I have to admit, amongst all the books that I received on my birthday this year, I was attracted to this book first, only because of its catchy title. Goes to show that good branding and naming of your product is half the battle won. Similarly in the world of books too, any experienced publisher will tell you that having an attention grabbing title is a prerequisite. 'Stay Hungry Stay Foolish' as a title for Rashmi Bansal's first book is an excellent choice. It is borrowed from Apple's Steve Jobs' now famous commencement address made to the 2005 graduating class at Stanford University. 'Stay Hungry Stay Foolish' were the famous last words of the speech, which meant that all of us have this innate, burning desire, something like a hunger to do something great and big in our lives. We need to work on this hunger, to achieve greatness in our lives. If we do not work on it, we will stay hungry, and stay foolish.
For reference sakes, following is an excerpt of the text of the Commencement address by Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computer and of Pixar Animation Studios, delivered on June 12, 2005, in the concluding part of which he mentioned these now famous words.
"When I was young, there was an amazing publication called The Whole Earth Catalog, which was one of the bibles of my generation. It was created by a fellow named Stewart Brand not far from here in Menlo Park, and he brought it to life with his poetic touch. This was in the late 1960's, before personal computers and desktop publishing, so it was all made with typewriters, scissors, and polaroid cameras. It was sort of like Google in paperback form, 35 years before Google came along: it was idealistic, and overflowing with neat tools and great notions.
Stewart and his team put out several issues of The Whole Earth Catalog, and then when it had run its course, they put out a final issue. It was the mid-1970s, and I was your age. On the back cover of their final issue was a photograph of an early morning country road, the kind you might find yourself hitchhiking on if you were so adventurous. Beneath it were the words: "Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish." It was their farewell message as they signed off. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish. And I have always wished that for myself. And now, as you graduate to begin anew, I wish that for you.
Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish."
The book captures the lives and times of 25 such IIM (Indian Institute of Management) Ahmedabad graduates who chose the rough road of entrepreneurship. These guys worked on their hunger, and did things that people of their times deemed foolish and even after that they remained hungry for something more. This is a brilliant concept, and especially in today's recessionary times, when the world has a bleak vision of economy and salaried jobs in general, it could come as an inspiration to those who want to set out on their own. That is not to say that entrepreneurship is a cushy path, as a matter of fact, all the entrepreneurs in the book did what they did not for the sake of money, and some did not even end up making that much money, but they were in it for creative satisfaction.
In a sense of achieving what the author had set out to achieve, Rashmi has made an inspiring book out of 25 different tales. The 25 entrepreneurs are from different strata of society, started off at different stages of their lives - some started right after their IIM stint, some started after 20 years of working as corporate honchos, and they are from different industries - Retail, Sugar, BPO, Education, Healthcare, etc just to mention a few. It seems a good selection of inspiring personalities and tales, and probably it does propagate the message that as a predominantly young country (as per the latest census, more than 50% of India is less than 25 yrs of age), we should look beyond placements, jobs and salaries; rather we should believe in the power of our dreams.
But whether the book is a good research effort of the lives and times of these 25 individuals is highly debatable. There is an inevitable sense of anguish when one finishes the book, because the research done is really very poor. What Rashmi has effectively done is just write what the interviewee said. Each of the interviews have the same set of questions and after the 5th or 6th tale, most entrepreneurs sound the same. 'First 3-4 years were difficult times, starting a business in India is a behemoth task especially because of the bureaucracy involved, family life suffered, partners moved on, finally somewhere along the 4th or 5th year the business began to break even'. What would have helped better would have been a different perspective rather than just that of the individual. In many cases what the entrepreneur says sounds pretty much like blowing his own trumpet. Rather if Rashmi had chosen to interview the entrepreneur's family, friends, partners, co workers, juniors, etc. we could have seen a different picture emerge.
But that would mean years of research in itself, and maybe coming up with a volume which would cost more (the book is priced at a very economic Rs 125), and would need more time and insight to come out with. Maybe that is what an IIM degree equips you with (IIM-A is Rashmi's alma mater as well). More sense while it comes to producing, branding, marketing and pricing your book. With a minimum production time of about 2 years (and that too with a very active full time job in hand), and a very economic cost, Rashmi is aiming for massive sales of her book to make money, rather than charge more a better quality. Looks like she has cracked the formula. In that respect, we can easily equate her with the Chetan Bhagat (known for 'Five Point Someone' and 'A Night at the Call Center' amongst other books) from the school of Indian Fiction writing. Chetan comes out with very pedestrian potboilers in quick succession (every year or two, he has a new book out), prices them moderately and makes quick and easy bucks. His books sell because the plots relate to and reach out to the entire computerized, gizmoized, Indian IT/BPO geek community who are used to getting away with introductory sentences like "Myself IT Gizmo" every time they are asked to do so. It's a sad, but true fact, that as a country we write complex computer code better than a simple, gramatically correct sentence. Incidentally Chetan went to IIM-A as well. That makes me think, why didn't she include Chetan also in one of the 25 entrepreneurs? Hmmm...Inclusion might mean admitting that his is a successful formula which she is out to replicate with this book of hers, and maybe she doesn't want to do that.
Other than being poorly researched, the book is also poorly written. Rashmi introduces herself as as a writer, entrepreneur and youth expert in the book. Just because you write a blog about youth, which probably a few hundred young guys read, doesn't make you a youth expert. I write reviews on movies and books on my blog, that doesn't make me a movie or a book expert (ya, I know my place!). I don't even understand what being a youth expert means and entails. Maybe she advises young girls what beauty cream to apply when there's a pimple situation, but wait, doesn't that make you a skin expert? Similarly the entire book is riddled with phrases, usages and acronyms which make it a very substandard showcase for Indian English writing. There are entrepreneurs in the book describing their IIM A days saying they took "a few courses like LEM and PPID". Sorry dear reader, this book was meant as a year end scrap book for all my IIM A classmates. Too bad, if you can't understand what it means. Then there are abundant Hindi words and sentences making their way into the book. "Aur itni jagah mein bhi ek 14" ka TV kone mein laga diya tha jahan par cricket dekhte the. So it was a lot of fun. Those were the real days I think...." After every second sentence written in English she feels compelled to break into Hindi. Sample this entrepreneurship mantra: "Find something you want to do, that you are passionate about and paisa to koi na koi dega. Unless it’s a stupid idea!" By now you get the drift of how she writes, I guess.
Maybe if Rashmi had focussed more on doing a better job of what she set out to, it would have been an enjoyable read. All in all it is indeed a great concept, which deserved more research and patience, rather than being put together hurriedly.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Is war the only solution?
As a layman, unknown to the world of politics, war, terrorism, and security, here are my thoughts, questions and comments regarding the goings on in India, a week after the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai:
1) By now, it's amply clear that the terrorists who had laid seige on Mumbai were LeT operatives. LeT is an outfit named amongst the terrorist outfits in both India and the US, and is banned even in Pakistan.
2) It is not clear though whether the Pakistan government had any role to play in this. And it is wrong to assume that they had, inspite of the LeT indeed operating from Pakistan.
3) Immediately after the lone captive terrorist confessed that he is from Pakistan, India had put up a demand with the Pakistani government to hand over 20 of its most wanted criminals who are residing in Pakistani soil now. This list includes Dawood Ibrahim, the mastermind behind the 1993 serial blasts in Mumbai, and the chief of the LeT group as well. It is not the first time that India had made this demand, it has been made many times before, but India upped the ante this time.
4) Pakistan has refused to hand over the 20 most wanted guys to India saying that they have no extradition treaty with India, and if India provides sufficient proof, they will be tried in Pakistan itself based on the laws of the Pakistani land. This despite Pakistan promising full support to India during the investigation and complete transparency.
5) India has got back to Pakistan saying that most of the guys in the list are actually Indian citizens who have just escaped from India to avoid being prosecuted. Indeed the list includes Indians like Dawood, Tiger Memon and some 6 Sikhs. But now this brings an interesting counterpoint, which India will need to answer if we keep pressing with the demand. The Dalai Lama is Tibetan (now Chinese) and is seeking refuge in India right now. The Chinese claim that the Dalai Lama is a splittist, someone actually looking to split Tibet from China, and has asked India to hand over him to China many times. This was even one of the reasons for the Indo-China war in the 60s. During those days, the then Prime Minister of India refused to hand over the Lama to China saying that India has a special emotional connection with Tibet. Today, although India is still smarting from the wounds inflicted during the Indo-China war, we yet refuse to toe the Chinese line. We do not actively support the Tibetan protest for a separate state, in fact, there were special provisions made and Tibetan protesters arrested when the Olympic torch was making its way through Delhi. This is because we know better than to engage in another war with the Chinese. But if India presses for the 20 guys from Pakistan (which I am pretty sure Pakistan will not follow), we can expect a Chinese call someday pretty soon with a similar demand. Are we ready to then hand over the Lama? Have we thought of the consequences? Off the top of my head, if yes we do hand over the Lama, there will be wide spread Buddhist and Dalit protests all over the country. Note that the Buddhists form the 5th major religious group in the country. If no we don't hand over the Lama, the Chinese response could be ranging from anywhere as minimal as a diplomatic tiff to something as severe as strikes along the North Eastern border or who knows, another Indo-China war?
6) So with Pakistan refusing to hand over the 20 most wanteds to India, what options does India have? A war?
7) The media sure seems to think so. One point which I really want to make here is against media sensationalism. Against the media's arm twisting tactics, of putting words into the mouths of ministers and public servants and misinterpreting and broadcasting them later. It's great that the media has considerable freedom in India, that is one of the few privileges that an Indian is used to and takes for granted. The media here is not a mouthpiece of the Government and is considerably free and fair. But in the wake of an issue of tremendous national importance as this, the media definitely goes overboard and does not know where to pull the reins. Just yesterday I was watching on TV the interview of the external affairs minister of India, Mr Pranab Mukherjee by a journalist from NDTV. Couple of times during the interview, the journalist asked whether Mr Mukherjee thinks a war is the solution to this type of a terror strike, to which Mr Mukherjee replied saying that it was not ruled out, but the Indian course of action depended on the Pakistani response. The immediate next headline all over the channel said "India does not rule out a war if need be". Seriously guys, temper down the tone a bit. Today when Mr Mukherjee appeared again in front of the media saying "We will take all steps possible to protect India's territorial integrity", all news channels have gotten into a frenzy decoding and dissecting the message and interpreting that only a war is the solution to tame these rogue terrorist groups operating out of Pakistan.
8) The media seems to forget that a large section of common populace like me, have no idea of what would entail in a war. Never has a war affected me in my lifetime. The only war which India had gotten into since I gained consciousness was the Kargil war. And that was in response to the Pakistani attacks, and that too was limited primarily to the area in and around Kargil in Kashmir. The vast majority of India remained unaffected by the war. But as a person with reasonably decent common sense, I can only imagine the rigors of a life during war. And seriously, what problems in the world have been solved with wars? The palpable anger in the minds of common man is given fuel to by this kind of views echoed by a section of the media, and like I mentioned in my yesterday's and day before yesterday's posts, the internet is rife with gullible young Indians declaring that this is the time for a war. I do not agree, but then I also do not know better as to what the alternative to war is.
9) In the middle of all this, US Secretary of State, Ms Condoleeza Rice came to India today and after prolonged meetings with the Indian contingent of ministers she appeared in front of the media and said that even if non-state actors were involved in the terror strikes, it was the responsibility of the Pakistani state to rein in the terror growing in their backyard. It is really commendable that the US sent its representative to India to guide and advise us, but if this is the only thing that Ms Rice had to say, then I have my doubts whether this was the only thing discussed between Ms Rice and Mr Mukherjee, the Indian external affairs minister. Behind closed doors with the Indian ministers, she might have condoned the idea of a war. The US knows it best when it comes to the ill effects of long-drawn and futile wars. True, there has been no terror strike on US since 9/11, and in many ways, the war probably did act as a deterrent. But not just the war, it was also a better security system, less corruption, a well stocked and well armed police force, modern ammunitions to fight the war and above all a very transparent and accountable political body at the top of the system. Maybe behind closed doors, that's the message she relayed to the Indians - War is not the only solution, strengthen yourself first and then bully Pakistan. And God knows, Pakistan has its own share of problems with these terrorists. But this is just my speculation, and I am just speculating based on all that I am seeing and hearing and reading.
10) Even if war is a good solution to such strikes, I feel that the present government might not engage with Pakistan in a war. For simple reasons, the first and foremost being the tenure of the present government is limited to just another 6 months. India goes to vote in another 6 months, and the present government might decide against a war, just because if the gamble backfires, then whatever little chances remain of it winning the election, even that will get flushed away. As it is, the common sentiment is very much against the present Congress Government and it is highly likely that the next election might see them losing the election battle bitterly. Along with the already sour mood, they don't want to be in a pickle with a war situation.
11) And seriously, if we go to a war with a democratically elected government, aren't we fulfilling the very purpose of the terrorist strikes by the non-state rogue groups? These groups are intent on seeing democracy taking a brow beating in Pakistan. Since the government was sworn in, there have been numerous terrorist strikes in Pakistan itself with the latest one being as debilitating as the bomb blast in front of the Mariott hotel in Islamabad. And really as little as I know about Pakistan and world politics and foreign affairs, it seems kind of likely to me that the State Government is genuinely not able to control the terrorist groups operating from their soil. It does not seem like a case of Pakistan discreetly supporting the terrorist groups, rather it looks like a case of Pakistan unable to contain the terrorist groups in their backyard. With Indians getting into a war with them, we are just forwarding the cause of the terrorists. If India does succeed in the war, democracy goes down the drain in Pakistan, and then we can forget any future peace making attempts with Pakistan.
So like I mentioned many times during this piece, for sure, I think war is not the solution to these terrorist strikes. It is a befitting answer, and a strong one, but will it solve the problem? I don't think so. And if not a war, I do not even know what the possible alternative is. Only the next few days will reveal how things develop, I hope for the better.
1) By now, it's amply clear that the terrorists who had laid seige on Mumbai were LeT operatives. LeT is an outfit named amongst the terrorist outfits in both India and the US, and is banned even in Pakistan.
2) It is not clear though whether the Pakistan government had any role to play in this. And it is wrong to assume that they had, inspite of the LeT indeed operating from Pakistan.
3) Immediately after the lone captive terrorist confessed that he is from Pakistan, India had put up a demand with the Pakistani government to hand over 20 of its most wanted criminals who are residing in Pakistani soil now. This list includes Dawood Ibrahim, the mastermind behind the 1993 serial blasts in Mumbai, and the chief of the LeT group as well. It is not the first time that India had made this demand, it has been made many times before, but India upped the ante this time.
4) Pakistan has refused to hand over the 20 most wanted guys to India saying that they have no extradition treaty with India, and if India provides sufficient proof, they will be tried in Pakistan itself based on the laws of the Pakistani land. This despite Pakistan promising full support to India during the investigation and complete transparency.
5) India has got back to Pakistan saying that most of the guys in the list are actually Indian citizens who have just escaped from India to avoid being prosecuted. Indeed the list includes Indians like Dawood, Tiger Memon and some 6 Sikhs. But now this brings an interesting counterpoint, which India will need to answer if we keep pressing with the demand. The Dalai Lama is Tibetan (now Chinese) and is seeking refuge in India right now. The Chinese claim that the Dalai Lama is a splittist, someone actually looking to split Tibet from China, and has asked India to hand over him to China many times. This was even one of the reasons for the Indo-China war in the 60s. During those days, the then Prime Minister of India refused to hand over the Lama to China saying that India has a special emotional connection with Tibet. Today, although India is still smarting from the wounds inflicted during the Indo-China war, we yet refuse to toe the Chinese line. We do not actively support the Tibetan protest for a separate state, in fact, there were special provisions made and Tibetan protesters arrested when the Olympic torch was making its way through Delhi. This is because we know better than to engage in another war with the Chinese. But if India presses for the 20 guys from Pakistan (which I am pretty sure Pakistan will not follow), we can expect a Chinese call someday pretty soon with a similar demand. Are we ready to then hand over the Lama? Have we thought of the consequences? Off the top of my head, if yes we do hand over the Lama, there will be wide spread Buddhist and Dalit protests all over the country. Note that the Buddhists form the 5th major religious group in the country. If no we don't hand over the Lama, the Chinese response could be ranging from anywhere as minimal as a diplomatic tiff to something as severe as strikes along the North Eastern border or who knows, another Indo-China war?
6) So with Pakistan refusing to hand over the 20 most wanteds to India, what options does India have? A war?
7) The media sure seems to think so. One point which I really want to make here is against media sensationalism. Against the media's arm twisting tactics, of putting words into the mouths of ministers and public servants and misinterpreting and broadcasting them later. It's great that the media has considerable freedom in India, that is one of the few privileges that an Indian is used to and takes for granted. The media here is not a mouthpiece of the Government and is considerably free and fair. But in the wake of an issue of tremendous national importance as this, the media definitely goes overboard and does not know where to pull the reins. Just yesterday I was watching on TV the interview of the external affairs minister of India, Mr Pranab Mukherjee by a journalist from NDTV. Couple of times during the interview, the journalist asked whether Mr Mukherjee thinks a war is the solution to this type of a terror strike, to which Mr Mukherjee replied saying that it was not ruled out, but the Indian course of action depended on the Pakistani response. The immediate next headline all over the channel said "India does not rule out a war if need be". Seriously guys, temper down the tone a bit. Today when Mr Mukherjee appeared again in front of the media saying "We will take all steps possible to protect India's territorial integrity", all news channels have gotten into a frenzy decoding and dissecting the message and interpreting that only a war is the solution to tame these rogue terrorist groups operating out of Pakistan.
8) The media seems to forget that a large section of common populace like me, have no idea of what would entail in a war. Never has a war affected me in my lifetime. The only war which India had gotten into since I gained consciousness was the Kargil war. And that was in response to the Pakistani attacks, and that too was limited primarily to the area in and around Kargil in Kashmir. The vast majority of India remained unaffected by the war. But as a person with reasonably decent common sense, I can only imagine the rigors of a life during war. And seriously, what problems in the world have been solved with wars? The palpable anger in the minds of common man is given fuel to by this kind of views echoed by a section of the media, and like I mentioned in my yesterday's and day before yesterday's posts, the internet is rife with gullible young Indians declaring that this is the time for a war. I do not agree, but then I also do not know better as to what the alternative to war is.
9) In the middle of all this, US Secretary of State, Ms Condoleeza Rice came to India today and after prolonged meetings with the Indian contingent of ministers she appeared in front of the media and said that even if non-state actors were involved in the terror strikes, it was the responsibility of the Pakistani state to rein in the terror growing in their backyard. It is really commendable that the US sent its representative to India to guide and advise us, but if this is the only thing that Ms Rice had to say, then I have my doubts whether this was the only thing discussed between Ms Rice and Mr Mukherjee, the Indian external affairs minister. Behind closed doors with the Indian ministers, she might have condoned the idea of a war. The US knows it best when it comes to the ill effects of long-drawn and futile wars. True, there has been no terror strike on US since 9/11, and in many ways, the war probably did act as a deterrent. But not just the war, it was also a better security system, less corruption, a well stocked and well armed police force, modern ammunitions to fight the war and above all a very transparent and accountable political body at the top of the system. Maybe behind closed doors, that's the message she relayed to the Indians - War is not the only solution, strengthen yourself first and then bully Pakistan. And God knows, Pakistan has its own share of problems with these terrorists. But this is just my speculation, and I am just speculating based on all that I am seeing and hearing and reading.
10) Even if war is a good solution to such strikes, I feel that the present government might not engage with Pakistan in a war. For simple reasons, the first and foremost being the tenure of the present government is limited to just another 6 months. India goes to vote in another 6 months, and the present government might decide against a war, just because if the gamble backfires, then whatever little chances remain of it winning the election, even that will get flushed away. As it is, the common sentiment is very much against the present Congress Government and it is highly likely that the next election might see them losing the election battle bitterly. Along with the already sour mood, they don't want to be in a pickle with a war situation.
11) And seriously, if we go to a war with a democratically elected government, aren't we fulfilling the very purpose of the terrorist strikes by the non-state rogue groups? These groups are intent on seeing democracy taking a brow beating in Pakistan. Since the government was sworn in, there have been numerous terrorist strikes in Pakistan itself with the latest one being as debilitating as the bomb blast in front of the Mariott hotel in Islamabad. And really as little as I know about Pakistan and world politics and foreign affairs, it seems kind of likely to me that the State Government is genuinely not able to control the terrorist groups operating from their soil. It does not seem like a case of Pakistan discreetly supporting the terrorist groups, rather it looks like a case of Pakistan unable to contain the terrorist groups in their backyard. With Indians getting into a war with them, we are just forwarding the cause of the terrorists. If India does succeed in the war, democracy goes down the drain in Pakistan, and then we can forget any future peace making attempts with Pakistan.
So like I mentioned many times during this piece, for sure, I think war is not the solution to these terrorist strikes. It is a befitting answer, and a strong one, but will it solve the problem? I don't think so. And if not a war, I do not even know what the possible alternative is. Only the next few days will reveal how things develop, I hope for the better.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Something new that I learnt today
A friend...no, sorry, an acquaintance of mine, has been very active on the web and online messenger services and social networking sites posting inflammatory messages and articles, suggesting that a war is the only answer to the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai(refer to my previous post on war whores, here, which also applies to him) and getting into an argument with anyone who does not agree with him. On discussing with others as to what should be the reason for such a behavior on his part, I learnt a new term 'Internt troll' which is applicable to him. Here is wikipedia on Internet trolls. Quite interesting!
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
What's with the indecorum, Mr Politician?
I got a text message last night, which was the funniest amongst all the messages that are doing the rounds since the 26/11 attacks. It read "Ram Gopal Verma ki bas yahi kamaai; do sarkar banaayi aur ek giraayi". This might very well be the case, given that the CM has refused to see light even after repeated arguments by the common populace and the media that what he has done was improper. Mr Deshmukh justified his action by saying "Mr Verma is not a terrorist".
RGV (though he is not a minister) was equally blunt when he continuously went on justifying himself and the CM in an interview with Sreenivasan Jain from NDTV. Finally Vasu gave him one last chance to redeem himself, and asked him given the public reaction to the "terror tourism" that he indulged in, if such an opportunity arose again in the future, would he do it? RGV answered very much assertively that he would. There is a thin line between being candid and going overboard, that was when RGV crossed the line.
The ex-Deputy CM, RR Patil went one step ahead and said "Bade bade shahron mein aise ekaadh haadse hote rahte hai". With that comment he made the 26/11 attacks as another common place accident, nothing that the media and common man should get hyper about. The insensitivity was one of the many reasons, he lost his position, that's why the ex besides his designation. His followers tried to make light of it by saying Mr Patil was not well versed in Hindi, and hence he might have misworded what he actually meant. The explanation was too little, too late.
The crudest and the most unexplicable gaffe, now being called 'the lipstick gaffe' came from BJP member, Mr Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi. If I remember well his version when translated in English read as "Ladies wearing lipstick, applying talcum powder and following western culture, light a candle and protest against the politicians. They are similar to the terrorists in Kashmir, demonising politicians, and bad mouthing democracy". Obviously women's groups are in a furore all over the country. So apparently ladies wearing lipstick and applying talcum powder have no right to protest or voice their opinion, they can be equated with terrorists. What a liberating thought!
The biggest and unforgivable statement is the one coming from Kerala's CM, Mr Achutanandan. Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan who is a Malayalee was killed in the 26/11 attacks, when he was rescuing the people trapped in the Taj. After his body made it to Bengaluru, and after even the Karnataka CM made it to his house to offer condolences, there was a media frenzy in Kerala, prompting Mr Achutanandan to express his desire to pay his last respects to the Major's family. Apparently saddened by his son's loss, the Major's father made it clear to the CM that he did not wish to meet anyone. Even then the next day, the CM with his entourage reached the Major's house to pay his respects. Shaken because of his son's death and angered by the politics around something as trivial as paying respects to him, the Major's father drove out the entire group from out of his house and shouted out aloud "Get out of my house, you dogs!" After going back to Kerala, the Kerala CM tells in an interview "A soldier's father should be more sensible. If it was not the house of Major Sandeep (a martyr), not even a dog would have turned up there". It is ridiculous that a person at such a responsible position can utter such insensitive statements and even refuse to apologize.
The politicians and ministers have to understand that they are public servants and not drown in the highrises of their chairs. Emotions are running high all over the country nowadays, and the dirty politics which seem to follow every such event just seem to be beginning. The boiling point of people's emotions seems not too far off now, if the heat does not die soon, and the first ones to get scalded might be the politicians.
RGV (though he is not a minister) was equally blunt when he continuously went on justifying himself and the CM in an interview with Sreenivasan Jain from NDTV. Finally Vasu gave him one last chance to redeem himself, and asked him given the public reaction to the "terror tourism" that he indulged in, if such an opportunity arose again in the future, would he do it? RGV answered very much assertively that he would. There is a thin line between being candid and going overboard, that was when RGV crossed the line.
The ex-Deputy CM, RR Patil went one step ahead and said "Bade bade shahron mein aise ekaadh haadse hote rahte hai". With that comment he made the 26/11 attacks as another common place accident, nothing that the media and common man should get hyper about. The insensitivity was one of the many reasons, he lost his position, that's why the ex besides his designation. His followers tried to make light of it by saying Mr Patil was not well versed in Hindi, and hence he might have misworded what he actually meant. The explanation was too little, too late.
The crudest and the most unexplicable gaffe, now being called 'the lipstick gaffe' came from BJP member, Mr Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi. If I remember well his version when translated in English read as "Ladies wearing lipstick, applying talcum powder and following western culture, light a candle and protest against the politicians. They are similar to the terrorists in Kashmir, demonising politicians, and bad mouthing democracy". Obviously women's groups are in a furore all over the country. So apparently ladies wearing lipstick and applying talcum powder have no right to protest or voice their opinion, they can be equated with terrorists. What a liberating thought!
The biggest and unforgivable statement is the one coming from Kerala's CM, Mr Achutanandan. Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan who is a Malayalee was killed in the 26/11 attacks, when he was rescuing the people trapped in the Taj. After his body made it to Bengaluru, and after even the Karnataka CM made it to his house to offer condolences, there was a media frenzy in Kerala, prompting Mr Achutanandan to express his desire to pay his last respects to the Major's family. Apparently saddened by his son's loss, the Major's father made it clear to the CM that he did not wish to meet anyone. Even then the next day, the CM with his entourage reached the Major's house to pay his respects. Shaken because of his son's death and angered by the politics around something as trivial as paying respects to him, the Major's father drove out the entire group from out of his house and shouted out aloud "Get out of my house, you dogs!" After going back to Kerala, the Kerala CM tells in an interview "A soldier's father should be more sensible. If it was not the house of Major Sandeep (a martyr), not even a dog would have turned up there". It is ridiculous that a person at such a responsible position can utter such insensitive statements and even refuse to apologize.
The politicians and ministers have to understand that they are public servants and not drown in the highrises of their chairs. Emotions are running high all over the country nowadays, and the dirty politics which seem to follow every such event just seem to be beginning. The boiling point of people's emotions seems not too far off now, if the heat does not die soon, and the first ones to get scalded might be the politicians.
Monday, December 1, 2008
War and Vocab
There are two new words that the 26/11 terror attacks on Mumbai taught me.
1) Terror tourism - When people visit sites torn by terrorist attacks not for apparent heritage tourism or nature tourism purposes, but to revel in the glory of disaster caused by mankind very intentionally and brutally. It was most frequenty referred to in the case of the chief minister of Maharashtra, Mr Vilasrao Deshmukh who apparently took director Ram Gopal Verma with him to visit the Taj Mahal Hotel which was the most struck by the 26/11 attacks. Accompanying RGV was Mr. Deshmukh's son, Riteish Deshmukh (yes he has added an 'i' in his name, as suggested by his numerologist), an actor by profession, who has starred in couple of movies made by RGV. This action of terror tourism encouraged by Mr Deshmukh set the rumor tongues wagging that probably RGV is planning a movie on the recent terror attacks on Taj, being a "realistic" movie maker that he is (I don't buy that), and Vilasrao Deshmukh is promoting his own son to be cast as an actor in that movie, and hence the opportunity to see the Taj in its now shambles situation as a sop provided by Mr Deshmukh. The apparently insensitive "terror tourism" promoted by Mr Deshmukh might cause him his position, his head might be the one to roll next.
2) War Whores - All the people who are up-to-date and keep others updated with all news related to the war and terrorist attacks. These people post graphic details of heads, arms, legs, and other bloody body parts disengaged from the rest of the body on social networking sites. They are brazen proponents of the idea that the answer to the 26/11 terrorist attack is another war with Pakistan, just so that they get an opportunity to slut in the bloody aftermath. They are glued to TV all times during such attacks, and rather than providing helpful information, they spread news without waiting to ascertain whether they are certified facts or just rumors. It's not that this set of people have a criminal bent of mind, or anything of that sort, but in their excitement to show solidarity with the victims of the terrorists attacks, they go overboard and make themselves sound as if they are enjoying the war tidbits.
Whoring on the war news in the dailies has definitely increased my language skills.
1) Terror tourism - When people visit sites torn by terrorist attacks not for apparent heritage tourism or nature tourism purposes, but to revel in the glory of disaster caused by mankind very intentionally and brutally. It was most frequenty referred to in the case of the chief minister of Maharashtra, Mr Vilasrao Deshmukh who apparently took director Ram Gopal Verma with him to visit the Taj Mahal Hotel which was the most struck by the 26/11 attacks. Accompanying RGV was Mr. Deshmukh's son, Riteish Deshmukh (yes he has added an 'i' in his name, as suggested by his numerologist), an actor by profession, who has starred in couple of movies made by RGV. This action of terror tourism encouraged by Mr Deshmukh set the rumor tongues wagging that probably RGV is planning a movie on the recent terror attacks on Taj, being a "realistic" movie maker that he is (I don't buy that), and Vilasrao Deshmukh is promoting his own son to be cast as an actor in that movie, and hence the opportunity to see the Taj in its now shambles situation as a sop provided by Mr Deshmukh. The apparently insensitive "terror tourism" promoted by Mr Deshmukh might cause him his position, his head might be the one to roll next.
2) War Whores - All the people who are up-to-date and keep others updated with all news related to the war and terrorist attacks. These people post graphic details of heads, arms, legs, and other bloody body parts disengaged from the rest of the body on social networking sites. They are brazen proponents of the idea that the answer to the 26/11 terrorist attack is another war with Pakistan, just so that they get an opportunity to slut in the bloody aftermath. They are glued to TV all times during such attacks, and rather than providing helpful information, they spread news without waiting to ascertain whether they are certified facts or just rumors. It's not that this set of people have a criminal bent of mind, or anything of that sort, but in their excitement to show solidarity with the victims of the terrorists attacks, they go overboard and make themselves sound as if they are enjoying the war tidbits.
Whoring on the war news in the dailies has definitely increased my language skills.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)