw.
This particular neighbor was in a good mood until the movie started playing in the TV. Then as the movie progressed, the family noticed that he was being morose. he started complaining about his wife. By the end of the movie, he was in a frenzy about being ill-treated. He could not stand his malign family - nagging wife and ungrateful children. He started yelling and screaming. We all were listening and making fun of them.
It took him a few days to come out of "Mudhal Maryadhai" syndrome.

Now, during all this, there was one family, that was annoyingly peaceful. they never fought. We could never hear their voices outside. They were very proud of it and we were all waiting for them to have a big fight.
It finally happened this way. You have to follow this closely.
There was a teen aged girl who lived with her parents in our colony. This girl, thinking back now, was not all that great; but she was there (as Sir Edmund Hilary would have said). Her neighbor had a teen-aged son. This young man took a fancy to the girl next door. She had no idea.
There was a servant maid in the girl's home. That maid was also serving in another house.
Our Romeo thought that his way to the heart of the girl went through the maid. Why? No idea. But he wanted desperately to give the girl a love letter. He could easily have passed that letter on. But our genius, instead, approached the servant maid. He wanted her to pass on the love-letter.
This he did with the help of two other friends. One of these was the son of the peaceful family guy.
As you can imagine, it was not the best plan. First, the maid thought the letter was for herself. Then she was faced with three young guys assuring her that Romeo would take care of his lady love forever (he was in Plus One at that time). She went and told everyone.
One fine evening we were all playing downstairs, when there were shouts from somewhere. I automatically thought it was my family, in battle stations. Well, it was not. Surprise of surprises, the peaceful family were all yelling at each other and fighting. Their son had brought shame on them.

We watched the fight for some time. It followed us in our homes. We talked about it for a few days, complaining about how these families were too loud. Everybody felt very mature and good for some time.
Then my brother asked for a bicycle and all hell broke loose.

Five questions for India's leaders

2011-04-10T11:57:00.000-07:00

Since we are having elections shortly; and our state's ruling family now has the pride of being the "invisible hand" behind the 2G scam, here are a few questions for India's "smarter" political leaders:
1. What do you think Government's role is, in society? Do you think government's focus should be on revenue or in ensuring long-term happiness of citizens?
If a neighborhood has a park, owned by the government; and that park is in a prime area of the city; do you think government should set up an SEZ there and bring more corporations and thus boost revenue? Or do you think the park should be available for the citizens to use?

2. Is due-process more important to you? Or are immediate benefits more important to you?
Let us say that you are offering a piece of government land. A corporation offers to provide a lot of benefits to the local community. Therefore, would you bypass an actual auction or bidding process and make the land available to the the said corporation? Let us say the bidding process takes more time; while the corporation can start providing benefits immediately. What is your role as a minister? Would you make sure due process is followed, or would you "cut" the process short?

3. Are party and the government the same?
Let us say that your actions as a minister affects a corporation. Let us say that corporation donates money to your party. Do you consider it necessary to act against the corporation? Let us then say that your party's success is crucial for the next elections and even for the future of India; and let us say the alternative party is horrible. Would you still act against the corporation?

4. Do you think government should be run like a company? Do you agree with the "CEO" title given to Chief Ministers? In other words, do you think the goals of a company and a government are the same?

5. Do you think political parties are open institutions, that are the first level of defense, when appointing a candidate? Or do you think it is the people who should decide if a candidate is fit or now?
In other words, if a candidate with somewhat shady dealings, was likely to win in a constituency, would you still choose them? Do you think people are the ultimate judge of a candidate or do political parties have a role in filtering candidates?

Those are my five questions for Karunanidhi, Jayalalitha, Manmohan Singh, Rahul Gandhi,Modi and all of the rest. I think answers to these are at the heart of the current "ideology" in India.

Vijay TV Westernization debate

2011-04-03T10:39:00.000-07:00

The Vijay TV debate show "Neeyaa Naanaa" covered the issue of Westernization last week. The topic of the debate was "Is Westernization desirable or not".
The comments by the people involved made me consider the topic in some detail. Here are my opinions:

Individual preferences
One of the participants in the show maintained that he preferred western food; but went on to claim that this was a matter of individual freedom.
I have encountered this argument before - and it is simply a means to shut the opponent down. It is truly a matter of individual freedom whatever someone chooses to eat; but, once you publicly talk about it in a debate show, any other person also has the freedom to criticize you.
Remember Richard Gere kissed Shilpa Shetty in a show and there was a big hue and cry over it? We were discussing this in a restaurant - and I said public displays of affection were ok. Another guy said he was offended even if a couple held hands in public. I said that seemed a pretty low bar to get offended over. He immediately said it was his personal opinion; and so by implication no one could talk about it.
It is only your personal opinion when you have a thought in your head. When you publicly express a thought, you have the freedom to do that. At the same time, others have the freedom to condemn your thought.
This is a not a trivial issue - it is the basis of a very bad misunderstanding of Freedom of Speech rights. Freedom of Speech right protects you from government censorship. It does not protect you from criticism at all. Your critic has the same Freedom of Speech.
Therefore the issue of Westernization in the private or public sphere is certainly open to commentary - as long as you are not advocating hanging everyone who orders a pizza.

Westernization and Sociology
There is certainly a case to be made that our society is changing rapidly. The pace of this change, the nature of it, its causes are all subject matter for Sociology. If a lot of people in the United States started using Hindi words while talking, do you think everyone would say "Ah...individual freedom at work" and throw up their hands? No, they would study the phenomenon to death - that is exactly why the pace and causes for Westernization are open to study.
Let us take the case of the Valentine's Day celebration. This has become a lightning rod for fights between the Indian culture police such as the Shiv Sena; and people who believe in individual freedom. That is fine. I think the Shiv Sena are thugs too.
But ANALYZING the sudden popularity of that day and the causes for it are completely game for an inquiring person. Such analysis itself does not mean that I want to ban the Valentine's Day - it simply means I want to find out the sociological reasons for its popularity.

Westernization vs Americanization

In the debate show I noticed that everyone stuck to the word "Westernization" even though a lot of what they were talking about was really Americanization or Modernization. These three words have become synonymous in our minds. But they do not mean the same thing.
The West itself, most of the states in Europe, for example, are actually a victim of "Westernization". From Scotland to Switzerland, a lot of homogeneity has developed over the past 50 years. These have been at the cost of local cultures and arts. The United States itself has become very homogenous in this time. This has been due to the cultural "hegemony" of the United States (I do not use the term hegemony in a negative way).
This is an important distinction - because when people broadly say Westernization it means a quest for new experiences or the celebration of a "better" culture, a culture of the Europeans. But the European native cultures themselves are under threat from "Westernization". And this mono-culture is actually changing too.
This is why debating about eating pizza or Dosa seem silly to me - the pizza as we eat it is not "Western" in any sense. The big companies that are pizza franchises are all American; and their preparation has little to do with the pizza prepared in Italian homes. (For one, they would never dream of putting masala on pizza)
There are bigger issues at stake than pizza.
The truth is the USA is a global hegemon in terms of money and power. Therefore there exists a good reason why it exercises cultural hegemony too.
The mono-culture in the USA itself, meanwhile is largely shaped by the corporate media there. Thus, you may as well celebrate "American-corporate-mediaization" instead of Westernization.

Westernization vs Modernization
Neither is Westernization synonymous with Modernization. In the debate show one person mentioned that her husband (who is a Christian) wonders why we should receive money all time with the right hand (as we do in India). She mentioned that she had no answer for this question.
If her point was that there are a lot of absurd social conventions in India, she is right. But that is the case in the West too. I lived in Philadelphia for a few years in an apartment complex that had four blocks. None of these blocks had a 13th floor! The floors reached 12 and then the next was 14. There was no 13th floor because 13 is an unlucky number.
Social conventions and rituals exist in all societies. The Americans have very absurd fashion rules such as not wearing certain colors in the winter.
My point is that it is easy - not really knowing anything about "Western" culture - to say that it is devoid of all the ills of ours.
One common confusion is about the Indian wedding. The Indian wedding involves 500 to 1000 invitees and a lot of rituals in some castes. In a forum debate someone said it was less meaningful as compared to a "Western" wedding.
But the Western wedding (the wedding rituals we see in Hollywood movies are not representative) has its own set of peculiarities. Once you have agreed to marriage as a ritual, almost every society has absurdities in marriages.
As human beings we are prone to meaningless rituals; it is hard to escape them. The NASA countdown to rocket launch is a ritual (the Russians do not do countdowns). The American Presidential inauguration is a ritual. Swearing in a political leader is a ritual.
There is very little specifically "better" about Western rituals.

Western Music
The SS Music Channel VJ Pooja, who was a guest in this debate show, started saying that Western music is better and has global reach. She mentioned that it influences Indian film music a lot.
I am always suspicious of people who claim about a better art or a better music based on regions or cultures. The amazing diversity you find in cultures in this world allows for many different dimensions of music, dance, painting, cinema, sculpture or literature. We cannot claim that one is better than the other based purely on a region to which an art belongs to.
The truth is that Western music has a big degree of penetration around the world because the West ruled most of the world (again, using the term West loosely).

To me, if Indian music borrows from the West it actually enriches Indian music. And vice versa. Music and other arts are not static - they get better when they borrow other influences. This is as true for Western music as it is for Indian music. Instead, it is weird to consider this "borrowing" to be a weak point of Indian music - it is a point in our favor, not against.
I have a great respect for all aspects of music including Western music - I don't think you can compare these music systems at all.
As an aside, the people who make such comparisons also make another mistake - they compare Indian CLASSICAL music with Western POPULAR music. This is a confusing comparison - classical music in any culture has lesser number of listeners (just as classical literature has lower number of readers). This is true in the West too - not everyone is grooving to Mozart over there.

The Biggest Issue
Having said all this, I thought the debate skipped the most important issues of Westernization.
The fact that our language is slowly decimated by schools which require students to speak only in English - that is a big concern. That is a conscious, deliberate attempt by the school system. I have written multiple times about this here.
The fact that all our advertisements in media show extremely fair people who move about in a Western styled landscape is a cause for concern. To me, it seems it makes us identify with white people, thereby subtly making us a client state.

These two combine to show a conscious attempt to push us into a forced Westernization program set by our elites.
That bothers me; Pizza eating does not.

Mynah, Aadukalam - the issue with Tamil movies

2011-02-24T06:43:00.000-08:00

சமீபத்தில் மைனா படம் பார்த்தேன். அதை பற்றிய ஒரு இணைய விவாதத்திலும் சில கருத்துக்கள் சொன்னேன். இந்த கட்டுரை தமிழ் சினிமா பற்றிப் பல நாட்களாக என்னுடைய மனதில் இருக்கும் சில எண்ணங்களை எடுத்து வைக்கிறது.

தமிழ் சினிமா இந்தக் கடைசி ஐந்து வருடங்களில் நிறைய மாறி விட்டதாகத் தான் எனக்குத் தோன்றுகிறது. அந்த மாற்றங்கள் காமிரா, படத்தொகுப்பு, நடிப்பு, நடிகர்களின் தேர்வு , திரைக்கதையின் அமைப்பு மற்றும் ஆர்ட் டைரக்க்ஷன் போன்ற துறைகளில் பிரமாதமாகத் தெரிகிறது. இதை நான் ஒத்துக் கொள்கிறேன். இது பெருமைக்குரிய விஷயம்.

ஆனால் தமிழ் சினிமாவில் மோசமான அம்சம் என்று நான் கருதுவது கதையிலும், கதையின் பொருளிலும் உள்ள இரு குறைகள்.

வன்முறையின் சித்தரிப்பு

மைனா, பருத்திவீரன், சுப்பிரமண்ணியபுரம் இவை யாவுமே வன்முறையுடன் முடிகின்றன. இந்த வன்முறை தேவையில்லாதது, மற்றும் சரியாகப் படம் பிடிக்கப் படாதது என்பது என் முதல் குறை.
இதைப் பற்றி நான் பேசும் போது, பொதுவாக சில மாற்றுக் கருத்துக்கள் சொல்லப்படுகின்றன.
- வன்முறை வாழ்வின் ஒரு அம்சம். அதுவும் "விளிம்பு நிலை மக்கள்" வாழ்வில் முக்கியமான ஒரு அம்சம். ரியலிசதுடன் எடுக்கப்படும் படங்கள் இத்தகைய வன்முறையைக் காட்டுவதில் ஆச்சரியமில்லை என்பது ஒரு வாதம்.
- மற்றொரு வாதம் கொரிய மற்றும் ஹாலிவுட் படங்களைக் காட்டி அதில் இல்லாத வன்முறையா என்பது.
இந்த இரு வாதங்களும் சரியா?
நான் மேலே சொன்ன படங்களில் வன்முறை ரியலிசத்துடன் எடுக்கப்பட்டதே இல்லை. உதாரணத்திற்கு வெயில் படத்தை எடுத்து கொள்ளுங்கள். அல்லது மைனா படத்தை எடுத்துக் கொள்ளுங்கள். இவை இரண்டிலுமே வன்முறை என்பது முடிவில் உள்ள சோகத்தை மறைக்கவே காட்டப்படுகின்றன. மைனாவில் போலீஸ் அதிகாரியின் கடைசிச் செயல்கள் ரியலிசத்தினால் எடுக்கப்பட்டவையே அல்ல. அவை படம் பார்த்து விட்டுச் செல்பவர் மனதில் சோகம் நிற்காமல், பழி வாங்கிய திருப்தி ஓங்கி நிற்கவே காட்டப்படுகின்றன.
இப்படிப்பட்ட வன்முறையைத் தெளிவாக படத்தின் வணிக வெற்றிக்காக எடுத்து விட்டு ரியலிசம் என்று அதை சமாளிப்பதாகவே தோன்றுகிறது.
அப்படியே வன்முறை கதையில் நடக்கிறது என்றே எடுத்துக் கொள்வோம். அதை அப்படியே காட்டுவது தான் ரியலிசமா என்ன? ரியலிசம் என்பது இயக்குனரின் கட்டு மீறிய ஒன்றல்ல. இயக்குனர்களும் கதை சொல்லிகளும் படைப்பாளிகள். கதையில் ஒவ்வொரு காட்சியிலும் அவர்களுடைய படைப்புக்கு மேல் அவர்களுக்கு கண்ட்ரோல் இருக்க வேண்டும். வன்முறையைக் காட்டுவதற்கு எவ்வளவோ வழிகள் இருக்கின்றன. அதில் ஒன்றையுமே அணுகாமல் ரத்தம் சிதறுவதை ஒரு மெஷின் போல காட்டுவதற்கு இயக்குனர் எதற்கு?

ஹாலிவுட் படங்களில், தரண்டினோ போன்றவர்கள் படங்களில் வன்முறை ஒரு கொண்டாட்டமாகவே வருகிறது என்பது உண்மையே. ஆனால் அப்படங்கள் வன்முறையை ஒரு ஸ்டைலாக ஏற்றுக் கொள்கின்றன. நம் படங்களைப் போல, பாதி வரை காமெடி, பாட்டு முடிவில் கோரக் கொலைகள், மற்றும் பழி வாங்குதல் என்று அர்த்தமே இல்லாமல் போவதில்லை.
முதலில் நாம் தமிழர்கள் பார்க்கக் கூடிய நல்ல கதைகளை, படங்களை எடுப்போம் - பிறகு தரண்டிநோவைப் பின்பற்றலாம் என்பது என் தாழ்மையான கருத்து.

ஹீரோயிசம் செத்து விட்டதா?

சிறிது நாட்களுக்கு முன்னால் ஆடுகளம் படம் பார்த்தேன். மைனாவைப் போலவே அதிலும் அர்த்தமே இல்லாத ரவுடி ஹீரோவும் அவன் காதலும்.
இதைப் பற்றி சிலருடன் பேசிய போது, நான் இப்படங்களில் ஹீரோக்களுடன் நாம் ஒன்ற முடிவதில்லை என்று சொன்னேன். அதற்க்கு அவர்கள், "இப்பொழுதெல்லாம் படங்களில் ஹீரோக்கள் என்று யாரும் இல்லை. கதை தான் ஹீரோ", என்று சொன்னார்கள்.
இது உண்மையா என்ன?
நான் ஹீரோ என்று சொன்னதும் என் நண்பர்கள் ரஜினி ஸ்டைல் ஹீரோ என்று நினைத்துக் கொள்கிறார்கள். எனவே இந்த பதில் சொல்கிறார்கள். ஆனால், ஆடுகளம் படத்தையோ, மைனா படத்தையோ வேறு நாட்டுக்காரர் ஒருவரிடம் போட்டு காட்டி, இதில் ஹீரோ யார் என்று கேட்டால், மிக சரியாகச் சொல்வார்கள் என்று எனக்குத் தோன்றுகிறது.
ஏனென்றால் இவ்விரு படங்களிலும் ஹீரோக்கள் இருக்கிறார்கள். படம் யாருடைய கதைகளை முன் வைக்கிறதோ, யாரிடம் நம் பார்வையை இட்டுச் செல்கிறதோ, அவர் ஹீரோ தான் - ஆணாக இருந்தாலும் சரி, பெண்ணாக இருந்தாலும் சரி. ஹீரோ இல்லாமல் படம் எடுக்க முடியாது என்று நான் கூற வரவில்லை - மைனாவும் ஆடுகளமும் அது போன்ற படங்கள் இல்லை என்று தான் சொல்கிறேன். இரண்டிலுமே ஹீரோக்கள் இருக்கிறார்கள்.

அவர்களுடன் நாம் ஒன்றாமல் போவதற்குக் காரணம் அவர்களைக் கிட்டத்தட்ட ரவுடி அல்லது லூசு போலக் கட்டுவது தான். தவறு நம்முடைய புரிதலில் இல்லை. படத்தின் இயக்குனர் மோசமான, பெண்களை தொந்திரவு செய்கிற, சம்பந்தமேயில்லாமல் மேலே பாய்கிற நபர்களை ஹீரோவாகக் கதையை எழுதியிருக்கிறார். மைனாவின் ஹீரோ ஒரு கடைந்தெடுத்த மடையன் என்பதில் சந்தேகமே இல்லை - இவர் போன்ற ஒருவரை நாம் பக்கத்துக்கு வீட்டிலோ தெருவிலோ பார்த்தால் எரிச்சல் தான் வரும்.
சில பல காரணங்களினால் தமிழில் சாதாரணமான மனிதர்களை வைத்துக் கதை எழுத வருவதில்லை. அடிமட்டத்து மக்கள் என்ற பெயரில் அதீதமான் நம்ப முடியாத, நம்மால் கொஞ்சம் கூட இரக்கம் கொள்ள முடியாத கதாபாத்திரங்களை வைத்துக் கதையை எழுதுகிறார்கள். இதற்கும் அந்த கதாபாத்திரங்கள் ஏழையா பணக்காரனா, விளிம்பு நிலை மனிதனா என்பதற்கும் சம்பந்தமே இல்லை.
உண்மையில், முடிவில் உள்ள வன்முறையை மட்டும் தெளிவாக திட்டமிட்டு விட்டுப் பிறகு மிச்சக் கதையை எழுதுவது போல இருக்கிறது.

சுருக்கமாகச் சொல்வது என்றால், தேவையற்ற வன்முறை சித்தரிப்பு , மற்றும் அசட்டு ஹீரோக்களை விட்டு தமிழ்ப் படம் வெளியே வர வேண்டும். அதற்குப் பதிலாக சர்வதேசத் தரத்தில் படம் எடுப்பதாகக் கூறுவது நம்மை நாமே ஏமாற்றிக் கொள்ளத் தான்.

My experience with religion

2011-02-08T08:43:00.000-08:00

For the first 20-25 years of my life I was a pretty religious person. This blog post tracks my experiences in religion.

I suddenly found a great attachment to religion in 2nd standard. The bullock cart for taking us all to school would wait outside, while I will be chanting Kandhar Sashti Kavasam for half an hour. My teacher did not know what to make of this; she had to wait outside too.
My hope at that time was that I would become a holy man. This lasted until I saw Sri Vidhya in 4th standard (not the actress). I had joined a new school and there was a divine girl named SriVidhya. For the next two years that I studied with her, I do not remember chanting Kandhar Sashti Kavasam.

At that time, performances known as "Kathakalatchebam" were famous in Tamil Nadu. Krubanandha Vaariaar, one of the most famous performers, used to draw huge crowds. He would talk for 10 days about the Ramayanam or Mahabharatham. I call them performances because they were not solely devotional. Vaariaar used to joke a lot; sing; and would have danced if his size had permitted. Sukhi.Sivam, who now talks in television about the evils of coke cans, used to be young and funny then.
WE used to go to a lot of these performances. One of the more devotional and serious ones were by a person named Krishna Premi. He had disciples and a retinue following him ; and so he was more like a "swamiji".
I was very inspired by him (by that time SriVidhya was gone - my parents put me in a gents school). So one day while we were walking to listen to him, I decided that I would ask him my question. My question's inspiration was taken from Vivekananda's question to Ramakrishna(and Nachiketas's question to Yama). "Some say there is God; some say there isn't. What do you think?" (for context - I was in 6th standard at that time)
A bunch of people were standing before Krishna Premi and they were falling one by one at his feet. I was impatient - I was afraid I would forget the exact question. In my mind the time for self-realization had come. I would ask him the question, he would answer it brilliantly. And then he would deserve to take me as a disciple. I may even end up in Chicago.
I approached him and nervously said, " Some say there is God; some... "
He nodded his head and said, "Ok" and moved on to the next person.

At some point in this whole deal, I decided that I knew a lot about religion. I felt that I had crossed the stage of the masses who have to deal with Bhakthi,offer prayers and had to make pilgrimages etc. These foolish people actually did not realize what Vedanta says! I decided that I would follow the Vedanta and Bhagavat Gita and all that.
In this, I was helped by my family. My parents were getting into Vedanta themselves. Discussing Vedanta with different people is an exercise in increasing intensity of self-righteousness. When two middle-aged Vedantins of the 20th century met, their conversation went like:
V1: That is why I have given up all ties to my children. I tell my son, you go to college or become a peon, I don't care. I have no attachments.
V2: Why just to children? I have given up ties to my wife. After my duties are done, I will just leave for (usually Himalayas or Kashi)
V1: Come on, wife and children are not the only ties. I told all my relations....
and so on. They try to beat each other by how much they have given up "attachment". I have not seen one guy (it is always guys) from this circle actually go to Himalayas. They all stuck around until retirement; complained about pension; and are now generally Green Card holders and spend their time watching Asianet for some reason.

My family was also into Sanskrit at this time. I discovered this one day when I came back from playing outside and found a strange conversation at home:
My dad: But ..., you have too much Kshaathram in your voice.
My brother: No, I don't have any Kshaatram
Mom: You are always talking with so much Nishtooram

What the hell? What is Kshaatram? Who is Nishtooram? And they were all talking as if they all knew these words. I did not ask them, of course. I just managed to sneak in weird words myself (such as NiratcharaGutchi) into our conversation. At some points, I would say 50% of the words we used made no sense to each other.
It was just a phase.

In the newspaper Hindu, Khushwant Singh wrote an article that dismissed the idea of reincarnation. I got upset at this and spent one full day brooding about how to answer Khushwant Singh. That is how I developed the "Law of Conservation of Souls".
You see, the Bhagavat Gita says the soul can neither be created nor destroyed. That is similar (in my mind) to saying energy can neither be created nor destroyed. My letter to the editor of The Hindu had the following passage:
"According to the Law of Conservation of Souls, a soul is neither created nor destroyed. But we do know that there are a lot more people and souls in the world now rather than earlier. Where did all the new souls come from? They must be coming from other alien civilizations in distant stars, which are getting destroyed all the time"
They must have had a good laugh in the editor's room about the alien stars.

As a Vedantin, when I went to temples it was pure torture. On the one hand, I wanted to pray fervently about getting marks in Plus 2 exams; or getting at least one neighborhood girl to be my girlfriend.
On the other hand, as a Vedantin I was supposed to realize that all desire is futile; god is myself; and so the neighborhood girls do not exist.
Everything is Maya!
So I would go into the temple and one part of me would be praying and the other part would be like, "Excuse me, why are you praying to yourself? Hello?"

Finally I broke down and decided to go full metal into Devi Bhakti. I started doing 4 hour poojas every Friday waking up at 4 AM. College was missed many times, but what is college before the wishes of my goddess? I went pretty deep into the whole thing; I learnt a lot of theory in Devi worship. When I got into the bus at Nungambakkam and went to Mylapore, I would close my eyes and start praying for every temple along the way. There were a LOT of temples.

So my religious exploration had taken me from meaningless chanting; to Vedanta and philosophy (without gaining any good knowledge of either); to something pretty close to Bhakti. I was in engineering school by that time, and had to get a job. My times of exploration had come to an end.

I do pray from time to time, a short prayer thrown to the universe, just in case someone is listening. It is always a specific prayer about some immediate thing (such as praying for my client to be in a good mood). I am completely comfortable with that.

Some thoughts on corruption and regulation

2011-01-23T06:16:00.000-08:00

Do we require a mass movement?

A lot of people have invoked the vision of a second freedom struggle to eliminate corruption. Taking them at their word, I will try to explain why it is not.

The freedom struggle included strands of reforming our society. But its primary goal was to eliminate a clear "other" (the British) from a colonial role. For most of the leaders, the "enemy" was NOT the British; the enemy was the colonial system itself. But when translated into a mass movement, the enemy was clearly defined.

In the case of a "mass movement against corruption", who is the "other"? The other is all among us. They are naked exploiters of the system, but we cannot really identify them and stage "satyagrahas" or anything like that.

I think this is a core problem of attitude when talking about corruption - the corrupt are not a distinct group of people.

Should India be corrupt?

Why is India corrupt at all?
Most of us born after independence have assumed that this is the natural status of things - that India is somehow "hardwired" to be corrupt. We do not know any other possible way things could have evolved.
If you read the literature on corruption in India, the conclusions are different. The reason, experts say, corruption took hold in India was because India had a huge License Raj set up very soon after independence. This encouraged, in the first 30-40 years, a systemic fault which pushed people to adjust prices through corruption. Thus corruption in India would have been at low levels if the License Raj had not been set up or did not have so much power.
Jitendra Singh of Wharton management says in an interview:

There was a distortion of incentives within the economy, such that people began expending efforts toward fundamentally unproductive behaviors because they saw that such behaviors could lead to short-term gains. Thus, cultivating those in positions of power who could bestow favors became more important than coming up with an innovative product design. The latter was not as important, anyway, because most markets were closed to foreign competition--automobiles, for example--and if you had a product, no matter how uncompetitive compared to global peers', it would sell.

These were largely distortions created by the politico-economic regime. While a sea change has occurred in the years following 1991, some of the distorted cultural norms that took hold during the earlier period are slowly being repaired by the sheer forces of competition. The process will be long and slow, however. It will not change overnight.

So it is possible that we could have evolved to be not so corrupt; there is nothing genetic or core cultural about Indians and corruption.

Will Individual efforts prevent corruption

People have suggested not paying bribes as a means of fighting corruption. This is impractical. I think this is suggested as a means for blaming the victim.
Let me narrate an incident - this is not so much of corruption, but government incompetence:
Me and a friend were coming back from Bangalore. We had booked seats in a government bus. The bus was there. We got in; had nice seats. I settled down with a comfortable blanket.
Well, about half an hour after the bus was supposed to start, the driver came and told us the bus won't go. We were all frustrated and he gave no explanation. It seemed they had a difference of opinion with some body else and they decided to protest by not driving.
We all got down and were madly trying to find some alternative ( me running around with the blanket wrapped around me). An admin guy came and told us to get tickets in another bus. We all rushed to the counter and tried to get the tickets.
There was one guy who was among the passengers - he was yelling at us that we were making a mistake. We should fight for the original bus to go and demand an explanation. If we did not do that they will keep repeating this.
I sympathized with him; but NOBODY else was listening to him. Everybody scrambled for the tickets, and I got mine too.
I felt ashamed of not fighting for our rights for a long time; but then I realized that what was expected was very high.
People respond to incentives. Given between staying and fighting for a bus that may not really go anywhere, and getting back to Chennai for our regular jobs, 99% will choose getting back to Chennai. This is not because we were all craven fools - it is because that is really the sensible thing to do.
(I have successfully refused to pay bribes elsewhere - before people rush to judge)
This is what I feel about regulating autorickshaws or refusing to pay bribes to policemen - these are problems for the COMMUNITY to fix; not for individual people to fight. People will fight for their rights if very fundamental things, such as their property, their family or their own lives are under threat. Let me correct that - they will fight if these are under IMMEDIATE threat.
A long term threat like air pollution in Chennai also affects our family, lives and property. But we are humans - not given to such long term calculations.
(In fact if we all calculated long term, no one will be building anything in Chennai, given that the sea level is supposed to rise by 1 meter by 2030)

Case Study - Regulating Autorickshaws in Chennai

Chennai autorickshaws are unique in their extortion - They never use their government mandated meters. This results in a very complicated issues for the passenger and the driver. The driver has to know the EXACT location where you are going because if they have to drive more, they lose. The drivers are also badly trained but that is another story.
How do you make sure the auto driver uses a meter?
If I want to get from Adyar to Anna Nagar for a function and the auto guy refuses to use his meter, then I will pay him what he asks after haggling. I will not be staging a satyagraha to shame him. My goal at that point is to get to the function - not the solution of the auto problem. I do know that in the long term, this is what auto drivers understand as well. The stakes are all in their favor.

This is why community organizing is important - in any community, there are people who are generally more concerned with such issues. In Chennai, there is an autorickshaw passengers association. They are trying to influence things, but I don't see much success. But the solution definitely lies in that direction; not in individuals protesting.
Ideally, given some funding, all that you have to do when a driver asks too much money, is to call some number and leave them the auto registration number. Then they take care of all the legalities of punishing the driver. You only have to show up as a witness.

When I was in Philadelphia, I worked on an elaborate website for reporting complaints to the Philadelphia Parking Authority who regulated taxis in the city. There were elaborate rules for recording complaints; for holding hearings; and punishing the drivers including an appeals process. It was very easy to report complaints. Each taxi actually had a phone number listed for reporting complaints.
(Again, I am not saying we should build a website)
But in Philadelphia, this was the city government's function. In Chennai, it IS the Corporation's function, but they are not doing anything about it. I am guessing this is the least of their priorities - because auto drivers are a special interest group. Given a special interest group and a amorphous set of citizens, the interest group will always win.
My point is that there are pretty rational explanations why the auto drivers behave the way they do; and there are ways in which you can combat them without holding a freedom struggle. Individuals refusing to pay over meter charge will not help anyone.

Blogging Block

2011-01-12T06:26:00.000-08:00

I have not blogged for at least a month. One reason was my efforts to write a big one about the "Aadhaar" project (National ID Card project) and what it means to us.
But there was also one other reason. I had a general chat over IM with a long-time friend yesterday. I ranted and raved about the state of the country. At the end of it I realized I had a nice editorial to write.
So here are my excerpts from the IM; and some additional comments.
My friend asked: What about blogging? Why are you not feeling motivated?
My response went on and on:
Too many scams; and now the mask is ripped off.I dont feel like there is anything new to say. Right now the Radia tapes and the scams and Binayak Sen's conviction basically show the ugly naked face to everyone.
Till now there was some belief that we are heading towards some manageable state.
But now I am sure that there is actually an elite which is consciously pushing the country towards some policies; and the Karunanidhi family etc are very well entrenched. If you protest they can put you in jail for pretty much anything.
If there is one thing I learnt studying the Aadhaar Law, it is this - we need an Indian Tea Party [I am referring to the American crazy libertarian, anti-government movement called the Tea Party]. Basically laws are passed by our representatives;
and these laws have consequences. But much of these are not debated and pushed in.
Then we are accused of breaking the law.
One example is Chidambaram's recent statement about Binayak Sen's conviction
He said that there is the rule of law and they have to go through due process and appeal.He said that is the only way.But he missed the point. The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act was passed by all these states and it is plainly unconstitutional.
And so now we have a law that goes against the constitution and the minister is telling us we should obey it
My friend: You think the case against Binayak Sen is fraud?
Me: I dont know, but it is two things. It is guilt by association and should not be treated under sedition. Secondly the judge's comments seem to mean that the judgement was meant as a deterrent and not as a particular sentence for Sen's crime. That is shocking. He is almost saying that because Maoists cause killing and you are associated with them indirectly, this will send a message to everyone not to link with them. That is a very shocking judgement.
It violates all sense of balance
My point is that Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha matter. They pass laws that are sometimes crafted by special interests. The most important laws are passed without debate or interest and then people only realise the laws' effects much later. Such as Sen's case. Now anyone who has "Das Kapital" in his home can be arrested and sentenced.
Take the UID modification in 2003 [ I am referring to the change in the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955, that enables compulsory registration of all citizens]. We are only now realizing its implications. When we object, we are violating the law; and they tell us to obey the rule of law.
My friend: ok
Me: Parliament matters. But nobody knows the effects of its laws including the morons who pass them, I suspect

My Friend: Do you know the conditions when the bill was created and passed?
I mean, why did they have a need for that law.

Me: I think they push these through because the police want it in Maoist states but it will be good to do some research. I suspect that other states then adopt them too
That is how the line between a police state and a democracy blur.
There are 1000 different stories there. If u had a journalist staff you could just spend days covering the chennai city budget or laws in state houses or parliament and so on.
For example I found a depressing story in the Hindu that our military and top diplomats are trading visa favors from the US for influencing policy in India
The US consciously promotes that. That was one story and no one commented on it; no ripple.
Our population is under informed and no one is taking up the job of informing them.
The media is mostly corporatised. There is a crying need for independent media
Someone who can cover stories at city level, parliamennt level. I wish there was a Tea Party in India. Just to yell "tyranny" every time.
CNN-IBN in India telecast a story about lobbying. They solicited user comments via twitter during the debate. Most of the comments were supporting lobbying.
Then one guy got the screenshots from the television and website; and looked up the twitter accounts. They don't exist
IBN team was doing this themselves in trying to influence the debate because they are corporate owned and they like lobbying. That just completely depresses me.
These are smart people who think we are all idiots.
At this point in India, no information is available to most people.

My friend got tired of me at this point and left the IM. But not before the damage was done; I may start blogging again.

Rapiscan systems - the Other Corruption

2010-12-09T09:34:00.000-08:00

Usually when we say a politician is corrupt, we think about money exchanging hands. Not a lot of thought goes to other forms of corruption - such as power-brokering or abuse of power.
The central government in India is enormously powerful - the simple edicts that bureaucrats pass from their desks actually have consequences.
When we suffer a major erosion in our rights, it is fair to question the motivation of those powerful people in the center.
One such step is coming our way - in the form of the Full Body scanning machines, the Secure 1000 created by Rapiscan Systems.

The news story in Economic Times is here.

The article takes a kind of positive line with the "Indian-born" Deepak Chopra, owner of Rapiscan Systems. Economic Times is usually deferential to big corporations.

But what the article is really saying is that the Indian government is all set to unveil full body scanners in Indian airports. There has not been any debate or news about this (except for the fawning coverage of ET).
In a country that is now seeing major abuses of power by government officials, the LAST thing we need is airport officials videotaping passengers' "near-naked" walk-throughs and publishing it in the internet or threatening passengers with such images.

A few passages from an informative commentary on the "Secure 1000" scanner from Rapiscan:

Scientists from the University of California have publicly challenged the safety of the devices. The U.S. Airline Pilots Association, warns the TSA that they have offered no credible specifications for the radiation emitted by these machines. The USAPA has determined that frequent exposure to TSA-operated scanner devices may subject pilots to significant health risks. The long term health effects of these technologies remains unknown.

However, The Food and Drug Administration has responded to concerns by announcing that the potential health risks from the Naked Body Scanners are "minuscule."
A Matter of Privacy

A full naked body image is produced by the Backscatter x-ray producing virtual strip searches without probable cause which opponents claim are illegal and violate basic human rights, arguing that the scans are a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano ensured passenger privacy and affirms that the images are permanently deleted immediately once viewed and are never stored, transmitted or printed. However, TSA officials admitted that the scanners are required to be capable of saving images for the purpose of evaluation, training and testing. Concern over the possibility of leaked images was further stressed when leaked photos documented by gizmodo.com were made public on their site. The images were from a Florida courthouse scanner that may have illegally saved 35,000 images.

So, the Indian government, which faces no comparable threat as the USA; whose officials and elected leaders are abusers of power; is now contemplating getting a machine that will show naked anyone who tries to fly.

I have a sneaking suspicion that this purchase (and the resulting windfall for Rapiscan) happens not just because of the absolute need for it; but because someone up there has been perfectly lobbied by Rapiscan. It is one of our "industry-friendly" masters who has taken this awful decision.

As I said, there is corruption and then there are power abuses. Installing full body scanners in airports is a complete power abuse by the Indian government.

Pawar proves my point

2010-11-30T03:42:00.000-08:00

In my earlier blog I had connected Modi, Raja, the Telecom scam and the Nano car deal to a general confusion between "corporate friendliness" and corruption. All that you have to say is "create jobs" and you can justify any corrupt practice.
After liberalisation politicians have figured out how to make money and gain power while appearing to serve the nation at the same time. That is by saying they support individual businessmen and then yell that they were "business-freindly" when caught.
Being corporate friendly is NOT the same as being MARKET-friendly. Government leaders are expected to maintain a fair market - that is, to be MARKET-friendly. The market has buyers and sellers. Leaders are supposed to look out to BOTH their interests.

Instead what we have is CORPORATE friendliness - which translates to accepting money from corporations and then shilling for them. That was my point in my earlier blog.

Now, within two days of writing it, I found the BEST example of that in an Economic Times link today. Here is the link to the original story:
Pawar turns crusader for India Inc against Centre

As investigating agencies turn the heat on business groups over issues relating to corruption and insider trading, Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar cautioned the government against “targeting” corporates without “adequate” reason.

He said recent developments that have triggered corporate disaffection with the government could have adverse implications on the coalition’s stability. More crucially, he went on to suggest that if this persisted, big corporate houses could shift their loyalties to the Opposition. “This will not augur well for the government,” Pawar is learnt to have said.

On Monday afternoon, Pawar raised the issue at a meeting of UPA leaders and warned that there was a “growing feeling” that the government was no longer “corporate-friendly” and had stopped having a “soothing effect” on companies.

The agriculture minister, who is known to be industry-friendly, is learnt to have presented this issue of corporate disaffection as one that affects the sentiments of the share market. Fluctuations in the capital market would affect the average investor, said Pawar, whose own tenure at the helm of consumer affairs over two stints of the UPA has witnessed volatile commodity market fluctuations.

Read that and weep.
So Pawar thinks the government is not corporate-friendly if it investigates wrong doings.
Note how the Economic Times frames this - read the title of the piece again. "Pawar turns crusader for India Inc against Center". Pawar is NOT crusading for India Inc - he is "crusading" for a few rich businessmen.
Secondly, Pawar is right that this may turn some corporations, the party's big donors against the ruling coalition. That is bad for the party - but NOT for the GOVERNMENT. The party is not the government in India. Something like this, although bad for the party, is actually good for government, isn't it?
So, that is what we are dealing with here. Pawar is obviously proud of his "industry-friendly" title, helpfully provided by the Economic Times and other media. What he should be called is "the corrupt agriculture minister". Replace "corrupt" for "Corporate friendly" in the above article and you have an accurate picture.

Politicians now actually have an excuse to claim they are creating jobs or they are corporate friendly - when actually what they are is simple: they are corrupt.

2G, Raja, Modi and Greed

2010-11-28T10:28:00.000-08:00

(Updated Below)
Ever since the 2G scam broke, I have been waiting for Narendra Modi, CM of Gujarat to say something about it. Then in a seminar, he was asked what he would have done if he was PM. Very original question. And he answered,"It would not have happened."
The reason I was waiting for Modi (or anyone in the media) to link between Modi and 2G is this: Minister Raja's claims during the 2G scam, his justifications and his mentor Karunanidhi's justifications seemed to be the SAME one's that Modi's defenders used during the Nano factory offer in Gujarat.
The rest of this essay will make that connection; and I will try to explore the philosophical underpinnings of the current mess.

Nano and 2G
What is Raja's crime according to the CAG? Raja bent the rules of allocating the spectrum; and favored certain businesses. This caused huge losses to the government - but the important part is that Raja violated the rules to favor certain companies.
But Modi did the SAME thing when he sought out Tata's Nano. He favored a SINGLE company, Tata, and showered a lot of government favors on tha company so that the factory will relocate to Gujarat. Why didn't ANYONE talk about corruption then? In fact Modi is hailed as a pro-business messiah.
Modi justified the handover of no-bid favors to Tata, a single business, as creating jobs and encouraging investment. Raja said he had acted according to policy - but the CAG report showed that he and his department had bent the rules to favor some businesses.
Modi's actions caused losses to the state of Gujarat too - there has just been no auditing of those losses. Raja could be prosecuted because he is a member of the executive. Modi, as the elected leader of a state cannot be. That is the only difference.

Crony Capitalism

Corruption has always existed in India. But in the last 20 years since liberalisation, politicians have come to realize that they have a MORAL argument FOR corruption. Modi's actions or Raja's can now be justified because showing favors to individual businessmen is now called "pro-business". It magically creates jobs.
I wrote a long article detailing the economics behind this here.
To favor INDIVIDUAL businesses is NOT pro-business - it is anti-business. By favoring Tata and showering a lot of favors to him, Modi has made it difficult for OTHER auto companies to thrive in Gujarat. 20 years back this will be called corruption. People will suspect that Modi took a bribe. Now, instead, Modi is called pro-business or business-savvy - even though he is neither.
This moral justification is now used by almost every politician. There is a justification of corruption of this form. Media seems to be convinced that Modi is pro-business - but the same standard should be applied to Raja too.

States are now expected to compete for business, and offer wild concessions to businessmen, offer public land and build roads for private businesses and so on; Raja simply did the same thing. His department "competed" for certain providers; and favored them. What is wrong with that? I think he was creating jobs; "creating wealth" as they call it now. We should make him Gujarat's CM.

The Government as a Corporation

Linked with this is the idea, that has gained traction in media over the past few years - the idea that a government should be run like a corporation. I remember that Chandrababu Naidu called himself CEO of Andhra. Modi is called the CEO of Gujarat.

When your government is confused with a corporation, your government leaders think their goal is maximise revenue. Hence the justifications for "bending" the rules; or justifying stunts such as Modi's.
There are several important reasons why a government should NOT be run like a corporation:
1. A government's role is ensure happiness and a level playing field for its citizens. That is its goal - not maximising revenue. Revenue helps, definitely, but there are higher goals for government.
On the other hand, a corporation's role has very little to do with happiness. The goal is maximising profits for shareholders.

2. A government leader's SPECIALTY is not in running a company; or to determine how much profit can be obtained. That helps, but their specialty is always in human relations or law. Thus, leaders who THINK they are running their government like a company almost always fail; they make short term decisions (like Modi). They fail because their role requires a different specialty.

3. Thirdly, and this is important for later, a corporation has no transparency requirements. It need not be a fundamental feature in a corporation. But in a government, transparency helps.

By confusing government and corporations, in ALL three of the above, government leaders in India have started acting like corporate leaders.
1. They think it is ok to bend rules to bring in revenue; they forget that their oath binds them to manitain the rule of law. Their oath has NOTHING about revenue.
2. They think they are, indeed, the best judges of maximising such revenue, even though they are not qualified.
3. They tend towards less and less transparency

This constant emphasis on revenue and a corporate picture of government has subverted the original intention of the Constitution or the leaders who formed modern India. Politicians now seem to have bought into a worldview of neo-liberal thinkers.
Earning extra money through cronyism used to be called corruption earlier; but now it is corporate-friendly. Even if you are "honest", you tend to make all the wrong decisions because of this worldview.
Then ultimately, your ministers do the same thing and you have a bunch of scams.

A government leader's role is to take the set of laws you have and apply them uniformly. It is not to speculate about how much revenue the government can additionally earn by bending those laws. The laws are there for a reason. They provide a level playing field in the market. If you think the laws are holding you down, change them through the legislature. Do not violate them and then talk about how it helped create jobs. That is not your role.

The Angst of Sonia

Sonia Gandhi complained that leaders have become more greedy. Manmohan Singh seems to be saying the same thing.
I don't think greed is the issue here. Why should government leaders be less greedy than any of us?
What we have now is a more subtle form of corruption. When magazines talk about corruption, they paint vivid pictures of suitcases changing hands. That is not how it works now.
The benefit for favoring certain businesses and bending the rules is to gain a powerful presence in the table. Raja or Modi need not get money transferred to them. They just have power, a power that is almost as sexy as currency. Karunanidhi has it. Jayalalitha has it. Maran has it. What these people have done, is they have gone and identified themselves as entrepreneurs. They consider themselves businessmen and women. And they think that is the ultimate career goal for them. Not being just an executor of laws.
You cannot fight this by appeals to personal quality. I don't think Karunanidhi or Jayalalitha are greedier than your average guy on the street. They are just in the wrong profession. Or the profession has bent to them.
If we fought tooth and nail and made the laws and the systems transparent enough; and in many areas, remove government power, then they will just move to professions more "natural" to them, such as owning and running companies.
We may even gain some benefit from that.

Update I:
I posted an update to this article called "Pawar proves my point" here.

Geeking out with Endhiran

2010-10-21T09:36:00.000-07:00

I saw the Tamil movie "Endhiran" a couple of days back. I liked it a lot, mainly because of Rajnikanth's excellent acting, the screenplay's internal consistency, dialog, and, of course, the beauty and stylishness of the special effects. I want to see it again.
The movie is impressive because, after a long time, you can keep thinking about the technical discussions about AI and Robotics in the movie. There is a consistent theme to it.

Asimov's Laws
When Dr.Vasi appears before the approval board, one of them asks if the robot obeys Asimov's laws. I was wondering about this during most of the fights before that scene. If the robot obeys Asimov's laws, it will not be fighting at all.
Asimov's laws were used in many of his Robot series. I read them in the novel "I, Robot". There are three laws and the whole novel is a series of situations structured around the contradictions between the three laws.
The laws are:
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

In the final story of "I, Robot", a man runs for political office. But there is a suspicion that he is not a human at all, that he is a robot. There is no real way to prove it - until a situation based on the First Law comes up. Robots cannot hurt humans - and therefore if the candidate hits a human, he cannot be a robot. How this resolves itself I cannot reveal. You can read the novel.
So, Chitti is created for military applications - and therefore he is designed without the three laws.
The whole movie, thus, can be seen as a demonstration of what happens when a robot is designed without the three laws. But I don't think Shankar had that angle in mind. Dr.Vasi is shown as a noble person, who wants to help his nation by creating fighting robots. But there is a problem there - when you create machines which cause harm, they can be used by your opponents too. The "flipping" of Chitti (or his clones) to the dark side is actually inevitable if you mass produce robots for fighting.
In fact, we see such a phenomenon CURRENTLY. In personal computers, the original Terminate and Save Routines (TSRs) were intended for background processing. They were quickly adapted as the early viruses. Now, the virtual world is awash with computer worms and viruses. We have no control over the malicious use of programming. There is an escalating fight between unethical and criminal hackers on the one side and government and private security agencies on the other.
There are other ethical arguments against using Robots in combat.

The Military Application of Robots
The original reason that militaries offered for using robots was mine-sweeping. Such robots will comply with Asimov's laws above. They won't harm humans. That was the original reason offered.
But, right now many militaries around the world are researching on robots for combat applications. The US military, right now, has drones (or unmanned aerial vehicles) deployed in Pakistan and Afghanistan. These are armed with missiles and have caused much damage in both countries.
To keep in line with Geneva Conventions, the drones require human input before firing. There have already been ethical questions about such uses. Let me address one angle of the drone controversy:
When a country goes to war, the assumption is that there will be checks for deployment of their citizens - atleast in democracies. Because there will be a loss of life on THEIR side, the decision to go to war is not taken lightly by countries, in theory.
But if you deploy drones which are operated by civilian contractors sitting thousands of miles away, you have removed one major reason which may deter countries from launching agressive war. Without loss of life, and facing no pressure from their citizens, a democracy can sustain a war purely through money and technology.

For this problem, a few people have argued back and said that war is a bad choice, but once a war is launched, a country is justified in using its technical might to win.
Thus, robots for warfare is being increasing seen as a technically brilliant advancement. It is also seen as inevitable.
This means that we will likely see a new kind of "arms" race similar to the nuclear era. It is no surprise that terrorists will seek to use robots in combat too - after all the same argument about winning applies to them too.
It is in this context that Enthiran raises questions.

Enthiran and Military Robots
If you think about it, a humanoid robot is NOT necessary for the conventional military. A conventional military may use complex machines, with a narrow range of purposes. They don't need Chitti.
The movie shows arms dealers and terrorists interested in robots. To me, that seems completely natural and inevitable. In fact, because Dr.Vasi designed the robot without the in-built (non-overridable) three laws, the entire sequence of events, from the interest of arms dealers to the hostile takeover of Chitti by Dr.Bora is unavoidable.
There are no international laws currently in place to govern use of robots in combat. Let us say that a robot brigade in a future war with Pakistan malfunctions and ends up killing a lot of innocent civilians. Who do you blame? Who will be punished?

Some random notes
1. Neural Schema Architecture is a kind of AI architecture that supplies "schemas" for different behaviors. These are the ones that Dr.Vasi says cannot be shared until the patent is obtained.
2. An Inference Engine is the core of an "expert system". It has a rule list, and it takes actions based on applicable rules. It also has a knowledge base. A kind of Inference Engine called Fuzzy-Inference can make decisions in uncertain situations.
Dr.Bora calls Chitti "just an inference engine". What he is saying is that it just evaluates rules and takes actions. He seems to be saying it is not "intelligent". 3. Contrary to what the movie says, Dr.Bora did not provide a contradictory command to Chitti in the approval meeting. He asks Chitti to stab Dr.Vasi and the robot attempts to do it. That command does not seem to contradict any other command (unless I am missing something).
4. Dr.Vasi works on Chitti for 10 years. What was he doing at that time?
The major portion of his work would have been the representation of knowledge. In the initial scenes, Chitti is fed martial arts, dancing programs and so on. Creating the knowledge of such expertise and representing it in storage is a major problem for expert systems. That part of it is much more complex than creating the physical body.

An interview with my wife (on art)

2010-10-15T05:59:00.000-07:00

September of this year was our tenth marriage anniversary. I interviewed my wife (she is an artist) for that occasion.
This is the second interview in this blog; it is mostly about art.
RA: Hello SS. Can we start the interview?
SS: Enna vachu edhuvum comedy keemadi panlaye?
RA: No, let us be professional here. You will discover how skilled I am at writing and interviewing. You have only seen the positive side of your husband. Now you will see how serious I am with a subject. I am relentless and ask very tough questions. Lying is useless; you may as well give up now.
SS: Is the interview about art or you?
RA: Yes. About art. I know. I am just warning you.
(In the meantime, my son wanders into the room; wants to be part of the interview process. We convince him to go play with toys - "choppu". He has a little set of small wooden cooking utensils.)

RA: You know, art has always interested me. If you think about it, I am an artist myself - I draw with words.
(pause)
I guess you could say I paint colorful characters.
(pause again)
I outline the landscape of life with my words.
Do you notice how good I am with this?
SS: (silence)
RA: Anyway, my point is art is such a essential part of our lives. But many people are not aware of it. They only have contempt for people studying art.
(pause)
I guess you could say the same thing about writers. I have gone through a lot of insults in my life for being a writer. The first time I wrote something about the neighborhood cat, my father laughed at the manuscript and threw it away.
SS: You know, if you just want to talk about yourself, I can go play with the kid.
RA: Ok. I guess my question is how did you become a drawer? What interested you in drawering?
SS: I am not a drawer. I am an artist.
RA: Whatever.
SS: I am not a full-fledged artist. I came to know I had a talent for it in school. But I only thought of it as a separate field you could specialize in after watching the "Art of Painting" show by Bob Ross in the WYBE channel, Philadelphia.
I also had access to the Free Library of Philadelphia close to our home, which had an extensive collection of books on art (even for a novice).
RA: Now, that would be after your marriage to me?
SS: Yes
RA: So you could say I had a part to play?
SS: No, Bob Ross did.
RA: Ok, so then you went to the Community College of Philadelphia. What options does a person studying art have in the USA?
SS: They start from High School, where they create a portfolio. The idea is to get a BFA degree which makes you employable in Graphic Design, Product Design, Printing, Textiles, Interior Design, Architecture, Photography, Web Design, Animation, and even into movie and advertising fields.
Usually you apply to a private art school. The best is Rhode Island School of Design. New York University is famous. The Pratt Institute. UPenn in Philadelphia has a good art department.
RA: What are the options in India?
SS: Government Arts College, Chennai is good. I think Art director Thottatharani, actor Siva Kumar and many others studied there. The "elite" schools in India (like the IITs) are the National Schools of Design. The Ahmedabad NSD is very famous.
Again, you get a BFA (4 year) degree and then you can do masters (MFA).
One big difference is that the Indian schools have an age bar. Generally after 27, you cannot get admitted to any of these.
RA: Back to Philly. What courses did you take in CCP?
SS: I started with basic drawing and design. I never planned to complete a diploma there. (The CCP provides an Associate in Art degree; it is equivalent to an art diploma).
I had several streams to specialize in - Printing, Art & Design, Photography or Architecture. You take a lot of common courses and then take a few specialized courses (for 65 credits). I specialized in Art & Design.
They teach you drawing, painting, sculpture, ceramic work, basic design, three dimensional design..
RA: Now, when you say design, you don't just mean graphic design.
SS: No. There is a separate stream called design. They teach you Fundamentals of Design, Color Theory, use of space. For example, when I say three dimensional design, it has nothing to do with computers or animation. We had to mold or cast and prepare models. That was 3D design.
Such a design course, with no reference to computers, gives you a very strong foundation for all design work, such as Interiors.
The computer is just a tool. Design has existed for a long time.
RA: You also had to take Art History courses...
SS: Yes. You remember the heavy text books.
RA: We had a fight over where to keep them.
SS: Art History is vital to students because it inspires you with art over time and different cultures.
RA: In other words, it lets you copy not just from current artists but also dead artists.
SS: What we create now will be history for future generations. Varalaaru migavum mukkiyam, Amaichare.
RA: What was the teaching like? You had been to college in India. Was it different?
SS: We had to do creative work all through the semester. It was very stimulating that way. Like anywhere, there were good teachers and bad teachers. But I always felt good at school.
RA: Ok, for people finishing art school, where do you like to work the most?
SS: Ad agencies. They are the ultimate prize in terms of work. Also Design firms that do graphic design. One of my friends is specializing in product photography.
RA: Now, let us get to the crux of this interview. Modern art. Why is it so weird? One of my classmates in college said it was a complete scam because you could hang a picture upside down and nobody would notice. Kamal Hassan makes fun of it in the movie "Kaadhala Kaadhala".
SS: Sometimes it creates magic. It has to do mostly with your subjective interpretation.
The important thing is there is no "message" in modern artwork. There can be focal points, but the artwork itself cannot be reduced to a single message. It is like poetry - you just understand something that makes a connection. I think it plays with the viewer's emotions. A landscape or a portrait is about the scene represented by the artist. In modern art, the viewer plays a major role.
Sometimes people confuse messages with symbols. When we say "symbolic" (in India) we generally mean in terms of "something that is a hidden hint for something else". In the West, they actually mean symbols, cultural, historical symbols.
RA: So, if you see a human being drawn in a weird way, it does not "symbolize" anything? Such as his mood, or his nature?
SS: It can, but such art is not really "modern". Such symbolism has existed throughout history.
If a human being is drawn in a different way, then whatever it means to the viewer is all that matters.
You should not ask an artist what she "intends to convey" in a painting. In art class, if we are asked to talk about the masters' paintings, we describe what we see - such as if it is an oil or watercolor and other obvious features. But we never were asked to talk about the "meaning" of the painting. That is wrong when it applies to any art, particularly to modern art.
RA: So, it is like hearing a Ilayaraaja song and asking for its "meaning"?
SS: Yes.
RA: My classmate Vijay and I had an argument about modern art in college. He said that the art that we see normally growing up, such as in magazines, the European paintings, Ravi Verma's paintings...they seem more "natural" than modern art.

SS: European paintings brought in realism around 16th century because they did a lot of research at the time of the Renaissance. The proportions that they drew in were based on real human proportions. Before that, drawings in Europe were religious themed mostly. They also showed very ideal figures. The figures' sizes were based on hierarchy in society (you can still see this in Mughal paintings).
They had something called a register where the focus or the top of the painting was Christ or the King. The knights followed and so on. Serfs were shown as small figures at the bottom.
Now, that CHANGED to realism in 16th century. Even that included symbolism and hierarchies.
That is, the paintings that we consider "normal" would not have been considered normal 500 years back. Not in India, not in Europe.
Art has always had different streams and evolutions. You cannot judge between the arts of different times or different cultures.
RA: I would say that applies to music and writing and so on.
SS: Yes.
RA: Thank you, SS, for your time. Now, one final question...
SS: Yes?
RA: Do you think I am the best person in the world ever?
SS: I will answer that on our 20th anniversary.

Incredible India advertisements

2010-10-13T06:31:00.000-07:00

or the idea that the problem for tourists in India is Indians.

I have below two videos from the Incredible India series featuring Aamir Khan:

There was also a recent ad that shows tourists disgusted at a kid peeing in the road, and other such "bad behavior" deemed by the tourism ministry.

First of all, almost every Incredible India ad I have seen features white people only - either young white women or young white men. I saw one ad with a Japanese person. I can understand that Bollywood stars won't feature in anything without white people, but this is not a song and dance feature after all.
The Incredible India campaign is commissioned by the tourism ministry. Someone up there in the ministry is approving these; so we have to wonder about the attitudes expressed in these ads. I AM taking them seriously as attitudes in the ministry and among our elite.

Attitudes in the ad
1. Tourists are white people, period; "internal" tourism, which counts for majority of tourists do not count. The Japanese, Korean and other eastern people don't generally count (even though they form a good percent of tourism targets anywhere in the world).
Africans! Don't even dare to show Aamir Khan with an African person. Darkies don't count.
2. The ads seem to mainly teach behavior - in front of white tourists. You better not have your kid pee in the road because white people may be watching. Thus, the ads seem to be (incredibly) suggest that individual people and their behavior may be a problem - more than (for example) the absence of clean public toilets.
By making such a suggestion, the ads present another way for Indians to judge other Indians. We behave a certain way because we are a developing country - a country still in the "Third World".
3. The ads always show white people "repulsed" by the bad behavior of Indians (such as throwing a banana peel from the bus). In that way, it assumes that they are judges of such behavior. On the contrary, I have personally seen Western tourists misbehaving in THAT SAME WAY. The reason is, of course, not difficult to find out - trash cans do not magically show up for them to drop trash in. Toilets don't magically show up for them alone. Given the Indian public systems's constraints, they behave the same way. They are in no position to judge.

Misguided Ads

More than anything, WHAT is the purpose of these ads? That is something I have a hard time figuring out - the ones that feature Aamir Khan and teach behavior - what exactly are they trying to do? They seem to take a sneering attitude at the guy spitting Paan, or the guy dropping a banana peel from a bus. But why is that a problem that the TOURISM ministry is concerned with? Are they going to provide decent public toilets throughout the country or trash cans in all public places? No. That is not their job. So why are they even preaching to people about this?
You could say the same thing about the eve teasing of the white women in the ad. What, is that exclusive to white women? Otherwise everything is fine with women in this country?

It seems suspiciously that the tourism ministry considers Indians in public places (behaving within the constraints and nature of our system) as a really bad nuisance.

But this fits in with my overall theme over the past couple of years - there is a tendency in India to blame people for systemic faults. These ads show that tendency.
Think about this for a minute - we all have heard of how Indians behave very well abroad, but not when they land in India. I have heard that from when I was young. The assumption is that the problem is with Indians. But in reality, the problem is with India, the system here - not with Indians. Like any other people around the world, Indians respond to incentives.
The proof of this, is that tourists or other people on business here from abroad (including white tourists) misbehave too! I have seen this personally in beach resorts. In fact they behave worse because they know that they are courted no matter what.
The ads show the thinking within the tourism ministry - and they are a pathetic lot.

Allahabad Verdict - Comments

2010-10-02T09:29:00.000-07:00

Summary of Issues and Judgement
The court has weighed on a number of issues in five different CIVIL suits filed between 1949 and 1971. Of these, Suit-4 was filed by the Sunni Waqf Board. This is the only suit in which Muslims are the plaintiffs. In the rest of the suits, the Hindu parties are the plaintiffs.
The suits have nothing to do with the Masjid demolition - that is a criminal suit. Therefore the judgement has nothing to do with Sangh Parivar's acts.
The judgements were delivered by justices S.U.Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and Dharam Veer Sharma. Justice Khan's verdict is sympathetic to the Muslims; while the majority opinion (Agarwal and Sharma) is sympathetic to the Hindus.
The judgements have covered a lot of issues - but most notably the majority opinion says:
- that a temple may have existed in the site in which Babar or his commander built the mosque.
- that the mosque is not built by Sharia and therefore is not legitimate
- that Ram Janma Bhoomi as beleived by Hindus, is at the site in dispute

and then the judges proceeded to partition the site between the Hindus parties and the Muslim parties in detail.
Please note that the judges expressed the above opinions because the Suits asked for opinions on these, not because they wanted to. The judges did skip a couple of issues as irrelevant.
Contrary to media reports, the judges did not say explicitly that "Ram was born at the site". Justice Agarwal says:
"It is held that the place of birth, as believed and worshipped by Hindus, is the area covered under the central dome of the three-domed structure.."
Justice Sharma simply decided the issue in favor for the plaintiffs (Hindus).

My opinion
1. I think the court overstepped its authority when it partitioned the site. If two parties are fighting for a title, the court cannot just go in and partition the site of dispute - that is not what courts are for. That is an administrative or arbitration settlement. The court,if it could not establish title, should have just dismissed the suits and allowed it to be settled through arbitration.
This issue (if the court overstepped) will probably be decided by the Supreme Court.
Reading the judgements, it seems that the judges felt the need to defuse the situation, irrespective of their authority. But this sets up a bad model.
We repeatedly see in this case (from 1949) that people have taken the wrong approach in this dispute because of fear of public (read majority) opinion. After all one of the core reasons for the suits is that the sneaky installation of the deities was not reversed for fear of popular backlash.

2. From a purely moral perspective, the judges' decision does not make sense (even if they had the authority). For anyone reviewing the issue, it is obvious that the masjid had been target of Hindu mobilisation and attacks for some time. This was true in 1934 when it was damaged. This was also true in 1949 when the deities were sneaked in.
Now, the motives of the people who brought the deities is clear - they had a wedge issue that administrators will be afraid to deal with. Getting the deities in such a manner was a work of incitement.
60 years later, the court has rewarded the inciters.
Now, the court has argued that this is a matter of faith. But it is also clear that this was an act of minority-baiting. The court addressed the faith part, but not the "protection of weak" part. If the majority's faith is against a weaker party, it is the court's role to protect the weak - not emphasize the faith.
Even otherwise, this "faith" is more manufactured. We all know that.

3. I also think the court has set a bad precedent based on faith. Note this - the verdict basically says Muslims have no right to the mosque because Hindus believe it is Ram Janma Bhoomi and the Muslims have no title. They do not directly say that, but that is the implication of their findings on the issues.
That is a very dangerous precedent. It leaves religious parties to create many more wedge issues. There are plenty of temples and mosques out there without titles. They are all now vulnerable.

The court summaries are publicly available - reading them, I was surprised by the judges' complete denial of issues to the Muslim parties. Almost every issue is decided against the Muslim parties. I feel sorry for them.

If I can program..

2010-09-18T07:06:00.000-07:00

I am posting after a long time. Researching a long screed on the National People Registry. In the meantime, here is a filler.
It is true that in this day and age, people who know computer programming have an advantage - it is somewhat like auto mechanics but with more glamor and money. I was recently at my wife's sister's place. They are running a business and they had a problem with a sales product they had bought. One fine day the product stopped working. The product maker just denied support. And all their information was tied up in the database.
They asked me to take a look at it. This is an unknown product; I had no access to source code. But I could make the product work again. My relatives were very thankful and my wife very proud.
Computers still have a glamor in India. Its "mechanics" are still not sullied with the geek image that programmers in the United States have to bear. If you know a certain set of programming languages, you can understand how systems work and (mostly) what breaks them.
Given this, it is sheer luck that I chanced upon this particular field. I was a computer hater in college.

Computer Hater
I majored in electronics engineering as well as Physics. Our class had a few guys who were taking computer courses. "We" thought they were pathetic traitors to the cause of Physics.
"We" were a bunch of guys who thought it was fun discussing the existence of the centrifugal force when we were hanging in the bus footboard. We all thought we were the natural inheritors of Einstein's legacy. Even though I myself had difficulty doing Physics experiments in the lab without breaking things, I completely identified with the great physicists. I thought I was a "theoretical" physicist, like Einstein. (It took some courage writing that last sentence)
In my world, if you sucked at experiments, then you were a theoretical physicist.
Unfortunately I was bad with theory too.
We started noticing that a few of our classmates were going to NIIT classes. They all had books such as "C Programming". Since none of us knew anything about computers we decided it was not worth knowing.
Then college ended and most of my bunch of budding physicists went on to MCA.
I was shocked by this. I decided I would carry on the lone torch of Physics even if everyone in the world started learning "C".
I was in engineering college by this time; and our syllabus involved computers. In the 5th semester I finally had to sit before a computer and write something called a program.

What is all that blank space after C:?
One of my classmates Vijay was an expert in computers (he apparently has patents to his name now). I enticed him with a Rava Dosa and begged him to teach me DOS.
He sat before the computer and typed a few commands. He created a directory. He deleted one. He copied a few files. Then he explained to me that files were organized in paths, like house addresses.
"When you say your house is in 20, Some Street, Adyar, Chennai, India - you are pointing to your location. It is the same way with files. You have to tell the computer where the file is."
I was intently staring at the monitor. It had a C: and then a cursor blinking.
I said, "So what is all this blank space after C:?"
He said, "What blank space?"
I said,"You said there are files. But I only see a blinking dash."
He was confused. He said again, "It is like an house address"
I did not relent. "What is in the computer after C:?"

It took me a long time to realise a couple of things:
1) The computer monitor is not directly connected to the keyboard. There is something in between called the processor, memory and all that. That is, the computer is not a typewriter.
2)There is nothing after C:.

It took a lot more Rava Dosas too get that precious bit of knowledge.

My point is that when you don't know something, you automatically dismiss it. Then you have to take it as a course in 5th semester and your entire career depends on it. That is my point.

My encounter with Windows
Before I first saw a Windows machine (3.1), I did not think multi tasking was really needed. I was surprised that people were spending so much time on the ability to do multiple things at the same time with one computer. To me, it seemed like you would need two keyboards before you could multi task. Then you would need two people to type in the keyboards. Who needs one other person sitting near you and typing?
So that was my understanding of multi tasking.
(By the way, I had a similar reaction to constructors in C++. I did not understand why they would ever be needed, so I skipped the entire chapter on them)
Then I was sitting in a shopfloor one day and saw a computer with a screensaver. I saw the mouse and thought it was very cool. I tried to explore that computer to learn all about Windows.
Qucikly I found out that I could play Solitaire and so spent the entire evening playing Solitaire. That was my first attempt at learning Windows. That computer only had two icons. One was Solitaire and the other was Minesweeper. I thought Windows was completely lame.

The debate between Systems and Application programming
Once we understood that all the computer learners were being shipped off to the USA, we found a new interest in computers. I was convinced that I was born for computer programming, but I still thought of myself as a theoretical programmer.
At that time there were people who worked on Y2K; there were people who worked on network programming. In between there were weird people who were learning VB6, Java or HTML/ Javascript.
Now each of these were split into camps which knew nothing about the other. You can find some aspect of the below question, I am sure, still raging in campuses:
Would you be a systems programmer or an applications programmer?
In college, most people wanted to be a "systems" programmer. We had no idea what this meant. But in our minds, we would rather be someone who wrote code that everyone else would use (such as a tiny portion of an Operating System) than a mere programmer who ASSEMBLED such pieces.
That is, we wanted to write core functions that everyone else will call.
Now, as most people familiar with software programming will understand, this is impossible. Every programmer assembles their software - but that does not mean that the coding is easy. If anything, application programming is very complex because it has changing requirements. Application programmers simply address a different set of problems, and those are not trivial.
(The reason I emphasize this is because a few months back in a facebook discussion, someone told me that an AT&T scientist thought Indians were better with applications; but could not write really complex software - such as algorithms. This is hilarious, because applications model human interactions and transactions. These are hardly trivial )
So we have tribal warfare between the Javascript guys and the Middle Tier programmers; network programmers vs application programmers;C++ vs Java; C# vs VB; and so on. Each camp knows nothing about the other. The sorriest lot of them are the database developers who stand in a small corner and keep complaining.

I always took sides in these debates until I found out that all of these can take you to the United States. In fact the much detested web UI programmers have the best shot.

So I started from staring at C: and wondering what that was; and have ended up even winning my relatives' approval as a computer expert. All the while I hated everything new that came up the horizon until I learnt it.
My current hatred is for mobile app/web programming. I am sure it is just a fad and will go away shortly. I cannot imagine that people will actually access websites through mobile phone. That is what I have been telling everyone...

தாடகா வனத்தில் ஒரு நாள் - Tamil Short Story

2010-08-05T02:34:00.000-07:00

I created the post in May; but published it today. So the link is buried in the left. Here is the link to the short story - தாடகா வனத்தில் ஒரு நாள்.
Please read and comment.

Lying while leaving IT companies

2010-07-23T06:17:00.000-07:00

A few days back, a fresher (2009 batch) came to meet me at home. A month earlier, he had started working for a huge MNC in Chennai. He had been looking for work more than an year and finally this clicked.
Except that they had him attending training in QA instead of his core interest - database programming. He had a certificate in Java. [Nothing wrong with QA. Just that this guy was not interested in it]
In the meantime, a company which had actually offered him in campus (but then had made him wait through the recession) came back. They were recruiting again and they could have him working in Java.
The fresher faced a dilemma - he had attended work at the MNC for a month, in pretty much pointless training. He wanted to quit. He had not signed any bond. He wanted to know if he could resign; and whether there would be any problems.
I advised him to tell the HR in the MNC the truth. Tell them you were bored with testing and you had decided to leave. Let them know the situation and then leave.
He went and told them the truth.
I will tell you what happened at the end of this post. But before that let me rant about IT companies a bit.

The Lying Culture
I had posted earlier about a white guy who asked me if lying was in the Indian culture. I have seen HR and line managers in IT complaining that people are not honest. "Why don't they just tell the truth about leaving?", they say.
You know why they don't tell the truth? Because you can't handle the truth.

IT Employees lie when they say grandma is dying and they are moving back to the village and tilling the field; when they say (I am not making this up) resigning and starting an MBA school; when they say they are moving to another city and starting a company for selling churidaars.
They lie and say anything to get away from YOU.
Because they know you are power hungry. You have THE POWER - to ruin an employee's life by lying in background checks. They know how vindictive you are - that if the management asked you to go after someone you would do that. You would call up people you know at the destination company and ask them to "be warned" about this "nasty developer you have just recruited". They know you will delay the (legally mandated) relieving order. They KNOW you will exercise your power.

I know all of this happens; we all know all of this happens. Yet HR and Managers have the gall to complain about lying when we leave a company. Of course, we lie. We lie so that we can leave in peace. In any culture, people do not come after you if you are bereaved about a death. So we have to say that our long-dead grandma is dead again.
If we just said, "I am leaving your company and joining the company over there", would you all shut up and bless us with the sacred relieving order?
No, you would talk to us for 15 days about staying, going onsite, giving a promotion, threatening to talk to our parents (believe me, has happened), and so on and on.
In India sane IT employees do not let you know which company they are joining next. When a bunch of people behave that way, it is fair to ask the question why? To say "It is cultural" means you are a moron. The answer is, of course, that we are worried about the nature of people with power, some power, any power.
Because people with power always choose to exercise it.

My Experience Not Lying
I resigned from a big Indian services company when I was in the USA. I had been with them for 2.5 years. I decided to stay in the USA, while they wanted me to go back offshore and work on a project.
I had completed ALL the transitions for my onsite work. The offshore team was already set up for 6 months. If I left, it was not a big loss. I was not leaving at a critical time - it was a maintenance project. I had done all I could (along with the excellent onsite lead) to operate the project smoothly.
I resigned by email and let them know I was giving two weeks notice. I told them I was joining another company.
The Account Manager onsite called me and harangued for 2 hours. He said it was unethical for me to leave at all (nice try; it was not). He insulted me to his heart's content. I said I was available for the two weeks notice period. But he said it was not necessary.
Did I deserve the call or the insults? No, but I am sure he enjoyed it.
I met one of my classmates last week and he tells me that the idea around my former company was that I had "ditched" the company. I was surprised because he had joined a few years after I left, and I am not that famous a person. But I got confirmation from a couple of other people.
So, to recap - I had resigned; given notice; and left. That is ditching. And it is so bad as to make an example out of it.
What I should REALLY have said to the Account Manager is this: "My grandma in the USA has died. In her last will she wanted me to leave your company. How can I ignore that?"
By the way, the Account Manager "ditched" a few months later.

What happened to the Fresher?

The fresher (you should read from the beginning) went and told them he was leaving them and HR freaked out. They found out that they had not got the bond signed. So they asked him to stay back for two months - although it served no purpose;he was in training, and no revenue would be gained.
He went the next day and said his father was sick and they HAD to move to Bangalore because his father's whole family was there. They shut up.
If HR will shut up only on hearing lies (that everyone know are lies), that is what HR will hear. You don't have to dig through culture to find that out.

My Grandma and the movie Gentleman

2010-07-10T09:27:00.000-07:00

When television first spread across Tirunelveli, there were people who frowned at the development. Television viewing was a community endeavor - you could expect half the street to be at your home for the Sunday movie.
My father got a television in 1986 - it is still at his home.
At that time people would visit other people's homes and find that they were not welcome. They were not as interesting as "Vayalum Vaazhvum". If you went to someone's house between 7:30 and 8:30PM on a Friday (Oliyum Oliyum or Chitrahaar time), you would probably have a lifelong enemy.
Now, from the safe distance of 25 years, I can see that we were going through a transition to more nuclear communities. Nothing wrong with that, but it created some tension.

The Idealistic Balu

During that time, my father was associated with the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP). It was a tumultous period, about to get more tumulty between 1989 and 1992, a period that ended in the criminal demolition of the Babri Masjid.
High ranking Tamil Nadu VHP cadre would visit our home pretty often.

There was a young VHP member named Balu stationed in Tirunelveli at that time. He was a extremely polite, nice person. His family wanted him to marry and settle down. But Balu was a nationalist. He (along with many others in the "Sangh Parivaar") had no plans to marry. He was waiting for Akhand Bharat (a future plan of the RSS in which India, Pakistan and Bangladesh will reunify and form a mighty nation of software programmers).
Balu visited our home often. He had a lot of respect for my father and mother. They tried to tell him to marry, but he was not convinced.
Then my father bought a television.
Initially we had Doordarshan, Hindi, telecast from Kodaikkaanal. Our family still maintained a rule - if a visitor came in, we were to switch off the television. The switching off was easy in 1986 - while watching the news with Rajiv Gandhi's face plastered all the time.
The next year Tamil programs started coming in from Chennai. Balu still was visiting our home, but my father had a noticeable disinterest in Akhand Bharat, or in reclaiming the Dalit-Muslims of Meenakshipuram. He was talking about avoiding "social commitments".

The Ringing of Temple Bells

Soon we left Tirunelveli. My father was slowly disengaging from VHP and RSS contacts. But the fires of communalism were burning bright across India. Apparently not everyone had bought televisions. Advani started going around in Raths, pretending to rescue Lord Ram from a 500 year old affront.

On Dec 6 1992, a couple of my classmates came to meet me at home. They wanted me to accompany them to the nearby temple; apparently there was to be a peaceful protest by ringing temple bells for the Ayodhya temple at 12 Noon.
What really happened in Ayodhya at 12 Noon was far from peaceful. That is now history. But why didn't I accompany my classmates to the temple-bell-ringing?
Because there was a new movie on the cable channel at 12 Noon.

My Grandma and the movie Gentleman

Cable television had just arrived for the Chennai middle class. Music director A.R.Rahman had also arrived on the scene. Mani Ratnam was at his peak. The Chennai film institute cameramen had just begun to kick butt.
That was the early 90s.
From that time on, my family was completely hooked on cable. There were several new channels within a couple of years. Further, we all were proud that "our" cable channels telecast even the newest movies immediately. We had no idea about piracy or copyrights. We just thought the new cable technology guys were hooked with the movie makers and all of them were telecasting arabic sub-titled Tamil movies in our television purely out of benevolence.
Time to introduce my grandmother.

My grandma was the bestest grandma in the whole wide world.
She was smart, the sanest one in the family. She was around 90 and managed most of her tasks herself - even though she was blind by then.
I had a habit of narrating world events (she was completely briefed on the First Gulf War). I kept her abreast of the progress of the Agni missile. Our only point of difference in politics was that she believed the Nehru family were royal. I tried to educate her about democracy (she had voted many times in her life). But she was very emphatic on that.
Apart from these, I also told her stories of the movies I watched. She usually did not like the stories much. She would listen to the whole thing and then say "Bad story" and walk away.
When the movie Gentleman was released, we all went bravely to Vetri theater, Chromepet; fought in the crowd; got tickets; and watched the debut of director Shankar. As you all probably know, that movie cannot be "seen with family". It had too much eroticism, and was not subtle. But the movie is very, very fast. It is just spectacular.
I came home and narrated the story (editing out the nasty parts) to my grandma. Surprisingly, she liked the story. She had a lot of sympathy for "Kicha" as the lead character was called. She also understood that the very rhythmic song "Ottakatha Kattikko" was from this movie.
Within a few days the cable company announced they will be telecasting Gentleman that Sunday afternoon.
Sunday afternoon, I asked my father and mother and brother to sit together and watch the movie. This rarely happens; we all usually end up fighting. But that day we were all ready and it seemed that we could watch the movie without beating each other up.

The doorbell chimed at 12 Noon.
It was Balu.
Balu who? Yes, the same Balu who was the tireless worker for VHP, whom we last met running around Tirunelveli.
After five years, Balu had finally gotten married. But he was still passionate, I think. He had brought along his new wife to meet his ideal family.
Unfortunately the television was on. And Arjun was beating up people in it.
We all sat down. The conversation was mostly one-sided. Nobody switched off the TV.
Balu kept talking and we all kept watching television.
I think he was slightly disillusioned. His wife fidgeted in her seat. Surely, Balu must have thought, there must be some remnant of that old dignified family.
Then "Ottakatha Kattikko" started. There was commotion in one of the inner rooms. The door slammed open and my grandma came feeling her way to the living room.
She said, "Is it Gentleman?"
I said, "Yes, Grandma"
"Oh, that poor Kicha. He tries so hard, but the police is after him", said Grandma.
And then she started keeping time for "Ottakatha Kattikko".

Balu left and we never heard from him again.

It makes you wonder - If everyone in the country had cable television in 1992, that old Masjid may still be standing.

The issue of banning Tamil speech in schools

2010-06-19T23:18:00.000-07:00

I had a chance to interview my esteemed nephew, Arjun - he was transitioning from 8th std to 9th std. In the middle of his very busy schedule of watching TV and listening to "Singh is King" songs, he allocated ten minutes for me. I will write the detailed interview later, but for now, I wanted to highlight something. The interview started with him asking me a question about writing in Tamil.
"Why would you write in Tamil? Write in English and a lot of people will read it", he said.
I said, "I have tried writing in English. It is not my native language and I write Indian stories, which sound stilted in English. My English is not fit enough for first class writing."
He understood this to mean that I had scored low in English. He said, "I get lots of marks in English."
I said,"But think about it...by your logic everyone around the world should be writing in English. There should not be any Spanish, French or Turkish writing at all. That is not the case, right? There are enough people to read those languages and that is so in Tamil too. There is no real first or last in languages. Every language is equally good."
He responded with this: "If what you are saying is true, why does our school prevent us from talking in Tamil, ever?"
I was stumped.

A couple of days after this discussion the school near my home had announcements. It was the opening day and the principal gave a long, rambling talk as usual (in bad English - I have written about this here). This was the person who had banned facebook and promised to put cameras in every classroom.
In the middle of her talk she said this:"I don't want my students engaging in bad activities, such as talking in Tamil. I don't want that."
There were many parents standing at the door, since it was the first day of school.I wondered what they thought of this.

Where does this come from? Why is this not called fanaticism? How could any sane society tolerate that its schools ban its own native language?
I have wondered about this, but failed to come up with any good reason. It requires a bunch of sociologists to figure out what is going on here.

Fixing the Fanaticism
There is an important issue in balance here. You see, schools have a right, as private entities to fix any rules they deem necessary, as long as they submit to the education departments' requirements. The government cannot directly go ahead and legislate out Tamil hatred from schools.
There are two questions:
1. Why did we reach this stage?
2. How can we fix the underlying reasons?
It is easy to call the school principal an idiot. She is ignorant, sure, but she is responding to some kind of pressure or confirming to some social tradition, when she bans Tamil.
Where exactly is that pressure coming from? Is it coming from the parents? They are the demand side, the "buyers" of education. Are they expecting that schools completely ban Tamil within the campus?
May be to a certain extent, but education is a seller's market. A parent is constrained a lot in shopping for a good school - it is not like shopping for a product in a store. Your school has to be close to home, for example. It is not as if a parent would seek out a school and then can AFFORD to decide, "No, this school bans Tamil. I won't admit my child here." They can't, that is why there are long lines in front of every school.
Sure, we have reached this stage starting from colonial times. Knowing English was no doubt an advantage then. But what happened after independence? In particular what has happened in the past 40 years when ostensible Tamil lovers have ruled this state?

The Failure of English Education
Here is my shot at an explanation:
You start out first with the fact that your range of jobs immediately expands if you learn science and technology in English. We are a developing country and not at the forefront of research and development in most fields. The words that we use at work (Kalai Chorkal in Tamil) are generally in English. The process of translating Kalai Chorkal to Tamil is slow (although it continues to be done by admirable people). You are a better hire if you know learn technical subjects in English. This explains why schools offer two streams, Tamil and English medium, with English medium charging more. That is just Economics at work.
The next step is to speak English fluently - not just knowing technical terms or understanding documents. Ideally, (think about this carefully), your school education would be SUFFICIENT for this purpose. That is, if you took English as a language in your school, then that class education should make you fluent in English.
We all know that is not the case - just as that is not the case with any subject in our system.

If English is to be taught as a foreign language, then it should be taught right - with practice sessions and interactive classes - not as you would teach any other subject like History. If English was taught correct, it will be enough to learn it in the English class.

My point is that the school principal near my home forces kids to talk all the time in English because she KNOWS that her own school curriculum is INEFFECTIVE in teaching good English. If her school was effective, she won't care what language the kids speak outside of English class.

Thus, the myth has taken root, that you can talk English fluently ONLY if you talk in English all the time. That is what the schools are attempting and they do seem to make it a selling point.

So, my theory (I could be wrong) is that schools force kids to speak in English all the time because they have no faith in their own English teaching system. But you can't blame them. They are probably right in their belief. As I have explained before (in this article), the examination system decides how you educate students. I believe the examinations are all wrong. So that is what you get in your education.
How then, can we go about correcting this situation?

One way is simply a blanket ban by the government on such rules by schools. But it would be thrown out of court, at least for minority institutions to whom the government has no right to dictate. I believe that such a ban would also be an infringement on the rights of private institutions - who knows what else the government will ban next?

Second is to focus a lot on English education - this is completely paradoxical. But if you had excellent resources and require good English education standards at the English SUBJECT level, schools simply may not feel the need to ban Tamil. I realize this sounds very contrarian.

I also think that the Tamil Nadu government should do a LOT more to save the language from extinction. It IS the government's responsibility in this country. But that is for a separate post. Two related points here:
1. Modernise Tamil education too - stop the stupid "Manappaada paattu".
2. Teach some post-modernist thoughts at school. There is a common view that languages (or music or art, for that matter) are hierarchical and that there is a single path to modernity. The past forty years of post-modernist thought has completely broken this view, but it is not yet taught - as a concept - in our schools.

PS: Tamil society, in the world outside school, has fought against such school bans. There is a reason words such as "Peter" or "Mary" entered popular Tamil lexicon. In school and college the kids who spoke in English all the time (without reason) were thought to be uncool, when I was growing up. I don't know how it is now.

Bollywood is not about movies

2010-06-15T09:53:00.000-07:00

I will make a case below but let me lay out my conclusion first - Bollywood is not the Hindi film industry. Films are simply ancillary to it. Bollywood is a brand, a brand that helps corporations sell products using a small clique of new aristocrats. It is really about manufacturing artificial demand, by a tie-up of big media, consumer goods producers and film corporations. The movies and their release are at best ancillary to their purpose. The original Hindi movie industry has been taken over and supplanted by these corporations.

A Voyage of Discovery
I remember watching the Hindi movie "Kuch Kuch Hota Hai" in Devi theater, Chennai, back in 1999. This was Karan Johar's first directorial venture. The movie release was preceded by the usual promotions. One of these was an article in the magazine India Today. The magazine had a photograph of a college lobby with lockers for students and Sharukh Khan walking bouncing a basketball. The article said Hindi films were going through a resurgence in costumes, artwork and stories (I guess in that order). When I watched the movie I could feel it. The college in that movie seemed "like in America". The students had individual lockers (while my college barely had a bathroom). Kids went to a giant summer camp and the actors went from country to country. You would be forgiven for thinking that colleges in Bombay actually looked like the newer ones in the United States.
Later I learnt that the movie was a big hit in the United States and UK. Nothing critical came to my mind while watching the movie.
A few months later India Today again published a "puff piece" (as journalists call it) on the Hindi film world. It said that the movie industry was attracting the interest of corporations, both in India and abroad. The article mentioned that story discussions were now done using powerpoint presentations! There was talk of bound scripts and market analysis and such. The article thought it was a great thing. What could go wrong with that?
This corporatisation of that industry was more and more associated with professionalism. There was excitement that our movies would now be as "good" as Hollywood movies - after all Hollywood movies were made by corporations and now, so are ours! People talked of "genre" movies and much was made of Ram Gopal Verma's "Factory" production house.
Ten years later, there is not much to show for that corporate revolution. The powerpoint presentations seem to have made the situation worse. But I am getting ahead of myself.
Soon I was in the United States and the flood of promotions even there was astonishing. The movie Devdas was on the (desi) airwaves, television and online all the time. The movie did not do well in India, but it did well abroad. Suddenly we were in Cannes, for no good reason. Our movies were still bad, but Aishwarya Rai was on the red carpet...you know, the carpet reserved for white people! Who designed Aishwarya's wardrobe? and so on.
Initially this was amusing but me and many of my friends were annoyed that Hindi movies were so "westernized". A standard movie started like "A guy and a girl are sitting in the Waterloo station, London, talking..". Most Hindi movies that we came to know about (that is, that were promoted) were very weird, to say the least. Almost all the movies were set abroad. Even if they were set in India, it was an India that most of us had not seen - it had palatial buildings in which NRIs landed in helicopters, for one. You would not see a normal road or tea shop.
Even "Dil Chahtha Hai" which was a great story, showed a "global" Indian - a person who flew to Australia and went to operas.
It would be fine if there were a couple of movies like this, but every movie was this way. It was as if the stars will not act in "local" settings.
It revolted me and many of my friends so much that most of gave up watching Hindi movies.
To make fun of this trend, I wrote a blog post four years back - here. That post is still one of the most popular posts in this blog. But I believe I got it fundamentally wrong.

Post 2006
In the last few years, the Hindi movie industry increased in its weirdness - which they now called escapism. Watching a movie like "Black" or "Saawariya" or "Jaane tu ya Jaane Naa" or "Kabhi Alvidha Naa Kehna" was excruciatingly painful. They all acted like they were born and brought up in the West, while talking perfect Hindi. The colleges, costumes and everything seemed..incongruent. It did not make any sense.

Please note that in the last ten years, Bollywood, in spite of its insistent rebranding and propaganda (that is what it is), is still a loss making industry. They mostly depend now on a nostalgic NRI community. Most Hindi movies flop.
You have to wonder, then, what is going on. I had noticed these trends:
1. That the national film awards committee now gave more awards to Bollywood movies and presented more of those movies in foreign award shows.
2. That the actors and actresses were generally drawn from a small pool of models, celebrities or star children. There were rarely any "normal" actor who was promoted. This is unlike, for example, the Tamil of Malayalam movie industries (although the trend is noticeable now in Tamil).
3. That the movies rarely addressed any "real" issues or social issues. They showed, at best, relationship problems. There were no comments on caste, or women's issues or even traffic.
4. That the stars rarely seem to suffer from a flop - they simply act in another flop movie and then another and so on.

Realization sets in
I decided early last year that I would look for economic reasons for people acting a certain way, instead of blaming individuals or culture. I wrote a long post on this here.
What are the incentives for Bollywood? That was the question I wanted to answer. In my post making fun of Hindi movies, I had assumed that their "imitation" of the West (that makes movies look like fancy dress competitions) was born out of foolishness. I thought they were simply like the idiots who wore flowing gowns to coffee shops.
But what if they were not? What if we are the real idiots?
In other words, what are the incentives that makes Bollywood run the way it does? How can they make so many flop movies and survive on the same cycle of incongruent stories, huge promotions and finally bad letdowns?
The answer came from a close friend. She asked me to look up the term "brand ambassador" and a few actors' names.
For example, if you search for Abhishek Bachchan and brand ambassador, you see that he is promoting Videocon DTH, Motorola, BIG 92.7 FM, Idea! and so on.
Hrithik Roshan, who has been giving out flops for a long time, is the brand ambassador of Acer, Provogue, ITCis John Players, Reliance Mobile and so on.
Well they are established actors, after all.. how about new comer Ranbir Kapoor? He has only acted in three movies of which two were flops, right?
He is the brand ambassador for Pepsi, Nissan and Panasonic India!
Where am I going with this?
The "actors" are not really actors. They are really fronts for an elaborate corporate game.
What has happened is this:
1. Corporations move into making movies
2. They realize, quickly, that instead of going the hard route of actually making good movies, they can make a lot of money for themselves and the stars by USING the movie as a way to sell merchandise, music and consumer products.
3. The actors now can make more money by making advertisements than in movies (By the way, in spite of all the talk about Hollywood, Hollywood stars do not act in many advertisements). Indian movie actors have become, basically, advertising models.
4. The actors tie up with products, the movie corporations tie up with products - and so people make money whether the movie is a flop or not.
5. Then they sell the movie for television viewership and make a lot of money there too.
Shyam Benegal described this in a recent CineBlitz interview - the focus is on becoming a star, because as a star you can make money sheerly out of a "brand" name. All that you need is name recognition. You do NOT need to have acted in any successful movie.
In other words, the movies are actually "events" which help companies launch product prmotions. They do not signify ANYTHING more than that. What we look for, story, screenplay, acting, camera - all of these are really irrelevant for the ECONOMICS of the Bollywood industry.

Hence, I present you the retard looking Ranbir Kapoor, the unibrow Imran Khan and the building of a brand.

In a giant tie up between corporate media,corporate production houses, consumer goods sellers and corporate PR firms handling each and every aspect of an actor as a brand - the Hindi film industry is now taken over by a bunch of carpetbaggers.

You know this - look at the amount of propaganda unleashed on us by the media houses prior to the release of, say, Gajini or recently, Kites. There is such a network of product tie-ups that is difficlut to untangle.
The sole purpose, now, of a Bollywood movie is to launch advertising campaigns. It has NOTHING to do with a movie.

This explains some of trends I commented on earlier.
1. It explains why the star pool is open to a small clique - because the members of the new aristocracy have better connections and better name recognition. If all that you cared about was branding, why would you use a nameless actor from Bikaner?

2. Very importantly, it explains the SUBJECT matter of these movies - if your whole goal is to increase consumption and promote a lifestyle that "looks" rich, then you can see why Bollywood movies focus on relationship issues in New York or action sequences in the Bahamas. Why would they ever show actual issues? Why would they ever show caste or communal issues? Most movies look like an American teenager's (a particularly stupid one at that) fantasy. This is not escapism - they have simply called it escapism to justify their path.

3. Also, it is pointless, given this, to accuse movie makers of copying other movies. If your core problem is that your movie industry is about selling products rather than movies, then who cares if those movies are copied?

The corporations have taken over the mantle of all those who came before them, in an actual movie industry and then replaced them with Public Relations images. And they have sold those images to us.

Who is the loser in this? The Hindi movie audience has been had for suckers.
Ten years after the much-hyped corporate entries, this is the result.

PS: There is a possibility that someone would read this whole piece and decide that the issue is really that I am culturally backward or anti-Western or even anti-Corporations. I will just point out a couple of things for such people:
There are many movie industries around the world that are run by corporations. Although they do have issues sometimes in quality and some bias in favor of corporatism, none seem to have reached the low-point of our industry. The Hindi movie industry was not at a very high standard even during the 90's. There was already nepotism in the industry. But the corporations took all that and made it the current monster (The only consolation seems to be that the movies still suck but at least they show London around). Reflexively cheering corporations was wrong.
The incentives now are set up to ignore good movie making. They think that is INCIDENTAL to the "product" success.
When I say good movies I do not mean "Pather Panchali" type. I know people jump at that. I mean commercial movies like Munnabhai, at least. Do not pass of Krish as some kind of great movie so that we all feel happy that "our" India made a super hero movie. That is all I am saying.
Finally, before you accuse me of being anti-Western, anti-progress (people think both are the same) and all that, hold on. I just don't think there are ANY colleges in India where the kids look, dress or dance like in the movie "Jaane Tu Ya...". I would love such colleges, believe me, I would hang out there all the time. It is just that the movie looks like it is a fancy dress competition where you say, "let all of us pretend that we are all in an all-Indian Ivy League college somewhere in the UK and that we are all born and brought up there and talk in Hindi and our parents are all Indian but let us just say we have English customs...and so on".
That is not escapism, it is pathetic. As I explained, that movie was really about launching another set of product promotions and making Imran Khan a brand so that he can become another brand ambassador.

My post in DailyKos on Israel and the USA

2010-06-02T20:49:00.000-07:00

The below post was originally written for dailykos.com. The article and comments on it can be found here.

After watching the coverage of the flotilla incident and the Israeli attack, in the blogosphere and on television, I could not understand initially why there seemed to be so much complexity in the debates in the United States. Here is my shot at an explanation. (I am an East Indian, and I could be wrong about some American history here).
The history of 20th century and the lessons that we should learn from it are a big part driving the flotilla and the blockade narrative in people's minds. And the media, government and intellectuals in the USA are UNIQUELY incapable of learning certain of those lessons.
Why?

Because the USA (as far as I know) has never been an Imperial country that maintained colonies and faced broad enough anti-colonial forces against it.
So, we have a) Britain, France, Italy etc who were colonizers and who faced very successful anti-colonial struggles on the one hand.
We have b) China, India, countries in Africa and West Asia, colonized countries that fought against such colonizers.
And then we have c) the USA, the current global power.
Countries in sets a and b know this to be true: that the twentieth century had SEVERAL great struggles - NOT just the one against fascism.
Thus as an Indian I know that the big fight that our country faced was not our small but significant participation in WWII. It was the fight against colonialism that really determines the lessons we learnt.
I think the British or the French also see the 20th century as fights against fascism (on which they were on the right side) AS WELL AS fights against colonialism (on which they were in the wrong).
This means that we both consider the lessons and history of colonialism to be important.
But this is not the case with the United States. Intellectuals in the USA seem to give singular importance to the fight against fascism and totalitarianism, while completely being ignorant of the behavior and lessons of colonialism. The American people I talk to are certainly ignorant that there is a point of view on issues held by the formerly colonized peoples around the world, and that point of view is VERY, VERY significant.
What has this got to do with Israel?
Simply that the tactics and rhetoric used by Israel "smell" very similar to a colonizer to an Indian, while the Palestinians come across similar to ourselves and our predicament hardly 60 years back. We "get" Palestine - while intellectuals in the USA (even those who support Paestinian statehood) seem to be engaged in a rhetorical quagmire.

The actions of the Israeli government or the Gaza blockade are not at all that subtle or complex to explore - collective punishment, extreme responses to individual incidents and ritual humiliation have ALWAYS been tactics used by colonizers. To explore this further, I have chosen the incident of Jalianwala Bagh massacre or the Amritsar massacre on April 13, 1919 in Amritsar, Punjab, British India.

You can read a summary of the incident here.
The restive city of Amritsar was under martial law in April 1919 because of an attack against an English woman by a mob earlier. A group of peaceful unarmed civilians gathered in the grounds of Jalianwala Bagh on the day of Baisakhi, the spring festival.
General Dyer commanded a group of fifty soldiers who opened fire on the crowd for 10 minutes.
The casualties estimates range from 379 by the government to 1800 by the Civil Surgeon.
Now, given that incident what tactics of colonizers can we learn?
1. The propaganda that the Palestinians only understand force
All the below are based on this article in wikipedia on the Jalianwala Bagh massacre and Reginald Dyer:
General Dyer, perpetrator of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar, Punjab 1919 wrote an article in the Globe of 21 January 1921, titled, "The Peril to the Empire." It commenced with "India does not want self-government. She does not understand it." He went on to write
* It is only to an enlightened people that free speech and a free press can be extended. The Indian people want no such enlightenment.
* There should be an eleventh commandment in India, "Thou shalt not agitate."
* The time will come to India when a strong hand will be exerted against malice and 'perversion' of good order.
* Gandhi will not lead India to capable self-government. The British Raj must continue, firm and unshaken in its administration of justice to all men.

2. Extreme responses to certain incidents:
Brigadier Dyer designated the spot where Miss Marcella Sherwood was assaulted sacred and daytime pickets were placed at either end of the street. Anyone wishing to proceed in the street between 6am and 8pm was made to crawl the 150 yards (140 m) on all fours, lying flat on their bellies. The order was not required at night due to a curfew. The humiliation of the order struck the Indians deeply. Most importantly, the order effectively closed the street. The houses had no back doors and the inhabitants could not go out without climbing down from their roofs. This order was in effect from 19 April until 25 April 1919. No doctor or supplier was allowed in, resulting in the sick being untended.

3. The disputing of certain facts:
After the firing was over, hundreds of people had been killed and thousands had been injured. Official estimates put the figures at 379 killed (337 men, 41 boys and a six week old baby) and 200 injured, though the actual figure was almost certainly much higher; the wounded could not be moved from where they had fallen, as a curfew had been declared. Debate about the actual figures continues to this day.
....
In 1997, the Duke of Edinburgh, participating in an already controversial British visit to the Amritsar monument, provoked considerable outrage in India and in the UK with an offhand comment. Having observed a plaque claiming 2,000 casualties, Prince Philip observed, "That's not right. The number is less."

4. The support of the democractic people of Israel:
On his return to Britain, Brigadier Dyer was presented with a purse of 26,000 pounds sterling, a huge sum in those days, which emerged from a collection on his behalf by the Morning Post, a conservative, pro-Imperialistic newspaper, which later merged with the Daily Telegraph. A Thirteen Women Committee was constituted to present "the Saviour of the Punjab with sword of honour and a purse."

and so on.

I am not comparing Jallianwala Bagh to the flotilla incident. I am comparing it with the blockade and such ritual humiliations and violence perpetrated on the people of Gaza.

Now, if the USA had actually maintained a set of colonies the way Britain did and then faced stiff anti-colonialism, then it is likely that some of the above defenses and actions of Israel would be seen for what they are - after all the history of the last two centuries is mainly about colonialism (for the majority of the people on the planet).
It is not hard for most people to recognise it for what it is.
Instead there is an exclusive focus among American intelligentsia on the struggle against fascism.
It is natural, if you use that struggle ALONE as a guide to view 20th century politics, to swear to defend Israel in any way you can.
But unfortunately that is not the actual case. There were many actors in the 20th century world and the world was not so simply split between fascist dictators and democracies as American intelligentsia seem to represent.

This is why I have thought of the "defense" that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East curious. What does that statement mean? Democracies have been known to colonize and punish colonised people, and otherwise engage in severe inhumanity. Why do American media think that a democracy somehow is incapable of such behavior?
The answer is clear - if you look at the world solely through the prism of a struggle against fascism (because you happened to be on the right side of it), then of course, a democracy can do no wrong.
It is just that this is a very narrow view of world history (and, shall I say, very convenient for the United States and Western Europe).

தாடகா வனத்தில் ஒரு நாள் - Tamil Short Story

2010-05-21T23:07:00.000-07:00

தாடகா வனத்தில் ஒரு நாள்
----------------------------------
இராமையா அரியா

நானும், ராமனும், ரிஷியும் அடர்ந்த வனத்துக்குள் புகுந்த ஓரிரு நாட்களிலேயே சற்றே பயமுறுத்தும் காட்சிகளைக் கண்டோம்.
பாழடைந்த ஒரு பிரதேசம். பாறைகள் அங்குமிங்கும் உருண்டிருந்தன. செம்மண்ணில் வெயில் தகித்தது. அங்கங்கே பெரிய மரங்கள். சில இடங்களில் முள் காடுகள்.
இரண்டு மூன்று இடங்களில் சில மண்டை ஓடுகள் கிடந்தன. ரிஷி சுற்றுமுற்றும் பார்த்தவாறே நடந்தார். நான் ஆவலுடன், "ஏதோ யுத்தம் நடந்த மாதிரி இருக்கிறது?" என்றேன்.
"இலக்குவா, தாடகை என்னும் அரக்கியின் உறைவிடம் இது",என்றார் ரிஷி. அந்த மண்டை ஓடுகளைச் சுட்டிக் காட்டி, "அவளுடைய இரை ", என்றார்.
என் உடம்பு நடுங்கியது. "மிதிலைக்கு இந்த வழியாகத் தான் சென்றாக வேண்டுமா?" என்றேன்.
சற்றுத் தள்ளி கோணல் மாணலாக ஒரு எலும்புக் கூடு கிடந்தது. அதைக் காட்டி, "என் சிஷ்யன் பிங்கலன்", என்றார் ரிஷி.
அன்று இரவு ஒரு பெரிய மரத்தின் மேல் ஏறி படுத்துத் தூங்கினோம்.

மரத்தின் கடினமான கிளையில் படுத்தவாறே நான் வாழ்க்கையைப் பற்றி யோசித்தேன். பல நாட்களுக்கு முன்னால் அயோத்தியில் வில்லையும், அம்பையும் வைத்துக் கொண்டு மாங்காய் அடித்துத் தின்று கொண்டிருந்தோம். இந்த ரிஷி வந்து அழைத்துப் போனார். எனக்கு என் தந்தை தசரத மன்னர் என்னை அனுப்பி வைத்ததில் ஆச்சரியமில்லை. அவருக்குப் பாதி நேரம் எனக்கும் என் இரட்டைச் சகோதரன் சத்ருக்னனுக்கும் வித்தியாசமே தெரியாது. இன்னும் யாரை அனுப்பினோம் என்று அவருக்குத் தெரிந்திருக்காது.
ஆனால் ராமனை, பட்டத்து இளவரசனை எப்படி இந்த தாடி மீசை முனிவருடன் காட்டுக்கு அனுப்பி வைத்தார்? ராமன் மேல் அவருக்கு அடங்காத பாசம். மிகவும் நல்லவன் என்று ஒரு நினைப்பு.
லேசாக நான் கண்ணயரத் தொடங்கிய நேரம். வானத்தில் கொக்கு போலிருக்கும் நட்சத்திரக் கூட்டம் நேர் மேலே மிதந்தது. சில நேரமாக உயிரே போவது போலக் கத்திக் கொண்டிருந்த கோட்டான் கூட அடங்கி விட்டது.
'கரக்' என்று ஒரு மெலிதான சத்தம், ஒரு கல் நகர்வது போலக் கேட்டது. நான் தூக்கக் கலக்கத்தினூடே உற்றுக் கேட்டேன். மறுபடி அந்தச் சத்தம் கேட்கவில்லை.

**********************************************

ரிஷி பொதுவாக அதிகாலையில் தானும் எழும்பி, மற்றவர்களையும் எழுப்பி உயிரை வாங்குவார். 'பிரம்ம முகூர்த்தம்' என்பார். தேவையே இல்லாமல் இருட்டில் குளிர்ந்த நீரில் இறங்கிக் குளிக்க வேண்டும். பிறகு அவர் சொல்லும் மந்திரங்களைத் திருப்பிச் சொல்ல வேண்டும்.

மரத்தில் நாங்கள் படுத்துத் தூங்கிய மறு நாள் வெகு நேரத்திற்கு யாரும் மரத்தில் இருந்து இறங்கவில்லை. காலைத் தொங்கப் போட்டுக் கொண்டு கீழே பார்த்தவாறு இருந்தோம். எந்த நேரத்திலும் தாடகை பாய்ந்து வந்து காலைக் கடிப்பாள் என்று பயம்.

விஸ்வாமித்திரர் கடைசியில், "ஹூம்.. இந்நேரம் தூங்கியிருப்பாள். இலக்குவா, நீ முதலில் இறங்கு", என்றார்.

"அண்ணா, நீ தான் பெரியவன். நீ முதலில் இறங்கு", என்றேன் ராமனிடம், பயபக்தியுடன்.

ராமன் பயப்படுவான். ஆனால் முகத்தில் காட்ட மாட்டான். அவன் முகம் எப்போதும் ஒரே மாதிரி இருக்கும். எனவே சிரித்தவாறே என்னைப் பிடித்துக் கீழே தள்ளி விட்டான்.

மூன்று பேரும் காலைக் கடன்களைக் கழித்து விட்டு வில்லை இறுக்கிப் பிடித்தவாறே நடந்தோம். ரிஷி சற்று முன்னால் போன பொழுது ராமன் என்னைப் பிடித்து நிறுத்தினான். நாங்கள் தூங்கிய மரத்தின் அடிப் பகுதியைக் காட்டினான். அந்தக் கடினமான அடிமரத்தில் நான்கு கோடுகள், ஆழமான கிழிசல்கள் தெரிந்தன.
"கரடியா ?" என்றேன்.
"தாடகை", என்றான் ராமன்.
நாங்கள் ரிஷியைத் தொடர்ந்தோம்.
நான் சற்றுத் தைரியத்துடன்,"ரிஷியே, இவள் யார்? இவள் ஏன் இப்படிச் சாதுக்களைத் துன்புறுத்துகிறாள்?" என்று கேட்டேன்.
ரிஷி தொண்டையைக் கனைத்துக் கொண்டார். பிரமாதமாகக் கதை சொல்லுவார். "ஹூம்.." என்றார். "உங்கள் குரு வசிஷ்டன் இருக்கிறானே" என்று தொடங்கிச் சற்று நேரம் வசிஷ்டரைத் திட்டினார்.
தாடகை உண்மையில் மனிதப் பெண் (பூர்வ ஜன்மத்தில்). பயங்கர புத்திசாலி (இதுவும் பூர்வ ஜன்மத்தில்). வசிஷ்டரிடம் வேதம் பயிலச் சென்றிருக்கிறாள். வசிஷ்டர் தத்துப்பித்தென்று ஏதோ சொல்லித் தர, அவள், "மந்திரம் தப்பு" என்று வாதிட்டாள். பிடி சாபம். பார்த்தால் அடுத்த ஜன்மத்தில் ராக்ஷசி.
ராமன், "பூர்வ ஜன்மம் என்று ஒன்றே கிடையாது என்று ஜாபாலி சொல்கிறார்", என்றான்.
"அவன் ஒரு மடையன்", என்றார் ரிஷி.
"கார்கியும் அப்படியே சொல்கிறார்".
"அவள் ஒரு மடச்சி. பூர்வ ஜன்மம் என்று ஒன்று இல்லா விட்டால் இந்தத் தாடகை ஏன் இப்படி அரக்கியாக, மகாபாவியாக வந்து பிறக்க வேண்டும்?"
நான் ஆச்சரியத்துடன், "உங்களுக்கு எல்லோருடைய பூர்வ ஜன்மமும் தெரியுமா?" என்று கேட்டேன்.
"வந்தது, வரப் போவது எல்லாம் தெரியும்."
எனக்குப் பல நாட்களாக இருக்கும் சந்தேகத்தை இவரிடம் கேட்டால் என்ன?
இந்த நேரத்தில் மரங்களின் அடர்த்தி மிகவும் குறைந்து விட்டது. இன்னும் பல பாறைகள் உருண்டு கிடந்தன. நாங்கள் மேட்டுப் பாதையில் போய்க் கொண்டு இருந்தோம். ராமன் சுற்றிப் பார்த்தவாறே முன்னால் சென்றான்.
நான் ஆர்வமாக, "நான் எப்போதாவது, ஒரு நாளேனும், ஒரு நாட்டுக்கு அரசனாகும் வாய்ப்பு உண்டா?" என்று கேட்டேன்.
ராமன் சிரித்தான். "நீ எல்லா ஜன்மத்திலும் என் தம்பி தான்", என்றான்.
"ரிஷியே, சொல்லும்" என்றேன் நான்.
ரிஷி, "இங்கிருந்து தெற்கே வெகு தூரத்தில் குரங்குகளின் மஹா சாம்ராச்சியம் ஒன்று உள்ளதாம். கேள்விப்பட்டிருக்கிறேன்", என்றார்.
ராமன் மறுபடி சிரித்தான். "இலக்குவா, நீ கட்டாயம் குரங்கு மன்னனாவாய்" என்றான்.
திடீரென்று அவன் சிரிப்பு மறைந்தது. வில்லைத் தரையில் ஊன்றிச் சுற்றிப் பார்த்தான். "அது என்ன சத்தம்", என்றான்.
நான் திகிலுடன் உற்றுக் கேட்டேன்.
மெலிதாக மரத்தை அரம் அறுப்பது போல ஒரு ஒலி கேட்டது.
ரிஷி, "சிறிது நேரத்தில் நீங்களே பார்ப்பீர்கள்", என்றார்.
நாங்கள் நடக்க நடக்க மேட்டின் உச்சி தெரிந்தது. சத்தமும் பலப்பட்டது. உச்சியில் இருந்த ஒரு பெரிய பாறை அருகே ரிஷி நின்றார். கீழே சுட்டிக் காட்டினார்.
நாங்கள் பாறைக்கு பின்னாலிருந்து மெதுவாக எட்டிப் பார்த்தோம். கீழே கிடுகிடுவென்று இறக்கம். அதன் முடிவில் பல பாறைகள் அரண் போல நின்றன.
அதில் ஒரு பாறை ஏறி ஏறி இறங்கியது.
நான் உற்றுப் பார்த்தேன். அது பாறையே அல்ல. ஒரு மனித உருவம் தான். அங்கே படுத்து நல்ல வெயிலில் குறட்டை விட்டுத் தூங்கிக் கொண்டிருந்தது.
நான் ரிஷியிடம் திரும்பி, "தெரிந்தவர்களா?" என்றேன்.
"தாடகை", என்றார் ரிஷி.
*************************************************
மூன்று பேரும் பாறைக்கு பின்னால் பதுங்கி உட்கார்ந்து கொண்டோம். ரிஷி அவசரத்துடன், "ராமா , உச்சி வேளை. நல்ல நேரம். அவளைக் கொல்", என்றார்.
ராமன் சந்தேகத்துடன், "நாம் ஏன் இவள் இருப்பிடத்திற்கு வந்தோம்? காட்டைத் தாண்டி மிதிலைக்கு அல்லவா போகிறோம்?" என்றான்.
ரிஷி பெருமூச்சு விட்டார். சற்று யோசித்தார். பிறகு, "ராமா, உன்னிடம் உண்மையைச் சொல்ல வேண்டிய நேரம் வந்து விட்டது", என்றார்.
குருகுலத்தில் இப்படி யாராவது சொன்னால் பொய் சொல்லப் போகிறார்கள் என்று அர்த்தம் என்று சொல்லி கொடுத்திருந்தார்கள்.
"ராமா, இவளுக்குச் சாபம் என்று சொன்னேன் இல்லையா? அதற்கு விமோசனம் உண்டு. உன் கையால், தசரத புத்திரன் ராமன் கையால் இறந்தால் இவளுக்கு உடனடி மோட்சம்", என்றார்.
ராமன், "நீர் சொல்வது நம்புகிற மாதிரி இல்லையே", என்றான்.
"சத்தியமாக", என்றார் விஸ்வாமித்திரர்.
ராமன், "இவள் ராக்ஷசியாக இருந்தாலும் பெண். என்னை எந்தத் தொந்திரவும் செய்யவில்லை. எனவே நான் அவளைக் கொல்ல முடியாது", என்றான்.
"நீ சொல்வது தர்ம நியாயம். அது ராட்சதர்களுக்குப் பொருந்தாது. அவளுக்கு நீ வெறும் இரை. காட்டு மிருகத்தை, புலியை இப்படிக் கண்டால் விட்டுப் போவாயா?"
நான், "ராமா, ரிஷியே...", என்று தொடங்கினேன்.
"நீ சும்மா இரு" என்றார் ரிஷி.
"இல்லை...குறட்டைச் சத்தம் கேட்கவில்லை..அது தான்..", என்றேன்.
*****************************************
மூவரும் காட்டு வழியாகத் தலை தெறிக்க ஓடினோம். நான் தான் முதலில் ஓடிக் கொண்டிருந்தேன். சிறிது நேரம் கழித்து ஒரு இடத்தில் இளைக்க இளைக்க நின்றோம்.
ராமன், "கவுசிகரே, நான் அவளைக் கொல்ல மாட்டேன். இது அவளுடைய நிலம். இங்கிருந்து எம்மை வெளியே அழைத்துச் செல்லும்" என்றான்.
"சரி. உன் இஷ்டம்" என்றார் ரிஷி.
"ஓடிக் கொண்டே பேசலாமே", என்றேன் நான்.
******************************************

அன்று கிட்டத்தட்ட ஒரு காத தூரம் ஓடியிருப்போம். விஸ்வாமித்திரர் முன்னால் வழி காட்டிக் கொண்டு போனார். அந்தி சாயும் பொழுது ஒரு சிறு கானகத்தருகே வந்து சேர்ந்தோம்.
ரிஷி தரையைச் சுத்தம் செய்தார். இரவு தங்குவதற்குத் தயாரானோம். அரணிக் கட்டையைக் கடைந்து தீயைப் பெருக்கினார் ரிஷி. நானும் ராமனும் பார்த்துக் கொண்டு உட்கார்ந்திருந்தோம். கால்கள் வலித்தன.
"தாடகை கட்டாயம் இங்கே வர மாட்டாளே? பேசாமல் மரத்தின் மேலேயே தூங்கி விடலாமே?" என்றேன் நான்.
"சூரர்களே! நாம் அவள் எல்லையைத் தாண்டி வெகு தூரம் வந்தாகி விட்டது. எப்பொழுதும் மரத்தில் தூங்கிப் பழக வேண்டாம்", என்றார் ரிஷி.
சாப்பிட்டு விட்டு கால்களை நீட்டிக் கொண்டு தீயைப் பார்த்துக் கொண்டிருந்தோம்.
"இந்த ராட்சதர்கள் இப்படிப் போகிற வருகிறவர்களை எல்லாம் பிடித்துத் தின்கிறார்கள் என்று தெரியும். வேறு வழி இல்லையா?" என்றேன் நான்.
"ஆஹா! அருமையான கேள்வி! நீ கேட்ட கேள்வி எனக்குப் புரிகிறது."
"அப்படியா?"
"சாதுக்கள் வாழும் இந்த உலகத்தில் ராட்சதர்களைக் கொன்று சாதுக்களை யார் காப்பது? நல்ல கேள்வி."
"அப்படி அல்ல. காட்டைச் சுற்றிப் போக வேறு வழி இல்லையா?"
ரிஷி என்னைப் பொருட்படுத்தாமல்," சாதுக்களைக் காக்கத் தான் காக்கும் கடவுள் விஷ்ணு இந்த உலகத்தில் அவதரிக்கிறான். அசுரர்களைக் கொல்வது அவன் கடமை", என்றார் ராமனைப் பார்த்து.
"நான் கடவுள் அல்ல", என்றான் ராமன்.
"ராமா, நீ விஷ்ணுவின் அம்சம்."
நான் ஆத்திரத்துடன், "நான்? நான் யாருடைய அம்சம்?", என்றேன்.
யாருமே பதில் சொல்லவில்லை. ரிஷியும் ராமனும் முறைத்துக் கொண்டே தூங்கச் சென்றார்கள்.
நான் மரவுரியை விரித்துப் படுத்தேன். வானத்தைப் பார்த்தவாறே தூங்க முயற்சி செய்தேன். வானத்தில் கொக்கி போன்ற அந்த நட்சத்திரக் கூட்டம் தெரிந்தது.
கண்ணயரும் போது அந்தக் கோட்டான் அலறியது.
"க்க்க்ரீச்"
நான் திடுக்கிட்டுக் கண் விழித்தேன்.
காலையில் தென்மேற்காகச் சென்றோம். பிறகு தாடகையின் உறைவிடத்தில் இருந்து விரைந்து சென்ற பொழுது எந்தத் திசையில் போனோம்?
நன்றாக யோசித்துப் பார்த்தேன். எனக்கென்னவோ மறுபடி வடகிழக்கில் வந்திருக்கிறோம் என்று தோன்றியது.
காலையில் கிளம்பிய இடத்திற்கு மறுபடியும் வந்திருக்கிறோமோ?
**************************************************

ராமன் தூங்கி கொண்டிருந்தான். தூங்கும் போதும் அவன் முகம் அப்படியே இருந்தது. நான் அவனைத் தட்டி எழுப்பினேன்.
தூக்கக் கலக்கத்துடன் எழுந்து உட்கார்ந்தான்.
"என்ன?"
"என்னுடன் வா", என்றேன்.
அவன் கேள்வி கேட்காமல் வந்தான். எரியும் தீக்கம்பு ஒன்றை எடுத்துக் கொண்டேன்.
ரிஷி இன்னும் தூங்கவில்லை போலும். "எங்கே போகிறீர்கள்?" என்றார்.
"எனக்குக் கழிக்க வேண்டும்", என்றேன்.
"துணைக்கு அண்ணனா?" என்று சிரித்தார்.
"காக்கும் கடவுளாயிற்றே", என்றேன் நான் நடந்து கொண்டே.
கானகத்தின் உள்ளே புகுந்தோம். ராமனுக்குத் தூக்கம் போய் விட்டது. "என்ன விஷயம்", என்றான்.
நான் பக்கத்தில் இருந்த மரங்களைச் சுற்றிப் பார்த்தேன். ஒரு பெரிய மராமரம் ஒன்றின் அடியில் சென்று பந்தத்தை உயர்த்திப் பிடித்தேன்.
அந்த மரத்தின் அடியில் நாங்கள் காலையில் பார்த்தது போலவே நான்கு நகங்கள் அழுத்தமாகக் கீறியிருந்தன .
"ரிஷி நம்மைத் தாடகையின் எல்லைக்குள் சுற்றி அழைத்து வந்திருக்கிறார்", என்றேன்.
ராமனின் கைகள் உடை வாளை நாடின.
**********************************************

நாங்கள் திரும்பி வரும் போது ரிஷி எங்களைப் பார்த்துப் படுத்திருந்தார். ஆனால் அவர் விழித்திருப்பார் என்பதில் சந்தேகமில்லை. தாடகையின் காட்டில் எந்த மனிதனுக்குத் தூக்கம் வரும்?
"ரிஷியே, எழுந்திரும்", என்றான் ராமன்.
அவர் கண் விழித்துப் பார்த்தார்.
"ஏன் இப்படிச் செய்தீர்?" என்றேன் நான்.
ரிஷி பெருமூச்சுடன் எழுந்து அமர்ந்தார்.
"ராமா, இலக்குவா, நீங்கள் சத்திரியர்கள். உங்களுக்குப் புரியும் என்று நினைத்தேன்", என்றார்.
"ஏன் தாடகையைக் கொல்ல இப்படி ஒரு அவசியம்?" என்று கேட்டான் ராமன்.

***************************************

தாடகா வனத்தில் இருந்து ஒரு யட்சனைப் போல வானில் எழுந்து, இரண்டு யோசனை உயரச் சென்று நின்றால் கீழே என்ன தெரியும்?
வட கிழக்கில் வெகு தூரத்தில் மலை அரசனாம் இமவானின் ராச்சியம். பிறகு பெரும் காடுகள். அவற்றின் முடிவில் முதல் நகரம் அயோத்தி. அந்த நகரத்தினூடே ஓடும் சரயு நதி அயோத்திக்கு அருகே சிறிது தூரத்தில் கங்கையில் கலக்கிறது. கங்கை தென்மேற்காக வளைந்து சென்று ஒரு சிறு மலைத் தொடரைத் தாண்டி மிதிலையை அடைகிறாள். மிதிலை, விஷாலம், ராஜகிருஹம், பொன்னால் கூரையிட்ட அரண்மனைகளைக் கொண்ட பாடலிபுத்திரம் - பெரு நகரங்களும், ஜனசங்கங்களும் பரந்து விரிந்த ஆரியவர்த்தம் மிதிலையில் இருந்து தொடங்குகிறது.
இவை யாவும் ஒரு காலத்தில் யட்சர்களும், நாகர்களும், ராட்சதர்களும் வாழ்ந்த காடுகள். நாகர்கள் கிழக்கே ஓடி விட்டார்கள். கடைசியாக மிஞ்சிய யட்சர்களின் நாடு அயோத்திக்கும் மிதிலைக்கும் இடையே இருந்த - மாலடம் என்று ரிஷிகளால் அழைக்கப்பட்ட - தாடகா வனம்.
இரண்டு யோசனை உயரத்தில் இருந்து உற்றுப் பார்த்தால் அயோத்தியில் இருந்து ஒரு பெரும் சாலை ஒன்று கிளம்புகிறது. தசரதனின் பாட்டன் ரகு பாவிய அந்தச் சாலை கங்கைக் கரையில் வந்து நிற்கிறது.
தென் மேற்கே, அது போலவே மிதிலையில் இருந்து ஒரு சாலை ஒன்று கிளம்புகிறது. அதுவும் தாடகா வனத்தின் மரங்களிடையே மறைந்து விடுகிறது.
யாருமே பயன்படுத்த முடியாத அந்தச் சாலைகளின் நடுவே, மலையும், முள்ளும், பாறைகளும் அடர்ந்த அந்த வனத்தில் யட்சர்கள் தம் கடைசி யுத்தத்தை நடத்துகிறார்கள்.
யட்சர்களின் தலைவன் சுகேதுவும் அவனுடைய மருமகன் சுனந்தனும் திரும்பத் திரும்ப மிதிலையில் இருந்தும், அயோத்தியில் இருந்தும் வரும் ரிஷிகளையும், அவர்கள் பின்னால் வரும் படைகளையும் தடுத்து நிறுத்துகிறார்கள்.
தாடகை சுகேதுவின் பெண். குகைகளில் தன கணவனுக்காகவும் தந்தைக்காகவும் காத்திருக்கிறாள்.
யட்சர்களின் அந்தப் போர் நல்லபடியாக முடிய வழியே இல்லை. தாடகை பயந்தது நடந்து விட்டது. ஒரு நாள் சுகேது கொல்லபட்டான். சுனந்தனின் தலை அயோத்தி கோட்டை வாசலில் ஏற்றி வைக்கப்பட்டது.
சுற்றி அயோத்தி மக்கள் கொண்டாடினார்கள். மிதிலைக்குப் போகும் சாலை, ரகு வம்சத்தின் பல தலைமுறைக் கனவு நிறைவேறும் என்று நம்பினார்கள்.
அவர்கள் தாடகையை, கணவனை இழந்த அந்த யட்சியின் கோபத்தை எதிர்பார்க்கவில்லை.
யுத்தம் அவள் தலைமையில் தொடர்ந்தது. இருபது வருடங்களாகத் தசரதனின் சாலை தூங்கிக் கிடக்கிறது. பல யட்சர்கள் இடை விடாத யுத்தத்தால் தளர்ந்தார்கள். ஆனால் தாடகை அயரவில்லை. இன்னும் கங்கையின் கரையை அவள் கண்கள் பார்த்தபடி இருக்கின்றன.
பெரும் படையுடன் யட்சர்களை மோதிப் புண்ணியமில்லை என்பதைத் தசரதன் கண்டான். அயோத்தியில் ரிஷிகள் தசரதனுக்கு யோசனை சொன்னார்கள். தாடகைக்கு வயதாகி விட்டது. சிங்கக்குட்டி போல, வில் வித்தையில் கை தேர்ந்த ராமன் இருக்கிறான். அவன் விஷ்ணு அம்சம். சப்தவேதி - ஒலியைக் கொண்டே குறி பார்த்துக் கொல்லும் வித்தையைக் கற்றவன். அவன் நம்மைக் காப்பான்.
துஷ்டர்களை அழிப்பது காக்கும் கடவுளின் பொறுப்பு.
எனவே, யட்சர்களின் கடைசி ராணியைக் கொன்று போடத் தாடகா வனத்தில் இரு இளைஞர்களை அழைத்து வந்தார் ரிஷி விஸ்வாமித்திரர்.
வந்த வேலையை முடிக்காமல் எப்படி மிதிலைக்குப் போவது?

**********************************************************

ராமன் ரிஷியை அருவருப்புடன் பார்த்தான். "யட்சர்களை விரட்டிச் சாலை கட்டுவதற்காக நான் ஒருக்காலும் ஒரு அப்பாவியைக் கொல்ல மாட்டேன். அவள் பக்கம் நியாயம் இருக்கிறது. இலக்குவா, வா போகலாம்", என்றான்.
ரிஷி, "ராமா, நில்", என்றார்.
அந்த நேரத்தில், காட்டு வழியே, தூரத்தில், அந்தகாரத்தைக் கிழித்துக் கொண்டு ஒரு பயங்கர உறுமல் கேட்டது.
எனக்குப் புல்லரித்தது. மூவரும் காட்டில் உறுமல் வந்த திசையை உற்றுப் பார்த்தோம்.
"அவள் வருகிறாள்", என்றார் ரிஷி.

*********************************************************

ராமன் கீழே கிடந்த வில்லை எடுத்துத் தரையில் நிறுத்தினான். நாணை நன்றாக இழுத்துப் பூட்டினான். காட்டில் மரங்கள் சலசலவென்று ஆடின. என்னுடைய நண்பனாகி விட்ட அந்தக் கோட்டான் காள்...காள் என்று கத்தியபடியே பறந்து சென்று விட்டது.
என்னுடைய முதல் யுத்தம் எப்படி இருக்கும் என்று சிறு வயதில் பெரும் கற்பனை செய்து வைத்திருந்தேன். குதிரைகள் என்ன, யானைகள் என்ன...சதுரங்க சேனைகளும் அணிவகுத்து நிற்கும் என்றும் , நான் ஒரு யானை மேல் அமர்ந்து பலப்பல வியூகங்கள் வகுப்பேன் என்றும் எண்ணியிருந்தேன். இப்படி நடுக்காட்டில் எவளோ ஒரு காட்டுமிராண்டிப் பெண்ணால் பிறாண்டப்பட்டு இறக்கும் நிலையை எதிர்பார்க்கவில்லை. ராமன் விஷ்ணு அம்சம்...எப்படியாவது தப்பி விடுவான். நான் ஏன் இந்தக் காட்டில் வந்து மாட்டிக் கொள்ள வேண்டும்?
காட்டுக்குள் பல பேர் ஓடி வருவது போலிருந்தது. நான், "யட்சர் படையே வருகிறதோ?" என்றேன்.
ராமன் உற்றுக் கேட்டு விட்டு, "இல்லை. அவள் மட்டும் தான். இது ஒரு அசுர தந்திரம்", என்றான்.
திடீரென்று ஒரு பெரும் மரக் கிளை எங்களை நோக்கிப் பறந்து வந்தது. ராமனின் நாண் ஒலித்தது. அம்பு பறந்து கிளையை அடித்து வீழ்த்தியது.
"பலே", என்றார் ரிஷி.
இப்பொழுது சட சடவென்று கற்கள் பல பறந்து வந்தன. நாங்கள் மூவரும் அவற்றில் இருந்து தப்ப அங்குமிங்கும் ஓடினோம். சில கற்கள் எங்கள் மேலே வந்து அடித்தன. வந்த வேகத்திலேயே கல் வீச்சு நின்றது.
நான், "ஏதாவது மரத்தில் ஏறித் தப்பலாமே?" என்றேன்.
"வீரர்களுக்கு அது அழகல்ல", என்றான் ராமன்.
சற்று நேரம் முன்னால் அவன் குனிந்து ஓடியதை மறந்து விட்டான் போலும்.
அதற்குள் சில மரங்கள் வந்து விழுந்தன. மிகவும் குறி வைத்து எறியப்பட்டது போலத் தோன்றவில்லை. ராமனின் அம்புகள் அவற்றை எளிதாகப் புறம் தள்ளின.
காட்டில் இருந்து பெரும் உறுமல் ஒன்று மறுபடி கிளம்பியது. நாங்கள் சலிப்புடன் ஆயத்தமானோம்.
ஒரு உரத்த அலறலுடன் தாடகை மரங்களின் உள்ளிருந்து வெளிப்பட்டாள். தீயின் மங்கிய வெளிச்சத்தில் அவள் உருவம் பல மடங்கு பெரிதாகத் தெரிந்தது. அவள் கையில் இருந்த ஒரு கூரிய கம்பத்தை எங்களை நோக்கி எறிந்தாள். வேகத்துடன் வந்த கம்பை ராமனின் அம்பு சந்தித்து அப்பால் விலக்கியது. அவள் காட்டுக்குள் சென்று மறைந்தாள்.
ராமன், "நம்மிடம் அம்புகள் குறைவு", என்றான்.
நான் வியப்புடன், "திட்டமிட்டுத் தான் இப்படிச் செய்கிறாளோ?" என்றேன்.
"அப்படித் தான் தோன்றுகிறது. எல்லா அம்புகளும் தீர்ந்த பின் நாம் வெறும் வில் குச்சிகளுடன் சண்டையிட வேண்டியது தான்", என்றான் ராமன்.
தாடகையின் உருவத்தை முதன்முதல் பார்த்தது என் மனதில் பதிந்து விட்டது. மிகவும் உயரமாய், பனைமர நீளக் கை கால்களுடன், அரை அடி நீளக் கோரைப் பற்களுடன் கனவுகளில் வரும் பேயைப் போல இருந்தாள். அவளை எங்களால் நிச்சயம் சமாளிக்க முடியாது. அகோர மரணம் எனக்குக் காத்திருக்கிறது.

மீண்டும் பயங்கரக் கூச்சல்...மீண்டும் கல்லெறிப் போர்...மீண்டும் ஓட்டம். ராமன் மேல் ஒரு கூரிய கல் பட்டு ரத்தம் ஒழுகியது.
நான் களைப்புடன், "நாமும் பதிலுக்குக் கற்களை எறிவோமா?" என்றேன்.
அவளுடைய மரக்கிளைத் தாக்குதலில் ராமனின் அம்புகள் முக்கால்வாசி தீர்ந்து விட்டன. எங்களால் நடக்கவே முடியவில்லை.
இன்னும் சிறிது நேரத்தில் களைப்பில் விழுந்து விடுவோம். எதிரி மேல் எங்கள் அம்புகள் ஒன்று கூடப் பாயவில்லை. தாடகை வென்று விடுவாள். ஆனால் எவ்வளவு நாட்களுக்கு? இன்னும் பெரிய படைகள் வரும். இளவரசர்களின் மரணத்தை அயோத்தி மக்கள் மன்னிக்க மாட்டார்கள். இரு அனுபவமற்ற இளைஞர்களை இப்படி எதிரியுடன் மோத அனுப்பிய தசரத மன்னரை யாரும் குற்றம் சொல்ல மாட்டார்கள்.
காட்டுமிராண்டி தாடகை இரு பச்சிளம் பாலகர்களைக் கொன்று விட்டதாகக் கதையைத் திரித்து விடுவார்கள். சிறிது சிறிதாக யட்சர்களையும் ஒழித்து, தாடகையும் கொல்லப்படுவாள்.
முடிவில் அந்தச் சாலை நிறைவு பெறும். மிதிலைக்கும் அயோத்திக்கும் இடையே வணிகர்களும் வண்டிகளும் போய் வரும் ராஜபாட்டையின் ஒரு திருப்பத்தில் எங்களுடைய சமாதிகள் சிறு வீரக்கல்லுடன் கவனிப்பாரற்றுக் கிடக்கும். நாளடைவில் அதுவும் அழிந்து போகும்.
எனக்குக் கண்களில் நீர் துளிர்த்தது. ராமனின் கடைசி இரண்டு அம்புகள் மிச்சமிருந்தன. எங்களைச் சுற்றி எதிரிகளின் தலைகளுக்குப் பதிலாக வெட்டப்பட்ட மரக் கிளைகளும் பல வகைக் கற்களும் கிடந்தன.
தாடகையின் உறுமல் சத்தம் அதிகரித்தது. ராமன் வில்லின் மேல் சற்றுச் சாய்ந்து நின்றான். ரிஷி, அவனிடம், "ராமா, நீ சப்தவேதி அல்லவா? ஏன் தயங்குகிறாய்?" என்றார்.
ராமன் அவரைத் திரும்பிப் பார்த்தான். பிறகு ஒரு அம்பை எடுத்து வில்லில் பூட்டினான்.
"அவளைக் கொல்லாமல் நீ இந்த இடத்தில் இருந்து தப்பிச் செல்ல இயலாது", என்றார் ரிஷி.
அவன் மெளனமாக இருந்தான். வில் வளைந்து குறி பார்த்தது. தாடகை மறுபடி உறுமினாள். அம்பு பறந்தது.
"ஓ" என்று ஒரு அலறல். தாடகையின் பெருத்த உடல் தரையில் "தொம்" என்று விழும் சத்தம் கேட்டது.
மூவரும் காட்டைப் பார்த்தபடி நின்றோம்.
"செத்தாள்", என்றார் ரிஷி.
"இல்லை...நான் அவளைக் கொல்லவில்லை", என்றான் ராமன்.
காட்டில் இருந்து எந்த அசைவும் இல்லை. பிறகு யாரோ, ஒரு சாதாரண மனிதப் பெண், தீனமாக முனகும் சத்தம் கேட்டது.
"போய்த் தலையில் ஒரு கல்லைப் போட்டு மோட்சம் கொடுக்கலாம்", என்றார் ரிஷி.
****************************************************

காட்டுக்குள் நாங்கள் நுழைந்தோம் - நான், நடுங்கிக் கொண்டே ஒரு தீப்பந்தத்துடன் முதலில் சென்றேன். எனக்குப் பின்னால் ரிஷி. கடைசியில் விஷ்ணு அம்சம். என்ன நியாயமோ.
எந்த நேரத்திலும் அவள் என் மேல் பாய்வாள் என்று முதலில் எண்ணினேன். ஆனால் அந்த மெலிதானப் புலம்பல் சத்தம் நெஞ்சை உருக்கியது.
ஒரு மரத்தின் மேல் சாய்ந்து தாடகை அமர்ந்திருந்தாள். அவள் காலில் அம்பு பாய்ந்து நின்றது. கீழே ரத்தம் குளம் போலத் தேங்கியிருந்தது.
அவள் எங்களைப் பார்த்து பயப்படவில்லை. முறைத்தபடி இருந்தாள்.
"ராமா, இன்னும் ஒரு அம்பு இருக்கிறது", என்று நினைவுபடுத்தினார் ரிஷி.
ராமன் கோபத்துடன் அந்த அம்பை எடுத்து முறித்துத் தரையில் போட்டான். "ரிஷியே, அவளை நன்றாகப் பாரும். என் தாய் கௌசல்யாதேவியைப் போல அல்லவா இருக்கிறாள்?" என்றான்.
நான் பந்தத்தைத் தூக்கிப் பிடித்தேன். உண்மையிலேயே தாடகை ஒரு மானுடப் பெண்ணைப் போலத் தான் இருந்தாள். மிகப் பலசாலி. ஆனால் மானுடப் பெண் தான். அவள் முகம் அயோத்தியில் உள்ள பல பெண்களைப் போலத் தான் இருந்தது.
ரிஷி மெளனமாக இருந்தார்.
ராமன், "உமக்கு யட்சர்களின் மொழி தெரியும் அல்லவா?" என்று கேட்டான்.
"ஆம்", என்றார் ரிஷி.
"நான் சொல்வதை அவளிடம் திருப்பிச் சொல்லும்", என்று என் கையில் இருந்த தீப்பந்தத்தை வாங்கிக் கொண்டான்.
"என் கையில் உள்ள அக்கினி சாட்சியாக, இந்த மாலடம் என்னும் தாடகா வனம் இனி யட்சர்களுக்குச் சொந்தம். அயோத்யாபுரிக்கு இந்த நிலத்தில் எந்த உரிமையும் கிடையாது. இது பட்டத்து இளவரசனான என் மேல் ஆணை. என் தாயின் மேல் ஆணை", என்றான்

******************************************************

தாடகையின் காயத்திற்கு மருந்திட்டுக் கட்டுப் போட்டோம். பிறகு அவளிடம் பிரியாவிடை பெற்றுக் கிளம்ப வேண்டி இருந்தது. எங்களுடைய மூட்டைகளைப் போர்க்களத்தில் இருந்து எடுத்துக் கொண்டு நடந்த பொழுது லேசாக விடியத் தொடங்கியது.
விஸ்வாமித்திரர்,"ராமா, என்னை மன்னித்து விடு", என்றார்.
"இப்பொழுது மிதிலைக்குத் தானே அழைத்துச் செல்கிறீர்?" என்றான் ராமன்.
"ஆம். கவலைப்படாதே. இருந்தாலும் எனக்கு உன்னைப் பார்த்தால் வியப்பாக இருக்கிறது. உன் பாட்டனார் காலத்தில் இருந்து போர் புரிந்து வரும் நிலத்தை எப்படித் தியாகம் செய்ய உனக்கு மனது வந்தது?"
நான், " நமக்குச் சொந்தமே இல்லாத ஒன்றைத் தியாகம் செய்வதில் நம்மைப் போல வராது", என்றேன்.
தூரத்தில் யட்சர்களின் சிரிப்பொலி கேட்டது.

*********************************************************

Update I:
Thaadaka's story as described in the Valmiki Raamyana is in the links below:

http://valmikiramayan.net/bala/sarga24/bala_24_prose.htm

http://www.valmikiramayan.net/bala/sarga25/bala_25_prose.htm

http://www.valmikiramayan.net/bala/sarga26/bala_26_prose.htm

The country that gave these songs cannot fail

2010-05-12T11:17:00.000-07:00

I got an exposure to Pakistani songs in the USA, and through the Indian music talent shows. Recently I came across a few songs in Youtube that I wanted to share:

The below, "Aaj Jaane Ki Zid Na Karo" is by Farida Khanum. The song has very beautiful lyrics (which I will post in the end). It has many versions including one by Asha Bhosle. The original is a Pakistani movie song sung by Habib Wali Mohammad (which is also posted below).
Notice in Farida's singing that she simply renders the song with minimum embellishment and lets the lyrics stand by themselves. This is such a minimalist rendering and her voice and expression are very subtle. That must be the mark of a true artist. I wish I can write stories or blogs with such minimalism.

Next, below is the original movie song, by Habib Wali Mohammad. I loved this too. Note how "Indian" the background music sounds.

Next is this very weird Punjabi song, sung by a singer named Humera Arshad. You can find a lot of her songs in the internet. She is very good singing live. This is a love song and has good lyrics.

The country that produces such great artists will survive their current crisis - they should for all of our sakes.

Translation for "Aaj Jaane Ki Zid Na Karo" (source):

Don't insist on leaving today
Keep sitting beside me.
Don't insist on leaving today
else I shall die, I shall be looted.
Please don't talk like this.
Don't insist on leaving today.

Give it a thought,
why shouldn't I stop you?
When you leave,
life goes out of me.
For your own sake, beloved
Just listen to this one plea,
don't insist on leaving today,
keep sitting beside me.
Don't insist on leaving today.

My life is trapped in time's bars,
just a few solitary moments are free.
And if you lose them too, my beloved,
you shall keep craving forever.
Don't insist on leaving today,
keep sitting beside me.
Don't insist on leaving today.

What an innocent colorful meeting this is
of beauty and love, they rule today.
Who knows what lies tomorrow,
Let's make this night stand still.
Don't insist on leaving today,
keep sitting beside me.
Don't insist on leaving today.

A few interviews

2010-05-08T23:46:00.000-07:00

I interviewed more than 500 people when I was at Photon. The below stayed in mind. At the end I am providing one of my own stupidity.

The Microsoft Connection

1. I generally interviewed people on the Microsoft stack. I have noticed that only Microsoft stack developers provide the following answer:

Q: Have you worked with .NET 2.0?
A: I downloaded the Beta.

I don't know why downloading a particular software is a great skill, but I regularly get that answer, and only from developers in MS technologies. The only explanation I have is that they think it shows their initiative. It does not. It only shows their ability to click on a link.

2. It is my practice to ask developers in MS techs what they thought of open source technologies. The reason I ask that is to find out if they are too opinionated (more on this later). Usually they say they have not worked with them. But here was the classic (this interview took place in 2008):

Q: What do you think of open source technologies?
A; Two things. First, I don't think they will work out. Developers spread across the world working together to create software that is free - that is just stupid.
Secondly, I don't know anything about open source technologies.

I thought the second answer should be the only one given.

3. I was interviewing a particularly angry candidate. He said he worked with Microsoft on developing a framework. Since he was inexperienced, I was impressed. I kept digging until it turned out what really happened was:
2005 - Microsoft consulting had developed a framework for a shipping client in Norway.
2008 - Candidate had worked in Chennai for a company whose client was same shipping client in Norway. There he had used the framework.
Therefore, by candidate's logic, he had worked with Microsoft on developing a framework.

The Opinionated Candidate

There seems to be an impression among developers and architects out there that the more extremely frustrated and opinionated you seem, the more likely that you will be hired.
I saw this repeatedly:

Me: Have you worked with Microsoft ASP.NET Ajax?
(Candidate sighs. Throws up his hands. Shakes his head.)
Candidate: I don't know why Microsoft does this every time, you know, why it is just Microsoft...I have tried repeatedly explaining to them...why? (sighs again)
Me: (confused) You have not answered my question...How about Sharepoint? Have you used sharepoint?
(Candidate starts moaning)

This opinion virus has spread so much that you never get a straight answer to anything from senior people.

Slightly Above

We interviewed a candidate who had driven all the way from Pondicherry. French guy, he was extremely concerned about his golf appointment than the interview. Three of us sat down to interview him and the following exchange took place:

Q: So are you interested in mentoring developers? Building a team?
A: Sure, I can do that. But I am slightly above that level. That kind of work would be slightly below me.
Q: Oh, ok. How about design, architecture. Do you write technical specs?
A: Slightly above that level, I am afraid.
Q: Managing a vertical?
A: Still above.

It went on like that till he had to leave for golf. Till the end we could not find anything at his level - we were always slightly below and he was above.

My Interview 13 years back

I was interviewing for a C++ developer position. The interview was in Taj Coromandel, Chennai. I went in supremely determined to appear confident and gung-ho.
The first question in the interview was how I would rate myself in a scale of 1 to 10 on C++.
My answer? 11. It seemed like a very intelligent thing to say.
The next question was if I knew what virtual destructors were for in C++.
I closed my eyes and thought for a long time. Nothing popped up.
They asked me four different questions on C++ - medium level, and I had no clue. I was utterly unprepared.
At the end of the interview they told me to come back when I really reached 11 on the C++ scale.

Anti-Outsourcing ad - is this racist?

2010-05-01T04:37:00.000-07:00

I found this youtube video of an ad against Bill Halter, candidate in the Arkansas Senate race. Tha ad says Bill Halter, who was in the board of directors of WebMethods (he left in 2006). In that time WebMethods opened an office in Bangalore. The ad criticises that Halter caused Bangaloreans to say thank you, while ignoring Arkansans.

I did not feel offended by it. It was... interesting. But it was called racist in DailyKos here.

Interview with a Lawyer on Labor law and IT employees

2010-04-19T00:17:00.000-07:00

I interviewed a corporate lawyer a few weeks back. In a free-ranging discussion pertaining to labor law; rights of employees; long notice periods;bond documents; exit clauses; court procedure and so on. I will summarize my impressions in the end. I have been writing about corporations and employees for some time - this interview was an eye-opener for me. It pointed to the limits of the legal system to solve certain issues. It also led me to think an IT employee's union is more important than ever.

Note: The interview was not recorded. I am mostly paraphrasing below. But the lawyer has reviewed the transcript below and approved of it. All emphasis (capital letters) are mine.

Interview Transcript

RA: Layoffs and firings – what is the difference in labor law? I have seen companies such as TCS, IBM call layoffs as firings in public. Can an association of employees sue them?

Lawyer: Layoffs mean failure, refusal or inability of employer to give employment to a worker/employee on muster roll, on account of cancellation of a project contract, shortage of power or raw materials or accumulation of stock or lack of finance to run the business or natural calamity; An employer has to intimate the labor dept before laying off its employees as per the industrial disputes act. The obligation of the employer upon laying off its employees would be to compensate the employee so laid off.

Management Of Cholamandalam Software Ltd. vs Presiding Officer, I Addl. Labour Court, Madras And Ors. is a classic case wherein the applicability of I.D.Act to IT Companies has been discussed.

Unfortunately the judgment of the courts on whether IT Companies fall within the definition of an “industry” has not come to a finality..

Whileso the IT Companies make the most out of the situation and go ahead firing/discharging employees, which may not be that easy in any other industry. IT Companies during recession or even at will fire their employees rather than lay off their employees. Since the employees themselves are ready to swap jobs instead of being laid off, move out of an organisation without any protest. The irony is that such a situation gives the IT Companies a wide option in targeting an employee of its choice i.e an employee under probation could either be the target or maybe an employee drawing a fat salary.

In the case of freshers they are retrenched not because they underperform - but because freshers are usually in their probationary period and according to law, employees in probationary period can be fired at will .

In fact, in India IT companies fire employees in a very decent manner. They simply ask the concerned employee to sign his/her own resignation letter, requesting the management to relieve him/her “at the earliest”. When employees do this, the Company is in a WIN-WIN situation. The Company succeeds in retrenching the employee and they are not liable to pay in lieu of notice period. Under such circumstances, the employee loses his/her right to initiate legal proceedings on the company later.

A third party stranger, who is not aggrieved by such firing cannot sue TCS or IBM for such firings - only the affected employees can do that. [Ed. Note: This is a recurring theme in my discussion. You cannot sue a company "on behalf of" someone - only the affected parties themselves can do that. This is an important part of legal theory everywhere, and I could see the reason for it.]

RA: Notice periods in the IT industry keep lengthening and now stand at 3 months. Is this legal?

Lawyer: As long as the employee signed the Employee agreement with the notice period, yes, it is legally enforceable. Usually notice periods have exit clauses , where you can buy off the remaining period by compensating the employer for the shortfall in notice period.
When an employee resigns from a company, the company has to accept it. If they do NOT accept it, you can walk off at the end of your notice period.But an employee who has put in his/her resignation cannot unilaterally force the employer to concede to his/her wish in buying off the remaining months (shortfall in notice period) and cut short his/her employment. However an employee who has put in his/her resignation has all the right to negotiate with the employer for relieving –him/her even before the completion of the notice period. However the discretion to relieve the employee sooner is that of the Company.
Unfair notice periods ARE NOT enforceable - but it depends on the industry. For example, a few years back Indian Airlines pilots walked off to private airlines in droves. They had six months notice period, but they violated it. Indian Airlines sued to have them not take up alternate jobs. The court REFUSED to provide an injunction against the pilots. This is because the court thought six months was a very long notice period.
Now, the same has not been decided for the IT industry. No one has sued to make the matter decided by courts. Therefore in the IT industry, three months notice periods are legal.
I would also like to point out that this should be discussed by HR managers within the IT industry - if everyone sets notice periods at 3 months, then companies cannot pick up employees in a short duration for projects. Thus the industry's decision backfires on itself - if you recruit for a project, employee will not be available for the next 3 months. It seems industry itself should move away from this course.

RA:What is the legal status of employee agreements? Are notice periods enforceable? I mean in terms of precedent

Lawyer: Yes, employee agreements (terms and conditions of employment spelt out in the Appointment Letter/ Offer of Appointment) that have been accepted by the employee concerned are enforceable by courts.

RA: Can companies ask for very long bonds and enforce by holding original certificates? What is the nature of “one-sided” bonds?

Lawyer: First of all we have to understand what really a bond is and the reason behind employers seeking it from their employees. A bond is sought by an employer to retain an employee with the organisation for a longer period of time.

A bond is an extension arising out of an employment agreement/appointment letter. If only a candidate accepts the offer, a bone can be executed. Hence for executing a bond, the candidate should first be an employee of the organisation. An appointment letter shall contain a clause informing the employee on a bond that has to be signed by the employee. appointment letter should also necessarily have on exit clause for both the parties. Whileso the bond is an agreement within an agreement. The terms and conditions of the bond shall be in consonance with the terms and conditions of the appointment letter/employee agreement. Breach of such bond shall have to be compensated by the employee and such compensation shall be quantified in monetary terms. Breach of a bond shall arise if the employee wants to leave the organisation even before the accepted period. Under such circumstances the employer cannot unduly reject the resignation tendered by the employee. The option available with the employer is to get compensated as agreed. Violating a bond is NOT illegal - it simply means that you shift to the exit clause mentioned in the employment agreement/appointment letter .
An arbitrary bond that simply asks you to serve a certain number of years, without an exit clause is not valid. There should be an exit clause. An aggrieved employee can always go to the court if he/she fall in asituation discussed above. Whether you are willing to go to court is another question.
Even if a bond has a certain sum mentioned, it should actually link that sum to the money that the company has paid for your training etc. [Ed Note: I have seen such bonds; they mention the breakdown of sum in detail].Instead if the bond simply asks for money, without indicating any cost the company incurred for you, then that bond will likely be rejected by a court of law.
A company CAN ask for your original certificates as part of a bond. Itis a contractual arrangement between the employer and employee.
One of my friends was recruited as a Probationary officer for a Bank, to be confirmed and placed a Law Officer. They had his certificates. After his confirmation he was placed like any other officer and was asked to do all jobs. My friend simply went to the court, got an order saying he was offered a job that had nothing to do with the actual job; he got back his original certificates and moved over to another company.
If you know the law, yes, you can get back your certificates, if your reason is just.

RA: Can companies withhold relieving orders at all? How about providing wrong information on background checks?

Lawyer: If you complied with your side of the agreement, then they cannot withhold relieving orders or provide wrong information on background checks, legally. If they did, you can sue them.

RA:What circumstances will make a bond null and void? If you get cursed or abused by your boss, does that automatically release you from bonds?

Lawyer: How are you going to prove abuse? For example, you cannot record such conversations. Indian law does not consider audio recordings as material evidence. Practically it is difficult to prove such abuse.

RA:Practically, do all cases go through a court for labor disputes or is there any other redress such as arbitration?

Lawyer: Labour disputes are settled by initiating conciliation proceedings and then if the conciliation fails the matter is referred to the labour court.
There needs to be a specific term in the apploinment letter stating that the dispute between the employeer and the employee may be settled through arbitration. If so a neutral person will decide the issue on merits.
Since there are no trade unions in IT industry, matter affecting the employees do not reach the labour court. Rather the aggrieved employee if he/she wants to persue the matter takes it to the civil court.
Settlement of such disputes may take time say one year to even ten years.

RA: How long do such cases take to settle? Doesn’t it seem like companies have an unfair advantage in this regard? That they can depute subordinates and keep asking for postponements?

Lawyer: True and there is nothing to really do about it.

RA: Are Indian courts, in general, receptive to employees? Or do they enforce unfair agreements strictly?

Lawyer: Indian courts are very receptive to employees. They do form a check against employer abuse. For example, there is the case of a travel agent. He left the agency where he worked and joined another agency. The original employer sued asking that the agent not be allowed to work in the same industry (for non-compete purposes). The court decided in favor of the agent - it said that the agent's only known profession is to be a travel agent. So, they said it is unfair to ask him to not work in the same industry and deprive him of livelihood.

RA:What would be the typical cost of such a litigation? How long would it take? Are there law firms or lawyers that specialize in such disputes and can help out employees?

Lawyer: The cost can be high - actually the lawyers gain a lot. They go through multiple rounds and as the case drags on, they make a lot of money. It is in their interest to prolong the case. This is why most people are afraid of going to court. There are labor lawyers, but they vary in quality.

RA: Do we have punitive damages in Indian law? Will that help stop some abuse by corporations?

Lawyer: You can claim costs from the opposing party. But it is the discretion of the court to allow costs claimed by you. You can also file a suit for damages. The problem here is that you may have to pay court fees based on your claim. You will forebear such litigation because depositing court fees is a dead lock investment, the returns of which is not guaranteed. There is no such thing as punitive damages in Indian labor law.

RA:Some companies file false cases of property theft etc on employees. What are our rights under such conditions?

Lawyer: Practically companies do get away with such false complaints. For example, when someone files a complaint, the police will come to your home and take you to the station for a statement. At that time, it is better to have a lawyer with you - but it is unlikely that you are prepared with a lawyer for just such an occasion.
The police are supposed to produce you before a magistrate before 24 hours. If they wanted to harass you, they can keep you in jail for that time. They can potentially also take you in Fridays and keep you in for two days. ALl of this does happen in India.
Even if you had a senior lawyer, say, in the High Court, that lawyer cannot directly appear before (for example) the magistrate in Saidapet and argue your case. The lawyers in Saidapet will not allow it. [Ed Note: almost like a union]
The magistrate also knows the local lawyers better and therefore will be sympathetic to them. This is the current situation.
So, a company filing a false complaint can sometimes harass you more than enough. You can hit back by filing another complaint against the owner if you are inclined that way. [Ed Note: It seems the lack of punitive damages helps companies]

RA:Can employees publicly blow a whistle on companies’ internal policies? Let us say someone publishes such behavior and names the company, (assuming what they are saying is true), can they be punished by law?

Lawyer: You cannot make judgments about a company in a blog post or something. You can say that a company engages in some behavior - but you cannot criticize it publicly. You can be served a legal notice for that.

RA:Specifically, if someone was to start a fund for helping employees in such labor disputes, is that feasible? Is it possible to find lawyers who can capably help with such pro-labor suits? Are there such organisations right now?

Lawyer: Think about it - such an independent organisation will face flak from both sides - from the employee who may think you are losing the case (losing happens sometimes). And also the lawyers who may not want to complete the case because they are getting paid by you on each hearing.

RA: How do you think, then, that we can fight such abuses by companies?

Lawyer: Employees have to organize themselves and fight for their rights.

The interview ended there.

My Impressions of the Legal Recourse

When I went into this interview I thought the law will actually help stem abuses by employers. That is, I thought filing of enough suits will improve the situation. But it seems that we have the following issues:

1. The legal system is slow to act; time is on the side of employers.
2. It is tough for independent organizations to get involved.
3. Most importantly, the law sees employment as a contractual free agreement of two parties. Thus it impartially puts the two parties in the same level.
But, practically, we all know that a fresher from college has no means of negotiating with a company. In India there are fewer jobs and more people. Asking employees to INDEPENDENTLY negotiate, alone, with employers is like "asking the sheep to negotiate with the wolf". In many ways this is not unlike the situation you face with hospitals or schools - the common man in India seeking these services has no negotiating power.
This fact ALONE points the way at collective bargaining (in other words, organizing into trade unions).

4. I also wish punitive damages (damages that can effectively bring a company to its knees for wrongdoing) are awarded by Indian courts for abusing employees, such as filing false complaints.

To me it seems like filing suits will help, but not without a powerful IT Employee's Union. That alone will make sure that abuses such as wrong background checks, holding on to relieving orders, and keeping original certificates are brought to a stop.

References
Wikpedia Article on Layoffs

Indian Contract Act Explanation

Manupatra - website with legal opinions, judgements and so on for research (requires a subscription)

A Handbook of Labor Laws in India

Nano - I told you so

2010-04-12T10:59:00.000-07:00

A couple of Nano cars have caught fire and I just feel like I have to pint out this long article by me an year back. The article argues that by taking the success or failure of Nano as a product AWAY from Tata or the market; and instead subsidizng the product heavily with taxpayer money as Gujarat does - is actually a violation of sound economic policy.
Let me quote from my article:

There are people who argue that job creation is primary goal. Some guy even calculated that in 10 years the government of Gujarat would get money back from the Nano plant because of tax payments by employees. But there is a vital flaw in such arguments:
What if the Nano is a failure?
Let us say that some design flaws make Nano a failure. Can the Gujarat government assure that the Nano will be a success? They can't - the factory is not even in their control. They have not studied the market or discussed the quality procedures or the thousand other things that can go wrong with a product. By tying themselves to a single businessman's product, the government has committed taxpayer money for something it has no capability to ensure or manage.
Instead sound economic theory requires that the Gujarat government create conditions for manufacturers in general and then wait for business to flourish.

I am not saying that the Nano WILL be a failure. Given the amount of propaganda surrounding it, Tata has ensured its sales. But, for Gujarat to have tied itself with that car and committing taxpayer money to a product that they have no control over is WRONG.
It means individual profits and socialized risk. That is what it is.

Perceptions of Indian developers in the West

2010-03-27T00:38:00.000-07:00

I landed in the USA in late 1999. We were to take over maintenance and further development of a travel website. Me and a couple of colleagues were excited and awestruck by the skyline of Boston.
One day were discussing finding an apartment at work when one of the American consultants said, "You guys are going back - don't bother looking for apartments".
We actually became crucial for taking over the website and two years later the same person told me that he had never believed that offshoring or bringing in Indian consultants would work. He said he had no idea if we would even speak English. And he said he had been proved wrong (not just about the English).
Cut to the present - I was talking with one of my friends (a swedish guy) who is used to complaining about "the Indian way" of doing anything. He said he was discussing with a department head of a Fortune 500 company about offshoring when the head guy started complaining about not being able to understand Indians or whatever.

Twenty years after the software outsourcing boom started, it is obvious that the Indian developer, whether onsite or offshore generates a lot of hostility in the West. Just for a sample, read this article and its comment thread.

The question is why does this happen? We call this hostility "racism" but I dont believe in using imprecise, general terms. There are other issues at play here. The both sides of the offshoring game have to understand certain undercurrents:

1. For Indians - Offshore outsourcing is not a preference of middle managers in the USA - middle managers want control. The directives come from executive management and middle managers are meant to cede control and make it work and show results by cutting costs.

Digression:In many cases outsourcing is about more than cutting costs. The truth is that Indian companies present a very attractive package to enterprise customers in the developed countries. The degree of expertise that even medium-sized companies in India offer to such customers is high (this is from my experience for 11 years in the services industry). Even in terms of sheer process methodology Indian companies offer a lot more as compared to Western equivalents.
There are systemic reasons why this is the case: it is just that a considerable portion of the Indian economy is invested in the success of IT and therefore has spent a lot more time specializing in the services industry.I have worked in American services companies as a consultant - they are excellent, but they are simply rolled by bigger Indian companies.

The middle managers are actually led kicking and screaming to offshore work. They, therefore, are resentful and not much hopeful of success.
The resident developers, of course, have their jobs threatened.
Therefore much of the "racism" is not racism at all - it is simply hostility and fear of change.

2. For the Client - One frequent issue is the power that some clients feel about offshoring. This took several forms including making fun of Indian names in India itself. The idea seems to be that you can generally get away with saying anything at Indian managers or developers.
Let me give an example:
A developer in my old company had a normal Indian name. The clients were in a room meeting and asked him to come over. One of them (he thought he was funny), tried to pronounce the developer's name but could not. He then announced that he would call the developer "Sam". Everyone had a good laughover it - but they actually implemented it by calling him Sam every time.
A variation of the above scenario occurs in some offshore companies - the main reason it occurs is twofold:
- The degree of power a western client has over a small offshore company is enormous. He can cut off the spigot at any time. This level of power exists even if you outsource to a different company within the US or UK - but socially there is a taboo to exercising power in those societies. Thus the average American client would be very loathe to make such comments publicly about other people in their social setting.
When these people land in India, they basically feel free from such taboo. They do not think that appearing like a jerk before other humans matters. They let this liberation get to their heads and end up sounding like jerks. Not all of them, mind you, just a small minority.
- when a western client makes a comment like this or exercises power in such unusual ways, we do not know how to respond. Is it just normal humor in their countries? Or is this specific guy being an idiot? This is not surprising - after all the fault is not ours if a client behaves like an idiot. This non-response enables the client and leads him to try more such idiocy.
My advice to Western clients is to not be stupid and say something you won't dare say in your own home country. In short, don't be a dumbass.

3. For the West
The biggest issue, I feel, that lets Western technical people comment about the competence of Indian developers is this - they romanticise coding too much.
I have noticed that American developers, working even in the IT departments of crappy companies, have a very romanticised image of coding. I can understand the developers at IBM or Microsoft feeling this way.
Mind you, this is just an image - these develpers are not particularly competent. They just have a self-image of Ninja coders toiling away at solving the Turing Test.
They are convinced that only the superior education offered by their system prepares people for the tough challenge of building an Access based inventory list.
Again, this has nothing to do with racism. It is merely what they have been told from childhood.
The contradiction between this self-image and the discovery that their jobs could be taken away by a $5 worker shocks them. That, I believe, is the reason for much of
the animosity at Indian developers.

"Does offshore outsourcing work?" - this question has been answered in the affirmative for some time now. The particular experience for different companies may vary - as it should - but in the aggregate, it is like any other work outsourcing. There is nothing system specific that prevents it from working when Indian developers are involved.

By the way, there ARE specific examples of generalization and racism; I will close with a last episode that I faced:
A developer at my employer was onsite. There was some dispute between him and my employer, but he was well liked by the client. The employer decided to bring him back. They lied to the client saying the dev's father was sick.
The client came to know about the lie through rumors. At that time on of them was at Chennai. I was talking to him generally, when he narrates this lie and says: "Is it a cultural thing to lie like this?"
Get that? The evil brown people lie as a cultural trait. Pure white culture does not lie.

Disclaimer:
I hope I have managed to avoid writing some generalizations myself. I do not, of course, believe that most Western clients are prone to exercising their power in unprofessional ways. Some do. The vast majority are pretty decent. My goal was simply to point out that there are specific reasons why some may face hostility and that the hostility has little to do with racism.
And I do sympathize with the social cost of outsourcing - but I always think restrictions on immigration should be done away with. A lot of our problems will go away if we do not restrict human beings from travelling anywhere they want to.

The Nithyananda Affair

2010-03-12T20:22:00.000-08:00

(updated below)
I had a facebook conversation on this and I wanted to summarise my thoughts here:
1. The dumbest argument I have seen about this is that Nithyanada "cheated" people by engaging in false propaganda. I watched Sun TV for a half hour yesterday and I saw several advertisements for fairness creams, nutrition products that make your kids grow taller and claims about how Coca Cola makes you cool. ALL of that is false propaganda. Should we prosecute all of those companies and Sun TV for engaging in false propaganda?
We should realize that there is a religious industry out there; there is a market for their products. You may disagree with that - but the people who are gurus, devotees and followers have RIGHTS. You may think them delusional, but I think all "followers" and "devotees" of Jayalalitha or Karunanidhi are delusional.
Should we then arrest Jayalalitha or Karunanidhi, because they are engaged in "false propaganda"?
Whatever individuals think about other people's beliefs has no relevance to the law. Most people do not like other people in India. That does not mean we should go about prosecuting each other.
2. So, Sun TV telecast this video; and then police is obviously struggling to justify the completely unreasonable "popular" anger. If we had to prosecute people for their private affairs, most of us will be in jail. There is NO law by which a self-proclaimed holy man cannot have sex in private.
So we see the utterly ridiculous spectacle of a set of charges filed that make no sense. For example, Nithyananda has been charged with offending religious sensibilities! That law (more on section 295-A here) is so overly broad that anyone can be charged and noone can be convicted in a sane court.
The idea that holy men now better not have sex or otherwise they will be LEGALLY prosecuted is just hilarious. This is a moral issue, not for courts. The case will be thrown out of court and rightly so.

3. Let us consider the following cases:
- a politician declares in a party meeting that he/she will go in a bicycle to work every day. After he/she comes to power, can they be sued if they take a car to work? Can the police file charges? No
- a product says that consuming it makes people strong. Can the people who consume it then sue the product for not making them strong? No.
- a holy man says he is celibate. People follow him. Can the police sue him if he is proved to be not celibate? No (apart from the impossibility of proving whether someone violated celibacy. Masturbation violates celibacy - so I bet Sun TV is going to have a video of this guy's bathroom coming out soon)

4. I have not touched upon Sun TV's utter arrogance in telecasting this in prime time. In a sane country, their license will be revoked. I do not know if the newsroom guys consulted with their lawyers.
We are now entering a new age of "proto-fascism" in Tamil Nadu.
Sun TV and the Karunanidhi family now control television, cable distribution, movie production, FM radio, and newspapers. I think this is their first demonstration that they are not answerable to anyone and can manipulate Tamil people as they want to.
We have a long fight ahead to rid ourselves of this family's control.

5. One of the factors that surprises me is the contempt that people express for followers of such "godmen" as the media calls them. I have seen a bunch of people shaking their heads (on television) and talking about the followers as if they are sheep.
In the modern era, we are ALL sheep. We either worship digital products, celebrities, businessmen, politicians or godmen. I don't know why we pretend that followers of religious gurus are uniquely dumb. The average DMK, ADMK or Congress worker worships at politicians' altar. Why are they better than devotees?

6. More than anything I want to highlight a subtle problem in Tamil politics. For a long time the Kazhagams (DK, DMK, PMK and ADMK) have been calling themselves rationalist. The truth is these guys are far removed from any rationality or scientific approach to anything. A rational movement will not have made such a nasty issue of Kushboo's statement about women a few years back.
But this guise of a rational base has twisted popular culture in Tamil Nadu and taken it towards such unreasonable response to the Nithyananda scandal. I have seen NO public or media figure come out and call this affair for what it is - a violation of privacy by Sun TV is the core issue here. That a corporation can telecast the private affairs of an individual is shocking. This means that you and I are not protected from such violations either. Sun TV is not just the press - it is a media corporation that has stepped in forcefully into a citizen's privacy.
THAT is the chilling aspect of this "scandal". yet, I don't see ANY media or public figure come out and call a spade a spade.
The reason is that lynching Nithyananda (a religious figure) gives people the impression that it is a very rational thing to do.
That is, the narrative has become:
A public person was cheating people. The brave Sun TV folks exposed his true face. they performed the role of a true press.

The above story is appealing, but is FALSE. I am all for Sun TV exposing public corruption such as by the political parties. But I have never seen such coverage by Sun TV. Instead here they have violated the law and broken the privacy of a private citizen. As I explained above, I can be a god man, say anything and people are free to believe or disbelieve me. That does not violate the law. IF THAT violates the law, then every politician, banker, and most businessmen will be in jail.
The function of society is a balance between private rights, freedom of speech, government powers and press freedom. In this particular case the violator of this balance is Sun TV NOT Nithyananda.
But (I may be wrong), most people are unaware of such distinctions in India. They confuse morality and legality.
Sun TV has now moved one step more in getting into our lives. Being the most powerful network, the above perspective will not even make it into any media coverage.
No one is going to talk about the absurdity of prosecuting a person under section 295-A for having sex.

Update:
I missed another aspect of this issue. One of the reasons why everyone sounds enraged about this issue (but secretly enjoys it) is the sexual starvation in this country. This is a state in which women cannot travel freely in buses because of the constant groping by sex-starved men. Slowly the TV media have been ratcheting up the levels of sex and violence in reality shows, television serials, movies and advertisements. The public has been told that we are "modernising"; but no modern society tolerates this level of objectification of women in their media. I know that the US media constantly gets pushback from parents and consumer organizations. Their society is not as sex-starved as we are.
The Nithyananda affair is probably less about any exposure of wrong-doing; it seems to be more about pushing the boundaries of such sexual exposure. Anyone in advertising knows that the cheapest and easiest way to be "creative" is to go directly to sex appeal.
By showing such sick voyeuristic images, Sun TV has reserved the option to push the sex envelope to the extreme. They now know they have their audience captured and unable to fight back. Now, our kids and family will be sitting and watching news when they will be shown naked images of Sun TV's choice. We will all be told that these are features of a modern society. Every other media house will follow through.
Kalanidhi Maran owns us.

I am proud of Indian Software Services

2010-02-13T06:36:00.000-08:00

I am generally proud of the Indian software services industry - there was a business model that the pioneers caught on and developed into a mega money-making, and value delivering exercise. I have been in services since 1999 and I do NOT believe that:
- the services industry does not serve Indian society
- the services business itself is non-innovative compared to creating products
- the work that services companies do is uniteresting or boiler-plate.

I believe that all of the above are myths; many of these opinions - including calling IT employees as coolies - arise out of plain resentment than any substantive reason.
For example, one claim is that cost differences beween India and the USA have been the sole reason for the dominance of Indian services industry. People who say this seem to think cost differences are somehow not the right reason for doing business. That is absurd, of course. The whole idea of competition is the ability to gain an advantage by showing better value - and lower cost is a HUGE value.
I also see nothing wrong with "body-shopping". It is pure propaganda that selling labor is "low" compared to selling products. The reason why we think that way is simple - that way leads us to accept free trade in products and not free trade in labor.
Let me explain better - for the past 50 years since the founding of the GATT and later WTO, developed countries have gone around preaching free trade and in many cases succeeding in opening up borders so that their products can compete with local products (and many times decimate them). They have justified this pointing to consumer choice and lower prices.
How can business in a country like India compete with this? We found our own competitive advantage - we have plenty of cheaper labor and we have managed to turn that into a business model.
I don't see how this makes Indian services industry "lower" in the hierarchy.
In fact, logically, we should have free movement of labor across borders (just as we have for products). That is the logical and fair conclusion of free trade. But guess what? Politicians in the West (who preached free trade to everybody all these years), have suddenly discovered the virtues of tight immigration policies. So you find the Democrats in the USA threatening to abolish the H1B work visa (while simultaneously calling for legalizing illegal immigrants).
Trading labor is equally valid as trading products. The only reason we think otherwise is because the West benefits one way and not the other.

The IT Industry is Built by IT Workers
The truth is also that this industry has been built not just by business founders - but by the individual employees all across India. Since the business model is built using labor, the model's success is a vindication of the quality of this labor.
This is why I always thought it weird that the average IT worker is never congratulated or appreciated in the media. They celebrate Ramalinga Raju or Subrato Bagchi or Narayana Murthy. Actually most of the credit in IT organizations should go to the IT workers, developers, leads, architects. managers - all of them.

I have only heard complaints about IT workers - that they push up rents; that they are all showing off; that they are working and creating value for foreigners, not India. Then within the industry itself people blame them for job hopping; fake certificates; asking for too much salary and so on.

The average IT guy in this industry comes from a rural or urban poor/middle class background. He/she does not know much English. He/she has a family dependent on their paycheck almost entirely. He/she has to work insane hours and weekends. Most of these men and women did not learn about the industry-specific skills until college or after leaving college.
I recently met a fresher who passed out in 2009. He is from a lower middle-class family. He was offered a job in campus by an IT company. Then they got wind of the recession and so just suspended him from joining indefinitely (I am not blaming them for this; just that if the employee had done that kind of thing, he will be accused of disloyalty). His degree in computer engineering only gave him skills in C and C++.
So he learnt Oracle and cleared Oracle certification. He learnt Java and cleared certification in that too.
He has got job offers from every interview he attended. But, they all have caveats:
Company A wanted him to sign a 3 year bond.
Company B wanted him to sign a 2 year bond and give a check for Rs. 2,00,000 at the time of joining. If he left in between, they would take that money.
Company C asked for a 2 year bond and all his original certificates.

All of the above is against labor law and would be overturned in court - but who is going to approach courts?
This fresher and many hunderds of thousands like him join this industry every year. They work hard. They learn the technologies at stake even though those can change from project to project. I have seen 21-23 year old programmers learn the Facebook API in 2 weeks and create excellent applications. I have seen these guys struggle balancing work pressure and family requirements and deliver again and again.

If they had NOT delivered, we would not be holding 60% of the world's offshore outsourcing market share in software.

The idea that, instead, these guys have to be blamed for not "innovating" or not taking risks or having bad attitude is absurd.

A Criticism of "3 Idiots"

2010-02-08T11:46:00.000-08:00

After hearing that the Hindi movie "3 Idiots" had shed light on the educational system in this country, I was excited. I had read the original book "Five Point Someone" (Chetan Bhagat) and did not see anything regarding the educational system in the book - I saw that book's marketing potential being people's fascination for IITians more than anything else. The book was mediocre.

I watched the movie yesterday. Frankly it was entertaining, but it seemed to have a lot of climactic scenes and needless symbolism which made it dragging. I counted five climaxes with rousing music and all that. I counted 3 different symbols - the Dean's pen, people pulling their pants down (no idea why) and "All is Well" (used tiresomely over and over). English movies have such symbolism, but usually there is a single one in a movie.

But I have two specific criticisms of the movie:
1. Aamir Khan talks about the system - but nowhere in the movie does he identify ANY element of the system. What is a feature of the system? Rote learning is NOT a feature of the system - students learn by rote because the questions asked of them is in that manner. Saying "Rote learning is an issue" is to start blaming a symptom - it is in NO WAY a criticism of any system.
I have explained this better in the article "Are Indian System-Blind?". Basically, conservative societies (such as India) blame people for issues. They do not look at underlying root causes of people's behavior. Such societies also blame the victims for systemic shortcomings.
When we were in school, we used to be contemptous and (yes) envious of people who learnt by rote. ALL of us did it to a certain degree because you cannot pass Indian board exams without rote learning. The people who learnt by rote and got a lot of marks were not any less smarter than us. They were merely performing what was expected in the examination system better than us.
This movie, instead, casts Chatur Ramalingam as an antagonist at the very beginning because he learns by rote. Instead, if you think back to our own experiences in college, our classmates who learnt by rote were also suffering from the same problems that we were. They merely had better memory.
So, Aamir Khan pays lip service to raising questions about the system - but this is still a movie that does not shed ANY light on what the system is. Instead, true to form, it blames the victims.
You could argue that Chatur Ramalingam is competitive while Rancho (Aamir) is not "chasing" after success. But again, that is not a choice individual actors can make. We have a large number of people with a fewer number of jobs. Competition is a natural corollary of such an economy. It is not as if Chatur has any choice in being non-competitive.
That is supposed to be other message of the movie - follow your career dreams. Be whatever you want to become. Do not chase after engineering. I explained why this may not be as easy as it sounds even in ideal environments (See "Myths on Careers"). But in a society in which high-paying jobs are few and concentrated in a few industries, why is it surprising that people chase after engineering or doctor degrees?

My point is that it is easy to pontificate about people going after lucrative jobs or people being competitive - all that you are doing is blaming the victims, instead of explaining why people behave a certain way.
A lot of people chasing after engineering jobs does NOT mean that there is something wrong with those people - it means something is wrong with the existing economy or educational system.

There are so many actual, strong issues in this area. Instead this movie PRETENDS to talk about the system and then switches to blame-the-victims mode. All that it does is reinforce people's prejudices about other people.
And in order to "prove" that its message is authentic, it uses a implausible plot - in which the rote-learner is a bad guy; there is a convenient wild life photographer waiting to fly Madhavan out of India; Raju gets a job in a impossible to believe interview; and the guy who scoffs at rote learning is actually getting the first rank every time (because he is the hero).
If all of the above happens in real life, yes, you have a valid message. The message of this movie and its plot do not coexist.

And stop with the pop-psychology already. It was good in Munna Bhai - but here it is just tiring to see so many "psychological" insights from Aamir Khan squeezed into every scene.
Plus everyone has to be drunk to express their true feelings or show their acting talents - I don't know why.

2. I also see the same distressing trend continuing - people such as Chatur Ramalingam get punished out of all proportion to their actual "crimes". And we are all supposed to enjoy these punishments. Thanks to incredible acting by the guy who played Chatur, I felt extremely sympathetic to him, throughout the movie. I could not find any reason in the movie itself about why he was such a horrific person to be punished with the public humiliation in the "college speech" - we only accept it because Aamir is the hero, and a hero cannot be wrong.
That is, our movies still want us to accept that a hero, by definition is good - not because he does good acts; but because he is the hero. He can harass a woman, steal, be an alcoholic, humiliate a harmless person publicly, pee on someone's frontyards - whatever. He is still the hero.
The personality cult that these guys promote is disgusting. In the book, by the way, Rancho is not a top scorer. Nor does he get the woman. They changed all that in the movie so that Aamir Khan comes out like some kind of intellectual superman.

My Short Story in Chennai Book Fair book

2010-01-06T06:36:00.000-08:00

I was browsing in the Chennai book fair when I noticed a book prominently displayed with an attractive cover. It was called "Vaanavil Koottam" (Group of Rainbows). I had seen this book name earlier (at least an year back) in my email. On a hunch, I picked up the book and turned and the inner cover had my name! It is an anthology of short stories and the second short story is "Garvam" (Pride). By A.R.Ramiah (that is me).
Here are a few pictures of the book and display.

This story was written along with others 5 years back when I was in the US. I had lots of time in my hand and wrote a series.
Then I sent it to Kalki magazine (I had won a short story competition many years back in Kalki and hence liked them). They said it was too long.
So I just kept it for a couple of years. In 2006 I published it in Thinnai, the online magazine.
A couple of months later I got an email from someone who said they wanted to publish it and asked for my address. I was worried for some reason and did not provide my address. It seems they went ahead and published it anyway.
I talked to the publisher. I was actually not upset - it made me happy to see (after such a long time) my story in print. He said they had to get approval from 37 writers (including Sujatha and Jeyamohan). I felt sorry for him.

I somehow feel more motivated now. I have not been able to complete a single good short story since I came back. I have not felt good about the ones I wrote recently. But this is motivating.

Airtel Super Singer Junior 2009 Update - I

2010-01-01T09:38:00.000-08:00

(Updated Below with Priyanka's wild card performance)

I am following this show as much as possible on Vijay TV.
Initially I was disappointed in the kids' performances - except for Alka Ajith who seemed like a prodigy. But it is obvious the training is helping a lot. The remaining kids now (except for Monisha and Srikanth) are very talented and capable singers.
The poor boys, particularly older ones are at a disadvantage - their voices are ready to break and sound awkward. The girls, of course, do not have this problem. Many of them sound ready for play back singing right now. I liked Sowmya, Priyanka and SreeNisha (Amazing voice). I liked Oviya for her command and versatility.
The question is Alka. Somehow I thought she was unbeatable in the beginning, and judges (particularly Chitra) obviously love her. But I have begun to not like her singing as much. Her performance in the "Playback first song" round held this week was not good and her song selection is generally mediocre. I think she is being spot selected because of past performances and not so much for her current performances. I still would like to listen to her sing "Udhaya Udhaya".
The orchestra is atrocious - Vijay TV has completely messed up their role in providing a good experience. They sound like the orchestra played in kinder garten fancy dress competitions.
I am also annoyed about them bringing Srikanth into the contest - he is too young and seems to be there as a show piece for people to consider cute. I feel sorry for him - his parents should have waited before bringing him into a singing circuit. And the misery is being prolonged by passing him on in every round. It is an embarassment.
Ignoring "winning" the prize, I think all of these singers (except for Monisha and Srikanth) are good.
Right now, my favorites are (the contest will probably be not won by these kids):
Roshan - he is very sincere and a great singer. His voice will break later, but his performances (such as Poove Sempoove, Raathiriyil Poothirukkum, Pon Maane) have been superlative.
Bala Sarangan - this kid has improved a lot over the past few rounds.
Sree Prasanna - this kid will likely be eliminated; his pitching still breaks, voice is not perfect and because of that he is not confident. BUT, he has something - his nuances are very, very appealing. He shines in certain renderings. I thought his "Jab Deep Jale Aana" was very, very good in certain places - particularly for his age.
Vishnu Charan - this kid chooses very different songs; he sang "Pitchai Paathiram" from "Naan Kadavul"; "Vasantha Mullai" and this week he chose "Unakkaena Pirandhen" from "Kaadhal". He has no classical training but good musical sense.
Of all the kids, I enjoy listening to Roshan, Sree Prasanna, Vishnu Charan and Sree Nisha the most.
Let us see how they fare.
Here is a video of Alka, Vishnu Charan and Roshan singing "Poo Vaasam" from "Anbe Sivam". Three different versions and all good:

Update I:
The below (Maraindhirundhe Paarkum, Priyanka, 3rd week of May, Starts at 1 minute into the video) is one of the best EVER live performances I have heard. This girl's voice is just amazing. She can directly go into playback singing. I have already heard the song ten times in the space of a day.

Is Entrepreneurship a Cultural trait?

2009-12-27T04:15:00.000-08:00

A friend of mine sent this New York Times article a few days back.
The article discussed the lack of entrepreneurship (it took me two minutes to type that) culture in India. It discusses the lack of venture funds and angel investors.
It starts out by saying:

Innovation is hard to measure, but academics who study it say India has the potential to create trend-setting products but is not yet doing so. Indians are granted about half as many American patents for inventions as people and firms in Israel and China. The country’s corporate and government spending on research and development significantly lags behind that of other nations. And venture capitalists finance far fewer companies here than they do elsewhere.

More later:

Mr. Raghavan and others say India is held back by a financial system that is reluctant to invest in unproven ideas, an education system that emphasizes rote learning over problem solving, and a culture that looks down on failure and unconventional career choices.

I found the article informative. But the friend who spoke to me about it seemed to focus on the last line above - the cultural angle. In fact, I think most people who read that article would find the cultural angle more easier to understand than the financial or educational.
Most of the people who talk about innovation in public also seem to prefer trying to influence this "cultural" factor. There are conferences and seminars focussed exclusively on innovation and the need for inspiration for innovators.
Unsurprisingly, this coincides with a slew of management books about innovation in the corporation.
The narrative seems to run as follows: India has a culture that looks down on investing in new products. Failure is not an option. Therefore Indians do not start companies that create new products. To change this, we have to motivate Indian future entrepreneurs with a lot of seminars and conferences which charge a minimum of Rs.1000 only.
I am completely prepared to believe that entrepreneurship is low in India and that India is not a source of many patents. What I do NOT trust is that there is a cultural angle to it.That is, I believe that there are perfectly rational economic reasons for Indians not to get involved in creating products - I don't think you have to bring culture into the mix.
I also believe (cynical bastard that I am) that the only reason culture is touted as a prime factor is this: that is the only way a lot of people can easily make money, offering to change the culture. If we were to go after the root causes, we may be required to fight the battle on the political, policy making front. That is truly in public interest and there is not a lot of money to make in that direction.

The Cult of the Entrepreneur

I think entrepreneurship is being elevated as something equivalent to superstardom by management gurus. To start a company, and to create a product - the decision is usually made based on evaluating marginal benefits, not based on good intentions.
Let me take the case of the software industry:
(By the way, The Indian Patent Act does not apply to software! That is, you cannot patent a software algorithm in India. Software is protected by copyright - not by Patent Law in India. )
If you start a software company in India, you have two choices - start a company that creates an innovative product (remember, you cannot patent software innovations in India); or perform coding services for American, Japanese or European clients. Which option would you choose?
Purely going by marginal benefits, I would prefer a services company unless I am rich already. This is because with no outside investment, getting a software services company up and running is easy in India. Not only that, if I had just a couple of clients, I can break even pretty fast. The market for software services is high and has stayed high for the past fifteen years. Even under a bad recession, the market has been able to accomodate thousands of small companies.
Now, you may ask me, why would I do this? There are a thousand small and medium services companies - wouldn't I rather start a product company that I feel passionate about?
But people run businesses not just out of nobility. They run businesses because they want to make a lot of money as fast as possible. I know that we are all supposed to believe in passion, innovation and all that - but has anyone considered the true state of the Indian economy?

1. Our healthcare costs are skyrocketing
2. IT workers have no government mandated pension
3. There is no real social security net - unemployment benefits are abysmal and difficult to secure.
4. The public education system is bad and private education costs are soaring.
5. It is not easy to go into bankruptcy and come out of it.

Let me highlight the final point - the European Corporate Governance Institute had a paper out (pdf can be downloaded here)on Bankruptcy law and Entrepreneurship in 2008. The authors, John Armour and Douglas Cumming found a link between countries that support a "fresh start" through personal bankruptcy laws and entrepreneurship. The USA, for example, enables such a fresh start through Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Countries that allow such fresh starts have significantly more entrepreneurial activity.
What is the status of Indian law on this? The Indian Insolvency laws are dated. But more than anything, going to the a court managed bankruptcy in India will drain all your energy and time away.

Unlike Western countries, a person living in India cannot depend on government if he gets sick, for his children's education or for his retirement. Meanwhile it is obvious that all our costs are increasing exponentially. Would I be trying to make as much money as possible or would I be passionate about a product that may never work? The answer is clear.
So, my question is why don't all the innovation gurus turn their attention to a better bankruptcy law that actually works? Why don't they focus on a social security net? Why don't they focus on pension schemes?
Well, there is no money in such fights. You will likely lose over and over fighting policy changes.
Therefore, we are all back to wondering what the devil is in the Indian culture preventing risk taking. We are back to organizing seminars and conferences on innovation.

(By the way, I believe that people who create products also use the same marginal benefits analysis. They are not guided by nobility or pure passion either. They may see a niche market opening or a way to get funding. My point is that we can discuss innovation and entrepreneurship purely as economic decisions, without bringing in cultural angles.)

Those of you who find this article interesting may also read more about its background here.

James Bond talks to Taxi Driver

2009-12-15T09:42:00.000-08:00

In most American Action movies involving foreign countries you have these well-dressed military men and politicians pondering life and death decisions. Meanwhile a surveillance plane is tracking a terrorist 10000 miles away. Sometimes this plane even picks up the terrorist's conversations. The all-upright military men place the decisions on their civilian leaders. And then the drama goes on.
There have been so many movies showing the dramatic reach and power of American (and British) intelligence organizations and military in very subtle ways. In the movie "The Bourne Supremacy", CIA tracks (from their headquarters in the USA), the movements of Jason Bourne in a train station in London. At one point, they ROTATE the camera in the London train station FROM VIRGINIA.
There is an immense sophistication projected by these movies that, to an extent, you are subconciously awed by Western power. You forget that these movies have a propaganda element.
Bob Woodward, in his book on the Iraq war and the Bush administration describes a scene: Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary at that time, is meeting the Saudi Prince along with Dick Cheney. The Prince is concerned about the fallout of the proposed invasion. Rumsfeld shows a map of Iraq with army positions and sweeps his arm across. "All of these will be gone" says Rumsfeld.
Seven years later these guys are still fighting an insurgency in Iraq.
The propaganda of American movies is not just directed at foreigners - it also misleads the American people; it makes them believe that their army is full of upright men who do not torture (see Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, Rendition) and who do not engage in criminal acts (see the Haditha rape).
Which brings us to the Taxi Driver of Baghdad.

James Bond and the Taxi Driver
One of the key elements of the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) canard perpetrated by Bush and Blair was the "45 minute to deploy" story. Sometime during 2002-2003, during the run up to the invasion of Iraq, Tony Blair released a dossier to public which claimed that Saddam Huseein could release WMD within 45 minutes.
Remember that Saddam Hussein had no WMD, but where did this 45 minute claim come from?
A British investigation shows that the claim came from a Taxi driver in Baghdad.
Here is what happened (you can find details here):
MI6 was asked to find some dirt on Saddam and WMD. They put some pressure on an Iraqi official. That guy said that a Taxi driver had overheard a conversation between two Saddam officials in which they discussed the 45-minute-to-deploy nugget.
That is, the claim that Blair showed in his public dossier came from a third hand hearsay through a taxi driver!
The Iraq war has killed at least a hundred thousand people - the war was based on a claim of WMD that could be operationalised in 45 minutes. Yet Blair got into this war FULLY KNOWING that his sources were taxi drivers.
Isn't this criminal?

What does this illustrate for democracy? It means that people in power in the USA and UK could get away with murder. All that a democracy has to do is provide good local services - as long as that is done, the leaders of those countries can "Manufacture Consent" for any of their pet wars.
But, more importantly, none of this has shaken the American or British public from their absolute belief in their politicians or their military or their intelligence services. The people who voted Bush out now have Obama escalating the war in Afghanistan. There are a few powerful people clamouring for a new war with Iran.

Smart Bombs
Just as many American people believe in the noble intentions of their leaders in dropping bombs on foreigners, they also believe in specific concepts that helps them deal with this.
For example, the idea that you can target bombs so effectively with their missiles that they will kill only the evil guy and not the innocents in the surrounding street or city.
This idea of smart bombs is not new - American media was talking about smart bombs in World War II! Whenever a new war comes up, their media starts talking about how accurate their bombs are - they did it during the Vietnam war, during the first Gulf war and the Iraq invasion.
During the Iraq invasion, some of these smart bombs actually missed the entire country of Iraq and fell on Jordan.
But, you see, you do not need real smart bombs - you just need to bring that up as an abstract concept. That is enough for civilians to approve of any aerial war. This time, this current debate is going on about the drone strikes in Pakistan. And people are talking about smart bombs again.
America uses her bombs so freely that all that you have to say, to be known as Serious Foreign Policy Expert is "Targeted Military Srikes". If you just say military strikes, then you come across as a warmonger. Instead, just say "targeted military strikes". It makes the experts sound intelligent and eases the fears in American minds about getting civilians killed.

So, the next time you see, in an American movie, a bunch of honorable men in military unfiorms discussing Very Important War Decisions, remember that there is probably a taxi driver who is helping them out.

My son and my music

2009-12-03T10:46:00.000-08:00

I have already said here, that I am going to make sure my son becomes a singer. I decided to take his training myself and the below is the result.
He seems to show a keen interest in getting away from me when I sing, but I think that is because of the bad acoustics.

He also laughs at weird words. Here is the video:

Some advice on Arranged Marriages

2009-11-24T05:54:00.000-08:00

I was married eight years back. It was an arranged marriage; people think (especially abroad) that arranged marriages are very easy and that you do not have to make any effort. Let me narrate my experience and you can judge for yourself:

The very first problem I faced was managing my hair. I had it all nicely turned and everything so that I had the 50s samathu payyan (good boy) look. I spent atleast two hours before the mirror trying to adjust every individual strand of hair. I had no idea how my potential future wife would judge my looks. I knew vaguely that they did not like the Albert Einstein hairstyle.
Well, after this struggle, I got into the car and sat, stupidly, in the window seat. So my hair ended up looking, indeed, like Einstein. I hoped that the woman liked physics.

It is best, in my mind, to keep the affair as low-key as possible. I was sure that the girl would not like me. I would be lucky if she did not throw up on seeing me and hated every word that I spoke. So, I did not want one of the huge movie style episode in which a bunch of my relatives and a bunch of her relatives, plus all her neighbors show up to watch me getting rejected.
I actually wanted to meet her in a restaurant in a remote corner of the city so that only the waiters would know, but no one would leak the matter to the press. But when I asked for this specifically, I was accused by my parents of being an un-Indian brat. Her parents did not like the idea either - they thought I would kidnap their daughter. They wanted the full glory.

Thus, my ONE attempt at trying to influence the course of my own marriage and life failed. I stopped trying after that.

So, we ended up at her home. Luckily there were not too many people around. I got out of the car and ran in before the tabloids could take photographs.
I sat in a nice elevated chair and kept my head down. Her brother sat in a corner and kept looking at me with an impassive face. Let me tell you what he reminded me of: In American movies they show a secret CIA interrogation room where one inscrutable American sits silently in the corner while they try to get information from the terrorist. At the end he usually walked over and banged the terrorist's head on the table until he revealed the location of the bomb.
Her brother never took his eyes off me the whole time and never said anything. He rarely says anything to me even after 8 years of the marriage.

Her mother and sister buzzed about and we all tried to make conversation. I tried a few jokes. But I was waiting for my future wife to show up.
I had spent a lot of time (the previous day) in front of the mirror trying to see the angle in which I looked good. I was sure that there must be atleast one angle out of the 360 degrees where my face would show up handsome. So I tried each one of those angles until I found that there was one particular way, if I raised my head and bent my face to the left - I looked absolutely dashing. Turn a little bit to the right or left and the "effect" was gone. I could see myself only from a corner of my eye in the mirror, but I was sure I had hit upon the ideal way to present myself to my future wife.

Now, sitting in front of her whole family, I tried to find that angle again. I was almost there when the door opened and my future wife walked in. She did not look at me at all. She sat in a chair and studiously avoided looking at me.
So we both sat like statues while the rest of them had fun.
The one advice I would give you, the future arranged marriager, is to AVOID eating mixtures (this is a south-indian dish), while you are on a "girl-seeing" episode. It is a nasty trick played by the bride's family. They are trying to judge your mechanical competence. There is absolutely NO way to eat the mixture without a)looking uncool or b) spilling most of it on oneself. If they offer you the mixture, politely say no. If they insist, tell them you know their dirty trick.
Do not drink coffee either. They will offer a very full cup of coffee and figure out how scared you are when your hand shakes. Ask for half a cup; if they offer anymore, throw it on your brother-in-law. That will teach them.

There are several misconceptions about arranged marriages. Movies show the guy and the girl falling in love immediately; then pining for each other while the evil villain takes the girl to a mountain cave. The truth is that you don't really feel anything when you look at her. Your goal at that point is to get out of a really awkward situation. There is no place for love. It is a tough world out there.

After some time, they suggested that we talk to each other. This is the most liberal advancement in the institution of arranged marriages in the last two thousand years - they allow us people to talk.
So, me and her went to the terrace. It was evening time and the terrace was cool. It was very romantic except for the airport close by. There were flights zipping over us every five minutes.

I had prepared a long speech to her. It went something like this:
"I do not have much experience in this. I like your family. Let me say something about myself. But before that, I want you to be assured that you may say no to me without any reservations. You do not have to marry me out of compulsion. But that does not mean that your family compels you. I am just saying, if your family is of the type that comples daughters, then if they compel you to marry me, you can freely say no. This does not mean that I suspect your family of tyranny. No, no, on the other hand I like your family a lot. But it is all circumstances. Instead if you say yes to me because of compulsion, then our life may not be that happy. No, I am not saying that I will torture you. But I am just saying that if I do...."

I forgot most of the speech when I sat there. It sounded like a PhD dissertation.
Anyway, I started with "I don't have much experience in this"
My wife said, "It is not as if we are all sitting here with lots of experience."

That was it. We ended up chatting for an hour and by the end of it, I wanted to stay at their home.

PS: Apparently there is a rule as to the decent time when you can get back to the girl's family and let them know you like her. Say you see the girl on Monday evening at around 6 PM. Then the decent interval is to let their family know Tuesday afternoon at 3 PM. If you do it any sooner, they think you are too needy. If you do later, the girl may be married off to someone else. The optimum time interval is the above.
I did not know this. We got into the car and I started badgering my family about the marriage date.

Encounters in "A Wednesday"

2009-11-09T02:52:00.000-08:00

I watched the movie "A Wednesday" very late, last week. I had heard much about the movie and Kamal Hasan had remade it in Tamil.
I did not like the movie at all. This is a belated analysis of the movie. This is just my opinion, I am not claiming to be a connoiseur of fine movies.

(By the way, if you have not seen the movie, please be aware that this is NOT a proper review. It reveals everything about the ending. I am taking this liberty because I think the movie has been out for more than six months now. Don't read further if you want to watch the movie. This analysis is more about political beliefs than anything else.)

Before you stat reading this post, please visit the link - The Hindu -Ishrat Jehan's encounter.

The Story
The Police Commissioner of Mumbai gets a call warning him about five bombs set to explode at 6 PM unless he fulfills certain demands. We are introduced to a couple of second level police men. One of them is Arif Khan, who seems to enjoy bashing up people. He is with the ATS and the police themselves call him a psycho and a problem guy.
The guy who set the bombs, Naseeruddin Shah, then proceeds to demand the shipping of four terrorism suspects to the Juhu airport. In an abandoned runway, amid lots of drama with cell phones, three of the suspects are killed by Shah's bombs. The fourth one escapes, but then the police shoot him on the request of Shah.
Why did Shah do this? He explains in a lengthy dialog with the commissioner that he is just a common man and is tired of being killed by terrorists.
In the final shot of the movie, the commissioner does find Shah, but then leaves him free after shaking his hand.

The Writer and his stand
I have seen that in India, directors create movies with dubious moral stands (such as demeaning women). Then when questioned about such stands they ask us to enjoy the movie as a story. That is, they ask us not to attach any "meaning" to the movie.
Thus, a director like Parthiban can show a movie in which a raped woman ends up seeking and marrying her own rapist. Rajinikanth or Surya or Vijay can insult women's dresses and teach women how to behave all the time. But when confronted, they claim that it is just a story.
So, the first question to ask is if writers take stands about social issues or not in movies. It is recognised throughout the world that this is, indeed, the case, most of the time. A story in a movie is a point of view. It is somewhat like an argument. The writer positions characters around the argument and shows them in a bad or good or gray lights. This is particularly true of "commercial" stories. It is certainly true that when a shrew is shown to be slapped in a movie, the writer is guiding you towards certain judgements about women.
This is NOT the case with every story. I am not saying that stories are written with bad and good people in mind. But I think we are all intelligent enough to know when a writer is trying to guide us.
In this light, who are the "heroes" in "A Wednesday" and who are the bad people? What does the writer guide us toward?
The movie is not at all subtle in this regard. Naseeruddin Shah is shown as a "common" man again and again. He calls himself as a represntative. At the end of the movie, the commissioner lets him go (in spite of him killing three people) with a proud handshake.
So, the writer expects us to identify with Shah. He wants us to sympathise with the commissioner. And he wants us to spare no thoughts to the men killed for "terrorism".
Now that we are clear about what the writer is saying, is that a moral stand? I will not ask this question of every movie, but this movie, clearly, tries to make a political statement. It is not "just" a story. The writer is writing about contemporary events and asks us to judge a consequence of that.
This is where I had a big problem with the movie (I had other, more aesthetic issues which I discuss later).
The idea that some vague "terrorist" can be encountered at any point of time, without a trial, is morally abhorrent. And in this movie there is not enough shown to "judge" these guys.
At one point, Naseeruddin Shah says that people are kept in jails for ten years without a judgement - but that happens with EVERY case in India. By that logic, why shouldn't we be killing murder suspects? Why only "terrorists"? There have been serial, mass killers who have killed more people than some terrorists. Shouldn't we be killing people in the streets?
Once you have decided that a trial is just a bureaucratic requirement, then why stop with terrorists?
In fact, the cruel arm of the Indian state punishes more innocent people, by keeping them without trial in jails for as much as seven or eight years. Why didn't anyone make a movie out of THAT?
If Shah, the common man, has to be angry with someone, anyone at all, it should be the delayed justice system. Instead focussing on a formless "terrorist" who can be killed just like that, how morally repugnant is that?
To me, it is clear that Shah is the murderer in the movie. At least he should have been showed as deranged. This is why I could like the Tamil movie "Evano Oruvan" ("Dombivli Fast" in Marathi) better than this movie.
The director is not required to give a solution - but at least do not PERVERT the original issue.
The most revolting scene in the movie was the policemen killing Ibrahim in cold blood. Do people really think encounters are fun hunting of "terrorists"?
If you have not visited the link above yet, here it is, again: The Hindu -Ishrat Jehan's encounter.

The Revenge story
Now, we all enjoy revenge movies, of course. We all like it when a single man takes revenge for his family or lover. But there is a difference between that and this movie.
You see, in a revenge movie, the director has already shown US the viewers, who is responsible for the crime. At that point there is a direct, personal line of connection between the crime, the murderers and the vigilante.
In "A Wednesday" I saw no such connection -
1. There was no personal connection between Shah and the "terrorists"
2. There is no connection between the CRIME and the terrorists either.
So what the hell?
This is why I felt that the movie was deeply dishonest. I felt they had made it to exploit the resentments of people after the Mumbai attacks while really coming up with no innovative stand.

The Aesthetics of the movie
1. I told my friend that this could have been made as a telefilm or something more appropriate for television. The big twist in the movie was just the revealing of Shah's intentions. I did not think that was so mind-blowing that they make a movie out of it.
2. There are ZERO other innovations in the story. The entire "detection" process was a cop-out with a contrived "cool" hacker solving everything.
3. What is with Hindi movies and pretentious characters? I have heard NOBODY in my entire life saying "I love you" and "I love you too" over the phone. Only American television characters talk that way.
4. The movie also shows people in very predictable wooden stereotypes - the hacker, for example. This idea of a "cool" young computer geek is so stupid. I am in the industry and I can tell you I have never seen such people.

I would actually suggest that these guys make real Indian movies instead of thinking they will make an "almost Hollywood movie" as they say in reviews.

Airtel Super Singer 2009 Junior

2009-10-28T10:43:00.000-07:00

Is this the group of singers that they selected after going through every city in Tamil Nadu? Most of these young singers should not be on TV singing - they need lots of training.
Zee Tamil had a far better show last year.
Chithra as a judge is too much for this show. She is carrying on gamely.
I only like the girl Alka's singing - she is a star. There are a couple of others who are good too.
Anyway here is a classy performance: