The history of every country is measured by what it has attained as a people in terms of something. This something is different in varying situations. India is no different from others. We have non-violence and ahimsa as a measuring stick to observe what we have attained. Then we have violence and protest to attain equal grounds to play in a level playing field. A third form is the middle path which uses both of the above. Now India is experiencing the fourth wave. This is crude greed for wealth and power through any and all means. This fourth wave is the IPL (Indian Premier League). While we lowly ones sit on the edge of our seats watching minnows beating the giants and excitement in every ball and second, matches are fixed and money is exchanged under the table.
The IPL has claimed its first major casualty in the form of Shashi Tharoor, the by now former minister of state of the Ministry of External Affairs in India. It is reported that the former minister’s alleged friend Ms. Sunanda Pushkar was helped by him to get an equity worth 70 crore rupees in the newly formed Kochi IPL team. Tharoor has maintained all along that he has not done anything wrong and that Ms. Pushkar is a professional who has been given a stake as part of the services she will offer to the Kochi IPL team over a period of ten years.
The media went all out to get pictures and stories of the couple. Ms. Pushkar came out with a statement that the media did not have the right to harass her like this and the stake (sweat money) that she was offered was taking into account the services she had to offer as a professional. But who cared? Sunanda has been placed by the media in the middle of Lalit Modi and Shashi Tharoor, as if to suggest that the two are fighting over her. One almost got the idea of Ms. Sunanda being portrayed by the media as a pin up cheer leader who was cheering for a high profile minister who was trying his best to get an IPL team for his home state Kerala. Sunanda has been treated with disrespect in a fight between two men who think the IPL is the bench mark in India.
Shashi Tharoor need not bring in the Kerala factor and the importance of what he was trying to do by bringing such a team to Kerala. In his first interview after winning the Trivandrum Lok Sabha seat he said that his priority was to his voters and not being a minister in the government. The people of Kerala do not benefit by getting an IPL team. Their needs are rather cheap drinking water, electricity, jobs and roads, just to name a few. By thinking that the IPL is more important he has betrayed the trust of the people in him. All is not lost yet though as he can use his resignation as a time to get back to what matters. Twiterring is good but only when it is matched with work at the grass roots!
The Indian Premier League is a blow below the belt to the Indian Poverty League. What does it benefit the ordinary people of India when companies can invest in a sport and make money out of it? Why should our children pay exorbitant amounts of money to sit on a seat and watch a game when they should have free public parks and grounds to run without reservations and break free? Why should I support Chennai and curse Bangalore and Calcutta when I love all three? Will cheer girls, music and booze eradicate poverty in my country? I feel sorry for Sunanda because she has got a hard deal from the media. I feel sorry for Shashi because he has got carried away with he, him and himself. I feel sorry for Lalit because he has stamped on himself by stamping on the poor of this country.
Showing posts with label twitter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label twitter. Show all posts
Monday, April 19, 2010
Thursday, January 7, 2010
New year and the power of no
We are still very much in the fervour and flavour of the new year 2010 and it makes pure sense to gung-ho with the things which need to be discussed however weird they may seem to the naked eye. In 2010 technology in all its variants will be blamed again for causing disruption in the lives of people and ruining families. Lives will be lived online and though it wont lead to empty streets, people will complain about the lack of time and the feeble existence of life. We wont have time to meet each other and even keep in touch with our inner selves.
We love a punching bag, don’t we? And in this case it is new media technology. We will know what our friends and family on facebook, orkut and twitter are doing but we wont know what people in our house are doing! True to an extent but who is to blame? I wonder whether in 2010 we will be punching into thin air because the punching bag wont be there to take our punches?
As a priest, it is important to come to terms with life in all its fullness, technology included. Can I preach from the pulpit that my congregation is aloof from me because of something I cant control? Or should I look to myself to see what is happening today? A priest/bishop in Kerala (and I have come to understand that this happens in all denominations) is under severe time pressure. We have to perform according to the needs and expectations of people. We have to attend umpteen programs in a single day and it doesn’t matter whether we actually even know what we are doing by the time we are half through. The physical and mental exhaustion is put aside and we perform the great Indian rope trick, of course in the absence of a rope. After the offline world we have to enter the online world and perform again.
Several priests and bishops I have talked to agree to a common thing. There is nothing they can do about it. Its out of our hands! But maybe that is again only one part of the problem. The other is the fear and inability to say no. Even if we end up being late for programs and hold up weddings, we wont just say no. The only time a no would surface is when I am saying this. No, many would protest. We cant say no!
Ian Fleming came out with his novel Dr. No in 1958 and later it was made into the first James Bond movie in 1962, starring Sean Connery. The villain Dr. No could have got his name because he rejects something and he is to be rejected by the audience as well. No is more of a rejection of yes and therefore something negative and not positive.
This routine continues even now. Obviously priests/bishops and anyone for that matter would not like to be associated with a character like Dr. No and with the no negativism. The problem then lies not in inventions and new forms of communication but in the inherent human behaviour to appear nice and good. But appearing nice/good need not lead to doing something nice/good eventually. 2010 will also bear the weight of the expectations of people mutually on saying yes, with those who will be bold enough to say no being ostracized and decorated with the not too well meaning 'Dr. No'. Poor Dr. No!
We love a punching bag, don’t we? And in this case it is new media technology. We will know what our friends and family on facebook, orkut and twitter are doing but we wont know what people in our house are doing! True to an extent but who is to blame? I wonder whether in 2010 we will be punching into thin air because the punching bag wont be there to take our punches?
As a priest, it is important to come to terms with life in all its fullness, technology included. Can I preach from the pulpit that my congregation is aloof from me because of something I cant control? Or should I look to myself to see what is happening today? A priest/bishop in Kerala (and I have come to understand that this happens in all denominations) is under severe time pressure. We have to perform according to the needs and expectations of people. We have to attend umpteen programs in a single day and it doesn’t matter whether we actually even know what we are doing by the time we are half through. The physical and mental exhaustion is put aside and we perform the great Indian rope trick, of course in the absence of a rope. After the offline world we have to enter the online world and perform again.
Several priests and bishops I have talked to agree to a common thing. There is nothing they can do about it. Its out of our hands! But maybe that is again only one part of the problem. The other is the fear and inability to say no. Even if we end up being late for programs and hold up weddings, we wont just say no. The only time a no would surface is when I am saying this. No, many would protest. We cant say no!
Ian Fleming came out with his novel Dr. No in 1958 and later it was made into the first James Bond movie in 1962, starring Sean Connery. The villain Dr. No could have got his name because he rejects something and he is to be rejected by the audience as well. No is more of a rejection of yes and therefore something negative and not positive.
This routine continues even now. Obviously priests/bishops and anyone for that matter would not like to be associated with a character like Dr. No and with the no negativism. The problem then lies not in inventions and new forms of communication but in the inherent human behaviour to appear nice and good. But appearing nice/good need not lead to doing something nice/good eventually. 2010 will also bear the weight of the expectations of people mutually on saying yes, with those who will be bold enough to say no being ostracized and decorated with the not too well meaning 'Dr. No'. Poor Dr. No!
Monday, October 5, 2009
The language of the dogs
Language is a way of expressing oneself using words and even actions. It is a cultural learning that we are put through, and eventually we will add on to our traditional learning with our own unique experiences. We have the official language that is thrust upon people and the un-official language which is a public outcry and protest. In India too we have Hindi, struggling to assert itself as the national language, English as the most used language across different states largely by default and maybe as a colonial hangover which has turned into an advantage for Indians, and many other languages hustling for space in the Indian sphere with slight similarities and differences at the same time.
There are unique and almost extinct languages which are spoken by small communities and which express meaning to specific groups while being completely strange to others. But what happens when we have classifications within a language which make it confusing to one and clear to the other? The English language despite being a colonial infusion into India, has been absorbed into the Indian fabric which has even made English dictionaries sit up and take notice and add new Indian English words to the latest versions of their dictionaries.
This difference and new way of talking the same language is not just a matter of accent and words used but the way some words are used and perceived. ‘Heh dude’ and ‘heh dog’ in the U.S. for instance would not strike a chord for a majority of Indians. This could have been one of the reasons why the Oscar winning “Slum Dog Millionaire” was seen derogatory by some in India for the use of the word dog, even though it was not meant to be derogatory.
Similarly, there will be sections of the population in India who would not battle an eyelid before saying, ‘what the f##k’, while others would find it inappropriate and in bad taste. We see here a total shift of language according to the perceived culture of a group of people. So even though we speak the same language we don’t understand one another!
This confusion in language can also be separated into a rich, fortunate group’s indulgence or the spontaneous expression of ordinary people who have made the language their own. Which is why I suspect that many heated discussions are due to small confusions. And when it is done in a small space with minimum words like on twitter, the confusion is bound to increase. Which is why it is not enough to learn a language but to learn a culture. Journalists cannot swoop down on single words but need to understand the culture setting in which it is made, thus expressing a new meaning. The language of the dogs then expresses a whole new meaning, a different culture, a whole new world, waiting to be explored.
There are unique and almost extinct languages which are spoken by small communities and which express meaning to specific groups while being completely strange to others. But what happens when we have classifications within a language which make it confusing to one and clear to the other? The English language despite being a colonial infusion into India, has been absorbed into the Indian fabric which has even made English dictionaries sit up and take notice and add new Indian English words to the latest versions of their dictionaries.
This difference and new way of talking the same language is not just a matter of accent and words used but the way some words are used and perceived. ‘Heh dude’ and ‘heh dog’ in the U.S. for instance would not strike a chord for a majority of Indians. This could have been one of the reasons why the Oscar winning “Slum Dog Millionaire” was seen derogatory by some in India for the use of the word dog, even though it was not meant to be derogatory.
Similarly, there will be sections of the population in India who would not battle an eyelid before saying, ‘what the f##k’, while others would find it inappropriate and in bad taste. We see here a total shift of language according to the perceived culture of a group of people. So even though we speak the same language we don’t understand one another!
This confusion in language can also be separated into a rich, fortunate group’s indulgence or the spontaneous expression of ordinary people who have made the language their own. Which is why I suspect that many heated discussions are due to small confusions. And when it is done in a small space with minimum words like on twitter, the confusion is bound to increase. Which is why it is not enough to learn a language but to learn a culture. Journalists cannot swoop down on single words but need to understand the culture setting in which it is made, thus expressing a new meaning. The language of the dogs then expresses a whole new meaning, a different culture, a whole new world, waiting to be explored.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)