The Do Nothing School

When a society emerges, I guess most of whom we call "intellectuals" feel the need to involve themselves in the shaping of its future. There could be many motivations for it- altruism (most of them are hardly affected by the machinations of the state), a higher calling (simply reading books, doing jobs and thrashing out meaningful arguments in a debate has a shelf life) or simply the egotistic feel of driving the less privileged (less moneyed, less educated and less articulate) on the road to promises.
It does not quite remain the same when the society matures. When the first set of intellectuals retire, their actions are scrutinised and perhaps for some time their halo remains intact. Then as times change, irreverence breeds and new ideas emerge. Newer truths emerge, some skeletons are dragged out of the closets and most halos slip. The "icons" get their sets of admirers and detractors- they debate about the ideology, acumen and the motivation of the icons. The less serious ones do not even spare the private lives of these icons.
The new intellectuals, groomed in the dialogic tradition, face a dilemma- whether to carry on the tradition of public involvement or carry on with their lives. Now, the difficulties of living in a mundane world (same old job, same old environs, same old debates) are less visible. For one, if indeed the society has progressed, there are more intellectuals (as a proportion) to argue with. More intellectuals may mean more books, more ideas and more issues to contend with. Arguments can go back and forth and a lifetime can be spent on them. Newer societies (again if there has been some progress) will create more diverse opportunities (in the private sphere) and will for some time, set back the ennui that settles in a simpler life.
Perhaps more importantly, the courage disappears. Having seen the icons fall from grace, and reduced to old hacks, the new set plays safe- despite the sound bites, chooses no involvement. The muddiness of public service readily offers an excuse- its beyond repair and much more can be done without the stymying public life.
Hence the popularity of doing nothing. It does not feel right to blame this school- after all staying away does not always mean they are irresponsible. Society has to run on wheels- and wheels perhaps run better when there are brighter people running them. And truth be told, a lot of do-gooders are fed on the ambition to be someone (one way or another) rather than out of some higher calling.
But I guess someone has to reinvent the wheel.

Cubicle Diaries III: Conversations

The one on politics:
It is on rare occasions that I chat with one of my flatmates (also a co-worker) about politics. But whenever we do it always veers into the fascinating territory of secularism, existing political parties and systems. I don't why we always manage to strike a chord: it could well may be that we both possess very strong opinions. Him a spokesman of the conservative thought. Me a card-carrying liberal.
I like him for his opinions. His is the unabashed conservative articulation. He is not in the least unapologetic about what he believes in. In discussions, he arms himself with simple yet strong arguments-

• In the recent past, 99% of terrorist activities has been committed by Muslims. Hence the followers of Islam should be under constant surveillance and suspicion. They ought to be guilty unless proven. We are dealing with human lives here (terrorist attacks) and hence you cannot ignore the damning evidence (the 99% fact)
• India needs an anti-terrorist law: special courts, faster justice (or rather faster route to the guillotine!) and hence safer homeland. Why have mercy on people who don't think twice about killing innocent men, women and even children? Why keep them in jails (and why feed them?) while in about a year's time they can hijack an airline and demand the release of such scoundrels? If all this is not pansy enough, what is? The present administration is very soft on terror
• Communism cannot work anywhere, and it can never work in India. As for Chinese Communism (I'm assuming you know what it is) that too can't work in India as we have a democracy that caters to too many opinions

I am quite unlike him. When faced with a conservative, I don't counter each and every argument. There could be many reasons for this, but I am fairly aware of two-

• I am not qualified or experienced enough to have the last word. I have never experienced the three things that make a man shed his liberal inclination ('garb'?) - fear, greed and loss. Fear when you fear for your life and limb. I have not lived through a riot. Greed- that lust for power or money that overwhelms any other consideration. I am moderately ambitious- but I have not yet been presented with a situation of all or nothing- where I can say "Stuff happens" to convince others, not in the least myself. Loss- I haven't lost anyone to terror. I don't know the feeling after such a loss. There is much I don't know or haven't seen
• I prefer equanimity to vitriol. Faced with a staunch conservative, I know I have very little chance of converting him, no matter how hard I try. I listen to the rules of probability and play safe. I abdicate my responsibility to liberalism (and hence society?) this way but that's what I am. A post on that later

So I write. Here is what I wish to say to him but I can't-

• The evidence is damning. But there are many ways to resolve a situation: either I can give up and detain (or worse) kill all Muslims or we live in the hope they elevate their cause to more saner ways: through protests, discussion and debate. We are talking about lives here: "they" are also human beings. The methods of terror are not theirs: they simply adopted it. Terrorism did not have Islamic origins
• Justice does not mean Hindu justice. I am not one to say we don't need better courts- there have been plenty of ink wasted on how we can have a better judicial system- faster courts is definitely not the cure-all
• Divisions are endemic in Indian society. I will not dwell on this, I have far too many posts on this matter. But communism (the Indian brand!) diluted the divisions at places they were successful. It took time but it did happen. A more robust version when applied on the whole of India can do the trick - imagine the power of a communist party with foothold in at least 12 states. And with practised ease, it'll kill off most sources of dissent. The only reason the party has lost its balance today is that it wields too little power (significant presence in 3 states) and too gung-ho on industrialisation. Even then, will it be voted out of power? NO CHANCE. Communism is very effective in reducing all other forms of opposition to nought (not for perpetuity, but for quite some time). Nationalism has the same traits (Hitler, Mussolini, Putin?!) but the constant need for devouring other territories sketches its downfall- Communism does not need this crutch. So the Chinese brand of communism can work in India, provided we have a revolution (a bloody one is not necessary)

I am not a fan of communism. Neither do I have putrid hate for such a system. But I think it can function in India. By this I don't mean any of these- the poor will be saved, the rich will be hanged, inequality will disappear or even we'll become as caste less, secular country. Certain divisions will blur, newer ones will emerge, we'll lose many forms of liberty and there will be the "lives of others". But the system may survive- can't just claim that'll not even last a day.

Mistakes and Life

This post actually came out of three impulses: a chat with my ex about mistakes in life (as portrayed in the novel "The Joke"); idle reminisces about some silly things I did in school. And that the post would be somehow congruent to the latest bestseller "Three Mistakes of My life" (I haven't read the book and neither do I intend to. It's just that I think I can guess what it is about and then contrast it with what I have to write).

Mistakes have always been quite intriguing to me. What is a mistake? If you commit a wrong (something that in itself is subjective) the wrong-doer would try to label it as a mistake and the affected will probably not be so generous. Ludvik, in "The Joke", commits several things that could be labeled differently. His letter to his romantic interest having references to Trotsky (which proved to be a turning point in his life): was it a mistake? surely it was an attempt to "show off" his intellect- in a free society, the only outcome it could have had is a "jerk" from the girl, shaking her head. Or at the maximum, a censure.

But it wasn't a free society. Ludvik, of his age, should have known better. Now there is a belief that one deserves what one gets. Did he deserve what he got? it is from this point subjectivity creeps in. I believe nothing is sacrosanct- and very few believe in this. You try and strip a greatly revered idea/person/faith of its glory and the most likely face you'll see is a shocked one. Worse, universal condemnation.

Was his treatment of the women (who came later) justified? Subjectivity creeps in- answers would vary from "see it from the context" and "no". It'd also include mine- what one goes through in such extreme circumstances is something very few can empathise with. So all actions commited during such periods are very difficult to judge upon. But we have to; otherwise there is no rule of law. We have "extenuating circumstances" to mitigate such judgements. But we cannot free the wrong-doer.

To be consistent, Rule of law cannot be taken as sacrosanct. I've always felt an inexplacable derision towards authority. But I admit its importance; and hence bow down to it.

Life has its own quirks. Randomness (I have been fooled by randomness!) makes sure people make mockery of rule of law- let's not get this wrong- I'm only talking about people who went scot free without exercising any form of influence. Ludvik was also not punished, or rather not in the sense we see punishment.

But he understood the "jokes" of his life. Is the realisation of a wrong, punishment enough? I am in murky waters now. Realisation is not suffering. Or is it?

Life is a narrative. Everyone makes mistakes: some of these are "wrongs". Some are punished for what they have done. Some realise and repent, some don't do either.

Today, the mysterious mind drifted to my schooldays. I remembered a computer class where I (armed with a basic knowledge of MS DOS) was acting smart and had this "I know it all and so I don't need this" attitude. Seated in the back bench, me and a few others (same tribe of "experts") looked at the instructors with disdain and tried to create a ruckus now and then. Try and make a mockery of the proceedings.

The instructors didn't need all this. I'm sure they were getting paid- but noisy kids who know the alphabet and know nothing of prose are something they ought to not have bargained for. Eventually they got me (One female showed me something I didn't know- and how was I to realise that there were so much I didn't know and still don't know). But I saw the light and learnt to be humble.

I realised my mistake- but did it change me? Not really. Even today, I make the same "mistake". With some semblance of expertise under my belt, I sometimes bask in the glory of an "expert". Why? I have seen others do it? A fault built inside me?

Let's not be too difficult on myself. I am rather humble compared to many I have seen. I experience moments of hubris- and sometimes I show it to others strategically. It helps. But experiences (like the one I described) have made me wiser- I am aware of what I don't know, haven't done and haven't achieved.

Mistakes are like death and taxes. At least in my case, it has never ceased to go away. The chronicler knows some of these are "wrongs".

There are no three mistakes in my life. There are too many. I can only rank them according to how they have affected me- not others. That I'll never know- because sometimes they will not tell me or they may not know themselves and more importantly, sometimes I wouldn't like to know.

The Responsibilities of Ideation

Now, honestly I don't know whether the word 'ideation' exists. But it is strewn about by MBAs and so I thought be a cool add-on.
To the topic at hand. Ideas and the creative process at work that generates the ideas as such do not have any responsibility. And it is better not to weigh the creative process with values and so on. There are very few things I believe on, but I have absolute belief in liberty in all forms of creation, including ideas.

But there is one more thing I steadfastly believe on- every creative form can and ought to be subjected to questioning. A critique is not a caricature. It is a process that may actually enrich both the maker and the observer. I don't think I am naive. Obviously, there'd be many voices that will not make sense and may prove to be disparaging enough to set your creative spirit ablaze. But then that is where detachment comes in. And self-control.

Though I'd admit, in spite of the heavy words used above, the first creative form that comes out of a creationist has special meaning to him. Detachment may seem logical, but it wasn't cold reason that made him create. Every critic has the responsibility to take this as a special case. This is where you bring out the kid gloves. I'm sure it feels great to sound like a big guy and brand a new thing as trash. But that is not what a fan of creation does.

So, essentially I wish to say, is that the observer ought not to go ga-ga over a new form (could be an idea) needlessly neither should he criticise it in such forceful terms that it sows self-doubt in the creationist or antagonise relations to such an extent that neither listens to each other. In both ways, the whole point is lost.
Last night, I met a man (for the second time, the first time I barely got to know the guy) who's about to formally launch a new rock band. We discussed his ideas on how he wishes to shoot his video. Since both have little command on the form, we discussed the plot. I am not at liberty to discuss it fully, but then I'll offer a glimpse: imagine a brown man, disturbed by his complexion. He tries many things to be fair, predictably all in vain. But then one fine morning, he goes out and sees a Black man. It changes the way he thinks- he feels good that his case (sic) is not as bad as his. And then other such scenarios follow.

The idea is nothing new. Explored and dissected in many forms of culture and refined to the extent the aforesaid idea seems a little hackneyed. But then I nodded along, amidst one guy gushing about it (this guy, also my flatmate, considers Tom Clancy as his favourite author. Easy to guess why he is not an audience that needs to be taken seriously). The Rocker put more perspective- in India, where bands sell teeny-bopper romance and puppy love, this is quite a remarkable break. Usual videos have a typical fare- pretty men and women flaunt their bodies, teach people how to make out, and sometimes double up as travelogues for exotic destinations.

This made me look at the idea afresh. It obviously didn't seem any brighter, but at least I knew what he was saying when he claimed that it'd be different.

But what disturbed me was the fallibility of such an idea. The purpose of the idea is not at fault: it wishes to make people feel good about themselves. But the way it seeks to do it is gravely at fault. When you look at the black man on the street and consider yourself lucky, you're still trapped in the world of comparisons. It can only give you temporary solace. One can argue that it will make the person think about his obsession about his shortcomings and come to terms with what we are but does it naturally follow?

I think not. If you are stretching boundaries, stretch them a little bit more. A black man on the street will make you happy today. It won't make you happy tomorrow when you see someone with a paler complexion. If you think I'm making a case out of nothing, then think of this: how many times one has looked at a destitute and considered himself lucky? Has it led to a life-altering epiphany that what you are what you are and one ought not to be bothered about falling back in the great race of life? NO. Everyone still runs the great race, constantly checking how the other guy is doing to make sure he does not fall behind.

The only way, I think, you can escape the vortex of this constant pursuit of "Happiness" is to transcend the realm of comparisons. The brown man has to come to terms with his skin and find the beauty in it, but not by seeing himself as superior to the black man. I am not stupid enough to think that its easy to stop doing what people has accepted as being natural. But I have the responsibility to say that the idea falls short on this and can perpetuate the compare-and-compete world we live in.

Stretching the piece too far, and just for the benefit of my JNU brethren, the "feel-good" the idea propagates reflect the class system. The finest among us sit atop the pyramid, marveling us with their blessed gifts (gift? - or a gene matter? subject matter of another post). The intermediates are stuck in between and feel satisfied that they're better than the worst.
The worst, well, we all know what the class system thinks of the worst.

Isn't rock music supposed to be radical?

The Thing with Art

Now I really don't know what art (in the universal sense) means- but I do know what constitutes art to me. Memorable cinema, an eminently readable book (prose), music, a piece of sculpture that makes you feel so damn inferior that you wish to die (!!!), the art of capturing the world through lenses (photography) and of course art itself (paintings). There are dramas, poems, and a variety of other things that qualify as art bust since I am ignorant of these mediums, I won't consider them here as I really don't have anything to offer on them.
I am at a stage of life where one questions oneself- what is going to be the driving force? What is going to be that single-minded pursuit that makes you wish to live a little longer, die a little later?

For me the late realisation has been art. I am late at this game, but hopefully not too late. I have had so far exposure to very low brow stuff- but then I am born in a country that boasts of neither the Gallic flair or the American ingenuity.

There are perhaps two ways to the high pursuit of art- eclectics or the esoteric. For me, the time has not yet come to make such a decision. The two-year old kid does not decide between Oxford or Cambridge. I am at a cultural infancy and it could take a decade before I reach the stage where I may have to chose either.

Now why art?

Honestly enough, though it may seem to be a logical conclusion for a Bengali rice-eater, its sheer enjoyment that drives me to this goal. All I am valiantly trying to project here is that it is not the cultural pull or the omipresent desire to be cool is driving me. Or at least that is what I think.

As for coolness, honestly put, I move in a company that hardly appreciates my diligence. People ridicule me when I see an excellent movie twice in the theatre and throw up their hands when I refuse to give in to their pleas to accompany them to very below-average movies. To illustrate, I'd watch the Rashomon as many times as possible to grasp the narrative and the finesse of the craft but choose not to watch the regular potboiler. This is not to say I avoid all blockbuster material. In fact, I make it a point to see them. I value the presence of stars (the ones who can act) and find their utilisation a key aspect of the craft.

Coming back to what I was saying, all this is not helping me get cool. Its making me alone.

Interestingly, a very good friend of mine is much higher on the art scale than I am. Yet through some way, he retains all his old friends who have not, obviously, been on the same pursuit. He switches between avatars with remarkable ease. So in front of women, he'll be the gentle soft-spoken cultured guy. In front of me and another good friend (I like to think of us as the triumvirate, but both of them frown on it, as it affects their homophobic sensibilities!) who share the same tastes, he's the guy we like and know- the analytical, argumentative, radical and the really well read Sid. And in front of the guys, he is a raucous fellow showering expletives, one-liners, puns, toilet humour and yes, unsolicitously toughening them up (by simply taking them on fights- it helps he's huge)

Now I can be many different people too. But definitely not with ease. I have acted in my time (nothing so grand- skits and all) but those are meant for the stage. My general personality remains the same, except as someone very close alleged, it changes quite a lot over time.

So with this unvarying persona, I am finding it difficult to reconcile my sole aim in life with the very necessary need to make friends.

A difficult existence.

What bothers more that it is out of choice.

Cubicle Diaries II: Alienation?

Traversing through the corporate realm, I cannot feel but alienated sometimes. To convince myself (my blog does not boast of any readers) , let me recount two particular instances-

• Recently I heard the story of a fellow who just disappeared without a trace. He left his reasonably well paying job, the fast lanes of Delhi and his parents for a cult somewhere in the bowels of Middle India. Everyone knew his devotion to the cult (many a times colleagues and friends have noticed that) but no one guessed this would happen. While I discussed with some people I know, they all seemed to agree that the guy may be a little loony and such an action is certainly irresponsible. I am yet to find someone who thought the decision was mysterious and to an extent, required courage
• Interpretation of films has become a source of major irritation. The blatant labeling of brilliant movies like "Dark Knight" and "Fight Club" as action movies is somehow unacceptable to me. Sure they had elements of action, but the underlying theme was nothing but a direct contest between good and evil, embellished by car chases, kick-ass action and pyros. Yet otherwise smart men (boasting of impeccable degrees, certifications and work performance) do so. Why are people so lackadaisical in their attempt to understand mediums of entertainment?

The general reception to radical ideas are still met with ridicule, and at best skepticism. Reconciliation with such attitudes are extremely difficult. Why is everyone so dismissive?

Running away from it all requires conviction. The reason I have reserved my admiration for the runaway fellow's action is that, needless of how it finally turns out to be, the decision needed courage. And the execution a kind of daring that I can only dream of.

Despite all the talk, I have myself settled into a stasis that can hardly be shaken by anything. Only perturbed by events that somehow effect me, the whole spirit of idealism has been grinded to dust and everything seems past now.

The past in itself an alien world. I hardly reflect back- and I am yet to understand why.

Perhaps alienation works in many ways. One alienates from oneself, as well as from others

A Bit of Social Service- Hyderabad Facts

It's time to admit it- I have the writer's block. I could never write well, but lately I haven't found anything to write on. Sure, I can go on rambling about the lack of meaning in my life, the mediocrity inherent in me and such inglorious stuff that I keep moaning about in my posts. But after all, as a dear friend pointed out, this is not a personal diary and it's time I stopped using it like one.

So let's help out people. I'm fairly new in Hyderabad (five months now) and so my list of places to be is far from being an authoritative one. But I can always try and here's my best shot. Point to be noted is that I'm 24 and have a wee bit of disposable income, so there may be places that you think are too yuppie or too expensive. Or maybe too oldy or cheap.

Places to EAT (has to be the first one) -

1. Aromas of China: situated at the top floor of the City Centre Mall at Banjara Hills Road No.1, is the probably the best place to have chinese food in Hyderabad. Try out the squids (I like the salt & pepper preparation), the steamboat and the sticky fried rice. Hell, try out anything. If you don't like it, I'll treat you to your favorite chinese place. Approx meal for two- INR 800-900 (w/o drinks)
2. Barbecue Nation: Opposite City Centre Mall. Not quite the Gurgaon version, but pretty good all the same. A must for all the carnivores. The buffet spread for Rs 450/head is quite a deal.
3. Fusion 9/ Deli 9: Very classy place- or rather my kinda place! Lebanese platter and pizzas are very good. Also do try the Lamb chops. Beer Pitcher for Rs 470 works best for a 3-4 strong group. Meal for two- INR 1000.
4. Angeethi: Cheap but succulent. Dressed up as a dhaba, but surely the only top-floor dhaba in the country. Indian food. Approx meal for two- INR 600. Near the City Centre Mall. Recommended are the kebabs, Rogan Josh and Mutton Barra
5. Mainland China: Decent chinese food. Love the lunch buffet - INR 250 during weekdays, INR 350 during weekends. Near the Ashoka Metropolitan Mall. Good service.
6. Indijo's: Great weekend lunch buffet. Cheap too- INR 300/head. City Centre Mall. Weekday buffet (if you get the time) is at an eye-popping INR 190/head
7. Eatway@ NKM's Grand: Decent weekend lunch buffet- INR 287/head. On the Taj Krishna down road.
8. Copper Chimney: Good Indian.
9. Bowl'o'China: Cheap chinese food. There are quite a few branches.
10. Noodle Bar: Decent chinese food. Hyderabad Central Mall.
11. Sahib Sindh Sultan: Decent Indian. A bit pricey. City Centre.
12. Rajdhani: Veg place, but worth the visit. Situated on the top of Big Bazaar, Ameerpet. It has a traditional Indian feel. The place and the food is really good, but I didn't enjoy my visit, as it was like a Metallica fan forced to listen to ragas.
13. Chinese Pavilion: Cheap chinese.
14. Ohri's: At Road No.2 Banjara Hills, a great place if you wish to impress someone about hyderabad. A multi-cuisine place, with every floor devoted to each cuisine. Decent midnight buffet.
15. Paradise: Decent biryani.

Places to Go-

1. Eat Street: Lake facing food court. Good place to kill time. You can also take the jetty to the island.
2. Lumbini Park: okay place to kill time. Besides Hussainsagar.
3. Golcoonda Fort: Good place to hang around. The lights and sound show tedious.

Pubs-
Not too much into drinking, but being a social animal often accompany friends. Some good places are-

1. Ten Downing Street: Just as it sounds, it has a unique Brit feel, minus the snootiness.
2. Firaangi Paani: A place, yes you've guessed right, full of firaangs looking for a quick drink.
3. Xtreme Sports Bar: Cheap place and positioned opposite the City Centre mall. Average music (but you can put in your recommendatios to the DJ - he acquiesces to my demands for Led zep and Doors)


This much for now.