Tamil Short Story - 2

I wrote the following story recently. It continues with the husband-wife characters Raghu and Prema, first written here. Let me know if you like it.

பெண் விடுதலை வேண்டும்!
----------------------------------
இரா. இராமையா

ரகு மணி பார்த்தான். முதன் முறையாக வீட்டுக்கு அலுவலக நண்பர்கள் வருகிறார்கள். அவனுக்குப் படபடப்பாக இருந்தது.
மிகவும் சிரமப்பட்டு பார்ப்பதற்க்கு ஒரு குடும்பப் படம் தேர்ந்தெடுத்து இருந்தார்கள். அதிலும் நடுவில் ஒரு குத்து டான்ஸ் இருந்தது.
"அவங்க வந்தவுடன உள்ள கூட்டிப் போய் புடவை, நகைன்னு பேச வேண்டாம்" , என்றான் ரகு.
"நாங்க ஏதோ பேசிக்கறோம். உங்களுக்கென்ன ?" என்றாள் பிரேமா.
"கொஞ்சம் உபயோகப்படற மாதிரி எதுனா பேச மாட்டீங்களா ?" என்றான் ரகு.
பிரேமா நிதானத்துடன், "ஏன்? நீங்கள்ளாம் ரொம்ப அறிவு பூர்வமா தான் பேசுவீங்களோ?" என்றாள்.
"எவ்வளவோ சப்ஜெக்ட் இருக்கு. நாட்டு நிலைமை, சமுதாயம் இப்பிடி கேவலமா இருக்கு. எனக்கு அப்பிடிப் பேசத் தான் பிடிக்கும்."
"அதெல்லாம் பேசினா சண்டை தான் வரும்."
"வராது. உன் மரமண்டைக்குப் புரியுற மாதிரி இன்னைக்குப் பேசுறோம் பாரு."

படம் முடிந்து சிறிது நேரம் மெளனமாக இருந்தார்கள். ரகு, அர்த்தபூர்வமான வகையில் அறிவைத் தூண்டும் ஒரு விவாதத்தை தொடங்க முடிவு செய்தான்.
"அந்தப் படத்துல வர மாதிரி பெண்கள் வேலைக்கு போறது பத்தி என்ன நினைக்கறீங்க?" என்றான்.
இரு ஆண்களும் அவனை முறைத்தார்கள். மனைவிகள் தங்கள் கணவர்களை ஆவலுடன் பார்த்தார்கள்.
"வடிவேலு அடி வாங்கறதே ஒரு அழகு", என்றான் வருண்.
"எவ்வளவு முறை பார்த்தாலும் அலுக்காது", என்றான் காந்தி.
"அவரு கேட்டதுக்குப் பதில் சொல்லுங்க", என்றாள் வருணின் மனைவி.
"என்ன கேட்டான்?"
ரகு மறுபடித் தன் கேள்வியைக் கேட்டான்.
"ஒ ..அதுவா? வந்து...நல்ல டேலன்ட் இருந்தா என்ன தப்பு?" என்றான் காந்தி.
"ஏன்...நீங்கள்ளாம் ரொம்ப டேலன்டோ ?" என்றாள் அவன் மனைவி.
"வரலாறு பூர்வமா பார்த்தா நாட்டுக்கு ஆணு , வீட்டுக்குப் பெண்ணுன்னு வைச்சான்", என்றான் காந்தி.
அவன் மனைவி விடாமல், "எவனும் வைக்கல.. வச்சவன உங்களுக்குத் தெரியுமா?" என்றாள்.
காந்தி, "வருணுக்குத் தெரியும். என்ன ஆள விடுங்க", என்றான்.
ரகு விவாதத்தைச் சற்றுப் பயனுள்ளதாக்கும் பொருட்டு, "அப்போ டேலன்ட் இருந்தா தப்பு இல்லன்ற?" என்றான்.
"டேய்..நீ என்ன பெரிய சாலமன் பாப்பையாவா? நீ சொல்லேன். வேலைக்குப் போறது தப்பா , ரைட்டா? "
ரகு இதைச் சாக்கு வைத்து அரை மணி நேரம் பேசலாம் என்று முடிவெடுத்தான்.
"ஐ.நா சபையோட ரிபோர்ட்படி பார்த்தா பெண்கள் உலகத்துல ஐம்பது சதவிகிதம். ஆனா எழுபத்தி ஐந்து சதவிகிதம் வேலை அவங்க தான் பாக்குறாங்க"
"யாரு...இவளா?" என்றான் வருண்.
"ஆமா"
"கிழிச்சா"
"ஹலோ அவரைப் பேச விடுங்க".
"டேய்.. ஐ.நா சபையெல்லாம் இதுல இழுக்காத...உங்க வீட்டுல எப்பிடி?"
"கரெக்ட்" என்றாள் பிரேமா.
ரகு அவளை முறைத்தான்.
"ஸீ ..எங்க வீடு, உங்க வீடுன்னெல்லாம் பேசக் கூடாது. ஸ்டாடிஸ்டிக்ஸ்படி பார்த்தா...."
"நீ சொல்லு பிரேமா. இவன் வீட்டுல எப்பிடி?"
"வெள்ளிக்கிழமை சாயங்காலம் வந்து லுங்கியக் கட்டி டி.வி முன்னாடி உக்கர்ந்தாருன்னா திங்கள் காலையில தான் எந்திரிப்பாரு."
எல்லோரும் ஹோ..ஹோ என்று சிரித்தார்கள்.
"அவன் நம்ம லெவலே கிடையாது. ஐ.நா சபை லெவல் அவன். " என்றான் காந்தி.
ரகு கடுகடுப்புடன், "என்னோட பாயின்ட் என்னன்னா..காந்தி சொன்ன மாதிரி டேலன்ட் உள்ள பெண்கள் வேலை பாக்கறதுல என்ன தப்பு?" என்றான்.
"ஒரு நிமிஷம்", என்றாள் காந்தியின் மனைவி.
"என்ன?"
"வேலைக்குப் போகாதவங்களுக்கு டேலன்ட் இல்லையா?"
"அதுவா? அது நான் அப்பிடி சொல்லலியே.." என்றான் ரகு.
"இல்ல நீங்கள்ளாம் டேலன்ட்டோட தான் வேலை பாக்கறீங்களா?"
ரகு பரிதாபமாக விழித்தான்.
காந்தி, "விடுறி", என்றான்.
"அவ்வளவு டேலன்ட் இருந்தா ஒரு கார் வாங்க வேண்டியது தான?"
சட்டென்று அமைதி நிலவியது. ரகு, பிரேமா உதவிக்கு வருவாள் என்று நினைத்து அவளைப் பார்த்தான். அவளோ வாயைப் பொத்திக் கொண்டு சிரிப்பது போல இருந்தாள். கிராதகி.
"இல்ல..வருண் நாட்டுக்கு ஆணுன்னு சொன்னதுக்குத் தான் நான் சொன்னேன்".
"நான் அப்பிடி சொல்லல. காந்தி தான் சொன்னான்."
காந்தி, சம்பந்தமே இல்லாமல் , "எனக்குக் கூட கிரண் பேடியை ரொம்ப பிடிக்கும்", என்று சொல்லித் தப்பிக்க முயற்சி செய்தான்.
வருணின் மனைவி, "நாங்கல்லாம் கிரண் பேடி மாதிரி இருந்தா நீங்கள்ளாம் காலி", என்றாள்.

பிரேமா, திடீரென்று "கோலங்கள் சீரியல் பார்த்தீங்களா?" என்றாள்.

ரகுவுக்கு எரிச்சல் வந்தது. அவனுடைய கருத்துக்களை அவள் ஏன் எப்போதும் தடுக்கிறாள்? இப்படிக் கோலங்கள் , அரசி என்று போய் புடவை நகையில் முடிப்பார்கள். அவன் பெண்கள் விடுதலை பற்றி ஏகப்பட்ட யோசனைகள் வைத்திருந்தான். பெண்களுக்கே அவர்கள் விடுதலை பற்றி பேச விருப்பமில்லை!

"சும்மா கிட", என்றான் பிரேமாவைப் பார்த்து.
பிறகு மற்றவர்களைப் பார்த்து, "நாம் இது வரைக்கும் பேசினதைத் தொகுத்து சொல்லவா?" என்றான்.
"வேண்டாம்", என்றார்கள் எல்லோரும் கோரஸாக.
ரகு விடாமல், "அப்ப சரி ...நான் இந்த சப்ஜெக்டோட முக்கியமான இன்னொரு கோணத்தைப் பற்றிப் பேசணும்னு நினைக்கறேன்" என்றான்.
"அப்ப கிளம்பலாமா?" என்றான் வருண், காந்தியைப் பார்த்து.
"இல்ல இருங்க. ஆண்களா நாம பெண்கள் விடுதலைக்கு என்ன செய்யலாம்?"
என்றான் ரகு.
"ஒரு பக்கக் கட்டுரை எழுதி நாளைக்குக் கொண்டு வரோம்", என்று எழுந்து நின்றான் வருண்.
ரகு பரபரப்புடன், "நம்பளால பெண்கள் அவதிப் படறாங்கன்னு உனக்குத் தோணலியா?" என்றான்.
"உன்னால நாங்க அவதிப்படரத விடவா?"
வருணின் மனைவி, "சே சே ..வருணால அவதியெல்லாம் எதுவும் கிடையாது..பாவம்", என்றாள்.
வருண், "கேட்டியாடா", என்றான்.
"அப்ப பெண்களை வேலைக்கு அனுப்ப நாம ஏன் தயாராயில்லை?" என்றான் ரகு.

வருண், "இவ்வளோ பேச்சுப் பேசறியே..நீ ஏன் ப்ரேமாவ வேலைக்கு அனுப்பல?" என்றான்.
ரகு திடுக்கிட்டு, "நாம பெர்சனலா பேசக் கூடாது", என்றான்.
"பிரேமா.. நீ சொல்லு. இவன் ஏன் உன்னை வேலைக்கு அனுப்பல", என்றான் காந்தி.
ரகு குறுக்கிட்டு, "அவ ஒரு இன்டெர்வியு போனா. அதுல தப்புத் தப்பா பதில் சொல்லியிருக்கா. அவன் எடுக்கல. அதான் நான் வேணாம்னு சொன்னேன்", என்றான்.
"நான் தப்பா ஒண்ணும் பதில் சொல்லல", என்றாள் பிரேமா.
வருணின் மனைவி, " ஒரு இண்டெர்வியுல தான எடுக்கல? தோ..இவரு பத்து இன்டெர்வியு பெயிலாகி அப்புறம் திருப்பதிக்கு மொட்டை வேண்டித் தான் இந்த வேலை கிடைச்சுது", என்றாள்.
வருண், " ஆமா. ரொம்ப அவசியம். எல்லார் கிட்டயும் சொல்லு", என்றான்.
ரகு, "அப்பிடி இல்ல...நல்லா படிச்சிட்டுப் போனு சொல்லறேன். எனக்குத் தெரிஞ்ச கம்பனில எல்லாம் போயி தப்புத் தப்பா பதில் சொன்னா எனக்குத் தானே கெட்ட பேரு," என்றான்.
வருணின் மனைவி, "அப்போ உங்க மானத்துக்காக அவளை போக விடுறதில்லையா?" என்றாள்.
ரகு குழப்பத்துடன், " நல்ல வேலையா இருந்தா நானே அனுப்பி வைப்பேன்", என்றான்.
காந்தியின் மனைவி, "முதல்ல நீங்க என்ன அனுப்புறது? எங்களுக்கே போகத் தெரியாதா? நாங்க ஏதாவது படிச்சா 'படிக்க வச்சேன்'னு சொல்லிக்கிறது. நாங்க வேலைக்குப் போனா அனுப்பி வச்சேன்றது", என்றாள்.
ரகு, "சரி..நான் அனுப்பி வக்கறேன்", என்றான்.
"மறுபடியும் அப்பிடியே சொல்லறீங்க?"
காந்தி, "கமான் ரகு. ஒரு இண்டெர்வியுல பெயிலானதுக்கு நீ இப்பிடிச் செய்யக் கூடாது. வீட்டுக்குள்ளயே ஏன் அடைச்சு வைக்கறே?" என்றான்.
ரகு எல்லோரும் தன்னையே பார்ப்பதை உணர்ந்தான்.

"பிரேமா..கோலங்கள் போடு...டைம் ஆச்சு.." என்றான்.

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

HR vs Technical Staff in Neeya Naana

First I want you to take a look at the photograph of the guy in the picture. He was a participant on the HR side in the Vijay TV talk-and-debate show Neeya Naana. This guy made an idiotic and thoroughly dangerous claim against employing women. He made it on television and was recorded (the video clip in YouTube was removed because of copyright issues). No one challenged him. The host said the participant "was bringing up good points". The rest of this post is about the implications of such claims and some comments on Human Resources managers in that show.
Most of what I write applies only to the offensive HR managers on that show. I have known some pretty good HR managers and I am not generalizing my comments.

Transcript of the Offending Clip

Gopinath, the Host: But there are companies which ask, in HR interviews, if a lady candidate plans to have a baby. This is a really bad rights violation.

The man in the photograph, HR: But what is wrong with that? (at opposite side) Will you work with such a person in a project? The project just won't work. We are interested in the well-being of the project. In fact, let me ask - will you work without a salary? I won't either. Management is concerned about profit. What is wrong with that?

Host: You are bringing up some good points. But aren't you concerned about employee's welfare?

Some background on that debate
As I said, the show's clip has been removed from YouTube. But the debate was very acrimonious. There was no common ground between the two sides. There was a lot of yelling, particularly from the HR side.
The highlights were:
1. HR started talking about fake certificates. They said this was a major problem and the host accepted it at face value.
2. They all kept coming back to layoffs. The HR side insisted that only poor performers were being laid off. I have no doubt one morning they woke up and found out that there were hundreds of poor performers in their company. What a shock! It had nothing to do with the economy or how their management planned poorly. It was the middle class programmers who are the problem!
3. In the end they brought in two "experts". The experts were a CTO guy and another HR guy himself. The HR "expert" said employees were spending too much. That was the problem, the host agreed. The employees had suddenly found money and were spending too much. When they lost their money, they blamed HR!!! In fact the host concluded the show by asking employess to spend less. No comment on companies which went nuts with hiring anticipating 1000% growth prospects.
4. The HR "expert" also said "we should blame ourselves" in this economy. When someone says "blame ourselves" what they mean is they are blaming everybody but themselves. Very common trick in India to start saying "we should blame ourselves". Ramalinga Raju steals money and gets caught!! Let us start blaming oursleves!
5. The CTO guy said every employee should think about how they would behave if they were a business owner themselves. That is, of course a neat trick itself. There are hundreds of books on why that is exactly the wrong thing to do. If every middle class guy started "imagining what he would support and oppose if he was a business owner" then he/she would end up just hurting themselves. I thought being a learned CTO, this guy would know that employees and business owners have opposing interests. That is why labor law is needed in the first place. For example, a business owner will love bonded labor - an employee, not so much.
6. A supercilious women on the HR side said employees were not hiding their cigarettes when she passed them by outside office. I am glad she did not want them to bend down and salute her.
7. In the end everyone agreed that the employees were spending too much; that only bad performers were being laid off; that HR were doing their best. No one objected or brought up again the critical issue raised by the HR guy in the photo: that companies need to find out if a woman plans to have a baby, and reserve the right to reject them on that grounds.

The Voice of the Powerful
Sometime back I wrote a post describing how corporations' point of views are heavily represented in media. This debate show is an example of that. It makes me so angry to realise how much powerful people get away with. We say that politicians abuse power. But abuse of power is a DEFINING characteristic of the Indian systems. The HR guys in this show have no problem questioning rights which were hard won by labor and have become part of law for the last 50 years. And they get away with it.
The employees side was pathetic - they were completely outmanouevred by the HR worthies. The whole arguments about fake certificates and bad performers was brought up simply to insult the employees sitting opposite to them. In fact, watching the show, it was hard to shake off the feeling that we were watching the age old fight in India between oppressive upper classes, all well-fed and bloated with their power, representing HR; while the lower classes were cowering at their allegations on the employees side.
None of the employees brought up very obvious legal issues - what the guy in the photograph said was illegal, and if his company is following such practices of questioning reproductive habits, they can be shut down.
The reason I feel enraged is because bad talking points are pushed by corporations and their representative lackeys all the time ; and they are repeated again and again across the media spectrum. And they become common wisdom.
Why did the economy come down?
IT employees spent too much and prepared fake certificates
Why are companies laying off thousands?
Because they are all bad performers.

We badly need an IT employee's union which can push back such talking points in public at least.

The rest of this post will be a debunking of some of these talking pints.

Talking Point I - HR vs Employees
First of all the show should never have been titled "HR vs Employees". The assumption was that HR is somewhat different than employees. This is a big psychological issue - the corporate structure in India is structured around power instead of utility and convenience. In the United States HR plays a very different role. In fact, a HR manager in the United States will be the last person to make a comment about employing women.
In India HR has become compliant lackeys who would do the management's dirty work for them. The reason it works well is because HR knows the law. Most employees do not know their rights.
In the corporate structure in India, executive management needs to be distinguished from other management areas - for example, the Administration department is called Facilities Management. This does not mean that admin staff are managers who can mess with other people.
Project management means you manage IT projects. That does not mean that you run the company.
Similarly Human Resources Management means you manage employee's welfare. You are NOT in charge of profit making. In fact, your role is to guide Executive management to avoid excesses and treat employees fairly.
By calling the show "HR vs Employees" the show hosts implied that Human Resources staff themselves are somehow special. In reality, the company is run by executive management (CTO, COO, CEO, CFO). The decisions that they feel squeamish about are handed over to a HR manager who then assumes that he has a role in profit making.

In exchange for the illusory "power" they get from executive management, HR managers end up doing the opposite of their jobs. And they, true to Indian tradition, abuse the power too. I will explain later why this is bad for long-term health of a company.
This distinction, that they are NOT "management" management was lost on most people in the debate show. They sought to speak on behalf of executive management themselves - a job they are not qualified to do.

Talking Point -2 - Bad performers are laid off
This argument is plain offensive and I see it repeated again and again only in India. The recession has caused massive layoffs in the USA. I do not see ANY companies in America insulting their former employees and calling them bad performers. They know that they will be sued off their money if they claimed as such.
The reason HR continues to peddle this nonsense is because they think no one can reliably respond to this charge. Who wants to come out and say, "I was laid off and I performed my job well"?
The idea that absolute "performance" can be somehow magically figured out in a medium-sized company by HR, of all people, is hilarious. HR has NO clue about project performance. It is surprising that they are defending this issue. The layoff process does not START with HR. It comes from executive management to the account managers or bench managers. These managers then make lists. Almost all the time, the list contains non-billable resources. The key concept here is this - the company has ALREADY started losing clients. Thus the COMPANY is the entity performing poorly. Nobody does mass layoffs of "non-performing" resources when clients are paying money for those resources.
HR gets into the process very late. All that they get is a list and a request to "manage" the layoffs.
So, that is ALL that they have to say: we get lists and we do the dirty work. Don't blame us. Instead, here they are, covering for their bosses and pretending they run a company. Power corrupts indeed.
A layoff is different from a firing. When a company faces major shortfalls in profits and loss of clients, they need to shed some of their employees. Companies cut entire departments. That does not mean everyone in that department is a "bad performer".
Atleast the government should make this dictinction obvious (it DOES exist in labor law in India). TCS, IBM and many other companies have got away with calling everyone a bad performer but themselves.
How can a capitalist society function sanely when companies refuse to obey the law and insist on an agreesive offense on labor?
By the way, these were the same companies which kept screaming "loyalty" and promoted that as a virtue - when the times got tough for them, they have not only laid off their loyal employees, they also insult them by calling them bad performers.

Talking Point - 3 - HR has right to ask personal questions such as likelihood of pregnancy
Finally, I would like to address HR guy in the photo and explain why he is wrong and causes harm to his company.
In India, when you say something against the law, it does not seem to matter much. It somehow does not seem to impress people that a "point-of-view" is against the law. The reason is an attitude that considers law as a flexible guideline; in a country where powerful people get away, literally, with murder, this is not surprising.
Thus we see the photo-HR-guy talking about a point of view and say, "what is wrong with that". The first thing that is wrong, is of course, that discrimination based on reproductive habits is against the law. A candidate can succefully sue a company for asking questions about future pregnancy or current pregnancy.
Secondly, the argument "management needs profit; will you work without a pay" is completely a false choice. The counter is if he is willing to go to jail or pay a fine for discrimination. By his logic, management can violate the law as long as they are having a profit out of it. This is a dangerous argument - by that logic you should be able to beat up people for leaving a company, because from the management's "point-of-view" people should stay in their company. It is very irritating to hear this "point-of-view" arguments from corporate jalras. They are implying that a company is some kind of super-legal entity, having the power to do anything as long as they are "creating jobs" ( a new buzz word these days).
Remember the Mani Rathnam movie "Guru"? The "Guru" justifies violating the law because he wanted India to grow. It is just convenient that he made lots of money in that process. He also caused the failure of other competitive businessmen who actually followed the law; but that is fine as long as India is growing.
I am tired of this kind of false arguments about "utility" from corporations. The common citizen is forced to follow the law. He is punished heavily for even perceived violations. Meanwhile corporations continue to claim that they are "creating jobs" and violate laws constantly. Why doesn't the law apply to them?

But I am guessing that the above two arguments won't impress our photo-HR-guy. So, let me explain a third reason why he is wrong - his "idea" of not employing women who are likely to get pregnant will entirely shut down his company eventually, if implemented.
I have interviewed more than thousand candidates for technical positions. That HR guy, I am sure, has not. It is very hard finding right people for technical jobs as it is. The idea that you can just eliminate 50% of the candidates (because they are young women) and then try to fill positions in a tech company is just ridiculous. The HR guy thinks qualified people are infinitely available. Let me assure you, they are not. We cannot afford to eliminate people based on gender, disability, age or region. It just limits the talent pool and makes it very hard to compete with other companies.
This is, in fact, ONE of the reasons laws exist. Labor laws are not cruel rules imagined by communists so that noble businessmen would suffer. Ultimately they promote fairness in a society and that fairness helps the society in the LONG TERM.
That HR guy, in fact, makes the crucial mistake of making decisions about things he is not qualified to - as I said above, HR is not in charge of profit making (for a good reason). When he actually imagines that he, somehow, is promoting the profits of a company, he is only acting in a short-term perspective. That is natural because he is NOT trained to run a profit-center. But he is so power-drunk that he assumes that his "ideas" about project staffing apply to the whole company - they don't. I really hope his company is not listening to him, for their own sake.

This is also the reason we should not accept when politicians or businessmen insist that they violated laws for other people's benefits or for the nation's welfare. Following the rule of law is the best way to guarantee success - not cowboy ideas about eliminating women from the competition.

Airtel Super Singer

(Updated below)
Update I:
For those of you landing up on my blog pages for the first time _ I write on issues of politics, culture and society. Please check out some of my featured posts on the left navigation bar. You can follow me on Twitter (left nav) or click on the "Follow" link in the left nav. In the bottom of this page is the "Subscribe" link through which you can get updates on your RSS reader.
Do not forget to visit my blog home page and read some of my posts in the last month.
Thanks for visiting. Please keep returning atleast once a month.

Original post below:
I have been watching this show on Vijay TV for the last 8 months. I also follow other talent shows in the North such as SaReGaMa; and have watched Pakistan's "Sangeet Icon" show.
At this point the finals are running and some interesting questions have risen - Super Singer's current edition being one of the most popular.

Performance vs Musical ability
The reality shows emphasize performance on stage along with pure singing. They also make the performances attractive by themes (such as patriotism) and specific costumes.
I have seen even judges (such as Vani Jayaram) question such performance based shows. The reason is, of course, that Indian music's ideal is when the singer can express emotions completely through their voice. In classical music shaking your head to bring out "gamakam" (the peculiar curving of Indian music) is banned. Indian art traditionally tries to simulate a half-merged state between the sub-conscious and the ego - and therefore immersion in Indian music requires minimum distractions by the singer's actions.
Singers such as P.Susheela and Jesudas were famous for this - they showed no outward emotion while their voices expressed maximum pathos or romance.
But the reality shows are based on American Idol style rendering. They seek to entertain their audience, so they require the singers to perform wildly. These performances are usually confined to faster songs or "Kuthu" style songs. Along with it, the singers are encouraged to show lots of emotion even while singing softer, melody songs.
But in the case of Super Singer, the end goal is to produce a play back singer. The idea is not to create a showman (as Indian Idol does) but to select a voice and singer who is best suited for employment in play-back singing.
Thus even though Super Singer borrows all of its entertaining elements from other talent shows to the North and West, its prize (a singing stint with music director Yuvan Shankar Raja) is at odds with its selection process.
Why does this matter? We will see below.

The Super-Singers
The current batch is very talented and they have evolved over the last nine months. The singer Ravi, who has the best grasp of classical singing has already won on SS music channel. But as the show has progressed he has been found to be a great singer of semi-classical or old songs. His voice has an amazing range but I do not think it is best suited for play-back singing. He can run his own band.
The singer Ajesh is the youngest of them. He has a very casual way of singing and his voice changes between higher and lower scales(which is sometimes disturbing). He is talented, no question there, and could win.
The singer Ranjani, is one of the most sincere and confident singers I have seen on this show. She killed in the final rounds. Her voice is a boon and sounds very well in higher and lower ranges.
The singer Prasanna - I initially liked him. He has a very good adaptable voice. His song delivery (particularly "Shambo Shiva Shambo" from Ninaithaale Inikkum) was amazing. But somewhere along the line he seems to have lost his moorings. He tries excessive drama and has been annoying and embarassing to watch. I will return to him later.

The singer Renu is my favorite. She has been consistent, even though she does not have a background in classical music. Her voice is absolutely soaked in honey. Her songs such as "Unna Vida" from Virumaandi; "Saami Kitta"; "Ninaithu Ninaithu Paarthen" from 7G Rainbow Colony are unforgettable. I think she has the most unique and cinematically suited voice of the lot.

[Not in this list, one of the singers, Vijay deserved respect, but was eliminated from the finals. He was passionate about music and he could sing Bryan Adams or Hariharan's Gazals with ease. He was better at Hindi and English songs than Tamil. He does not belong in talent shows - he should run his own band.)

Thus, if I were to choose simply for the purpose of their utility, I would choose Renu - she has the ideal voice for play back singing. But as we will see, that is not just the determinant here.

The Mass Voting Process
I remember the show SaReGaMa, the unquestioned king of music talent shows in India. During the late 90s SaReGaMa was not run as a reality show. A set of judges chose the winner. A few years back that changed; the voting system came in.
Since the voting system came in to music talent shows, there have been many controversies. At one point Indian Idol contestants and the audience fought with each other, because one of the singers, Debojit was getting all the votes from East India. There were campaigns to vote for him from Assam to Bengal and that year's Indian Idol was one of the worst.
A certain set of music lovers believe that the voting system is open to such pulls and prejudices that have nothing to do with music. For example, some of the best singers in the shows such as "Junoon - Kuch Kar ke.." (Akbar Ali and Ali Abbas), SaReGaMa (Amanat Ali) and SaReGaMa Little Champs (Ameer Hafeez) have been eliminated for no good obvious reason. It is suspicious that Pakistanis and Muslims are routinely eliminated from Indian talent shows. To me, it seems possible that prejudice is at play.
In the case of Super Singer, there is no such room for prejudice; all the singers are actually from the same background. But Prasanna, the singer I mentioned before, was eliminated by a judge (Unni Menon) and then brought back in by the voting system. When he was "reselected" he mentioned that he targeted "popular" performances mainly because he knew people would then vote for him. This was a smart move - being an "entertainer" he calculated that he would get more votes from the public than from the judges. Thus while the judges repeatedly criticised his "drama", he stands a very likely chance of winning the Super Singer contest.

Purely as a game show. Prasanna's move is smart and focussed. But the result may not be of utility value - I do not think that he has such a unique voice for playback singing as compared to the current crop of talented singers. Thus while the Super Singer contest may select a good performer, by no means does that help Yuvan Shankar Raja.
What is the ultimate goal of a music talent show? The voting public may consider the show from a bang-for-buck or Paisa-Vasool kind of angle. They do not end up selecting the best, most versatile musician. There is a disconnect between the show's purpose as seen by different "stakeholders":
1. The corporate show organizers consider it an effective way to increase the channel's popularity. They are not specifically interested in contribution to the music world.
2. The contestants, of course, see it as a game with a prize and so try to win.
3. The voting public consider the show a popular search for musical talent, and therefore vote for the person they would like to hear more.
4. Poor Yuvan Shankar Raja, meanwhile, is looking for a good play back voice.
5. A small minority, of course, see this as a genuine opportunity for music to be enriched and look forward, not to a single winner, but a collection of stars. This minority is somewhat "knowledgeable" about music and are passionate about it.

If you take a step back, this is no different from the questions raised by our nation's election process itself. Different groups act in self-interest and hope to have an outcome desirable to themselves. If nobody is "gaming" the system, then such a popular voting contest will eventually succeed in finding good talent. But there is a difference between a somewhat objective search for administrative talent and a subjective search for a good artist.

My core question is this: is the system of selection by a voting public (in a music talent show or any art show) better or worse than a system in which a few judges pick the winner?
It is a very political question - and it relates to recent ideas such as crowdsourcing.
Is popularity a good measure of talent in art?
Is popular art better art?


Meanwhile, below is Ameer Hafeez singing Laaga Chunari Mein Daag (starts at 1:52). He was eliminated in that show:

Quick Note on Narmadha Dam

I have always wondered about this - that the Narmadha Dam issue has been projected as a fight between capitalism, development one side; and the anti-developmental forces of leftists on the other.
Purely from a theoretical perspective, private property is sacred and inviolate in capitalist society. In fact the origins of modern forms of government were based on the question of the guarantee for private property. What I mean by private property is the rights of a human living in peace to hold property without threat of confiscation. In medieval days, such property was held to be liable for confiscation by the King. It is to stop such violations on indviduals that Magna Carta was signed.
In a capitalistic society the rights of an individual holding private property is inviolate. On the other hand Communism demands the placing of all private property under the central planning authority, for public good.
This is one of the fundamental differences between capitalism and communism.
Yet, in the Narmadha dam issue, the private property of Adivasis (who are granted such rights by the Consititution) is being confiscated by the government, by exercising its power. And the cheerleaders for the Gujarat government call it development work of capitalism.
The people fighting against such confiscation and who seek to protect the rights of private property, such as Medha Patkar are, instead, called as Communists and holders of a failed philosophy.
The irony of it never seems to amaze me. Capitalism means, in our country, whatever the kings will. The kings shall take from us when they want, in the name of development.
"The real object of all Despotism is revenue" - Tom Paine

Religion and Science - a debate

(Update - Smitha replied)
Background
I recently wrote a blog on Science Education in India. In that blog I mentioned that rationalist movements are not effective and that their mission is a failure.
In comments, one of my frequent commenters, Smitha, challenged this statement. He also pointed out (read his comments here) that rationalist movements have precedent and that faith needs to be challenged as an obstacle to progress.
I have no big problems with faith, although I do not believe in God. I am an atheist, but I do not consider religion a threat. Since I wanted to explain my point of view to Smitha and vice versa, this blog post is being written. The idea is that Smitha's comments to this blog will be promoted to the main post as an update so that we can carry a civil debate. Let us see how far it goes. We are both busy people and may not update frequently. But please check back this post from time to time if you are interested.

The Case against Religion
Let me start with this first - I do understand that a set of humans at this juncture have a healthy hatred of religion. Starting with practices such as Sati, child marriage, female circumcision, racism, casteism, the horrors of religious wars such as the crusades, burning witches at stakes, stoning for adultery and so on; to the current global tinderbox of non-state-terrorism to state-terrorism there are many evils of society that have been instigated, sustained and sanctioned by religion.
Even at this present time we have seen the horrors of 500 year old grudges held by Hindu fundamentalists; the End Times driven evangelical fervor of Christian fundamentalists that drives American violence against West Asia; the ethnic hatred perpetuated by the Buddhists of Sri Lanka; the Caliphate dreaming Al-Qaeda and Taliban's reign of Terror in Afghanistan and Pakistan and several other conflicts around the world based on religion. New cults spring up all the time - such as the LRA in Uganda; Wahaabism in Arabia or the several Kalki avatar based cults of South India.
It is tempting to see these obvious effects of religion and then come to a conclusion that the concept of religion (broadly defined as a belief in a Supreme God) needs to be eliminated from Human society. That, in the future, we will LEARN about religion at schools, just as we will learn about untouchability or casteism - as a thing of past.
The proponents of this non-religious future point to increasing trends of population in developed countries to be non-religious. This future, they insist, is attainable using the following methods:
1. Education that emphasizes rationalism
2. An effort to eliminate religion from the public sphere
3. A constant effort to scrutinise human actions through rationalism

So where do I stand on these?
(Throughout this essay I will use the male term God to denote a supreme being, purely for convenience. I understand it may as well be a Goddess, if she exists)

My Views of Religion
Before I begin, I want to point out three broad trends in my arguments:
1. I have a belief in the universal declaration of human rights, which guarantees practise of religion.
2. I do not like judging the actions of humans who cause no harm to others through their private lives.
3. When I talk about science and scientists I include the soft (inexact, humanity-based) sciences such as psychology and sociology. In fact, I think they have more bearing on this debate than the exact sciences.

Thus, even though I have a pretty good knowledge of and fascination for science, I do NOT think that science and religion are two opposing poles from which one needs to choose for living a happy life.

The Judgements of Rationalists
The biggest mistake that religious people make, when judging atheists is this: they think establishing a moral compass (to know right from wrong) is impossible for people who do not believe in a God.
It is absolutely possible to know right from wrong just by being self-aware. You do not have to believe in God to know right from wrong.

By the same token, rationalists believe that it is not possible to be interested in Science or be a professional without a disbelief in God. That is, you have to reject religion in your PRIVATE life to be a doctor in your public life.
I think this is a completely false item of faith among rationalists. They are making the same mistake that religious people do - of judging people's private lives to be a guide to their public efficiency.
Let me explain why this is false:
a. There have been innumerable scientists who have been religious in their private lives. That does not prove anything deductively, but it does call into question the rationalist basis.
b. The truth is, the human conscious mind can perfectly live with contradicting beliefs. We do it all the time in relationships. It is possible for a person who reads the Bible or Quran or Gita daily to ignore their literal meanings and treat it merely as a vehicle for some peace of mind. That same person can step into their office and be a doctor who knows the germ theory of disease. It happens all the time in daily lives - in India most people pray at roadside temples and then go to work and fulfill their social and professional roles quite successfully.
Now, I am NOT saying that religion is essential for society. But at the stage in which we are, people can manage the dissonance effectively.

It is only when religion gets oppressive and authoritarian and provokes a LITERAL interpretation of scriptures that you have a problem. That is best managed by compromises - by a good education and self-awareness, I believe, it is possible to minimise such effects.
So, I believe, frankly, that rationalists have NO right to judge other human beings who cause no harm to society.

A Life of Illusion
One debater quoted Carl Sagan to me on this. Sagan said a life of reason should be preferred over one of illusion (I don't remember the exact quote).
Now, I think Sagan was wrong. He was obviously speaking from a exact scientific perspective. Psychologically speaking all of us have basic illusions through which we observe the external world. One simple illusion is, of course, the illusion of immortality.

The Yaksha asks Yudhishtira what is the greatest wonder in this world. Yudhishtira replied, "The greatest wonder is that every human sees others dying before him, all around him. And yet carries on living as if he is immortal".

We all have it. Going by the exact sciences, our very purpose is only to pass on our DNA. Yet humans strive to reach immortality by works of imagination and creativity. Everyone tries to find meaning in their lives. That is the whole role of philosophy.
Thus, an illusion-filled private life is fine - as long as you don't act like Chandramukhi.

The Rationalist Ideal
This is why I believe superstition and myths and rituals have their place in human life. The rationalist ideal is that of a life in which every action is examined for rationality. I am an atheist but I don't carry around this belief in rationality in all actions. There are many, many sources of irrationality other than religious belief.
For example, take a marriage ritual. Remember the premier rationalist movement of DK in Tamil Nadu pushed for a non-ritualistic marriage. In the end such marriages became rituals themselves, with some even tying the Thali. The point is, many of these rituals are engaged in as a duty or as fun. They are a communal activity and have deep psychological implications for a social member. American presidential inaugurations have rituals, for God's sake.
I am not arguing (as religious people do) that rituals need a rational meaning - such as a meaning for the tying of Thali. If there is a conscious meaning it is not a ritual. Human beings seem to form conventions and some kind of social acts in sequence as rituals from time immemorial. A goal to eliminate these (which cause no harm to anyone) is a goal born out of passing judgement on other people's lives.
This is why I have no problem participating in a ritual. In fact, even religious people do not participate in rituals out of a deep conviction for "meaning" or blessings or whatever. They do it automatically.
Let me put it this way - irrational rituals have as much meaning as life itself has meaning.

Religion and State
The word secularism in India has been corrupted thanks to the BJP's pushing of their brand word "pseudo-secularism". I believe religion has no role in public policy. But it gets more subtle than that.
France recently banned headscarves in schools. They also banned crucifixes and any religious symbol, but it immediately caused a problem. It is obvious to me, as an Indian, where the problem would be. For example, for a foreigner, the Sikh turban is a religious symbol. To me it seems a matter of cultural identity. This is more so in a foreign country, a colonial country like France, with deep-seated racism. It is no wonder to me that people see the ban as an assault on their identity.
The issues of identity goes very deep into our psyche. In movies we see characters spouting lines such as "I am Indian first, then a Tamil, then a Hindu" and so on. It is not as simple as that. The world has not gone through an ideal development phase that enables seeing ourselves just as humans. In fact, I suspect it is impossible for us to NOT recognize racial, regional, linguistic, religious and cultural identities - such is the diversity in this planet. Instead of attempting to fight identity, it would help if we managed such issues by recognizing the rights of minorities separately.
This is why I pointed out that sociology is at odds with the rational movements. While the rational movements attack frontally any role of what THEY SEE as religion, religion itself is not, simply, religion. The practice of untouchability, for example, has "religious" sanction. But it is likely that the sanction was AFTER the practice was widespread - I doubt if Manu Smriti INVENTED caste. Similarly what we call Islamic terrorism, is seen as a knee-jerk response to the forces of globalization, by sociologists.
I am NOT saying that religion is all good - mind you. I think it enables authoritarianism - deference to a master authority no matter what. It enables a literal interpretation of its scriptures.
But there are several aspects of religion and it is possible to regulate some while understanding and appreciating others.

Spiritualism
One such aspect is the ability of religion to trigger an exaltation in the human spirit. I am not saying that only religion can do it. But there are a lot of creative people who are also religious - particularly in Indian music and art. This trend is also there in Arabic, Persian, and almost every regional art. How can we pass judgement on religious people, while at the same time wondering at the poetry of Andaal or the music of Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan? The mystical and spiritual strands of religion have enriched many lives and helped them find their own meaning.

In conclusion, I think rationalists have swung to the opposite pendulum from religion. Their faults of judgement are similar to those of religious people. Both of them seek an utopia instead of trying to make sense of where we are at this stage. Both of them are extremist in their views and selectively apply knowledge.

Smitha, your turn.

Update: Smitha's reply
Smitha says in comments:

I tried to post the rebuttal here. But it wont allow more than 4096 chars at a time. So I'm posting it in my blog instead.
pichuva.blogspot.com

P.S: I've a tendency to digress. You also have to excuse the general structure of the argument, I was pressed for time. Also, the text contains many unacknowledged quotes and verbatim arguments from many of my daily reading materials.

Some notes on Homosexuality

(Updated Below); Update II
I first read of homosexuality when I was in 8th std. There were American and British novels at home; written by Frederick Forsyth; Jeffrey Archer and other trumpets of the glory of the West. Some of the male characters showed a predilection for other males. When I first read the word "Homosexual" somehow I understood its meaning.
You see, one of the kids in the neighborhood (he was 2 years younger than me) was known to make advances on my friends. This was in Tirunelveli, and I bet he was not "converted" into homosexuality by anyone. In fact I doubt if he knew the term. There was no Tamil equivalent then (now there is - ஓரினச் சேர்க்கை ).
We used to harass him a little bit; but we all knew that homosexuality was taboo.
At that point of time, people just pretended that homosexuals exist only in the West. Homosexuality burst into public consciousness following the rapid spread of AIDS. AIDS was thought (incorrectly) to spread primarily through homosexual contact - so much that a friend thought it was unique to homosexuals. Of course, it was not unique to gay people. It was a virus that spread through unsafe sex, or sharing needles or a hundred other ways.
But when AIDS started spreading, there were advocacy groups who came on television and they openly talked about being homosexual. They advised tolerance for homosexuality in society. I believe that primary reason why AIDS patients are reviled in India is because of the association with homosexuality.
During this period, I got hold of a book based on popular psychology. It was one of the books such as "I'm OK; You're OK". It had lots of information about sexual behavior and variations. I have always believed that knowledge is the true key to fighting fear; reading that book has since made me more aware of the variety of sexual behavior common among humans and consider it normal.

Some Terminology
1. Homosexuals are not the "Third Gender" (Moonram Paal). They are not physically varied from general males or females.
2. The people we call "eunuchs", Napumsak (in Sanskrit) or "Aravaaani" (அரவாணி ) in Tamil are humans born with slightly different genetic make up. They MAY have both male and female sexual organs (hermaphrodites) or some other genetic difference. There is an ongoing fight for their rights and dignity.
(In Tamil Nadu they call themselves "Aravaani" because they trace their history from the oral story of "Aravaan", a warrior character in the Mahabharatha. An important part of the narrative of such marginalized and oppressed groups is their myths and legends. We will look at a few about Homosexuality later))
3. Transexuals are people who have a desperate wish to belong to the opposite sex. They are typically called as men trapped in a woman's body or women trapped in a man's body. In the West, transexuals actually have the option of undergoing medical procedure to change from a woman to a man or vice versa.
(Again, the Mahabharatha story of Shikandi - reborn from a woman to a man for revenge - can be taken to be a reference to a transexual.)
4. Cross-dressers are men or women who prefer to dress like the opposite sex. Men who dress in skirts (called "drag" in American popular culture) is an example. Cross-dressers NEED NOT be homosexuals. That is, even though some men may like to dress in women's clothes, they may not be attracted to other men.
5. Bi-sexuals are people who are attracted to males and females - their own sex and the opposite sex. Psychologists believe that bisexuality is very common, but it is concealed.
6. Finally, homosexuals are general males and females who feel sexually attracted to their own sex. In Western popular culture male homosexuals are called gays and female homosexuals are called lesbians. There are several derogatory terms for gays and lesbians in English. I won't list them here.

Homosexuality has NOTHING to do with child molestation or incest. There are people among us who somehow feel like having sex with children. They are called pedophiles and it is a horrid crime. Psychologists can try and cure pedophilia but Homosexuality is not a disease.
In popular culture, some of the worst offences on homosexuality are committed by comparing homosexuals with pedophiles or people who have sex with animals. Please note that homosexuality is consenting sex between two adults - that is, both the partners agree to have sex.

Homosexuality and the Fight for Equal Rights
In modern times, homosexuals in the West have been leading a more open lifestyle and have been demanding equal rights in society such as the right to marry and adopt children. We have to remember that even in the 1950's homosexuality was punished in the UK and USA (although they have forgotten all about that and use gay rights as a convenient beating stick on countries like Iran). Alan Turing, the founder of Computer Science and the main cryptographer who broke the German Enigma cipher machine was gay. He was punished by an English court to take medicine to "cure" homosexuality and he ended up committing suicide by taking Cyanide.

Why is homosexuality so reviled? It is "abnormal" in the mainstream's thinking and it involves sex. But there are also religious reasons in the West.

The Biblical sanction against homosexuality
The Book of Genesis in the Bible describes the story of Abraham. At the time of Abraham, there were two cities in Palestine called Sodom and Gomorrah. The people of Sodom and Gomorrah were said to have been involved in several acts of sexual deviancy. The Abrahamic God gets angry at this and plans to destroy both cities. He informs Abraham about this impending destruction.
Abraham remembers that his cousin Lot lives in Sodom and therefore begs the God to protect his life. God agrees and a couple of angels turn up like ordinary men at Lot's house in Sodom.
Unfortunately, the deviant people of Sodom had seen the angels and they demand from Lot that the men be handed over (presumably for raping them). Lot manages the situation. He is warned by the angels to flee the city of Sodom and not to look back.
Lot gets out of Sodom and across the plains towards the Sea of Galilee, as clouds gather above Sodom to inflict God's punishment. With him are his wife, and two daughters. His wife, curious as to what is happening behind her to Sodom, turns back and immediately becomes a pillar of salt. (Even now, near the Sea of Galilee there are several salt pillars and tourists are informed that one of them can be Lot's wife).
The acts in which the people of Sodom engaged are collectively called "Sodomy". They are identified with homosexuality. The laws of several states in the USA prohibit Sodomy, because of such Biblical sanction. The Indian Penal Code forbids Sodomy - that is homosexuality is a CRIME, still, in India. Although the law is hardly enforced.

Other Arguments Against Homosexuality
The "abnormality" of homosexuality has prompted it as a assault against society's basic structure. For example, Homosexual marriage is portrayed as an assault on heterosexual marriage. The gay lifestyle is thought to be hedonistic. As I said above, people (ex- Rick Santorum ex-Senator PA) have compared homosexuality to sex with beasts or with children. The idea that our kids will choose homosexuality or will become homosexuals is a potent fear for some people.
These fears are caused by sexual repression, and religious superstition. Psychologists believe that strong homophobia (fear of homosexuals) may be caused by repressed homosexuality itself (ex- Senator Larry Craig of USA sponsored several anti-homosexual resolutions, but was found to have solicited and had sex with men in airport restrooms).

The Arguments for Homosexual rights
What are the equal rights that the gay community demand in the West and in India?
They want the anti-Sodomy laws repealed.
They want awareness of homosexuality in society so that "hate-crimes" against them stop (remember the guy burnt to death in a Chennai suburb for having AIDS?)
They want to be not discriminated against in jobs (that is even if someone is openly gay, he/she should not be fired for that reason.)
They want to be able to serve in the military or police
They want their marriages (between a guy and another guy or a woman and another woman) recognized in courts so that benefits and property rights follow.
They want to be able to adopt children.

It is clear that in the West homosexuality is rapidly gaining social tolerance and equal rights will eventually be theirs. Most younger people are tolerant of different lifestyles. In India, there is a long way to go - even women have not reached a tolerable lifestyle here.

Some of the arguments made by homosexuals to be considered as part of society are interesting:
The "Hardwired" argument
One strand of homosexual advocates have tried to present homosexuality as a genetic difference. Thus, they argue, homosexuals cannot help being gay; it is hardwired in their brains.
As a proof they have tried to show some scientific work. The religious community has hit back with other scientific work and at this point it is a stalemate.
I personally believe this argument may make homosexuality acceptable in people's minds; but I don't agree with the thrust of it. Hardwired or not, even if it is a matter of choice, society HAS to give equal rights to gay people. Who cares if it is in the genetic code or not? The private lives of adult humans are not the business of laws.

By the way, interestingly, as a part of this argument, gay rights advocates also point to the fact that homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom - dogs can be homosexual; and zookeepers have known homosexual animals for some time. For example, Baboons are said to be 50% gay.

The Historical Argument
The oldest surviving epic in the world is the Epic of Gilgamesh. It is a classy Sumerian poem compiled around 1700BC and has miraculously survived and has more miraculously been translated.

Sidenote:
I will quote a few classic lines from the debate on Death in this epic. Nothing to do with the subject of this essay, but these are thoughts of people who existed 4000 years back:

But man's life is short, at any moment
it can be snapped, like a reed in a canebrake.
The handsome young man, the lovely young woman -
in their prime, death comes and drags them away.
Though no one has seen death's face or heard
death's voice, suddenly, savagely, death
destroys us, all of us, old or young.
And yet we build houses, make contracts, brothers
divide their inheritance, conflicts occur -
as though this human life lasted forever.
The river rises, flows over its banks
and carries us all away like mayflies
floating downstream: they stare at the sun,
then all at once there is nothing.

-- Gilgamesh, a New English version. Stephen Mitchell. Free Press Publishers

Gilgamesh talks about a very close, extraordinary friendship between the King of Uruk, Gilgamesh, and a savage in the forest, Enkidu. Several of the descriptions of their friendship sound like a homosexual relationship. When Enkidu dies, Gilgamesh dresses him in a bride's veil.
Homosexual rights advocates claim of a historical tradition of homosexuality being accepted in society. They point to Greek and Roman societies and their literature points to accepted homosexuality.
Further along, Leonardo DaVinci, one of the greatest Renaissance men was said to be homosexual.
These arguments legitimise homosexuality and try to detach it from the biblical context.

In several ways, the thrust of these arguments is a demonstration of human rights - that society shall not take away the natural rights of humans. I think it is time for a repeal of the Sodomy laws in India and some education about alternative lifestyles.

Update I
I missed clarifying a few common misconceptions about homosexuals.
1. Psychologists say that many "straight" men and women have a few homosexual fantasies. This does NOT mean they are gay.
2. You do not become a homosexual because you had a domineering father. This belief, common in evangelical circles, is a myth.
3. Homosexual men need not be impotent. Impotence has nothing to do with straightness or gayness.
4. The converse too - if someone is impotent it does not mean they are homosexual or even feminine.
5. Homosexual men need not be feminine acting or feminine thinking. Homosexual women need not be masculine.

Update II
I know I am digressing too much here, but I am unable to resist.
The Epic of Gilgamesh has meaning for Indian readers. The character, Enkidu, who becomes Gilgamesh's friend, is found as a savage in the forest. He is said to be born the son of Goddess Aruru. When Gilgamesh hears about this formidable savage, he asks a guide to contact Shamhat, a priestess of Ishtar in his city (Uruk). The priestesses of Ishtar are described very similar to Devadasis, being available to any man, having dedicated their bodies to the goddess.
The guide takes Shamhat to meet and seduce Enkidu into coming back to Uruk. Shamhat reaches the forest and observes Enkidu. He has never seen a woman and is smitten byher. She then convinces him to leave the forest and go with her to Uruk.
This story must be familiar to Malayalam movie watchers. This is the story of the movie "Vaishali". Vaishali is based on the legend of Rishyasrunga described in the Ramayana.
The kingdom of Anga has not had rain for a long time. The King is advised to perform a yaga (fire worship). The yaga has to be performed by a man who has not known a woman. The sages advise the king to get Rishyasrunga, son of the Rishi Vibhandhaka and the celestial dancer Menaka. He was born in the forest and brought up by his father without contact of any woman.
The King of Anga sends a delegation of Devadasis, to seduce Rishyasrunga and bring him back. They go and accomplish the task.

See any similarity? Isn't this amazing? The Sumerian legend had obviously spread around and influenced the Indian epics of Ramayana and Mahabharatha, both of which contain this legend. The original Sumerian poems, which were written much before the epic was compiled, were from around 2500BC.

Establishing an Internet Presence

I wrote about the administrative details of starting freelancing here. In the below article, let me talk about a few guidelines for getting clients.
When you plan to take the freelancing route, as I mentioned in the above article, be clear about your role: A freelancer in IT is usually a programmer (or graphic designer). You need to be ready to program and be hands-on.
You are NOT starting a business - for now. You are a one-man show initially. Do not be over-aggressive in going after clients. Do not commit to more than you can do. All the rules that apply as a programmer in a project applies to a free-lancer too.
There are certain possibilities for getting clients as a freelancer - let us consider these:

The GetAFreeLancer route
Here is a link to a set of freelancing websites for coding: 85+ Tools & Resources for Freelancing
When you start, it is tempting to look at getafreelancer or other sites and assume that you can bid lower than everyone and get projects. This route is completely packed with a million other programmers all over the world. The clients are mostly cheap and try to lowball every bid. They have no idea about the true value of programming and may not pay at the end either. I have seen people who ask for an Email campaign system for $200. It is ridiculous, and I would advise you to stay away from this route.

The NRI route
As I mentioned in the previous article, if you have been abroad for some time, maintain contacts with your immediate friends. This does NOT mean that you go after any contact like an Amway rep. Stay within your comfort zone but let people know that you will be available for freelancing. Open a LinkedIn.com account and keep it current.
In my experience, if you let people know that you are going back to India, they will approach you with offers. In this technological age, remote working is pretty easy and so feel confident about going into freelancing.

The Long Hard route
If you are in India, have not had time to cultivate contacts abroad, you can still get clients. But it is a long haul. You need to prepare from now. Most Indian programmers with a talent and passion for programming would be in the situation I describe below:
1. You will have had some years of experience (3 or more) in a services company.
2. You will have worked with foreign clients. You would have communicated with them via email,IM; you would also have interacted with them personally when they come over or you go abroad on short visits.
3. You know that there are a set of "soft skills" - writing grammatical English with some structure; how to organize your thoughts and write emails; and you understand a few foriegn accents. If you are not skilled at these, you atleast know that you have gaps and try to get better.

The method I suggest below takes a long-term view. It may not yield results immediately; but there is no question that it is a clean route to take.

Note: Most services companies have non-solicitation agreements. Based on those agreements, you cannot usually work with direct clients of your company for a time-period. So, PERISH the thought of freelancing directly for your companies' clients.

Establishing an Internet Presence
1. Register a web domain name with a good hosting provider. For now, go cheap. Think a bit about your domain name. Remember that you MAY grow to be a business at some point, so create a professional sounding name.
2. Make sure that you get a hosting provider which offers platforms with the technology you are most comfortable with - such as .NET framework and SQL Server if you are Microsoft; or PHP and MySQL if you are in PHP.
3. Google (and other providers) offers email services under your own domain. For example, if your site is www.mygreatcompany.com, then you can get email services for @mygreatcompany.com. Most hosting providers give you a way to map from the domain name to a third party email service such as Gmail. Use that and create professional email ids such as sales@mygreatcompany.com and an email address with your name.
4. Some hosting providers give blogging packages for a small fee. That way, you can host your blog in your site itself. Or you can try the route I chose - I have a blogspot technical blogging address (http://ramsnotes.blogspot.com). I link my articles from my website (http://www.alphazonsystems.com).
Having a blog is important. Having some backend such as .NET or PHP with database support is also important, even if your site consists of html pages only at this stage.
5. Have a graphic designer design a decent website. Develop it and make it available for public.

At this stage what is the content strategy for your website? How do you get traffic?
You have to create content based on your goals. Your goal is to be known as a good technologist. This website will be seen by your potential clients. They will NOT take a decision solely based on how good your content is, but it is definitely ONE of the factors. You are trying to gain popularity in the internet.
The best way to create content is to write blog articles. These articles can be of certain types:
a) Explaining a concept such as XML parsing or concurrency checks in a O-R framework.
b) Explaining a tip such as how to trace HTTP calls with Fiddler while browsing from Firefox.
c) Exploring a new technology such as Microsoft Silverlight or Adobe Flash Collaboration Service.

I have written a detailed article on the idea of blogging here. You need to learn to write well. Apart from writing articles, provide free code. People will always visit sites with free code. For example, if you wrote a business app based on Silverlight as a proof of concept, provide the code as a zip file, linked and downloadable from your website.
If you create good content, then there are two advantages from it:
1. Obvious one - people will visit your site; they will link to you. It serves as online credntials.
2. Subtle one - for every article you publish, send the link to your clients, friends and contacts. Put the link in LinkedIn.com, facebook and so on. What that does is it REMINDS your contacts that there is a talented guy/gal out there who is available. They will keep being reminded by your work. Let us say, instead, that you send an email every month telling everyone that you need contracts. people will not react favorably to that. But sending the blog link is a very subtle reminder.
I think this is the best way to use the internet as a marketing tool for personal work.

One big question is how far you can market yourself while STILL working for another company. If you look at my website, alphazonsystems.com, I am explicitly marketing myself. But I ONLY did it after I left my last job. Before that, the site was available and so were the articles. But I did not cross the line and ask for work for myself. I think that is safe. Maintain a website and post articles, but don't let your company feel threatened.

This internet presence you create will take time to accumulate. Over time people will link to you, download code. But you may not get actual clients who ask for services. That is fine. There are other indirect reasons it will help you.

The Website as Credential
As I said earlier, you cannot directly approach your clients. But your clients have friends and their own network. THAT is the network you can tap into. It is one level separated from your own network. If you impress the people known to you, they will refer you and remember you when someone is looking for a freelancer.
That network does not know you personally. But your website and the work that has accumulated in that website over a period of a couple of years will serve to convince them to trust you.
If you are passionate about technology and want to freelance anytime in the future, it is IMPERATIVE for you to establish an online professional presence. Start the process NOW.

So, again, the steps to create an internet presence are:
1. Create a website
2. Create a blog in your website or separately
3. Start writing a couple of articles
4. Popularize your articles by linking them in your website; linking them from your IM; Facebook; LinkedIn; and send emails with the links to everyone who likes technology in your circle.
5. Write frequently
6. Create demos in your website with free code downloads.
7. You can also write articles in online tech journals and link to them. It requires professional writing skills but you should try.

Back to my original point, you require this kind of long haul approach to seeking clients for freelancing. Particularly if you do not have many contacts abroad.

Layoff Dharma

I want to quickly point out a couple of things about layoffs.
I see people often arguing that layoffs are essential load shedding for a business cycle. Whenever you rant about layoffs, a bunch of guys talk about the businees point of view.
While it is true that layoffs are unavoidable, we have to look at a bunch of predicaments employees face in the Indian context:
1. They are not paid fair compensation during layoffs - most companies only pay till the day the layoff occurs, while according to law they are supposed to pay till the month end. Thus companies violate the law for their benefit.
2. Even during the peak of this recession, you see companies insisting that the layoffs are performance based. Obviously, (as I have argued here and here), almost every layoff in this cycle is because companies THEMSELVES are not performing well. They are losing projects, are unable to hold on to clients and find new clients. Yet, the fallacy is mantained that a vague "performance" criteria goes into layoff listing. The truth is, there cannot be any independent verifications of performance. It is a vague term. Whoever heard of companies laying off employees from billable projects enmasse?
3. As I wrote before, companies have hiked the "notice period" for an employee to leave to be an unmanageable THREE MONTHS. This was done when the market was good so that companies can treat employees close to bonded labor. They have thretened and cajoled employees to sign these notice periods.
But while laying off those same employees, they do not adhere to any notice period. By any standards this is unfair. While we are ready to give allowance to companies for maintaining their interests, we are not ready to grant the same to employees. Why can't the notice periods be mutual?
4. More than anything, what makes me angry is that the HR and management keeps talking about "loyalty" as a prime virtue in any company. The relationship between an employee and employer is contractual, and there is no need to talk about loyalty. Yet, they kept claiming some kind of divine moral authority based on loyalty. How loyal have THEY been to their employees?
5. There is another very important consideration here - companies like to treat employees as if they are contract workers, during a recession. But, they are NOT allowed any of the conveniences of a contract worker. If you work for a company, and you want to earn more money, you CANNOT freelance. If you do it you have to secretly. Thus, you KNOW that you will be laid off during a business cycle, YET you cannot accumulate additional money for the rainy day. I think this is the unfairest condition, either mentioned in employee agreements or implicitly enforced. If an employee does NOT use any of the company's resources and does NOT go after a company's clients (non-solicitation) I don't see why he/she cannot freelance.

Thus, the scenario in India is loaded against employees. Layoffs are fine, if you give a sufficient notice, adhere to the severance package, and allow employees to freelance in their spare time. Otherwise it is just naked exploitation.

I will write more about freelancing next, but here are the list of my links on the recession:

IT Layoffs - Stop Blaming the Staff
IT Layoffs and Corporations
A Quick Note on the Economic Downturn
Being Self-Employed in IT

Being Self-Employed in IT

I have been self-employed doing freelancing programming work for the past 6 months. Let me describe how I got into it and a few administrative details.
Taking the plunge
There is a difference between being self-employed and running a business. If you plan to run a business, you can face exponential growth or risky shutdown. Freelancing is not the same thing, even though there is pressure for you to expand. (Note: Do NOT freelance if you plan to get loans. Banks do not give out loans to freelancers)
If you are in the USA and planning to come back to India, or if you are already in India but have enough contacts in the USA, freelancing may be a good idea for you. Let your contacts know that you plan to freelance. Your contacts will need some credentials to justify hiring you. For that purpose, register a domain and have a basic website - if only with html. Put your resume outline in that resume and highlight your work. If you can write well (with grammar and good content), then link your blog articles in the website. Have a set of email addresses registered under your domain. My own website is here:http://www.alphazonsystems.com
Freelancing works well if you have a stable contact who trusts you and vice versa. Companies may not trust just an unknown freelancer in another country. You need a champion at the client. It would be ideal if he/she can coordinate payments and also help you get set up for starting. The gain the companies have is, of course, lower rates.
So, I would advice you to cultivate potential clients if you are abroad and planning to come back. If you are already in India, do not hesitate to contact your friends abroad.
Technically, you will generally need a VPN connection to the client. You will need a high speed internet connection.
You will also need to be self-motivated to work by yourself. I maintain a timesheet even if the client does not ask for it. I have regular calls and status updates sent to them - and that keeps my work planned.

Infrastructure and Administration
Freelancing, of course, needs the following infrastructural and administrative elements:
1. You need your own computer, preferably a laptop. Make sure you have a warranty.
2. Get an UPS for electricity failures.
3. You may not need an office space, if you have enough space at home. Otherwise, get a small enough office space, close to home. Don't plan a long commute or spend too much money on decorating the office.
4. Get a webcam.
5. Open a Skype account with SkypeOut (ability to call international phones). Start with a $10 SkypeOut credit. For the SkypeOut payment, get an online receipt printed for your tax purpose.
6. Get a good set of headphone with a microphone.
7. Get atleast two physical file folders. Label one of them for your business account in the bank and the other for your taxes. (I will come to banking and taxes later)
8. Since you will spend time at home, make sure you have a decent broadband internet connection. Atleast 512kbps will be needed.
9. Get a good computer table and chair. Make sure your working location has good airconditioning. This is important, because if you are at work, the AC is takend care of by a company. If you only have AC at bedroom at home (as most middle class households do), then you will find yourself trying to work from the bedroom all the time. That is not a very good place to work from. Plan for a second AC room.
10. Buy an external hard disk with atleast 160GB for backup. Have a bunch of DVDs for storing your important files. Have a USB flash drive with 4-8GB capacity. If possible, sign up with a service like Windows folder share or SugarSync for an online backup of your programming work.
11. Backups are VERY important. Take a full system backup atleast once a month. If your client uses source control, check in your files regularly.
12. Get a copy of Norton Anti Virus with Internet Security. Run LiveUpdate once a week. Keep running Windows Update every week or have it run automatically. Keep your computer well patched and do not have any anonymous shares. If you use Vista, run under the UAC (User Access Control) mode all the time. You cannot afford a virus infection.
13. Get a laser printer; they are not that costly now and will help you out.
14. For ALL of the above purchases, whether online or not, get a receipt. You will need it for tax purposes.

Founding the Company
In India, there are different kind of company structure - proprietorship firm, partnership or private limited. For a beginning freelancer, a proprietorship firm is ideal. It ties to a single bank account and you can use your personal PAN card for filing taxes. (You can still hire people under a proprietorship firm). Other than the bank account, you do not need any other form of registration. Here are the steps for founding a proprietorship firm:
1. First decide on a name. Make sure the name is also unique for starting a website.
2. Make sure you have a individual PAN card. A PAN card in your name is sufficient.
3. Decide on a bank. Contact the bank official and let them know you will be running a current account for your business. They will give you a set of guidelines for opening a current account.
4. You need rubber stamps. 3 stamps at least - a seal called a "For" seal that you will affix with your signature to documents; a seal called the address seal with your company name and address; and a date seal. All these rubber stamps cost around Rs.600-800.
5. You need letter pads and a logo. If you already have a website designed, you may have a logo. Otherwise design a logo, a letter pad and a visiting card. A graphic designer can do this for you. Get a letter pad printed and the visiting card printed. (The visiting card is not essential).
6. Contact an auditor near your location. Let them know you are starting a company. You would go back to them when filing your taxes.
7. After the bank opens your account, they will send you a checkbook.
8. Usually, if you work with clients from abroad, the easiest and fastest way to transfer money (payment for your services) is to wire transfer. But wire transferring has charges - upto $100 for a single transfer. The charge applies to the person doing the transfer ie your client. They may deduct it from your payment. If you do plan wire transfers, then get the wire transfer details document from your bank. Every bank has a slightly different procedure and there are some details to fill in. Send the details to your client.
9. From a stationery shop get a "Cash Voucher" book and a receipt book. They may come in handy when you document expenses.
10. For invoices, get an invoice template online. Every invoice should have a unique number and will have the amount you will be charging your client. (Invoices are the "bill" for your client. They will make payments according to the invoices.)
9. With a bank account, stamps, letter pad, PAN card, invoice template, cash voucher book and (if possible) a website, you are all set to go.

Payments and Taxes
Before you negotiate with your clients, you need to know this: it is better to be on a hourly work basis than on fixed-bid work. If your work is such that the clients engage you for a long term with a steady hourly payment, that situation is ideal. Please note that a commitment for an engagement long term does not mean much - the client can cut you off at any point with payment for services till that point.
So for hourly work, what would be your "take-home"? Let us say you bill $100 every hour (unlikely, but it is easy for calculations. Being in India, you would probably only bill less than half that amount).
There is no service tax for dollar exports in software coding services. So, your taxes would come to 20%-30% (depending on your slab). Let us say you started work in January; If by end of March, you earn less than 5 Lakhs, then your slab would be 20%. But, this is assuming you had no other income from the previous April to December. You are taxed for your entire income from April to March.
So $30 of every $100 you earn would go to the government ideally. But there are a few expenses that you can claim to lessen your tax load.
(Your US client may want to know if he needs to tax you in the USA. Because India and the USA have a dual taxation treaty, your income will NOT be taxed twice. )
The expenses you can claim are:
Capital expenses (all your initial investment such as buying the UPS, printer, headphones, stamps and so on)
Location rent (if you work from home, only 50% of your rent is eligible for deductions. If you have an office, your entire rent is eligible)
Transport (if you commute to work; have a car or two-wheeler)
Water
Phone and broadband
Stationery (not much use in IT)
Entertainment (such as lunch with your client at the Taj)
You are a proprietorship firm - you can hire people. You do NOT have to deduct tax for them. Your payments to them count as expenses.
Your LIC, PPF and other savings still apply.
Keep a receipt of ALL your expenses in a physical file. Auditors advise to keep a note of credits and expenses in a excel file.
You have to pay advance taxes twice a year (March and September) and file returns in June. For advance taxes, you would sit with your auditor and go over all the expenses and income. The advance tax can be paid in a local bank such as SBI or HDFC. Keep the advance tax receipt safe.
When you file returns in June, you will include the advance tax receipt and then adjust your final payment according to actual figures. At that point, you need all the proof of your expenses. The Income Tax office may ask you to come in person and ask you to submit the proofs.
If you receive foreign exchange payment, then do NOT forget to get the receipts from your bank called the FIRC. You need it for submission to the Income Tax office.

How to Plan Future Work
The biggest problem you will face as a freelancer is insecurity. Your contract may end at any time. It is tempting to take additional contracts to stave off this danger, but then you may end up having a hard time managing two contracts and clients. So, you tend to try to hire someone. But then you have to face all the problems that comes with trusting a third party - he/she may not like to work for such a small shop. they may disappear any day. They may ruin your reputation with clients.
So, it is a dilemma. I have avoided this by deciding early on never to hire other full-time people. I also decided that I will not take additional full-time contracts. Sure, my position is risky in that case - I actually lost a couple of contracts because I refused to work full-time for them. But that is fine for me.
One key struggle psychologically is NOT to consider yourself a budding star entrepreneur. It is very tempting, particularly with all the propaganda about entrepreneurs to consider yourself a special sort of human. I remind myself constantly that I am simply self-employed and not running a business. It helps.

Tamil Short Story

I wrote this story (among others) 4 years back. I thought I may as well publish here. It is copyrighted to me and should not be reprinted without my permission.

ஒரே ஒரு ஜோக்
--------------------
இரா. இராமையா

வீட்டில் இருந்து பார்ட்டிக்குக் கிளம்பியதில் இருந்து ஒரே சண்டை.

முதலில் ரகு மௌனமாகத் தான் வந்தான். பிரேமா பேசிக் கொண்டே வந்தாள். திடீரென்று ரகு கத்திச் சிரித்தான்

"என்ன?" என்று கேட்டாள் பிரேமா.

"ஒண்ணுமில்ல"

பெண்களிடம் இது சொல்ல கூடாத பதில் என்பதால் சற்று நேரத்தில் அவனே பணிந்தான்.

"இல்ல.. ஒரு ஜோக் ஒண்ணு யோசிச்சேன்."

"என்ன ஜோக்?"

"பார்ட்டில சொல்றேன்"

அவள் நிதானித்து, "பார்ட்டில ஜோக் சொல்லப் போறீங்களா? வேணாமே.."

"ஏன்? போன முறை மாபிள்ளை ரொம்ப ஜோவியல் டைபுன்னு எல்லாரும் சொன்னாங்களே? நீ தான சொன்ன?"

"ஏதோ சாதரணமா சொன்னாங்க"

"ஏ.. சும்மா மட்டம் தட்டாத ..போன முறை எங்க தாத்தா பத்தி சொன்னேனே. எல்லாம் விழுந்து விழுந்து சிரிச்சாங்க."

"உங்க பரம்பரைய பாத்து யாரு தான் சிரிக்கல?"

ரகு அவளை முறைத்தான்.

"நீ கூட அன்னிக்குப் பெரிய பல்லை காட்டி சிரிச்ச .. குழந்தைங்கல்லாம் பயந்து அலறிச்சு."

பிரேமா வாயை மூடிக் கொண்டாள். சில நிமிடங்கள் கழித்து, "ஒரு முறை ஜோக் சொன்னா சிரிப்பாங்க. ஒவ்வொரு முறையும் சொன்ன கோமாளின்னு சொல்லுவாங்க." என்றாள்.

"யாரும் அப்பிடி சொல்ல மாட்டாங்க."

"சரி..என்ன ஜோக்? சொல்லுங்க.."

ரகு சிரித்தான். அவனுக்கே அவன் ஜோக்கை நினைத்துச் சிரிப்பு வந்தது.

"ஒரு முறை ஷார்ஜா கிரிக்கெட் மேட்ச் எந்த ஊருல நடக்குதுன்னு பேசிக்கிட்டோமே?"

"ஐயே. அது வேணாம்."

"ஏன்? நீ சிரிச்சியே?"

"கேவலமா இருக்கும்"

ரகு கவலையுடன், " வேற எதுனா யோசிக்கிறேன்" என்றான்.

மணி பார்த்தான். இன்னும் ஐந்து நிமிடத்தில் ஹோட்டல் வந்து விடும். அவனுக்குக் கவலை அதிகமாகியது.

"எங்கயாச்சும் காரை நிறுத்திட்டு ஜோக் யோசிப்போமா? " என்று கேட்டான்.
"அப்பிடியாவது ஜோக் சொல்லி ஆகணுமா?"
" என் மேல எதிர்பார்ப்பு நிறைய இருக்கு பிரேமா. பார்ட்டியே என்னால தான் களை கட்டணும்."
திடீரென்று, "கிடைச்சிடிச்சு ..சூப்பர் ஜோக்", என்றான்.
"என்ன?"
"உன் கிட்ட சொல்ல மாட்டேன்."
"அங்க வந்து மானத்த வாங்காதீங்க."
"முதல்ல நீ என் மானத்த வாங்காத. ஜோக் சொன்னா சிரி. போன முறை சில ஜோக்குக்கு நீ சிரிக்கவே இல்லை. எல்லாரும் விழுந்து விழுந்து சிரிச்சாங்க. நீ மட்டும்..திமிருடி உனக்கு"
"சிரிப்பு வந்தா சிரிக்குறேன். தத்து பித்துன்னு எதாவது சொன்னா?"
"உனக்கு எப்பவுமே நான்னா நக்கல்"
"சரி".
"என்ன சரி? இந்த முறை மட்டும் சிரிக்காம இரு..உன்னை வச்சுக்கிறேன்."

ஹோட்டல் வந்து விட்டது. இருவரும் கடுகடுவென்று இறங்கி உள்ளே போனதும் புன்னகைத்துக் கொண்டே போனார்கள். பிரேமாவின் உறவுக்காரப் பெண் மாயா, பிளஸ் டூவில் நிறைய மார்க் வாங்கியதால் இந்த விருந்து. அந்தப் பெண்ணிடம் நேராகச் சென்றார்கள்.
"கங்க்ராட்ஸ்", என்றாள் பிரேமா.
"தாங்க்ஸ்"
"என்ன மாயா..பேப்பர் சேசிங் போல இருக்கு? இவ்வளவு மார்க் வாங்கி இருக்க?" என்றான் ரகு.
அந்தப் பெண் பயத்துடன், "அதெல்லாம் இல்ல", என்றாள். லேசாகக் கண் கலங்கியது அவளுக்கு.
பிரேமா அவனைத் தரதரவென்று இழுத்து கொண்டு போனாள். "சும்மா இருக்கீங்களா?" என்றாள் தரதரவிற்கிடையே.
"நான் என்ன சொல்லிட்டேன்?" என்றான் அவன்.

எல்லோரும் சாப்பிடத் தொடங்கினார்கள். ரகுவிற்குப் பரபரப்பாக இருந்தது. தகுந்த தருணத்திற்காக காத்திருந்தான். எல்லோரும் கத்திப் பேசி கொண்டிருந்தார்கள்.
"இப்பல்லாம் ஸ்டூடென்சுக்கு நிறைய வாய்ப்புகள் இருக்கு", என்றார் ஒருவர்.
பிரேமாவின் அப்பா, "மாயா ..என்ன படிக்கப் போற? மெடிகலா?" என்று கேட்டார்.
"சிங்கப்பூர்ல ஒரு ஸ்காலர்ஷிப் வந்திருக்கு", என்றாள் மாயா.
ரகு, " சிங்கபூர்ன உடன ஒரு ஜோக் ஒண்ணு நினைவுக்கு வருது", என்றான்.
யாரும் அவனை கவனிக்கவில்லை.
"சிங்கபூர்ல எப்படித் தனியா போயி படிப்ப?"
"அதான் யோசனையா இருக்கு"
ரகு பல்லைக் கடித்து கொண்டான்.

சாப்பிட்டு முடிக்கும் வேளையில் ரகு ஆவலுடன் காத்திருந்த சந்தர்ப்பம் வந்தது. எல்லோரும் பேசி முடித்திருந்தார்கள்.
"கேர்ல்ஸ் தான் இப்பல்லாம் நிறைய மார்க்கு", என்றார் ஒருவர்.
"உலகத்தையே சுத்தி வந்திடறாங்க கல்யாணத்துக்கு முன்னாடி", என்றார் பிரேமாவின் அப்பா.
"உலகம்ன உடனே ஒரு ஜோக் நினைவுக்கு வருது", என்றான் ரகு.
அவனே பயப்படும் விதமாக எல்லோரும் அவனைத் திரும்பிப் பார்த்தார்கள்.
"என்ன ஜோக்", என்றார் பிரேமாவின் அப்பா.
ரகு சற்றே கலவரத்துடன் தொடங்கினான்.
"அமெரிக்கால ஒரு பொம்பளைக்கு நாலு குழந்தை பிறந்துதாம். நாளுக்கும் நார்மலா பேரு வச்சா. அஞ்சாவது குழந்தை பிறந்திச்சு. அதுக்கு மட்டும் ஹூவாங் ஹூவங்க்ன்னு பேரு வச்சா...ஏன் தெரியுமா?" என்று கேட்டான்.
ஒரு பாட்டி, "என்ன அசட்டு ஜோக்கா இருக்கு..", என்றாள்.
"சிரிப்பே வரல", என்றார் ஒருவர்.
"ஜோக் இன்னும் முடியல", என்றான் ரகு.
"மாப்பிள்ளை..சீக்கிரமா முடியுங்க. குலோப் ஜாமுன் சாப்பிடணும்", என்றார் பிரேமாவின் அப்பா.
ரகு, "ஏன்னா உலகத்துல பொறக்குற ஒவ்வொரு அஞ்சாவது குழந்தையும் சைனிஸ் குழந்தையாம்", என்று முடித்தான்.
எல்லோரும் அவனையே பார்த்துக் கொண்டிருந்தார்கள். பிரேமாவின் அப்பா, "உம்..மேல சொல்லுங்க", என்று ஊக்குவித்தார்.
ரகு கோபத்துடன், "ஜோக் அவ்வளவு தான். முடிஞ்சு போச்சு ", என்றான்.
பிரேமா "ஹா ஹா ஹா ..." , என்று கத்திச் சிரித்தாள். வேறு யாருமே சிரிக்கவில்லை.

வீட்டுக்குத் திரும்பிப் போய்க் கொண்டிருந்தார்கள். ரகு மௌனமாக இருந்தான். பிரேமா ஏதோ பேசிக் கொண்டே வந்தாள்.
ரகு திடீரென்று, "என்ன திமிருடி உனக்கு..", என்றான்.
பிரேமா திடுக்கிட்டு, "என்ன?" என்றாள்.
"அந்த ஜோக்குக்கு ஏண்டி அப்பிடிச் சிரிச்ச?"
"நீங்க தான சிரிக்கச் சொன்னீங்க?"
"எல்லாம் சும்மா இருக்காங்க. நீ மட்டும் ஏண்டி சிரிச்ச?"
"இது என்ன இது..சிரிச்சாலும் தப்பு ..சிரிக்கலன்னாலும் .."
"உம்..சும்மா கிட"
கார் போய்க் கொண்டிருந்தது.
"திமிருடி உனக்கு"

The Indian English Media

This is going to be a long post.
For the past couple of years I have been observing the English news channels in television and also online portals such as rediff.com and IndiaTimes.com. A pattern emerges, but I wonder about the causal factors for news reporting in India.

Two Recent Campaigns

The IPL move to South Africa and Tata Nano's launch are two cases in point. To any dispassionate observer watching the news reporting, it must be obvious that the media went nuts with both. They hysterically covered Tata Nano's launch so much that it seemed Tata needed no additional marketing. One reporter, self-reighteously asked Tata what he would say to Mamata Bannerjee, as if Mamata's campaign was somehow against the Nano (it was not). Tata, of course, is a businessman; even though the media tried to project him as a warrior against politics in this country, he knew his place. So he just said "Good afternoon". But that statement was enough for the media to interpret as some kind of witty come back to the evil Mamata.
On the two days following the Nano's launch, rediff had a total of 39 stories on the launch. Many of these did not read like news - it was as if Tata had paid rediff, Indiatimes and all those English television channels.

At around the same time, the IPL controversy was gathering momentum. On the day IPL decided to move out of India, rediff publishes the following lead-up to a discussion forum: http://cricket.rediff.com/report/2009/mar/22/ipl-message-board.htm
That particular article has to be read to be believed. A basic journalistic standard is to clearly show the difference between editorializing (expressing opinion) and news reporting. This helps readers understand that what you are talking about may not be facts, but your own opinion.
The above article blurs that distinction and presents the IPL organizer point of view as if it is objective fact. It does it through some standard tricks - such as omitting quotation marks from quotes.

While the government did not want to take chances with the security after the attack by gunmen on Sri Lankan cricketers in Lahore [Images], it also lost a lot of revenue and a chance to show that the country is a safe place to host sports events, keeping in mind next year's Commonwealth Games [Images].

The BCCI also apologised to fans, saying the government had left them with no other option. It made it clear that a lot of money was at stake and the Board along with the franchises and broadcasters could not afford to lose so much.
...
Who do you blame for depriving Indian fans of the high-octane action in the IPL, which was a mega success in its first year?

At first glance it seems as if rediff is doing this violation of ethical journalism so that they can support the BJP.
In both these news stories, the media went overboard, with the English TV channel's 24 hour coverage of the Nano. Watching the pathetic emptyheads on television cheerleading for a car, we can easily blame them for being without substance. It is clear that in both these cases, the media is forcing a certain narrative down the throats of viewers. The question is why they do that.

What is at Stake
In India media criticism is rare, but before I make a case I have to explain what is at stake here. After watching decades of doctored news from outlets like the Tamil Sun Television or Jaya Television, it is natural for us to assume that the media, like any other institution can report whatever they deem as news. At least that is what they say.
The Corporatised media needs to earn money, true. But we should not forget that a honest press is one of the pillars of democracy. They have responsibilities to the public beyond earning money. They have strict ethical guidelines for news reporting.
More than anything, the press enjoys a host of benefits from the government. A member of the press enjoys access to high officials and is definitely more powerful than an ordinary citizen.
Without a free press that is not acting as a tool for the rich and powerful, we may as well call off our democracy experiment. People curse politicians all the time and celebrate corporations as repositories of all that is good and benevolent. But we ought to be cursing our corporate media too, for letting down the majority people's interests.
Having said that let us analyze two views for the corruption of media.

Ezra Klein and the Media Narrative- A Charitable View
There is a charitable view we can take about the media behavior. That is explained in this classic post by Ezra Klein, a leading liberal blogger in the USA. Klein was talking about the nature of the American media, but it applies here too (emphasis mine):

I think one aspect of the modern press that doesn't get enough attention -- either among folks in the media or folks critiquing it -- is the transition from the fundamental scarcity being information to information being in abundance and the fundamental scarcity being mediation.
...
If everyone got a newspaper once a day, and there were eight political stories, and all of them were different each day, and one of them had pointed out that Palin actually did support the Bridge to Nowhere, then the press would indeed have done its job. The job was to report the story, and they reported it.

But cable news and blogs and radio sort of changed all that and now there's too much information, and so consumers largely rely on the press to arrange that information into some sort of coherent story that will allow them to understand the election. And the press assumed that role -- they didn't create some new institution, or demand that the cable channels be credentialed differently and understood as "political entertainment."

They fill this new role through the methods storytellers have always used to tell stories: the repetition of certain key themes and characters, which creates continuity between one day's events and the next and helps the audience understand which parts to pay attention to. It's sort of like a TV show:

In the case of the Nano, it was obvious from the first that there was a narrative here - a businessman is let down by powerful, evil politicians such as Mamta Bannerjee. He takes his show and leaves for the arms of another, more business-savvy leader (Narendra Modi). And he finally releases his car thereby satisfying the dreams of millions.
The press chose this narrative and ran with it, even though there were big holes in the story - for example, Tata had an private agreement with the Communist government in West Bengal for land transfer in Singur. If he was so noble, he would never have tried to go for such a deal. Secondly, during the entire controversy, Tata himself never expressed any antipathy to a deal with the politicians - he knew that he needed them as they need him.
Thirdly, Tata's cars in Gujarat are now heavily subsidized by the tax payer. There are estimates that Rs.50,000 to 60,000 of each Nano is borne by the tax payer. If Tata was a people's hero, he would never have tried to wrestle such concessions from elected governments. Gujarat has literally bribed a single businessman enormously to base his plant in their state.
This is transparently not capitalism, but the media thought the narrative was powerful. The same narrative idea holds for the IPL, where Lalit Modi was the new brave warrior against government.
So, it is entirely possible that the Indian corporate media is simply building these narratives and presenting well-packaged stories to the Indian public (even though they are violating news standards) - because that has become their job in this age of "too much information".
But then there is another possibility.

The Indian Media and Elitism
We should note that every narrative the media builds somehow enables and enriches private business elite. I suspect that the IPL controversy made the private business elite go crazy because government seemed to be saying that business was not the most important thing in the world. They screamed about lost revenue for the government - if government's purpose is only revenue making we should probably rent out Parliament House in the summer.
But over the past few years there is a strong streak of class warfare in our media. It is clear that the media tries to suggest the following:
1. Government should be run like a business
2. Any government "inteference" to regulate the private business world is a travesty of capitalism.
3. The interests of everyone in India is closely allied with the interests of business people
4. Businessmen are noble
During the IPL auction, which they feverishly covered, the media stars declared "What Recession?" because the amounts in the auction were astronomical. Meanwhile ordinary construction workers were facing the recession alright. In fact everyone was feeling the recession probably except for the narrow band that the media glorifies. P.Sainath wrote an excellent article on this elitist coverage here.
I am not sure how much the media has succeeded in this myth creation - reality, like the Satyam fiasco, kind of tends to expose their stars for what they are.
But it seems to me that the media is performing this dance around private business because their own corporate masters see what we all see - that in India the business class has an excellent opportunity to suppress a class struggle. It never fully worked in the developed countries, but they see an opportunity here.
This is why I reject the view that the media is directly paid by Tata or Lalit Modi to do their marketing. It is more subtle than that. They get access and power and form an alliance that blurs the real issues at stake in modern India.
They think they have formed a heady concoction using Cricket stars, Bollywood's talentless tarts and "lifestyle" issues.
I got a glimpse into their inner workings in an article by Tehelka editor, Tarun Tejpal, 3 weeks after the Mumbai attacks. In that article, Mr.Tejpal talks about a media consultant who lost his life at the Taj. But he also talks about what these consultants advise - they apparently guide media corporations towards such "lifestyle" issues and meaningless trivia in news. They think this is what the public is asking for. This is why your local newspaper publishes a lifestyle section with unrelated stuff about Paris Hilton and Brad Pitt.

As a more interesting note, corporatization seems to have directly caused this abuse of power and a complete corruption of journalistic ideals. So much for the glory of private business and businessmen...

As much as we hate politicians, we have as much to fear from the corruption of this new monster in the block.

Is Hindi Film Music in a Renaissance?

Short post - but it seems like Hindi film music is going through an amazing resurgence the last few years. I don't know what is the cause of it...if it is the increasing number of fresh music directors; or the music talent shows sparking a renewed interest; or the influence of Pakistani bands. But I am hearing more and more sweet and well-sung numbers. Most movies now come with a Sufi style song (and an item song, which is another matter).
I have a few personal favorites, such as:
Mitwa from Kabhi Alvidha Na Kehna
Dil De Diya Hai from Masti
In Dino Dil Mera from Life In a Metro
Jab Se Tere Naina from Saawariya
Aaoge Jab Tum Saajna from Jab We Met
Aaj Ki Raat from Don
Woh Lamhe from Zeher


"In dino dil mera" rendered by Debojit Datta in Zee SaReGaMaPa (starting 1:20)


At the same time I am worried about the Tamil music industry. Harris Jayaraj or Yuvan Shankar Raja are pale substitutes for giants such as Ilayaraja and Rahman. Yuvan still has off key singing in his songs. They are going wholesale Western without any attempt at fusion. It is disappointing and it would be nice if we have another music director of the calibre of Ilayaraja...