Monday, May 30, 2005

The emotional and political science of Love

The affair of Amit and Rekha was well-known. They shared a pyrotechnical chemistry and people derived scenes for their dreams by looking at them looking at each other. Such was their love!

But time saw an unfortunate separation between them. Amit delivered the coup de grace to the moribund relationship betweem Rekha and himself. We dont know why Amit was skeptical about the revivability of their romance. Perhaps he had never seen any movie which showed reconciliation after the stage they were passing through. Or perhaps he had heard a song of separation he was very fond of and he wished to feel it. Or childhood fascination with some story like 'The count of Monte Cristo' in which the protagonist Edmond Dantes says, 'Madam, I dont eat muscatel grapes.' as his statement of refusal to Mercedes. Or the metaphors he had used for love. As Kundera says a metaphor can give birth to a love*, it could also kill it. It could be anything. Anything. We dont exactly know what it was in this case.
(*The unbearable lightness of being - Milan Kundera)
All we know is that the departure of Rekha is followed by the arrival of Jaya in Amit's life.

SCENARIO 1: Once Amit and Jaya were walking on the rainbow of tulips under the azure of the vast canopy. I will not indulge myself in describing the indescribable beauty they were enveloped in. I want to say something else here. I want to examine the state of mind of Amit when he saw Rekha there. He mustered something which meant to be a smile on his embarrassed face. But his smile remained unrequitted as he could see nothing but a tinge of disgust on the face of Rekha who stoned him with her eyes for a moment before imagining that she saw an apparition, a shadow and not a living man whose heart once throbbed for her and only for her. What did Amit feel? Shame. He felt stark naked before her gaze. He knew that she knew him in and out: what does he talk when he feels romantic, how does he hold a woman while walking, all whens and wheres you can imagine, everything about everything! Nothing was secret and therefore nothing was his own. He shared his most intimate nature with someone who was not his anymore. He detested her sight and felt irritated with her for being there. He wanted her to leave him alone. Alone.
Amit was now more scared of her love than her hatred for him. He wanted to start a new life, afresh, forgetting the mishaps of the past because it was dead and he couldnt allow its ghost to haunt his future. After all, the life must go on! But here was she who would ruin her life for the sake of martyrdom, for the sake of glory, for the sake of false pride. What a perversion! He couldnt fathom the cunning of these roadside beggers who exposed their amputated limbs, their festering wounds, their other abominable abnormalities to the horror of others. It only aroused outrage from within him. The miserable pity-seeking bugs! The scum of earth! They punish you for nothing and blackmail you for your well-being as if it's a crime or aberration. They levy tax on you for your health and happiness. She was no different. How was she? She wanted him to feel responsible for her misery. She wanted him to bear the guilt for her misfortune. She wanted him to feel sorry for everything that had happened. And she calls it 'Love'! Why not? God knew what did Hatred mean then! His face contorted into a sarcastic smirk. But he didnt want to feel bitter about anything. He didnt want to bear grudge or ill-will for anyone. All he wanted was to live peacefully. Was it impossible? Was it a luxury?
Rekha tried to think that she saw a dead man walking. She tried to forget the fact that she even saw something. It gave her solace and necessary insulation from the reality which was maddeningly bizarre and excrutiating. She was pleased with herself for not saying 'Hi' to him. She wouldnt allow him to take her for granted. She was happy for her victory.
But her memories and her imaginations were not so easy to be shooed away for long. Like dreams they were autonomous and couldnt care less about her will and gatecrashed whenever they willed. They persisted despite her earnest attempts of losing herself in all sort of beguilements. Her attention frequently recidivated into the 'Dekha ek khwaab' days.
People had suggested her to move ahead. She was genuinely grateful to them for their concern for her. But she had her doubts. They talked as if loving someone was like a standstill, an impasse in a frenetic rush along an infinitely elongated straight rails where there was no time for anyone to experience the life the way one felt like! She used to get attached with inanimate objects also and after some time kept them with care only for their nostalgic value. How could then she jettison something which she valued most? They would urge her to shrug off the last trace of him in her mind. As if one could selectively erase the not-so-perfect lines of the sketch on the canvas of your memory! Somewhere she was not fully convinced. What would be the meaning of words like gratitude if we were morally or psychologically capable of such acts, of forgetting as per convenience? She found these ideas too convenient to be ethically permissible. How could you customize everything according to your needs? She wished she could also convince herself as some other fellows did with their reasonings. She felt you could reason out anything if you had the power of words. Her friends admonished her for taking his name. As if not doing it would transport him in the realm of non-existence! She recalled one atheist friend of hers who had said to her mother when she urged her to participate in the pooja that she could make her join her hands but she couldnt generate reverence in her heart for God. Silence just meant his absence in air not in her heart. She was also accused of glorifying her and making him feel guilty about himself. She couldnt supress her smile. She could not do anything which wouldnt invite any critical remerk or derogatory word from others. And since when did the world become so generous to distribute glory in retail? And since when did people become so sensitive to feel guilt about things they do? Only a few can. And only a fewer do. Now people said she was an egoist person who considered herself more capable for love than others. According to them all are equal when it comes to emotions. Everyone loved similarly, with equal passion. Though surprisingly all are not equal when it comes to rationality, logic and reason! They had to say something!
She had finally stopped minding people much. She had understood a fact that whenever you would need to take a moral decision there would be two type of people. One with moral uprightness and other woth moral depravity. And both would laugh at you and want you to fall in the abyss of turpitude. This would provide exclusivity and superiority to one and company and vindication to the other. She thought that forgetting Amit was as much as a moral question as an existential one.
Failing to ignore the turbulence in her mind, she decided to analyse it and trivialize it and divest it of its emotional contents and then discard it as something useless and valueless. After all she lived in a utilitarian world. When others forgot everything(God knows how?) to live(!) then why should she only shroud herself with the memories of the past? She didnt make the world as it was. She tried to recall the fiercest of altercations she had had with him and the meanest things he had said to her with the vilest of expressions. She felt a searing sensation of fury in her veins. But not for long. It subsided. And his smiling face showed itself again like a moon coming out of the clouds. She could hardly believe this. It was hopeless. She still loved him.
SCENARIO 2: Rekha met Amit in a hospital, in a maternity ward. Jaya had delivered a baby. I am not sure if Rekha felt disgusted but Amit didnt feel any shame. This time the context was entirely new. Rekha had no idea how would he behave to a pregnant woman or to the mother of his child. He had his space and secracy. He didnt feel naked anymore.
SCENARIO 3: Amit and Jaya met Rekha at her wedding ceromany. Though there was no air of erstwhile informality and amiability but still many complicated knots had been slackened and hoped to be disentangled in future. Amit could easily pretend to not having seen a glance of longingness in Rekha's eyes. Now she was happily married and he could relieve himself of all the real as well as imaginary notions of guilt. She had no tragedy left in her life to derive glory from.
I have not said anything about Jaya. Because I dont feel like. I am not interested in that. Or may be I am not very sure about her feelings. Or may be I dont have anything to say.
After all every work of art is an expression of the political preference of the artist. And every work of art has to be therapeutic in some way or other, and thus autobiographical.
DISCLAIMER: All the characters in this post are fictitious. Any reseblence to anyone living or dead is incidental.

The die is cast

Rome 49 BC.

Caesar with his army crossed the Rubicon and said: 'The die is cast.'

Background: Rome, unlike all the other major civilizations the world has seen, was not a monarchy. There was a Senate consisting of aristocrats which decided the political and economic fate of the state. The majority was the slave population with no rights.

Around 60 BC, the time when triumvirate ruled which was constituted by Caesar, Pompey and Crassus(who repressed the revolt by the gladitorial slaves led by Spartacus).

49 BC, Caesar crossed the river Rubicon which was the mark of his intention to defy law of Senate and to face the forces of Pompey. Crossing the Rubicon indicated his determination to move along a one way road, beyond the point of no return.

44 BC, The Roman Senators, who had always abhored the idea of monarchy, conspired against Caesar who returned with soaring ambitions from Egypts after his honeymoon with Cleaopatra, the Pharaoh Queen, and stabbed him 60 times to death.

But till then Caesar had inscribed his name indelibly on the surface of time.

History remembers the names of men who are not scared of throwing dice. Most of us die keeping it in our hands.

He is not as modest as I am

Saturday 28.05.05

Rajesh and I were strolling on F C Road. We visited IMS too. He enquired about CAT and GMAT and how they could help him in the preparation of these exams. A lady was there to entertain the tramps like us when they have nothing better to do.

Somehow I managed to excite the lady. I do it quite often. But this time I shouldnt have. After all she didnt even know me and my nature. And she was mighty charged! I dont know why did I allowed myself to say what I didnt mean at all. I casually expressed my xenophobia and she got pretty touched.

Well, whatever. But I am happy because the incident evoked the quote of the year. By none other than the coolest one. He said to the lady: 'He is an arrogant IITian. He is not as modest as I am.'

I hope you can appreciate the humor. :)

I cant stop smiling.

Friday, May 27, 2005

The halcyon days of Darauli 2

Mother is a word which invokes nothing but LOVE. And we cannot count reasons for it because it transcends every humanly conceivable limits. And the number of reasons we can recall is just a function of chance and memory. Let me dig up something to share with you from the deep recesses of my mind. I remember that was a time when I was learning alphabets and the letters used to fascinate me immensely. After all an intellectual phenomenon was in the making! And my 'Ma' had started to realize that her only son's education would be very costly. She had to yield to his demand to make the designs of alphabets on the bristles of his toothbrush every morning in order to make him brush his teeth! And as the kid(that's me :)) was small, his toothbrush was also tiny. So it could be imagined how difficult it would have been for her to satisfy his unrelenting condition! What a crazy devil I was!
Pehaps I have been expiating my sins till now with my irregular teeth. I vividly recall me and Ma burying my broken tooth the field of our quarter and chanting some strange mantra to issue Gods an imperative to make my tooth grow as the grasses in the field. How naive it seems in retrospect!! But equally cute!
And not only this. I had to pay my respects to the 'Dooj ka chand'. In Hindus perhaps it is considered sacred. Incidently I was born on Dooj, so she used to flatter me. I and used to get flattered.
My father used to pamper me royally. I am a hell of a spoilt brat. I dont remember anything which was denied to me if I asked for it. And I detested the word NO simply because I was not used to it. I never asked for anything which was potentially declinable. For me a NO means an unjust demand, a folly on my part, a grave mistake which reduces the gravity of my words! And that irks me because I find the burden of this political levity too heavy to bear on my mind. I didnt know though that a few years later I would meet a person who would mean a lot to me and who would subject me of this word time and again and make me feel to the core of my consciousness. Life! Life is a sobering experience. After all, all the people who say they love you dont actually know what they are saying.
I shouldnt make anyone feel that I lived in absolute bliss. I was duly punished whenever I transgressed the boundaries of childish mischiefs. I was a tyrant and used to pass orders to my servants(sorry not my servants as I was told many times) and charge on them with unmitigated ferocity if my orders were not obeyed. Later on I would be humiliated by the cruel fact that they were better than me because they earned their living unlike me. Also, they were more educated than me who was in std 2 or UKG. I would vent my wrath on my kid sisters which would fetch me more punishment. But I honestly admit I amply deserved every mortification. The most embarassing moment(next only to the incident when you call your mom to extricate your 'thing' from the zipper of your pant! Did that ever happen to you? I am sure it did. :)) would be when Pitaji would hold me with my hands in the back and ask my sis to slap me. Though she never did it. Not because of love but of sheer terror my smouldering eyes would arouse in their poor soul.
But I was not that bad a guy though initially I liked to watch beheaded fowl rise and fall on earth. How ironical it is to even recall for me! It could not have been me! I am sure I had stopped deriving perverse pleasures from blood very soon. I remember myself waking in early morning to release a fowl under a basket in my storehouse. Gradually I developed an affection for animals and corresponding hatred towards those who tortured them. I didnt like to mount on a horse-ridden cart and I felt like kicking the ass of the horseman when he whipped the helpless animal. I dont know why did it take me 10 more years to quit non-vegetarian food but finally I followed my heart and turned out to be a vegetarian.
I was very fond of dogs. After all they are man's best friends. I particularly like their liquid eyes. How lovely their eyes are! Well, this is a story of this small puppy which roamed near my house. It was winters and what attracted my attention was the unfortunate fact that it had no home to take refuge in the chilly nights. I made a small house for him by bricks I found lying around. Then I kept the pup in his home to let him know about his new possession. I dont remember exactly but perhaps I fed him in night too. Anyways some 6-7 years later I would feed the puppies the milk I was supposed to drink, and would be chided for that. Whatever, I dont know why but Pitaji didnt like it and he sent the dog somewhere. I didnt say anything(When I am really hurt, I dont speak anything) but certainly I found it cruel, to the dog as well to me.
I felt distressed when I saw birds in cages. How vulnerable they become because of their beauty and lovability!! I liked them free. I tried to release one parrot from somewhere(I dont remember the details) and was scolded and thoroughly discouraged. I was suspected for letting go the chicken too from the store though I denied it out of fear to be rebuked. But this incident fanned by burning determination to help the caged birds. I somehow figured that maturity is accompanied by apathy. I disengaged myself from every reason and made a promise to my innocent childhood to release the caged birds when I grew up. This vow was impenetrable to adultly arguments which I knew were corrupt and indifferent to others' pain and plight.

Thursday, May 26, 2005

The halcyon days of Darauli 1

Our school was approx 1000 km far. We would walk to school with our box filled with our books, note-books,pen,inkpot and a jute-mat(to sit on the floor, rather earth because our school had no building). One or two guys had bags and they would flourish their free hands and tease us. Poor us! We would carry our boxes with our left hands when our right hand grew red and tired and started hurting. We would talk so much, share so much of our stories and make a world of childish fantasies where everything was happy and problems had no entry. I vaguely remember the days of my early childhood when I had just entered std 1st after passing LKG. I did my UKG after passing std 2nd! It happened because until then I was in Hindi medium. My parents had to demote me to get me admitted in an English medium school. After an year that I took admission in std 3rd, in Hindi medium again. :)
We were not very fond of sunlight. Our bodies started melting under the sun. So whenever some cloud like a kid-loving hero of a comic book would come to our deliverance by covering us from the innumerable heat arrows incessantly fired from the sun, we would feel relieved. One of us conjured up a wonderful formula to prolong the fleeting moments of cool and comfort. And it was incredibly easy! All we had to do was to clench our fists tightly as soon as the sun was eclipsed. It seemed to work also. At least initially we found it pretty effective. But sometimes it flopped. The wise innovator would then blame the carelessness of one of us because the formula was undoubtedly infallible. Each one of us would then vow of his and her sincerity. We would then decide to clench our fists more tightly from next time and drop the matter.
There was a place(I dont exactly remember what it was. The place I lived was rural and very open.) in our way. A mad man used to reside there and would walk on the road nearby. All of us were scared of him. We would stop and wait till he went away if we saw him. My kid sis would hold my hands strongly while we passed that place. I would feel like superman then and pretend to be absolutely insulated to any sort of fear. But I was perhaps more afraid than her because I had to keep my composure too.
And my father would give us a rupee in the morning as our pocket money or as a token of his unlimited affection for us. After the school hours we would eat 'fuchka' with that money. The fuchkawla seemed to feed us some 'hazaar' fuchka by that money. Even then I would hope my sis to finish early so that I could eat her share too. But she was a hell of a glut! But I loved her. We used to eat our tiffins together in the school field with a lot of flying eagles above our heads. Some friend of mine had warned me of eagles. The eagles pounce and snatch the bread out of a kid's hand leaving him or her hurt and terrified for lifetime.
I was 'relatively' a good student and I used to top the class. I was even bored of topping the class. I remember once I failed a paper just to see how does it feel when one failed? The experience was not very encouraging when my father came to know about it. No, he didnt flog me or something but still I dont remember repeating it, perhaps because this idea didnt seem as interesting to others as to me and I was slightly disappointed with the anti-climax. Some 3-4 years later I remember urging my teacher to give me 'Better' as remark on my handwriting sheet instead of 'Best' because I was sick of it. There were some 'Good' but one of the trio was conspicuously missing and I was not very happy with it. I wanted all!!!

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

The traders of peace

IF YOU KILL ONE, YOU ARE A MURDERER
IF YOU KILL THOUSAND, YOU ARE AN ALEXANDER

History has been like a helpless old priest who had to sanctify the coronation of a barbarous conqueror, of an invader who felt realized only by forcing the rupture of geographical hymens, of a plunderer who was morbidly obsessed with the sight of mutilated bodies and taste of blood, of a despoiler who revelled in the goriest and most cold blooded manslaughters, of men of ambition for whom nothing was sacred.
It has been like a miserable mistress lying prostrate at the disposal of men of power and position who abused her at their will with utmost contempt and derision and who were absolutely indifferent to her occasional moans and objections.
It has been like a writer of fiction under constant probation and trial. It saw something but it was made to say something else. It was made to record the biographies of the illigimate products of lust and rapacity (whose stories are replete with outrages against common people, as literary documents reveal) and immortalize them. The plight of the oppressed remained unarticulated because of the lack of inherent aesthetic beauty and political leverage it could afford to provide and commercial support it could procure. The butchered body of truth was dispensed with unpalatable details and packed in paper for the consumption of progeny.
It has been like a poet in the court who was patronized for the entertainment of the royalty. Everything ugly was covered under the noise of the lyrical eulogies in the praise of the might of kings and panegyrical sonnets in the praise of the beauty of their queens. Even the disagreements were made to be agreeable to them. The light of moon was given more attention than the darkness of earth.
Throughout the history it was made to be a mute spectator of the exploitations and was made to extol the savagery perpetrated with absolute impunity by power-thirsty monsters. Thousand of people paid with their blood and lives for the insatiable quench of the swords of these Alexanders and Baburs and Caesars and Dariuses etc. Youth paid with its dreams and futures. Women paid with their honor and dignity. The soldiers died anonymously for the name and fame of their generals and kings. People were brutally and callously killed at the name of patriotism or Crusade or Jehad or Dharma. But the ulterior motive of battles and war has always been an unending struggle for POWER(which is invariably behind the vitiation and subsequent deterioration of any religion and any institution and any establishment). And their voice gets suppressed under the noise of trumpets and gradually disappear into the domain of unreality with the passage of time. The reality vanishes, it evaporates into nothingness!

BUT HISTORY KNOWS THE TRUTH.

Time passed and the face of earth changed.
We proclaimed ourselves to be civilized, and cultured too. We touched new heights in the fields of science and technology. The life expectancy increased and so did the per capita income. There are many other 'indicators' to convince us that the 'quality' of life has improved. I would not go into details.

Perhaps this is true.
But our achievements was largely MATHEMATICAL or to be precise NUMERICAL.
What have definitely improved the various 'quantities' of life. We live longer, travel faster etc etc. Again I would leave you to see many others examples by yourself. Please let me be clear that these accomplishments are certainly valueable. Denying it would be not only an evidence of naivety but also ingratitude. I will surely prefer to live in this world rather than in past.

But this is not a reason to be complacent. This is not a reason to claim that the 'quality' of life is improved. We have hardly improved spiritually, as a species. We are still controlled by same old passions. Gautam Buddha would not be overwhelmingly impressed. Jesus Christ would renounce christanity, if he ever was a christian. Let me elaborate instead of throwing rhetorics.
The last century has witnessed two devastating world wars, one cold war which fortunately didnt turn into hot one bacause of the disintergration of the world's largest nation, one nuclear holocaust and lot many other remarkable masterpieces of our efforts and maturity like Auschwitz and Gulag and Nanking.

WE KNOW THE HISTORY.
We are aware of the fact that balance of power is dyanamic in nature. The greatests of empires have been pulverized to dust by the sweep of time and the most majestic emperors died disgracefully, sometimes away from their place. We know that power doesnt rescue anyone from pain and death.
After the catharsis of world war 1, some men with post-war wisdom took an initiative to create an organization which could curb the mass hysteria and consequent warfare. It was named "League of nations".

But the irresitible desire for expansion never seems to respect the dullness of peace. Hitler was dying under the unbearable pressure of the greatness of his race so he was in utmost urgency to spread his legs all over the world. His neighbours warned him perhaps bacause they had the similar intentions. Soon the world war 2 was waged amongst the most cultured nations. The white man 's burden was too much for his capacity and he disencumbered himself of what he has: The atom bomb, the chef-d'oeuvre of numerical science and technology. What a thousands of mythological legends could not do, the technology did in a few minutes.

This was really something!! The game stopped because one player was hit where it hurts most. The excitement subdued for sometime. The post-war wisdom (the more distructive the war, the more constructive the wisdom) engendered United Nations on Oct 24th, 1945.

But the post-war gimmicks like that are nothing but rituals, the continuation of war only. These types of rites just highlight the winners and losers, the one who stipulate conditions and other who acquiesce because of right or wrong reasons. This furthers the virulence which culminates in future in yet another and bloodier warfare. Also, the knowledge of history has inoculated and perpetuated the idea of 'Hero' so profoundly that the notion of peaceful co-existence seems to be not only intolerably prosaic but a threat to our virility. The most glaring proof of our crooked and duplicitous intentions is the existence of security council in UN. This organization, ostensibly committed to establishment and maintenance of peace worldwide, is a symbol of inequality among the nations on the basis of military capability. And all it serves is to justify the victimaization of helpless poor countries by one of the members. Had it really been dedicated to what it professes, we would not have witnessed Vietnam and many other shameful wars. Now in the new millenium when we tirelessly boast of modernity, SC institutionalizes all sorts of brutality and tyranny against the defenceless. Though other sisters like WTO etc are no less merciless but here I will concentrate on SC only. The reason is the recent debate over the question of the permanent membership of India in SC.

So India, the nation which has never invaded any other country in its 10,000 years of history is now standing in supplication with closed hands before the UN for its recognition as a powerful force! After all, is it possible to live without falling prey to this universal temptation? But dont you find this patently ridiculous? Did US begged or pleaded anyone for it? Or Russia or China? No. No because power is never obtained by negotiation. It is not mute and inarticulate, it speaks loud and clear.

In the words of 'Dinkar' -

Kshama shobhti us bhujang ko jiske paas garal ho,
Uska kya jo dant-heen, vish-heen, vineet saral ho.
[The idea of mercy and forgiveness suits only to the serpent which has venom in its mouth. And not for the one which has no canines, no poison and who is simple and humble.]

And what for? What are the other member nations doing? Could they deter US from razing Afganistan to dust? What purpose does India think it would serve after having been granted the much coveted membership with VETO POWER? When you are not able to defend your own parliament how can you even imagine to protect others? When your economy is so volatile that a mere sanction shatters its foundations then how do you even claim to be a superpower? Only on the basis of speculation or population? Being the largest democracy is no cogent reason because the criterion is, dont forget, power and POWER and nothing else. If you have the potential to disrupt the heartbeats of the world or to disturb the economy then only you can practically aspire for a permanant membership of SC.

Otherwise you will only serve to sing the American national anthem with tears in your eyes. Or cheer and clap while somebody is being raped or killed.

So India, wait. First strive to be trully free and independent. Not only politically but economically too because economic genuflection would invariably lead to political subjugation sooner or later. Unless one becomes strong from within he can nor bring any peace without. Then only strive for the other things. And instead of playing the dirty power game suitable only to barbarians, try to realize the unfulfilled dreams of Asoka and Buddha. And start by abolishing institutions like the security council.

Friday, May 20, 2005

Nature of insanity

Warning: Dont take this too seriously. This is a product of a restless mind which creates and recreates ideas again and again. There is no concept of final sketch here because the pleasure lies in drawing, and this particular line at the canvas, like other lines, is liable to be erased in future in order to develop a better picture. The writer is aware of the dyanamic character of his thoughts but the readers sometimes fail to appreciate this simple point.
So, lets play with this idea with full spirit but remember not to lose the control.
ALL OF US ARE INSANE.
Okay, let me bulid my argument. But you know the conclusion beforehand so you are in a better position to understand my intentions and refute any argument which is driven by emotions rather than reason.
All of us are different. I hope you would agree. Each one of us is a living testimony of the incredible creativity of nature.
But we can categorize the whole human race into two classes: Man and Woman. You invariably fall into one of these categories.
(There are, however, exception to every rule. I hope you are not with exceptional qualities. :)
I am a man. Let me assume that you are also a man for the simplicity of argument.
Now how can it be possible! After all there are many differences between us. I am 5'11'' with a dark complexion and slim figure and other physical and mental characteristics. You can be anything but the exact replica of mine. And each one of us claims to be a man. How is it possible? What is 'Man' then?
Is it a superset and each one of us is a sub-set of this superset? May be. But I am not sure. Because then none of us can claim to be a man. Each one of us would be an incomplete man. Or none of us would be a man.
Is it a basic class and each one of us is a derived class of this basic class? We inherit all the masculine qualities and in addition to that we have some more individual qualities which add distinctive colours to our personalities. So we are not only men but something more. We are unique. Again I am not sure. Because here we assume the absolute absence of that colour(or colours) in others' personalities which makes me distinct from other men. Also, I am not entirely convinced with it. This view seems to be extreme.
Let's try to visualize the ideal Man. We see something. Dont we? We see a person with some physical features. With some (qualitative) features like head and limbs and etc etc. With some (quantitative) features like some height and some weight and etc etc. We'll study the quantitative features only because any absence or variation in qualitative features is considered animal or exceptional(handicapped, eunuch etc). We will ignore such special cases in the current discussion and concentrate on the general case. Though these quantitative features are dependent on geography and thus society(So the concept of the ideal Man is defined by society! Deja vu!) but let's take the case of your society only. In India the 'good' height is 5'10'' for a man whereas in US I guess it would be around 6'.
Now let's compare yourself with this ideal Man, in appearance. There are certain dissimilarities which make you different. Your height might be lesser than him. Your shoulders might not be that broad. Your tummy might be protruding out a bit. Leonardo Da Vinci has specified certain proportion for a male body. Your body might be out of proportion by that standard. There can be other differences based on some numbers that correspond to our corporal measurements. In addition to that we can take into account your voice, your gait, your eyesight etc also which are semi-quantitative in nature. Here too you deviate from the perfection (perceived by society). And the way we differ is very particular, very individual. These deviations from the standard or ideal make us unique in appearance.
Similarly, there would be an ideal mind or ideal masculine mind with a particular way of thinking and attitude. This again is not constant and varies with time in your society but lets take the case of contemporary society only.
Now comparison with this ideal mind with yours is not easy. To know about the ideal mind exactly is difficult. We have some idea but we can not visualize it. The degree of subjectivity is much more and so is the chance of dispute. To know our own mind is even more difficult. In fact our mind might disturb our understanding of our mind as well as of the ideal mind.
Communication doesnt help much because the meaning of words are also not objective. Let's take an interesting example. Suppose you show me a 'red' rose and tell me that the colour of this particular object is red. Now lets assume that I feel the sensation of 'blueness' when I see that red rose. I will associate this sensation with the colour 'red'. Whenever I would say 'red' I would mean 'blue' but that that would never arouse any suspicion in your mind regarding the inability my visual faculty. We can never experience the experience of others.
Also, our childhood experiences set our attitude towards most of the things. The same word can mean very differently for two individuals resulting a communication gap. The whole sense of morality, good and bad, permissible or not, practicable or not etc varies substantially across cultures. But we have already talked about this issue in our previous posts so let the matter rest.
There are many scopes of intricacies and thus possible avenues of deviation here. So lets assume that such an ideal mind exists and resides in the ideal body of our ideal Man. There would be then a standard thought process and emotional response for a given stimulation. Again we can appreciate that there are the qualitative as well as quantitative features of this ideal mind. If there is a variation in the qualitative features then that is considered to be an extreme or exceptional case(hardcore Insanity beacause of malfunctional brain). What we think is a reflection of the semi-qualitative feature and how we think is a manifestation of the quantitative feature.
Now there can be a comparison between the qualitative features of your mind with the ideal man's mind. How fast are you in calculation? How much does your memory contain? There is a term IQ which represent such quantitative faculties: How we think. Some people are considered to be more intelligent than others.
But the most interesting feature is what we think! Here I would like to say a word of caution. The most important thing is not what we think but that we are inclined to think that more than others. Our nature makes us see certain thing and not others, and for too long. I am pointing to the attitude which blow 'simple' things out of proportion. This involves more degree of subjectivity and individuality. For some of us certain things are more beautiful or important than that for others. We think too highly or too lowly of them. I am trying to explore the world of irrationality, the world of biases and prejudices based on our past and various experiences. We dispense our reason and behave sentimentally. We might exhibit more anger than expected in certain circumstances which might appear to be excessive to others. We might feel touchy about certain things. We might show phobia of something. We all have certain idiosyncracies which are sometimes repulsive or even revolting to others. As these things belong to the domain of emotions and not reason so the methods of rationality hardly works.
All of us have our own set of idiosyncracies. We would admit that we behave abnormally sometimes. But do we know when do we act like that? Do we know our nature of insanity?
The understanding of the nature of insanity is most important for human relationships. If you know the irrational side of a person then only you can say that you know the person. This is what we call understanding. In a relationship we develop understanding and reconcile ourselves with one another's irrational behaviours.
A coach examines the physique of an athlete and advises the best possible career for him or her depending on his or her physical capabilities and limitations. A teacher identifies the skills and IQ level of a student and counsells an appropriate career accordingly. We choose our career on the basis of things like what charms us and what gives us a sense of pride. We might hesitate to admit but it is very childish things that really motivates us. We never share our reverence for our childhood heroes and our fantasies to be like them but we all know that how silently, without saying a word, they lead us.
Similarly it is of supreme value to realize the emotional limitations of a person in order to nurture a stable and successful relation. We must know what is he or she touchy about. We must know what irritates a person and drive him or her mad. I believe human being is predominantly a reasonable creature but we must be human enough to grant 'emotional allowance' to others because we too need it sometimes. It is against social contract to be apathetically indifferent to others' emotional needs. Such an attitude would serve only the purpose of mutual alienation and nothing else.
It is also vital to understand our own nature of insanity. It demads a herculean effort and a lot of honest introspection. We must be aware of our irrational nature. Sometimes the right diagnosis is 50% elimination of the malady. We must know when do we behave unusually or abnormally. At least we would be able to admit our mistakes and sincerely apologize to the persons who we unknowingly hurt by bahaving like that.
Let me admit one of my insanities. I expect exclusivity in any realation which I consider meaningful. This makes me too vulnerable to be left unhurt. Often this impractical expectation makes me disappointed due to its unfulfilment. I tend to be possessive about the person I am related to. I want to get absolute attention and I dont want it to share with anyone. It increases to such an extent where that person feels suffocated and helpless. Again it is not the presence but its magnitude which is disturbing and which makes me insane. The same nature in limit, in proportion is not only agreeable but may be adorable for some because people feel valued and loved.
So I think that knowing a person means knowing his or her nature of insanity. This is what differentiates a person from others and so this is what is unique in him/her.

Thursday, May 19, 2005

Main aur meri tanhaii..

Main aur meri tanhaii..
Aksar yeh baatein karte hain...

Tum hoti to kaisa hota,
Tum yeh kehti, tum woh kehti,
Tum is baat pe hairaan hoti, tum us baat pe kitnii hansti,
Tum hoti to aisa hota, tum hoti to waisa hota,
Main aur meri tanhai..
Aksar yeh baatein karte hain...

Yeh raat hai ya tumhaari zulfein khuli huyi hain,
Hai chandni ya tumhaari nazaron se meri raatein dhuli huyi hain,
Yeh chand hai ya tumhara kangan,
Sitaare hain ya tumhara aanchal,
Hawa ka jhonka hai ya tumhaare badan ki khushboo,
Yeh Pattiyon ki hai sarsaraahat ki tumne chupke se kucch kaha hai,
Yeh sochtaa hoon main kabse gumsum,
Ke jabki mujhko bhi yeh khabar hai.. ki tum nahii ho,
Kahin nahin ho..
Magar yeh dil hai ki kah raha hai,
Ki tum yahin ho, yahin kahin ho...

Majboor yeh halaat idhar bhi hai udhar bhi,
Tanhai ki ek raat idhar bhi hai udhar bhi,
Kahne ko bahut kuchh hai magar kis se kahein hum,
Kab tak yoonhi khaamosh rahein aur sahein hum,
Dil kahta hai duniya ki har ek rasm utha dein,
Deewaar jo hum dono mein hai aaj gira dein,
Kyoon dil mein sulagte rahein logon ko bata dein,
Haan humko mohabbat hai!
Mohabbat hai, mohabaat.
Ab dil mein yehi baat idhar bhi hai, udhar bhi.

Main aur meri tanhaii..
Aksar yeh baatein karte hain...

Saturday, May 07, 2005

Why do I know you?

Priyanka Bhattacharjee, my colleague and friend in geometric software posed a simple question on her yahoo messenger(as her status message) yesterday: Why do I know you?
I found the question interesting. And it triggerred a chain of thoughts. But what I achieved after racking my brain is utter frustration. I could do nothing but to flounder aimlessly in the realm of metaphysics in search for a consoling answer. I attempted in vain to decode the key point of the question as I often do. Many times the answer lies in the question itself. All you have to do is to find out the word which you consider important or emphasized. Or you need to hit upon the premiss or assumption behind any argument or even question. But none of my formula worked. After sometime I relented.
But she aroused me from my mental lethargy by asking this question directly to me. I tried to evade the question and took her for a ride in an absolutely unrelated domain. I praised her for conceiving this great question which was an undeniable testimony of the originality of her thinking and which was so concrate an evidence of her having inherited the Bengali tradition of mysticism etc.
I said then that whys cannot be answered. For instance all us are familiar about the law of gravitation. We are able to calculate the force with which the bodies(independent of their sex!) attract each other. But we do not know why does it happen. Science explains the hows but feels hopelessly helpless when we expect it to unravel the ultimate reasons for anything.
Then I asked her whether she was familiar with Brownian motion. I posited that we are like those little molecules which move randomly in a space and our interaction with one another is like their collision with other molecules which are also moving randomly. Some collisions are very light, like a gentle touch or brush which corresponds to our casual meetings with countless people in our day to day affairs. They scarcely leave anything significant mark in our life. But there are a few people who change the whole course of our life by their forceful impact. Like a head-on collision. For sometime, life seems to be at a standstill! The speed as well as the direction of life changes. Our world-view alters. We change as a person and we notice change around us in the world also!
This often happens when we fall in love!! Life suddenly seems to be beautiful, more pleasant than ever. The songs become more, much more meaningful and everything appears to be dancing with joy at the tunes of life: the leaves of the trees, the clothes hanging on the strings and even the stones at the roads when you kick them with an abstract affection you've never felt before. The flowers shower more fragrance and the moon seems to radiate more milk in the night. You marvel at the various patterns the clouds make in the sky and you wonder at the range of colours the sunsets offer in those evenings. Everything around seems beautiful and the things which are not beautiful never seem to be around! The pressure of pleasure brings literature in life. You remember poetry to recite before her. You even try to write for her but only to rub or throw that away because it hardly expresses your feelings for her. You do everything keeping her in mind and heart. You think everything keeping her in mind and heart. You even dream keeping her in mind and heart. No matter what mirror says, she becomes the most lovely creation of nature. Your eyes see her even while they are closed(believe me it happens!). And her voice defines music for you. You enjoy talking all the banalities and inanities of life at the cost of your sleep. You even read Linda Goodman's love signs for God's sake! You start planning a life with her ceaseless companionship. In a nutshell, you go bananas. :)
But beauty is transitory and it is vulnerable too. Then if anything in life happens which means 'sorry for interruption' in your unrestrained high-amplitude high-frequency romance then you get a shock of your lifetime. And it invariably happens. The son-of-a-bitch Murphy's law is not utterly nonsense it seems! When it happens you suddenly become aware of your hitherto unknown capacity to experience pain. In fact you realize what the word pain means! The gloom of the lonely evenings eclipses the last streak of your happiness. And your own memory creates the phantoms which steal the rest of your life. In the sleepless nights you recall her promises, her pledge of eternal intimacy but then you realize that there exists no court in this world where you could go for justice and appeal against this unilateral decision which affects your life so unthinkably much!! Your mind, if at all it recovers, questions the veracity of her vows but your heart, in whatever number of pieces it might be, refuses to see anything but the look of her glistening eyes in those tender moments and listens to nothing but itself. You imagine thousand possible reasons to absolve her of any perfidy and any guilt(koi majboori rahi hogi, yoonhi koi bewafa nahi hota...). You even hope that she would come back to you some fine day with the same disarming smile as if nothing had happened. You walk to her street in the veil of darkness and stop to look at her house. You turn and look with infinite emotions at the place where you once sat and talked about some most trivial topic in utmost details and with boundless interest. Your eyes continue to see her.. anywhere and everywhere and sooner than later you are declared to be a victim of schizophrenia. You imagine countless circumstances which would have bred better endings or no endings at all. You even remember the things which had never happened. Your plans cry for their future. And many untold stories cry for their expression. But you find youself alone, and utterly lonely. The burden of love and its invisible products seems unbearable. Hardly anything attracts your attention let alone interest. Words like success and achievement become foreign and hollow. The life doesnt seem to be so worth living. The world seems to be anything but of concern. And God seems to be far, vary far.
This was just to present before you the meaning of head-on collision. The effect is actually much more profound but to understand that you'll have to feel it yourself or you need a Somerset Maugham(Of Human Bondage) or a Gabriel Garcia Marquez(Love in the time of cholera).
My God!! This time I royally deviated.
But not for long. While taking my regular post-dinner walk this question again tried to haunt me when found me alone at night. I couldnt resist much. But... just a minute... hey!! my formula worked!! Yes it did. The underlying assumption implicit in this question, or for that matter in any question starting from why is the essential purposefulness of the world. Why means what for? There has to be a motive for everything, for our existence, for the existence of the tree in your backyard and the cat in your neighbour's house, for the existence of the crators on the moon, for any event that occurs.. like the marks you obtained in the history paper in the 2nd term exam when you were in class 8th. I admit everything, however minute, can be of paramount importance for you and me if it influences our life in a subtlest manner. Perhaps that's why we feel obliged to attribute reason to anything around us. We even say that the cow exists to give us milk. But think! Aint we being unduly and unreasonably egocentric? The species like us can be and will be obliterated from the face of earth in no time! We tend to ascribe meaning to everything, big or small. But we shouldnot forget that we do it just to make our life easier and simpler. We tend to categorize, theorize or put things into perspective because of our inherent inability to deal with chaos and disorder. But the truth is that the world is not made for our amusement. And it is not obliged to submit to our megalomaniacal sense of ego and its nonsensical products. And very often we tend to distort the fact to put in into one of the pre-defined class. Robert Pirsig beautifully illustrates this point by giving us the example of Platypus, a mammal which lays eggs. Its discovery had shook the foundation of the scientific world. When the esteemed scientists found it not fitting into the definition of either mammals or the egg-laying animals then they refused to recognize its existence rather than revising their theories!! The theories we make rule our minds after their creation. The 'causal and effect' theory is no exception. But the causal effect is in fact what we observe and interpret by employing inductive reasoning. But there is nothing logical in it. Empirical science is never logical. It is based upon experimentation and observation and assumes that nature is not erratic. But we can never prove with certainty that the nature would continue behaving in the similar fashion tommorow or even 1 hr later. And we can never prove that change in nature is not the nature of nature. But we forget the limitations of inductive reasoning and confuse its derivatives with something absolutely true. So, in a nutshell, all our science is nothing but stories. Pure myth, nothing else. Its only virtue, that too debatable, is technology which keeps us busy(and that's all!!) in the disguise of something which has been conceived to free Man from misery and pain. Bullshit!!
After all our all systems of morality and hence laws are based on certain premises. We presume an order in the system. We believe in a reason which is nothing but blind superstition. But its existence is, like the existence of God, is necessary for those who run the world. It is to fecilitate them, the priests, the kings, and now the leaders and managers. But all of them are either morons or bastards. This explains why(see how deeply this word has been injected in our blood, we can hardly convey our thoughts without it!) we need this word 'why'. To perpetuate the myth of reason.
The more mature behaviour would be, though certainly more challenging, to accept the things as they are. Lets free ourselves from the old patterns.
ciao

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

Redefining sexuality

I remember I saw a movie called 'Abhimaan' by Hrishikesh Mukherjee. This is one of my all-time favorite movies. A well-known singer Amit (played by Amitabh Bachchan) marries an unknown woman from his aunt's village(played by Jaya Bhaduri) who turns out to be more successful singer than him. The outcome is not very unpredictable in Indian society: frustration and jealousy followed by the disintegration of the marital ralationship. The end is, however, happy with a moral lesson that there are more imporatant things in life than the gratification of ego.

But even after watching the consequences of having a huge ego, I could not think of any alternative behaviour the protagonist could have shown to exhibit without overstepping the limits of reality. In the present social framework, it is unthinkable for a man to be less successful than his woman. A woman wants and works to be more successful than thousands of men, but even she wishes her husband to be better than her. If it does not happen, she might lose respect for him. Many a times she starts connecting his failure with debilitation of his character and even libido! Even the so-called broad minded modern women is not above this mentality.

What should Amit do?
Is he supposed to celebrate or at least tolerate his inferiority gracefully? Has he been trained for that? Or has he been trained otherwise?
Is he supposed to work harder till he outshines his wife and redeems his as well as his wife's lost dignity? But then is it not a good action done for bad reasons? You must have heard about 'negative motivation'. Is this a sign of healthy spirit or a way of life worth emulation?

We see some suppositions. We are supposed to be like this and we are not supposed to be like that. We are expected to act like a man or like a woman, as per the pre-defined rules of the sexuality. There are guidelines for maintaining propreity in whatever we do or not do. If you dare to differ or deviate then you are less masculine or less feminine. History says that these definitions are dependent on time and place and are not absolute or immutable. For instance, keeping long hair or wearing pants/skirt can hardly be seen as exclusive masculine or feminine trait. But the voice of rationality is suppressed in the clamor of convention. These ideas of sexuality is so deeply rooted in our consciousness (may be subconsciousness) that it seems it cant be altered without the help of genetic engineering :)

Even success is, predominantly and practically, a social concept. So it is linked with sexuality. Being less successful than a woman is not manly, so shame and confusion, so insomnia, so crash!
What to do?

Ravindar Kour, a faculty member of the humanities department, IIT Delhi has written an article called "Men in Distress" in The Times Of India(30.04.05). The essay touches upon one of the most burning issues of the contemporary society: the gender roles in the 21st century.

Well the work was very witty and I laughed a lot. I liked the title very much, especially because it was conceived by a woman. Well man has always been in distress thanks to the unavoidable presence of women around him:) But this time the reasons are new and more interesting. I have already thrown light over these reasons in my previous post- "Sleeping with the enemy".

What caught my attention was the conclusion. She suggests a solution: to make new models for masculinity to enable man to adapt in the changing world around him. She says that now since man has lost the traditional role of the bread-winner for his family(because now even mamma earns!!), he is facing an acute psychological crisis. He is groping for his lost identity, alone. This makes him 'distressed' and therefore depressed and sometimes deranged too. :)
Result- the high rate of domestic violence and divorce in urban India. Now the story doesnt seem that funny!

She attributs this behaviour to the classic concept of masculinity which is being needlessly carried by us. Its hightime to jettison the antediluvian idea to avoid the sinking of the social ship. Only its removal (like a vestigial organ, say tail) will make us a man fit for the modern world. Noone is trying to suggest here that the present idea of manhood compels a man to react violently when a woman surpasses him in worldly accomplishments. But surely it deplumes him of his self-respect and peace of mind which engender undesirable consequences. So we need some change. Urgently.

Hmm... impressed?? At least I was impressed. She makes sense. When the concept of feminity is ardently being studied and revised and modernized then the idea of masculinty has to be adjusted to ensure compatibility and harmonious co-existence. When the role of woman is being rewritten then the dialogues of man has to be modified else chaos would take control of the stage.

In my previous posts I have mentioned that the root cause of conflict between man and woman in modern world is primarily the social concept of masculinity and not masculinity as such. It is difficult to say what is essentially masculine(or feminine). Try to think and you will realize that most of the attributes we associate with genders are surprisingly not based on reason but on the things as unsuspected as our mythology! We can only throw some light on what the society expects from a man(or woman). Sexuality is a social construct, whether you agree or not. And like every thing created by the imagination of man(for instance- religion) it exercises greater control on our lives(and death) than the forces of nature. There are separate code of conduct for men and women. And this code accordingly conditions the sense of morality, pride and shame for men(and women). A man feels exalted if he does anything manly and a woman feels glorified after doing something womanly. On the other hand, a man is made to feel ignominius if he acts womanish and similarly a woman disgraces herself by being mannish. All of these italicized terms are created and defined by society to control and monitor the actions of an individual. But the presence of rationality in this classification and differentiation is not beyond questions.

But there are people who can appreciate distinction in man and woman beyond biology. You must have heard of a best-seller book "Men are from mars, Women are from venus". The author can see the demarcation between the thought-process of man and woman! He means to say that they are psychologically(not only physiologically) different from each other. That means that the structure of a man's brain differs from a woman's brain. So we can deduce that the sense of sexuality is, partially at least, inherent in us.
A man and a woman living in a jungle would show different response for the same stimulus, and the response is determined by their sex which influences their minds!

Though the admission of this proposition hardly refutes the impact of cultural conditioning, it questions the possibility of remodelling of sexuality. Because one point is certain, any civilization which is based on a culture contrary to biology will not last long. We can not defy the inviolable rules of evolution without jeopardizing the very existence of our species. I am aware I am going far ahead but sometimes exaggeration seems to be the only way to present a perspective.
The next challenge comes in the implementation of the idea. As we are interested in the overall transformation of attitude about sexuality, it has to be popular. Now the dissemination of this new model for adoption and internalization by mass should be very aggressive. Sexual identity constitute a major part of one's identity. So the renunciation of the old one can not be expected to be readily accepted. The new notion has to be appealing, not just convincing. So it has to be marketted. How? May be through media. By publishing new books and telecasting new tele-serials.
Okay, fair enough. But then what are we going to do with the classic literature and movies which shape the minds of people in the traditional way? Because they will continue to perpetuate the old beliefs about gender roles. And then who will dictate an individual to choose a particular book to read and a particular movie to watch? And who should? Is it fair to confiscate subjectivity and freedom from a society to facilitate the injection of a political viewpoint in people's mindset? Should media be allowed to be used as an instrument of political propaganda? These are the sphinx-like questions which need to be answered before doing anything in this direction under the umbrella of rectitude.
At last one passing thought. Wont the proposed desexualization(or re-sexualization) make our life more boring? What'ld be its affect on poetry? On romance? On the man-woman chemistry?What would we do then, for excitement? Will it make ur more libertine? Or will it just lead us to more freedom and individuality? We need to estimate the overall cost of this change before giving it our countenance.
I find myself coming up with so many doubts. They are not unreasonable. But it might be because of the fear of the unknown. It might also be due to nostalgia. Or something like castration complex?? Or do I want to retain my power? Oh no. not again!! Is it nothing but a power game? At least there are people who would dismiss all your arguments in one sweep, by questioning your intentions. No, the poisoning has been done, irremediably. The change is inevitable.
No one can stop an idea whose time has come. - Victor Hugo
In the brave new world, Let Amit and his wife(I dont remember her name) sing in harmony. Amen.