Tagged: culture

Looking glass


The India Today [[http://www.indiatoday.com/itoday/20051226/|30th Anniversary]] edition is a true collector’s edition. Its as good an account of contemporary Indian history as any. Besides, Rs. 20 for 384 pages of good reading material is a good deal any day!

I really enjoyed reading this issue for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I don’t follow Indian politics very actively and I’ve never really had a good grasp of how the Indian political scenario evolved in the post-independence era. This issue had a three year concise summary for each year — the highs, the lows, the oomphs, the oops — covering everything from sports to politics. So after this whirlwhind tour of the last 30 years, I atleast had some vaguely consistent picture of what has been going on in the country. For one thing, it made me feel much less guilty for not having a strong opinion (in favor) of any of the politic parties in India.

The second reason why this issue struck a chord with me was that it was a glimpse into the past. A sort of looking glass. So much has happened that we soon forget. And while its not good to live in the past, its not good to forget it altogether either. Reading the issue brought back floods of memories of things I had heard but not understood, seen but not felt. And though none of these events personally affected me, I still somehow felt connected — be it the bhopal gas tragedy, or the Godhra massacre, or the tsunami or the earthquake(s), the demolition of the Babri masjid, the emergency and so on. I just felt that I understood a little more, absorbed a little more of India.

Of course then there was the ego boosting factor: its always good to look at your achievements over 30 years if you pile them up all together. I was inspired by what India had achieved in cinema, in economic terms, in sports, in fashion, in literature etc. The issue had sections on “Living Legends” and “Turning 30″ (some newsmakes who were born in 1975) which made for a very good read — and there were plenty of names in there that I had never even heard before.

Last, but the funniest, was this sarcastic “Whammy Awards” section done by Dilib Bobb that was just hilarious. Here’s a teaser: Manmohan Singh won the “Best Supporting Actor” award, Lalu won the “Milk the Cow” award and Jaya Lalitha won the “Amma Dekh” award. A must read.

The truth is out there


Or so we hope. Allegations of doping against Lance Armstrong have [[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-527-1753419-527,00.html|surfaced again]], but this time with supposedly substantial evidence. The case is strong, but still has some holes in it.

But I always get a feeling that in such high power battles, the “real” truth doesn’t really matter. I mean look at Clinton, despite all the astounding evidence against him in the Lewinksky case, he came out unscathed. Do I know the truth? No. I do have a strong feeling that its not all that meets the eye.

The truth is out there somewhere. Lets hope our legal systems are robust enough to let the light shine through.

Men are from mars and women are just idiots?


Got this via [[http://slashdot.org|/.]] this morning:

>In controversial research reported all over the place, Richard Lynn, the emeritus professor of psychology at Ulster University claims that, on average, men are more intelligent than women. Let battle commence! As the research is not yet published there’s nothing more to go on than the press reports. The co-author of the study, Dr Irwing, a senior lecturer in organisational psychology at Manchester University, is apologetic about the findings. In the BBC News report he states that the paper will go on to argue that despite their disadvantage in IQ, there is evidence that women utilise their (lesser!) talents better than men. This simply begs the question of what use IQ tests are if they don’t predict anything in the real world.

Here are some of the links:

* [[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/4183166.stm|BBC]]
* [[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1749346,00.html|Times Online]]
* [[http://education.independent.co.uk/news/article307985.ece|The Independent]]

Ladies, let the wars begin.

On motherland


[[http://nakulmandan.blogspot.com | Nakul]] and I have been debating on nationalism and whether one should feel a certain way about one’s country by virtue of being born and/or brought up in it (see [[http://nakulmandan.blogspot.com/2005/07/hypocrisy-is-it-just-indians.html|this]] and [[http://floatingsun.net/blog/2005/07/21/55/|this]] for context).

A couple of days back, Nakul raised the issue again in [[http://nakulmandan.blogspot.com/2005/08/motherland.html|this post]]. The quote mentioned there-in is very well written indeed (that [[http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20050811&fname=monbiot&sid=1&pn=1|outlook article]] raises some very good points, and presents them succinctly). It might all boil down to just a difference in perspective, but let me still try to further elaborate on my point of view. I’ll give you three different ways of looking at it.

**Why you //must// have some feelings for your motherland**

Nakul (and that article) say that they are not ashamed of their nationality, but why should they feel any different for it than for any other country. They say how does it matter where you’ve been born and brought up.

I’ll give a simple analogy (its an exaggeration, of course, but you should see the similarity). How do you feel towards your parents? Looking at it objectively, they invested some resources in you to raise you (just like your motherland); you’ve lived with them and inherited much from them in terms of culture, beliefs, values (just like your motherland); and you _do_ feel differently towards them than say towards other parents, don’t you? Then
why do you treat your country any differntly?

I would love to live in a society where there are no geo-political barriers, where we are all citizens of the world. However, the reality is that that day is no where close. For an innumerable number of reasons (some good, some bad) the world we live in continues to be divided. And its going to stay that way for a while.

**Why you //should// have some feelings for your motherland**

The fact remains that who who are and where you were born and how you were raised, //do// make an impact on your life, whether you want it or not. Throughout history, groups of people have been in clashes, inevitably.
Perhaps its just human nature. Whatever be the case, even today, we see nations in conflicts, there are still the opressed and the oppressors. If you were born in a country that was being invaded, just //randomly//, would it
help that none of the people of that country felt no feeling of nationalism?

What if no other country comes to help?

We live and breathe in a free world today, and we should be thankful for that. But not less than hundred years ago, things were very different. This independence didn’t come for free, it came at a cost. Sure, had you been born elsewhere, who knows how things might have turned out. But you were born //here//, and the life you led would have been *so* much different had you not enjoyed this freedom. Don’t you owe anything to the people who fought for this country and built it?

**Why you //could// have some feelings for your motherland**

Feeling pride for your country doesn’t mean you look down on others. I don’t
know how Mr. Manbiot concludes that a patriot British will choose a program
that lets 101 non-britishers die other a program that lets 100 britishers die.
Since when did patriotism imply non humanitarism?

Infact, I have often found that appreciating how my “motherland” has evolved
over the years has //increased// my appreciation of the struggles and the
triumphs and the tribulations of countries and cultures struggling elsewhere
(both in time and space).

Let me rewind a little bit. Let me ask you some questions: we always hear
about efforts to preserve and promote handicraft, aboriginal art, rare
forms of pottery or porcelain or even cheese making — what do you think
of these efforts? Why do we care about these things? What are “these
things”?

I’m guessing your answer would be something similar to “they are a part of
history, a part of the cultural heritage of some people and so it is
important that they be preserved”. When I was in middle school, I used to
hate history — it was so boring, so drab. But over the years I’ve come to
realize how interesting and fascinating history really is. And not just
for the factual content, but also for insights into the evolution of
civilizations.

Why is culture important? Why should we care what culture people had
before us? I’m not going to answer those questions. But I believe if you
sit down and think about it, you will come up with //some// reasonable
arguments. But how does all this relate to nationalism?

//If// I was living in the aforementioned utopian world, the notions of
nationalism that we are discussing here would simply not make sense.
Then we would all be part of the same culture, the same civilization,
share the same heritage and so on. However, that is not the case. The
fact remains that (and this is as true for individuals as it is for
countries) if we don’t assert our individuality, we start to lose our
identity.

True, if you moved around a lot, you might feel more a part of the “global”
citizenry than others, and you might not feel strongly about any one
particular country. And I think thats //perfectly fine//. Eventually
(hopefully) as boundaries dissolve, we will all merge in the global culture.
But its not happening yet.

I don’t know from where Mr. Manbiot got the notion that patriotism can be
interpreted as a kind of racism, and could encourage wars. While there are
certainly extremes in each ideology, I think “taking pride in my culture” and
“looking down upon other cultures” are two entirely different things. I
respect and admire other cultures as well (modulo the fact I don’t know most
of them as well as I do mine).

Finally, I’m not in favor of blind or false pride. That kind of disillusion
is never useful. No one is perfect. Be critical of your motherland, just like
you are of your parents. But if you find something that you believe in, that
you admire, that you care about, then be proud of it. Why not?

Learn to dream


This post is inspired by (and in comment to) Abhaga’s great post: [[http://abhaga.blogspot.com/2005/08/to-bend-and-not-to-fold.html|To bend and not to fold]].

I have often wondered, what makes a great school great? How is it, that over and again, we see that certain places manage to inspire and produce generations of outstanding thinkers and artists and scientists.
The Stanfords, the Berkeleys, the MITs, and of course, the IITs.

Abhaga astutely observes that experiences such as living in a hostel don’t make a place unique. Irrespective of where you live, 4 years of hostel live will definitely teach you a lot about people, the world around you, the realities and the brutalities, the goodness and the selfishness. You will grow as a person, understand your responsibilities, learn to make your own decisions, make mistakes, learn from them (or not). Hostel life prepares you for the real world.

But these places have something more. They teach you to dream. Rather, they teach you to //learn to dream//. I’m neither as emotional or articulate as Abhaga was when writing his post, so this probably doesn’t sound that eloquent :-) But the point I’m trying to make is, the actual education is not in the text books and the assignments. Somewhere in those hall ways and libraries and great halls and quads, we get inspired, and learn to live and pursue our dreams.

I think the inspiration factor is key here. Inspiration can come from many places. Roaming in the lawns at Stanford, among those old-architecture buildings, I could easily imagine how people could get inspired simply by their surroundings. The rolling hills, the lush green grass, the tower and the status. Or if you are sitting around with your friends around a fountain in the cobbled courtyards of Princeton. Atleast to me, it seems sometimes just the //natural beauty// is enough to inspire.

Then of course there’s the rich history factor.

Another important thing IMHO is //tradition// — be it the hall 2 vs. hall 3 rivalry of IITK (which sadly, is not anymore… or is it?) or the MIT hacks — traditions both grand and silly, serve to bind the whole place by an invisible threads. Even if you meet a 10 years senior from IITK or a 10 years junior whom you’ve never met — you can always talk about the buildings and the mess and the faculty and the freshers and the ragging. Traditions make you feel that you //belong//.

Sometimes I feel we are in a constant battle to defeat our past, to live up to the expectations of these institutions that we so proudly associate with.

Of course, all of these places were not always great — I mean they all had a beginning right? But they all built a //critical mass// of good students and faculty, that gave them the foundation, on which they built upon and spawned forth. And its not that all the places are consistently great. Everyone has their lean period. But the sheer momentum of the past sometimes burgeones us into the future.

Ah, those days.