C’mon man!

So the government and the media have done it again! Once again the skeletons tumbled out of the closet but somewhere in the store that rat had nibbled out the cork leaving the red wine flow unappreciated and hence the whole household, with that nonexistent cat, is running after it.

Congratulations to the giants of the game for taking away all the focus from a nation-wide cross generational endemic, affectionately called corruption, by talking intellectual nonsense about petro prices and FDI in retail. Thank you my enlightened brethren who have made the white world their home, my dear formidable NRI role models, all graduates from posh B-schools whose fees my hardworking and honest father could not afford, for talking absolute ‘sense’ about the degraded Indian economy which indeed is like the famished African refusing to sell oil for food. Thanks for reiterating ‘enough is enough, let’s not talk of corruption and the coal scam because the Indian economy is in dire straits’ so as to debate the new-generation Big Bang that would conjure a new world where some of my privileged, and intellectually blessed, friends would rule.

Now somewhere in all this formidable discussion figuring jargons and graphs and numbers and dollar bills and debt crisis and crude prices and what not, I – the average ‘common man’ who earns say just over 20,000 per month and follows all these matters of grave interest with great enthusiasm with the honest intention to understand, if not participate, the process of running an economy- am getting lost.

Can anyone tell me how would the Indian economy post this Big Bang benefit me? You see I am a ‘common man’ – a term that the Indian political ‘class’ and the media at its service have coined.

If at all words can depict social psychology through binary, then this term – ‘common man’ or ‘aam aadmi’- says a lot about how our politicians think. We are ‘common’, we are the ordinary. Hence, we should have to bear the burden of unemployment, of the ravaged economy, of inflation, of a quarterly rise in petro prices, of crammed rail coaches, of bribery to get a passport processed, of power cuts, of traffic jams while a convoy is passing. Vis-à-vis are the people who don’t come under this definition ‘common man’. I mean the politicians, the business houses that run governments and the well-paid national media.

Let me elaborate. All our netas would say this would harm the common man, that was a betrayal of the common man’s trust, these are what the common man does not want… Have they ever made a statement where they are a part of this common man’s class? They are special. Aren’t they? So MPs get free diesel, ride imported cars, own mines and businesses yet get subsidized delicacies at the parliament canteen, have free homes in the national capital where there is uninterrupted power supply, travel free with no queues for tickets and many more. Please don’t forfeit these. After all we have voted you to and for privilege/s. Take them, but don’t talk such rubbish about the economy because you very well know that the money lost in these innumerable and shameless scams and those dollars deposited overseas could have done turned all your promises and planning to reality.

But why aren’t there any efforts netaji?

Ah c’mon man! Try to understand.

Made for more

He came, he saw, he lost, and then he fought and finally conquered.

This one sentence could well surmise -for those with little, but not dangerous, knowledge of history and modern day tennis- the trials and travails of tennis’ ‘ex-choker’ Andy Murray.

Till that Monday night in New York, Murray resembled a long distance runner who, having led the entire race pulls a hamstring paces ahead of the finish line. The Scot had reached four Grand Slam finals but ended them on a tearful note going back home with the runner-up trophy. So regular had been this episode that the inevitable tag of being a ‘choker’ was becoming an unfair reality. But a marathon final has now altered equations and Murray can start with renewed vigour having won the Olympic gold and his first Major.

Given his credentials Murray is not a one-Slam man. History is replete with surprise winners of one Major- players, who like a stray lightening on an otherwise calm and breezy day, surprise us by their sudden emergence and disappearance. Murray has always been an out an out champion’s material. He is not just a lucky survivor, but the fierce fighter destined to rule. To elaborate Murray is a potential No. 1 and good enough to win a bagful of Grand Slams. This is no mere fancy because the golden era Murray has been part of is bound to see a change of guard very soon.

The larger than life Roger Federer is slowing down his perfection giving way to unforced errors, even though on any given day he is the bookmaker’s favourite. Rafael Nadal’s knee is taking the toll and given his style of play his agility on the baseline can be affected. So out of the big four, Murray and Novak Djokovic could start a new rivalry, one that can even rival that between Federer and Nadal.

In this context, Murray’s win at the Flushing Meadows and breaking the Grand Slam drought were necessary to get the proverbial monkey off his back. But this is no time to relax either and Murray’s unit knows it best. His coach, the legendary Ivan Lendl, has already chalked out plans to take Murray to the top and given the shelf life of a tennis player’s prime the Scot does not have the time which Federer, Nadal or Djokovic have had. By 25, that is Murray’s age, Nadal had won 10 Grand Slams (he won his first in Paris as a 19-year-old), Federer had nine Majors (starting with the Wimbledon as a 22-year-old) and Djokovic, 25 now, has five (he tasted Slam success in Melbourne four years back). So in sheer numbers, since they at times are a measure of greatness, Murray is way behind.

Nonetheless that does not dampen the spirit either and as Britain’s son of the moment looks ahead he can at least do so singing heartily, “Say goodbye to the world you thought you live in.”

Why the BCCI should say a yes

So what’s new? Unfortunately nothing! The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has yet again repeated its reservation in using the Umpire Decision Referral System (UDRS) for the Test series that gets underway this English summer. A move which has made world number two bowler Graeme Swann slam the BCCI as taking immature decisions being based on ‘kidology’. Nevertheless he has made a point when he noted that the Indian cricket board should have tried out the UDRS for India could well have got lucky as the Poms had when in Brisbane last year they were all chips down and suddenly Alastair Cook got a reprieve, thanks to an astute Andrew Strauss, and scored a double-century to take England to 500-plus in the second innings.
But the Indian contingent is unlikely to be wooed. The skipper himself has been very critical of the UDRS and more so after Ian Bell got lucky during the World Cup. After the tied match in Bangalore an irritated Dhoni had fumed: “Adulteration is quite bad, whether it is natural or with technology. I think the adulteration of technology with human intention was the reason why we didn't get that wicket. Hopefully next time, it will be either technology or human intention.” And the legend Sachin Tendulkar has been vocal in this opposition on more than one occasions. “You have to find something that is close to 100 per cent. There were occasions in the past where we were not convinced at all. I thought the lines were not correct and that's my personal opinion,” Tendulkar had remarked perhaps reminiscing the 2008 tour of Sri Lanka where the Islanders had got 11 decisions in their favour and India only one.
Though times have changed, Team India is quite comfortable in basking in its disbelief, and to some extent disgust, over the UDRS, sitting pretty even after bitter sweet experiences last year at Mohali when a few blunders went against them. Nonetheless, the Indians draw heart from the fact that it won the opening thriller courtesy some courageous batting by the ever dependable VVS Laxman and some poor umpiring that prevented the last stave Pragyan Ojha from being knocked off. These though are not a redeeming factor for the BCCI has its own secret logic in never budging up for the ‘controversial’ UDRS. The very contention of having a ‘fool proof’ technology is highly contentious and this alone cannot overrule the facts that the UDRS has favoured teams that once felt swindled after a bad outing in the field and has reduced animosity between belligerent sides to a considerable extent. And given the nature of the series India would play in England, where the top two teams would fight to ratify their supremacy in the five-day format, it will not be surprising to see some fiery words being exchanged if some poor umpiring is seen.
“Anything that reduces the errors in the game will minimize tensions between teams and should be encouraged,” Sunil Gavaskar had written last winter in favour of the UDRS. Though the former India captain is not himself comfortable in challenging the umpires, yet he feels the provision should be considered as it would serve the cause. “Personally, I am not in favour of players challenging the umpires’ decisions but feel that it would be better for the on-field umpires to check with their colleague sitting in front of the TV for any decision about which they have doubts in their mind.” Animosity though may not bother the world’s richest cricket board for seldom has any Test playing nation risked it wrath. Recently Sri Lanka tried to tighten the screws but got tamed instead. However, the BCCI top brass need to understand that the UDRS does a lot of good to the game even though it is not technically ‘fool proof’, especially in the longer version of the game which is still grappling for survival after the T20 boom. With technology changing the course of a game well nigh a draw, the UDRS can also be seen as a boon for Test matches which the newer and impatient generation of cricket lovers has come to see as dull and monotonous.

to whomsoever it may concern

will my kiss fade into the twilight,
my dreams sleigh on frail snow?

you've never known who am i to you
just a face in the virtual space,
eager to sneak into your privacy
yes, just another contact in your phone book never reckoned
and if like a pop-up i infringe, you minimize me,
you can't cross me out, i know that
for the risk of a malware, or even an unwanted information.
baffled at the strange emoticons at your disposal
i have been there whole night- the green button saying ' i am available'
or some silly stupid status to initiate a love-tale
and when the grey letters flash saying you're typing, my heart leaps into filthy conclusions.
all in vain, for like your flesh you too are deceitful, tactical
always ignoring with a smile.

hence unhappy the impatient hunter leaves his game,
tracing the trail of yet another.

Ode to slavery , Canto II

And then the divine orders came
write oh slave of glory and fame!
Thus this Coleridge drank some rum
Muse be thine sanctum sanctorum!
Short point became that magnum-opus,
Playing a game in hocus-pocus
Of many a tale thus spake I
Mailing the whole I heaved a sigh!
Though unread back it came
Headline is too long was the claim!
But I never doubt his judgment
He who nods off my payment.
Thus I kept following in sleep and walk
What wrote Jennings Brenkeley and Roebuck!
And at time came Ogden Nash
Livening the writing that is trash!
But i confess now today
A by-line i get each Sunday!
This oh master is more to me
Still pay in time would better be !

Ode to slavery

(Every word has a history as it tells a story, it may be of the letters comprising it if not anything else. The following lines were written over a long period of two months. The composition began in my bathroom, and in chatty sessions at coffee house, Mc Donalds the idea developed. The final knell though was rung out of much frustration. And as always no polemic intended.)

Master master know you not thine?
I am a twig of an Imperial vine !
Oh master, please renounce thy anger,
I'm the famished dog, lonely in the manger !
Whatever you say are words divine,
Let me lick thy ass, it tastes fine !
Oh please don't put that boot on the floor,
I will use my hanky to polish it more !
I need no money but your kindness,
I'm the husky, you're my harness !
Who says the British are long gone?
I'm here to ring that colonial gong!
Without your orders my life is bane,
This old age and withering mane!
Yet I look up to you master,
Even if my words are a meaningless cluster.
I am no drunkard you must know,
In two small sips my sense may go !
So Australia becomes for me Honolulu,
That's why my juniors call me ................ (it's a secret !)

Kolkata's hidden phobias, and Islamophobia

My profession, if I may be allowed to call this waywardness by that term, is supposed to take me to many places. But quite ironically I don't frequent places where I can collect 'news bites/ bytes' befitting the section I've been put into. Nevertheless, I've been quite lucky to squirm into places, and annoyingly so for many people, where I gathered certain experiences which have not been that much 'sweetening' to my already dysfunctional brain.
It is a widely known fact that Bengalis, and for that matter 'Bongs' who live in and around Kolkata, have a highly conceited notion about their culture, and 'sub-ethnicity'- for I dare not to use the macro term. A high-nosed approach towards migrants, especially those who have come from erstwhile East Bengal, is commonplace here. (And I would just like to assert here that the carefree way of putting this with the omnipresent 'here' is symbolic of the inherent and inherited acceptance of this prejudice.)
But for the present Bengali generation a prejudice, and quite ironically so, though this too is an inherited phenomenon going back to just one cohort, is palpable. It's an uncalled for pugnacity towards those who don't speak the Bengali tongue. In this group one can comfortably include the rest of India, and particularly those communities who have made an immense impact on the business here. The barb of this 'gentle hate', springing out of a 'merely naturalised difference of culture', is directed at the Marwaris, Gujratis, Biharis, and Sikhs. But while these communities are still under the 'graceful canopy' of Hinduism (this may be an aberration but I have this feeling that the Sikh community is quite comfortably thought of as very close to the Hindus) the Muslims, who have in patches become successful in certain types of business have been the worst victims possible.
Muslims in Kolkata are huge in number, and some areas do really abound in them where they outnumber the Hindus: Park Circus, Rajabajar, Chadni Chowk, Patuli and Khidderpore are a few I am aware of. And in these areas one gets a blatant view of the urban poverty: where hungry children by the embankments of high drains collect plastic waste, and chase crows and famished dogs to procure the skin of a dead animal. Now when a majority of a minority community live in these circumstances one is bound to ask where lies the reason to hate these destitutes.
One very popular, and obviously very very controversial, view which describes the political status of these people is that they are Bangladeshi refugees who have been brought in by various political factions for their own purposes. (So be it, if allegations are true.) And so why not hate them as they are not Indians?
But this very simplistic jingoism is not the reason why these homeless are hated. They are Muslims and hence not essentially the people of the land. And that's what a taxi-driver expressed. Now this was a rather odd experience for me. One day I took a taxi which had to take the Number 4 bridge over the Park Circus station- a thickly populated and a Muslim dominated area. It was a sultry Kolkata noon and a well-known RJ was at his hilarious best when the car radio went off and I heard Anuradha Paudwal singing a Ram bhajan. When the car had traversed a fair distance the bhajan also stopped. In a light mood I asked the cab-driver what the matter was and he expressed quite boisterously that he is a Hindu and feels rather 'circumcised' when he travels through such areas, and so he always plays a bhajan in order to remain 'chaste'. Now this came from a person who, to be very un-Marxist, does not have enough education to understand the sensitivity of his comments, and the foolishness too.
But my next experience left me pretty baffled as it came of a shocking confession from my room mate. Now this young man is an MBA and he works for more than just a well known corporate firm. One day we were just chatting our precious time away when he told me that he doesn't frequent the 'hotel' which I very conveniently do. The reason: the eatery is owned by a Muslim and it's a 'Halal' shop, and the Muslim owner will take every opportunity of feeding the Hindus with beef and convert them into Islam. Even if not with beef, that fellow may put in a cow's blood in the curry !
Though it is a very common belief among Hindus that eating beef would rob them of their religion, this fear in an educated Indian of the 21st century is something more serious. He fears that a Muslim will secretly feed himself the ominous pie and he would cease to lead a dignified life. (An honest confession here. I don't take beef because I do have a aversion to it which may be influenced by my Hindu consciousness. And also because I don't take red meat, for that matter I never take mutton.)
A third experience was in the local train while returning home. There was a group of young Muslims seated together and as you know the local train was crowded 'cattle class'. But there was, and surprisingly so, a seat vacant where the fore-mentioned group was sitting. I obviously pounced upon this opportunity! Then it took quite a while for me to realise why the seat was vacant. All the people who were standing on the foot-board would rather suffer than sit where the bearded 'Mollas' were. I don't know how the people with whom I sat through out the journey felt, for there were hardly any visible expressions, but the experience left me thoughtful, and so have the others.
I don't want to end this blog, if you have been patient enough to peruse through this waffle, by lecturing upon national integration or religious harmony, for there are no such possibilities in the case of the Indian union. Secularism has never been a part of the peoples lives, though we tend to behave likewise. But for our generation the challenge lies somewhere else, and it would be just foolish of us to bother ourselves with such 'nothings'. So why don't we live life in a professional manner and leave all these behind?