Saturday, November 21, 2009

If Shivaji came back.

The council of the afterlife carefully examined the application, and debated over it for a few years. Then they granted the applicant's wishes, with all the regular conditions ofcourse.

On a remote hill, in the centre of India,amidst the broken fortresses, a King of old reappeared.
His name was much celebrated, for he was the high king of the Marathis, and a few centuries after his birth- the overburdened bearer of its pride. Curious, he was- about how his land was and whether it had prospered.Now, his wish was granted. He could observe and speak, eat and drink. He could ofcourse claim that he was Shivaji...but who would believe. Even in the land of superstitions and Shivaji worshippers, he would be yet another actor. He had sixty earth days ofcourse, before he would have to beam back to the other world.

Much aghast he was, at the broken state of his proud forts. One after another, they were just mudpiles flying foreign flags and guides speaking strange tongues. The marathi they spoke was a strange too, but several hundred years would normally do that. He walked the land..through sugarcane and paddy, highways and hotels. He was crestfallen, to learn that there was a king no more and that his precious state was ruled by outsiders...from that ancient source of evil..Delhi. His work had been broken.

On a lonely rock, atop a windy hill, he lamented the loss of his kingdom. While in his anguish, in the far off distance, he beheld a mighty city...stretching down to the sea, glowing brightly in the overcast monsoon darkness. Over many a days he drifted into the city. In his time, this land was just wet marshes and islands. In the harbours, he could perceive a great many ships flying the same foreign flag. As was his reason for coming, he spoke to many- the fishermen who spoke his tongue, the driver of the horseless carriage who spoke another and the fire worshipping man who spoke a third. Mumbai the city was called.

He learned of how the world had changed since he departed to the next. He learnt of the British, the fight for freedom, the birth of a new India and the importance of Mumbai in this new nation.
It was not clear , whether he appreciated it completely. But, his opinion was no longer of importance. He had only come to see how his land was prospering.

He found that there were still some who claimed to defend his country for him. Infact, they seemed to believe exactly what he believed on his death bed. He wondered if they were his true successors. One day, he went to a large hall, where the shadows of people moved and spoke...larger then lifer they were. The shadows were descriptive of a man(we will refer to as A) who claimed that invaders from other parts of India had to leave his state. Shivaji, the courageous, found it hard to understand why A was being deified by an actor who was from the far north and a director from the far south, the very people who A wanted to be kicked out. It made little sense to Shivaji. Infact, it would make little sense to any one, why A was being deified.

Shivaji's time on this world, was once again ticking to an end. He,as was his nature, wanted to one last time defend his old country. He joined A's army and marched on a tall building. He put his club to good use and was once again in his element- the fearless king. In marathis defending outsiders, he saw traitors. In outsiders working to make Mumbai and themselves prosperous, he saw parasites. Such was his worldview, for he was from a time when the Marathas- feared warriors, fought hard to save their independence and their way of life. That, that time had gone, was not appreciated by Shivaji.

A's activities had set the city afire. Out with all those people who cant speak out tongue, they cried. Shots echoed in the distance, as the local government struggled to bring control. Shivaji ran now, trying to find as many invaders before the messengers of heaven arrived to get him. In the darkness and the melee of battle, Shivaji looked like one of those men from the north..yet, he did not realize it. At one corner, stood the army he had fought proudly for. Into their waiting arms he ran. He let down his guard and smiled. The smile froze, as he noted that a large sword had pierced him in the heart. He felt no pain, for his body was only a vehicle for his spirit. The body lay limp and the spirit of Shivaji drifted up into the world of the afterlife above.
He beheld with his senses, his lands once again...far they stretched, further then he could imagine. Beyond its ancient boundaries, the lands of his country stretched on. It seemed that his lands had grown and become part of a larger land...with wide hills, quick rivers and thick forests.
A light dawned on him. His time had passed.

Postscript: No offense to mighty Shivaji.Offense meant to several morons, who inhabit the 21st century but use brains produced in the 17th.

Sunday, November 01, 2009

Remembering Mrs. Gandhi, for what ?

I was seven months old when Indira Gandhi died.My dad apparently cried. A lot of other people cried and a lot of others- died. On the occasion of the twenty-fifth death anniversary, many have used the occasion to write essays that have been ubiquitously titled- Remembering Mrs. Gandhi.

My title does not imply disrespect, though I cant claim to have any real respect for her.
I am just disconcerted by modern day perspectives of Indira's contribution to India as described by several news outlets. It reminds me of the slogan- " India is Indira". We remember only her achievements,but not her crimes. Yes! crimes. I will not get into any of the hearsay and rumors that have circulated about her and the way she governed. She was an Iron lady etc and fought the Congress syndicate to become prime minister. So, yes, she was a hard knuckled politician. In this character, she was responsible for the dismissal of the first democratically elected leftist government in the world (in Kerala). She was also responsible for the rise of the extremist movement in Punjab, one that eventually lead to her death.

She also ushered in the era of institutionalized political corruption and incompetence.Her abolition of elections of Congress leaders ensured that only her cronies,not people of talent, were in power. By annointing Sanjay Gandhi her sucessor, she made a mockery of democracy and set an example that Shivsena, TDP and DMK have managed to replicate with much efficiency.

Then, ofcourse, there was the Emergency. India has actually had multiple emergencies. However, only one is reffered to as "The Emergency". In her hunger for power, the Iron Lady hammered democracy into cutlery to serve herself,her family and her closed circle of fawning courtiers.Much has been said about the emergency and I will not go there, except to wish that we dont ever go through another again. I dint live through one and dont want to live through one.

Those of us who want, remember her as Kali- the decimator of Pakistan. But I urge you to consider one important statement. Liberating Bangladesh was no doubt a great military victory.
It possibly increased the confidence of Indian citizenry, but arguably made no lasting contribution to India. On the other hand, her methods to guarantee her political power have poisoned democracy, governance and India itself.

Monday, October 12, 2009

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

Nobel and Ignobel

Nobel and Ignobel were brothers, step brothers infact. Nobel was the nerd. He invented dynamite, gelatin-the explosive that is not made from cows and wrote a play called Nemesis. The play about an Italian noble (not nobel) woman was so horrendous that his wife eloped with his step brother and his well wishers burnt the rest of the copies of the play. Depressed,broken, but not bankrupt...Nobel was on his death bed. A french newspaper greatly exaggerated reports of Nobel's death and wrote about how he had invented weapons that killer faster then ever before. (this was wierd, since the death of even the most blood thirsty, but victorious despots only leads us to express our sorrow..but not our happyness). Our man Nobel, read his obituary, was upset and to link his name with something better...created the Nobel prizes. Oh! Nobel laureates, wake up. You are winning bloodied money. (not to say that I wont take it, if they give it to me).
(Note: Indian readers will also know the name Bofors. Nobel, at one point of time owned bofors).

Now to the step brother.Ignobel was a ladies man who made a living running a circus in Russia. He was infact, the creator of the Russian circus.He never liked his brother.
In true filmy style, they fought each other. It was a long and deadly vendetta.It was also not much helped by the fact that Nobel's wife eloped with Ignobel. Anyway, after Nobel's death, Ignobel, still hale and healthy, decided that his name too should live on.Thus were created the Ignobels, in memory of the fun he had.
This year's Nobel and Ignobel prizes have been announced.

Its always fun to start off with the Ignobels, awarded by a very interesting journal called Annals of improbable research (http://www.improb.com/airchives/paperair/index.htm). This year's chemistry prizes went to Tequila diamonds and a brassiere that can be converted into a gas mask. I think that tequila diamonds are an excellent idea. I have had the horror of multiple encounters with that vile substance and guess that another grad student like me came up with the idea of putting it to better use. However, I wonder what happens to the catterpillar at the bottom of each bottle. I am told that there was no tradition to pickle a caterpillar in the bottle.But at some point of time, an enterprising salesman realised that the americans would drink more of it , if it came with something wierd.
Now to the bra, its clearly for women who work in really hazardous environs. Why else would you need two of them?Further, whats gonna happen to the men? This is just sexist. Its just more evidence of the feminist plot to take over the world.
(note: to people who like annals of improbable research,I also suggest http://www.jir.com/ )

Moving onto the Nobels, the biology/physiology/medicine prize went to a trio- Elizabeth Blackburn and her student Carol Grieder and an independently working person Jack Tsoztak(or something like that). They solved a pretty important puzzle and much deserved it. As usual, the Lasker awards, given to them in 2006, predicted their nobel well in advance. I will direct you to wikipedia for all the facts about telomere and telomerase (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telomerase). I will add what wiki doesnt say. Telomerase was once the magic bullet to make us live forever. However,only diamonds from tequila are forever, we may at most die another day- with or without telomerase. Despite this horrible fact, many biology students have had a love affair with telomerase- brief for some, longer for others.

There is also one other lore about telomerase.Carol Greider is often portrayed as the greatest phd student that ever was- since she discovered telomerase on Christmas eve-hard at work while everyone else sang christmas carols. Cornell was also all abuzz becase Dr.Jack was once a grad student at Cornell...in the aeons long forgotten. This nobel prize also marks another important trend: the rising number of women in biology.

Now the physics nobel went to people who got us fiber/fibre (do you speak british english or american)optic cables and CCD. CCD brings to us digital cameras in their most ubiquitous use and the Hubble space telescope in its most exotic use. While it is debatable whether it deserves a nobel, its in keeping with previous nobels going to technological developments like PCR, rather than a fundamental scientific advance. Now, the Fibre optic cable nobel is bound to cause some heart burn. While, Dr. Kao undoubtedly made several critical technical contributions, several others including an Indian called Narinder Singh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narinder_Singh_Kapany) made pioneering contributions, which have possibly gone unrecognized. However, I am not competent to understand Dr. Kao's contributions and will leave it as such.

The chemistry and peace prizes are yet to come. I wonder who the peace prize is gonna go to. I am betting that it would be a somewhat not so well known figure, so in short..i dont have a clue.
I stopped studying chemistry 5 years ago.I will stop at that. Nobel prizes in Literature are usually for books that are of the Sylvia Plath school of literature- i.e books you wouldnt read or write if you were in the right frame of mind. Some of the authors are so obscure that some judges openly boycotted the final choice. However, in truth , there are many a nobel prize winning book that make a good read. My candidate for a nobel in literature would be Bill Waterson, for Calvin and Hobbs...which must be one of the greatest pieces of American literature ever.

However,here is a true prediction for a future nobel prize: Yamanaka and others who have discovered the technique of making embryonic stem cell like cells from adult tissues.

with that..........I end this rambling discourse.

Note: Some creative license used.

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Around the World in stereotypes





Around the world in 80 days was one of my favourite books, as a child. So, in honour of those days, I today watched a version of this movie starring David Niven. The movie, and in retrospect, the book, should be labeled "Around the World in Sterotypes". The movie starts in a Gentleman's England where the maintenance of standard time, the drinking of tea and the exhibition of sangfroid that would put a million fictional spies to shame is all the rave.
First stop in the movie is Spain. Spain has his august highness, a moorish prince and ofcourse a bullfight. I was willing to accept this deviation since the man playing Passepartout was a real life Bull fighter of some fame called Cantiflas.
The next major stop is India- which is ofcourse replete in elephants, holy men and human sacrifice .Through the twenty minutes spent by the movie in India, I dint see anyone who was not involved in some sort of activity that involved religion or mysticism.It almost seemed that no living Indian was normal. Hong Kong made up for its lack of exotic features via ostrich drawn cabs. What ostriches were doing in HK, I really dont know.
Much comment was reserved for the United States, which is reffered to by Philleas Fogg as " a very primitive country".I had a hearty laugh when Fogg reprimands his man servant for tipping a waiter at an SF bar with the splendid line- "Do not spoil the natives."I wonder what Fogg would have to say if he realised that you have to spoil them with 15% of your money each time you go out.There was a 2 second Frank Sinatra cameo. He was playing the piano in the bar.Maybe, it was just before he approached the Corleones to sort out his problems! No movie about the wild west is quite finished without the red indians. They are at first peaceful. As the ticket collector in the train explains, "You can say that by the peace pipes they are smoking".The wild west is wild, with falling bridges, falling rocks and ofcourse more hostile indiansHowever, the tactical maneouvering of the indians is rather limited because of fenced off farm land lying next to the rails. To end it all, life in the United states is ended by the cavalry riding to the rescue. There were some skunks, which I think is an important feature of life in the United States.

When I finished the 3 hr long movie, which could have been 2 hours or less, I just wondered about what Jules Verne must have thought about each country as he wrote the original book. Much of the book's alure is the adventure of traveling through strange lands.Jules Verne was by any standards, a well read man. He would have probably cherry picked facts to make his book a blockbuster. The lands he describes arent that strange anymore. But, it brought to me an important realisation- spin doctoring is an ancient art, further- its useful in any era.

Thursday, January 15, 2009

What is India

For twenty-one of my twenty-three years, I lived in Hyderabad( a city in the state of Andhra Pradesh).I was brought up, never in doubt of my identity as an Indian. But I never ever asked the question of what makes an Indian. This question, I posed to myself after many an important personal experience.

Over the last two years, I stayed in Bombay, working at an institute which attracts people from India and beyond. Many an experience here made me ask that question. A Taiwanese student who had come for a conference after meeting half a dozen people from all over India- remarked that they all looked so different. We are also different, yet what makes us a nation?

Nations all over the world have been mostly constituted on that basis of the ethnic nature of their populace. In a few countries such as the United States, different ethnic groups are mashed into one. I argue that India stands apart, a society of not one or two different ethnic groups ( as seen in many countries), but a collection of disparate and diverse groups. I feel proud that India, essentially a freak, a unique example in history stands strong as a nation- nearly sixty years after its birth.Again, what makes an Indian?

Is it a common pre-modern history that contributes to this? We do share a common pre-modern history.The Mogul empire,the gupta empire etc. did bring unify large parts of India.But i argue that many European nations were once part of the Roman empire, the French empire etc, but they all don't claim to be a part of a common country. Fifty years of attempts have brought them only to a community. No, our common pre-modern history is not what welds us together.

I have heard from many a people that its a religion that unites us. This is a supremely fallacious argument. We have the second largest Muslim population in the world. According to the introduction to the law of the land that Indira Gandhi got added,we are a secular nation. I agree that the secularism is maintained in place not only by government policy but by the actions of one religion discriminating against another. Anyway, further, an overwhelmingly large majority of south America is Catholic Christian, but they never failed to unite. We could have had multiple republics within India which were of a Hindu.No, religion is not an argument.

......to be contd.


Continued at long last....

I must confess, after writing the first part, I realised that I had no real clue as to what India is and what defines us as a nation state. My inspiration to finish this, ironically comes from a recent BBC documentary called 'the story of India'. In it, is described the march of India and its population from prehistory to the modern era. It then stuck me that there were two common features or threads that run through the whole of the subcontinent, two important features that make India. Also,some of my current arguments may be at odds with what I have previously written. Its part of an evolving argument I am having about what really makes India and who is an Indian.

Our ancient history:
Of the known history of the subcontinent, modern geopolitical India has been united for only for a small fraction of time. However, culturally, the subcontinent has been united for most of this history. I will make no claim to Indian culture being a North Indian or Aryan synthesis. However,all I will say is that the geographical limitations placed by the mountain ranges in the north and east and strong native cultures in the west created a real mixing pot. The cultural influences of the north would spread south and and southern cultural influences would spread north. As the centuries passed by, though they were some differences, the Indian subcontinent as a whole could be considered by certain metrics to have similar cultural features.
Important among these are the spread of Hindu, Buddhist and Jain religions. There is ample evidence that while these spread to the south of India from the north, there was a great schools of Hinduism and Buddhism in the south. From the south spread a multitude of dance forms to the north. This cultural synthesis is one of the most important features of India.
One important event that cannot be brushed over is the role played by Sanskrit as a progenitor of multiple primary languages in north and central India. However, I agree that Sanskrit probably had lesser influence of Tamil or that it has been purged over the ages.( My understanding of the linguistic relationships of Indian languages requires more reading and I will make no judgements.)Sanskrit would have provided a conduit for ideas, a factor important in the homogenization of Indian culture.

Now, the important question is - How does this part of Indian history really affect modern India? It might be argued that several Indian political and cultural practises. Hammurabi's laws have often been held up as the progenitor of law in many regions of the world and has probably affected us also. However, some of the greatest influence on our laws, both those in the constitution and those that are social are Ashoka's edicts. Why else would we use his symbols as our national emblems? The concept of peaceful coexistence has also been an important feature of Indian foreign policy. Arguably, therefore, these concepts have also deeply influenced us through the generations. As the 'story of India' made me realise, we are the projections of three or more millenia of history.

Medieval and Modern Indian History:

As Northern India came under the infuence of various Islamic Dynasties, North Indian cultures diverged from the more insular Southern India. Language, architecture and religion were heavily influenced by Muslim invaders coming from the west and central asia. This is a defining point in Indian history creating a point of divergence between southern and northern india, a divergence that would need to be bridged. The divergence and some could claim- animosity between the south and the north is so huge that they might have really been two independent nations. So, why are they one nation? Why do people on both sides of the Vindhyas consider themseleves Indians? I think here in lies the importance of a few good men who brought India together at Independence.
There are many who claim that it was really the British who united India. But they forget, that at independence- Kashmir, Hyderabad, Goa and Pondicherry werent really a part of India. Also, they forget that most of the princely states were given the choice to secede and form independent kingdoms. So how did the Indian national identity crystallize? There exists a reasonable case that this identity arose due to the actions of a few men.

Indians are prone to hero worship. Indian religions and culture, more than any other mainstream culture, has portrayed god in human form- or shall I say forms. In an extension of this habit, we have considered a few men- the likes of Gandhi and Nehru to be demigods. One provided the culture of ancient India moderated by the modern world while the other provided the modern world tempered by ancient India.Modern India rallied to them. As far as I see it, the British provided a medium through which these men reached out to modern India. Its probably the love of these men that fashioned modern India- bridging the gaps that arose between the vastness of the Indian subcontinent.

Post independence, we were all conditioned to believe that diversity was the normal state of existence. Regional heros became national heros. Thats what I think India really is, a melting pot. Thats where I think we are heading- towards a synthesis of north and south, old cultures that never die but are only refashioned by modern gods.

I hope I have done a modicum of justice to this topic. I am not sure I have touched all the important points and more importantly, my ideas on this topic are still evolving.

Sunday, January 11, 2009

Ice and snow

Ithaca is picture perfect when it snows. Cosy cottage like houses, pine trees and beautiful lonely lamps, all blanketed by white snow. Hurts the eyes by day, glows deceptively warmly in the moonlight and forms snow men when the university is in session. From the hilltop, you can see the world white. From the warm indoors, you know why the poet fluffs about fluffy snow. You can see the ploughs clearing the road and a lone hooded pedestrian walking through the falling cotton fluffs.
When you become that lone hooded pedestrian, you can hear the tobogganing and snow fight shrieks. You hurry and scurry, seeing the rabbits that dint hibernate. You get out of the falling snow, shake your shoes and reenter the warmth of the home.

When the mercury goes up, you can hear the snow cakes on the roof fall. You can see the snow on the trees cave in. As a few more days go by, a million salt whitened feet tread the road, turning snow to slime, making you wish that ice and snow could sublime. The feet that tread, encrusted white with salt, slip and slither down the sidewalks. The cold wind blows and the slime freezes into ice, tripping the lone walking man. Now, why dint Frost ever write about the downsides of snow and ice?

I am not yet bored of winter. It is dull and grey, but when the feather like snow falls to the ground, I am still enthralled. But not too long can the thralldom of winter hold me. Come March and April, winter will pierce my senses and make me long for the warmth and color. But then will come April and May with spring warmth, brightness and warm rain. And as they say, Rains in spring, flowers in summer bring.

I wait.